[00:00:01]
ROAD.[*This meeting was joined in progress.*]
THERE IS A FIRE STATION,[City Planning Commission on June 15, 2023. ]
UH, RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF JIM MILLER AND POLAND.AND YEAH, SO THAT'S BASICALLY IT.
UM, 6 38 WAS ESTABLISHED IN MAY OF OH THREE.
UM, IT ALLOWS PUBLIC SCHOOL OTHER THAN AN OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL BY RIGHTS.
UM, THE EXISTING PUBLIC SCHOOL IS URBAN PARK ELEMENTARY.
IT REMAINS IN OPERATION CURRENTLY, HOWEVER, IT IS, UH, TO BE REPLACED BY BRAND NEW SCHOOL AND THEN DEMOLISHED.
UM, THE CURRENT REQUEST, UM, INCLUDES, LIKE I SAID, CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, UM, ADDING A TMP REQUIREMENT TO THE PD SINCE IT DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT IN THE TEXT.
UM, LANDSCAPING IS PER ARTICLE 10, BUT UNLIKE THE LAST SITE, THIS IS A BRAND NEW BUILD, SO THE ENTIRE SITE WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 10.
UM, SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT, PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES, AND TEXT UPDATES.
UM, AND THEN JUST GONNA TAKE HERE AROUND THE SCHOOL, THIS IS ACTUALLY THE NEWEST PART OF THE SCHOOL.
WE'RE LOOKING, UH, FROM MILITARY PARKWAY.
UM, AND THIS IS THE EXISTING, UH, THRIVE AND I GUESS GUEST PARKING, VISITOR PARKING AREA, ALSO ON MILITARY.
UM, AND THEN WORKING OUR WAY AROUND.
UM, THIS IS, UH, AT THE CORNER OF MILITARY PARKWAY AND JIM MILLER AND THE PARKING AREA THAT YOU SEE, UM, ON THE SITE THERE IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE REMOVED.
AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF CURB CUTS ON JIM MILLER THAT ALSO BEING CLOSED OFF AND CURB RESTORED.
UM, WE ARE AT THE CORNER OF JIM MILLER, AND I THINK I MAY HAVE THAT WRONG, JIM MILLER AND TOLAND, IT SHOULDN'T SAY WIL, SO IT SHOULD SAY JIM MILLER AND TOLAND.
UM, PORTABLES OBVIOUSLY BE GONE.
UM, AND THEN SO MUCH TROUBLE WITH MY SLIDES.
I KNOW BECAUSE I'M CONFUSING MYSELF BY SHOWING YOU THE SITE PHOTO AND THEN LATER THE SURROUNDING GOING A BIT OUT OF WATER.
UM, CONTINUING AROUND THE SITES, YOU'RE GONNA BUILD, AS WE'VE SEEN A NUMBER OF TIMES BEFORE, THEY'RE GONNA BUILD ON THE UNDEVELOPED PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, UM, CLOSER TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THIS CASE, AND THEN DEMOLISH THE SCHOOL AND BUILD ATHLETIC, OR NOT REALLY ATHLETIC FIELDS, BUT OPEN SPACES, PLAY AREAS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SURROUNDING USAGE, LIKE I SAID, THERE'S A COUPLE OF CHURCHES AROUND THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE ONE AT, UH, JIM MILLER AND WILKES.
UM, AND THEN AT THE, UH, TO THE SOUTHEAST OF THE SITE, THERE'S A, A CR AREA THAT HAS SOME, UH, COMMERCIAL, VARIOUS COMMERCIAL USES.
UM, THERE'S A FUELING STATION, SOME AUTO RELATED USES ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SITE.
UM, BUT AGAIN, PREDOMINANTLY APPEARS THE FIRE STATION RIGHT AT, UM,
UM, AGAIN, I HAVE THE, THE EXISTING, THE ORIGINAL AND THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN HERE.
IF THERE'S ANY REASON TO REFERENCE THEM, WE CERTAINLY CAN IN THE CASE REPORT AS WELL.
UM, JUST KINDA SHOWING YOU THE EVOLUTION OF THE SITE, AS I MENTIONED, UM, THEY ARE CLOSING, UH, ANY EXISTING CURB CUTS ALONG JIM MILLER.
I MEAN THIS, THIS, UM, SORT OF CIRCLE DRIVE IS GONNA EXIST KIND OF IN THE SAME SPACE WITH A LITTLE BIT OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT YOU'LL SEE IN THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT THEY'RE EXTEND INTO THE SITE SO THAT THEY CAN GET MOST OF THE QAN OFF OF THE PUBLIC ROADWAYS.
UM, THIS IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND I'M GONNA SUBMIT THAT IN AS MUCH AS I POSSIBLY CAN.
UM, SO AS I SAID, UM, QUEUING IS GONNA COME IN, IN THIS, UH, OFF OF MILITARY PARKWAY.
THERE'S ALSO A QUEUING AREA ON OFF OF POLAND STREET.
UM, THEY DID HAVE A THIRD CURB CUTS ALONG THAT ROADWAY AND THEY AGREED TO REMOVE THAT
[00:05:01]
AND THEN TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF, UM, UH, MAGIC TO HIDE THE BACK OF HOUSE SERVICE AREA FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY ACROSS TOLEN STREET.SO THEY'VE RECONFIGURED THAT AREA.
THEY'VE ALSO ON THE INDENTED DRIVE OVER HERE, UM, THEY'RE CREATING ALONG WILKES, THEY'VE AGREED TO PUT IN, UM, A BIT OF A CURB SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE RANDOMLY COMING IN AND OUT.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE ORGANIZED FOR DROP OFF AND PICKUP.
UM, AND PHIL HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE SITE AS DESIGNED, UM, CAN, CAN COMPLY WITH ARTICLE 10.
SO THERE SHOULD BE NO ISSUES THERE.
UM, AGAIN, LIKE ON THE LAST CASE, WE'RE FOCUSING PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES AT CERTAIN KEY AREAS.
GENERALLY OVER HERE ON WILKES AVENUE, UM, ADJACENT TO THE SIDEWALK, WE'RE DROP OFF, THE PICKUP ARE HAVING, ARE ARE GOING TO BE OCCURRING.
AND THEN A COUPLE OF AREAS OVER HERE ON TOLAND.
AND THEN ANOTHER, UH, GROUPING OR A COUPLE OF GROUPINGS OF PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES WILL BE MORE INTERNAL TO SITE OFF OF THIS LOOP TRAIL THAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO BUILD AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
UM, THERE IS THE POTENTIAL FOR A BIT OF BACKUP TRAFFIC, AS YOU'LL SEE ON THE LOWER LEFT CORNER OF YOUR SCREEN HERE WHEN IT COMES UP.
LOWER LEFT CORNER OF THE SCREEN.
UM, I WILL POINT OUT THAT THERE IS, I DON'T KNOW THE CORRECT WORD FOR IT, BUT THERE'S AN EXTRA STREET ALONG THE SIDE OF MILITARY PARKWAY.
IT'S A BIT MORE OF A LOCAL STREET ADJACENT TO THE SCHOOL, NOT THE, THE MAJOR LANES OF TRAFFIC.
SO, UH, THE WAY THEY DESIGNED THIS, THAT TRAFFIC WILL CIRCULATE IN A CLOCKWISE MANNER SO THAT THEY, ANY OVERKILL, UM, THAT CAN'T QUEUE ON THE PROPERTY WILL ACTUALLY BE ON THIS LITTLE SIDE STREET RIGHT HERE THAT'S NOT ON MILITARY, NOT ON THE MAJOR TRAFFIC LANE OF THE MILITARY.
UM, POINTING OUT, UM, AGAIN, I HAVE THE CONDITIONS SHOWN HERE, UM, IN CASE WE NEED TO REFERENCE THEM, THEY ARE INCREASING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 40 FEET THAT'S ALLOWED.
UM, OTHER THAN THAT, IT'S, IT'S REALLY THE ONLY CHANGE, UM, FROM 51 A ACTUALLY THEY'RE REDUCING THE, THE, THE LOT COVERAGE AS WELL.
BUT THAT WAS THE SAME AS LAST.
UM, AGAIN, LIKE ON THE LAST ONE, WE'RE GONNA NEED TO TWEAK THE PEDESTRIAN AMENITY LANGUAGE AND THEN SO ON AND SO FORTH.
UM, AND WHAT WAS THAT? HOW ABOUT FENCING? I'M SORRY, FENCES.
OKAY, SO THIS WAS, THIS WAS SIMILAR TO SAME LANGUAGE I THINK IS IN THE LAST ONE.
BASICALLY, UM, MAKING SURE THAT THE UNDERSTANDING IS THAT FENCES NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE, THE 51 A PROVISIONS.
UM, BUT UH, IN AN, SINCE IT REFERS TO A NORTH SEVEN 50 A BASE DISTRICT, THEY WOULDN'T NORMALLY BE ALLOWED TO PUT A SIX FOOT FENCE IN FRONT YARD.
AND SO THESE ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT SAY, OKAY, YOU CAN PUT A FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD HERE IF ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE MET.
SO AN OPEN FENCE INSTEAD OF JUST SOLID, OBVIOUSLY.
UM, AND THEN MAKING SURE THAT, UH, VISIBILITY TRIANGLES ARE, YEAH, THE GATES AREN'T IN THE, SO WE'RE RECESSING THE GATES AND JUST MAKING SURE GENERALLY THAT WE HAVE, UM, A GOOD SITUATION OTHERWISE, CORRECT.
UM, AND THEN I JUST PUT A BLIP IN HERE TO SHOW YOU TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN IS BEING ADDED.
IT'S ALL THE SAME STANDARD LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE USED TO SEEING, BUT, UM, I'M NOT GONNA BELABOR THAT.
UM, SIDEWALKS IN THIS CASE, UM, WILL BE UP TO THE NEW STANDARD.
UM, THERE IS A PROVISION THAT THEY CAN REDUCE THAT AGAIN TO ZERO, WHERE THAT INDENTED DROP OFF AND PICKUP HAPPENS.
UM, AND IF THEY HAVE A MINIMUM EIGHT FOOT WIDE ON OBSTRUCTIVE SIDEWALK, BUT THAT'S REALLY THE FRONT OF THEIR SCHOOL.
AND SO THERE'S, THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF SPACE THERE.
THERE'S MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE AT LEAST EIGHT FEET FOR WALKING AND THEN FOR THOSE PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES.
UM, AND SO APPROVAL ON THIS ONE IS SUBJECT TO OR STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
COMMISSIONER, YOUNG, UH, SAME QUESTION ABOUT AFTER STUDENTS BEGAN ATTENDING CLASSES.
I WAS, I KIND OF DID THAT ON PURPOSE TO SEE IF YOU'RE PAYING ATTENTION.
BY THE TIME THE CASE COMES UP, WHO KNOWS.
YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GET OUT AND TALK SOMETHING WE GOTTA GET OUR GANG FACES ON.
BUT HERE, YOU KNOW, JUST SAME.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER, DON'T, DON'T TELL ME SCHOOLS ARE GETTING BORING.
[00:10:01]
FOUND SIGN.I THINK WE CAN GET ONE MORE CASE THERE.
KRAMER, DO YOU WANNA TAKE FRAYER? YES.
IT'S NOT, COMMISSIONER HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ONE AND IT'S LOOKING OUT OF THE ROOM, YOUR HONOR.
CAN I JUST LIKE, CAN I GO SIT THERE OR CAN I SOME WATER? YEAH, DON'T GET TOO COMFY.
UM, IS AN APPLICATION SORT NEED TO, AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO LAND ENROLL DISTRICT NUMBER 6 65 TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SCHOOL, ARTHUR KRAMER ELEMENTARY.
THAT'S ON A BLOCK THAT'S, UH, BOUNDED BY BURY ST.
IT'S, UH, A LITTLE BIT OVER NINE ACRES IN AREA.
THE LOCATION IS IN NORTH DALLAS, UH, SOMEWHERE BY, UH, 75.
UH, IT'S IN A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY, ALL, UH, ON ALL SIDES.
UM, THE SCHOOL IS ALREADY EXISTING.
THEY'RE PLANNING AN ADDITION AND, UM, THE ADDITION, THE RELOCATION OF THEIR PLAYGROUND, UH, GOING AROUND THE BLOCK STARTED AT MID BURY BECAUSE BURY IS BASICALLY THEIR MAINTENANCE MAIN FACADE.
JUDE'S, UM, I WAS TRYING TO, AND WE PROBABLY ALSO GET BACK TO THIS, UM, I WAS TRYING TO AGAIN SHOW HOW THE SIDEWALK IS CONFIGURED.
UH, AND THEY HAVE A LITTLE PLAZA IN THE FRONT, AND THEN THEY HAVE MATURE TREES ARE CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE SIDEWALK WIDTH.
AND I WILL MENTION THAT ALL OF THE FOUR BLOCKS, UH, THE FOUR BLOCKS OF FOUR UM, SIDES, THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME CONFIGURATION.
LIKE FIVE, SIX FOOT BUFFER IS ALREADY EXISTING FORKLIFT SIDEWALK.
UM, NOW THE OTHER CORNER, UM, BURY DRIVE AND TUNICA DRIVE, YOU CAN SEE THE PLAYGROUND THAT'S ON THE CORNER.
THIS A BETTER VIEW, A BETTER VIEW OF THE PLAYGROUND.
ON TUNICA DRIVE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A SLOPE.
UH, AND THEY HAVE A RETAINING WALL.
UM, AGAIN, A BETTER VIEW OF TUNICA DRIVE WITH THEIR RETAINING WALL AND STEPS.
THIS IS THE PLAYGROUND THAT IS GONNA BE RELOCATED TO MAKE ROOM FOR THE ADDITION THAT'S GONNA FACE TUNICA DRIVE, JUST TO SHOW THE BIT THE, THE GRADE.
IT'S PRETTY, THE SLOPE IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT.
THERE IS A LITTLE SITTING AREA THAT THEY HAVE IN HERE, AND I THINK THEY'RE PLANNING TO BASICALLY DO SOMETHING SIMILAR A LITTLE BIT ON THE OTHER SIDE.
THIS IS THE VIEW FROM UNI DRIVE AND MASON DELL'S.
AGAIN, AS I WAS SAYING, LOOK AT THE EXISTING CONFIGURATION.
THEY ALREADY HAVE SIDEWALKS AND THEY HAVE ANOTHER SMALL RETAINING WALL ON, UM, MASON DELL'S SAME.
UM, EVERYTHING AROUND IT IS SINGLE FAMILY.
SO, UM, THIS IS THE CORNER OF MASON DOS IN ST.
THIS IS, THEY HAVE ATHLETIC FIELDS IN HERE, AND THERE'S ANOTHER LITTLE PLAYGROUND INSIDE.
THAT'S WHERE THEY HAVE THEIR, UM, ACCESS, UM, THEIR CAR ACCESS.
THEY HAVE THIS OLD PARKING LOT THERE ON THE SIDE WITH THEIR GARBAGE DUMPSTER.
SO THIS IS THEIR, UM, SERVICING AREA.
THEY HAVE, I THINK, PROPOSING TO REPLACE WITH THIS ONE.
THE, THAT RECOMMENDATION IS SUBJECT TO REVISE JUST BECAUSE WE NEED TO CLEAN IT UP A LITTLE BIT.
UM, THE WAY THEY'RE SHOWING THE PROPERTY DIMENSIONS IS JUST COMING UP.
I THINK THERE ARE SOME LINES ON TOP OF ONE ON BASIS,
[00:15:01]
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.SO THE ADDITION, THEY ARE COMING A LITTLE BIT CLOSER.
THEY'RE ADDING A LITTLE BIT, UM, ALONG MID BURY, WHICH IS THEIR FRONT MAINTAINING THE PLAZA.
AND THEN THEIR MAIN ADDITION IS ON KIKA RE BASICALLY REMOVE, REMOVING, UH, MOVING THE PLAYGROUND TO THE INTERIOR.
THEY'RE PROPOSING, UH, THEY'RE PROPOSING, UH, PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO LINK TO THE, TO THE SIDEWALK ON MASON DE'S THE HOMES.
SO IT'S INTERESTING, IMPORTANT TO MENTION THAT ON MASON DES THE NIGRO, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE HOMES FRONTING THE WHOLE BOTTOM.
IKA AND ST YOU HAVE SIDE, UH, THEY ARE NOT GONNA TOUCH IKA AT ALL.
UM, THEY ARE GONNA TOUCH ONLY MID BURY.
THAT'S WHY THE CONDITIONS IN THE PD ARE TO INCREASE THE SIDEWALK ON MID BURY AND NOT TOUCH THE SIDEWALKS ON THE OTHERS.
SO THAT WAS PART OUR AGREEMENT WITH THEM.
BUT, UM, UM, WE ARE SHOWING IT HERE AREAS WHERE THE AMENITIES, AND WE WERE TRYING TO CONCENTRATE THEM AS CLOSER TO THE SIDEWALK AS POSSIBLE SO THEY CAN HAVE SOME SORT OF AN UN UNRESTRICTED ACCESS.
AND OBVIOUSLY THE FOURTH ONE AROUND THE PLAYGROUND LOCATION.
SO WE HAVE, UM, THREE AREAS THAT ARE VERY CLOSE TO THE SIDEWALK.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE BENCHES AND TREES.
AND IN THE CONDITIONS WE ALSO INCLUDE A CONDITION FOR THEM TO ADD STREET TREES ON THEIR PROPERTY ALONG MASON DELLS MASON DE 40 FEET APART.
SO THIS IS ABOVE AND BEYOND AN ARTICLE 10, AS JENNIFER WAS SAYING, BECAUSE ARTICLE 10 IS TRIGGERED, BUT IT WON'T GIVE US A BIG BUMPING AND SKIPPING.
UM, THIS IS THEIR TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLAN.
THIS IS SHOWING THE EXISTING SITUATION.
AND YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE QUEUING BOTH LANES ON BURY AND THE BUSES ARE ON THE CORNER.
THIS IS THE IMPROVEMENT THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.
THIS IS WHAT'S IN YOUR REPORT.
I SENT AS YOLANDA SENT YOU REVISIONS.
IT WASN'T, IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF JUST AND FORTH WITH THAT.
UH, THEY ASKED FOR THIS QUEUING LINK TO BE REMOVED AND THEY BASICALLY CLEANED UP AND, UH, ADDRESSED THAT COMMENT.
UM, SO YOU CAN SEE THIS IS AN UPDATED, AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS GONNA BE PER THE TMP A BRIEF, THE BUSES, THEY'RE PLANNING TO PUT THE BUSES ON SITE AND QUEUE, UH, ALONG THE STREETS, BUT ON
AND THEY'RE ALSO ADDING, LET'S SEE, THIS EXHIBIT, WHICH IS SOMETHING WE STAFF REQUESTED TO ENCOURAGE THE PARENTS TO MOVE FLOCK WISE AROUND THE SITE.
AND ALSO IN WHAT I SENT YOU, I ASKED THE APPLICANT TO ALSO PROVIDE A CLOUDED VERSION SO WE CAN ALL SEE WHAT THE CHANGES ARE.
BUT AGAIN, IT'S A LOT OF RED IN HERE, BUT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A LOT OF CHANGES.
ANOTHER CHANGE THAT WE ASK FOR IS TO INDICATE THAT THE PEDESTRIAN PATH IS GONNA BASICALLY CONNECT WITH THE, WITH SUPPLY WALLS.
BUT THIS PEDESTRIAN PATH, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY AN AREA WHERE THE KIDS ARE GONNA BE DROPPED OFF AND PICKED UP.
MAJOR DROP OFF IN PICK UP IS GONNA BE, UH, MID BRIDGE, RIGHT? UM, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THE SAME.
UH, WE JUST QUOTED THE SETBACKS.
SO THERE'S NO CONFUSION AT PERMITTING AT ALL.
UM, CHANGES TO THE PD JUST TO LIKE BRING THEM UP TO CODE.
UM, WE ARE GONNA HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A REVISED LANGUAGE FOR THE AMENITIES.
UH, WE ARE GONNA HAVE, SO ALL OF THESE CONDITIONS ARE CHANGING.
WE'RE ADDING, WE'RE ADDING CONDITIONS FOR LANDSCAPING AND FOR SIGNS JUST TO EXPLAIN.
THEY ARE JUST PROPOSING TO BASICALLY MOVE THE BIG SIGN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO THE SETBACK BECAUSE OF THESE TRIPS TO EXPLAIN.
AND THEN THIS IS YOUR CHANGE PERIOD.
NOW SUBJECT TO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CLEAN OUR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANNING CONDITIONS INTO THE SLIDE.
COMMISSIONER, HONOR WITH THE THIRD COMMISSIONER, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM OF I HAVE MORE PLEASE.
IN, IN REGARDS TO OUR, WE THESE SCHOOLS.
I KNOW ALL OF THESE STUDENTS HAVE, UM, OUR PAY GRIDS, UH, PORTABLES ON SITE.
DO WE HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS WITH OUR GROUP TO NEVER BRING THOSE BACK? LIKE, TO THINK ABOUT THAT WE ARE NOT, I TALK TO THE APPLICANT ABOUT THAT BECAUSE IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT AT THIS SCHOOL THEY CAN MAINTAIN FOR.
THAT CONCLUDES THE BREAKING VALLEY CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
WE HAVE ABOUT FIVE MINUTES TO GO OUT THERE AND GET STARTED.
MORRIS RON COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.
UH, MS. BESINA, CAN YOU START US OFF WITH A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? YES.
[00:20:01]
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.DISTRICT TWO, PRESENT DISTRICT THREE.
UH, DISTRICT FIVE, CHAIR PRESENT? DISTRICT SIX.
DISTRICT SEVEN, DISTRICT EIGHT? I'M HERE.
AND DISTRICT 14 HERE AND PLACE 15? I'M HERE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. PACINO.
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
TODAY IS THURSDAY, JUNE 15TH, 2023 AT EXACTLY 12:54 PM A COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS BEFORE WE GET STARTED.
OUR SPEAKER GUIDELINES, ALL SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
I'LL ASK YOU TO PLEASE BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, MS. PACINO WILL KEEP TIME AND, UH, SHE WILL LET YOU KNOW WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP.
UH, WE DO HAVE SOME FOLKS ONLINE, UH, AND SOME REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR OUR FOLKS ONLINE.
JUST MAKE SURE THAT YOUR CAMERA IS ON AND WORKING.
WE CANNOT HEAR FROM YOU IF WE CAN'T SEE YOU.
UH, ON CASES WHERE WE DO HAVE OPPOSITION, UH, PER OUR RULES, THE APPLICANT WILL GET A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
ALSO, FOR OUR VISITORS HERE, WE HAVE THESE LITTLE YELLOW CARDS DOWN HERE ON THIS TABLE, THE BOTTOM RIGHT.
AT SOME POINT TODAY, WE SURE WOULD LOVE FOR YOU GUYS TO COME DOWN AND FILL THESE.
YOU CAN JUST LEAVE 'EM ON THE TABLE.
SO WE'LL HAVE A RECORD OF YOUR VISIT WITH US HERE TODAY.
UH, AND WITH THAT, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.
UH, BEFORE WE DO, UH, WAS THAT 16? OKAY.
AND WITH THAT, COMMISSIONERS, UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH, UH, THE DOCKET.
IF YOU NEED A COPY OF THE DOCKET, I BELIEVE THERE MAY BE SOME.
THERE ARE SOME RIGHT THERE AT THE TABLE.
WE'LL GET STARTED WITH THE VERY FIRST CASE.
ACTUALLY, NO, WE'LL GET STARTED WITH THE MINUTES.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG, MR. CHAIR.
I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 1ST, 2023 MEETING AS SUBMITTED.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL LAWS IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
WE'LL GET STARTED WITH THE, UH, MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS. MS. MORMAN, GOOD AFTERNOON.
YOUR NEXT ITEM IS, UH, AN IS Z 2 23 DASH 0 0 5, AN APPLICATION FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER SIX 12.
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST LINE OF SPUR 4 0 8, NORTH OF WEST LEDBETTER EXTENSION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
UH, WE DO HAVE ONE REGISTERED SPEAKER.
IS MR. BROOKS ONLINE? HE IS NOT.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS CASE NUMBER TWO M 20 2305.
ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? I'M HERE FOR JOHN, I HERE ASK QUESTIONS.
THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER YOUNG? SIR? SIR, COULD YOU COME DOWN PLEASE? IF YOU COULD COME DOWN TO THE, UH, MICROPHONE.
THERE'S A LITTLE BUTTON THERE.
JUST PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
MY NAME'S JAMES SPENCER, 25 0 2 HARBORVIEW BOULEVARD, ETTE, TEXAS.
UH, ON YOUR PR ON YOUR LANDSCAPE PLAN, YOUR EXISTING LANDSCAPE PLAN, THERE'S AN AREA DESIGNATED AS PROPOSED CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
CAN YOU DESCRIBE YOUR INTENTIONS FOR THAT AREA? I CANNOT.
UH, I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND AND REVIEW THAT.
[00:25:01]
THAT'S THE WAY THE CIVIL HAD HAD DESIGNED IT.SO THE, UM, SIR, SO I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU.
SO SEVERAL NEIGHBORS IN THAT, IN, IN THE DISTRICT THREE WHERE, WHERE WE LIVE, UM, COMPLAIN ABOUT THE TRAFFIC COMING OFF OF 4 0 8.
UM, THERE HAS BEEN AN OFFICER BROUGHT IN TO KIND OF MANAGE THE TRAFFIC, BUT HAS ANYTHING BEEN CONSIDERED, UM, TO ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC THAT FLOWS FROM 4 0 8 WHEN IT'S TIME TO PICK UP AND DROP OFF? THE TRAFFIC STUDY HAS BEEN, HAS BEEN COMPLETED, AND IT SHOWS THAT THERE IS NO IMPACT TO THE, THE TRAFFIC STUDY DID NOT INCLUDE 4 0 8.
IT ONLY INCLUDED LEAD BETTER EXTENSION.
UM, SO THE CARS GO ONTO LEADBETTER EXTENSION FROM 4 0 8 AND STRETCH OUT COMPLETELY.
UM, AND SEVERAL OF THE RESIDENTS CAN'T GET TO THEIR HOME FOR UP TO 30 MINUTES.
SOMETIMES, UM, IN THAT LINE, THE, THAT, THAT TIME HAS BEEN CHARTED WITH THE ADDED OFFICER.
BUT IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU GUYS ARE LOOKING INTO AND REDUCING THE TRAFFIC AT THAT CORNER OF 4 0 8 AND GRADY NLA? UH, I'D HAVE TO DEFER THAT TO THE CLIENT.
I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT THEY'VE DONE.
UM, IT IS A SCHOOL, SO UNDERSTOOD.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER COMMISSIONERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UH, COMMISSIONER YOUNG, I THINK WE MAY HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU, SIR.
YES, I, I AM, I'M LOOKING BACK AT THE EXISTING LANDSCAPE PLAN.
AND IT IS CURRENTLY ON THERE SHOWN AS PROPOSED CONSERVATION DISTRICTS.
THAT SHOULD BE CONSERVATION AREA.
HOWEVER, IT'S THAT THAT HASN'T BEEN PROPOSED FOR A CHANGE IN, IN THE WORDING, BUT I BELIEVE WE CAN GET THAT DONE.
IS THAT PART OF YOUR RECOMMENDATION THEN? UH, YES.
AND WE CAN GET THAT FROM THE APPLI, AN UPDATED PLAN WITH THE WORDING CHANGED FROM THE APPLICANT.
SO THE, YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL AS BRIEFED? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SO IT'S AN ADJUSTMENT WOULD BE, UH, A MOTION THAT WOULD INCLUDE AS BRIEFED SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER HARBOR, DO YOU HAVE MOTION, SIR? UM, I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE MOTION, UH, HONESTLY CUZ IT'S HAS BEEN A HUGE ISSUE FOR THOSE NEIGHBORS IN THAT AREA.
UM, BUT I WILL SAY THAT THE, THERE ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND, UM, ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
SO, AND THAT BEING SAID, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE, I'M SORRY, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGES RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND BRIEFED.
CAN I MAKE A AS, AS BRIEF AS BRIEFED? AS BE AS BRIEFED? THANK YOU.
UH, CAN I GET A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
SO IT IS A, A MINOR AMENDMENT.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HERBERT IN THE CASE OF M 22 305 AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STANDARD.
AND I THINK WE, WE HAVE SOME COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, I WAS GOING TO, UM, MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO HOLD THE CASE UNTIL YOU CAN GET THE ANSWERS AND THEN COME BACK WITH THE ANSWERS THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE LOOKING FOR OR A PATHWAY TO THOSE ANSWERS.
UM, YES, THAT I, I WOULD LEAN TOWARDS THAT, ESPECIALLY SAYING THAT THE APPLICANT COULDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION.
UM, I, I DIDN'T CONSIDER THAT, BUT I I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER THAT IF IT'S NOT TOO LATE, IT IS NOT TOO LATE.
YES, YOU CAN WITH WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION IF THAT'S OKAY WITH COMMISSIONER STANDARD OR IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION FROM THE BODY, WHICH THERE IS NOT.
YOU HAVE ANY MOTION, SIR? THIS WOULD BE HELD WHEN IS OUR NEXT JULY 6TH.
UM, SO THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN, HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL THE JULY 6TH MEETING.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HERBERT, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO HOLD A MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT TO JULY 6TH, KEEPING THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER BLAIR? I KNOW THIS IS A MINOR AMENDMENT AND I KNOW OUR RULES WITH MINOR AMENDMENTS, BUT I ALSO KNOW THE AREA AND I'VE ALSO BEEN STUCK IN
[00:30:01]
THAT QUEUING LINE OFF OF 4 0 8 THINKING I'M GOING TO, UM, GET ONE OF MY NOTORIOUS, UH, SIDE STREETS AND IT ACTUALLY TAKES ME LONGER THAN A SHORTER PERIOD OF TIME.UM, SO WHAT I HAVE FOR THE RECOMMENDATION I HAVE FOR THE APPLICANT IS THAT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT YOU, YOU CAN BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, BUT BEING A GOOD NEIGHBORS MEAN BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR FOR EVERYONE, NOT JUST THOSE THAT ARE TOTALLY SURROUNDING YOU.
UM, BECAUSE WHERE YOU WANT THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS TO SUPPORT YOU, YOU HAVE TO ALSO SUPPORT THEM.
AND GRADY NLO AND 4 0 8 IS NOT THE EASIEST STREET TO N NAVIGATE, BUT IT WILL TAKE YOU ALL THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND ALL THE WAY TO GRAND PRAIRIE.
SO IT, IT, IT WOULD BEHOOVE ALL OF US TO BE GOOD TO THE MAJORITY OF US.
JUST FOLLOWING UP ON COMMISSIONER BLAIR'S COMMENT, UH, ONE OF THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVING A MINOR AMENDMENT IS THAT IT DOES NOT ALTER THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
USUALLY THAT INVOLVES THINGS LIKE HEIGHT OR SETBACKS, BUT HERE THEY WOULD BE, UH, EXPANDING THE FOOTPRINT OF THE CAMPUS, UH, UH, THE BUILDINGS SUBSTANTIALLY AND THEREBY GENERATING, UH, MORE TRAFFIC, WHICH HAS A DIRECT IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY.
SO I THINK IT FITS COMFORTABLY WITHIN, UH, THE MINOR AMENDMENT CRITERIA AND I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION WE HAVE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR ZONING CASES.
WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE CASES ON CONSENT, UH, THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE.
NUMBER FIVE HAS COME OFF CONSENT.
WE'LL BE VOTED ON INDIVIDUALLY, SO THAT LEAVES CASES THREE AND FOUR, THAT'S Z 2 23 1 32, AND Z 2 2 3 143 THAT WILL BE DISPOSED OF IN ONE MOTION UNLESS THERE IS SOMEONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON CASE CASES, EITHER THREE OR FOUR.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON CASES THREE OR FOUR? OKAY.
ITEM NUMBER THREE Z 2 23 1 32.
AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A CHILDCARE FACILITY ON PROPERTY ZONE AN R 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH CORNER OF FERGUSON ROAD AND DORRINGTON DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, AN APPLICATION FOR AN R FIVE SINGLE FAMILY DI R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES ZONE.
THE CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF BURMA ROAD EAST OF KISHKA STREET.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
IS THERE ANY, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THESE TWO ITEMS? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER RUBIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YES.
UH, FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTING OF ITEMS THREE AND FOUR, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF, UH, AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RUBIN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER YOUNG HAS A CONFLICT ON CASE NUMBER FIVE Z 2 23 1 60 AND HAS STEPPED OUT OF THE CHAMBER.
MR. PEPE? GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR.
ITEM FIVE IS Z 2 1 12 OR 2 3 2 23 160.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO, A SUB DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED A R S C, REGIONAL SERVICE COMMERCIAL TRACKED ONE SUB-DISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SANGER AVENUE, SOUTHWEST OF RIGG STREET.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS CASE NUMBER FIVE Z 2 23 1 60? YES, SIR.
WILL HARRIS, 1819 CLARENCE STREET.
CAN YOU, YEAH, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO
[00:35:01]
SPEAK UP OR WILL HARRIS.I'M THE APPLICANT AND OWNER AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
PLEASE STAND BY COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ROOM FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
AND WE'LL NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT COMMISSIONER YOUNG HAS RETURNED TO THE HORSESHOE.
CASE NUMBER SIX IS Z TWO 12 DASH 2 76.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 8 25 ON PROPERTY BOUNDED BY PALISADE DRIVE, NORTH PRAIRIE CREEK ROAD, TONAWANDA DRIVE AND GREENDALE DRIVE.
AND ON THE NORTH LINE OF PALISADE DRIVE BETWEEN NORTH PRAIRIE CREEK ROAD AND GREENDALE DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
UH, CARL CROWLEY, 2201 MAIN STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS REPRESENTATIVE, THE D I S D.
THIS IS, UH, SAMUEL HIGH SCHOOL.
UM, I WANNA THANK THE, THE, UH, STAFF WITH WORKING WITH US ON, UH, I THINK IT'S A, UM, IT'S A PLAN TO ADD SOME LANDSCAPING TO A SCHOOL THAT WAS BUILT WELL IN THE FIFTIES, I WOULD GUESS
UH, WE'VE, UH, ADDED SOME LANDSCAPING, AS JENNIFER MENTIONED IN THE, A PARKING LOT ACROSS THE STREET.
WE'VE ADDED A, A WHAT I'LL CALL A GROVE.
I THINK WE'RE ALL CALLING IT A GROVE OF TREES.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT A DEFINITION OF GROVE OF TREES IS, BUT AN AREA OF AT LEAST AN ACRE IN SIZE THAT WILL BE FULL OF TREES.
AND THEN, UM, ONE, I THINK THAT THIS IS THE FIRST OF THE SCHOOLS WHERE WE'VE SORT OF MODIFIED THIS PEDESTRIAN ASPECT.
AND, AND I THINK WE ALL SORT OF CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THIS OF A STANDARD EVERY 200 FEET GETS, KIND OF, DOESN'T REALLY SOLVE WHAT THE IDEA IS TO GET A PLACE FOR FAMILIES AND TEACHERS AND COMMUNITY AND OTHER PEOPLE TO GATHER AND STUFF.
AND, AND THIS IS THE FIRST SCHOOL WHERE WE'VE DONE THAT.
AND I THINK, UH, KRAMER'S LIKE THAT.
AND I THINK FROM NOW ON WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT WHERE IT'S LOGICAL TO PUT THESE AMENITIES IS THE LOGICAL PLACE TO PUT 'EM WHERE THEY'RE USED AS OPPOSED TO JUST EQUALLY SPACING THEM AND STUFF.
SO I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR WORKING WITH US ON THAT.
UM, KATIE IS HERE TO EXPLAIN THE, UH, LIGHT ASPECT.
I BELIEVE THE PRINCIPAL IS ON SITE, ON, ON ONLINE TO SPEAK.
DO YOU HAVE A, IS THAT MR. GARRA? YES.
SO I, I'M GONNA, UM, FINISH AND I'M SURE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS I CAN HOPEFULLY ANSWER 'EM LATER, BUT IF WE'LL GO TO HIM AND THEN I THINK, UH, OH, THERE SHE IS.
I THOUGHT YOU, I THOUGHT YOU ABANDONED ME UP HERE.
UH, SHE'LL TALK ABOUT LIGHTS, WHICH WILL COME INTO PLAY AND IF WE'RE GOING THROUGH HIGH SCHOOLS AND ADDING THESE TO ALL THE HIGH SCHOOLS AND AS LITTLE AT A TIME.
SO, UM, I GUESS THE PRINCIPAL.
MR. GARRA, OR THANK YOU MR. CARLEY.
GABRIEL GARRA, 89 28 PALISADE DRIVE, THE PROUD PRINCIPAL OF THE HISTORIC WW SAMUEL HIGH SCHOOL.
I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYONE ON THE PANEL FOR THEIR TIME.
UM, GREAT CONVERSATIONS WITH, UH, DEALING WITH THE UPGRADES TO OUR CAMPUS.
REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING AND THE, UH, BENCH ISSUES, UH, PARDON ME, UH, LANDSCAPING AND BENCH UPGRADES.
UM, E EXTREMELY EXCITED ABOUT THE PROPOSAL OF LIGHTS FOR OUR FOOTBALL FIELD.
THAT IS OUR FOOTBALL PRACTICE FIELD.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR US ON CAMPUS.
WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT HAVING THE ABILITY TO, UH, PRACTICE WITH OUR STUDENTS BOTH IN THE MORNINGS AND NOW HAVING THE ABILITY TO PRACTICE WITH OUR STUDENT ATHLETES IN THE AFTERNOONS AND THE EVENINGS AS WELL.
UH, A LOT OF TIMES WE TEND TO LOSE THEM BECAUSE OF THE LIGHT AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN THE WINTERTIME.
BUT, UH, WE ARE EXTREMELY EXCITED ABOUT THAT AND THAT'LL JUST GIVE US ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH OUR STUDENTS AND, UH, TO KEEP THEM HERE ON CAMPUS WHERE WE NEED THEM.
UH, THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT I HAD, UH, A CONCERN ABOUT WAS JUST WITH OUR NEW GROVE OF TREES THAT WE HAVE JUST FOR THE PROPOSAL FOR A PATHWAY OR A COMMUNITY PATHWAY THROUGH THAT, UH, ONE OF THE MAIN IMPORTANT THINGS THAT
[00:40:01]
WE HAVE ON CAMPUS IS CAMPUS SECURITY.AND SO WE WERE JUST LOOKING TO SEE ABOUT THAT AND IF THAT COULD BE AMENDED JUST SO WE COULD SECURE THE CAMPUS.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO, UH, ALL THE GREAT UPDATES HERE AT SAMUEL HIGH SCHOOL.
KATIE LENAHAN, 9,400 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.
I HAVE A PRESENTATION, I BELIEVE MR. CROWLEY IS ASKING YOU ALL TO PULL UP TO, TO ADDRESS THE ATHLETIC LIGHTING.
I'M THE DESIGN DIRECTOR FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR AT DALLAS I S D.
AND WE'RE INTERESTED IN INSTALLING ATHLETIC LIGHTS AT THE PRACTICE FIELD AT THIS CAMPUS.
ONE OF THE REASONS WE HAVE THIS PRESENTATION FOR IT.
NOPE, THERE, YOU, YOU JUST HAD IT.
AND IF I WANT TO SCROLL, I JUST DO THAT.
SO WE WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE, UM, AND INSTALL PRACTICE LIGHTS.
UH, ACTUALLY IN GENERAL AT OUR HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC FIELDS, THE REASON THAT WE WANT TO TAKE THIS ON IS WE WANNA EXTEND THE PRACTICE FIELD OP OPTIONS AND HOURS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO OUR STUDENTS, INCREASE STUDENT PARTICIPATION IN EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES, PROVIDE BETTER AND SAFER PRACTICE OPTIONS FOR THE STUDENTS, AND TO PROVIDE PARITY FOR DALLAS STUDENTS WITH OUR SUBURBAN SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS.
UH, WE'VE TAKEN A LOOK AT A NUMBER OF CASE STUDIES TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS WE NEED TO CONSIDER WHEN WE'RE SPECIFYING AND INSTALLING PRACTICE FIELD LIGHTS.
THIS IMAGE RIGHT HERE ON THE FAR LEFT, THAT'S WHAT FIELD LIGHTS LOOK LIKE IN THE 1970S.
UH, ON THIS IMAGE RIGHT HERE, THIS LIGHT, YOU CAN SEE THIS POLE.
THAT'S THE LIGHT THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO PUT ON, ON OUR ATHLETIC FIELDS.
THE LIGHT IS SHINING DIRECTLY DOWN ON THE FIELD.
WE'RE CONCERNED, AND WE'VE BEEN TRACKING THE ISSUES WITH LIGHT SPILL, LIGHT POLLUTION, AND SKY GLOW.
SO WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO VENDORS ABOUT THAT.
AS WE, UH, IDENTIFY WHICH TYPE OF LIGHTS WE WANNA USE, OUR GOAL IS TO LIGHT THE FIELDS, NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, WE'RE GOING TO INSTALL COMMUNITY FRIENDLY SPORTS, SLIDING TO MINIMIZE ALLOWABLE LIGHT, SPILL MANAGE HIGH GRADE GLARE, SKY GLOW EFFECTS.
THERE WILL BE CURFEW REQUIREMENTS AND UTILIZE BEST, UH, LIGHTING PRACTICES.
THE POLES ARE GONNA BE 80 FEET TALL.
THE TALLER THE POLE, THE MORE THE DIRECT, THE LIGHT ON THE FIELD, THE LESS THE LIGHT SPILL.
THIS IS THE HEAD OF THE LIGHT FIXTURE, SO YOU CAN SEE IT SHINES DIRECTLY DOWN ONTO THE FIELD.
WE'VE BEEN TAKING A LOOK AT A NUMBER OF STUDIES.
THIS IS A HEAT MAP THAT WE WERE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT FOR ANOTHER CAMPUS.
THE FOOT CANDLES AT THE PROPERTY LINE ACROSS THE STREET ON AVERAGE ARE 0.02 FOOT CANDLES.
SO TO GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT FOR THAT, THE IMAGE ON YOUR LEFT, THAT'S 25 TO 40 FOOT CANDLES, THE IMAGE ON YOUR RIGHT, THAT'S TWO FOOT CANDLES.
WE'RE GONNA BE 0.0 TO FOOT CANDLES, PROPERTY LINE ACROSS THE STREET.
UH, AGAIN, WE WANNA LIGHT THE FIELDS, NOT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE THINK THIS IS GREAT FOR OUR STUDENTS AND WE ARE HERE AND AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS OR ANY OF OUR OTHER CASES THAT ARE HERE TODAY.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF ITEM SIX? ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER YOUNG? UH, YES.
UH, MA'AM, IF YOU'D COME BACK, UH, WHAT ARE THE DIAMETER OF THE LIGHT POLES YOU PROPOSED TO INSTALL? OH, YOU'RE ASKING ME A QUESTION.
I DON'T KNOW, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY'RE VERY LARGE.
I DON'T, PROBABLY LIKE 12 TO 18 INCHES FOR THE POLE ITSELF.
MORE THAN 12 INCHES, I'D SAY LIKE 18 INCHES OR SOMETHING.
AND, UH, MR. CROWLEY, IF YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW, HOW DOES THAT COMPARE TO A, UH, MONOPOLE UH, CELL TOWER? WELL, I GUESS IT DEPENDS ON THE HEIGHT, BUT PROBABLY A LOWER ONE'S PROBABLY 36 INCHES ACROSS.
THERE, THERE, THAT'S A LOT MORE WEIGHT ON TOP OF THAT THAN THERE IS A L LED D LIGHT FIXTURE.
I WAS THINKING IT WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN A, UH, CELL TOWER.
WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER STANDARD THAN COMMISSIONER TREADAWAY.
UH, YES, MS. LENAHAN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION ON THE LIGHTS.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S A BIG ISSUE WITH ME IS THAT SPILLOVER AND WHEN IT'S 80 FEET, YOU REALLY DO HAVE TO, SO I LOVE THAT YOU DID
[00:45:01]
THE FOOT CANDLE AND HOW YOU DID THIS PRESENTATION.AND NEW TECHNOLOGY SEEMS TO DO MUCH BETTER.
THE ONLY QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS, UH, AT THESE PRACTICE FIELDS, ONE OF THE THINGS IS NOT JUST THE NIGHT DURING THE WINTER, BUT IT'S ALSO IN THE EARLY MORNINGS.
AT WHAT TIME, UH, DO YOU PLAN TO BE TURNING THESE ON IN THE MORNINGS? I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT SIX 30 TO NINE 30.
I THOUGHT I SAW, UM, COMMISSIONER HERBERT.
UH, CURRENTLY LOOKING AT THE SITE, THERE'S A LOT OF FENCING.
FENCING ON THE FRONT, FENCING TO THE YARD, FENCING TO THE FIELD HAS, HAS FENCING AROUND THE SCHOOL BEEN THOUGHT ABOUT REDUCING? UM, AS YOU DO A LOT OF THE NEW BUILD, WE'RE PROBABLY NOT LOOKING TO REDUCE FENCING AROUND SCHOOLS.
A LOT OF THE FENCING AT THIS CAMPUS IS AROUND THE ATHLETIC FIELDS.
WE HAVE STUDENTS OUT THERE PRACTICING AND WE WANT TO ENSURE THERE'S SAFETY.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S FENCING ON THE STREET, THERE'S FENCING ON ALL THE ATHLETIC FIELDS.
UM, AND IT'S, THANK YOU FOR THE ANSWER.
BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO TRY TO LOOK AT REDUCING FENCING AS WE MOVE FORWARD, BUT NEITHER ARE THEY.
UM, THE NEXT QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANY PLANS TO BEAUTIFY GREEN GREENDALE STREET? UM, THE STREET HAS A LOT OF PARKING LOT PARKING ON IT.
UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THEY'RE DOING DONUTS IN THE PARKING LOT ON GREENDALE.
UM, AND I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT ADDING TREES IN THE FRONT PARKING, BUT IS THERE ANY PLANS TO ADD, UH, TREES TO SOME OF THE PARKING ON GREENDALE AND REMOVING THE PORTABLES THAT ARE ON PARKING ON GREENDALE? SO WE'RE NOT ABLE TO REMOVE THE PORTABLES AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
THAT'S NOT IN OUR, UM, PROJECT SCOPE.
ALTHOUGH WE WOULD LOVE TO, IF WE HAD THE BUDGET TO DO IT REGARDING THE LANDSCAPING AROUND ALONG GREENFIELD OR GREENDALE, WE'RE ACTUALLY, UH, WORKING WITH COOL SCHOOLS AND TRYING TO FIND DONORS THAT ARE GONNA PARTNER WITH THE COST FOR THE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING.
UH, AT THIS CAMPUS, IT'S AN EXISTING CAMPUS, SO LANDSCAPING ALONG GREENDALE WAS NOT PART OF THE CONVERSATION AND TALKING TO COOL SCHOOLS WHEN WE HAD THE, THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE GROVE OF TREES, IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IF YOU HAVE A GROVE OF TREES, THAT'S THE BEST WAY YOU CREATE A CARBON SINK.
SO THE GOAL FOR THE TREES IN GENERAL IS TO IMPROVE THE AIR QUALITY IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
SO WE FELT IF WE COULD CONCENTRATE THEM IN THAT LOCATION RATHER THAN SPACING THEM AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE SCHOOL, WE WOULD HAVE A BETTER IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IT JUST SEEMS TO MAYBE THEY'RE GONNA BE HEALTHIER AND HAPPIER AND A GROVE.
AND THEN CARL HAS AN ANSWER TOO.
UM, JENNIFER EXPLAINED ON THIS ONE WITH THE ARTICLE 10 ARTIFICIAL LOT, WELL, PART OF THAT ARTIFICIAL LOT, THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO ART GONNA BE TWO ARTIFICIAL LOTS.
AND, AND I DON'T HAVE THE SITE PLAN.
I COULD, BUT IT'S NOT WORTH IT.
THERE'S A FIRE LANE THAT CONNECTS A PRAIRIE CREEK AND PALISADES FOR THE ADDITION.
SO THERE'LL BE TREES ALONG THAT, CUZ THAT'S PART OF AN ARTIFICIAL LOT MORE THAN 2000 SQUARE FEET OF PAVEMENT.
SO THERE'LL BE TREES ALONG THERE.
BUT THE OTHER ARTIFICIAL LOT, WHICH IS THE REAL SORT OF ARTIFICIAL LOT IF THAT MAKES SENSE, IS FOR THIS, UH, GYMNASIUM.
WELL THAT HAS, IT HAS TO TOUCH THE STREET IN THAT SENSE.
THERE'LL BE SOME ADDITIONAL TREES.
WILL THERE BE A, A GROVE OF TREES? NO, THERE WON'T BE.
UM, AND, AND SHE MENTIONED ABOUT THE PORTABLES.
THE OTHER ISSUE THAT COMES UP TO HAND IS, IS PARKING LOTS AND SCREENING.
I KNOW YOU MENTIONED LIKE TO REMOVE FENCES AND I'M SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE SECURITY INVOLVED IN SCHOOLS AND FENCES.
AND THERE'S ALSO THE SECURITY INVOLVED.
AND IF I PUT TALL BARRIERS AROUND PARKING LOTS TOO, IT GIVES HIDING PLACES AND STUFF.
SO WE'LL LOOK AT, THERE IS SOME, UH, SHRUBS ALONG GREENDALE MORE TOWARDS THE BASEBALL FIELD.
UM, AND ACTUALLY ONE OF THE, AS I RECALL JENNIFER, ONE OF THE AMENITY AREAS IS BY THAT BASEBALL FIELD.
SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE, BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD CONGREGATE WATCHING A BASEBALL GAME.
SO WE'RE GONNA PROVIDE A LITTLE SORT OF BENCH AREA THERE TOO TO SORT OF SOFTEN SOMEWHAT ON GREENDALE.
AND, AND PALISADES WILL HAVE TREES ACTUALLY ON BOTH SIDES OF PALISADES.
AND THERE IS A LOT OF TREES IN FRONT OF THAT SCHOOL.
BUT WE'RE ALSO GONNA ADD INTO THE GAP SO THAT, UM, IT'S NOT GONNA BE A A TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD, BUT IT'LL BE A BOULEVARD EVENTUALLY, UH, 50 YEARS, IF THAT SCHOOL REACHES A HUNDRED YEARS OR SOMETHING, THERE'LL BE SOME VERY LARGE TREES ALONG BOTH SIDES OF PALISADE.
SO THAT, THAT'S SORT OF THE CONCENTRATION THERE SINCE THAT'S THE FRONT DOOR AND REALLY WHERE THE PICKUP AND DROP OFF SORT OF CONCENTRATES.
UM, AND I'LL MAKE COMMENT AFTER.
AND I APOLOGIZE IF I MISSED THIS OUTREACH WAS DONE TO THE HOMEOWNERS ON THE, IF I'M LOOKING AT IT, THE RIGHT SIDE
[00:50:01]
OF THE, ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PLAY FIELD.WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING AT I'LL, I'M SURE IT WAS LAST YEAR.
AND YOU SPECIFICALLY INVITED THOSE HOMEOWNERS? UH, YEAH.
EVERYBODY WITHIN 500 FEET, THE SAME NOTIFICATION THE CITY HAD, WE USED THE CITY'S NOTIFICATION.
JUST ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP QUESTION FOR MS. LENAHAN.
I MAY HAVE MISSED IT IN MY EMAIL, BUT WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO SHARE THAT LIGHTING, UH, POWERPOINT THAT YOU, YOU USED TODAY WITH THE COMMISSION? I THINK IT WAS VERY USEFUL AND INFORMATIVE.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD, WE'RE ACTUALLY GETTING PHOTOMETRICS FOR ALL THE SCHOOLS THAT WE WANNA DO THIS TO, SO WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT BEING GOOD NEIGHBORS.
I'LL FORWARD THAT TO, UM, TO YOU JENNIFER, AND THEN OR YOLANDA, AND YOU CAN DISTRIBUTE TO EVERYBODY.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALRIGHT, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, MR. CHAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO HAVE A MOTION, UH, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 12 2 76, I MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A RISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, A REVISED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEF, INCLUDING THE ADJUSTMENT TO THE TMP IS SUGGESTED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
I HAVE JUST VERY, VERY BRIEF COMMENTS MR. CHAIR.
I THINK STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS JUST A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN? THAT'S CORRECT.
JUST A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN? THAT'S CORRECT.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.
UM, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? YES, I, I JUST WANTED TO, UH, THANK STAFF FIRST.
UH, MS. ALGAR DID AN OUTSTANDING JOB HERE, MR. CROWLEY, THE D I S D TEAM, UH, JANET MONIER AT TEXAS TREES, ALL THE, THE COOL SCHOOLS TEAM.
UM, THIS PROJECT HAS COME A LONG, LONG WAY, JUST IN FACT, THE LAST TWO WEEKS.
UH, AND SO I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, THIS, THIS PROJECT'S GONNA HAVE IN IMPROVED OPERATIONS ALMOST ALL THE WAY AROUND.
AND REALLY, THIS, THIS SITE IS JUST ABOUT THE TREES.
UH, THAT WAS THE, THE BIG POINT HERE, AND THAT WAS KIND OF THE, UH, THE, THE DIFFICULTY IN GETTING IT ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.
BUT I'M, I'M VERY PLEASED THAT WE WHERE WE ARE TODAY, AND I'M VERY HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YES, I I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION, BUT I DO WANT TO, UM, TASK THE I S D AND OUR PLANNERS TO THINK ABOUT, UM, THOSE FENCES, RIGHT? AND, AND THE STUDIES AROUND FENCING, AROUND SCHOOLS, UH, THAT DON'T LOCK THE GATES DON'T CLOSE, RIGHT? SO HOW, HOW MUCH SECURITY IS ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT OF ATHLETIC FIELDS.
HOW, HOW MUCH CAN WE HAVE STUDIES THAT SHOW, UM, SHOW THAT? AND, UM, THAT'S ALL JUST, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M TASKING YOU ALL TO THINK ABOUT THAT.
AND FOR OUR PRINCIPALS TO TASK YOU ALL, TO, UM, REMOVE DOORS, PORT THOSE PORTABLES AS A STUDENT WHO HAD TO LIVE IN THEM AND, UH, BE EDUCATED IN THEM.
SO, UM, JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.
UM, WE HAVE A MOTION BY THE CHAIR, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, UH, TO FILE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED WITH COMMISSIONER YOUNG'S CHANGE AS TO THE TIMING FOR THE TMP.
ANY OPPOSED? NAY, THE MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER RUBIN.
UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'LL NOW KEEP MOVING TO CASE NUMBER SEVEN Z 2 1 12 2 90.
THIS IS CASE C TWO 12 DASH TWO 90.
THE REQUEST IS FOR ONE, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE GREATER THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET.
AND TWO, A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTIES OWNED A C R D COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR
[00:55:01]
CONTROL OVERLAY.IT'S LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTH HAMPTON ROAD IN BURLINGTON BOULEVARD, AND IT'S ABOUT 0.38 ACRE LOCATION MAP SHOWING THE PROPERTY WITHIN CITY LIMITS.
AERIAL MAP WITH THE AREA OF REQUEST OUTLINED IN BLUE ZONING MAP WITH SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS AND LAND USES, UH, TO THE NORTH.
OUR OFFICE AND RESTAURANT USES ALONG, ALONG, UH, SOUTH HAMPTON ROAD TO THE EAST, UH, SEPARATED FROM THE AREA OF REQUEST BY AN ALLEY IS AN AREA OF SINGLE FAMILY USES ZONED R SEVEN 50 A, UH, TO THE SOUTH ALONG HAMPTON ROAD, OUR GENERAL MERCHANDISE RESTAURANT AND PERSONAL SERVICE USES.
AND THEN TO THE WEST, ACROSS HAMPTON ROAD IS A RESTAURANT.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED A C R D DISTRICT WITH A D OVERLAY.
UH, IT'S DEVELOPED WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE GREATER THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET.
UM, WITH THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A NEW S U FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE EXISTING STORE.
UH, THEY ARE ALSO REQUESTING A CHANGE TO A D ONE OVERLAY, UH, WHICH WOULD PERMIT THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES SUBJECT TO AN S U, WHEREAS NOW IN THE D OVERLAY, UH, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SHELLS ARE NOT PERMITTED AT ALL.
UH, THE APPLICANT DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING SITES, AND THEY'RE REQUESTING AN INITIAL TIME LIMIT OF THREE YEARS WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL TWO YEAR PERIODS.
AND SITE PHOTOS, THIS IS ON THE SITE LOOKING EAST, UH, FROM THE HAMPTON ROAD FRONTAGE AND THEN COMING AROUND ONTO BURLINGTON BOULEVARD, LOOKING SOUTH AT THAT FRONT EDGE OF THE PROPERTY, MORE VIEWS OF THAT FRONT EDGE.
AND THIS IS A PARKING AREA WITH DUMPSTERS ALONG THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE SITE AND SURROUNDING USES.
THIS IS THE COMMERCIAL TO THE SOUTH OF THE REQUEST AREA ALONG BUR ALONG HAMPTONS, EXCUSE ME.
AND THEN JUST KIND OF GOING IN A COUNTERCLOCKWISE DIRECTION, LOOKING AT SOME OF THOSE COMMERCIAL USES ALONG HAMPTON THERE AT THE INTERSECTION.
AND THEN THESE ARE SOME OTHER COMMERCIAL USES TO THE NORTH.
AND THEN VIEWS OF THAT SINGLE FAMILY, UH, TO THE NORTHEAST AND EAST.
THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED, UH, SITE PLAN FOR THE S U P AND STAFF'S.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF THE S U P, UH, FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD WITH NO ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, UH, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF THE D ONE LYRICA CONTROL OVERLAY.
AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY, WELL, ACTUALLY, I GUESS NOW I HAVE TO READ 'EM INTO THE RECORD.
WELL, WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA GO FOR QUESTIONS FIRST AND THEN WE'LL READ INTO THE RECORD.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? ANY YOUR FOLKS ONLINE? UH, YES.
COMMISSIONER TREADAWAY, SINCE WE'RE REQUESTING A CHANGE FROM A D TO A D ONE OVERLAY TO PERMIT ALCOHOL, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT OTHER USES PERMIT ALCOHOL IN THE VICINITY? YES.
SO THE ONLY, UH, OVERLAY DISTRICT WE HAVE IN DALLAS THAT RESTRICTS THE SALE OF ALCOHOL IS THE D OR THE D ONE.
UM, OTHERWISE, UH, THE SALE OF ALCOHOL WOULD JUST BE CONSIDERED A TYPICAL RETAIL USE.
UM, IT'S ONLY WHEN A D OVERLAY IS PRESENT THAT ALCOHOL SALES ARE NOT PERMITTED AT ALL.
AND THEN IF YOU HAVE A D ONE OVERLAY, UM, UH, THEY NEED TO, UH, THEY REQUIRE AN S U BEFORE YOU CAN SELL ALCOHOL.
UM, AND I, UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR DID POINT OUT I MISSPOKE.
UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR AN INITIAL THREE YEAR PERIOD, UH, BUT STILL WITH NO ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTO RENEWAL.
SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHAT USES SURROUNDING IT DO CURRENTLY PERMIT THE SALE OF ALCOHOL? UH, EVERYTHING ALONG THIS FRONTAGE OF, OF THE, OF THE STREET, UH, IS CURRENTLY IN A D OVERLAY, SO ON NO OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA IS ALCOHOL SALES CURRENTLY PERMITTED.
UM, DOES THAT, UH, AREA INCLUDE CLARENDON AT HAMPTON WHERE THERE'S AN EXISTING CONVENIENCE STORE THAT SELLS LIQUOR OR BEER AND ALCOHOL? BEER AND WINE, NOT LIQUOR? YEAH, I'D HAVE TO LOOK UP, UH, THAT AREA ON THE ZONING MAP, WHICH THANKS TO OUR LOVELY NETWORK OUTAGE IS RUNNING REALLY SLOWLY RIGHT NOW.
UM, BUT I COULD LOOK THAT UP FOR YOU.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE ZONING IS THERE, BUT THERE IS A CONVENIENCE STORE JUST A BLOCK AND A HALF AWAY THAT SHARES THE SAME OWNERSHIP.
[01:00:01]
THANK YOU FOR THE, AS WELL AS THE TOM THUMB DOWN THE STREET.THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
WELL NOW, UH, GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IF YOU COULD READ INTO THE RECORD, PLEASE.
ITEM SEVEN KC TWO 12 DASH TWO 90.
AN APPLICATION FOR ONE, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE GREATER THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET.
AND TWO, A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTY ZONE.
A C R D COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTHAMPTON ROAD IN BURLINGTON BOULEVARD.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE GREATER THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. MULKEY.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES, MA'AM.
I'M AN ATTORNEY WITH SONG WOODEN, P L L C.
WE'RE THE ATTORNEYS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE A BRIEF BACKGROUND.
THIS IS AN ETHNIC, UH, FOOD STORE WITH THE RESTAURANT AT TAQUERIA AND, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS TAKEN IT OVER DURING C UM, THAT'S WHEN, UH, I BELIEVE THAT THEY, UH, FIRST STARTED WITH THIS, UM, THIS BUSINESS.
AND SO THEY'VE BEEN DOING A LOT FOR IT, BUT THEY'VE BEEN, UH, KIND OF DEALING WITH A LOT OF COMPETITORS THAT ARE ABLE TO SELL BEER AND WINE.
AND SO THAT IS WHY WE ARE REQUESTING A D ONE OVERLAY.
UM, CURRENTLY THERE ARE NO PLANS TO SELL LIQUOR.
UM, WE DID MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND I BELIEVE I GAVE, UH, CITY PLANNER, UH, MULKEY A, UH, PRINTOUT OF AN EMAIL CHAIN FROM THE CITY, UH, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
UH, THERE WERE HAMPTON HILLS, UH, WINTE HEIGHTS AND, UH, THE NORTH CLIP NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, AND THEY ALL DID A VOTE AND HAD A UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF THE ITEM.
I'M GONNA RESERVE THE REST OF MY TIME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? WELL, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? ANY LAST QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I SEE NONE.
COMMISSIONER POPKIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
AND I HAVE COMMENTS IF I HAVE A SECOND.
UM, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 1 12 2 90, I VOTE TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER POPKIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER POPKIN? YES, UM, I DID ALSO ATTEND THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AND I WANNA COMMEND THE REPRESENTATIVES AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY OWNERS FOR ATTENDING.
UM, WE'VE GOT A GREAT RESPONSE FROM THE NEIGHBORS WHO ENJOYED MEETING THE PROPERTY OWNERS, LEARNING THAT THEY ALSO OWN THE, UM, SOMEWHAT NEW CONVENIENCE STORE DOWN THE STREET THAT ALSO SELLS BEER AND WINE.
UM, AND THEY REALLY CLEANED UP THAT PROPERTY.
THEY RECENTLY PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY AND LET US KNOW THAT THEY HAD KEPT THE CONVENIENCE STORE OPEN DURING THE SNOWPOCALYPSE TO HELP MAKE SURE EVERYONE WAS ABLE TO ACCESS FOOD IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, IT, SO IT WAS REALLY GREAT TO JUST MAKE THAT CONNECTION WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND TALK TO THEM ABOUT OTHER IMPROVEMENTS THEY COULD MAKE TO THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS SCREENING THEIR TRASH, POTENTIALLY, UM, INCLUDING A MURAL ON THEIR WEST FACING WALL.
SO IT WAS A GREAT CONNECTION AND, UM, I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO A CONTINUED RELATIONSHIP WITH THESE PROPERTY OWNERS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. POPKIN.
COMMISSIONER POPKIN IS, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SEE NONE.
COMMISSIONERS WILL MOVE TO CASE NUMBER EIGHT HAS NOT BEEN BRIEF.
WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE BRIEFING AND MS. MUNOZ ONLINE.
SETH, WE HAVE BRIEFED THIS ONE BEFORE.
CERTAINLY I'LL GO AHEAD AND START FROM THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SO THAT WE CAN DISCUSS THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE.
[01:05:08]
SO THE REVISIONS MADE SINCE THE LAST TIME IT WAS AT CPC ON FIVE 18 INCLUDE PROVIDING, UM, UM, A FRONT YARD REQUIRED F 15 FEET ALONG SUNSET AVENUE AND A WESTERN SIDE YARD SETBACK OF FIVE FEET, AN INCREASE IN THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING PROVIDED OF TO 10% FROM 5%, UM, GARAGE FACADE REQUIREMENTS.UH, SO ALL THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT APPLY TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE SINCE THE GARAGE IS GOING TO BE THE FIRST FLOOR, THEY WOULD ALSO APPLY ALL THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS TO THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE GARAGE PARKING AS WELL.
AND THEN FINALLY, UM, EV PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, SINCE THE DOCKET POSTING, WE MADE EDITS TO CLARIFY THE EV AND PARKING STRUCTURE FACADE TREATMENT, AND MADE A CORRECTION TO REMOVE A REFERENCE TO ZANG BOULEVARD.
BUT OVERALL, YOU SEE HERE THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND AS THEY'VE CHANGED THERE, THE ALL THE BLUE HIGHLIGHTS, AS I MENTIONED RIGHT NOW, AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION REMAINS APPROVAL AND IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? YES.
UM, MRS. MUNOZ, I JUST WANTED TO BRIEFLY GO OVER THE, UH, FACADE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU AND I HAD TALKED THROUGH.
UM, COULD YOU WALK US THROUGH SOME OF THOSE, UM, DESIGN REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE NOW REQUIRED FOR THAT FIRST FLOOR IF YOU WANT? YEAH.
I THINK THERE'S A WHOLE SECTION IN THE PD JUST TO CALL SOME ATTENTION.
UM, LET ME JUST PULL UP THAT SECTION REAL QUICK, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT, IT REQUIRES FACADE ARTICULATION AND FOR A CERTAIN LENGTH AND THEN DEPTH AS WELL, AND THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS I'LL PULL UP IN JUST A MOMENT.
WERE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OTHER THAN THE FACADE TREATMENT? NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
I, I WILL REITERATE MY QUESTION TO YOU BY EMAIL THAT, UM, BECAUSE THERE IS A SECTION IN HERE THAT SAYS IF IH IS IS MET.
IF THE IH REQUIREMENTS ARE MET AND, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS PROVIDED, THEN UH, THE SECTION OF THE CODE THAT, UH, REQUIRES DESIGN STANDARDS IS NOT APPLICABLE.
BUT THIS INCLUDES SEPARATE DESIGN STANDARDS, CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND I HAVE THAT SECTION UP NOW, SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SHARE THAT WITH YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? I'VE GOT ONE MORE TO USE, BUT I'M OF COURSE AFTER SHOOT.
WHAT I'M SHOWING YOU HERE THOUGH, IS THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS RED TEXT IS WHAT WAS SENT TO YOU THIS MORNING TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, ALTHOUGH I DID RECEIVE THE INTERPRETATION THAT IT DID APPLY TO THAT, I WANTED TO NOT LEAVE ROOM FOR ANY ADDITIONAL INTERPRETATIONS.
SO IT DOES ALSO INCLUDE THE PARKING STRUCTURES, WHICH WOULD BE THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION AS PROPOSED.
SEE, THIS NOW COVERS IF FOR WHATEVER REASON THEY DID A DIFFERENT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT HERE WE STILL HAVE THE SECTION ON PARKING STRUCTURES SEPARATELY.
THAT WOULD REQUIRE EITHER THEM TO HAVE, UM, THE ACTIVE USES IN THE FIRST 25 FEET OF DEPTH OF THAT GROUND LEVEL.
OR THEY COULD ALSO HAVE AN EXTERIOR FACADE THAT IS SIMILAR IN MATERIALS ARCHITECTURE AND APPEARANCE TO THE FACADE OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE.
SO THIS WOULD BE IF IT'S A SEPARATE STRUCTURE FROM THE MAIN STRUCTURE.
BUT SINCE IT IS A PART OF THE MAIN STRUCTURE, IT QUALIFIES UNDER THE REGULAR DESIGN STANDARDS OF APPLICABILITY FOR, UM, NEW CONSTRUCTION IN GENERAL AND NOW INCLUDING PARKING STRUCTURES.
AND WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS WE HAVE THE STREET FACING FRONTAGES HAVING TO HAVE, UM, AT LEAST ONE WINDOW AND ONE COMMON PRIMARY ENTRANCE.
AND AT LEAST 60% OF STREET FACING DWELLING UNITS HAVE TO HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL ENTRANCE.
AND THEN ALSO WE HAVE THE BLANK WALL PROVISION FOR EVERY 25 LINEAR FEET
[01:10:01]
OF CONTINUOUS STREET FRONTAGE, THERE HAS TO BE AN OPEN SPACE FRONTING FACADE.AND THEN THE INDIVIDUAL ENTRIES HAVE A ADDITIONAL, UM, REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS ONE EXCEPTION IN CASE THEY DO RETIREMENT HOUSING.
BUT THE, THE MAIN ONE IS THE FACADE ARTICULATION, WHICH I WAS TRYING TO DESCRIBE FOR MEMORY.
IT REQUIRES ANY FACADE EXCEEDING 30 FEET IN LENGTH TO THEN HAVE TWO OF THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS, INCLUDING A CHANGE IN PLAIN, SUCH AS AN OFFSET REVEAL, RECESS OR PROJECTION.
SO THIS IS VERY TYPICAL LANGUAGE AND IT WOULD BE FOR A WIDTH NO LESS THAN TWO FEET OR 24 INCHES IN A DEPTH OF EIGHT INCHES.
SO WE WOULD SEE SOME VARIATION IN THAT FACADE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS NOT JUST ONE MASSIVE BLANK WALL ON THE FIRST LEVEL.
AND THAT SECTION ALSO INCLUDES THAT IF IT'S LONGER THAN A HUNDRED FEET, THEN THERE ARE FOUR OF THOSE THAT ARE REQUIRED, CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
UM, AND THEN, UH, I WANTED TO ALSO NOTE IN LODGING USES SECTION THAT IT INCLUDES THAT BOUTIQUE HOTEL WOULD BE ALLOWED BY S U P, IS THAT CORRECT? I THINK THAT'S RIGHT HERE.
I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT.
UM, AND THEN FINALLY, BECAUSE WE HAD A LOT OF CONSTERNATION AND DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE WANTED TO SET THIS UP FOR THE EV PARKING, ALTHOUGH, UM, SOME PREVIOUS CASES HAVE BEEN TYING THE PARKING TO THE NUMBER OF UNITS WE DISCUSSED, WHETHER, YOU KNOW, THE PROS AND CONS OF TYING IT INSTEAD TO THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES VERSUS THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES PER PROVIDED AND OPTED TO PROCEED WITH, UM, TYING THE PERCENTAGE OF EV PARKING SPACES TO THE PROVIDED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES.
BECAUSE, UM, IF A, IF A PROJECT SUCH AS THIS WERE TO PROVIDE AN, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK THIS IS WHERE WE LANDED, THAT IF A PROJECT SUCH AS THIS WERE TO PROVIDE MORE SPACES THAN REQUIRED, IF WE TIE IT TO THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES, THEY END UP WITH FEWER SPACES FOR A COMPLEX WITH THAT COULD END UP HAVING MORE TENANTS THAT ARE DRIVING.
WHEREAS IF WE TIE THE EV PARKING PERCENTAGE TO THE NUMBER OF PROVIDED SPACES, THEN A PROJECT THAT'S PROVIDING EXTRA SPACES THEN IS REQUIRED BY CODE WILL ALSO BE PROVIDING MORE EV SPACES, WHICH IS WHAT WE WANNA BE INCENTIVIZING, THAT IF YOU'RE DRIVING, YOU'RE HOPEFULLY DRIVING AN EV IF YOU'RE PROVIDING FEWER SPACES FOR YOUR TENANTS, THEN YOU CAN PROVIDE FEWER EV SPACES BECAUSE LIKELY YOUR TENANTS AREN'T DRIVING BECAUSE YOU'RE PROVIDING FEWER SPACES IN ANTICIPATION OF SOME FOLKS NOT OWNING CARS.
IS THAT KIND OF WHERE WE LANDED ON THIS ONE? CUZ IT'S DIFFERENT FROM OTHER, UM, PROJECTS WE'VE SEEN RECENTLY, CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
I KNOW THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION BECAUSE, UM, WE WANNA START STANDARDIZING THESE, UM, AND IT, IT, I FELT LIKE THIS WAS AN IMPORTANT POINT TO MAKE.
UM, BUT THEN WE ALSO LANDED, I I THINK IT ORIGINALLY SAID TWO TO 7% OF SPACES THEN OUR EV CAPABLE AND WE DECIDED THAT WOULD END UP AT 25%.
IS THAT WHERE WE LANDED? 25% EV CAPABLE IN ADDITION TO THE EV READY? THAT'S RIGHT.
I THINK THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF OUR MAJOR CHANGES.
UM, IN READING THROUGH THESE, AND I APOLOGIZE, I MISSED THIS EARLIER AND NOW I'VE LOST IT ON THE PARKING GARAGE STANDARDS, UH, FOR THE, HERE IT IS AND THE PAGE WON'T COME UP.
IT'S ITEM THREE AND SECTION H DESIGN STANDARDS.
IT SAYS PARKING STRUCTURES, THE GROUND FLOOR, GROUND LEVEL FLOOR FACING THE STREET OF ANY MULTI-FLOOR PARKING FACILITY.
DO I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A SINGLE, AND AGAIN, I, I KNOW IT'S A, THERE'S NOT A PLAN ATTACHED TO THIS, BUT I THINK WHAT I HAD UNDERSTOOD IS THAT THEY'RE DOING PARKING ON THE GROUND FLOOR WITH UNITS ABOVE THAT WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED A MULTI-LEVEL PARKING STRUCTURE.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
WHICH IS WHY WE INCLUDED IT IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR NEW INSTRUCTION IN GENERAL.
AND SO THERE, IT STILL HAS A FACADE ARTICULATION.
IT HAS AN OPENING THAT WILL RELATE GENERALLY TO THE FACADE EXPRESSION OF THE BUILDING, BUT WOULD NOT TRIGGER THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN ACTIVE USE.
IS THAT CORRECT? BUT ALL THE OTHER COMPONENTS CAN APPLY? YES.
[01:15:01]
OKAY.THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? HELLO.
OKAY, MS. MUNOZ, CAN YOU PLEASE READ IT INTO THE RECORD? ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SUB AREA ON PROPERTY ZONE SUB AREA FOUR WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER THREE 16, THE JEFFERSON AREA SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SUNSET AVENUE AND SOUTH BISHOP AVENUE.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
I WAS AT 39 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS, AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING JDE PROPERTIES IN THIS, UM, ON APRIL 20TH.
UH, UH, UNFORTUNATELY I WAS NOT HERE.
WE HAD A, A GREAT DISCUSSION, UH, ABOUT THIS AND WE HELD IT SO WE COULD REFINE IT.
UH, AND THE BIG QUESTIONS I HEARD, OR THE BIG CONCERN WAS THE, UH, THE LACK OF A CONTINUOUS SETBACK ALONG, UH, SUNSET AVENUE BECAUSE OUR PROPERTIES TO THE WEST HAD A 15 FOOT SETBACK AND WE WERE ASKING FOR ONE MUCH LESS THAN THAT.
UH, AFTER HEARING YOU ALL AND TALKING WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER POPKIN, UH, AND STAFF, WE HAVE CHANGED THAT.
SO WE NOW HAVE A 15 FOOT SETBACK, UH, ALONG SUNSET.
AND, UM, WE ALSO WENT THROUGH AND DID A LOT OF THE REVISIONS THAT, UH, MS. MUNOZ JUST SPOKE ABOUT, UH, INCLUDING, UM, INCREASING EV PARKING REQUIREMENTS, UM, PROVIDING THE, THE, UH, SETBACK ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE, UH, DOUBLING THE REQUIREMENT FOR MIXED INCOME HOUSING AND, UH, STRENGTHENING THE, UH, GARAGE FACADE REQUIREMENTS.
ONE OTHER THING THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER POP AND I JUST DISCUSSED, AND I'M HERE TO OFFER UP, IS THAT ALONG SUNSET, WE'RE GONNA OFFER AN ADDITIONAL, UH, PLANTING GROUP, AN ENHANCED BUFFER AND AN ADDITIONAL PLANTING GROUP, UH, OF, OF TREES AND SHRUBS ALONG SUNSET BOULEVARD.
AND SO WITH THAT, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? OKAY.
UH, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, I'M GREAT TO SEE ALL THESE REVISIONS AND APPRECIATE YOU WORKING WITH COMMISSIONER PUCK ON THIS.
IN THE FACADE ARTICULATION STANDARDS, I NOTICED THAT TWO ARE CARRIED OVER FROM OUR STANDARD LANGUAGE, WHICH ARE A CHANGE IN COLOR AND A CHANGE IN TEXTURE.
I'M NOT SURE FULLY CAPTURE THE INTENT OF THAT.
WOULD YOU, UM, CONSIDER REMOVING THOSE FROM THE FACADE ARTICULATION REQUIREMENTS? IT STILL LEAVES YOU SIX IN YOUR TWO OR FOUR.
WELL, UM, I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT, AS YOU KNOW.
UM, THESE ARE THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS WE, WE FIND IN OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS.
UM, WE HAVE TO HAVE PROVIDE FOUR OF 'EM.
UM, I CAN'T SPEAK, I CAN HAVE MY ARCHITECT HERE, UH, WHO'S STANDING BEHIND ME IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO 'EM ABOUT THAT.
I DON'T WANT TO TRY TO TIE HIS HAND WHERE MARK, HE WAS UP THERE, NOW HE'S HERE.
SO, UH, NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.
MY NAME IS MARK LEON WITH CROSS ARCHITECTS.
IT'S, UH, 87 9 JUNCTION DRIVE, ALLEN, TEXAS.
UH, YOU MENTIONED STRIKING TWO OF THE EIGHT ITEMS FROM THE SELECTIONS.
CAN YOU REITERATE TO ME THE OTHER SIX THAT WOULD BE REMAINING? JUST TO ENSURE BEFORE WE MAKE ANY PROMISES.
SO, UM, AND I'M GONNA ABBREVIATE THESE, BUT THE FIRST ONE IS THE CHANGE IN PLANE, SO AN OFFSET OR REVEAL RECESS OR PROJECTION.
UM, SECOND ONE IS ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS SUCH AS RAISED BANDS OR CORNICES, THIRD ARCHITECTURALLY PROMINENT ENTRANCES.
UH, FOURTH ATTACHED TOWER TURRET, UH, E IS OR FIVE IS AWNINGS.
THE NEXT ONE IS CHANGE IN COLOR.
THERE'S A CHANGE IN MATERIAL AND CHANGE IN TEXTURE.
AND SO I WOULD JUST SAY GENERALLY IT WOULD SEEM THE MATERIAL WOULD COVER AN INTENT OF A, UM, COLOR OR TEXTURE.
AND THOSE JUST DON'T SEEM TO BE REALLY SPEAKING TO WHAT I WOULD UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF A FACADE ARTICULATION MIGHT BE.
YEAH, I COULD DEFINITELY SEE THAT SOME OF THOSE ITEMS ARE A LITTLE BIT REDUNDANT, BUT WITH THE SIX THAT WOULD BE REMAINING, IF WE WERE TO STRIKE THE ITEM F AND G AND KEEP A THROUGH E AND ALSO THE H ITEM, WE CAN DEFINITELY STILL SELECT FOUR OF THOSE SIX AND ADHERE TO WHAT WE'RE, UH, SHOWING IN THE PD LANGUAGE.
COULD YOU TELL ME THE LETTERS THAT YOU JUST SAID ARE OKAY TO REMOVE? UH, WE COULD ADHERE TO THE ITEMS A THROUGH E AND GOT IT.
SO WE WOULD REMOVE F AND G IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR REQUEST.
OH, WELL I WAS LEAVING MATERIAL TO GIVE YOU BETTER FLEXIBILITY.
[01:20:01]
OKAY.SO, BUT I, I'M FINE WITH WHATEVER YOU WOULD LIKE
SO JUST REMOVE F, REMOVING F ONLY, IS THAT WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING? F AND H.
SO KEEPING THE, OKAY, SO A THROUGH E WE WOULD KEEP AS WELL AS G, CORRECT? YES.
YEAH, F AND H CAN BE REMOVED AND WE CAN STILL HAVE FOUR EASY OPTIONS TO STILL ADHERE TO THESE, THESE ITEMS REQUIRED ON THAT FACADE WITHOUT AN ISSUE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS? YES.
UM, UH, THANK YOU FOR OFFERING TO ADD ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING.
I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A LONG BACK AND FORTH CONVERSATION, UM, TRYING TO UNDERSCORE THE ENHANCED PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT SINCE WE ARE GONNA HAVE A PARKING GARAGE ON THE FIRST FLOOR IN THIS VERY WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND, AND WE'D SPOKEN ABOUT, UM, IS YOUR CLIENT OKAY WITH ADDING AN EXTRA PLANTING GROUP EVERY 35 FEET WITHIN THAT? I THINK IT'S 135 FOOT LONG STRETCH ALONG, UH, SUNSET.
WHERE WE'LL HAVE A 15 FOOT SETBACK FOR PLANTING? YES, WE HAVE THAT SETBACK NOW.
AND THAT'S WHERE SOME OF OUR, UH, PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES WILL GO AS WELL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER POPKIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF Z TWO 12 DASH 32 1, I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CASE AS, UM, RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WITH TWO ADDITIONAL, UM, CHANGES TO THE PD ADD SECTION D UNDER SEVEN, UH, SECTION SEVEN, UM, UH, REFERENCING PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES THAT SAYS ENHANCED BUFFER OF FACADE LANDSCAPING TO MEET ARTICLE X REQUIREMENTS WITH AT LEAST ONE PLANTING GROUP FOR EVERY 35 FEET.
A PLANTING GROUP INCLUDES STREET TREES, CANOPY, TREE, AND SHRUBS, AND THEN ALSO REMOVE IN SECTION TWO FACADE ARTICULATION OPTIONS, REMOVE, UM, OPTION NUMBER F AND H FN.
WAS THAT F AND H OR F N G? F AND H.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR, FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION COMMENTS? UH, I I JUST REALLY WANNA, UM, THANK THE DEVELOPER FOR PUTTING IN THE HARD WORK TO FINALIZE THESE PLANS, UM, BOTH AT THE HORSESHOE AND BACK IN THE OFFICE AFTER WE DISCUSSED IT.
UM, I'M REALLY HOPING THIS IS GONNA BE A GREAT PROJECT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THINK IT WILL BE, UM, ESPECIALLY WITH ALL OF THESE RECENT CHANGES TO, TO IMPROVE THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF IT ALL.
UM, SO THANK YOU GUYS FOR ALL OF YOUR HARD WORK.
COMMISSIONER POP POPKIN, UH, HAY CHAIR RUBIN, JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION ON THE, UH, PLANTING GROUP DEFINITION.
I HEARD ONE TYPE OF TREE CANOPY, TREES AND SHRUBS.
IS THAT SUPPOSED TO BE AN AND OR AN OR ARE YOU REQUIRING TWO TREE TREES OF DIFFERENT TYPES WITHIN EACH PLANTING GROUP, OR ARE WE GIVING THEM THE OPTION? UM, I INITIALLY GOT THIS LANGUAGE, UM, FROM, CAN MR. BALDWIN JUMP IN HERE? YEAH.
SO A PLANTING GROUP IS A DEFINED TERM IN ARTICLE 10, AND IT CAN EITHER BE A TREE AND SHRUBS OR TWO SMALLER TREES, BUT THERE'S A, THERE'S SEVERAL OPTIONS TO GIVE YOU WHAT A PLANTING GROUP IS.
AND YOU, UH, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE ONE EVERY 50 FEET AND WE'RE OFFERING TO ONE EVERY 35 FEET.
SO I COULD AMEND MY LANGUAGE TO SAY AS DEFINED IN ARTICLE X OR ARTICLE 10.
OKAY, WE'LL MAKE THAT AMENDMENT THEN.
I JUST WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE COMMISSIONER POP'S WORK ON THIS.
I THINK IT HAS MUCH IMPROVED FROM WHEN WE HEARD THIS OUR LAST TIME.
AND I'M, UH, ALSO WANTED TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION FOR THE UPDATE IN THE BUILDING ARTICULATION STANDARDS.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT? SAME HERE.
UM, I, THIS IS KIND OF MY FIRST ROUND WATCHING THIS BACK AND FORTH, COMING BACK, AND THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL PLAN.
I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE THIS DEVELOP.
UH, WE HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO, SO I JUST SAY DITTO.
WELL THEN, COMMISSIONER POPKIN, UH, THIS IS A MUCH BETTER PROJECT THAN IT WAS BEFORE.
CONGRATULATIONS TO THE APPLICANT FOR YOUR FLEXIBILITY.
AND, UH, ALSO CAN'T WAIT TO VISIT THE SITE COMMISSIONERS.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER POPKIN SECOND BY BY CHAIR RUBIN TO CLOSE UP WITH HEARING AND FOLLOW SUBJECT AND FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT
[01:25:01]
TO CONDITIONS, UH, AND THE THREE ADJUSTMENTS THAT COMMISSIONER FAKIN MADE IN REGARDS TO PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES, F AND H.AND I BELIEVE THE LANGUAGE IN REGARDS TO ARTICLE 10.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA FLIP TO CASE NUMBER 12.
UH, THE TWO CASES WHERE WE NEED AN INTERPRETER, WE'LL TAKE THEM ON NOW.
UH, MS. ALGIRE, AND IS OUR INTERPRETER READY TO GO? I'M NOT SURE WHO THE 12, IT'S GONNA BE 12 AND 16.
CAN YOU TURN THE MICROPHONE ON? I'M SORRY.
I THINK THE INDIVIDUAL WHO HAD REQUESTED THE INTERPRETER FOR 12 IS, IS NO LONGER HERE.
I'LL TURN IT, NO, TURN IT BACK OVER TO THE CHAIR.
AN INTERPRETER WAS ORIGINALLY REQUESTED FOR THIS CASE AS WELL, AND THE INTERPRETER WILL, UH, STAY HERE UNTIL, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE, ON THE MICROPHONE? MR. PEP? AN INTERPRETER WAS ORIGINALLY REQUESTED FOR THIS CASE AS WELL, AND I WILL BE HERE UNTIL I'M EXCUSED.
ACTUALLY, WE HAVE NOT BRIEFED THIS ITEM.
THAT'S NOT BEEN, YEAH, SO WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE BRIEFING.
I THOUGHT THAT WOULD MAKE IT WORK.
OKAY, I'LL GET STARTED REAL QUICK.
THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED A R 10 SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ADEL ROAD IN RAVEN VIEW ROAD.
IT'S LOCATED IN FOREST, SOUTHEAST DALLAS, AND HERE IT IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED SLASH AGRICULTURAL.
ARADEL AND RAVEN US DATED, UH, TO THE WEST IS OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMIT.
UH, TO THE NORTH THERE'S SINGLE FAMILY AGRICULTURAL USES, ADDITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY TO THE EAST.
UH, TO THE SOUTH, THERE'S A MIX OF PROPERTIES.
THERE IS, I'M TRYING TO GO AND ORDER AS BEST I CAN.
OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE, A VEHICLE ENGINE, LIGHT REPAIR, MAINTENANCE AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, UH, MIX OF DIFFERENT PROPERTIES IN THE SOUTH.
THEY'RE CURRENTLY REQUESTING THAT CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE USE OR DISTRICT, AND THEIR PROPOSED USES IN OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE.
THE CS COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ALLOWS SEVERAL HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES THAT GIVE TANGIBLE LAND USE IMPACTS ON ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL.
QUICKLY SHOW THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
UM, AND AS THE REPORT STATES, THERE ARE, UH, THEIR DEGREE OF LIMITS THAT, UM, RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY AND PARTS ON COMMERCIAL ZONING SUCH AS THIS.
UM, IT WOULD STILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN THE SURROUNDING ESTABLISHED PATTERN IN TERMS OF LOT COVERAGE, NOT, NOT TO MENTION USES AS WELL, AND THEY MIGHT, THEY WOULD LIKELY BE ABLE TO BUILD THE, UH, THE FULL HEIGHT AT, UM, AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER.
UM, HERE IS THE SITE FROM RAVEN VIEW, LOOKING NORTH, THEN FARTHER WEST, STILL LOOKING AT THE SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
I BELIEVE I'VE TURNED THE CORNER HERE UP ADEL LOOKING
[01:30:01]
AT EAST.AND THIS IS THE NORTH MOST PART OF THE PROPERTY AT, UH, ADEL LOOKING EAST.
SO THEN THIS IS BACK ON THE, UH, SOUTHEAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE IS A, UH, HOME TO THE SOUTH ACROSS RAVEN VIEW, A LITTLE BIT FARTHER EAST.
THERE'S A, UH, BUILDING UP PRESENTS AS A HOME AND SOME UNDEVELOPED LAND AND FARTHER FURTHER FIELD, THERE IS A WAREHOUSE.
THERE'S A SMALL OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE, UH, TO THE SOUTH ACROSS, UH, RAVEN VIEW.
LOOKING AT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY THAT'S IN THE CITY OF WALK SPRINGS DOES PRESENT A SINGLE FAMILY, AS DOES, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, PLEASE.
SO THE RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL IS BASED ON THE CURRENT ZONING, OBVIOUSLY, AND NOT THE ADJACENT LAND USES IT.
IT IS BASED ON THE ESTABLISHED PATTERN, UH, POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, VIABILITY OF THE SITE, INCLUDING YOUR AWARENESS OF THE USE TO THE WEST AND TO THE SOUTHWEST.
AND THE I AM AWARE, YEAH, WE ARE AWARE OF THE INDUSTRIAL USE ESTABLISHED ACROSS RAVEN VIEW.
UM, HOWEVER, NONE OF THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED TO THE NORTH, UM, OF, EXCUSE ME, THE NORTH OF RAVEN VIEW.
ALL, EVERYTHING NORTH OF RAVEN VIEW IS SINGLE FAMILY.
IN TERMS OF ZONING, IN TERMS OF REALITY, THE, I WON'T HAVE AS MUCH DATA ON THE PROPERTIES IN THE WEST SIDE OF ADEL AS THOSE ARE IN CITY BOX SPRINGS.
I CAN'T CONFIRM USES OR ZONING THERE.
UH, THAT SAID, IT'S STILL AN, IT'S STILL A SINGLE BLOCK IN WHICH WE'VE GOT SINGLE FAMILY, UH, IN RESIDENTIAL USES ON, ON THE CITY SIDE, ON THE NORTHEAST COMMISSIONER YOUNG, UH, YES.
THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, UH, ALONG THE STREET APPEARS TO BE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, BUT NORTH OF THAT IS A PROPERTY WITH ALL MANNER OF LOOKS LIKE COMMERCIAL VEHICLES PARKED ON IT.
IS THAT A NON-CONFORMING USE, AN ILLEGAL USE? I HAVEN'T CONFIRMED IF THAT'S A NON, IF THAT IS A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING, UM, IT'S OBVIOUSLY NONCONFORMING DUE TO THE SINGLE FAMILY ZONING OF THE SITE.
UM, SO AS A RESULT, THAT DIDN'T PLAY MUCH ROLE IN THE RECOMMENDATION SINCE IT IS, UH, SINGLE FAMILY ONLY ZONING.
BUT I AM AWARE OF, I'M AWARE OF THIS, SEVERAL VEHICLES ON THE, UH, REAR OF THAT FROM ARIEL.
UH, THAT SAID, IT DOESN'T, YOU CAN'T ACTUALLY SEE THAT, UM, FROM THE STREET.
WELL, AND IT'S ALSO CONFUSING TO ME BECAUSE IT APPEARS TO BE A LANDLOCKED PROPERTY.
IT'S NOT CLEAR WHERE I, I DID, YEAH, I NOTICED THAT.
THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, IS IT NOT? UM, DID, DID, I NOTICED YOU DID NOT, IN YOUR REPORT, YOU DIDN'T MAKE MENTION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, ERODE AND, UM, RAVEN VIEW AT THAT PARTICULAR SITE.
NO CURBS, NO GUTTERS, NO CURB, UH, NO, UH, IN INFERIOR.
UM, IT'S NOT TRUE THAT THE ROADS ARE INFERIOR AND NARROW.
I'LL CONFIRM THAT THAT IS THE CASE.
INFERIOR IS SUBJECTIVE, BUT THEY ARE, UM, THEY ARE FAIRLY UNDEVELOPED AND SMALL.
WELL, OKAY, LET ME PUT IT THEN, LET ME, LET ME REPHRASE THAT.
WOULD THAT NOT BE, UM, INCONSISTENT TO THE, WITH THE NEEDS OF HAVING A COMMERCIAL, I MEAN A CS OR WAREHOUSE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD NEED, UH, UH, COMMERCIAL VEHICLES TO COME INTO THE COMMUNITY? UM, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S THE LIGHT.
IF IT INCLUDES THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES THAT PERMITTED BY CS, THAT WOULD, UH, POTENTIALLY BE A CAUSE PER CONCERN.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, CAN WE GET THAT RIGHT INTO THE RECORD PLEASE? OKAY.
Z 22 3,104 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A CS SINGLE FAMILY, OR EXCUSE ME, CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON
[01:35:01]
PROPERTY ZONED R 10, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ADEL ROAD IN RAVEN VIEW ROAD.IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I'VE GOT PRESENTATION, UH, GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS STACY ESPINOZA AND HERE FOR THE ADDRESS 1700 ARROWDALE ROAD.
UM, I KNOW THEY DENIED THE CASE, BUT THERE'S ALREADY ONE, UM, KIND OF BUILDING OF THE SAME THING THAT WE WANT TO DO ON ARROWDALE.
SO, SO THERE IS ENOUGH SPACE FOR, I DON'T HAVE TO CONTROL THIS.
UM, DO YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR US? I THE POWERPOINT? YEAH, I THINK THERE'S ONE HERE.
IS THERE A PRESENTATION HERE, MR. PEPE? THERE? OKAY.
UM, IF YOU COULD MAYBE STEP A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE SO OUR FOLKS ONLINE CAN HEAR YOU.
OKAY, SO THE BUILDING THAT WE WANT TO DO, IT'S, UM, SEVEN UH, THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT FOOTAGE WITH THE OFFICE SALES AREA AND A SPACE FOR OR STORED THE MATERIAL.
THERE IS ONE ALREADY OF THE ON DALE.
UM, LET ME SEE IF I CAN SHOW YOU.
THIS ONE HERE IS ON THE SAME STREET OF, UM, ARUNDALE.
SO I DON'T SEE WHY IF THEY GET APPROVED, THIS ONE WE CAN GET ONE IN THE SAME, UM, STREET ON ARROWDALE OR IS THIS CLOSE TO THIS ONE? AND LET ME SEE IF I CAN GO BACK TO THIS, UM, PREVIOUS.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR PRESENTATION? YEAH, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO SHOW YOU EVERYTHING HERE.
I'M HAVING A HARD TIME OVER HERE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? UH, YES, MY NAME'S SORO GARCIA.
I RESIDE AT 1200 MAIN, DALLAS, TEXAS 75,202.
UM, I ACTUALLY AM FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY AND THE PROJECT IN, IN QUESTION.
UM, JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS WILL BE ACTING AS A DISTRIBUTION CENTER, NOT A FABRICATING CENTER, NOT A PACKAGING CENTER.
THE MATERIALS WILL BE PREPACKAGED AND DELIVERED ACCORDINGLY.
UM, NOW THE THOROUGHFARE ON RAVEN VIEW IS SUFFICIENT FOR, UH, COMMERCIAL VEHICLES.
DOES HAVE ACCESS TO THE HIGHWAYS, TO THE MAIN THOROUGHFARES ON EITHER SIDE AS WELL AS SPRING GARDEN.
THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS? I'M SORRY? DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS? UM, YES.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD BEFORE WE GO TO QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER TREADWAY.
CAN YOU CLARIFY THE LOCATION OF THIS OTHER BUILDING? IS IT TO THE WEST OF YOUR LOCATION OR THE SOUTH? IT IS SOUTH.
IT'S ACROSS THE STREET ON ARROWDALE? YES, MA'AM.
AND, UM, MR. PEPE, SO THE LOCATION THEY'RE CITING TO IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
AND TO CONFIRM, WHAT IS THE ZONING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE ROAD? IT'S SOUTH SIDE OF THE ROAD IS IN THE CITY LIMIT.
[01:40:01]
AND I'LL NEED ONE MINUTE TO CONFIRM THAT FOR YOU.NO, THAT'S THE WEST SOUTH SIDE OF THE ROAD.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ZONING DISTRICTS.
THERE'S R 75, BUT I THINK YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE AT THE CORNER, WHICH I UNDERSTAND IS CS ZONING.
SO IT'S COMMERCIAL SERVICE LIKE THIS, HOWEVER, IT DOES HAVE DEED RESTRICTIONS ON IT.
CAN YOU PROVIDE MORE DETAIL ABOUT THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS? I DON'T HAVE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR THAT PROPERTY IN FRONT OF ME.
UM, I CAN PRODUCE THEM WITH A LITTLE, LITTLE TIME, UH, BUT THEY DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE AN ABILITY TO LIMIT, UM, OTHER USES IN, IN A DISTRICT OR ADD OTHER KINDS OF RESTRICTIONS.
SO I WILL PULL THOSE UP FOR YOU AS SOON AS I CAN.
COMMISSIONER STANDARD, I'M SORRY.
WELL, MINE IS JUST THE FOLLOW UP, THE LOGICAL FOLLOW UP TO THAT, WHICH IS, IF IN FACT THAT IS CS AND WAS APPROVED AS CS, WHAT WOULD BE YOUR RATIONALE IF THAT'S NOT IN BOB SPRINGS, BUT IS IN FACT, AS YOU SAID, IN THE DALLAS CITY LIMITS OF NOT ALLOWING THIS ONE TO BE CS? THIS IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S JUST PART OF IT.
UH, THAT PROPERTY DOESN'T HAVE, UH, THE SAME RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY THAT THIS ONE HAS.
THIS ONE HAS SINGLE FAMILY ON TWO SIDES ON EITHER SIDE TO THE NORTH AND TO THE EAST, UH, IN TERMS OF ZONING AND USE.
AND SO THIS, THAT ONE IS ON A BLOCK THAT HAS OTHER, UH, OTHER COMMERCIAL COMPONENTS TO IT, INCLUDING OTHER, UH, WAREHOUSING USES AND OTHER SHOWROOM USES.
AND THEN THE PROPERTY TO THAT ONE'S EAST IS NSA, WHICH IS A LIGHT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
SO IT IS FAIRLY INCOMPARABLE BECAUSE OF THE DIRECT RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY AND THE NATURE OF THE CONSISTENT NATURE OF THE BLOCK IS SINGLE FAMILY ON THE NORTH SIDE.
I WANTED THAT ON THE RECORD, THAT'S WHY I WANTED THAT.
RUBIN, JUST A QUICK QUESTION FOR, FOR I GUESS THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE.
IS THE TEMPLATE FOR YOUR SLIDE DECK THE SAME TEMPLATE THAT CITY STAFF USES FOR THEIR PRESENTATIONS? UM, I BELIEVE SO, YES.
HOW DID YOU GET THAT TEMPLATE? I, I, I DIDN'T PUT IT TOGETHER, SO I REALLY CAN'T CLARIFY.
UM, BUT I DO JUST WANT TO STATE THE THING.
THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY FOR, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION OR SOMETHING THAT YOU'D LIKE TO STATE? WELL, SHE ASKED WHAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE, THE TWO AND WHY ONE WAS APPROVED COMMERCIAL.
THE OTHER WAS, WOULD NOT BE, HE STATED THAT THERE WAS NO RESIDENTIAL ADJACENT TO THAT, UH, WHICH IS ACTUALLY NOT TRUE.
THERE IS RESIDENTIAL ON ARROWDALE ADJACENT TO THAT BUSINESS AS WELL.
UH, COMMISSIONER, CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR ANSWER, MA'AM? CAN YOU YES.
IN REGARDS TO HER QUESTION OF WHY ONE BUSINESS WAS APPROVED CS OR ZONE CS AND THE OTHER WOULD NOT BE, UH, WHAT THE RATIONALE HE SAID WAS THAT THERE WAS NO RESIDENTIAL ADJACENT TO THAT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY INACCURATE.
THERE IS RESIDENTIAL ADJACENT TO THAT OTHER SIDE ON ARROWDALE TO THAT BUSINESS.
JUST TO CLARIFY, THE PROPERTY THAT IS CS, UM, OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE ON THE SOUTH SIDE, THAT ONE WITH THE ATIONS AS DISCUSSED, TO CLARIFY, TO BE CLEAR.
SO THE EAST OF THAT IS NSA ZONING.
IT IS, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT IT PRESENTS AS SINGLE FAMILY OR, UM, LOOKS LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
IT'S ZONED AS N S A, UH, SO IT'S A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
WE STILL HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT COMMISSIONERS.
NO, UH, WAS, DO YOU KNOW IF THERE WAS EVER A DISCUSSION OF MAYBE DOING SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS TO MAYBE SOFTEN SOME OF THE USES? EXCUSE ME.
DID WERE, DID YOU EVER HAVE ANY DISCUSSIONS IN REGARDS TO OFFERING SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS TO MAYBE SOFTEN SOME OF THE USES ALLOWED?
[01:45:01]
I, UNFORTUNATELY, I CAME IN ON THE TAIL END OF THIS.UM, I'M GONNA SAY THAT I TOOK A CRASH COURSE YESTERDAY WITH THIS, UM, AND I DID IN FACT VISIT THE, THE SITE IN THE AREA AND TOOK SEVERAL PICTURES OF, OF, UH, 18 WHEELERS DRIVING THROUGH THE THOROUGHFARE OF, UH, RAVEN VIEW.
SO, UM, WHICH GAVE ME ALL THE CONFIDENCE TO BELIEVE THAT THAT PROPERTY COULD SERVE AS A LIGHT COMMERCIAL BECAUSE IT WOULD, AGAIN, JUST BE A, SIMPLY BE A DISTRIBUTION CENTER FOR, UH, MASONRY.
QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER C NONE.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I HAVE COMMENTS, UM, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 1 0 4, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, WHEN I ORIGINALLY, UH, SAW THIS, THIS PARTICULAR CASE, TALKED TO, UM, MS. ESPINOZA AND GOT THE, UH, AND REVIEWED THE REQUEST, WHEN WITH THE, THE RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL, I HAD TO SEE IT FOR MYSELF.
I HAD TO GO OUT, I HAD TO SEE WHY WAS THERE A RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL.
I LITERALLY WENT OUT THERE, DROVE ALL AROUND THE COMMUNITY.
IT'S RIGHT ON THE BORDERLINE OF BOX SPRINGS AND THE CITY OF DALLAS.
AND ACTUALLY IN ORDER TO GET THERE, I HAD TO DRIVE THROUGH ROCK SPRINGS.
I WENT, I WENT AROUND THE CORNER IN A DEEP RESIDENTIAL AREA, AND AS PEOPLE WERE GETTING OUT, I STOPPED MY CAR AND I TALKED TO THEM AND EVERYONE I TALKED TO HAD THE SAME COMPLAINT AND CONCERN.
WE DON'T HAVE CURBS, WE DON'T HAVE GUTTERS.
THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS, UM, NOT SUFFICIENT ENOUGH FOR THE BIG RIGS THAT WE SEE THAT COME DOWN AND GET STUCK IN THE DITCHES.
THEY GO DOWN THE STREET, YEAH, BUT THEY CAN'T TURN AROUND, WHICH REQUIRES BIG RIGS, 18 WHEELERS TO GO TO THE DRIVE THROUGH, UM, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND HAVE TO, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T TURN AROUND AND YOU HAVE TO GO COMPLETELY THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND MY CONCERN WAS THAT THE, IF YOU HAVE, BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE CURBS, YOU DON'T HAVE GUTTERS AND YOU HAVE CHILDREN, IF YOU HAVE A CAR THAT'S TRYING TO COME IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION, THE ROAD'S NOT, NOT, NOT SUFFICIENT ENOUGH, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO IN A DITCH.
THERE'S, THERE'S NO RESPONSE AT THIS TIME.
THIS IS JUST, SORRY, TIME FOR MOTION.
I DID TALK TO ONE OF THE COMMUNITY RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET IS A CHURCH AND THERE WAS, AND RIGHT NEXT TO A CHURCH IS A RESIDENT.
AND THE GUY THAT WAS CUTTING THE YARD FOR THE CHURCH WHO LIVES IN THE RESIDENCE, HE, HE WAS VERY CON HE, HE WAS CONCERNED AND I ASSURED HIM THAT I WOULD HEAR HIS CONCERN.
SO BASED ON THAT, I'M ASKING THAT YOU FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL WITH, AND I'M ASKING THAT IT BE DONE WITHOUT PREJUDICE SO THAT IF THERE IS ANOTHER, UH, TYPE OF SERVICES THAT WOULD, WOULD WANNA COME IN THAT'S MORE SUITABLE FOR RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY THAT WE ACCEPT THAT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
SEEING NONE THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 1 0 4, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR, SECONDLY BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL, BUT WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'M SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION.
WE'LL GO BACK TO THE ORDER NOW.
UH, THAT TAKES US BACK TO CASE NUMBER NINE, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN BRIEFED.
WE'LL GO BACK TO MS. MUNOZ ONLINE.
TAKE A BREAK ACTUALLY, MS. MUNOZ, WHILE YOU GET, UH, SET UP.
WHY DON'T WE TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK? IT'S 2 23.
WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET BACK ON THE RECORD.
[01:50:03]
WE'RE ALL RECORDING.UH, IT IS 2:38 PM UH, WE'RE GONNA HEAD RIGHT BACK INTO THE DOCKET.
UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, MY APOLOGIES, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO A LITTLE BIT JUMPING AROUND.
WE HAVE SOME, SOME MOVING PARTS.
SO WE'RE GONNA GO TO CASE NUMBER 14.
AND MS. MUNOZ, THAT WOULD BE Z 2 1 2 3 0 1.
WE'LL GO TO CASE NUMBER 14 AND MS. MUNOZ.
SO AFTER THAT, JUST ONE MOMENT.
I'M SORRY, I HAD THE NEXT ONE IN ORDER PREPARED INSTEAD.
WE'RE READY FOR YOU WHENEVER YOU ARE.
PLEASE LET ME KNOW AS SOON AS YOU CAN SEE MY SCREEN.
SO CASE NUMBER 14 IS Z 2 1 2 3 0 1.
THIS CASE WAS REMANDED FROM CITY COUNCIL.
AND ACTUALLY I DID BRIEF THIS ONE EARLIER.
SO AM I JUST TO READ IT ON THE RECORD, MS. YES.
MS. S, WE HAVE ALREADY BRIEFED THIS ONE.
IF YOU CAN JUST READ IT ON THE RECORD AND WE'LL BE IN THE HEARING.
SO CASE NUMBER 14 IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN EXPANSION OF PLAN DEVELOPMENT SUB-DISTRICT NUMBER 1 38.
AND FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN OUTSIDE STORAGE USE ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT, SUB-DISTRICT NUMBER 1 38 AND A GR GENERAL RETAIL SUB-DISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1 93, THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER AND SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MAPLE AVENUE AND VAGA STREET STAFF.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CARL CROWLEY, 2201 MAIN STREET.
UM, I'VE GOT A PRESENTATION THAT COULD LAST BUT I'M NOT GONNA DO IT BECAUSE Y'ALL HAVE LIKE BAZILLION CASES ALREADY, STILL LEFT.
UM, THIS IS A REQUEST THAT Y'ALL SAW WHAT, TWO MONTHS AGO.
UH, WENT TO THE COUNCIL, THE COUNCIL MEMBER REMANDED BACK FOR Y'ALL FROM THE U FOR THE SAME USE.
IT'S PRETTY MUCH, UM, WE'VE TWEAKED A COUPLE THINGS, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND AND DANNY IN OUR OFFICE THAT Y'ALL KNOW.
AND I'VE, UH, TRADED EMAILS BACK AND FORTH AND WE JUST TALKED A MOMENT AGO, SO I'M NOT GONNA SPEAK LONG.
SHE HAS SOME CHANGES THAT SHE WAS GONNA READ IN THE RECORD.
WE'RE OKAY WITH THOSE CHANGES.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IT'S THE SAME USE BASICALLY Y'ALL PROVED BEFORE WITH A, WITH A SUSPENDER TO ADDED TO THE BELT.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH SAYS IT.
SO, UM, I'LL BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR MR. CARLEY? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY, SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
AND I MAY NEED ONE ASSIST FROM MS. MUNOZ ON AN ITEM NUMBER, BUT ON CASE NUMBER Z TWO 12 DASH 3 0 1 I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, NOT FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR THE, UH, EXPANSION OF A PLAN DEVELOPMENT SUB-DISTRICT 1 38.
AND FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN OPEN STORAGE ON PROP PROPERTY ZONE SUB-DISTRICT NUMBER 1 38 GR RETAIL WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES ON THE S U P REQUIREMENTS FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITHOUT AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.
AND TO INCLUDE OR TO REVISE THE FENCING PROVISIONS TO READ THAT A SIX FOOT SCREENING WALL BE MAXIMUM OF SIX FEET.
AND MY APOLOGIES, I'VE LOST MY NOTE.
A MAXIMUM OF SIX FOOT FENCES MUST HAVE
[01:55:01]
MASONRY COLUMNS WITH DECORATIVE METAL PANELS EXCEPT FOR REQUIRED SCREENING FOR ALL FENCE PANELS AT FRONT OR SIDE YARDS TO BE A MINIMUM OF 50% OPEN.THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOU SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND I'LL BE BRIEF.
UM, I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT CONTINUING TO WORK WITH THIS.
I THINK WE ALL MAY REMEMBER WE HEARD THIS CASE, UM, AND IT WAS RECOMMENDED TO CITY, UM, COUNSEL FOR APPROVAL.
UM, THERE IS CONCERNS THAT THIS LAND IS GOING TO REDEVELOP THAT THIS IS PROBABLY NOT ITS LONG TERM USE.
UM, HOWEVER, THIS IS A SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS IN OUR AREA.
UM, THEY NEED SOME ADDITIONAL ROOM.
UM, WE CRAFTED PROVISIONS TO ENSURE COMPATIBILITY, UM, WITH THE AREA AS IT'S TRANSITIONING, BUT WITH CONSIDERING AN S U P, I THINK FIVE YEARS GIVES US THE APPROPRIATE TIMEFRAME TO EVALUATE THIS AND MAKE ANY NECESSARY ADJUSTMENTS.
SO I HOPE MY COMMISSIONERS, UH, WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION.
I HAD SOME HEARTBURN ABOUT THIS ONE THE LAST TIME, BUT UM, I'M PLEASED TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TODAY.
I THINK THE FIVE YEAR WITH NO AUTO RENEWAL STRIKES THE RIGHT BALANCE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.
COMMISSIONERS WILL CONTINUE OUR, OUR JUMPING AROUND A LITTLE BIT.
WE'LL GO TO CASE NUMBER 18, WHICH UH, HAS NOT BEEN BRIEFED, I BELIEVE MS. MR. PEPE.
HELLO? YEAH, WE NEED TO BRIEF THIS ONE, PLEASE.
THIS IS GOING TO BE Z 2 2 3 1 49.
ACTUALLY WE'RE GONNA HOLD THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT SO THERE'S NO NEED TO BRIEF IT TODAY.
SO IF YOU COULD JUST READ IN THE RECORD ABSOLUTELY.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN LO THREE LIMITED OFFICE AND A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF HASKELL AVENUE NORTHWEST OF WORTH STREET STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS CON, I'M SORRY, THIS IS UNUSUAL.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF AN NSA NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE DISTRICT IN LIEU OF CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? YES SIR.
UH, MICHAEL DAVIS, 28 0 7 ALLEN, DALLAS, TEXAS DAVIS' BUSINESS SERVICES REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, UM, AS A FORMER VICE CHAIR CPC.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR VOLUNTEERISM AND YOUR LONG JUNE MEETINGS.
I KNOW THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING
UM, WE DID WORK, UH, WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN APPROVAL.
THEY SENT A LETTER ON H OA PEAKS EDITION WORK WITH COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
UM, AND WE HAVE THE RESTRICTIONS, WHICH I BELIEVE,
[02:00:01]
UH, STAFF HAS NOW, UM, FOR OUR CR DISTRICT WITH SOME, UH, COMPROMISE.SO IF I NEED TO, I CAN READ THOSE INTO THE RECORD.
AND THE UM, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, SHE NEEDS US OFFICIALLY READ.
I CAN UH, READ THAT IN NOW SO YOU HAVE THAT GOING FORWARD PLEASE.
IS IT AN EXTENSIVE LIST? OH IT IS.
AND YOU KNOW, I WILL, SINCE THE CASE IS GONNA GET HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, IF YOU CAN VERY WELL JUST EMAIL ISSUE, ACTUALLY EMAIL IT TO, UH, MS. SINA AND SHE WILL FORWARD IT TO US.
WE'LL, I'VE EMAILED TO THE, UH, TO MR. PEPE, SO I'LL DO THAT TO MS. SINA AS WELL.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO AND I HAVE VERY BRIEF COMMENTS.
FIVE A SECOND IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH 1 49.
I MOVE TO LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JULY 6TH.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
UM, I APPRECIATE, UM, MR. DAVIS BEING HERE TODAY WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY.
UM, WE DID HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING.
I THINK THERE'S GENERAL AGREEMENT THAT THIS, UM, CASE IS MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, BUT WE DID HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION TODAY AND TO GIVE STAFF THE OPPORTUNITY TO VET IT IN ALL MY COMMISSIONERS TO, UM, UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.
UM, WE HAVE RECOMMENDED TO HOLD IT UNDER ADVISEMENT SO THAT WE CAN ALL HAVE THE INFORMATION IN FRONT OF US AS WE'RE MOVING FORWARD.
SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THIS COMING BACK AND THANK YOU ALL.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? HABIT? UH, WE'LL GO TO CASE NUMBER 19.
AND ON THIS ONE I'VE ALREADY BRIEFED, SO I'M JUST READING IT INTO THE RECORD.
YES, THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE, LIMITED TO A LIVE MUSIC VENUE AND A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT OUTSIDE ON PROPERTY OWNED AN RR REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SAMUEL BOULEVARD BETWEEN SIDLEY AVENUE AND OWEN WOOD AVENUE STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A REVISED SITE PLAN, A LAND DATE, LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. MUNOZ.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
1414 BELLEVUE STREET, SUITE ONE 50, DALLAS, TEXAS 75,215.
HERE TO REPRESENT THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE OPERATOR FOR THIS, I BELIEVE MS. MUNOZ HAS MY THREE SLIDES AND I WANNA GO TO SLIDE NUMBER THREE.
THAT'S THE ONE OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
IS IT NOT THERE YET? LET'S SEE.
NO, I'M STILL SEEING SLIDE ONE WITH THE AERIAL.
IT'S, IT'S ON THE RIGHT ONE FOR ME.
OKAY, WELL IN THE MEANTIME, I WAS LISTENING TO THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING.
UM, WE DID HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE OUTDOOR SPEAKERS.
THEY WILL BE SHUT OFF BETWEEN 10:00 PM AND 8:00 AM REGARDLESS OF WHAT'S GOING ON.
UH, OUR INSIDE COMMERCIAL IS FOR LIVE MUSIC TO BE PLAYED INSIDE THE RESTAURANT.
UH, THAT WOULD ALSO HAVE TO STAY INDOORS AFTER 10 O'CLOCK.
THE MUSIC MAY BE PLAYING ON THE SPEAKERS OUTSIDE AT THE PICKLEBALL COURTS.
UH, AFTER HAVING SOME MORE CONVERSATION WITH THE OPERATORS THIS MORNING.
THE REASON BEING IS WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE BRINGING THEIR PHONES AND THEIR EXTERNAL BLUETOOTH SPEAKERS AND PLAYING THEIR OWN MUSIC AT THE COURTS.
AND THEN YOU'VE GOT REAL CHAOS WHEN YOU HAVE SEVERAL DIFFERENT GENRES OF MUSIC PLAYING AT ONE TIME.
SO WE THINK IT'D BE BEST IF IT WAS ALL UNIFORM ACROSS THE BOARD.
SO WITH THAT, UH, IF WE CAN GET THE LANDSCAPE PLANNED TO SHOW UP, IS IT STILL NOT THE RIGHT PLAN? YOU GOT IT, BRIAN.
I WANTED TO BRING YOU A COLOR VERSION OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN BECAUSE I NOTICED THAT YOU DIDN'T EVEN GET TO SEE THE BLACK AND WHITE ONE THIS MORNING.
SO IT'D BE NICE IF YOU COULD SEE WHAT IT WAS THAT YOU WERE ACTUALLY, UH, VOTING ON.
[02:05:01]
AND WE DID THIS IN COLOR SO YOU COULD SEE WHERE ALL THE TREES AND THE GRASS, UM, EVERYTHING IS GONNA BE LOCATED BECAUSE ON A BLACK AND WHITE DRAWING, LET'S FACE, IT'S VERY, VERY DIFFICULT.UM, ONE OTHER THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT ON THIS, YOU'LL SEE THE TWO LITTLE BLUE ARROWS.
WE DO HAVE FIVE EV READY PARKING SPACES ON THIS PLAN.
WE HAVE TWO BEHIND THE RESTAURANT, AND THEN WE HAVE THREE OVER ON THE OWEN WOOD SIDE.
UM, WE DID THAT WITHOUT BEING ASKED TO DO THAT.
AND BEFORE ANY REQUIREMENTS WERE FAST.
BUT, UH, WE JUST THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A, A GOOD OPPORTUNITY IF YOU'RE GONNA BE THERE PLAYING PICKLEBALL.
YOU COULD CHARGE A CAR FOR, YOU KNOW, THE HOUR THAT YOU'RE PLAYING.
SO WITH THAT, UM, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, I'M SURE THAT YOU DO.
WE ONLY HAVE THREE MINUTES UP HERE, SO, UH, I'M READY TO TAKE QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YES, COMMISSIONER STANNER.
UH, I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHAT IS THE MATERIAL THAT THE PICKLEBALL COURTS ARE MADE OUT OF? I COULDN'T TELL YOU.
SO YOU DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A PERMEABLE SURFACE OR NOT? IT'S NOT GONNA BE AS DIFFERENT THAN CEMENT AND THAT SORT OF THING.
WELL, LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT THIS SITE.
THIS THIS THING IS GONNA BE AN ENGINEERING NIGHTMARE.
UH, IT'S GONNA HAVE A LOT OF DRAINAGE ISSUES BECAUSE THE ONE THING YOU COULDN'T SEE IN THE PHOTOS FROM THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING WAS THE ELEVATION CHANGE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL THAT'S BEHIND US, ACROSS THE UNIMPROVED ALLEY DOWN TO US.
IT'S ABOUT A 12 TO 13 FOOT FALL FROM THE BACKSIDE OF THE ALLEY ALL THE WAY DOWN TO SAMUEL RIGHT THERE.
SO WHAT WE HAVE TO DO HERE IS TO PROVIDE GRATES AT THE CORNERS OF THESE PICKLEBALL COURTS FOR UNDERGROUND DETENTION.
SO THAT'S WHERE ALL THAT WATER RUNOFF IS GONNA GO.
AND WHAT ABOUT THE LIGHTS? THE LIGHTS THAT WILL BE ON THE POLES WITH THE NETTING.
SO WE ALREADY HAVE NETTING POLES OUT THERE, SO WE MIGHT AS WELL USE THOSE AS DOUBLE DUTY.
SO THOSE ARE GONNA BE MOUNTED ON THOSE POLES ANGLED TOWARDS THE COURTS.
AND WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THOSE? AT THE NARROW END UP BY THE RESTAURANT, IT IS GONNA BE 10 FEET THERE, BUT THERE'S A FALL ALSO FROM SIBLEY OVER TOWARDS OWEN WOOD.
THAT'S WHY WE ASKED FOR 10 TO 15 FEET AT GRADE BECAUSE WE WANT A UNIFORM LOOK OF THE NETTING ACROSS.
SO IT'S GONNA BE 10 FEET AT GRADE AT ONE END, BUT IT'S GONNA GO UP TO POSSIBLY 13 OR 14 FEET ON THE OTHER END.
BUT WE WANT IT TO BE SYMMETRICAL ACROSS AND NOT STAGGERED.
AND YOU'RE USING HOODED AND SHIELDED, OBVIOUSLY.
AS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE PICKLEBALL COURTS WILL BE OPEN TILL MIDNIGHT ON WEEKENDS.
BUT THERE WILL BE NO AMPLIFIED SOUND AFTER 10:00 PM CORRECT.
COMMISSIONER HARBERT, UH, THIS COULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED, UH, IN THE STATEMENT OF WHAT THE USAGE IS, BUT THERE WILL BE, UM, WILL THERE BE RETAIL, UM, ALCOHOL AND FOOD SELL SOLD ON THE SITE? YES, IT'S A RESTAURANT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH 1 55, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER RU FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
WE'LL GO BACK TO THE ORDER NOW, I THINK TAKES US BACK TO CASE NUMBER NINE, MS. MUNOZ.
AND THIS CASE HAS NOT BEEN BRIEFED.
CAN YOU SEE MY PRESENTATION? IT'S COMING UP, I THINK.
C TWO AND 12 3 48 IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO, A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON A PROPERTY ZONED IN R 75, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH POLK STREET BETWEEN CASCADE AVENUE AND ELMHURST PLACE.
[02:10:01]
IT'S ABOUT 7,500 SQUARE FEET.THERE'S A GENERAL LOCATION MAP IN THE ELMWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU CAN SEE HERE THE AREAS LARGELY DEVELOPED ALL ZONES FOR R 75, A SINGLE FAMILY, UM, DISTRICT, AND IT'S COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY USES.
ALSO REPRESENTED HERE ON THE ZONING MAP.
THE AREA OF REQUEST PER DCA RECORDS CONTAINS A STRUCTURE THAT IS ONE STORY AND BUILT IN 1940.
IT HAS OVER 4,400 SQUARE FEET OF LIVING AREA WITH NINE DWELLING UNITS AS DEFINED IN OUR CODE.
A DWELLING UNIT MEANS ONE OR MORE ROOMS DESIGNED TO BE A SINGLE HOUSEKEEPING UNIT TO ACCOMMODATE ONE FAMILY AND CONTAINING ONE OR MORE KITCHENS OR, OR MORE BATHROOMS AND ONE OR MORE BEDROOMS. AND DUE TO THESE UNITS BEING CLASSIFIED AS INDIVIDUAL DWELLING UNITS, THIS IS NOW A MULTI-FAMILY USE AND NOT A GROUP RESIDENTIAL USE, WHICH IS WHAT THE APPLICANT HAD INTENDED TO BE OPERATING, BUT IT COULD NOT BE CLASSIFIED AS SUCH ANY LONGER DUE TO HOW THEY CONFIGURED EACH DWELLING UNIT.
SO THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO INSTEAD MAINTAIN THIS MULTIFAMILY USE THAT IS CURRENTLY OPERATING ON THE PROPERTY.
AND HERE IS A PHOTO OF THE SITE LOOKING AT IT FROM, UM, ELMHURST.
I'M SO SORRY, THAT'S THE WRONG STREET NAME NOW I CAN'T REMEMBER THE STREET NAME FOR A SECOND THERE GUYS.
AND SO THIS IS THE FRONT YARD FACING POLK STREET.
IT'S R 75 WITH A 25 FOOT FRONT YARD.
BUT AGAIN, THIS STRUCTURE HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE SINCE 1940.
NOW WE ARE LOOKING NORTH ON POLK.
YOU'RE GETTING JUST A FEEL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALL THE SURROUNDING SINGLE FAMILY USES.
SEE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY WITH THAT 25 FOOT FRONT YARD AND THEN DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET, UM, ON POLK.
AND NOW WE'RE LOOKING ONTO ELMHURST, WHICH IS FARTHER TO THE SOUTH AND WEST.
ALL THESE SINGLE FAMILY USES THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE SIMILAR IN NATURE, HOWEVER, THEY DO HAVE THE FRONT YARD CHANGE, BUT DUE TO BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY STANDARDS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE 25 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
AND THEN OF COURSE, THE DWELLING UNITS IS THE BIGGEST CHANGE WITH THE MULTIFAMILY TO SINGLE FAMILY, IT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO HAVE THEIR, UM, NINE DWELLING UNITS ONLY IF THE LOT WAS 9,000 SQUARE FEET.
NOW I'M NOT SURE IF THEY COULD ACCOMMODATE IT BASED OFF OF THE SIZE OF THE UNITS OR CLAIM THAT THEY ARE EFFICIENCIES IN SOME WAY.
THERE MAY BE SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN DO WITH THAT.
BUT OVERALL, WHAT I FOUND IN REVIEWING THE STANDARDS FOR THE NINE DWELLING UNITS ON THIS LOT WAS THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH, AT THE VERY LEAST, PROVIDING PARKING AND LANDSCAPING PER CODE FOR THIS SITE IF THEY DO OBTAIN BUILDING PERMITS AS REQUIRED.
SO NUMBER ONE, THIS IS A MID-BLOCK INTERRUPTION OF ZONING, WHICH IS VERY COMMONLY, UM, NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ARE TYPICALLY SEEKING APPROVAL FOR.
AND THAT'S BECAUSE THIS IS A WELL-ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY INTERRUPTION OF ZONING ON THIS ENTIRE BLOCK.
UH, WE USUALLY WOULD INTRODUCE NEW ZONING IN MAYBE CORNERS INTERSECTIONS, SOMETHING THAT WOULD PROVIDE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES AND NOT FACE THE ISSUE OF HAVING RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY ON MULTIPLE SIDES WITH DIFFERENT SETBACKS AND SUCH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT DON'T, THAT AREN'T TYPICALLY COMPATIBLE AND WOULD CAUSE ISSUES FOR EITHER THE LOT THAT'S BEING REZONED OR THE ADJACENT LOTS.
THEN IT'S ALSO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, WHICH IS EITHER NONCONFORMING OR IN ITS CURRENT STATE WITH NINE DWELLING UNITS ILLEGAL DOES NOT HAVE PROPER PERMITS AND CANNOT MAINTAIN THE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AS PROPOSED FOR THE MF TWO DISTRICT.
AND OVERALL THAT'S BECAUSE THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED PARKING OF ONE SPACE PER DWELLING UNIT AND THE LANDSCAPING THAT'S REQUIRED, INCLUDING SCREENING AND SUCH, CONSIDERING THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY FROM THE PARKING AREAS.
AND FINALLY, UM, THERE ARE MULTIPLE CODE VIOLATIONS DUE TO THE WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE WITHOUT PERMITS.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL.
OKAY, I'VE GOTTA ASK THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, WHICH IS, HOW HAS THIS BEEN ABLE TO EXIST TO CONTINUE IN THIS FORM? I MEAN, IT'S CLEAR THAT IT'S NOT 45% LOT COVERAGE.
THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING AND THIS, THAT AND THE OTHER.
AND I GUESS THE OTHER THING IS
[02:15:01]
WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS STRUCTURE NOW? I MEAN IF, YOU KNOW, IF WE FOLLOW THIS RECOMMENDATION, WHAT IS THE NEXT STEP? I MEAN ABOUT THIS BEING NONCONFORMING AND STILL SITTING THERE, IT'S PEOPLE'S HOMES.SO COULD YOU ANSWER THAT PLEASE, MS. MUNOZ? YES.
SO FROM FROM MY RESEARCH, IT SEEMS LIKE THE SIZE OF THE STRUCTURE HAS ALREADY BEEN IN EXISTENCE SINCE THE FORTIES.
AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEY ARE LIKELY AND NONCONFORMING AS FAR AS THE OVERALL STRUCTURE IS NOW THE CONFIGURATION OF THE NINE SEPARATE DWELLING UNITS, I DON'T, THAT PART IS WHAT I BELIEVE IS NOT PERMITTED PROPERLY.
AND IN WHICH CASE THEY ARE TRYING TO RECTIFY THAT BY APPLYING FOR ZONING.
THEY BELIEVE THAT THEY'LL BE ABLE TO MEET THE ZONING REGULATIONS AND PROVIDE EVERYTHING REQUIRED IN ORDER TO OBTAIN BUILDING PERMITS AND THEN HAVE LEGAL CONFORMING MULTIFAMILY UNITS THERE.
UM, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS THE CASE.
AND SO IF THIS CASE IS EITHER APPROVED, THEY WOULD HAVE TO PROGRESS TO THE PERMITTING STAGE TO HAVE LEGAL DWELLING UNITS THERE THAT COMPLY WITH THE CODE, OR NUMBER TWO, THEY WOULD HAVE, THEY WOULD BE DENIED AND THEN THEY WOULD BE AN ILLEGAL LAND USE AND CODE COMPLIANCE WOULD CONTINUE TO SERVE THEM WITH VIOLATIONS AND WE WOULD FOLLOW THAT PROCESS.
LET'S SAY THAT THIS GOT TO KEEP EXISTING AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET IT IN COMPLIANCE.
IS THERE A WAY TO MEET THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS? I'M JUST CURIOUS WITH ANY OF THE LEFTOVER SPACE.
IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE IT TO ME, BUT I WANT TO ASK YOU THE ZONING EXPERT.
AND WHAT IS THAT REQUIREMENT? JUST AS YOU SAID IT, BUT WOULD YOU SAY IT AGAIN? ONE, ONE SPACE FOR DWELLING UNIT.
SO WE'D HAVE TO GET NINE AS 20 FEET AS COMMISSIONER YOUNG POINTED OUT.
UH, YES, MS. MUNOZ, YOU MENTIONED THE TWO OPTIONS.
NUMBER ONE, IF IT'S GRANTED AND THEY CAN FIND A WAY TO COMPLY AND GET PERMITTED.
NUMBER TWO, UH, THEY CAN'T AND IT BECOMES AN ILLEGAL LAND USE.
WOULDN'T A THIRD OPTION BE TO APPLY FOR BUILDING RENOVATIONS THAT ELIMINATE THE ZONING PROBLEM? THAT IS TO TURN IT BACK INTO A BONAFIDE GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY POSSIBLY.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KIN, PLEASE.
UH, ALONG THOSE SAME LINES, MY QUESTION RELATES TO, UM, THE DEFINITION OF SINGLE FAMILY, UM, AND MY UNDERSTANDING, WHAT IS THE, IS THERE A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF BEDROOMS OR BATHROOMS THAT CAN BE PROVIDED IN A SINGLE FAMILY R 75 LOT? NO.
AND SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S THE NUMBER OF KITCHENS THAT PRIMARILY REGULATES A SINGLE FAMILY USE THAT SEPARATES IT FROM A MULTIFAMILY USE.
IS IT THE PROVISION OF A, AN OVEN AND A SINK THAT, UH, DEFINES A KITCHEN? I MEAN, WE COULD TALK ABOUT WHAT MAKES A SINGLE FAMILY UNIT, BUT I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, SINGLE FAMILY UNITS ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE KITCHEN.
IT'S MORE OF HOW THOSE UNITS ARE SEPARATED, WHICH MAKES THEM INDIVIDUAL DWELLING UNITS WITH THEIR OWN COMPLETE SUITE OF ITEMS. AND THAT'S WHAT MAKES THEM ALL DWELLING UNITS RATHER THAN BEING A SHARED COMMON KITCHEN OR MULTIPLE KITCHENS SERVING ONE SINGLE FAMILY UNIT, BUT THEY ALL HAVE ONE ENTRYWAY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT MORE TO IT THAN JUST WHAT COMPONENTS OF THE KITCHEN THERE ARE.
SO IT HAS A LOT MORE TO DO WITH THE CONFIGURATION IN THIS CASE THAN SIMPLY THE PROVISION OF TOO MANY OF ONE THING OR ANOTHER WITH THE, WITH THE NUMBER OF, I THINK IT'S A COMBINATION OF THE TWO, BUT YES.
IN YOUR OPINION, AND THIS MAY BE A DIFFICULT QUESTION TO ANSWER, IN YOUR OPINION, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOLLOWING COMMISSIONER YOUNG'S QUESTION TO POTENTIALLY SUBMIT FOR, UM, UH, WHAT IS IT RENOVATION, UH, REQUESTS TO REALIGN THE CONFIGURATION OF THIS SITE MORE IN TERMS OF WHAT WOULD BE DEFINED AS A SINGLE R SEVEN FIVE PROPERTY? I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT OF COURSE IT
[02:20:01]
COULD HAPPEN, BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE A LOT OF RESEARCH.IT VERY OBVIOUSLY WOULD BE ONE OF THE DENIAL, UM, I GUESS PRONGS OF WHAT, HOW THEY COULD PROCEED AFTER THAT.
YOU KNOW, IT'S EITHER CONFORM OR, YOU KNOW, RETURN TO THE LAST STATE OF CONFORMANCE.
RIGHT? SO IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THEIR NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS, HOW THEY'RE ABLE TO PROVE THOSE, HOW THEY'RE ABLE TO PROVE THAT THEY DID NOT ABANDON THOSE NONCONFORMING RIGHTS, HOW THEY COULD RETURN IT.
I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS THERE, SO IS IT POSSIBLE? MAYBE, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
I HAVE, I HAVE BEEN, I DID NOT INSPECT THE UNIT.
I DO NOT KNOW THE BUILDING CODE AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY WOULD PROVE THEIR NONCONFORMITY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MS. MUNOZ? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, MS. MUNOZ, CAN YOU PLEASE READ THE CASE INTO THE RECORD? THIS IS AN ITEM NUMBER NINE AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO, A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE IN R 75, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH POLK STREET BETWEEN CASCADE AVENUE AND ELMHURST PLACE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
WE'RE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
THERE'S A LITTLE BUTTON RIGHT THERE.
YOU MAY HAVE TO SPEAK RIGHT INTO THE MICROPHONE.
UH, MY NAME IS PHILLIP MITCHELL.
THIS IS MY WIFE, MICHELLE MITCHELL.
AND WE OWN, UH, 1608 SOUTH POLK STREET.
AND WE'VE BEEN IN THE BUSINESS FOR EIGHT YEARS.
WHAT WE DO IS WE HOUSE HOMELESS VETERANS.
EACH VETERANS HAVE THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL SUITE THAT INCLUDE A KITCHEN, A, A BATHROOM, A TELEVISION, A BEDROOM, A LET'S SEE, A BEDROOM, A KITCHEN, THEIR OWN PRIVATE INTERESTS.
CAN'T NOBODY COME IN THEIR PLACE.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO WALK IN NOBODY ELSE'S PLACE TO GET TO YOUR PLACE.
AND, UH, THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION ARE VERY PROUD OF US.
SAME THING ABOUT THE CITY OF DALLAS, UH, DALLAS COUNTY, UH, TAX OFFICE.
AND WE HAVEN'T HAD NO TROUBLE UNTIL WE GOT ONE JUST ROUND, UH, TENANT.
AND THIS IS WHERE THE STRUGGLE STARTED.
AND, UH, WHEN THEY SAID WE GOT BAD, UH, HAVEN'T GOT PERMITS.
EVERYTHING IN OUR PLACE HAVE BEEN PERMITTED BY THE CITY ZONING.
I MEAN, NOT CITY ZONING, UH, THE CODE COMPLIANCE.
AND WE, AND THEY HAVE THE CODE COMPLIANCE TOLD US TO GO TO THE GO DOWNTOWN.
AND WHEN WE GOT DOWNTOWN, THEY TOLD US TO DO SO MANY THINGS.
THEY SAID, ONLY THING, ONLY PROBLEM YOU HAVE IS PARKING.
SO WE LICKED AT THAT IN THE BUD.
WE WENT TWO AND A HALF BLOCKS AWAY.
IN FACT, WE DON'T HAVE THE, ALL OUR VETERANS DON'T, THEY OVER 65 YEARS OLD AND THEY DON'T HAVE NO CARS, SO CAN'T NOBODY DRIVE.
SO PARKING WOULD NOT BE A PL A PROBLEM, BUT THE CITY REQUIRED THE PARKING.
SO WE WENT DOWN THE STREET, A BLOCK AND A HALF AT THE, UH, UH, UH, TYLER, UH, VERNON STATION, AND THEY TOLD US THEY WOULD LET US LEASE, UH, FIVE, SIX SPACES.
AND, UH, SO NOW WE DONE LOOKED THAT PROBLEM.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT KINDA ELSE PROBLEM WE GOT BECAUSE WE, UH, BEEN IN BUSINESS, UH, EIGHT YEARS AND WE GOT, UH, 12 VETERANS.
WE GOT NINE, TWO OF THEM, AND WENT ON AND LEFT AND WENT ON HIS OWN AND GOT A JOB.
BUT THE ONES WE HAVE DON'T HAVE JOBS AND WE TAKE CARE OF THEM.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO WANT FOR NOTHING.
THEY GOT THEIR OWN TELEVISION, THEIR OWN CABLE TV, THEY OWN KITCHEN, THEIR OWN BATHROOM, THEIR OWN BED, THEIR OWN SHEETS.
AND WE EVEN PROVIDE TOOTHPASTE, TOOTHBRUSH FOR 'EM.
[02:25:01]
THEY GOT A HOME AWAY FROM HOME FOR SERVING US AND KEEPING US FREE.DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS, MR. MITCHELL? YES.
WE'VE BEEN GETTING AWAY, NOT WE'RE GETTING AWAY.
WE'VE BEEN GETTING ALONG FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND WE GOT THIS TENANT STARTED.
THERE MAY BE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU, SIR.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM IN SUPPORT? ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD? COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR MR. MITCHELL.
COMMISSIONER YACHT? UH, YES, MR. MITCHELL.
UH, DID I UNDERSTAND YOU TO SAY THAT AS FAR AS THE PHYSICAL LAYOUT OF YOUR BUILDING, YOU HAVE 12 UNITS? YES.
AND NOW YOU'VE GOT 10 RESIDENTS OCCUPYING, RIGHT? 10 VETERANS.
AND EACH, OH, MY WIFE TOLD ME NINE.
EACH BEDROOM IS PART OF A SUITE, IF YOU WILL, OF A BEDROOM, A BATHROOM, AND A KITCHEN.
I DON'T KNOW THAT MY QUESTION'S GONNA BE VERY ARTFUL.
HAS ANYONE EVER SUGGESTED THAT THIS BE CONSIDERED, AND I'LL HAVE TO CHECK WITH OUR PLANNER ABOUT THIS, BUT A RETIREMENT HOME OR IT BE CONSIDERED LIKE THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT A GROUP HOME FOR RETIREES? HAS ANYONE SPOKEN TO YOU ABOUT THAT POSSIBILITY? WELL, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A GROUP HOME, IT'S PEOPLE STAY TOGETHER.
THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT ALLOW THAT.
THEIR, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TO HOUSE THE HOMELESS VETERANS IS, THE VETERANS HAVE TO STAY ALONE.
HE HAVE HIS OWN BED, HIS OWN REFRIGERATOR, HIS OWN STOVE, HIS OWN EVERYTHING.
WELL, I GUESS I WOULD ASK YOU, I'LL ASK IT ANOTHER WAY.
IN A WAY, HOW WOULD YOU, IF YOU WERE TO PUT A DEFINITION OF HOW YOU SEE WHAT THIS IS, BECAUSE I MEAN, I JUST HEARD YOU, IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S ONE HOME WITH A SUPERVISOR WHERE A GROUP OF PEOPLE ARE LIVING, YOU HAVE PROVIDED LITERALLY A SINGLE ROOM, SO TO SPEAK, WITH ITS OWN KITCHEN.
SO SOMEONE COULD LIVE AUTONOMOUSLY, ALMOST LIKE A TINY HOUSE, BUT THEY'RE ALL CONNECTED WITHIN ONE STRUCTURE.
HOW WOULD YOU, UH, DESCRIBE WHAT YOU CALL WHAT YOU HAVE GOING ON? I MEAN, I'VE HEARD YOU SAY IT'S FOR VETERANS AND YOU'VE GOT 10 PEOPLE STAYING THERE, BUT IF YOU WERE TO GIVE IT A LABEL, WHAT WOULD YOU CALL IT? WOULD YOU CALL IT A SORT OF VETERANS' RETIREMENT HOME, WOULD YOU CALL IT? UH, YEAH, WE CALL IT, UH, WE CALL IT A, A HOME, UH, VINTAGE FOR FOR VINTAGE ELDERS? YEAH, AN INDIGENT.
SO YOU WOULD CALL IT LIKE A, A, A HOMELESS LODGING PLACE MIGHT BE THE KIND OF THING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND OUT IF THERE'S ANY ZONING CATEGORY THAT THIS CAN GO INTO TO PROTECT THOSE PEOPLE THAT ARE LIVING THERE.
AND I DO WANT TO ASK, I'LL FOLLOW UP WITH THE STAFF AFTER YOU ABOUT THOSE SIX, THOSE SIX SPACES THAT YOU LEASED DOWN BY THE TRANSIT, IF THEY COULD QUALIFY FOR THE PARKING.
BUT WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH THAT.
UM, DO YOU HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION? DO THEY WE GOT TO HAVE THAT, YES.
SO DO YOU THE VA SENT 'EM TO US.
SO ALL OF THE PEOPLE, THE VETERANS THAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY HOUSING ARE SENT TO YOU BY THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION.
IS THERE ANY SORT OF CERTIFICATION THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE BY THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION? WE JUST HAVE TO FOLLOW THEIR GUIDELINES, WHAT THEY, BUT, BUT THEY DO HAVE GUIDELINES? YES, THEY GOT GUIDELINES.
HAS SOMEONE BEEN OUT FROM THE VETERANS' ADMINISTRATION? OH YES.
TO LOOK AT YOUR PLACE? EACH VETERANS HAVE THEIR OWN CASEWORKER.
AND HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN MR, MR. MITCHELL, CAN YOU YOU PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE SO FOLKS SOUND? I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
EACH VETERANS HAVE THEIR OWN CASEWORKER.
AND HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN HOUSING VETERANS PLACED BY THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION? EIGHT YEARS.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, PLEASE.
AND THEY, AND, UH, THEY, THEY COME OUT AND INSPECT IT BEFORE, UH, THE VETERANS COME OUT AND INSPECT IT BEFORE IT PASSES.
[02:30:01]
QUALIFICATION.AND THEN THEY, UH, TOLD US THEY CAN MOVE IN, BUT THEY COME OUT AND THEY, THEY EXPECT EVERYTHING, UH, AIR, HEAT, REFRIGERATOR, THE WATER, EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING HAS TO BE TOP-NOTCH IN ORDER FOR THEM TO APPROVE IT.
UH, MR. MITCHELL, UH, YOU SAY THAT WE'RE HERE, UH, YOU SAID YOU'VE BEEN HOUSING VETERANS FOR EIGHT YEARS? YES.
IS THAT WHEN YOU ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY OR DID YOU ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY SOMETIME? NO, WE, WE HAD ANOTHER LOCATION.
YOU HAD ANOTHER LOCATION? LOCATION.
SO YOU ACQUIRED THIS PROPERTY EIGHT YEARS AGO? NO, WE, UM, BEEN HAVING THIS PROPERTY PROBABLY ABOUT MAYBE, MAYBE ABOUT FIVE YEARS.
AND WHEN YOU PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY, WAS IT JUST LIKE IT IS TODAY OR DID YOU DO SOME OF THE ADDITIONS? IT WAS A, I I THINK IT, IT WAS A, IT WAS A, A NURSING, NURSING HOME, I MEAN, FOR KIDS.
BUT YOU'VE NOT ADDED ONTO IT IN THE FIVE YEARS, ALL I, ALL I DID WAS RENOVATE IT AND ADDED, ADDED, UH, THINGS TO THE ROOM.
OKAY, BUT THE, THE STRUCTURE DID NOT GET LARGER.
YOU JUST RECONFIGURED THE NO, NO, NO, OUTSIDE.
SO THAT WAS ALL DONE BY SOME PREVIOUS OWNER? YES.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BLA I WANNA, UH, FOLLOW UP WITH, WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT WAS SAYING.
SO WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE PROPERTY FIVE YEARS AGO, IT HAD THE OUTSIDE WALLS, CORRECT? YES.
AND IT HAD SEVERAL BEDROOMS, CORRECT? RIGHT.
AND, AND THROUGH, AND YOU HAD THIS NEED OR THIS DESIRE TO SU TO PROVIDE SUPPORTIVE SERVICES FOR, UM, HOMELESS VETS, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO IN ORDER TO GIVE THEM THEIR SPACE AS WELL AS THEIR PRIVACY, YOU MAY HAVE HAD FOUR OR FIVE BEDROOMS? SEVEN BEDROOM? WELL, FOUR, GENERALLY SPEAKING, FOUR OR FIVE BEDROOMS. IT, IT WAS NINE OF 'EM.
SO IT, YOU, IT WAS MODIFIED ALREADY FOR NINE BEDROOMS, RIGHT.
AND PRIVATE BATHROOMS OR SHARED BATHROOMS? NO.
SHARED, EVERYBODY GOT THEIR OWN PRIVATE BATHROOMS. OKAY.
SO YOU, IT HAD NINE BEDROOMS, NINE BATHROOMS, SHARED KITCHEN.
SO, BUT IN ORDER TO GIVE THEM MORE PRIVACY, YOU ADDED A KITCHEN LIKE AREA TO EACH ONE OF THE BEDROOMS, AND THEN SOMEWHERE DOWN THE LINE, SOMEONE CAME OUT AND FOUND THAT IT WAS NON-COMPLIANT FOR THE ZONING IN WHICH THE, THE, THE BUILDING SET, CORRECT? RIGHT.
SO WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO NOW IS RETROFIT THE NEED AND THE USE INTO A ZONING CATEGORY THAT WOULD CON WOULD, WOULD ENABLE YOU TO CONTINUE DOING WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
IS THAT NOT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, MA'AM.
I HAVE BEEN TOLD SO MANY THINGS.
SO LET ME, LET ME SEE IF I CAN HELP YOU UNDER HELP EVERYONE GET TO THE SAME PLACE.
SO YOU ALREADY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT, THAT THERE IS NO ZONINGS CLASSIFICATIONS OR STANDARDS FOR MULTIPLE SMALL INDIVIDUAL UNITS ON ONE BIG LOT, CORRECT.
SO, AND THIS, AND, AND WITH THIS PARTICULAR, UM, SITE, YOU'RE, THE, THE, YOU WERE TOLD THAT IT WOULD NEED TO BE CHANGED TO A MULTI-FAMILY OR LIKE AN APARTMENT COMPLEX.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS EACH UNIT MAY NOT HAVE ITS OWN PRIVATE DOOR TO AN OUTSIDE HALLWAY OR OUTDOOR.
IT'S ALL ENCLOSED IN, IN, IN HOUSED INSIDE THE, THESE, THIS MASSIVE FOUR WALLS.
SO BASICALLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING THIS BODY TO DO IS TO LOOK AT, UH, UH, TO LOOK AT OUR ZONING STANDARDS AND HELP COME UP WITH A STANDARD THAT WOULD FIT YOUR USE? YES, MA'AM.
UM, QUICK QUESTION FOR, UH, MS. MUNOZ.
UH, IS THERE A MINIMUM UNIT SIZE REQUIREMENT UNDER MULTIFAMILY ZONING? NO, THERE'S NOT A MINIMUM UNIT SIZE.
[02:35:05]
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER STANDARD? YES, I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.UH, MS. MUNOZ, AND I KNOW YOU WERE SORT OF ASKED THIS ONE BEFORE, BUT DOVETAILING OFF WHAT COMMISSIONER BLAIR SAID, IS THERE ANY CATEGORY THAT YOU SEE THAT THIS EXISTING USE COULD BE, UH, GO, COULD GO UNDER WITHOUT SOME HUGE REVISION THAT IF FOR INSTANCE, THEY COULD USE THE PARKING, THE LEAST PARKING DOWN THE STREET AND THAT MOST OF THESE PEOPLE ARE OVER 65, SO IT MIGHT GO TO THE 0.7 OR THE RETIREMENT PARKING.
IS THERE ANY CATEGORY YOU KNOW OF THAT THIS MIGHT BE ABLE TO, I CAN'T, I'VE LOST THE WORD CONFORM TO NOT EXACTLY, BUT COME UNDER IN OUR ZONING CODE.
I HAVE, I HAVE NOT DONE AN EXHAUSTIVE COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPES FOR THIS SPECIFIC LOT AND FOR THE LAND USE AS REQUESTED IN THE LAND USE STATEMENT.
BUT I DID COMPARE A GROUP RESIDENTIAL HOUSING, WHICH THEY COULD NOT QUALIFY UNDER, AND IT'S NOT PERMITTED IN SINGLE FAMILY.
AND IT, IT'S ALSO PART OF THE REASON WHY THEY ARE HERE TODAY BECAUSE THEY WERE FOUND NOT TO BE CONSIDERED A GROUP RESIDENTIAL DUE TO THE SEPARATE KITCHEN AND DWELLING UNIT OVERALL.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT RETIREMENT HOUSING, LIKE YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, IT STILL REQUIRES THE SAME ONE PARKING SPACE FOR DWELLING UNIT.
IT STILL IS ONLY PERMITTED IN A MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT, UM, THE SPECIAL PARKING STANDARDS, THEY COULD COMPLY WITH PROVIDING UP TO 50% REMOTE PARKING, BUT REMOTE PARKING HAS TO BE WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE SITE FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE.
AND I DON'T THINK THEY CAN FIND ANYTHING WITHIN 300 FEET.
IT'S ALL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THE VICINITY.
SO ARE THERE WAYS THAT THEY COULD TRY TO ADDRESS IT? THEY SURE.
I MEAN, IF YOU APPROVE THE ZONING, MAINTAIN THE NONCONFORMITY, MAYBE THEY COULD GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND TRY TO GET, PROVE THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, QUALIFY FOR A VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
I DON'T KNOW HOW, BUT UM, MAYBE THEY COULD MAKE THAT CASE.
I ALSO THINK MAYBE WE'RE GIVING THEM SOME FALSE HOPE THAT DOES NOT, IT JUST, IT IT CAN'T WORK FOR THIS SITE IN THE WAY THAT THEY'VE DONE IT.
WELL, AND I BUT THAT REQUIRES THAT PARKING.
ON ONE HAND, WE ALL DO, BUT WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT THERE ARE 10 HOMELESS VETERANS THAT ARE GETTING TO BE HOUSED SOMEWHERE, WHICH IS DESPERATELY NEEDED.
SO I GUESS I'M ALWAYS LOOKING FOR WAYS TO MAKE IT WORK.
I UNDERSTAND ZONING IS ZONING, BUT IF IT'S 500 FEET AND NOT 300 FEET OR IF IT'S, UH, TRYING TO FIND SOME COMPROMISE.
I MEAN, LET'S GO BACK TO THE GROUP HOME.
YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE PER, UH, PERSON THAT'S PART OF THE GROUP.
WELL, IF WE KNOW IT'S AN OLDER GROUP, IF IT'S EXISTING, THERE'S NO WAY THAT THE CODE COULD GO TO THE 0.7 OR TO MAKE IT LESS OR TO ALLOW THE FIVE AND MAYBE THEY'RE AT 600 FEET AWAY.
IS THERE ANY IN A CODE THING LIKE THIS, OTHER THAN GOING TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, WHICH COULD TAKE TWO YEARS, RIGHT.
IS THERE ANY WAY OF BEING ABLE TO MORPH THIS INTO BEING ABLE TO EXIST UNDER WHERE WE ARE NOW? I CANNOT, I CAN'T SAY A HUNDRED PERCENT NO.
BECAUSE AS I MENTIONED, I HAVE NOT DONE AN EXHAUSTIVE COMPARISON OF EVERY SINGLE HOUSING TYPE IN OUR CODE.
SO IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, A BOARDING HOUSE OR RESIDENTIAL HOTEL, THESE ARE THINGS THAT I HAVEN'T CONSIDERED.
YEAH, I FORGOT TO THANK YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THE BOARDING HOUSE AND GETTING SOME SORT OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
I THINK, I HOPE THAT MAYBE WE CAN BE ABLE TO LOOK INTO THOSE ALTERNATIVES.
UM, MS. NUNEZ WAS THE WCAP DOCUMENT, UM, UH, DOES IT ADDRESS ANYTHING ABOUT THIS TYPE OF A USE, UM, HERE IN THE TYLER STATION AREA OR WAS IT REFERENCED FOR THE STAFF REPORT?
[02:40:06]
NO, IT WAS NOT REFERENCED AND I CANNOT TELL YOU AT THIS TIME IF IT MEETS ANY OF THE GOALS FOR WCAP.UM, UH, ARE YOU AWARE OF A POTENTIAL, UM, AUTHORIZED HEARING, UM, IN THIS AREA? I BELIEVE SO.
YOU CAN CONFIRM WITH MY GROUP IF YOU'D LIKE.
ADRIA, COULD YOU ANSWER? YES, WE DO HAVE A SERIES OF AUTHORIZED HEARINGS THAT ARE KICKING OFF IN, UH, WHAT USED TO BE WCAP AND, UM, IS THIS, DO YOU KNOW WHETHER THIS PROPERTY IS INCLUDED IN AN, AN EXISTING AUTHORIZED HEARING? OH, I DON'T KNOW.
I THINK THE CLOSEST IS DOWNTOWN ELMWOOD, WHICH WOULDN'T BE INCLUDED IN THIS AREA.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD, GOING BACK TO COMMISSIONER STANDARD'S COMMENT ABOUT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
IT, IT DOES NOT TAKE TWO YEARS TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S THE BEST OPTION FOR THIS CASE, BUT IF WE ARE LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVES, IT'S MORE OF A THREE TO FOUR MONTH PROCESS.
I JUST PUT IT IN THE CATEGORY OF EVERYTHING ELSE.
WELL, ARE YOU GOOD? I I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT, UM, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER HAS HAD HER HAND UP FOR SOME TIME.
WE'RE GOING RIGHT TO HER RIGHT WHEN WE GET AN ANSWER HERE, I'LL ADD TO THIS QUESTION AS WE'RE RESEARCHING, UM, AUTHORIZED HEARINGS IN WCAP.
UM, ARE, ARE YOU GUYS AWARE OF THE, UM, AUTHORIZED HEARING THAT NEIGHBORS ARE PUTTING TOGETHER FOR THIS AREA? THE POTENTIAL FOR AN AUTHORIZED, AN ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZED HEARING THAT WOULD INCLUDE THIS PROPERTY POTENTIALLY? I DON'T KNOW.
I BELIEVE YOU
WE'LL GO TO THE FOLKS THAT HAVEN'T SPOKEN YET.
I BELIEVE IT'S, UH, COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YES, MS. MUNOZ, I'VE BEEN DEEP KIND OF LOOKING AT THE CODE.
SO IF THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN ASKED, I APOLOGIZE.
WOULD THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED USE WITH THE KITCHEN IN EACH ROOM UNIT, WOULD THAT FALL UNDER THE DEFINITION OF GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY OR THERE BARRIERS BETWEEN THEIR, WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY DOING RIGHT NOW IN THIS MEETING? THE GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY DEFINITION? YES.
I THINK THAT THE INTERPRETATION IS THAT DWELLING UNITS THAT ARE OCCUPIED.
SO IF THEY'RE DWELLING UNITS, IF THEY HAVE TO BE OCCUPIED EXCLUSIVELY BY FAMILIES, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, BUT THEY DID, WE DID TALK ABOUT THIS WITH THEM AND THEY DID, UM, SPEAK TO BUILDING INSPECTION AND HAVE THE DETERMINATION THAT IT SHOULD BE MULTIFAMILY BASED ON THE CONFIGURATION.
SO THEY, THEY SPOKE WITH, UM, CHARLES TRAMMEL TO GET A LAND USE DETERMINATION.
AND I SPOKE, I I SPOKE IN LENGTH WITH HIM ABOUT THE CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUE, THE, UH, FAILURE OBTAIN PERMITS FOR ALL THE RENOVATIONS THAT WERE MADE AND THEN ULTIMATELY THE DESIGNATION AS A MULTI-FAMILY UNIT DUE TO THE CONFIGURATION OF THE UNITS AND THE KITCHENETTES THAT THEY DID NOT QUALIFY AS GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY IS WHAT I WAS TOLD.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
WOULD A PATH FORWARD BE TO CRAFT A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THIS ADDRESS AND CRAFT A CUSTOM DEFINITION FOR WHATEVER USE WE DECIDE THIS IS THAT COULD OPERATE BY S G P THAT WOULD THEN ALLOW US TO SET A CUSTOM PARKING REQUIREMENT? WOULD IT BE AN AVENUE? YES SIR.
WE HAVE PLENTY OF PDS THAT ARE ONE LOT AND IT'S NOT IDEAL.
AND DEFINITELY, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF AN S U P IN ADDITION TO A PD ISN'T THE LABORING THE ZONING PROCESS FOR THEM FOR SUCH, UH,
[02:45:01]
YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL COMPATIBLE LAND USE.IT'S THE ONLY THING I COULD THINK OF THAT WOULD MOVE THIS FORWARD IF WE ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THIS IS A, UH, A USE THAT IS NEEDED IN THIS AREA, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD OPERATE WITHIN THE, THE CODE.
I CUZ I DON'T THINK, WELL, WITHIN A PD COULD WE STIPULATE, UH, A PARKING REQUIREMENT WITHOUT AN U IN THE PD? YES.
YOU CAN, YOU CAN STIPULATE THE PARKING PD.
THEN A PD WITHOUT AN S U THEN IT IS THE ONLY WAY I SEE FORWARD IF THAT'S WHAT'S DESIRED FOR THIS USE TO CONTINUE.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, THAT FOLLOW COMMISSIONER TRIED WHITE.
UM, SO SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOMELESS CITIZENS, THAT MORE THAN LIKELY, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO STEREOTYPE IT, BUT YOU MAY NOT HAVE TRANSPORTATION.
UM, AND TO WEIGH HEAVILY ON THE PARKING, I GUESS IN THE CODE, IS THERE NOT A WAY WHERE IT'S PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC TRANSIT, UM, CREATING BICYCLE SPACES THAT EQUATE TO A, A PARKING SPACE OR A MULTIMODAL SPACE? UM, IS THERE NOT A WAY THAT WE CAN REINTERPRET THE CODE IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE USE? WE GOT BICYCLE SPACES AND, UH, BUT IN, IN SOME OF MY OTHER PROJECTS, WELL, I GUESS EXPERIENCES I SHOULD SAY, UM, THEY'VE BEEN WILLING TO TRADE BICYCLE SPACES AND MULTIMODAL SPACES FOR PARKING SPACES.
SO I THINK THEY'RE, I I'M NOT SURE IN THIS CASE, BUT THERE MAY BE A WAY TO THINK ABOUT THAT OR TO PERHAPS MAYBE REDUCE THE NUMBER OF, OF, UH, DWELLING UNITS IN THE BUILDING IN ORDER TO EQUATE TO THE AVAILABLE PART.
COMMISSIONER TREAD WHITE MS. MUNOZ, WERE, WERE YOU AWARE OF THEIR CURRENT ACTIVITY AND THE FACT THAT THEY WERE HOUSING VETERANS AND WERE BEING INSPECTED BY THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION? THEIR LAND USE STATEMENT DOES SAY THAT THEY'RE PROVIDING VETERAN HOUSING, BUT THEIR INSPECTION STATUS WITH THE VETERAN HOUSING ADMINISTRATION? NO, THAT NEVER CAME UP.
I'M JUST REFERENCING THE CODE, YOUR, THE CASE REPORT.
AND YOU KNOW, WHEN I READ IT, I, I WILL SAY I, I THOUGHT THIS WAS A VERY, I THOUGHT THIS WAS GONNA BE A VERY DIFFERENT CASE.
UM, BECAUSE SOMEONE THAT HAS NON-COMPLIANT USE THAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THEY CAN COMPLY WITH PARKING LANDSCAPE OR PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS TO GET TO THEIR USE SEEMS LIKE A FAIRLY SIMPLE, YOU KNOW, FACT PATTERN WHERE YOU'VE GOT A BAD ACTOR, YOU WOULDN'T LET THEM CONTINUE THE LAND USE.
IN THIS CASE, IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION WHERE YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE THAT NOT ONLY HAVE HAD A LAND USE FOR SEVERAL YEARS, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN COMPLYING WITH CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.
THEY JUST MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY HAVE BEEN DALLAS CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS.
AND SO I GUESS, UM, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF WHAT SORT OF LEVEL OF DISCUSSION, IF ANY, YOU HAD HAD WITH THEM ABOUT THE LEVEL OF INSPECTIONS THAT THEY WERE GOING THROUGH WITH THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION ON THAT POINT.
NO, WE DO NOT TYPICALLY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT TEXAS HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES REGISTRATION, LICENSURE OR FEDERAL HOUSING REQUIREMENTS AS FAR AS INSPECTION STANDARDS.
WE ARE APPLYING SOLELY OUR ZONING DISTRICT AND OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.
THAT IS ALL THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO ENFORCE.
I JUST THINK IT IS A RELEVANT THING TO KNOW THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH SOMEONE'S REQUIREMENTS.
IF, UM, IF WE WERE, LET'S SAY WE WERE GONNA PURSUE THE PD ROUTE, WE WOULD HAVE TO VOTE TO DENY THIS CASE AND THEN RE ADVERTISE, IS THAT RIGHT? CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION FOR, UH, FOR MR. MOORE? WELL, IF WE WERE TO PURSUE A PD, UM, WE WOULD HAVE TO RE ADVERTISE YES, THAT'S CORRECT, COMMISSIONER.
BUT WOULD THEY HAVE TO REAPPLY? AND THERE, THERE'S A, THE FEE IS DIFFERENT, SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO, UH, THEY THEY THEY'D HAVE
[02:50:01]
TO PAY THE FEE.THAT, THAT'S, YEAH, THAT WOULD BE TOO BAD.
UM, I MEAN, ASK HIM, OH, I WOULDN'T DO THAT.
MR. MOORE, CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THAT? ARE YOU SAYING IN YOUR ANSWER TO COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, OKAY, IF WE HELD THIS OVER, LET'S SAY RIGHT NOW, OH, EXCUSE ME.
IF, IF WE HELD THIS CASE OVER AND KNOWING THAT THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL OR A NEW FEE WITH THE PD.
BUT COULD THE CASE CON CONTINUE AND MORPH INTO A PD? BECAUSE WE OFTEN HAVE CASES GO, FOR INSTANCE, THAT THEY START OUT FOR ONE THING AND THEN IT SUGGESTED IT SHOULD BE ANOTHER LIKE AN S U OR SOMETHING.
SO COULDN'T WE IN THIS CASE, POTENTIALLY DO THAT? YES.
SO IT STAYS IN AN APPLICATION FORM? YEAH.
SO IT'S NOT STARTING A NEW AND GOING INTO THE QUEUE, BUT THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL FEE AMOUNT? YES, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL FEE AMOUNT AND IT, WE WOULD HAVE TO RE ADVERTISE, BUT I'M SURE ANDREA, YEAH, THE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.
WE'RE TRYING TO COME TO SOMETHING THAT WORKS, BUT DO IT WITHOUT, AS ANY, AS AS LITTLE POSSIBLE BURDEN TO THE APPLICANT DUE TO THIS SPECIAL SITUATION.
I THINK WE'VE GOT AN ANSWER FROM, UM, DR.
OBJECTOR, DO YOU HAVE AN ANSWER FOR COMMISSIONER POPKIN? PLEASE DO.
WE, THE WOKE UP VISION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD? I BELIEVE SHE DOES.
I BELIEVE TH IS, IS GONNA BE THE MAYBE THE WINNER OR PD.
YEAH, I KNOW WE HAVE A VISION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I WANNA TALK ABOUT, UM, WHAT, WHAT ARE THE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS THAT WE'VE GOT IN WCAP? IS THERE ONE NEAR THIS SITE OR INCLUDING THIS SITE? THERE ISN'T ONE THAT IS INCLUDING THIS SITE, BUT I THINK IT'S ONE NEAR.
AND, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS BEFORE I JOINED CPC, THERE WAS AN AUTHORIZED HEARING SOMEWHERE HERE AROUND TYLER'S STATION.
AND DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE COMMUNITY'S TALK TO REOPEN THAT AUTHORIZED HEARING AT ALL? I STILL DON'T KNOW.
SO AGAIN, WE WILL FALL BACK WITH WHATEVER WE DISCUSSED DURING WCAP.
I'M RECALLING IN WCAP, THERE WAS, UH, UH, SOME VERY CONTENTIOUS CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHETHER MULTIFAMILY SHOULD BE ALLOWED AROUND THIS TRAIN STATION.
AND THE VERDICT WAS THAT THERE ARE MORE CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE NEEDED AND A COMMUNITY VISION NEEDS TO BE, UH, DEVELOPED TO DETERMINE WHERE IS THE APPROPRIATE SITE FOR MULTIFAMILY AROUND THIS STATION AND HOW FAR IT ENCROACHES INTO THE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE RECALLING FROM THAT PROCESS AS WELL? YES.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE SAID.
WE ARE GONNA EXPLORE, UH, POSSIBILITIES OF DENSIFICATION WITHIN THE LIMITS AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF WCAP IN THOSE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS.
NOW THAT WE HAVE A VISION PLAN FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THIS AREA, WOULD IT BE OVERSTEPPING OUR BOUNDS TO AUTHORIZE AN INDIVIDUAL ZONING CASE IN AN AREA WHERE THEY'RE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS OR, UM, THE DESIRE TO SEE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS FOR CONTENTIOUS ISSUES THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS DISCUSSING? YES.
I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S WHY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL.
UM, I I THINK THERE'S THE POSSIBILITY THAT THIS, UM, PROJECT COULD BE, UH, THIS APPLICATION COULD BE REISSUED, BUT I THINK THAT THIS IS OPENING A MUCH BIGGER, UM, CONVERSATION THAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD NEED TO BE INVOLVED WITH TO REALLY DETERMINE IF THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR THIS USE.
I THINK IT'S MORE ABOUT LIKE THE DENSITY AND WHAT ARE THE THRESHOLDS FOR DENSITY AND HOW DOES INFILL HOUSING LOOKING IN THE AREAS OR AROUND THE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS OF A WCAP.
AND I THINK THE CONVERSATION WOKE UP WAS TO START WITH THE AUTHORIZED HEARING AREAS FIRST.
THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THAT QUESTION.
ANDREA, DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER BLAIR? YES.
SO MY QUESTION IS, UM, FROM STAFF, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S JUST LEGAL OR WHOEVER, UM, THIS REQUEST, OKAY.
[02:55:01]
UTILIZING THE BUILDING, THE BUILDING WAS A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, CORRECT? THAT WAS USED AS A GROUP HOME, CORRECT.THAT DID NOT HAVE THAT, AND THEY, THEY MODIFIED IT TO ADD THE BATHROOMS SO THAT EACH BEDROOM WAS EITHER AN, UH, EN SUITE OR IF YOU MADE IT PRIVATE, UH, MF TWO.
SO IS THERE, IF THERE, THERE IS NO CLASSIFICATION FOR THIS TYPE OF, THERE'S NO ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR THIS TYPE OF SUITE, AM I, UH, THIS TYPE OF USE? AM I CORRECT? NO, UH, WE'RE STILL, LIKE, AGAIN, FOR US IT'S A ZONING, GENERAL ZONING CHANGE FROM A DISTRICT THAT COME WITH EACH, EACH SET OF USES.
UM, FOR INSTANCE, WE'RE THINKING THAT THIS MAY LOOK, THIS USE MAY BE A RESIDENTIAL HOTEL.
WE NEED MORE FROM THE APPLICANT TO FIND OUT WHAT USE, BUT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT APPROVING THIS USE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING INTO THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT HAS ADDITIONAL USES AND OUT OF THOSE USES WHEN HE GOES TO PERMITTING, WE'RE NOT ISSUING COS HERE.
SO, OKAY, SO LET ME MAKE SURE THAT I'M, I'M, I'M, I'M GETTING THAT, I'M GETTING MYSELF BACK ON TRACK WITH YOU.
GERIA WOULD BE THAT THIS, THE CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PARTICULAR LOT IS R 75, SINGLE FAMILY.
BUT IN SINGLE FAMILY, YOU HAVE, FOR INSTANCE, HAVE HANDICAPPED DWELL DWELLING UNITS THAT ARE ALLOWED BY, RIGHT, EXACTLY.
SO THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ALLOWED IN R SEVEN FIVE, BUT OKAY.
BUT THEY'RE TRYING, BUT THIS IS NOW TRYING TO BE CHANGED FROM R 75 TO MF TWO CLASSIFICATION, WHICH IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING PATTERN THAT EXISTS THERE TODAY, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO, UM, AND SO, AND WHAT THEY, AND THE MODIFICATIONS THAT WAS DONE WAS TO TAKE THE NINE BEDROOMS. SO YOU CAN HAVE A, A R 75, THAT SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE THAT HAS NINE BEDROOMS, BUT THEY ARE NOT PRIVATE ROOMS, THAT ARE APARTMENTS.
SO WHEN, WHEN THE MODIFICATION CAME, IT WAS DONE A LITTLE WONKY BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAVE THE, IT DIDN'T HAVE THE BENEFITS OF A, OF A PERMIT.
UM, SO THEN IT BRINGS FORTH A CHALLENGE FOR THIS BODY TO COME BACK AND SAY, HOW DO YOU, HOW DO WE FIX THIS? CORRECT.
AGAIN, WHAT WE ARE HERE IS TO COMPARE AN R 75 TO AN MF.
IS THE BODY COMFORTABLE TO ALLOW AN MF FOR THIS PARCEL AT THIS LOCATION? AND WHAT ARE THE, UH, SO WE DON'T HAVE, OKAY, SO WHAT, WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT THE DIRECTION YOU'RE TRYING TO GET US TO GO IS, IS MF TO A GOOD USE OF LAND AT THIS PARTICULAR PLACE, REGARDLESS OF WHAT'S ALREADY THERE, REGARDLESS OF HOW IT'S BEEN STRUCTURED, ALTERED OR MODIFIED.
IS IT A GOOD USE OF LAND FOR MF TWO AT THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION? CORRECT.
MS. MUNOZ? UH, JUST, JUST TO BE FAIR, UH, THE LAST TIME WE HEARD THIS CASE, THERE WAS A, A WOMAN HERE THAT, THAT WAITED ALL SEEMS LIKE ALL NIGHT TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE.
I BELIEVE THAT SHE WAS ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS.
THEN SHE ALSO EMAILED, UH, AN EMAIL WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME FRUSTRATION STATING JUST THAT.
AND WITH SOME, YOU KNOW, SHE DETAILED SOME ISSUES HERE ABOUT MAYBE WHAT, WHAT SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS AND SOME OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE FOLKS AROUND THE AREA FEEL THE FRUSTRATION WITH THIS USE.
WERE YOU AWARE IF THERE WERE ANY OTHERS, ANY OTHER LETTERS IN OPPOSITION? ANY OTHER YES.
ANY OTHER FOLKS THAT, UH, CAME FORWARD AND, AND SPOKE ABOUT THAT? I HAD ONE GENTLEMAN CALL ME.
HE LEFT, UM, SEVERAL, HE MADE SEVERAL EMAIL AND PHONE CALL REQUESTS TO THE WHOLE DEPARTMENT SEEKING INFORMATION ABOUT THIS.
HE WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE REQUEST, BUT HE NEVER STATED OBVIOUS OPPOSITION TO IT.
AND AS FAR AS TODAY, HE ASKED ME WHAT THE STATUS WAS AND I TOLD HIM HE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO JOIN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[03:00:01]
IF MR. MELVIN IS HERE TODAY, PLEASE TAKE YOUR TIME.IF, IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
THAT'S THE ONLY OTHER PERSON I'VE HEARD FROM OTHER THAN MS. PIERRE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE.
COMMISSIONER POMPKIN, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? I DO.
AND I HAVE COMMENTS IF I HAVE A SECOND IN THE MATTER OF CASE NUMBER Z TWO 12 DASH 30 48, I MAKE A MOTION TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL ENC CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER POPKIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
IS THAT WITH OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE, MR. CHAIR? UH, UM, UM, I, I'LL I'LL SAY WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
UM, AND, AND PRIMARILY THAT'S BECAUSE I, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON A ZONING CHANGE SUCH AS THIS.
UM, THE FACT THAT THIS, UM, USE HAS BEEN IN OPERATION FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, I, I DON'T THINK, UM, SUPERSEDES THE, THE NEED FOR A COMMUNITY CONVERSATION ABOUT WHERE, UH, MULTIFAMILY FITS BEST.
I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF VERY CONTENTIOUS CONVERSATIONS ABOUT ALLOWING MULTIFAMILY NEAR THIS TRAIN STATION, AND THERE IS A DESIRE FOR IT FROM SOME AND, UM, ABJECT OPPOSITION TO IT FROM MANY OTHERS.
UM, AND, AND I KNOW I, I WOULD NOT WANT TO PUT THESE FOLKS IN THE POSITION OF SPENDING A LOT OF TIME AND MONEY, UM, IN A SITUATION THAT, UH, IS, IS IS GONNA JUST OPEN, UM, PANDORA'S BOX, UH, A HUGE CAN OF WORMS, UM, THAT THAT IS, UM, LIKELY NOT GONNA FALL IN THEIR FAVOR.
UM, BUT I KNOW THAT I'VE, I'VE THAT THIS, THAT THIS PROPERTY IN PARTICULAR, UM, HAS CAUSED SOME CONSTERNATION ABOUT WHETHER PERMITS WERE PULLED.
AND, UH, THE PROJECT WAS BUILT BY WRIGHT BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF, UH, PROJECTS, UM, INTENDED TO BUILD HIGHER DENSITY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WITHOUT THE CORRECT PERMITS.
AND A LOT OF FOLKS ARE ON EDGE ABOUT PROJECTS OPERATING UNDER THE RADAR WITHOUT CORRECT PERMITS, ADDING MORE DENSITY TO A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS UNDER THREAT.
UM, SO I I, I FEEL FOR YOU GUYS, AND I THINK YOU'RE DOING A GREAT THING FOR THE COMMUNITY AND, UM, I, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS, UM, THIS TYPE OF HOUSING OPERATE IN THE RIGHT LOCATION, BUT I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT THIS IS THE RIGHT LOCATION.
UM, IF, IF YOU'D LIKE TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION, YOU'RE WELCOME TO RESUBMIT ANOTHER APPLICATION, PERHAPS FOR A PD.
UM, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF, UM, NEIGHBORS WANTING TO WEIGH IN ABOUT THE ADDITION OF, UM, HIGHER DENSITY IN THIS SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD NEXT TO THIS TYLER STATION, TRAIN STATION.
UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT? UH, I'LL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
UH, I THINK THE APPROPRIATE ACTION TODAY WOULD BE TO HOLD THIS CASE AND GET THE MITCHELL'S SOME, UH, SOME ASSISTANCE TO, UM, TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM.
I THINK CHARACTERIZING THIS AS MULTIFAMILY IS A MISCHARACTERIZATION.
UM, WE'VE GOT A HOMELESS PROBLEM IN OUR CITY.
WE HAVE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROBLEM IN OUR CITY.
UM, I DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT THIS STRUCTURE APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN BUILT IN PHASES OVER THE YEARS, LIKELY WITHOUT ANY PERMITS, BUT WE CAN'T CHANGE THE HISTORY OF THAT.
THAT'S NOT THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S WE, WE, WE JUST CAN'T DO THAT.
AND SO, UH, I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH A CERTAIN CONSULTANT IN THIS ROOM THAT WOULD BE HAPPY TO REPRESENT THE MITCHELLS AND SEE IF A SOLUTION COULD BE ARRIVED AT, UM, IN A, UH, IN A, UM, A PERIOD OF SAY A MONTH.
UH, I REALLY THINK IT'D BE A SHAME TO ASK THE MITCHELLS TO START OVER, FILE MORE FEES, WAIT MORE, YOU KNOW, SPEND MORE TIME AND, AND ENERGY AND, UH, SEE IF A CREATIVE SOLUTION CAN BE, UH, UH, CAN BE ARRIVED AT.
SO, UH, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION AND LOOK FORWARD TO PERHAPS A DIFFERENT MOTION.
YEAH, I LARGELY TAKE THE SAME POSITION AS COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.
AND THE, THE POINT THAT I WANT TO EMPHASIZE, WHICH HE MADE, ALSO MADE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, MULTIFAMILY TAKES A LOT OF DIFFERENT LOOKS
[03:05:01]
AND, YOU KNOW, COMES IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT FORMS. AND THIS DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO END UP AS A, A MULTIFAMILY USE NECESSARILY.SO, YOU KNOW, WITH WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL DEFINITION OF DWELL MULTIFAMILY, WHICH I THINK IS THREE OR MORE DWELLING UNITS ON A PROPERTY.
SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD GIVE THE MITCHELLS HERE THE OPPORTUNITIES TO REALLY GO THROUGH ALL OF THE POSSIBLE OPTIONS AND ALSO HAVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ABOUT THE SPECIFIC USE THAT THEY WANT TO HAVE ON THEIR PROPERTY, WHICH IS HOUSING VETERANS AS OPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, RENTING OUT APARTMENTS TO, TO FAMILIES OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND, AND, YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S A SOLUTION HERE WITHOUT REQUIRING THEM TO COME BACK A SECOND TIME AND SUBMIT ADDITIONAL FEES.
COMMISSIONER TREADRIGHT, UM, I WANNA ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT AND VICE CHAIR RUBEN HAVE SAID.
I, I ALSO WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SOME TIME TO HAVE SOME COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND HEAR BACK DIRECTLY FROM PEOPLE THAT ARE AROUND.
WE DID GET SOME LETTERS AND OPPOSITION, AND I THINK IT IS WORTH FLESHING THAT OUT.
WHAT ARE THE CONCERNS? AND IF THERE ARE CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE, WHAT ARE THEY? CAN THEY CLEARLY BE IDENTIFIED? BUT I DO FEEL LIKE WE, NOT EVERY FACT WAS ON THE TABLE, UM, SO THAT IT COULD BE ADDRESSED.
AND FOR THAT REASON, I, I AGREE.
I, I WOULD PREFER TO SEE THIS BEING HELD SO THAT THESE ISSUES CAN BE WORKED ON.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG, I WILL BE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION.
I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT ALL OF US, UH, ON THE COMMISSION, UH, ARE IN SYMPATHY WITH THE USE THAT'S BEING CONDUCTED ON THE PROPERTY AND WANTING TO FIND A WAY TO, UH, FACILITATE THAT.
AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK WE ALL FEEL LIKE WE'VE BEEN PAINTED INTO A CORNER.
AND, UH, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE APPLICANT AND THE GOOD WORK THEY'RE DOING, IT'S THE APPLICANT THAT HAS PAINTED US INTO THAT CORNER BY TAKING MATTERS INTO, UH, THEIR OWN HANDS AND DOING A BUNCH OF, UH, CONSTRUCTION WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT.
UH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GONNA TAKE TO GET ACROSS TO THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS THAT IF YOU WANNA RENOVATE YOUR HOUSE, YOU DON'T JUST GO TO HOME DEPOT AND BUY SOME PLYWOOD AND PAINT, UH, THAT THERE IS A PROCESS TO BE FOLLOWED, WHICH IS NOT JUST A BUREAUCRATIC PROCESS, BUT IS A PROCESS TO DESIGNED, FIRST OF ALL, TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING IS DONE SAFELY AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH BUILDING CODES SO THAT THERE IS NO DISASTER FORTHCOMING.
AND SECONDLY, SO THAT PROBLEMS SUCH AS ZONING PROBLEMS WITH WHAT YOU'RE DOING CAN BE IDENTIFIED EARLY IN THE PROCESS INSTEAD OF HERE AT THE HORSESHOE AT A, UH, AT A HEARING WHERE THE ONLY OPTIONS ON THE TABLE ARE UNPALATABLE OPTIONS.
SO I DEFER TO COMMISSIONER POPKIN IN HER DISTRICT.
SHE HAS WORKED VERY HARD ON WCAP.
SHE HAS HER FINGER ON THE PULSE OF THE COMMUNITY SENTIMENT, UH, REGARDING MULTIFAMILY USES.
IT MAY BE THAT A WAY CAN BE FOUND TO PERMIT THIS USE WITHOUT OPENING THE DOOR TO UNWANTED GENERAL MULTIFAMILY.
BUT, UH, I THINK THE CONTEXT FOR THAT PROCESS NEEDS TO BE A BROADER PROCESS THAN JUST FINDING A WAY TO HAMMER THIS ROUND ZONING CASE INTO A SQUARE HOLE.
COMMISSIONER BLACK, I SECOND HER, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER POPS MOTION AND AFTER, YOU KNOW, AND I, EH, MAYBE HOLD IT, BUT AFTER LISTENING TO COMMISSIONER YOUNG, I DEFINITELY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT OUT OF MY, MY SENSE OF CONSISTENCY, I HAVE BEEN BOXED IN THAT SAME TYPE OF CORNER.
AND I, AND I DID THE SAME THING.
I, I SAID, DON'T BOX, DON'T, I, I DID NOT ALLOW AN APPLICANT TO BOX ME IN A CORNER WHERE I HAD TO MAKE, UH, A DECISION THAT WAS NOT PALATABLE FOR ANYBODY.
UM, WHEN, WHEN I TRY TO DO MEDIATIONS, I ALWAYS TELL MY, MY PEOPLE, WHEN I'M MEDIATING, MY GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT NO ONE COMES OUT TOTALLY APPRECIATE TOTALLY GETTING WHAT THEY WANT, IF YOU CAN, ALTHOUGH YOU CAN LIVE WITH IT.
WHAT I HAVE HEARD FROM, UM, COMMISSIONER POPS, THE COMMUNITY IS NOT HAPPY WITH BEING PUT IN A POSITION TO ACCEPT A LAND USE THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THEIR COMMUNITY.
[03:10:03]
UM, I DO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE SERVICE THAT THE, THE MITCHELLS ARE PROVIDING ARE FOR, UM, A, A SMALL SUBSET OF COMMUNITY THAT WE OWE OUR LIVES TO.WE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US HERE OWES OUR LIVES TO OUR LIFE AND OUR LIBERTY TO, THAT'S, AND WHICH MAKES THIS HARDER, BUT SHOULD NOT.
BUT, BUT IF, WHAT WOULD, UM, DR.
U DARA JUST MADE ME PUT ME IN A BOX, YOU KNOW, I DON'T LIKE THAT.
UM, THAT SAID THAT IT'S NOT ABOUT WHO WE THEY ARE SERVING, IT'S ABOUT IS IT A GOOD USE OF LAND, WHERE IT IS, AND IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH IT SETS IN? THANK YOU.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, COMMISSIONER STANDARD FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING VERY ELOQUENT TO SAY, BUT I WILL SAY THIS, THIS HAS BEEN THERE FOR EIGHT YEARS.
THE VETERANS HAVE BEEN THERE FOR EIGHT YEARS.
AND, YOU KNOW, I LIVE IN A FANCY CONDOMINIUM AND PEOPLE ALL THE TIME RENOVATE THESE CONDOMINIUMS WITHOUT GETTING PERMITS CUZ THEY DIDN'T KNOW A LOT OF TIMES THAT PROCESS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE HERE OR NOT, BUT I DO KNOW, I DON'T THINK THIS PARTICULAR CASE IS THAT BLACK AND WHITE SOMETHING GIVES ME PAUSE.
AND WHEN I FEEL THAT PAUSE, IT MAKES ME SAY, DON'T DISMISS, LET'S HOLD IT OVER BECAUSE I GOT THE SAME FEELING AS COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.
SOMETHING ABOUT THIS EVEN BEING DEALT WITH IS MULTIFAMILY, AS IF THEY'RE ONLY TWO I OPTIONS, SINGLE FAMILY MULTIFAMILY.
WHEN WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR EIGHT YEARS, THAT'S SERVING A MUCH NEEDED PURPOSE.
YOU KNOW, I, I MEAN, I GUESS I WANT TO EXHAUST ALL OPTIONS BEFORE WE JUST CLOSE THIS OUT FOR THE MITCHELLS.
SO I CAN'T SUPPORT THE MOTION EITHER.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER AB THAT THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
I AM GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION.
I THINK IT'S INTERESTING THAT WE STARTED TODAY'S, UM, HEARING WITH THE HOUSING BRIEFING, TALKING ABOUT THE DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPES THAT WE NEED IN OUR CITY.
AND I APPLAUD THE MITCHELL'S FOR THE SERVICE THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING.
LIKE EVERYONE HAS SAID BEFORE ME, THIS IS NOT A BLACK AND WHITE CASE.
THERE IS SO MUCH NUANCE HERE, BUT I'M ALSO NOT SURE THAT THE, THIS GROUP AROUND THE HORSESHOE IS THE RIGHT WAY TO SOLVE THIS.
IT'S GONNA TAKE A LOT OF COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND, AND IN DISCOVERING SHOULD IT CONTINUE AT THIS LOCATION, I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY THAT YOU ACTUALLY MOVED FROM ANOTHER LOCATION, YOU KNOW, IS THERE SOMEWHERE THAT WOULD BE BETTER SUITED? I DO HOPE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO FIND A SOLUTION, WHETHER IT'S HERE OR SOMEWHERE ELSE, BUT THAT'S GOING TO TAKE THE COMMUNITY BEING INVOLVED.
I DO LOOK AND SEE, WE HAVE FIVE RESPONSES IN, IN OPPOSITION.
SO THERE CLEARLY IS SOME CONCERN WITH HOW THIS IS OPERATING AT THIS LOCATION, AND WE DON'T HAVE THE CONTEXT FOR THAT.
I WOULD SUPPORT HAVING IT HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, BUT I'M ALSO NOT SURE THAT THAT'S MOVING THIS DISCUSSION FORWARD.
AND THAT WOULD BE MY GREATEST CONCERN IS, UM, IS THAT WE'RE, WE'RE SERVING BOTH THIS APPLICANT AND THE COMMUNITY.
SO I WILL DEFER TO COMMISSIONER POPKIN AND THE WORK THAT SHE'S PUT IN ON THIS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM OUR FOLKS ON COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? THANK YOU.
UM, I COULD GO EITHER WAY ON THIS.
I APPRECIATE BOTH COMMISSIONER HOUSE WRIGHT'S POSITION AND COMMISSIONER YOUNG'S POSITION.
AND IN THE END I TEND TO SUPPORT THE COMMISSIONER WHOSE DISTRICT IT IS.
AND, YOU KNOW, COMING FROM A MILITARY FAMILY AND HAVING A LOT OF EXPERIENCE DEALING WITH THE VA AND THE SERVICES THEY PROVIDE, I UNDERSTAND HOW NEEDED THESE SERVICES CAN BE.
BUT YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE THE PLAN COMMISSION AND WE DEAL WITH LAND USE ISSUES PRIMARILY, AND SOME PROBLEMS ARE BEYOND OUR SCOPE TO SOLVE.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT COMMISSIONER POPKIN HAS PUT INTO WCAP AND THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY THAT HER CONSTITUENTS HAVE PUT INTO, UM, THAT PROCESS SEEMS A LITTLE UNFAIR TO, AT THE BEGINNING OF IT, MAKE A DECISION, UM, THAT COULD BE CONTRARY TO IT AND IS CONTRARY TO THE FEEDBACK WE'VE GOTTEN TO THAT FROM THAT COMMUNITY, UM,
[03:15:01]
AT THIS STAGE.AND, YOU KNOW, ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT COMMISSIONER YOUNG SAID, WE HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED OVER TIME WITHOUT INSPECTIONS, WITHOUT PERMITS.
AND AT SOME POINT, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE.
THERE COULD BE LIFE SAFETY ISSUES THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT.
AND THE EFFORT TO TRY TO SAVE THIS PROJECT IS ADMIRABLE, BUT IT MAY NOT BE DOING ANYBODY ANY FAVORS LONG TERM.
NOT JUST FROM A LAND USE PERSPECTIVE, BUT FROM LIFE SAFETY ISSUES AND, UH, OTHER TENANT ISSUES THAT WE'RE NOT REALLY IN OUR PURVIEW IN THE FIRST PLACE.
SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
UH, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
UM, I THINK THAT THERE IS, UM, AN OPPORTUNITY AND OLIVE BRANCH HERE TO REACH OUT AND TRY TO HELP THIS ORGANIZATION CAN CONTINUE TO MOVE.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE, THERE WANTED TO BE MORE MULTIFAMILY NEAR THE TYLER STATION IN THAT AREA.
AND I THINK THAT THERE, THE PARTNERS THAT MAY BE INVOLVED WITH THIS OPERATION COULD POTENTIALLY HELP THEM, UM, IF WE WERE TO CREATE REQUIREMENTS THAT LOOKED MORE LIKE THE MULTI-FAMILY THAT THE WORLD CAB WANTED TO HAVE HAPPEN HERE, UM, AND THEN HAVE THEM MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS AS A CONDITION.
SO I MEAN, I WOULD BE MORE IN FAVOR OF HOLDING THE MATTER, UM, BUT I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS IT STANDS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE? YES.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, I, NO, THIS ONE'S JUST, THIS ONE'S GOTTEN UNDER MY SKIN.
UM, THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT THE MITCHELL'S ENLARGED THIS STRUCTURE.
THEY SAID THEY DID SOME RENOVATIONS AND, AND INSIDE THEY'VE NOT ENLARGED THE STRUCTURE.
THIS STRUCTURE'S BEEN THERE FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS.
AND SO WHY WE WOULD TAKE THIS MOMENT TO TAKE THE ACTION OF, OF DENIAL, UM, AS OPPOSED TO, UH, TAKING A MONTH AND EXPLORING SOLUTIONS AND THE, IT, WE MAY END UP RIGHT BACK WHERE WE STARTED A MONTH FROM NOW, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULDN'T GIVE THE, UH, APPLICANT THE RESPECT AND THE COURTESY OF A LITTLE TIME ON THIS TO TRY TO CONTINUE TO, UH, SERVE THE CONSTITUENTS, UH, THAT THEY SERVE.
I I SURE THIS IS IN DISTRICT ONE.
THIS IS NOT JUST A DISTRICT ONE ISSUE.
THIS IS FAR BIGGER THAN DISTRICT ONE.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I, UM, I'VE SAID MY, MY PIECE, SO THANK YOU.
UM, I WOULD PREFER TO SEE THIS ITEM PUT UNDER ADVISEMENT.
I CAN COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION TO A REQUEST FOR MULTIFAMILY, A STRAIGHT ZONING, UH, CHANGE TO MULTIFAMILY IN THE MIDDLE OF AN R 75 NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT I THINK THERE'S MORE NUANCE THAN THAT HERE.
OUR CODE DOES PROVIDE FOR INSTITUTIONAL USES WITHIN R 75, AND I THINK THIS FACILITY IS MUCH MORE LIKE A GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITY, A GROUP HANDICAPPED HOME THAN IT IS A STRAIGHT MULTIFAMILY.
SO, I MEAN, I, I THINK IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE TO GO BACK TO THE COMMUNITY AND HAVE A CONVERSATION BECAUSE I THINK THERE IS A POSSIBILITY HERE, UM, TO SORT OF RECRAFT THE, THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO AN MF TWO REZONING.
UM, THIS IS THE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF THE COMMUNITY KNOWS WHAT KIND OF USE THIS IS, BUT TO SAY THIS IS WHAT THE USE IS, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE THE GENERAL TYPES OF INSTITUTIONAL USES THAT WE FIND IN OUR SEVEN FIVE.
AND THERE'S A POSSIBILITY HERE THAT YOU COULD WRITE A PD AND CRAFT A DEFINITION FOR THIS AND MAYBE WE WOULD GET BACK AT THE SAME PLACE, BUT I, I WOULD PREFER TO, UM, HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT CONVERSATION.
AND, AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, TO EXTEND THE CONVERSATION.
COMMISSIONER POPKIN, I'LL, I'LL JUST ADD ONE MORE COMMENT THAT, UM, IN THE SPIRIT OF OUR CONATION ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I'LL DEFER TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CONVERSATION CONTINUE AND, UM, AGREE TO HOLD THIS CASE OVER, UM, IN AN EFFORT TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY TO FIND OUT WHETHER, UM, UH, POTENTIALLY A PD WITH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS COULD MAKE THIS USE PALATABLE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A LITMUS TEST FOR FUTURE CONVERSATIONS TO COME ABOUT, UM, MULTI-FAMILY OR INCREASED DENSITY AROUND THIS TYLER STATION, UM, AREA
[03:20:01]
THAT, THAT DOES NOT HAVE AN EXISTING AUTHORIZED HEARING YET.UM, AND, AND, AND SEE WHERE THIS CONVERSATION TAKES US.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER POPKIN.
SO IS, UH, YOUR MOTION NOW WITHDRAWN? NOW YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO HOLD OTHER ADVISEMENT TO JULY 20TH.
UH, COULD WE MAKE IT AUGUST 17TH? OKAY, LET'S DO THAT.
UH, SO THE MOTION IS, IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU? IS THAT OKAY WITH THE BOBBY MOTION HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN.
WE HAVE A NEW MOTION, UH, MADE BY COMMISSIONER POP TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN, HOLD THE MATTER UNDER HIS ADVISEMENT TILL AUGUST SEVEN 17TH.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IT WAS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR, I BELIEVE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, COMMISSIONERS WILL NOW MOVE TO CASE NUMBER 10.
UH, MR. MULKEY, CAN YOU PLEASE SIR? ANYONE JUST READ THAT INTO THE RECORD.
IT'S GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT.
ITEM 10 KC 2 23 DASH ONE 11, AN APPLICATION FOR A DA DUPLEX SUB-DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST LINE OF GARDEN LANE, SOUTHWEST OF SECOND AVENUE STAFF'S.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS NUMBER 10 Z 2 23 1 11.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER RUBIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YES, THE MATTER IS Z 2 23 1 11.
I HOLD, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT TO OUR JULY 6TH MEETING.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN, COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, MISS, JUST CAN ANYONE WHO JUST READ IT IN THE RECORD, THIS IS ALSO GONNA GET HELP.
AN APPLICATION FOR A DA DUPLEX DISTRICT ON A PROPERTY ZONED AN R 7.5.
A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF SOUTH PRAIRIE CREEK ROAD, NORTH OF FIRESIDE DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS NUMBER 11 Z 2 1 12 1 59.
COMMISSIONER, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 12 1 59.
I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE MATTER OPEN AND HOLD THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL AUGUST 3RD, 2023.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLA FOR YOUR MOTION.
IYE CHAIR, WE FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ITEM 12 IS Z TWO 12 DASH TWO 11.
AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 6 38 ON PROPERTY ON PROPERTY BOUNDED BY TOLAND STREET NORTH, JIM MILLER ROAD, MILITARY PARKWAY, AND WILKES AVENUE.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
UH, MS. GYER, MR. CROWLEY, CARL CROWLEY 2201 MAIN STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS, REPRESENTING THE D I S D.
THE, UH, PRINCIPAL AND HER OFFICE MANAGER WERE HERE, BUT THEY HAD TO LEAVE.
IT'S NOT DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR, BUT IT'S A HUGE BUSY TIME FOR PRINCIPALS TO SORT OF CLOSE UP THE BOOKS AND STUFF.
SO, UH, SHE APOLOGIZES FOR NOT BEING HERE TO TELL YOU THE WONDERFUL THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING AT, I JOKINGLY JOKE WITH THE FORMER PEACOCK MILITARY ACADEMY.
ORIGINALLY THIS WAS A MILITARY ACADEMY.
THIS SCHOOL WAS BACK IN THE THIRTIES, IF NOT BEFORE THAT.
UM, SO THIS, THIS SCHOOL HAS BEEN HERE FOR A LONG TIME.
IT'S BEEN A D I S D SCHOOL, OBVIOUSLY FOR A LONG TIME ALSO.
UM, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BASICALLY WE'LL REPLACE THE OLDER SCHOOL THERE WITH A BRAND NEW MODERN FACILITY FOR THEM.
UM, MUCH LIKE THE SAMUEL, WHAT I TALKED TO YOU EARLIER, WE'VE WORKED
[03:25:01]
OUT SOME IDEAS ABOUT, UH, THIS WHOLE INTERIOR OF THE SITE.AND I'VE GOT A PRESENTATION, BUT I'M NOT GONNA BORE Y'ALL WITH IT.
UM, COOL SCHOOLS IS INVOLVED IN THIS SITE.
THERE'S A LARGE SORT OF, I, I'LL CALL IT AN OPEN AREA.
I'M NOT GONNA USE THE WORD PARK BECAUSE IT'S, PARK HAS A DEFINED TERM, BUT AOKE A LO AN INTERIOR AREA FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND STUFF.
AND WE'VE PUT BENCHES AND THINGS AROUND THAT, WHICH IS THE APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS AND STUFF.
UM, WE'VE GOT THE TRAFFIC FOR THE MOST PART OFF THE STREETS.
UM, WE, THE PRE-K AND K IS THAT SIDE ON, UM, WILKES THAT, UM, JENNIFER MENTIONED TO YOU THAT THERE MAY BE A LITTLE BIT THAT SPILLS OVER, BUT WE'VE WORKED ON THAT.
RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST CHAOS WRAPS AROUND THAT SCHOOL.
UH, AND, AND WE'VE CLEANED OFF, UH, CLOSED THE MEETING OPENING IN MILITARY PARKWAY TO SORT OF GET RID OF SOME OF MAYBE THAT CHAOS AND STUFF.
OTHERWISE, UH, MS. LENIHAN'S HERE TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, BUT OTHERWISE, UH, UH, WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR WORKING US THROUGH THIS ONE.
AND YES, UM, MR. SMITH ONLINE.
HE'S, HE CAN JUST ANSWER QUESTIONS JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
MR. SMITH? YEAH, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? Z TWO 12.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, MR. HOUSE OR COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT? MR. CRAWLING? UM, I, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT D I D I S D NEEDS TO CON CONTINUE TO UPGRADE THEIR SCHOOLS, IMPROVE EDUCATION FOR THE STUDENTS IN OUR CITY.
BUT WE WEEK AFTER WEEK, MONTH AFTER MONTH, WE GET CASES THAT ARE TEARING DOWN WHAT I THINK ARE HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURES.
AND, AND SO HERE WE ARE WITH A SCHOOL THAT WAS A FORMER MILITARY ACADEMY AND FOR ALL I KNOW THE NAME OF THE STREET OUT FRONT IS NAMED BECAUSE OF THIS ACADEMY.
AND SO I'M LOOKING AT THIS FACADE ON, UH, ON GOOGLE AND THIS IS A HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
IT MAY NOT BE PROTECTED, BUT, UM, I JUST GET DISCOURAGED MEETING AFTER MEETING, VOTING TO TEAR THE, THIS PIECE OF DALLAS HISTORY DOWN.
DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT ON THAT OR DOES D I S D HAVE ANY COMMENT ON THAT? WELL, I, I SORT OF WISH THE PRINCIPAL WAS HERE.
SHE EXPLAINED TO ME THAT, UM, THEY OCCASIONALLY HAVE A STUDENT
UM, NOT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACADE.
UM, BUT, BUT THE INTERIOR IS NOT SAVEABLE.
IT'S IN, IT'S IN VERY BAD SHAPE.
AND ACTUALLY IF YOU LOOK AT ONE OF THE WINGS, UM, THAT WAS ADDED IN THE 2008 ISH TIME PERIOD, THAT IS ALSO BEING REMOVED CUZ IT'S ALSO IN, IN IN BAD SHAPE.
NOW THAT MAY BE A CONTRACTOR ISSUE, NOT AN AGE ISSUE.
UM, THE, THE ARCHITECT, WE ARE DOING SOME HOMAGE TO THAT.
WE ARE, UH, SAY THERE'S A LITTLE PORT, UH, I'LL CALL IT AN ARBOR SITUATION THAT SORT OF, UH, GIVES HOMAGE TO THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE, OF THE SCHOOL AND EVERYTHING.
BUT, BUT AS A FACADE AND EVERYTHING, SHE EVEN MENTIONED TO ME THERE ARE LITERALLY GUNS, UH, IN THE, IN THE, UH, I GUESS THE FREEZE OF THE, THE FACADE.
UH, BECAUSE THE STUDENTS, SHE SAID THE STUDENTS COME BACK TO WHY ARE THERE GUNS IN OUR SCHOOL? UM, THAT IT WAS A MILITARY ACADEMY.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT AGE IT WAS, BUT, BUT SHE EVEN BROUGHT THAT TO ME, DIDN'T EVEN ASK CAUSE SHE BROUGHT THAT UP THERE ACTUALLY GUNS IN THE, I I, I WENT TO ARCHITE SCHOOL A LONG TIME AGO, BUT THE FREEZE THAT'S IN THERE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S CARVED INTO IT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT FOR A SCHOOL NOW, BUT, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT.
UM, AND, AND GENEVA HEIGHTS THAT WE DID SAVE THAT OLDER BUILDING, IT WAS A MORE PRESERVABLE BUILDING, BUT SHE SAID THIS, THIS BUILDING IS IN VERY, VERY BAD SHAPE.
SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YEP.
THE FENCE AGAIN? NO, UM, WELL THE, THE HISTORICAL FACTOR IS IMPORTANT TO ME AND, UM, DALLAS HAS NOT BEEN KNOWN FOR SAVING HISTORY.
THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN THERE SINCE 1930.
IT WOULD BE A HUNDRED YEARS OLD IN A FEW YEARS.
UM, SO YES, I, I TOO SECOND THAT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK INTO RESTORATION, UM, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO EDUCATING OUR STUDENTS.
CUZ WE WANT TO EDUCATE THEM TO PRESERVE OUR CITY AND NOT TO DESTROY IT.
UM, BUT NEITHER HERE, THERE, UH, I, I'LL GO BACK TO THE FENCING.
I, I SEE FENCING AROUND THAT SCHOOL RIGHT NOW.
UM, A SCHOOL THAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IT'S NOT SAVABLE, MEANING WHY ARE WE HAVING STUDENTS IN THERE AND THEN WE'RE DOING A REBUILD ON THE SCHOOL, BUT WE'RE KEEPING THE PORTABLES THAT NO, ALL THE PORTABLES WILL GO AWAY.
[03:30:01]
OKAY.THAT WAS, THAT WAS MENTIONED OPPOSITE.
THERE'LL BE PORTABLES UNTIL WE BUILD THE NEW SCHOOL ALL.
MEMBERS? ANY OTHER, OH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
YEAH, I WANNA ECHO COMMISSIONER HOUSE RIGHT'S, UM, DISAPPOINTMENT WITH DSDS, UH, FAILURE TO MAKE ANY EFFORT TO SAVE THE HISTORIC FACADE OF THIS STRUCTURE.
AND IT'S ABOUT THE SAME AGE AS GENEVA HEIGHTS.
AND I THINK IF WE'RE BEING HONEST, GENEVA HEIGHTS, UH, HISTORIC STRUCTURE IS ONLY THERE BECAUSE A FEW OF US THREATENED TO CHAIN OURSELVES TO THE FRONT OF IT.
IF D I S D WAS GONNA CONTINUE TO THREATEN, TO TEAR IT DOWN.
AND IT'S ONLY THOSE EFFORTS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY THAT WERE NEARBY THAT SAVED THAT HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY.
UM, AND IF THIS BUILDING IS REALLY TO THE POINT THAT IT CAN'T BE SAVED.
IT'S BECAUSE THE DISTRICT HASN'T DONE WHAT IT NEEDS TO DO IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THESE BUILDINGS.
DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. CROWLEY? I, YES.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF MR. CROWLEY IS GOING TO CONVEY THESE SENTIMENTS TO THE DISTRICTS, AND IF SO, HOW? UH, DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE.
WHO IS THAT PLEASE? UH, I'M SORRY.
MS. LENAHAN
AND IS THE ARCHITECT THERE? HE IS ONLINE, YEAH, I'M ONLINE.
WHAT'S SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE FACADE OF THIS BUILDING PREVENTS THE DISTRICT FROM BEING ABLE TO SALVAGE IT AND USE IT IN THE NEW DESIGN? UM, SEVERAL THINGS.
UH, LOGISTICS IS A BIG PART OF IT.
IT'S, UM, IT'S A SCHOOL IN OPERATION AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, THE WAY WE'RE KEEPING THE SCHOOL RUNNING IS WE'RE BUILDING A NEW SCHOOL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SITE SO THE SCHOOL CAN STAY IN OPERATION, UM, WHILE WE BUILD A NEW ONE.
IF WE WERE TO RENOVATE IT, UH, IN PLACE.
OTHERWISE, IT WOULD BE REALLY DIFFICULT TO, TO DO THAT.
I GUESS WE'D HAVE TO DISPLACE ALL THE STUDENTS.
UH, WE ARE, I WILL NOTE, WE ARE PAYING HOMAGE TO THE OLD BUILDING.
THERE'S, UH, A CASTSTONE EMBLEM ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING OF A PEACOCK.
IT'S PART OF THE ORIGINAL, UH, 1930S BUILDING THAT WE'RE SALVAGING AND WE, THERE'S A DISPLAY AND THE, THE FRONT ENTRY PLAZA OF THE NEW SCHOOL WITH THE OLD CASTSTONE EMBLEM THAT WE SALVAGED.
ARE YOU REUSING ANY PART OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IN THE NEW BUILDING? UH, OTHER THAN, UH, THAT DECORATIVE CASTSTONE PIECE? NO, WE'RE NOT.
SO THE FACADE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING COULD HAVE BEEN REUSED, BUT THE DECISION WAS MADE NOT TO REUSE IT BECAUSE YOU WANTED TO? WELL, WE NEED DE WELL, WE NEED TO BUILD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SITE, KEEP THIS CIVIL OPERATION USING A TEMPORARY CAMPUS AND REMODELING USING THE EXISTING FACADE.
THAT DECISION WAS MADE TO TEAR DOWN THE EXISTING FACADE.
PART OF THE, PART OF THE REASON, YES.
SO THE EXISTING FACADE COULD HAVE BEEN SALVAGED AND REUSED AS PART OF THE BUILDING.
IT'S, IT'S NOT A, A CONDITION ISSUE, IT'S A DECISION, RIGHT? UM, YES, I'D SAY YES.
UH, THE CONDITION, A LOT OF IT IS, UH, JUST LOGISTICS AND EXPENSE AND, UH, THOSE TYPE OF DECISIONS.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY QUESTION.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AN SHE ASKED MY QUESTION, SO THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, SO ALONG THE SAME LINES AS, AS COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, UM, HISTORIC BUILDING AND PRESERVING PORTIONS OF THAT FOR A LOT OF OUR COMMUNITIES, UM, IS THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE.
AND COULD YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON WHY, UM, THE TRANSPARENCY, HEIGHT, ADMINISTRATION, NONE OF THOSE THINGS COULD HAVE PLAYED A ROLE IN, IN THE, IN THE FUTURE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING? ARE YOU ASKING AS FAR AS, UM, SALVAGING AND RELOCATING PARTS OF THE BUILDING OR NO,
[03:35:01]
KEEP KEEPING THEM WHERE THEY ARE, BUT PUTTING THEM INTO THE DESIGN CONVERSATION WITH THE REMAINDER OF, UM, THE OVERALL SITE DESIGN.BECAUSE YOU'RE BUILDING THE SITE, AS I UNDERSTAND, ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF, OF THE BUILDING, I MEAN OF THE SITE, THE EXISTING SITE, BUT WHICH WOULD ALLOW THAT TO REMAIN IN THE FUTURE.
SO COULD IT NOT BE ADAPTABLY REUSED OR COULD THERE BE SOME STRATEGY IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE HISTORY OF THAT BUILDING? WE DID INVESTIGATE THAT IN OUR EARLY DESIGN CONCEPTS, UH, WAS KEEPING PARTS OF THE FAC THE FACADE AND MAKING IT PART OF THAT PARK THAT IS THERE.
UM, THE EXPENSE TO DO THAT, UH, REALLY GOT IN THE WAY.
UH, IF WE, WE, THE PARTS OF THE BUILDING JUST DID HAVE TO BE REMOVED FOR SAFETY.
AND IF WE KEPT THE FACADE, LIKE OUR DESIGN CONCEPTS SHOWED, WE, THE AMOUNT OF STRUCTURE YOU WOULD'VE TO ADD TO SHORE IT UP AND ALL THE EXPENSE OF THAT WAS JUST PROHIBITIVE.
IT WAS, UH, IT WAS A LOT OF MONEY TO, TO SHORE IT UP AND KEEP IT THERE AS A HOMAGE TO THE OLD SCHOOL.
COULD, COULD I ASK THE QUESTION OF STAFF? UH, WE'LL GET THE STAFF QUESTIONS IN A MINUTE.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR, UH, OUR APPLICANT COMMISSIONER STANDARD? YES, I DO.
UH, AND THIS MIGHT BE FOR MS. LENAHAN SINCE SHE REPRESENTS D I S D, BUT ISN'T IT TRUE, BECAUSE WE DEALT WITH THIS WITH ABOUT THREE OTHER SCHOOLS, ISN'T IT TRUE THAT, AND TELL ME IF I'M WRONG.
SO I'M ASKING IT AS A QUESTION.
IS IT TRUE
IS THAT CORRECT? OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD? ABSOLUTELY.
SO, UH, WE DON'T MOVE STUDENTS LIGHTLY.
THE THREE SCHOOLS THAT WE DID MOVE STUDENTS ON ARE FOUR STOOLS SCHOOLS.
UM, THE SITES WERE SO SMALL AND THERE WERE, OR WE WERE CONSOLIDATING AT ANOTHER CAMPUS, BUT THE SITES WERE SO SMALL THAT WE COULDN'T BUILD ON THE SITE AND ENSURE THE STUDENT SAFETY AND, AND FOR THEM TO OCCUPY THAT BUILDING AT THE SAME TIME.
SO THEN THE LOGISTICS OF MOVING THEM, TAKING THEM OUT OF THEIR HOME NEIGHBORHOOD TO GO TO SCHOOL IN ANOTHER PART OF TOWN IS A CHALLENGE.
THEREFORE, IN ANY OTHER SITUATION, I'M SURE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE SAVED THE FACADE BECAUSE THIS IS RATHER HISTORIC, BUT THAT WOULD BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE IN THIS SITUATION WITHOUT UPROOTING THE KIDS FOR 18 MONTHS TO TWO YEARS.
ABSOLUTELY, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT THE DISTRICT DOES NOT TAKE LIGHTLY TAKING DOWN AN OLDER STRUCTURE AND REMOVING PART OF THE CULTURAL PATCH PROMOTING OF OUR CITY.
BUT WE'RE HERE TO BUILD SCHOOLS, AND WE'RE HERE TO BUILD SCHOOLS AND BETTER SCHOOLS FOR STUDENTS SO WE CAN ENSURE THEIR SUSTAINABLE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT FOR THE FUTURE.
AND A STUDENT IS OUR PRIORITY, AND THAT'S WHY WE MAKE THESE DECISIONS.
THANKS, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DID YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING.
UM, SOMEONE MENTIONED THE HISTORICAL VALUE.
ARE YOU GUYS AWARE THAT THIS IS A HISTORICAL MARKER THAT THIS BUILDING IS, HAS BEEN DEEMED HISTORICAL? I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S ON A HISTORIC REGISTER.
UH, I'LL LET STAFF, UH, STAFF DIDN'T MENTION IT.
IT, IT'S NOT A, A LANDMARK IN TERMS OF CITY DESIGNATION AS FAR AS ANY STATEWIDE DESIGNATION.
I, I WOULDN'T BE AWARE OF THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO REFER A CASE TO THE HISTORIC COMMISSION? NO, SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT.
SEEING NON CHAIR, DID YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
IN THE MATTER OF CASE NUMBER Z 2 12 2 11, I MOVE TO CLOSE TO PUBLIC HEARING FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEF.
I HAVE A BRIEF COMMENT IF I GET A SECOND.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL COMMISSIONER BLAIR, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SECOND CHAIR.
UH, A COUPLE OF THANK YOUS, THE SAME LIST AS BEFORE.
[03:40:01]
UH, AL GAER, UH, MR. CROWLEY, UH, THE D I S D TEAM.THIS IS GONNA BE A BEAUTIFUL SCHOOL.
THE PARK IS GONNA BE BEAUTIFUL.
IN FACT, IT EMBRACES THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, BEAUTIFULLY LANDSCAPED, UH, TIGHT LITTLE SIGHT.
AND I THINK THE, UH, THE DESIGNERS DID A GOOD JOB TO IMPROVE THE CIRCULATION.
AND JUST VERY BRIEFLY, I WANT TO JUST COMMENT ON THE, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, ON THE FENCE.
I THINK COMMISSIONER HERBERT IS, IS 100% CORRECT.
UH, BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE'RE WE'RE MOVING THE OTHER WAY.
UH, I THINK THE, THE FENCES INSTEAD OF COMING DOWN ARE ONLY, NOT ONLY GONNA KEEP COMING UP, BUT THEY'RE GONNA GET HIGHER.
AND, UH, UNFORTUNATELY NOT TO DIGRESS INTO, YOU KNOW, AWAY FROM LAND USE, BUT I THINK WE JUST LIVE IN A VERY STRANGE PERIOD IN HISTORY WHERE THERE'S A LITTLE WRINKLE IN THE, IN THE MATRIX, MAYBE, THAT WE HAVE ACCEPTED THE KIND OF VIOLENCE THAT WE JUST LOOK THE OTHER WAY AND WE HAVE ACCEPTED IT.
SO NOW WE'RE GONNA ADDRESS IT BY BUILDING MORE FENCES AND HIGHER AND HIGHER OFFENSES.
AND, UH, UNFORTUNATELY I THINK THAT'S THE CASE THAT WE, WE HAVE HERE AND THAT WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO SEE.
UH, AND I THINK IT'S JUST FRANKLY UNFORTUNATE, BUT HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.
AGAIN, THANK YOU TO THE COOL SCHOOLS PROGRAM.
UH, AND AGAIN, HAPPY TO SUPPORT MEMBERS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION BY THE CHAIR, SECONDED BY, UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A TRAFFIC MAN DEVELOPMENT PLAN, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
ANY OPPOSED? NAY? YOU SAID TWO IN OPPOSITION.
WITH, UH, THE MOTION CARRIES COMMISSIONERS, UH, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER TREADWAY HAS A CONFLICT ON THE NEXT CASE AND IS STEPPING OUT OF THE CHAMBER.
ITEM NUMBER 13 Z 2 12 2 66, AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
DISTRICT NUMBER 6 65, BOUNDED BY BURY DRIVE, ST.
JUDES DRIVE, MASON DELLS DRIVE AND TUNICA DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CARL CROWLEY, 2201 MAIN STREET.
UM, I'M GONNA BE BRIEFED CUZ I HAVE TWO SUPPORTERS, ONE HERE, AND I BELIEVE THE PRINCIPAL'S ONLINE, MS. WALKER, BUT I'M GONNA BE REAL BRIEF.
UM, THE DISTRICT IS, THIS IS KRAMER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, UM, A A TRUE NEIGHBORHOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
THE, UH, DISTRICT IS PROPOSING A, UM, CLASSROOM WING EDITION, WHICH WILL HAVE A STORM SHELTER BUILT INTO IT, UM, THAT WILL REMOVE PORTABLES YAY, NO PORTABLES.
UM, UH, TH THIS IS, AS I MENTIONED, UH, PART OF THAT IS, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, IS VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THE SCHOOL.
AS I MENTIONED, THERE'S A PLAYGROUND THAT WAS SOMEWHAT SPONSORED, IF NOT COMPLETELY SPONSORED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WE ARE WORKING TOWARDS MOVING THAT AROUND BACK TO PRESERVE IT, UM, AND ENHANCE IT AGAIN.
UH, THE, UH, STAFF WORKED WITH US ON, UM, UH, PRESERVING SOME EXISTING SIDEWALKS THAT ARE FAIRLY NEW AND THERE'S PROBABLY NOT A GOOD REASON TO TEAR UP A BRAND NEW SIDEWALK AND REPLACE IT WITH A NEWER SIDEWALK.
UM, AND THEN WE'VE ADDED SOME AMENITY AREAS AROUND THE PLAYGROUNDS, AROUND THE GATHERING PLACES AT THE FRONT OF THE SCHOOL, UM, THE, THE SORT OF ENTRANCE IN THE BACK OF THE SCHOOL THAT GOES TO THE PLAYGROUND.
SO, UH, WE THINK THIS IS AGAIN, A, A, UH, A VERY NEAT, UH, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOL.
AND, UM, THIS GETS RID OF, UH, THE, THE MUCH HATED AND MALIGNED, UH, PORTABLE.
SO, UM, I, YEP, I SEE PRINCIPAL WALKER.
SO I'LL FINISH AND THEN WE'LL LET PRINCIPAL AND THEN HEAD OF THE PTA IS HERE ALSO.
WE'LL GO TO THE PRINCIPAL ONLINE.
[03:45:06]
YOU'RE, YOU'RE MUTED.NO, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO TOGGLE YOUR THANK YOU.
I COULD, I'M SORRY I COULDN'T UNMUTE.
UM, I GUESS MY, MY ADDRESS, 71 31 BURY, UM, DALLAS, TEXAS, 75, 2 30.
GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE, AND THANK YOU ALL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY.
MY NAME'S KATE WALKER, AND I HAVE BEEN THE PRINCIPAL AT KRAMER FOR SIX YEARS NOW.
UM, KRAMER IS A VERY DIVERSE SCHOOL OF ABOUT 500 STUDENTS.
LO AS YOU KNOW, LOCATED IN NORTH DALLAS.
UM, AND WE SERVE A POPULATION WHERE 68% OF OUR STUDENTS ARE LOW SOCIOECONOMIC, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE IN, UM, A VERY WEALTHY NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UH, THIS BOND PROJECT IS SO IMPORTANT TO US BECAUSE WE WANT OUR STUDENTS TO HAVE THE BEST POSSIBLE FACILITY.
UM, AND THE SCHOOL HAS BEEN, UH, OR HAVE HAD AT LEAST 15 PORTABLE BUILDING, UM, SINCE BEFORE MY TIME HERE, SO PROBABLY AT LEAST 10 TO 20 YEARS.
UM, SO WE'RE EXCITED FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO BRING ALL OF OUR STUDENTS SAFELY INSIDE THE BUILDING.
UM, AND I KNOW THAT WE WILL ALL, INCLUDING EVERYONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BE VERY HAPPY TO SEE THOSE PORTABLES GO.
UM, AND I'VE BEEN REALLY INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS, THE PLANNING, AND WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE STUDENTS AND STAFF TO, UM, UH, SINCE THE BEGINNING, INCLUDING SOME OF THE TRAFFIC MANAGERS.
SO I'M JUST HERE TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT, UM, AND WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO, UM, PARTNERING TOGETHER.
AND I'M ALSO HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, TO ASK ME.
I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
MY NAME IS CAROLINE MOORE, 7 5 47 BURY.
THAT'S THE SAME STREET AS THE SCHOOL I LIVE THREE BLOCKS AWAY.
UM, I'M A MEMBER OF THE HILLCREST FOREST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT, UH, SURROUNDS THE SCHOOL.
I HAVE FOUR, UH, MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE FOUR DAUGHTERS.
UM, TWO OF THEM HAVE BEEN AT KRAMER FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS.
ONE OF THEM WILL BE IN PRE-K FOUR, UM, THIS YEAR AT KRAMER.
AND I HAVE A TWO YEAR OLD WHO IS A, GOING TO BE A FUTURE KRAMER COLT ONE DAY.
UM, AND I AM THE CURRENT PTA PRESIDENT AT THE SCHOOL.
UM, PRINCIPAL WALKER ALREADY TOLD YOU THAT, UM, THE DIVERSITY INCOME WISE OF, UH, THAT, UH, KRAMER SERVES WE'RE ALSO 50% HISPANIC, 20% BLACK STUDENTS, 20% WHITE STUDENTS, AND 10% OTHER RACES AND ETHNICITIES.
UM, THERE ARE VERY FEW NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOLS LIKE KRAMER IN D I S D.
THIS IS A REALLY SPECIAL PLACE IN TERMS OF THE ECONOMIC AND RACIAL DIVERSITY THAT WE SERVE.
UM, THIS IS A MUCH NEEDED RENOVATION.
THE SCHOOL SUFFERS FROM A NUMBER OF, UH, DEFERRED MAINTENANCE AND ITEMS. I THINK EVERYONE HERE IS ON THE SAME PAGE OF HOW GREAT IT IS TO BE ABLE TO REMOVE ALL THE PORTABLES.
I CHAIR THAT AS WELL, UM, IN TODAY'S WORLD AND THE VIOLENCE WE, YOU KNOW, UM, HAVE TO LIVE WITH.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE FACT THAT MY SECOND GRADER HAD TO MOVE THROUGH RESTROOMS TO, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTER'S OFFICE ANYWHERE SHE NEEDED TO GO JUST WITH A BUDDY OUTSIDE, REALLY ISN'T ACCEPTABLE, UM, IN TODAY'S WORLD.
SO I'M VERY GLAD WE'RE DOING THIS.
UM, THE DESIGN ALSO BLENDS WELL WITH THE EXISTING SCHOOL.
SO THIS, UM, IS A GREAT FROM A PRESERVATION OF THE MID, MID CENTURY FEEL OF THE SCHOOL.
THE, UH, FRONT VESTIBULE THAT THEY'RE BUILDING ALSO PRESERVES A BEAUTIFUL TREE, UM, THAT'S IN THE FRONT OF THE SCHOOL.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, AS THE, UH, AS THE ADVISOR ALREADY SPOKE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, IT ALSO TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT IN THE CURRENT PLAYGROUND AS IT MOVES TO THE BACK OF THE SCHOOL.
UM, I ALSO JUST WANTED TO MAKE A BRIEF COMMENT ON FENCING SINCE IT'S COME UP HERE SEVERAL TIMES.
UM, THERE'S A FENCE ALL THE WAY AROUND THE, YOU KNOW, BACK PERMIT OF THE SCHOOL, NOT THE FRONT.
I'M IN FAVOR OF THAT FENCING, UM, BOTH AS A PARENT AT THE SCHOOL WHERE MY KIDS ARE THERE IN THE DAY AS A NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENT, WHEN I TAKE MY KIDS UP THERE TO PLAY.
AND AS A SOCCER COACH, UM, I'VE COACHED FOUR YEARS UP THERE.
THIS YEAR I'LL BE COACHING LITTLE PRE-K FOUR GIRLS AND IF I DIDN'T HAVE THAT FENCE AGAINST THAT ROAD, I WOULD FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THEM ALL KICKING SOCCER BALLS AROUND AND POTENTIALLY GO INTO THE STREET.
SO I APPRECIATE THE FENCING, UM, AND I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSAL FOR MY FAMILY, FOR MY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND FOR THE COMMUNITY KRAMER THAT DESERVES A BEAUTIFUL SCHOOL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER STANDARD, UM, WELL, I GUESS I CAN SAY THIS TO, UH, MS. WALKER ONLINE AND TO THE PTA PRESIDENT.
UH, I JUST WANT TO, I'M, I DON'T HAVE A WAY TO ASK IT AS A QUESTION, SO I'M GONNA MAKE A STATEMENT, WHICH IS, I KNOW THIS SCHOOL
[03:50:01]
WELL.I GO TO THE JCC TO WORK OUT AND I WANNA TELL YOU THE FACT THAT IT HAS THIS DEGREE OF DIVERSITY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD JUST SPEAKS SO HIGHLY TO THIS BEING A WELL-DESERVED NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOL THAT NEEDS TO HAVE IMPROVEMENTS UNDER OUR BOND THING.
UM, SO JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, A DEFENSE, IT WAS THE QUALITY OF DEFENSE THAT I'M SPEAKING OF.
SO CAN I HAVE YOU SPEAK ON EITHER THE PRINCIPLE OR YOURSELF, YOUR OPEN FENCE POLICY, BECAUSE I'VE PASSED YOUR SCHOOL ON WEEKENDS AND I'VE SEEN NEIGHBORS PLAYING IN THE FIELDS AND HAVING FUN IN THE PLAYGROUND.
AND I NOTICED THAT YOUR GATES ARE OPEN A LOT OF THE TIMES.
DO YOU WANT TO TALK, CAN, CAN YOU SPEAK ON THAT FOR ME? PRINCIPAL WALKER? YOU, YOU FEEL FREE TO COME COMMENT HERE, HERE TOO, BUT I WOULD JUST SAY AS A NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, DURING THE SCHOOL DAY WHEN KIDS ARE ON CAMPUS AND THE CAMP SCHOOL IS USING THE FACILITIES, UM, THE CAMPUS IS CLOSED TO, YOU KNOW, OTHER PEOPLE.
SO YOU CAN'T COME, LIKE, USE THE FIELDS IN THE PLAYGROUND IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY AND NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTS ARE AWARE OF THAT.
BUT ON THE WEEKENDS, FOR EXAMPLE, MY FAMILY WALKS UP, OTHER FAMILIES WALK UP AND THE GATES ARE OPEN.
SO YOU CAN GET TO THE PLAYGROUND, YOU CAN GET TO THE FIELDS EASILY.
YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH CERTAIN ENTRANCE POINTS, WHICH EVEN AFTER SCHOOL, LIKE I SAID, I APPRECIATE MM-HMM
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, THE COMMUNITY CAN AND DOES USE THE FACILITIES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS THE APPLICANT OR, OR ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEN NONE.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 12 2 66, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO VITAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT CAN PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND, OH, HOLD ON.
I PLEASE, I'VE MISSING LANGUAGE REGARDING THE SIGN PLACEMENT.
THE HEIGHT OF THE, THE HEIGHT LIMITING THE HEIGHT OF THE SIGN TO 10 FEET.
YOU OKAY WITH THE LANGUAGE COMMISSIONER HARA THE BODY? YES.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION PLEASE? I'LL JUST SPEAK VERY BRIEFLY TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO, UM, DR.
UREA AND MR. CROWLEY AND MS. LENAHAN AND THE OTHER FOLKS AT D I S D FOR THEIR HARD WORK ON GETTING THIS ONE, UM, INTO GOOD SHAPE AND ALSO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO THE FOLKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UM, MS. MOORE AND PRINCIPAL WALKER FOR, FOR COMING OUT AND SHOWING YOUR SUPPORT AND, UM, PROVIDING YOUR INPUT ON THIS ONE.
LOOK FORWARD TO, UM, SEEING THIS EDITION COME ONLINE FOR KRAMER.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
HAVE IT, UH, COMMISSIONERS FOUR 40.
WE ARE RECORDING COMMISSIONERS.
IT IS 4:52 PM WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON THE RECORD.
UH, NEXT CASE IS CASE NUMBER 15 Z 2 1 2 3 41.
GOOD AFTERNOON IF WE'VE GOT EVERYONE OR ENOUGH.
WE DID NOT BRIEF THIS YET, SO I WILL DO SO NOW.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN RR REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES OWNED IN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH THE RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF RIVER FALLS DRIVE WEST OF NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.
THE AREA OF REQUEST IS 1.56 ACRES.
IT'S LOCATED IN THE NORTH DALLAS OFFICE CENTRAL.
AND HERE'S THE AREA OF REQUEST.
IT'S A SMALLER PORTION OF LARGER LOT, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE.
UM, MOSTLY MEANT TO ENCOMPASS ONLY THE END CAP, UH, SUITE OF A LARGER RETAIL SITE, UH, AS WELL AS ITS ITS PORTION OF THE PARKING LOT EXTENDING TO THE FRONT SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
UH, SO THE NORTH, THERE'S A MULTIFAMILY USE, UH, MINI WAREHOUSE AS WELL.
THERE'S A CHILDCARE FACILITY TO THE EAST.
THERE'S A RESTAURANT, TWO RESTAURANTS WITH A DRIVE THROUGH TO THE EAST, SOUTHEAST, THERE TO THE SOUTH.
REST OF THE, UH, RETAIL STRIP.
THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF RETAIL, UH, INCLUDING A GROCERY STORE, UH, UH, OTHER RESTAURANTS, UH, PERSONAL SERVICE USES, AND OF COURSE THE SERVICE PARKING ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
AND THEN RIGHT BEHIND THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST, THERE'S MULTIFAMILY USE, CURRENTLY ZONED AN M U ONE BUILT HOUSES, A SHOPPING CENTER WITH VARIOUS RETAIL PERSONAL SERVICE AND RESTAURANT USES.
THEY'RE PROPOSING TO REZONE THAT NORTH MOSTS PORTION OF THE RETAIL STRIP TO RR.
RR IS IN ORDER TO ALLOW, UH, OCCUPY THIS PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE WITH A VEHICLE DISPLAY SALES AND SERVICE USE.
[03:55:01]
AND THEN THEY ARE REQUESTING THIS UPZONING TO RR AND WHILE VOLUNTEERING DEED RESTRICTIONS TO LIMIT THE USES OF SOME OF THE USES OF RR.SO THE PHOTOS ACTUALLY, UH, DEPICT THE WHOLE SITE.
SO WE'LL ACTUALLY WALK THROUGH, BUT THE AREA TO BE REZONED, UH, IS SPECIFICALLY THE NORTH MOST PART, BUT THESE ARE INCLUDED FOR CONTEXT THAT THAT SAID.
SO WE'RE ACTUALLY ON THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE WHOLE RETAIL STRIP.
AND I'M GONNA HEAD UP TOWARDS THE AREA BEING REQUESTED, WHICH IS FARTHER UP IN THE BACKGROUND HERE AS I GO NORTH.
OH, I'VE FLIPPED RIGHT AROUND.
AND SO I'M AT RIVER FALLS IS BEHIND ME, WHICH IS A PUBLIC STREET THAT DEAD ENDS HERE.
UM, AND I'M LOOKING AT THE ALLEY BEHIND THE SITE.
UM, THE PORTION THAT'S TO BE REZONED INCLUDES THE STRIP THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT ON THE, ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE FRAME.
THERE'S A MULTIFAMILY THAT'S ON THE RIGHT.
UH, THAT'S NOT AN ALLEY, IT'S THE PUB, IT'S THE PRIVATE FIRE LANE BEHIND THE STRUCTURE.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS ACTUALLY THE SOUTH SIDE OF, OF MEADOW, OR EXCUSE ME, THIS IS SOUTH SIDE OF THE SIDE ON MEADOW THAT'S FARTHER SOUTH ON, NO, NO, EXCUSE ME.
THAT'S ACROSS RIVER FALL LOOKING NORTH.
UM, SO THERE IS A MULTI-FAMILY RIGHT ACROSS THE RIVER FALL RIVER FALL STREET FROM THE PROPOSED AREA OF REQUEST.
THERE'S A, UH, MINI WAREHOUSE USE ON THE RIGHT OF THIS IMAGE.
THEN I'VE GONE BACK A LITTLE BIT FARTHER ON RIVER FALL TOWARDS THE MULTI-FAMILY THAT'S AT THE KIND OF DEAD END OF RIVER FALLS STREET.
AND THEN THIS IS ACTUALLY BACK ON MEADOW LOOKING SOUTH, UM, LOOKING AT THE, UH, ADJACENT MULTI-FAMILY THAT'S DOWN THERE.
BUT THAT IS ON THE, THE FAR SIDE FROM, FROM THIS AREA OF REQUEST JUST, BUT IT IS, UM, NEXT TO PROPERTY SOUTH.
IT'S MORE, UH, MULTIFAMILY AND HOTEL USE TO THE SOUTH.
NOW THIS IS LOOKING AT THE, UH, EASTERN PROPERTY LINE, UH, WHERE IT BORDERS TO DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANT OR TWO RESTAURANTS AND DAYCARE FACILITIES.
SO CENTRAL IS BEHIND CHICK-FIL-A HERE, OR NOT CHICK-FIL-A GOLDEN CHICK MAYBE I'M JUST THINKING AHEAD.
UM, AND SO
UM, MIXED JUICE HAS THE ABOVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
REGIONAL RETAIL HAS THE BELOW.
UH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT A ONE FOR ONE AS TO WHICH IS MORE, UM, INTENSE NECESSARILY.
SOME OF THEM, UH, SOME OF THEM ARE GREATER THAN OTHERS ON EACH.
UH, SO THEY, BUT MOST, MOSTLY IT'S THE USES THAT ARE DIFFERENT BETWEEN THE TWO.
AND THEY DID VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH RESTRICTED OUT IN NUMBER OF USES THAT ARE LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
UH, BUT I DID LIST THE AS WELL AS THOSE.
I'M JUST, UH, FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE, PUTTING THE DEED RESTRICTION.
THE OTHER, UH, MORE FUNCTIONAL DEED RESTRICTION, UH, HERE THAT APPLIES TO THE VEHICLE DISPLAYS SALES AND SERVICE USE.
UM, IN THE EVENT THAT THERE'S A VEHICLE DISPLAY SERVICE, SALES AND SERVICE USE, ONLY ONE AUTO RENTAL FACILITIES PERMITTED ON THE PROPERTY, NO MORE THAN 20 OF THE OFF STREET PARKING SPACES CAN BE USED FOR RENTAL CARS.
AND SO THOSE WERE VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT IN, IN ADDITION TO THE USE RESTRICTIONS OF, UH, IN THE DOCKET.
UM, I WAS GOING TO BRIEF ON SOME OF THE LARGER, THE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS GOING ON IN THE AREA.
UH, THERE ARE OTHER LARGE SCALE MIXED USE PROJECTS.
UH, PRESTON HOLLOW VILLAGE, THE HILL, MIDTOWN PARK, UH, THOSE ARE LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREA THAT ARE BETWEEN THIS SITE AND WALNUT HILL DAR STATION.
SO DART DART STATIONS TO THE SOUTH EAST, NOT TOO FAR OFF, BUT THAT'S THE LARGE SCALE CONTEXT.
UM, AGAIN, PRETTY CLOSE TO WALNUT HILL STATION.
UM, I PUT IT IN D DOWNTOWN DALLAS FOR SCALE, UM, AS WELL AS THIS OTHER DEVELOPMENTS.
SO IT, THE ARGUMENT IN THE REPORT, UH, AS YOU'LL SEE IS THAT THIS IS A DEVELOPING MIXED USE CENTER, UH, ALONG THIS CORRIDOR BETWEEN HERE BETWEEN AND THE, UH, WALNUT HILL DART STATION, AS WELL AS OTHER, UM, AMENITIES BEING BUILT OUT PRETTY CONSISTENTLY AS MULTIPLE MIXED USE PROJECTS.
UH, IN ADDITION TO THOSE SINGLE DEVELOPMENT MIXED EX SINGLE SIGN DEVELOPMENT MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS.
WE ALSO HAVE HORIZONTAL MIXED USE GOING ON, UH, THROUGHOUT THE OTHER SITES AND PUT IN THE MIXED USE ZONED LAND, INCLUDING OUR SUBJECT PROPERTY.
I SHOULD HAVE HIGHLIGHTED THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HERE, WHICH IS A MIXED USE ZONE PARCEL.
BUT ALL OF THESE OTHER ONES ARE MIXED USE, ZONED LAND REFERRING TO MULTIFAMILY AND COMMERCIAL USES, UH, IN, IN ONE ZONING DISTRICT.
[04:00:01]
AND THOSE ARE THE OTHER ONES.SO THERE IS CERTAINLY A COLLECTION OF THOSE BETWEEN HERE AND THE MUL HILL DART STATION.
UH, THERE'S ALSO A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PROXIMITY OF HO HORIZONTAL MIX OF USES, UH, AMONG THE, UH, PARCELS THAT ARE NOT ZONED AS SUCH.
SO AS A RESULT, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL.
UM, SO THIS PROJECT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A COUPLE TIMES AND YOU KNOW, I, I KNOW THAT, CAN YOU PUT BACK UP THE PICTURE WHERE IT SHOWS KIND OF THE WHOLE PARCEL AND THEN THE PIECE THAT'S BEING, THAT'S THE SUBJECT OF THE ZONING REQUEST, THE AR THE AERIAL MAP.
I MAYBE THAT, THAT SEEMS PRETTY HELPFUL.
SO, AND TO CONFIRM, THE OWNERS HAVE THIS ENTIRE RECTANGLE AND SO WHAT IS JUST BEING ASKED FOR IS A REZONING OF JUST THIS TOP PORTION AND TO CONFIRM THE REZONING REQUEST WOULD HAVE THE SAME USE EXCEPT IT'S NOT MIXED USE.
BUT IN TERMS OF THE COMMERCIAL, IT'S ONLY ADDING ONE USE.
UM, AFTER YOU TAKE THE DE RESTRICTIONS AND SUBTRACT THINGS OUT AND REMIND ME, WHAT IS THAT ONE USE THAT'S BEING ADDED? VEHICLE DISPLAY SALES AND SERVICE? IT'S VERY HARD TO SAY IT IS, BUT THE POINT BEING IS THAT'S HOW AN AUTO RENTAL FACILITY IS CATEGORIZED, UH, AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN YOU GET A CERTIFICATE OCCUPANCY.
AND SO IT'S YOUR UNDERSTANDING AFTER TALKING TO THE APPLICANT THAT THIS REQUEST IS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED WITH ONE PARTICULAR USE CASE IN MIND? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND THAT'S WHY IT'S, IT'S MORE OR LESS LIMITED TO ONE SUITE HERE.
IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, IS IT COMMON TO TAKE A LARGE, UM, PROPERTY ZONED MIXED USE AND OR REALLY ZONED ANYTHING AND CARVE OUT A PORTION OF IT JUST TO SPECIFICALLY PROVIDE FOR ONE USE, ADDITIONAL USE? I WOULD SAY IT'S NOT PARTICULARLY COMMON.
UM, AND IT'S CERTAINLY NOT IDEAL.
UM, I'VE HEARD REFERENCE TO SOMETHING CALLED SPOT ZONING.
WHAT IS THAT AND DOES THIS CONSTITUTE SPOT ZONING? I WOULD SAY SPOT ZONING IS, UM, REZONING, SORRY, COMMISSIONER TO A DISTRICT COMMISSIONER IF I CAN MR. MOORE PLEASE.
UH, SPOT ZONING IS, HAS A, IS A TERM OF ART USED BY COURTS AND ONLY A COURT CAN DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING IS SPOT ZONING.
SO IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION, WHEN YOU'VE SEEN THINGS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE CHARACTERIZED BY A COURT AS SPOT ZONING, LIKE WHAT IS YOUR LAYPERSON'S INTERPRETATION OF THAT? YEAH, IF I MAY, UM, I WOULD, OUTSIDE OF THAT I WOULD, I WOULD CATEGORIZE, UM, IT AS A, A SPLIT ZONING.
SO WE'RE SPLIT ZONING THE LOT.
UM, WE'RE, SO WE'RE TAKING ONE PROPERTY AND, AND REZONING PART OF IT.
UM, AND THUS I WOULD ARGUE IT CREATES AN INCONSISTENCY YEAH, THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE LOT AND THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE AREA.
SO AT THE HEART OF ANY EFFECT, UM, IT'S AN IN INCONSISTENCY, IT'S INCONSIST ZONING, UM, WHEREAS THERE ISN'T, THERE ISN'T A DEGREE OF RE REGIONAL RETAIL THE HIGH, UM, HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL REACHING INTO THIS.
SO WHETHER WE CAN, WHETHER WE CAN CALL IT OR THAT OR NOT, IT'S UM, IT'S A DEGREE OF INCONSISTENCY, UM, FOR A SINGLE SITE.
AND I KNOW ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AT THE BEGINNING, UM, AND I'M NOT SURE I FULLY APPRECIATED IT, IS THAT THIS CHANGE IN ZONING FROM MU TO RR IS SOMETHING THAT'S CONSIDERED, I GUESS UPZONING.
AND CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOUR OPINIONS ON THAT? YES, I WOULD CONSIDER AN UPZONING.
UM, THEY'VE TAKEN STEPS TO LIMIT, UH, SOME OF THE INCREASED INTENSITY.
UH, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE ARE INCREASING THE COMMERCIAL INTENSITY AND SO I WOULD CONSIDER UPZONING UPZONING AND THEN JUST CIRCLE BACK CUZ YOU DID ASK DEF.
WHAT I WOULD, UM, DEFINE IT AS IS WHEN WE'RE INCREASING THE INTENSITY OF USES ALLOWED IN, IN A LOT, ESPECIALLY IN A WAY THAT MIGHT BE INCONSISTENT WITH, UM, ADJACENT USES.
AND THOSE ADJACENT USES, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS MAP TO THE NORTH AND TO THE WEST ARE MULTIFAMILY.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND ARE YOU AWARE OF PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY IN THIS AREA? YES, I WOULD SAY, UM, I DIDN'T HAVE, I DIDN'T HAVE PICTURES WHILE
[04:05:01]
I WAS THERE.IT WAS A COLD WINTER DAY, UM, BY DALLAS STANDARD.
SO NOT MANY PEDESTRIANS WERE THERE ON THE DAY I DID VISIT.
UM, BUT I HAVE VISITED SUBSEQUENTLY
SO I WOULD SAY THAT THE MIX OF USES THROUGHOUT THE AREA, ALTHOUGH IT MIGHT NOT BE CLASSIFIED AS WALKABLE AT THE TIME, UM, THERE IS A, THERE IS A DEGREE OF PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY FOR SURE.
UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT I'VE ALSO BEEN TO THIS SHOPPING AREA? YES.
UM, AND ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE'S A VETERINARY CLINIC WHERE PEOPLE CAN WALK THEIR DOGS TO NOW? I WAS NOT AWARE.
I'M AWARE BECAUSE I HAVE VISITED AND FREQUENTED AND BEEN IN THIS AT BUSINESSES WHERE PEOPLE CAN WALK THEIR DOGS, UM, BECAUSE I TOO HAVE TAKEN MY ANIMALS THERE
SO I WILL SAY, I THINK GIVEN THE NORTH, AND IF YOU EVEN LOOK JUST ALL THE WAY AROUND, WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THIS SEGMENT AT THE TOP, BUT IF YOU FOLLOW IT AROUND TO THE FULL WEST SIDE IS ALL OF THAT MULTIFAMILY, EVERYTHING FOR MIXED USE, EVERYTHING WEST ALONG, BACKING UP TO EVERYTHING, BACKING UP TO THIS RETAIL STRIP IS MULTIFAMILY, UM, AND HAS MULTI-FAMILY ZONING.
AND THEN THERE'S UH, ONE SMALLER MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, UH, RIGHT ACROSS RIVER FALL TO THE NORTH.
AND DO THIS LEVEL OF ZONING CHANGES THAT'S REQUIRED, DOES IT TRIGGER, UM, ANYTHING ELSE? ARE WE JUST LOOKING AT THIS ONE PROVISION, DID IT TRIGGER ARTICLE, UM, X OR ANY OTHER CHANGES THAT WOULD'VE BEEN REQUIRED? NO, THE CHANGE ITSELF WON'T TRIGGER, TRIGGER ARTICLE 10, UM, SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT OR THE IMPERVIOUS COVER WOULD DO SO.
UH, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S NOT PART OF THE PROPOSAL.
SO, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE THING.
UM, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF ANYTHING ELSE THAT MIGHT BE TRIGGERED.
BUT IN THIS CASE, ARTICLE 10 IS NOT, UM, WOULD LIKELY NOT BE TRIGGERED BY THE CHANGE CUZ IT'S, IT'S THE RE OCCUPANCY OF AN EXISTING SPACE.
IT'S NOT AN, A DEFINITIVE AMOUNT OF NEW CONSTRUCTION OR PERVIS COVER.
AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION, I THINK YOU MENTIONED THAT THE DART UM, THE WALNUT HILL DART STATIONS PRETTY CLOSE.
UM, LIKE HOW CLOSE CAN YOU, CAN YOU TAKE DART AND WALK TO THIS LOCATION? I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T MEASURE IT.
UM, IT IS HERE ON THE MAP, BUT I, WHEN I CONDUCTED MY SIDE VISIT, SAID I DID TAKE DART, UM, MYSELF, SO I DID WALK FROM THE WALNUT HILL STATION.
UM, SO IT CERTAINLY IS POSSIBLE.
AGAIN, HERE'S DOWNTOWN DALLAS VER SCALE BE LIKE WALKING FROM CITY HALL TO THE DART RAIL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? MR. PEPE? OKAY.
CAN YOU PLEASE READ IN THE RECORD, SO WE'RE GONNA BEGIN THE PUBLIC HEARING? ABSOLUTELY.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN RR REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT ON PROPERTY OWNED IN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF BRIER FALLS DRIVE WEST OF NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE? GOOD AFTERNOON? I BELIEVE SO THANK CAN I GET MY PRESENTATION? DID YES.
COULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? I APOLOGIZE.
MR. ATTORNEY ROBERTSON, UH, 2201 SOUTH MAIN STREET MASTER PLAN.
WE, I'M SORRY WE DIDN'T CATCH YOUR LAST NAME SIR.
[04:10:29]
I MEAN, IF IT'S ALL RIGHT, IF I COULD USE ONE OF STAFF SLIDES, I COULD GO THROUGH MY PRESENTATION.SINCE THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO LOCATE IT.
ARE YOU ABLE TO JUST TURN TO YOUR SLIDE WITH THE AREA ON IT AND I CAN GO AHEAD AND USE THAT? DOES THAT HELP YOU? JUST NOT MAKE IT HERE? I HAVE TO DOWNLOAD, I CAN PULL UP.
I'M HAPPY TO AND THEN I NEED TO HIT, WHOOPS.
I NEED, STILL NEED TO HIT HIT SHARE.
I'LL GO AND, UH, JUST USE STAFF SLIDE, UM, THAT DIDN'T SHARE IT.
I HAD A REALLY NICE PRESENTATION.
ALL RIGHT, IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
OH, DO I? IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S HIS.
UM, I GUESS I'LL JUST TELL YOU THE NEXT ONE WHEN I'M READY.
UH, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO IS WE ARE REQUESTED TO REZONE THE PROPERTY, A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, WHEN WE WERE, WHEN WE HAD THE USE GOING THROUGH THE, UH, CITY ORDINANCE, TRYING TO FIND A ZONING DISTRICT OR TRYING TO FIND USE THAT WAS, THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR CAR RENTAL, THERE WASN'T A USE LISTED ANYWHERE IN THE, UM, DEFINITIONS UPON OUR INVESTIGATION OF MULTIPLE COS UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY FOR CAR RENTAL AGENCIES.
A LOT OF THEM WERE ISSUED FOR OFFICE SPACES.
UM, IT WASN'T LISTED EVEN FOR THE USE THAT WE'RE REQUESTING TODAY.
UPON APPLICATION, UPON UH, TALKING TO STAFF, WE WERE TOLD, UH, THE CURRENT INTERPRETATION WOULD BE THIS CAR DISPLAY SHOWROOM USE.
AND FOR THAT REASON WE'RE REQUIRED.
WE WERE REQUIRED TO REASON ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, FOR THE REGIONAL RETAIL, IF YOU READ THE REGIONAL RETAIL, UM, DEFINITION, IT TALKS ABOUT, UH, THIS IS A USE THAT'S, THESE USES ARE CONSISTENT AROUND, UH, MORE INTENSE, DENSE, UH, DENSE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
UH, THE QUESTION ABOUT, UH, CONSISTENCY WAS ASKED IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROPERTY, UH, JUST IN FRONT OF OURS, UM, JUST ALONG THE EXPRESSWAY, THAT'S ALL ZONED REGIONAL RETAIL ALREADY.
SO WE WOULD ARGUE THAT THERE IS CONSISTENCY IN THE ZONING.
YEAH, I'M A SIX FOUR, SO IT DOES HELP A LOT.
UM, UM, NOT THAT I DON'T APPRECIATE THAT PART.
UM, SO WE ARE, WE DO ARGUE THAT THERE IS CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT OF WHAT WE ARE REQUESTING TO DO.
IF THERE WAS A WAY THAT WE COULD USE THIS AS AN OFFICE USE, AS OTHER COS HAVE DONE WITH OTHER CAR RENTAL PLACES, WE'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO.
BUT THIS IS THE DIRECTION STAFF, UH, LET US KNOW THAT WE NEEDED TO GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.
UM, IN ADDITION, UH, WE DID SUBMIT RESTRICTIVE DEEDS AND COVENANTS, UH, UH, RESTRICTIONS ON THIS PROPERTY TO LIMIT THE INTENSITY OF THE USE CUZ WE DO ONLY HAVE THAT DESIRE TO ALLOW FOR THAT CAR RENTAL AGENCY.
WE ALSO LIMITED THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO UTILIZE FOR THE CAR RENTAL AGENCY.
UM, IN THE MIXED USE IN THE ME ONE DISTRICT, IT ALLOWS UP FOR 25 RESIDENTIAL UNITS PER ACRE.
UH, THE, THE MULTI-FAMILY THAT WAS, UH, MENTIONED BY STAFF EARLIER IN THE EARLIER IN THIS PRESENTATION, UM, THEY'RE ACTUALLY ALLOWED FOR MORE DENSE, UH, MULTIFAMILY, UH, DEVELOPMENT THAN WE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BY.
UM, ANY KIND OF REDEVELOPMENT OF THE MU ONE DISTRICT IN THIS AREA WOULD MORE THAN LIKELY NEED TO COME IN FOR A REZONE TO EITHER THE MU TWO OR ANOTHER MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT OR EVEN A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
[04:15:01]
TO ALLOW FOR MORE DENTS TO MAKE IT REASONABLY WORK OUT.UM, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS USE, UH, WILL HELP SUPPORT THE AREA.
AS WE MENTIONED, THERE'S DART, THERE'S A LOT OF MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS COMING INTO PLACE.
UM, HAVING AN AREA WHERE YOU CAN RENT A CAR AND INSTEAD OF HAVING TO GO TO THE AIRPORT OR FURTHER OUT LOCATIONS, IT WOULD BE BENEFIT TO THE SURROUNDING AREA.
UH, ONCE AGAIN, WE DO BELIEVE THIS IS CONSISTENT.
ONCE AGAIN, IT'S SURROUNDED BY REGIONAL RETAIL.
IT'S U ONE, WHICH ALSO HAS HIGH INTENSITY, UH, RETAIL USES AS WELL.
WE BELIEVE THE USE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING HAS LOWERED THE IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING AREA.
IF YOU COULD, UH, GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
UH, THIS SHOWING THE CURRENT USES OF THE CURRENT SITE PLAN OF THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT WHERE WE'RE GONNA BE LOCATED IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, REALLY WILL HAVE A NO IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
WE WON'T HAVE IMPACT ON THE MULTIFAMILY TO THE NOR, UH, MULTIFAMILY SURROUNDING US.
THE ADDITIONAL, UH, RETAIL IN FRONT OF US, UM, WE WILL, WE WILL ONLY BE THERE TO SUPPORT THE SURROUNDING AREA.
IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
UM, THESE ARE KIND OF BEFORE AND AFTER PICTURES OF WHAT WE'VE DONE TO WHAT OUR CLIENT HAS DONE THIS DEVELOPMENT.
THEY'VE PUT A LOT OF MONEY INTO IT OVER THE YEARS.
UM, IT'S BEEN, UH, OVER THE YEARS, UH, THEY'VE DONE FACELIFTS, THEY'VE DONE PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS.
AND WHAT WE'RE SIMPLY REQUESTING IS TO ALLOW US TO CHANGE THIS USED TO ALLOW FOR A CAR RENTAL AT THE END OF THE SUITE, WHICH IS PRETTY CONSISTENT OTHER CITY ORDINANCES, UH, THAT YOU WOULD SEE THROUGHOUT THE METROPLEX, OR A SIMILAR USE BEING ALLOWED IN A SIMILAR TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I DON'T WANNA TAKE TOO MUCH OF YOUR TIME, BUT I CAN, UH, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
YES, I HAVE THREE MORE MINUTES.
WE HAVE TWO TRENTS IN OUR OFFICE.
TRENT, UM, CARL CROWLEY 2201 MAIN STREET.
UH, JUST WANNA REITERATE, SOME OF THE QUESTIONS CAME UP ABOUT PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY.
I DON'T THINK ANYTHING WE'RE DOING ON OCCUPYING REOCCUPYING, THE END CAP OF THE BUILDING REALLY WOULD AFFECT OR LOWER THE ABILITY FOR PEDESTRIAN, UM, INPUT BACK AND FORTH.
UM, UH, TRENT MENTIONED THAT ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PREAMBLE, I CALL IT A PREAMBLE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TECHNICAL TERM IS FOR A DEFINITION, MAYBE OF OF REGIONAL RETAIL.
IT SAYS IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE NEAR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
AND, AND I'D AGREE WITH 'EM, IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE NEAR SINGLE FAMILY.
THERE ARE OTHER RETAIL DISTRICTS, UH, NS OR CR THAT ARE PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATE NEAR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MF TWO.
BESIDES, ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE ZONING MAP, UH, MAYBE THE ONE A LITTLE FURTHER UP ON THE SCREEN.
IF YOU GO THE ZONING MAP, YOUR DOCKET, THERE IS SOME MF THREE AND MF FOUR IN THE AREA.
I AGREE THAT'S VERY RARE IN DALLAS.
BESIDES MAYBE THE OAKLAND AREA TO HAVE MF.
I DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER MF FOUR DISTRICT BEYOND US REALLY IN DALLAS.
BUT MF TWO ALLOWS THREE STORIES.
THIS IS BUILT TWO STORIES PROBABLY BUILT IN THE SIXTIES, EARLY SIXTIES, BUT IT ALLOWS UP TO 36 UNITS THE ACRE.
UM, JUST IF YOU JUST DID A, A NORMAL MIX OF ONE AND TWO BEDROOM THAT A DEVELOPER MIGHT DO, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO PARK IT, BUT IT, IT COULD HAPPEN AND IT DOES HAPPEN.
SO I WOULD SAY THAT, AND AS, UH, TRENT MENTIONED, UH, THE ME ONE ONLY ALLOWS A BASE IF YOU HAVE A MIX OF USES UP TO 25 UNITS A ACRE.
OBVIOUSLY YOU COULD DO MORE WITH, UH, WITH MIXED INCOME HOUSING AND STUFF.
BUT STILL, UM, THE DENSITY ALLOWED IN THE MU ONE DISTRICT IS LESS THAN THE DENSITY THAT'S, UH, ALLOWED NEXT DOOR.
UM, OBVIOUSLY THE MU ONE ALLOWS MORE HEIGHT AND A LOT MORE USES AND STUFF, BUT ALL YOU'RE REALLY LOSING IN THIS REQUEST IS THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT.
AND I THINK IF YOU LOOKED AT THE DISTRICTS THAT HAVE REDEVELOPED IN THE AREA, I GO DOWN TO WALNUT HILL AND IN NORTH CENTRAL IT'S A PD.
YOU LOOK ACROSS THE WAY THAT WHOLE, UH, MIDTOWN, I BELIEVE IT'S STILL CALLED MIDTOWN, IS A PD.
THOSE WERE PDS AND THE REASON THEY'RE MADE OF PDS OR OR UPZONE THEM WAS FOR THAT PURPOSE.
UM, IF, IF THIS SITE WERE TO REDEVELOP, AND I'M NOT ADVOCATING OR ANYTHING ELSE, THE LIKELIHOOD IT WOULD HAVE TO BE UPZONED TO SOMETHING ABOVE MU ONE JUST BECAUSE OF THE VALUE OF THE LAND, THE LOCATION, AND THE DENSITY AND HEIGHTS AND STUFF YOU'D NEED TO ACHIEVE.
SO I THINK, UM, THIS LITTLE STRIP OF OUR IS NOT GONNA PREVENT IT FROM REDEVELOPING.
UH, THE SITE WOULD REDEVELOP AS A WHOLE, UM, AND WOULD LIKELY NEED TO COME IN FOR A ZONING CHANGE.
SO I THINK THIS ACTUALLY ALLOWS, UH, AN END CAP THAT, UM, TURNS THE WRONG DIRECTION.
IT DOESN'T EVEN FACE, UH, NORTH CENTRAL TO BE DEVELOPED WITH A USE.
THAT'S REALLY A DESTINATION TYPE USE.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO RENT A CAR, YOU PROBABLY LOOKED ONLINE, YOU FOUND OUT WHERE THEY WERE AND YOU WENT THERE.
UM, AND IN THIS CASE, I'M NOT GOING TO LOVE FIELD.
I'M GOING TO A, A NEIGHBORHOOD LOCATION THAT PROBABLY MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO WOULD RENT A CAR THERE WOULD BE NEIGHBORHOOD RELATED TIME RELATED THING.
UM, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF REGISTERED SPEAKERS.
[04:20:04]
MR. ROBERTSON IS HERE.IS MR. CHOR ONLINE? DOES MR. CHOR INTEND TO SPEAK? DO YOU KNOW? I DON'T BELIEVE HE'S A REGISTERED SPEAKER.
COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? OH, ARE YOU NOT FOR THIS CASE.
UH, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY PLEASE.
MR. CROWLEY OR TR I MEAN, EITHER OF YOU.
I JUST, UM, ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY OTHER, UM, RENTAL CAR AGENCIES IN THIS VICINITY? I BELIEVE THERE'S AN ENTERPRISE, UM, ACROSS THE WAY.
ISN'T THAT GOING? ONE YEAH, HALF A MILE AWAY, QUARTER A MILE AWAY.
I, I HAVEN'T MEASURED UP PROBABLY QUARTER TO A HALF A MILE AWAY.
SO, SO ONE FAIRLY CLOSE BY, IF, IF ONE WANTED TO GET A RENTAL CAR IN THIS AREA AND NOT GO TO LOVE FIELD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE EXPRESSWAY.
UH, I DON'T KNOW FOR WHOM THIS IS, BUT EITHER ONE OF YOU, UM, YOU HAVE DE RESTRICTED AGAINST MORE THAN ONE AUTO RENTAL FACILITY.
ARE YOU WILLING TO DEED RESTRICT AGAINST A VEHICULAR DISPLAY SALES AND SERVICE USE OTHER THAN AN AUTO RENTAL FACILITY? ABSOLUTELY.
COMMISSIONER STANDARD? YEAH, JUST A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT FUNCTIONING.
I MEAN, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.
SO IT'S A, AN AN OFFICE, I MEAN A RENTAL OFFICE.
NOW DO YOU SERVICE THE CARS, WASH 'EM, DO YOU DO ANY OF THAT? SO THE CARS ARE COMING FROM ANOTHER LOCATION, SO THERE'S NO ACTIVITY OF SERVICING THE CARS THERE.
I JUST WANNA BE REAL CLEAR ON THAT.
AND THEN WHEN THE PERSON RETURNS THEM, DO THEY JUST RETURN IT TO THE PARKING LOT AT ANY TIME? UH, THEY WOULD RETURN IT TO THE PARKING LOT, UH, ACCORDING TO THE REGULATIONS, I BELIEVE THERE'S AFTER HOUR DROP OFF REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY CAN DO WHERE THEY DROP THE KEY OFF AT THE DOOR, INSIDE THE DOOR, UM, AND THEY JUST LEAVE IT OUT IN THE PARKING LOT, UH, CORRECT IN SOME DESIGNATED LOCATION.
SO THERE'S NOTHING GOING ON CUZ IT IS CLOSER TO THE MULTIFAMILY.
SO I WAS CONCERNED IF THERE'S ANY KIND OF, UH, DETAILING OR THE CARS OR ANYTHING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER TREAD.
DO YOU HAVE A MOTION COMMISSIONER TREADAWAY? I DO HAVE A MOTION.
UM, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THEN I'VE GOT COMMENTS, OF COURSE.
I'M GONNA MAKE THE MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, GO WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THIS APPLICATION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER TREADWAY FOR YOUR MOTION.
FIRST OF ALL, I, I KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THIS PROPERTY IS.
I THINK THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THERE ARE GREAT.
I TOOK MY DOG AND MY CATS TO THIS VET WHEN OUR VET WAS DESTROYED IN THE TORNADO.
AND I AM A FULL SUPPORTER AND, YOU KNOW, FREQUENT SHOPPER AT THIS AREA AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE.
SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I'VE SEEN THE ADDITIONAL PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC THAT COMES IN, UM, MAINLY FROM THE SOUTH.
BUT I KNOW THAT THE NORTH IS REALLY WHERE YOU'VE GOT DIRECT ACCESS TO THE MULTIFAMILY.
AND WHILE I'M USUALLY OF THE OPINION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD ENCOURAGE BUSINESS, UM, BECAUSE WE ARE A CITY OF ENTREPRENEURS, WHEN I READ BACK THROUGH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT IT, UM, I THINK IF WE HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT MEANS SOMETHING, THEN WE HAVE TO READ IT.
WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT IN CONTEXT AND WE HAVE TO FOLLOW IT.
AND I THINK IN THIS CASE, UM, STAFF IS SAYING THAT THIS ONE LITTLE BITTY ZONING STRIP DOESN'T MEET THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS WITH RESPECT TO FLEXIBLE ZONING AND PROMOTING PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AREAS.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE BEST USE CASE FOR THIS AREA.
AND TO HEAR MR. CROWLEY SAY IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER BECAUSE IF YOU WERE GONNA REDEVELOP THIS LARGE AREA, YOU'D REZONE IT ANYWAY.
TO ME, THAT'S NOT A REALLY GOOD REASON TO JUST REZONE THIS TOP SEGMENT.
YOU KNOW, I WOULD PREFER TO KEEP THE ENTIRE PROPERTY INTACT AND MAYBE THERE WILL BE A GREAT
[04:25:01]
DEVELOPMENT BY THE CURRENT OWNER, OR THEY'LL BE ABLE TO SELL IT TO SOMEBODY THAT DOES DEVELOP THIS ENTIRE PARCEL AND CONTINUES THIS MIXED USE ACTIVITY THAT'S HAPPENING.SO WHEN I THINK ABOUT THIS IN TOTALITY, AND I THINK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST SITTING HERE AS THE D 11 COMMISSIONER, BUT REALLY THINKING ABOUT IT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE WHOLE CITY.
I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE BEST USE FOR THIS PROPERTY.
AND SO FOR THAT REASON, I HOPE THAT YOU CAN GO WITH ME AND, YOU KNOW, GO WITH STAFF.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YEAH, I'M DEFINITELY IN AGREEMENT THAT WITH, WITH DENIAL HERE.
MY ONLY QUESTION IS WHETHER IT SHOULD BE A DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS SHOPPING CENTER HAS COME A WAYS, BUT IT STILL IS A SORT OF TRADITIONAL SUBURBAN SHOPPING CENTER.
AND IF SOMEONE DID WANT TO, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY TAKE IT IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, THAT MIGHT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL ZONING CHANGES, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE US THEM TO COME BACK TO US FOR A WAIVER.
SO IN MY VIEW, I THINK DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE MIGHT MAKE MORE SENSE HERE.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, SECONDED BY MYSELF TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL, BUT WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
CAN YOU PLEASE READ THIS INTO THE RECORD? CERTAINLY.
CASE NUMBER 17 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A HANDICAP CREW DWELLING UNIT.
AND FOR THE TERMINATION OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 5 52 FOR A FOSTER HOME USE ON PROPERTY ZONED AND R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF PROSPERITY AVENUE WEST OF STANLEY SMITH DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A HANDICAPPED PATROL UNIT FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR PERIODS, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF THE TERMINATION OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 5 52 FOR A FOSTER HOME.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. MUNOZ.
UH, WE DO HAVE ONE REGISTERED SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM.
UH, MR. BANGS, IS HE ONLINE? OH, ARE YOU MR. BANGS? OH, GOOD, GOOD EVENING.
I'M PHILLIP BANGS, 11 8 18 LEISURE DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 75 2 43.
I'M THE OWNER OF 28 26 PROSPERITY AVENUE.
AND A REPRESENTATIVE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR JUST AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS? THE, UH, THE PURPOSE FOR THE CHANGE IN THE S U P WAS, UH, IT WAS FOSTER CARE 5 52.
AND IT TOOK A WHILE TO GET THE DEFINITION OF EVERYTHING, UH, ONCE WE GOT IN THERE, BUT IT JUST SAYS FOSTER CARE.
BUT, UH, THE DEFINITION FROM THE CITY IS FOSTER CARE IS ONLY FOR CHILDREN.
AND SO THAT'S WHEN THEY, UH, I SPOKE TO CODE COMPLIANCE AND THEY SAID IN ORDER TO BE IN COMPLIANT WITH, UH, THE CITY CODE, UH, WE CAN CHANGE IT UP TO A U FOR HANDICAPPED DWELLING.
AND THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO THAT POINT RIGHT THERE.
UM, IT ORIGINALLY WAS MY GRANDMOTHER'S PLACE.
SHE STARTED THE THEMA BOSTON FOUNDATION FOR HANDICAPPED CHILDREN YEARS AGO IN 1974.
UH, SHE PUT ALL THE TIME INTO IT AND, UH, AS HER GRANDSON, I JUST, UH, ONE THING THAT CAME TO ME WAS THIS, UH, MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE.
AND, UH, WHEN THE, I GOT INTO THE BUILDING AND I LOOKED AT THE, THE USAGES THAT I COULD GO INTO IT, I, UH, I STARTED, UH, THE MENTAL HEALTH, UH, FACILITY CALLED IT THE BOSTON HOME RESIDENTIAL CARE.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE CAME UP WITH, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE THING OF TRYING TO GET IT CHANGED OVER.
AND REZONE, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.
THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? MR. BANGS? COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
SO MR. BANKS, YOUR CLIENTS, IF YOU WANT TO CALL THEM THAT SOME OF THEM ARE OVER 18, IS THAT THE PROBLEM THAT PREVENTS IT BEING CHARACTERIZED AS A FOSTER HOME? YES, SIR.
AND WHAT AGE RANGE DO YOU SERVE? UH, IT COULD BE ANYWHERE FROM 18 UP TO 65.
OKAY, BUT YOU, YOU NO LONGER SERVE MINORS? NO, SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR?
[04:30:01]
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH ONE 30, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE MATTER SUBJECT TO, UM, CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
WOULD THAT THAT BE REVISED AS BRIEF? REVISED AS BRIEF? THANK YOU, SIR.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ANDERSON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY COMMENTS PLEASE? COMMISSIONER HERBERT? UH, HOW YOU DOING, SIR? UM, I'M A DISTRICT FOR, UM, IT, IT TOOK ME, IT MAY, IT WAS HOME AFTER KATRINA FOR ME.
SO I, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR TAKING ON YOUR GRANDMOTHER'S, UH, YOUR MOTHER'S, UM, LEGACY.
UM, MY FATHER DIED OF CORONAVIRUS IN 2021, BUT SUFFERED FROM MENTAL ILLNESS SINCE THE AGE OF 25 YEARS OLD.
SO IT, IT REALLY TOUCHED HOME TO HEAR THAT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
LET'S UH, GO TO OUR SUBDIVISION DOCKET.
YEAH, I THINK WE'RE DONE WITH THE ZONING CASES.
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE CHECK MY WORK? CAUSE WE JUMPED AROUND A LOT.
DID WE PUT 18 UNDER ADVISEMENT? 18 WAS HELD TO JULY 6TH.
UH, ANY OTHER ONES THAT WE, I I SEE CHECK MARKS ON ALL OF THEM, SO.
SO, UH, WE DO HAVE CASES 20 TO 32.
UH, THEY'RE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON HAS A CONFLICT ON NUMBER 21, BUT SINCE SHE IS NO.
UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT ALSO HAS A CONFLICT.
SO HE HAS STEPPED OUT OF THE CH OF THE CHAMBER HOUSE.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S ABSENCE.
COMMISSIONER HOUSER IS STEPPING OUT OF THE, UH, ACTUALLY, UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSER.
WE'LL, WE'LL LET YOU VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND THEN WE'LL TAKE THAT ONE OFF.
UH, GENTLEMEN, WHAT CASE ARE YOU HERE TO SPEAK ON? 25.
LET'S, UH, LET'S TAKE UP 25 FIRST.
WELL, THE PHONE CONSENT THEY DON'T NEED.
WELL, THEY, THEY WANT TO SPEAK.
CAN WE, WE NEED TO READ THE RECORD, SIR.
NO, THIS, I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE IN OPPOSITION, SIR.
SUPPORT ARE YOU BELIEVING? BECAUSE, BECAUSE IT IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, IT'S GONNA PASS AUTOMATICALLY.
YOU DON'T, WITHOUT YOU SAYING ANYTHING.
WE HAVE STAFF READ IT INTO THE RECORD MR. ESTHER, AND THEN I'LL CALL YOU IN JUST 30 SECONDS.
SHE'S GONNA READ IT IN THE RECORD.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
SO IS THAT ITEM NUMBER 25? NUMBER 25 PLEASE? MM-HMM.
IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REPLACE A 0.697 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF, UH, CONTAINING A PORTION OF LOT SEVEN THROUGH 10 IN CITY BLOCK PIPE OVER 1142 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON COLONIAL AVENUE AT MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT HERE.
CAN YOU PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? THANK, THERE'S A LITTLE BUTTON DOWN THERE SO THE FOLKS ONLINE CAN HEAR YOU.
UH, I LIVE AT, UH, 72 11 LAGUNA IN GRAND PRAIRIE, TEXAS.
UH, WE'VE BEEN ON THE PROPERTY IN SOUTH DALLAS FOR THE PAST, UH, 20 YEARS.
WE'VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF, UH, IMPROVEMENT NOW WITH SKIN PLANTING SO WE CAN DO, UH, MUCH MORE, UH, BETTER DEVELOPMENT OF THE, OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, THANK YOU EDWARD OPERA 1 4 4 0 3 OVERVIEW CIRCLE DALLAS 75 254.
[04:35:03]
UM, YOU KNOW, I, WE WANNA THANK THIS, UH, THE STAFF FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE, OF THE RED PLA.WHAT WE ARE GONNA DO IS THIS IS, UH, A SITE ON THE CORNER OF MLK AND, AND, UH, COLONIAL.
AND WE ARE PLANNING A 25 HIGH RISE, UH, A BUILDING THAT'S GONNA BE MIXED USE.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW NOW THAT IF WE, NOW THAT THE PLOT IS APPROVED, THAT'S SO MANY, YOU KNOW, THE CPC VOTES FOR IT, THEN THE NEXT THING IS TO GO FOR THE ZONING.
BUT WE ARE VERY CONFIDENT ON THIS PROJECT.
WE HAVE OUR FINANCING IN PLACE.
UH, THIS WILL BE THE FIRST TIME IN 40 OR SO YEARS ON MLK TO HAVE A MAJOR DEVELOPMENT THAT RUN INTO 120 MILLION PROJECT.
SO WE, WE THANK THE STAFF FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE SO FAR.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR TWO SPEAKERS? OKAY, SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER RUBIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF S 22 3 157, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
ANY DISCUSSION? ARE THOSE IN FAVOR? PLEASE SAY AYE.
HAVE A GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
WE WILL NOW GO BACK TO THE, UH, CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH CONSISTS OF CASES 20 AND THEN 22 THROUGH 24, THEN 26 THROUGH 32, RIGHT? YES.
THAT'S 21 OFF CONSENT DUE TO CONFLICT.
AND WE ALREADY DISPOSED OF CASE 25.
SO MS. ESTA, THAT WOULD BE CASE 22 THROUGH 20, PARDON ME? 2022 THROUGH 24, THEN 26 THROUGH 32, 20 21 HAS COME OFF THE CONSENT AND WE JUST DISPOSED OF 25.
SO 20, THEN 22 THROUGH 24, 26 THROUGH 32.
THE CONSIDERATION CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF 11 ITEMS. S 2 23 DASH 1 52 S 22 DASH S TWO TWO DASH, UH, DASH 1 53 OH, I'M SORRY, 1 53.
SO S 2 23 DASH 1 52 S 2 23 DASH 1 54 S 2 23 DASH 1 55 S 2 23 DASH 1 56 S 2 23 DASH 1 58 S 2 23 DASH 1 59 S 2 23 DASH ONE 60 S 2 23 DASH 1 61 S 2 23 DASH 1 62 S 2 23 DASH 1 63, AND S 2 23 DASH 1 64.
CONDITION REVISED AS FOR, UH, PAVING AND DRAINAGE DIVISION ON, UH, ON CASE NUMBER S 2023 DASH 1 53 ON CONDITION NUMBER 15 ON THE FINAL PLA DEDICATE A MINIMUM 10 FOOT BY 10 FOOT CORNER CLAIM VIA FEE.
SIMPLE OR STREET IS RANGE AT THE INTERSECTION OF PEAK STREET AND SAM HASTON STREET STREET AND ON CON ON CASE NUMBER S 2023 DASH 1 54.
CONDITION REVISED PER PAVING AND DRAIN DIVISION ON CONDITION NUMBER 16 ON THE FINAL PLAN, DEDICATED 25 FEET OF RIGHT WAY VIA FEE SIMPLE OR STREET EASEMENT FROM THE ESTABLISHED CENTER LINE OF DISCUSSION AVENUE.
AND ON CONDITION NUMBER 17 ON THE FINAL PAD, DEDICATE 25 FEET OF RIGHTWAY VIA FEE SIMPLE OR STREET EASEMENT FROM THE ESTABLISHED CENTER LINE OF FOOD STREET.
ALL THE CASES HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR A HEARING AT THIS TIME.
AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
ANY QUESTIONS ON CASES 2022 THROUGH 24, 26 THROUGH 32? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.
SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSENTED DOCKET, UH, ITEMS 20 THROUGH WHAT? WHATEVER THE NUMBER, NUMBER 20, THEN 22 THROUGH 24, THEN 26 THROUGH 32.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE APPROVE THESE, THESE MATTERS SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND ANY CHANGES THAT WERE READ ON THE RECORD.
UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
NOW LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER, UH, HOUSEWRIGHT HAS A CONFLICT ON CASE NUMBER
[04:40:01]
21 AND IS STEPPING OUT OF THE CHAMBER, IN FACT, HAS DONE SO.MS. SHASTA, CAN YOU PLEASE DO, UH, READ NUMBER 21 PLEASE? S 2 23 DASH 1 53.
IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REFLECT A 0.557 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOTS ONE THROUGH THREE IN CITY BLOCK 14 OVER 7, 717 TO CREATE WALNUT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON SAN HATTER STREET AT PETER STREET, SOUTH CORNER.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
RSM INDICATED THE HEARING IS OUR REGISTERED SPEAKER ONLINE.
WHAT'S THAT? IS THAT REGISTERED SPEAKER ONLINE? THEY'RE NOT AVAILABLE.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER RUBEN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF S 2 23 DASH 1 53, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STATUTE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER POPKIN FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
LET'S TAKE A QUICK DINNER BREAK, UH, AND COME BACK AT 6 0 5.
GREATLY APPRECIATE, UH, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON KINGSTON AND CARPENTER FOR STAYING ONLINE.
WE'RE JUST AT THE BORDER OF, UH, QUORUM, SO I APPRECIATE YOU.
YOU WANT ME TO READ IT ON THE RECORD PLEASE? ITEM NUMBER 33 CA 2023 DASH TWO 40.
AN APPEAL OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION OF THE DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO INCREASE THE SECOND FLOOR PLATE FROM EIGHT TO 10 FEET.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
WE'RE BACK ON THE RECORD AND I BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT IS ONLINE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE ME.
JUST, JUST MAKE SURE YOU, YOU KEEP THAT CAMERA ON.
OTHERWISE, UH, WE CAN'T HEAR FROM YOU, SO, ABSOLUTELY.
UH, COMMISSIONER, THIS IS AN APPEAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, WHICH WAS DENIED BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AT ITS HEARING ON MARCH 6TH, 2023.
THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS REFLECTED IN ITS OFFICIAL MINUTES, WHICH ARE PART OF THE RECORD FOR THIS APPEAL.
THE APPELLANT IS REPRESENTED BY, OR IT IS MR. SHAW, AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY KATHLEEN.
PHONES AT THIS TIME, WE'LL SWEAR IN THE SPEAKERS.
IF YOU COULD STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, MR. SHAW, IF YOU THERE IN YOUR CAR, JUST RAISE YOUR HAND AND DO YOU SWEAR AND AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE COMMISSION? PLEASE ANSWER.
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 COMMISSIONER HAS RECEIVED ANY COMMUNICATION ON THIS MATTER, PLEASE DISCLOSE IT FOR THE RECORD.
UH, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION HAS RECEIVED AND REVIEWED THE RECORD FOR 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
[04:45:01]
AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.DOES EITHER PARTY HAVE ANY NEW EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY TO SUBMIT TO THE PLAN COMMISSION TODAY? SO THIS IS MR. SHAW BERNARD SHAW? YES.
UH, MR. SHAW IS MY, UM, I HAD PICTURES AND I WAS ACTUALLY THERE EARLIER, BUT I HAD BEEN RU RUNNING FROM MEETING TO MEETING JUST TO SHOW SOME HOUSES THAT ARE TWO STORY WITH A SECOND FLOOR, UH, FLOOR PLATE.
BECAUSE ONE OF THE, THE QUESTIONS THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAD WAS, ARE THERE OTHER HOUSES IN THE AREA THAT HAVE SECOND FLOORS? AND THERE'S SEVERAL, AND I, I THINK I PUT IT IN THE BRIEF, IN THE DOCUMENT THAT I SENT WERE AND VERBIAGE, BUT I DON'T THINK MY PICTURES WERE, WERE UPLOADED.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, CUZ I'M ON MY PHONE NOW, I CAN'T SHOW YOU A PRESENTATION, BUT THERE'S AT LEAST FIVE OR SIX HOUSES I BELIEVE THAT ARE IN THE AREA, IF NOT MORE, THAT ARE TWO-STORY OF HOMES.
AND THEY, AND THEIR SECOND FLOOR IS SPANS THE ENTIRE FLOOR PLATE OF THE FIRST FLOOR.
UM, SO I, MY REQUEST FOR THE GOING FROM EIGHT FEET TO, TO 10 FEET SEEMS REASONABLE IN LIGHT THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL EXAMPLES OF THOSE TYPES OF HOMES IN THE AREA.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONERS, WHAT WE HAVE TO DETERMINE IS, UH, IS THE EVIDENCE OR THE TESTIMONY THAT IS, UH, WELL IN THIS CASE IT'S JUST A TESTIMONY THAT'S BEING PROVIDED BY MR. SHAW.
WAS IT AVAILABLE, UH, DURING THE LANDMARK CASE? UH, IN OTHER WORDS, COULD HE HAVE PRESENTED IT TO THE LANDMARK? AND THAT'S WHAT WE MUST DETERMINE.
NOW, DO WE HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON THAT? MAY I ASK A QUESTION? QUICK QUESTION, MR. SHAW.
MR. SHAW, YOU REFERENCED SURE.
SOME HOUSES THAT, THAT HAD A SECOND STORY WITH THE SIMILAR FLOOR PLATE TO, UM, THE APPLICATION THAT YOU SUBMITTED TO LANDMARK COMMISSION, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
WERE THOSE HOUSES THERE WHEN YOU WENT BEFORE THE LAND LANDMARK COMMISSION? THEY WERE.
AND SO WHEN I DIDN'T, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROCESS, SO I GOT IT.
ADMIT IT WAS HERE, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I NEEDED TO SPEAK AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING, AND SO I DIDN'T SIGN UP TO SPEAK.
AND SO THEREFORE I COULDN'T REALLY PRESENT ANYTHING TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OTHER THAN A VERBAL, UH, REQUEST TO INCREASE THE FLOOR PLATE.
CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO FIND THAT THE EVIDENCE THAT MR. SHAW INTENDS TO SUBMIT TO THE PLAN COMMISSION, UM, WAS AVAILABLE TO HIM AT THE TIME OF, OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING? THANK YOU COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR THAT MOTION.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT DISCUSSION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, BOTH SIDES HAVE PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED A COPY OF THE PROCEDURES WE'LL FOLLOW TODAY.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION WILL NOW HEAR THE, 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 FOR ITS PRESENTATION, AND THE APPELLANT WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL PRESENTATIONS WILL BE MADE BY THE APPELLANT AND COUNSEL FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION ONLY.
CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY ASK QUESTIONS AFTER THE PRESENTATION.
TIME TAKEN BY THE QUESTIONS WILL NOT BE DEDUCTED FROM TIME ALLOTTED.
EACH COMMISSIONER WILL BE ALLOWED FIVE MINUTES TO ASK QUESTIONS DURING THE FIRST ROUND.
BE AWARE THAT THE FIVE MINUTES INCLUDES ANSWERS, THREE MINUTES WILL BE ALLOTTED BY A SECOND ROUND IF NEEDED.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SECRETARY WILL KEEP TRACK OF THE TIME.
IF A PARTY REQUIRES ADDITIONAL TIME TO PRESENT ITS CASE, THE PARTY SHALL REQUEST 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 PRELIMINARY MATTERS TO RAISE AT THIS TIME? OKAY.
IF NO, THEN UH, WE'LL NOW HEAR THE APPELLANT'S CASE FOR 20 MINUTES.
UM, WELL, I I, I FEEL LIKE I'M A LITTLE BIT OF A DISADVANTAGE, SO I APOLOGIZE.
JUST BECAUSE I'M IN THE CAR AND I CAN'T SHOW YOU ANY VIDEO OR SHOW YOU ANY PICTURES.
[04:50:01]
I, AS I STATED, THERE ARE AT LEAST FIVE OR SIX HOMES THAT ARE IN THE AREA THAT, THAT HAVE A SECOND FLOOR FLOOR PLATE.UH, THAT, AND THE CONCERN THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAD AT THE TIME AS I WAS LISTENING, IS THAT THERE WERE NO OTHER HOMES THAT RESEMBLED MY HOME.
THAT, OR THE CHANGES THAT I WAS SUGGESTING MAKING TO THE HOME THAT I HAD, UM, THIS HOME I'VE OWNED SINCE 2005.
AND I BOUGHT IT INITIALLY FOR MY MOM, THINKING THAT I WAS GONNA MOVE IN THERE.
SO I SAT ON IT AND I DECIDED THAT ULTIMATELY I WOULD DO IT, GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS TO IT AND, AND REMODEL THE HOME AND MOVE IN IN THE HOME.
UM, IT IS, IT IS NOT FUNCTIONAL AT THIS POINT.
THERE'S NO ELECTRICITY, THERE'S NO RUNNING WATER.
THE WINDOWS HAVE BEEN, UH, BE, UH, BROKEN OUT.
IT IS A BLIGHT FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AND I'M PLANNING ON SPENDING WELL OVER 500,000, MAYBE OVER $600,000 JUST TO REMODEL THE HOME AND ADHERE TO ALL OF THE CONDITIONS THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REQUIRES WITH RESPECT TO THE OUTSIDE APPEARANCE, KEEPING IT, IT, IT'S SIMILAR TO THE SAME, UM, CONDITIONS AS THE HOUSE IS NOW, BUT FOR ADDING A SECOND FLOOR FOR FUNCTIONALITY'S SAKE AND SPACE SAKE, THAT I AM ACTUALLY MOVING THE SECOND FLOOR TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, NOT EVEN BRINGING THAT ADDITION TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE SO THAT I DON'T CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE LOOK AND THE DRIVE UP APPEAL OF THE HOUSE.
AND SO UPON FURTHER INSPECTION OF THE PLANS, I FOUND THAT THERE WAS AN EIGHT FOOT FLOOR PLATE, MEANING THE SECOND FLOOR, HAVING THE EIGHT FOOT FLOOR PLATE WAS GOING TO, UM, BE VERY LOW AND SEEM CLAUSTROPHOBIC.
AND I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WHEN I LOOKED AT THE PLANS BEFORE.
BUT AS I'VE DELVED INTO THIS MORE AND GOTTEN MORE SERIOUS ABOUT REMODELING THE HOME, I REALIZED THAT AND WANTED TO MAKE THIS PARTICULAR CHANGE TO CHANGE THE, THE, THE CEILING HEIGHT ON THE SECOND FLOOR WHERE THE ADDITION IS GOING FROM EIGHT FEET TO 10 FEET.
AGAIN, THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS ALREADY ALLOWS FOR IT TO BE EIGHT FEET AND THE TWO EXTRA FEET WON'T GIVEN THE LOCATION OF THE ADDITION IS AT THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.
IT'S SO FAR FROM THE STREET, IT'S ALMOST A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE STREET.
SO BEING ABLE TO NOTICE THAT IT'S EIGHT, THERE'S AN EIGHT FOOT ROOF VERSUS, YOU KNOW, A 10 FOOT ROOF WILL BE VERY NEGLIGIBLE.
THE NAKED EYE CAN'T, CAN'T DISCERN THAT.
SO IT WAS MY INTENT TO GO THROUGH THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND GET THIS APPROVAL NOT KNOWING THAT.
AND GIVEN THE STAFF HAD APPROVED IT, TASK FORCE HAD APPROVED IT AND THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT, UH, A GREAT IMPROVEMENT AND IT WOULDN'T, UM, AND IT WOULDN'T, UM, DEVIATE FROM THE STANDARDS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, SOUTH BOULEVARD PARK ROAD THAT I DIDN'T, I I REALLY, I GUESS I, OUTTA IGNORANCE, I DIDN'T PLAN TO SPEAK AT THAT PARTICULAR LANDMARK COMMISSION CASE.
AND YEAH, YOU KNOW, I FALL MYSELF FOR THAT.
I KNOW THE PROCESS NOW AND, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IF I EVER HAVE FIND MYSELF IN THIS POSITION AGAIN, I'LL KNOW BETTER.
BUT I'M, I'M SIMPLY LOOKING TO, TO CHANGE IT FROM EIGHT FEET TO 10 FEET.
WHEREAS THE, THE CEILING AND THE ROOF LINE IS GONNA INCREASE BY AN ADDITIONAL TWO FEET, WHICH IS WELL BELOW WHAT THE STANDARD IS IN THE, IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND I'M GONNA BE STILL WELL BELOW THAT CUZ IT'S ONLY GONNA BE ABOUT 20, 22 FEET HIGH IN TERMS OF THE, THE CEILING ITSELF.
SO I, I AM, UM, I'M, I'M HOPING THAT THIS COMMISSION WILL FIND FAVORABLY, UH, THAT I MIGHT PROCEED.
OTHERWISE, I JUST, I WANT, I WANT A HOME THAT'S GONNA BE FUNCTIONAL AND THAT JUST WON'T BE FUNCTIONAL.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'VE SAT ON IT FOR 15 YEARS AND I, I JUST DON'T WANT TO INVEST SIX TO $700,000 INTO A HOME, YOU KNOW, FIVE, SIX, $700,000 INTO A HOME AND NOT BE HAPPY WITH IT.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT THESE CHANGES DEVIATE FROM THE STANSON LET, THAT ARE IN THAT PARTICULAR HISTORIC DISTRICT AS, AND AGAIN, I JUST REPEAT THAT THE TASK FORCE THOUGHT THAT THE ADDITION WAS, WAS, UM, NOT OFFENSIVE.
UH, IT DIDN'T DEVIATE FROM THE STANDARDS, NOR DID STAFF.
SO I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD SUPPORT THAT DECISION.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS, SIR? NO.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS WITH A REMINDER
[04:55:01]
THAT EACH COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS WITH THE ANSWERS ARE LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES? COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YES.UH, THANK YOU MR. SHAW, I KNOW THESE PROCEDURES FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND AND APPEALING TO US MAY BE A LITTLE CONFUSING, BUT I JUST HAVE SOME, SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROCESS.
YOU DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DIDN'T JUST DENY YOUR APPLICATION, DENIED IT WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WHICH GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO REAPPLY TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND THEN, YOU KNOW, COME BACK AND APPEAR AND SPEAK AT THE HEARING.
DID YOU UNDERSTAND THAT OR DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? I DID NOT.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, OUR ABILITY TO OVERTURN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS, IS LIMITED.
WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY IN THE CITY CODE, WE CAN ONLY DO IT FOR THREE REASONS.
IF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAS VIOLATED A STATUTE OR ORDINATE PROVISION, IF IT'S EXCEEDED ITS AUTHORITY, OR IF ITS DECISION WAS NOT REASONABLY SU SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD OF THOSE THREE REASONS, WHAT'S THE BASIS FOR YOUR APPEAL TO, UM, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION TODAY? IF IT'S ONE OR MORE THAN ONE? IT'S MORE THAN ONE.
I MEAN, I DIDN'T MENTION OTHER THINGS THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TALKED ABOUT.
THEY LOOKED AT THE PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED THAT IT, THAT SHOWED THAT THE ROOF LINE, UH, WAS BEING RAISED BY TWO FEET, AND THEN THEY LOOKED AT OTHER THINGS ABOUT THE, THE, UH, PLANS.
AND THEY THOUGHT THAT I WAS CHANGING ALL OF THAT.
I WASN'T CHANGING ANYTHING ELSE.
I WASN'T CHANGING THE MATERIALS THAT WERE BEING USED.
I WASN'T CHANGING THE WINDOWS THAT WERE BEING USED.
I WASN'T CHANGING HOW THE SHINGLES THAT WERE BEING USED ON THE ROOF.
I WASN'T CHANGING ANYTHING COSMETICALLY ABOUT THE HOUSE.
BUT THERE WAS A VERY ROBUST DISCUSSION IN THAT REGARD.
AND, UM, AND SO THEY THOUGHT THAT I WAS CHANGING EVERYTHING ABOUT THE ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AND THAT WAS ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE.
AND THEN THEY FURTHER WENT ON TO, TO, TO, UM, TO POINT OUT THAT THEY WANTED TO KNOW IF THERE WERE OTHER HOUSES THAT HAD A SEC, SECOND FLOOR.
AND SO, IN, AGAIN, IN MY BRIEF, I IDENTIFIED THE HOMES IN THE, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE SECOND FLOORS.
AND THESE ARE NOT NEW ADDITIONS.
THESE ARE, THESE HOMES HAVE BEEN THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
THE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE HAS A SECOND FLOOR ADDITION.
THERE ARE TWO HOUSES, TWO, THREE HOUSES, UH, TO THE WEST OF MY HOUSE THAT HAVE SECOND FLOOR ADDITIONS.
AND AGAIN, THESE HOUSES DON'T HAVE JUST SECOND FLOOR ADDITIONS THAT ARE ON A PART OF THE HOUSE.
THEY COVER THE ENTIRE SPAN OF THE FLOOR PLATE, THE, THE FIRST FLOOR FLOOR PLATE.
SO, UM, I, I DO THINK THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DID NOT PARTICULARLY UNDERSTAND, UM, THE SITUATION.
AND AGAIN, BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW THE PROCEDURES, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT I NEEDED TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK.
AND SO I COULDN'T DEFEND, I WAS ON MUTE AND I REALLY COULDN'T DEFEND ANYTHING ABOUT, UM, ANYTHING ABOUT THE QUESTIONS THAT THEY HAD.
SO THOSE, THOSE OTHER HOUSES THAT YOU POINTED TO, YOU WERE NOT ABLE TO BRING THOSE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S ATTENTION AT THE TIME OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY SAYING? THAT'S, THAT, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND JUST, JUST TO FINISH IT OUT, YOU CAN'T POINT ME TO ANY STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION VIOLATED.
ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY SPECIFIC STATUTE OR ORDINANCE? UM, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY STA STATUTE OR ORDINANCE, BUT I DO KNOW THAT THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN, I'VE GOT LIMITED TIME MR. SHAW.
SO LET ME JUST MOVE ON TO MY LAST QUESTION.
ARE YOU ARGUING THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION EXCEEDED ITS AUTHORITY IN ANY WAY? AND IF SO, HOW? I, I, I'M NOT, I'M NOT QUALIFIED TO SAY WHETHER THEY EXCEEDED THEIR AUTHORITY OR NOT.
I, I, I, YEAH, I'M NOT QUALIFIED FOR, AND I APPRECIATE THAT THESE ARE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS.
YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT THESE TECHNICAL STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE TO APPLY AS, AS THE, THE PLAN COMMISSION SITTING IN AN APPEAL.
SO, SO THANK YOU FOR INDULGING MY QUESTIONS, MR. SHAW.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. SHAW? YES, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
MR. SHAW, UM, UM, AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING, WELL, WELL FIRST, SO THE ADDITION THAT YOU ARE, UM, PROPOSING IT, IT IS, IS IT AN ADDITION TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE OR RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE? UM, SO THE EXISTING
[05:00:01]
STRUCTURE, UM, I, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS JUST A, A ONE LEVEL, UH, HOME.
THE, UH, THE SECOND FLOOR ADDITION IS, IS IT, IT IS AN ADDITION ON TOP OF THE FIRST, THE, THE ONE LEVEL HOME.
UH, BUT AGAIN, THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, UH, BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IN 2016.
THE SECOND FLOOR HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, BUT IT, THERE WAS A LIMITATION, IT WAS A LIMITATION IN, IN THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS.
SO IS IT THE CEILING HEIGHT OR THE SECOND FLOOR? UM, SO THE, THE SECOND FLOOR, OR ARE YOU CONSIDERING THAT BEING THE FLOOR THAT YOU WANTED TO, UM, EXTEND OR IS IT THE CEILING HEIGHT ON THE SECOND FLOOR? SO, SO THE, THE FIRST FLOOR, IF, IF YOU CAN IMAGINE THE CEILING, UH, ON THE INSIDE, IT GOES FROM, FROM THE FLOOR UP TO THE CEILING BEFORE YOU GET INTO THE WRAP AND EVERYTHING.
AND SO THE SECOND FLOOR, IF YOU THINK IT USE THAT SAME LOGIC, THE SECOND FLOOR FROM THE FLOOR TO THE CEILING WAS LIMITED TO EIGHT FEET.
SO I WANTED TO INCREASE THE CEILING HEIGHT FROM THE FLOOR ON THE SECOND FLOOR TO 10 FEET.
AND BY, BUT BY DEFINITION, THAT WILL INCREASE THE PITCH OF THE ROOF BY TWO FEET.
AND WOULD THE, WOULD THE COMMISSION NOT HAVE, UM, APPROVED A DIFFERENT SLOPE IN THE ROOF IN ORDER FOR YOU TO ACHIEVE THAT CEILING HEIGHT FROM THE INSIDE? I DON'T KNOW IF THESE ARE APPROPRIATE QUESTIONS, BUT I JUST NEED, SO COULD YOU, COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? I'M SORRY.
UM, DID THE COMMISSION NOT APPROVE YOU CHANGING THE SLOPE OF THE ROOF IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE SECOND FLOOR CEILING HEIGHT ON THE INSIDE AS OPPOSED TO CHANGING THE HEIGHT OF THE ROOF? SO IF, IF I'M JUST BEING MY READ OF IT AGAIN WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO HAVE A, A DYNAMIC DISCUSSION WITH THEM, MY READ OF IS IS THAT THEY, UM, THEY WERE THROWN OFF BY THE PLANS, CUZ AGAIN, THEY THOUGHT THAT THERE WERE OTHER CHANGES.
AND THEN, UH, ONE, ONE COMMISSIONER NOW DID GET SOMEWHAT ARGUMENTATIVE BECAUSE, UH, SOMEONE ON THE TASK FORCE SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, AND I BELIEVE MAYBE, I BELIEVE IT WAS A TASK FORCE, INDICATED THAT THE ROOF LINE ITSELF STILL IS WITHIN CODE, UH, FOR, FOR A SECOND FLOOR OF A HOME.
AND I DON'T, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE COMMISSIONER'S NAME, HE SAID, BUT I DON'T CARE ABOUT THAT.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HISTORICAL HOME AND, YOU KNOW, TWO FEET.
WELL, HE DID, HE DID NOT APPRECIATE TRYING TO RAISE THE, THE ROOF LINE BY TWO FEET SAYING THE ROOF LINE THAT YOU WERE PRESENTING IS IN LINE.
UM, IF YOU COULD STILL ACHIEVE THAT.
THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE IS, UM, THE ADDITIONS THAT YOU POINT AT, AT THE OTHER LOCATIONS DOWN THE STREET, ARE THOSE, UM, NEW CONSTRUCTION WHERE THEY HAVE A SECOND FLOOR OR HAVE THEY BEEN HISTORIC ADDITIONS? LIKE YOU'RE TRYING TO PROPOSE COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? I THINK THAT QUESTION IS NO LONGER GERMANE TO THE TOPIC OF WHETHER OR NOT LANDMARKS, WHETHER OR NOT IN REVIEW OF LANDMARKS, THIS BODY'S REVIEW OF LANDMARKS DECISION.
I WAS JUST TRYING TO, TO DETERMINE IF THAT INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE AT THE TIME HE, UM, WAS SUPPOSED TO PRESENT WHERE HE DID NOT PRESENT.
THAT THAT'S THE, ALL THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AND THANK YOU MR. SHAW.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? YES, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, WE HAVE A, A LETTER AT THE VERY END OF OUR MATERIALS.
SO MR. SHAW, THIS LETTER DOES NOT HAVE A DATE ON IT, IT JUST SAYS LANDMARK COMMISSION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.
CAN YOU TELL US, AND IT'S SIGNED BY YOU, WHAT IS THE DATE OF THIS LETTER? LANDMARK COMMISSION EXECUTIVE.
COULD YOU, COULD YOU, IS IT POSSIBLE TO, UM, THE FIRST
[05:05:01]
AND THEN STARTS, I AM WRITING TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE REQUEST TO A SLIGHT MODIFICATION TO THE CA GRANTED FOR 24 31 PARK ROW AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS 75,215 ON JULY 12TH, 2016, IN RESPONSE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S REVIEW OF MY REQUEST NUMBER MARCH 6TH, 2023 TO INCREASE THE SECOND FLOOR FLOOR PLATE FROM EIGHT FEET.SO WHEN DID YOU WRITE THIS? YEAH, SO THAT, THAT LETTER WAS WRITTEN WAS THAT, THAT LETTER WAS WRITTEN ON, IT WAS PROVIDED ON MAY 30TH.
SO IT'S JUST AN WHEN, WHEN ALL THE, WHEN ALL THE SUBMISSIONS WERE REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED.
THERE WAS A, THERE WAS A SMALLER SUMMARY THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, WHEN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REVIEWED THIS IN MARCH.
SO IT DIDN'T GO INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I'M GETTING TO.
SO THIS LETTER, YOU CITE SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF OTHER HOUSES, BUT THIS LETTER WAS NOT IN THE RECORD AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION BECAUSE IT POST DATES IT.
BUT ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU HAD A SEPARATE LETTER, EVEN THOUGH YOU DIDN'T SPEAK THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION? YOU, YOU BROKE UP ON ME.
I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THAT LAST, THAT LAST SENTENCE, THAT LAST QUESTION? YOU SAID THAT YOU DID NOT SPEAK AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING.
DID, DID I JUST HEAR YOU CORRECT, SAY YOU SUBMITTED A LETTER SIMILAR TO THIS ONE? NO, I DIDN'T SUBMIT A LETTER IN.
SO IN THE SUBMISSION TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, I PROVIDED A SUMMARY TO THE, UM, OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
AND IT, IT WASN'T, IT WAS JUST A BRIEF SUMMARY IN TERMS OF WHAT IT WAS THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR.
DID IT INCLUDE THESE SITES? SO, SO, SO IT DID, SO GO AHEAD.
SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, NO, NONE OF THOSE SITES WERE REFERENCED, UM, BECAUSE THAT, THOSE REFERENCES WERE IN RESPONSE TO WHAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION ASKED ON MARCH 6TH.
CAN I ASK A, A QUESTION OF THE ATTORNEY? NOW? OF COURSE.
IS THIS INFORMATION CONSIDERED NEW EVIDENCE SINCE IT WAS NOT, UM, AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THE COMMISSION HEARING, NOR WAS IT PRESENTED COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, THE NEW EVIDENCE WOULD BE EVIDENCE THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO LANDMARK AND COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO LANDMARK.
SO THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A DECISION THAT THIS BODY WOULD MAKE.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THE BODY HAS ALREADY MADE THE DECISION EARLIER ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE TESTIMONY WAS NEW EVIDENCE, BUT AS FOR HIS BRIEF, IT, THE, THE PURPOSE OF IT IS TO EXPLAIN WHY TO PERSUADE THIS BODY, WHY LANDMARK'S DECISION WAS, YOU KNOW, VIOLATED ONE OF THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS WAS OUTSIDE OF, UH, BEYOND ITS WHEN LA EXCEEDED LANDMARK'S AUTHORITY OR THERE WASN'T THE REQUISITE EVIDENTIARY RECORD.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO DISCERN WHETHER OR NOT, AND I, I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I'LL GO AHEAD AND ASK THE QUESTION.
SO HIS FAILURE TO APPEAR AT THE HEARING DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE EVIDENCE WAS NOT AVAILABLE? CORRECT.
AND BECAUSE THERE WAS EVIDENCE AT THE HEARING THAT SUPPORTED THE COMMISSION'S DECISION, WE ARE UNDER THESE EXTREMELY RESTRICTIVE GUIDELINES OF WHAT, HOW WE CAN MAKE OUR DECISION HERE TODAY.
YEAH, IF, IF THE BODY FEELS THAT THERE WAS, IF THE, IF THE BODY FEELS THAT LANDMARK'S DECISION WAS SUPPORTED BY A SCINTILLA OF EVIDENCE, THEN THE CODE REQUIRES THAT YOU AFFIRM LANDMARK'S DECISION, EVEN THOUGH THIS INFORMATION THEY DIDN'T HAVE, BUT IT ARGUABLY WAS AVAILABLE AT THE TIME IF IT COULD HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE AT THE TIME.
COULD HAVE BEEN COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, THE, THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL INFORM US ABOUT THE EVIDENCE THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION USED TO MAKE THIS DECISION.
THAT'S WHAT MS. FONZ IS HERE FOR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY.
WE'LL NOW HEAR, UH, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S CASE FOR UP TO 20 MINUTES.
UM, SO THE ISSUE HERE IS REALLY THAT WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED, IT WAS NOT, UM, LANDMARK HAD A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS.
[05:10:02]
THEY WERE NOT ANSWERED, UH, UNDER THE CODE.THE APPLICANT HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO SHOW THAT THEY HAVE MET THE, UM, THE REQUIREMENTS, UH, OF THE STANDARD.
AND THE STANDARD HERE, BECAUSE THE HOUSE IS A, UM, IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, WAS THAT LANDMARK WAS REQUIRED TO GRANT THE APPLICATION.
IF IT DETERMINED THAT ONE, THE PROPOSED WORK WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE REGULATIONS AND PRESERVATION CRITERIA CONTAINED IN THE HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT ORDINANCE TWO, THE PROPOSED WORK WOULD NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OF THE STRUCTURE.
THREE, THE PROPOSED WORK WOULD NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT, AND FOR THE PROPOSED WORK WOULD NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE FUTURE PRESERVATION, MAINTENANCE AND USE OF THE STRUCTURE OR THE HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT.
UM, AS VICE CHAIR RUBEN HAS POINTED OUT, THIS WAS, UM, DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO IF THERE WAS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, IF THE, THAT COULD BE BROUGHT TO LANDMARK TO ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS THAT WASN'T BROUGHT AT THE TIME, THE APPLICANT COULD JUST GO BACK TO LANDMARK AND BRING THAT EVIDENCE.
AGAIN, THERE'S NOTHING RESTRICTING THAT FROM HAPPENING.
UM, BUT LANDMARK WOULD BE ABLE TO CONSIDER IT AGAIN AS A ITEM OF, YOU KNOW, AS, UH, ANEW.
BUT THIS BODY CANNOT, THIS BODY IS REQUIRED TO GIVE DEFERENCE TO LANDMARK'S DECISION, UH, AND MUST AFFIRM UNLESS IT FINDS ONE OF THE THREE VERY NARROW CRITERIA TO OVERTURN THAT DECISION.
UM, THE CONCERNS RAISED BY LANDMARK THAT WERE NOT ADDRESSED WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THE CHANGE IN HEIGHT WOULD, UM, WHETHER IT WOULD BE ADVERSE ON THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND WHETHER THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE APPLICANT APPELLANT HAS ATTEMPTED TO BRING THAT NEW INFORMATION HERE.
THIS IS NOT THE PROPER PLACE TO BRING THAT NEW INFORMATION.
UH, THERE WERE ALSO QUESTIONS, UH, BECAUSE LANDMARK HAD APPROVED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO DO AN ADDITION IN 2016, THAT WORK HAD NOT YET STARTED.
UM, AND THEN THIS WAS TO CHANGE THAT ORIGINAL CA UH, INCREASED THE FLOOR HEIGHT FROM EIGHT TO 10 FEET.
UH, AND WHEN THEY WERE LOOKING AT THE PLANS FOR THE ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THEY HAD CONCERNS THAT THERE WERE OTHER CHANGES THAT HAD NOT BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE THEM.
THOSE QUESTIONS ALSO PROBABLY COULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED IF THE APPLICANT HAD SIGNED UP TO SPEAK BEFORE LANDMARK, BUT THEY WERE NOT.
AND, AND SO THEY HAD CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, WHETHER THEY WERE APPROVING MORE THAN WHAT WAS BEFORE THEM, IF THEY APPROVED THE NEW PLANS, THAT THERE WERE ADDITIONAL CHANGES THAT WEREN'T BEING SPECIFICALLY BROUGHT.
UM, AND SO THOSE WERE THE TWO CONCERNS THAT LANDMARK HAD AND THE, THE BASIS FOR THEIR DENIAL.
UM, IT WAS VERY CLEAR ON THE RECORD THAT LANDMARK WANTED ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS AND, AND WAS IN FACT, I BELIEVE EVEN ASKED THAT THE APPLICANT COME BACK, UM, THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE OPEN TO HEARING THIS, BUT THEY JUST NEEDED THE ANSWERS TO THEIR QUESTIONS AND THEY WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION, UH, A CLEARER PLAN THAT MATCHED WITH WHAT THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND, AND THAT DIDN'T HAVE ANY, THEY, THEY FELT THAT IT WAS CONFUSING WHETHER THERE WERE INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE TWO PLANS, UM, AND JUST ANSWERS ABOUT HOW THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT WOULD, UM, AFFECT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND WHETHER IT HAD AN ADVERSE EFFECT.
AND, AND THAT WAS THE APPLICANT, THE APPELLANT'S BURDEN TO PROVE THAT IT DID NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT.
UH, AND BY NOT BEING THERE TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS, THAT WAS THE BASIS FOR THEIR DENIAL.
UM, AND BECAUSE NOTHING THAT THE APPELLANT HAS STATED HERE, OR IN HIS BRIEF SHOWS THAT LANDMARK HAS VIOLATED A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION OR EXCEEDED ITS AUTHORITY, OR THAT THEIR DECISION WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, WHICH AS, UH, AS THE, UH, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY HAS STATED, IS ONLY IT HAS TO DO, IF IT IS SUPPORTED BY EVEN A, OF EVIDENCE THAT IS SUFFICIENT, UM,
[05:15:01]
THEREFORE WE WOULD ASK THAT, UH, LANDMARK'S DECISION BE AFFIRMED.QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YEAH, JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION.
I SEE CORRESPONDENCE IN THE RECORD FROM ELAINE HILL, THE COORDINATOR FROM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
DOES THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADMINISTER THIS PROCESS OF APPEALING AN ADVERSE LANDMARK DECISION TO THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION? YES.
I'M AN ARCHITECT, NOT AN ATTORNEY.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO PRESENT EVIDENCE.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO PROVE THAT NO ADVERSE EFFECTS.
DOES THAT SAME STANDARD NOT APPLY TO THE COMMISSION? DOES THE COMMISSION NOT HAVE TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE FOR WHY THEY MAKE THEIR DECISIONS? DOES THE COMMISSION HAVE TO NOT DEMONSTRATE A ADVERSE EFFECT? THAT SEEMS A LITTLE BIT ONE-SIDED.
UH, I MEAN, IF THE COMMISSION DETERMINES THAT THE APPLICANT HASN'T MET THEIR BURDEN, SO IT'S SOLELY THE APPLICANT'S BURDEN TO MEET THE STANDARDS.
WELL, WHY, WHY IS THE COMMISSION NOT, UH, TASKED WITH THE SAME BURDEN OF TELLING US WHY A TWO FOOT DIFFERENCE IN THE RIDGE 130 FEET FROM THE CURB IS AN ADVERSE EFFECT? I, I, I HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING THAT.
AND WHAT, AND DO THEY HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THE EIGHT FOOT PLATE IS WHAT WAS STANDARD THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT THE, AT THE TIME OF THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION, OR DO THEY HAVE EVIDENCE THAT 10 FEET IS JUST, WAS NEVER DONE? I DON'T THINK THEY, THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT EVIDENCE.
AND SO HOW IS IT THAT OUR LANDMARK COMMISSION IS NOT REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE SAME RIGOR THAT APPLICANTS ARE THE APPLICANT IS, IS APPLYING THERE, THERE ARE STANDARDS THAT ARE SET FORTH IN THE CODE.
THE APPLICANT IS APPLYING TO MAKE A CHANGE TO A HOUSE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND IT IS THEIR BURDEN.
IT IS, THEY HAVE TO PRESENT THE EVIDENCE TO LANDMARK.
LANDMARK CANNOT GO OUT AND GET, GATHER ITS OWN EVIDENCE IF, IF SUPPOSED LANDMARK.
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE EXPERTS THAT'S SUPPOSED, AND THEY EXPERTS ON OUR LANDMARK COMMISSION WOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH THIS PARTICULAR DISTRICT.
WOULD THEY NOT? I, I COULDN'T SPEAK, SPEAK TO THEN WHY ARE THEY ON LANDMARK COMMISSION IF THEY'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS DISTRICT? THEY THEY ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A CERTAIN LEVEL OF EXPERTISE.
AND SO THAT EXPERTISE IS NOT, UM, UH, DOES NOT EXTEND TO JUDGEMENTS ABOUT TWO FEET OF HEIGHT, 130 FEET FROM THE CURB.
THE, I I WILL SAY THAT, UM, THERE WERE, WERE CONCERNS THAT THIS WAS A, THAT WHAT IS STANDARD IN THAT DISTRICT IS CALIFORNIA BUNGALOWS.
UM, AND THAT THOSE ARE, ARE, WELL, ONLY ONE STORY.
THERE WERE CONCERNS ABOUT WHETHER THE SECOND STORY AND THEN POP WELL APPROPRIATE POPPING IT UP FURTHER WAS YEAH, WELL THEY'RE, THEY'RE TAKING A SECOND BITE AT THE APPLE BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T LIKE WHAT THE COMMISSION DID IN 2000, THE, THE COMMISSION DID IN 2016.
AND SO THEY USED THE 10 FOOT PLATE QUESTION TO DENY THE APPLICATION.
AND I DON'T SEE THAT THERE, THE EVIDENCE OF, UH, YOU KNOW, THE BASIS FOR THAT DECISION.
UH, AND I, WELL, I WOULD SAY IN RESPONSE THAT IT IS NOT FOR THIS COMMISSION TO DECIDE ANEW THAT THE, THE QUESTION IS SOLELY WHETHER POINT YOU'RE REQUIRED TO BE THAT'S A LANDMARK DEFERENCE.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE ON WHICH OR RATIONALE ON WHICH TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
SO WHY, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE SPEND OUR TIME ON THESE THINGS WHEN WE, WE COME IN HERE WITH THIS EXTRAORDINARILY NARROW, IT'S A WASTE OF THIS, OF THIS PLANNING COMMISSION'S TIME TO HEAR CASES LIKE THIS.
UH, COMMISSIONER RUBIN FILED BY COMMISSIONER TREADAWAY.
SO THE CITY COUNCIL HAS SET THE STANDARD FOR REVIEW AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND AT THIS, UH, ON APPEAL OF THIS BODY, RIGHT? YES.
AND THE CITY COUNCIL HAS CHOSEN TO ALLOCATE THE BURDEN TO THE APPLICANT, RIGHT? YES.
BECAUSE OF THE, THEY WANT LAND, UH, THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
IT IS WRITTEN THAT THE PURPOSE IS TO PRESERVE HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
AND SO THEY HAVE SET A HIGH BURDEN FOR THE APPLICANT TO MAKE CHANGES.
AND IF CITY COUNCIL THINKS THE PROCESS ISN'T WORKING, THEY COULD REALLOCATE THE BURDEN TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
[05:20:01]
IT MIGHT NOT BE WORKABLE.BUT THAT'S A DECISION THAT CITY COUNCIL COULD MAKE, RIGHT? YES.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT IS NOT AN ATTORNEY.
I AM NOT AN APPELLATE ATTORNEY.
AND SO I WOULD JUST SAY, UM, THIS PROCESS APPEARS VERY ARBITRARY.
AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE STANDARDS ARE SET BY THE CITY COUNCIL, I THINK IT BEHOOVES EVERYONE TO HAVE A CERTAIN LEVEL OF TRANSPARENCY BECAUSE IT BUILDS CONFIDENCE IN THE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE AND THE TIME WE ALL SPEND MAKING THOSE DECISIONS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
IN OUR COMMITTEE, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO, UM, HOLD CASES FOR FURTHER DATES.
DOES THE HISTORIC COMMISSION HAVE THE SAME, UM, ABILITY? NATIONAL? NO.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT? I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S NECESSARILY GERMANE, BUT WILL I WILL SAY IS THAT ROBERT'S RULES ALLOWS OKAY.
BODIES TO POSTPONE ITEMS. OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER.
WELL, UM, SO I HAVE TO ASK A QUESTION, NOT MAKE A STATEMENT THEN.
UM, I WILL JUST ASK A RHETORICAL QUESTION THAT WON'T CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF THIS EVENING.
BUT, UH, IF THE, UH, CHARGE TO THIS PROCESS AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS TO PRESERVE OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS, UH, TURNING THEM INTO MUSEUMS, RATHER, HOW IS TURNING THEM INTO A MUSEUM RATHER THAN A, UH, A LIVING ACTIVE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS REAL PEOPLE LIVING IN REAL HOUSES WITH REAL NEEDS, UH, TELL ME HOW TURNING IT INTO A MUSEUM IS, IS HELPING US PRESERVE OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, I I'LL SAY I AM A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
I AM NOT ON THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
I, I CANNOT SPEAK TO THAT LEVEL OF, IS A RHETORICAL QUESTION.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, PLEASE.
SO I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT SO CAN, SO CAN, CAN HE, IS HE ABLE TO GO BACK TO THE HISTORIC COMMISSION AND, AND SUBMIT THESE, THAT INFORMATION? DID I HEAR YOU SAY THAT? YES.
IT WAS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO HE CAN GO BACK TO THE, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND, AND REAPPLY.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE WE GO TO OUR REBUTTAL? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SWANS.
WONDERFUL JOB, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
WE WILL NOW HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
MR. SHAW, YOU HAVE A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL, SIR.
AND I, I, I APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION AND HOPEFULLY THERE'S A LOT OF LEARNING.
EVERY TIME WE GO, EVERY TIME I THINK WE GO THROUGH A PROCESS, WE LEARN SOMETHING.
UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, THAT REALLY CONCERNED ME WAS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, I SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION.
IT WAS SPECIFIC, IT WAS VERY SPECIFIC WITH RESPECT TO THE CHANGE BEING SOUGHT.
SO NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAW ON THE PLAN, IT'S IN, IN MY OPINION, THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION ONLY NEEDED TO RESPOND TO WHAT I WAS SUBMITTING.
THEY WEREN'T APPROVING ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT THE PLANS, THE PLAN.
THEY COULD HAVE SAID THAT THE, THE, YOU KNOW, 10 FOOT FLOOR PLATE IS APPROVED.
UH, BUT THAT IS THE ONLY THING THAT'S APPROVED.
THERE WAS NO NEED TO, UH, TO DENY ANYTHING ELSE AND, AND TO JUST SIMPLY FINE ON THE 10 FOOT FLOOR PLATE.
AND SO THE OTHER ISSUES THAT REALLY WERE A LARGE PART OF THE CONVERSATION, UH, DERAILED THE ENTIRE CONVERSATION.
AND, AND, AND I, AND I, FOR ME, YOU KNOW, I, I EXPECT THE SAME THING.
I THINK COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT SAID, I EXPECT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, JUST LIKE THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION, UH, UH, DEPARTMENT TO BE THE EXPERTS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN WHICH THEY SERVED.
AND I WOULD'VE EXPECTED FOR THEM TO KNOW THAT THERE WAS HOUSES THAT HAD, YOU KNOW, SECOND FLOOR,
[05:25:01]
UH, NOT ADDITIONS, BUT THEY WERE BUILT THAT WAY.SOMEONE ASKED EARLIER, I THINK COMMISSIONER ANDERSON ASKED, WELL, AND WAS THERE ANOTHER HOUSE? OR IS THIS NEW CONSTRUCTION OR THESE, YOU KNOW, IS THESE HOUSES BUILT THIS WAY? UH, PRIOR TO THE, THE AREA BEING DESIGNATED HISTORICAL, THERE'S ONLY ONE OF, THERE, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF HOUSES THAT WERE NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO HAVE A SECOND FLOOR FLOOR PLATE THAT SPANS THE ENTIRE, YOU KNOW, UH, FIRST FLOOR, UH, FOOTPRINT.
UM, AND SO I JUST, I, YOU KNOW, IF WE DO HAVE HISTORICAL AREAS LIKE SWISS AVENUE, LIKE SOUTH BOULEVARD PARK ROAD, I DO EXPECT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO BE EXPERTS ABOUT WHAT'S THERE.
RIGHT? AND, AND I, I DON'T, I DON'T REALLY AGREE THAT IT IS MY, JUST MY, UH, UM, RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVE UP A CASE.
AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN I'M WORKING WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION, UH, DEPARTMENT, AND THEY FEEL REALLY CONFIDENT, COMFORTABLE, I MEAN, THEY CAN'T, THEY CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
BUT ANYBODY THAT I TALK TO SAYS IT IS TWO FEET, AND IT IS WAY OFF THE STREET.
I MEAN, THIS, I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH THIS, BUT I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
SO I, YOU KNOW, I, I DIDN'T, I JUST, I HAD A IGNORANCE.
I DID NOT THINK THAT, THAT THAT SMALL MEASURE OF CHANGE WOULD HAVE CAUSED THIS TO BE DENIED.
SO, UM, AGAIN, I, I, I THINK I'M COMING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS BODY IS CHARGED WITH DOING, BUT I, I ABSOLUTELY THINK THAT IT WAS KINDA ARBITRARY WHAT, WHAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DID AND MAYBE OVERSTEPPED THE BOUNDARY OR JUST DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER.
THEY DIDN'T BOTHER TO LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO WERE ACTUALLY GIVING THEM INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WAS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UH, THE CITY PLAIN COMMISSION 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 PLAIN COMMISSION MUST GIVE DEFERENCE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION AND MAY NOT SUBSTITUTE HIS JUDGMENT FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S JUDGMENT.
THE CITY PLAIN COMMISSION MUST AFFIRM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION UNLESS IT FINDS THAT IT VIOLATES A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION EXCEEDS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY, OR WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE OF THE RECORD.
UM, NOTE THAT, UH, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE REFERS TO EVIDENCE THAT A REASONABLE MIND COULD ACCEPT AS, UH, ADEQUATE TO SUPPORT A CONCLUSION.
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS MORE THAN A MERE SENT.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, DO I HAVE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YES, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A MOTION AND THEN SOME COMMENTS.
UM, IN THE MATTER OF THE LANDMARK APPEAL, I MOVE THAT WE UPHOLD THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION DISCUSSION.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN, OUR ABILITY TO REVIEW DECISIONS OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS EXTREMELY NARROW, AND OUR STANDARD OF REVIEW IS, IS DEFERENTIAL HIGHLY DEFERENTIAL TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION? AND HERE, BASED ON THE RECORD, I I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT STANDARD HAS BEEN MET BY THE APPELLANT, BUT THAT DOES NOT MITIGATE ANY OF MY FRUSTRATION WITH THE RESULT OR, OR CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE SEEN CROP UP AGAIN AND AGAIN IN LANDMARK COMMISSION APPEALS TO THIS BODY.
FRANKLY, IF I WERE ON THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, I DON'T THINK I WOULD'VE MADE THIS DECISION, BUT JUST BECAUSE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DOES SOMETHING THAT I DISAGREE
[05:30:01]
WITH AND DISAGREE WITH QUITE VEHEMENTLY, DOESN'T GIVE THE PLAN COMMISSION THE ABILITY TO, UM, REVERSE A DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.WHAT IS ESPECIALLY CONCERNING TO ME IS THE PROCESS AS THIS IS ADMINISTERED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
AND, UM, BY THE WAY, NONE OF THIS SHOULD BE REF BE CONSIDERED A KNOCK AGAINST, YOU KNOW, MS. FAS, I THINK SHE'S DONE A CAPABLE JOB REPRESENTING THE CITY HERE BASED ON THE, THE ORDINANCES, BUT I I DO HAVE A LOT OF CONCERN BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE O H P IS BOTH THE APPE AND ALSO ADMINISTERING THE PROCESS.
AND IT'S CLEAR THAT MR. SHAW IS NOT THE ONLY PERSON WHO'S APPEALED A LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION, WHO THE PROCESS JUST HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED TO WELL AT ALL.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THE MUCH MORE PRUDENT ROUTE HERE, THERE, AND THIS, AGAIN, IS NOT MR. SHAW'S FAULT, IS BECAUSE THIS WAS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR HIM TO GO BACK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND HOPEFULLY APPEAR AND MAKE HIS CASE, WHICH HE WAS UNABLE TO DO AT THE TIME.
AND, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE EXPLAINED TO APPLICANTS WHEN A CASE IS DENIED AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
SO THEY KNOW THEIR OPTIONS AND DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO WASTE THE TIME OR MONEY ON AN APPEAL WHEN REALLY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION JUST WANTS TO HEAR MORE.
AND AN APPLICANT HAS A HOPEFULLY MUCH EASIER OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT IN FRONT OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, UM, INSTEAD OF IN FRONT OF US.
AND SIMILARLY, I WISH, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE A WAY TO MAKE THE STANDARD OF REVIEW, BUT IT'S JUST VERY DIFFERENT OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND VERY HARD TO OVERCOME, READILY APPARENT TO SOMEONE WHOSE APPLICATION IS DENIED BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AGAIN, SO THEY CAN BE FULLY INFORMED AND MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICE.
THE LAST THING I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS WE'VE SEEN A NUMBER OF CASES WHERE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DENIES A CASE WHERE THE APPLICANT DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
AND I DON'T KNOW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF EACH CASE WHEN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAS ISSUED A DENIAL WHEN SOMEONE DIDN'T APPEAR.
AND, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE THIS BODY HAS A PRACTICE OF GENERALLY HOLDING SOMETHING, IF SOMEONE IS INEXTRICABLY NOT PRESENT, UM, AT OUR BODY, YOU KNOW, I HOPE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WOULD DO THE SAME.
AND THIS BODY HAS A LIAISON TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSIONER, IF I'M CORRECT.
I BELIEVE IT'S, IT'S ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT OUR LIAISON TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION COULD, UH, IF IT'S PERMISSIBLE WITHIN, UNDER THE CITY CODE, COMMUNICATE, YOU KNOW, MY CONCERNS IF THEY ARE SHARED BY THIS BODY, UM, TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
SO WE DON'T END UP WITH THESE APPEALS, WHICH IN MY VIEW, YOU KNOW, AREN'T IN THE APPELLANT'S BEST INTEREST, AREN'T IN CITY STAFF'S BEST INTEREST.
AND SO WE CAN FIND A WORKABLE WAY SO ISSUES CAN GET HASHED OUT BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO GET A FULL REVIEW THERE.
SO IT BRINGS ME NO JOY TO UPHOLD THE DECISION IN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TONIGHT, BUT WE'RE TASKED WITH VERY NARROW REVIEW UNDER, UM, THE CITY CODE THAT'S APPLICABLE TO THIS.
SO I DON'T FEEL LIKE I HAVE ANY OTHER CHOICE, AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN IMPROVE THIS PROCESS IN THE FUTURE.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
UH, I WILL SAY I SUPPORT YOUR POINT OF VIEW.
UM, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
UH, I, I BELIEVE THE PLAN COMMISSION ABDICATED THEIR AUTHORITY TO PRESERVE HISTORIC DISTRICTS, UH, WITH THIS RULING.
I BELIEVE THEY EXCEEDED THEIR AUTHORITY, UH, BY, UM, IMPLYING AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON A TWO FOOT INCREASE IN A ROOF RIDGE.
UM, AND THAT THEY, UH, WERE UNABLE TO SUPPORT WITH ANY EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD THAT, UH, ANY HISTORIC EVIDENCE THAT A 10 FOOT PLATE IS NOT, UM, UM, NOT APPROPRIATE OR THAT, UM, AN EIGHT FOOT PLATE WAS WHAT WAS NORMALLY DONE.
I MEAN, THERE WAS, THERE WAS, THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE.
IT, IT WAS, IT WAS AN ARBITRARY DECISION THAT, UH, I THINK, UH, WAS, UH, JUST, UH, CLEARLY, UH, CLEARLY MADE AND, UH, THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT IS SUFFERING THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, I HAPPEN TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT AND COMMISSIONER, UM, RUBEN.
UH, I DON'T THINK THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN FAIR.
I THINK THAT THERE IS SOME OBLIGATION ON THE PART OF STAFF TO EXPLAIN, UM, WHAT THE PROCESS IS TO APPLICANTS.
I THINK THAT THERE'S SOME OBLIGATION
[05:35:01]
ON THE PROCESS OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO USHER APPLICANTS THROUGH THE PROCESS.THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT APPLICANTS DON'T HAVE SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEMSELVES, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE WE DO ON THIS BODY, WE DEAL WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT PROFESSIONAL SOMETIMES AND, AND DON'T HAVE PROFESSIONAL STAFF SOMETIMES, AND WE KIND OF HELP THEM ALONG THROUGH THE LOGISTICS OF IT.
AND IT'S CLEARLY TO BE THAT THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE IN THIS CASE AND IN LIEU OF, UH, A DENIAL AND TELLING THIS APPLICANT TO GO START OVER, UM, I COULD PROBABLY SUPPORT A MOTION TO SEND IT BACK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION SO THAT THIS COULD BE DEALT WITH THERE.
BUT SHORT OF THAT, I WOULD SUPPORT, UH, I, I'M ON THE SAME SIDE AS COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.
I THINK THERE'S NO REASON TO START OVER.
UH, I WOULD NOT SUPPORT WHAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAS DONE HERE.
I THINK THEY HAD A SHOT, I THINK THAT THEY DIDN'T DO WHAT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE, AND I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT I WOULD FEEL GOOD ABOUT UPHOLDING 'EM.
AND, AND TYPICALLY I WOULD THANKS.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY FOUND BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
UM, I'M NOT SURE WHO THIS QUESTION'S DIRECTED TO.
SO THE QUESTION ON THE TABLE AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WAS THE EIGHT FOOT VERSUS THE 10 FOOT FLOOR PLATE.
DID THE COMMISSION'S DECISION DO ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN SAY NO TO THAT? DID IT IMPACT THE OLD CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS THAT HAD BEEN ISSUED IN 2016? I, AS THE APPLICANT, AS I UNDERSTAND, WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE ON STAFF THAT'S GONNA ANSWER, MR. SHAW, PLEASE STAND BY CHRISTINA MANKOWSKI.
UH, IT DID NOT, UH, I'M SORRY, AFFECT THAT APPLICATION.
AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIG REASONS WHY STAFF APPROVED IT, BECAUSE THE PLANS HAD ALREADY BEEN APPROVED IN 2016, AND IT WAS REALLY JUST FROM THE STREET.
A TWO FOOT RAISE IN THE FLOOR PLATE AND OR CEILING IS VERY, YOU CAN'T EVEN TELL FROM A HUNDRED AND FEET AWAY.
AND THERE WAS IN THE DOCKET A PICTURE OF ANOTHER TWO STORY HOUSE THAT WAS JUST A FEW LOTS DOWN THAT I, THERE'S ONE ACROSS THE, INTO SHOWING THAT THERE WERE OTHER HOUSES THAT WERE TWO STORIES.
YEAH, THERE'S ONE ACROSS THE STREET, LITERALLY.
SO IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE 2016 CA EVEN THOUGH IT WAS BROUGHT UP.
UM, HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROTOCOL WOULD BE IF THEY WOULD WANNA OVERTURN SOMETHING THEY APPROVED.
NO, I I THINK THAT WOULD BE COMPLETELY OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO.
JUST LOOKING BACK AT THE THREE CRITERIA.
I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION, UM, ON THE GROUNDS THAT I THINK AS, UM, MY COLLEAGUES HAVE POINTED OUT THE PLAN, THE HISTORIC COMMISSION HAS NOT PRESENTED REASONABLE EVIDENCE THAT THEY'VE DONE DUE DILIGENCE ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD TO DETERMINE IF THIS IS A JUST RULING.
UM, AND I THINK THAT, UM, THAT HAS AFFECTED THE APPLICANT'S ABILITY TO MOVE FORWARD BY NOT HAVING, UM, THAT EVIDENCE AND THAT NOT BEING PRESENTED.
UM, SO I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION, BUT WOULD SUPPORT, UM, AN ALTERNATE MOTION.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? UH, WELL, I GUESS I'LL JUST, UH, BRING IN THE END BY SAYING I THINK EVERYONE IS RIGHT.
UH, I'M ALSO FRUSTRATED, UH, MR. SHAW, I THINK, YOU KNOW, 10 YEARS OF DEALING WITH THESE KINDS OF CASES IN, IN FACT, UH, WE HAVE ALMOST NO WIGGLE ROOM.
UH, UM, CLEARLY THE, THE PROCESS PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE REVISITED.
UH, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF NOTICE, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT IS THAT YOU FOUND YOURSELF HERE WITH US TONIGHT WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, KNOWING REALLY WHAT YOU WERE GETTING YOURSELF INTO.
I CAN TELL YOU THERE'S, UM, SIX OR SEVEN STAFF PERSONS HERE.
UH, THERE'S 8, 9, 10 COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE, ALL OF OUR TIMES ARE, IS VERY, VERY VALUABLE.
UH, SO I, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M HOPING THAT WE WILL TAKE A FRESH LOOK AT EXACTLY HOW THAT PROCESS IS NOW, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS, UH, EXTREMELY FRUSTRATING FOR
[05:40:01]
ALL OF US, AS YOU CAN TELL.UH, SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE A VOTE.
UM, ANY LAST COMMENTS BEFORE WE DO? SO COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, DOES IT SAY, AND SORRY, I'M FLIPPING, DOES IT SAY ANYWHERE THAT THE EIGHT FEET IS REQUIRED? IT DOES NOT.
WAIT, CAN YOU, CAN YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE TO MAKE SURE? UM, AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, UH, MS. MANKOWSKI, YOU, YOU WERE SWORN IN.
SO MY QUESTION IS, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION MADE THEIR DECISION ABOUT THIS EIGHT FOOT VERSUS 10 FOOT.
WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT EIGHT FEET FOR THIS SECOND FLOOR FLOOR PLATE IS THE STANDARD FOR THIS DISTRICT? I, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS EVEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
IT WAS MORE SO, UM, WHAT THEY THOUGHT WOULD BE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT ON IN THE ORDINANCE, IT JUST STATES THAT THE, THE HEIGHT CAN'T BE HIGHER THAN 36 FEET, AND THE TOTAL HEIGHT WITH THE TWO FEET IS NOW 33, UH, AND A HALF, 33, 6 AND A HALF IN, UH, FEET.
SO THERE'S STILL TWO FEET UNDER THE MAX HEIGHT FOR THAT DISTRICT PER THE ORDINANCE.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANYWHERE THAT STATES THAT EIGHT FOOT VERSUS 10 FOOT FLOOR PLATE.
AND AGAIN, THE THREE CRITERIA WE GET TO LOOK FOR IT EITHER VIOLATES A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION, IT EXCEEDS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY OR WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, EVEN THOUGH THE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE REVIEW IS VERY LIMITED AND REQUIRES ONLY MORE THAN A SCINTILLA OF EVIDENCE, I'M NOT HEARING ANY EVIDENCE THAT EIGHT FEET IS A REQUIREMENT IN ANY CASE.
AND I'M JUST GOING TO ASSUME THAT THE PEOPLE ON THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAD AT LEAST DRIVEN AROUND THIS AREA AND KNEW THAT THERE WERE SOME TWO-STORY BUILDINGS.
YES, AND I WILL SAY THAT I BELIEVE YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE MINUTES.
THE, UH, COMMISSIONER THAT RESIDES OVER THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS IN FAVOR OF THE TWO FEET RISE.
HE DID NOT BELIEVE IT WOULD CAUSE AN ADVERSE EFFECT, AND HE WAS AGAINST THE MOTION TO DENY.
I THINK BASED ON THIS ELIMINATING CONVERSATION, I FEEL COMFORTABLE NOT SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
UM, SO MR. MOORE QUESTION FOR YOU, SIR.
UM, SO THE, THE EVIDENCE THAT WE'RE, WE'RE HEARING NOW, UM, IT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE, THE, THE THREE ITEMS THAT WE, THAT WE LOOK AT, WHEN WE LOOK AT DECIDING THESE VOTES, UH, THESE, THESE CASES, I THINK THE EVIDENCE THAT WE JUST HEARD NOW WOULD NOT FIT INTO THE VIOLATE STATUTORY ORDINANCE PROVISION, OR EXCEEDS THE LANDMARKS.
COMMISSION AUTHORITY MIGHT FALL WITHIN THERE WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD.
IS THAT A POSSIBILITY WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS, WHETHER OR NOT THE RECORD HAS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT'S REASONABLY SUPPORTING LANDMARK'S DECISION IS ULTIMATELY A QUESTION FOR THIS BODY.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THE COMMISSIONERS THAT IN THAT SAME UH, SECTION, IT SAYS THAT THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SHALL GIVE DEFERENCE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION AND MAY NOT SUBSTITUTE ITS JUDGMENT FOR THAT OF THE LANDMARK'S JUDGMENT.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY FURTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE VOTE? MS. BESINA? CAN WE TAKE A RECORD VOTE PLEASE.
AND CAN YOU REMIND US WHAT THE MOTION IS ON THE TABLE, PLEASE? TO UPHOLD THE DECISION OF LANDMARK COMMISSION? DID YOU HEAR THAT? IT WAS TO UPHOLD THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION? ALL RIGHT.
DISTRICT ONE, SHE'S ABSENT OR GONE.
UH, DISTRICT EIGHT, I MEAN DISTRICT SEVEN, UH, ABSENT DISTRICT EIGHT ALSO STEPPED OUT.
[05:45:01]
DISTRICT 11? NO.CAN I GET AN A SECOND? MOTION COM? COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, I'M GONNA NEED SOME HELP, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW,
DON'T WE NOT FOLLOW LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION, BUT INSTEAD FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
REV REVERSE LANDMARK COMMISSION REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, DO WE HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE MOTION? SO WE'RE MODIFYING TO APPROVE, RIGHT? YEAH.
REVERSING THE, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION AND, UH, APPROVING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION DISCUSSION.
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
OH, SHOULD WE EXPLAIN TO MR. SHAW WHAT HAPPENED? HE JUST, YEAH, HE'S, LET'S JUST, JUST LET'S TO BE CLEAR, SINCE TRANSPARENCY SEEMS TO BE, UM, A, A GOOD THING WHAT, AND, AND I'M ASKING THIS QUESTION FOR MYSELF TOO.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NEXT STEP IS AT THIS.
WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
MAYBE SOMEONE CAN STAFF, DOES HE, IS THIS MEAN GO STRAIGHT TO PERMIT OR WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS NOW? UM, WHEN, WHEN SOMEONE FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION, IT'S APPROVED, CORRECT? YES.
SO I, IT'S MY FIRST TIME AS WELL
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN? I WOULD ASSUME WE ARE GONNA PROCESS THE CA FOR.
I'LL CHECK WITH OUR CHAIR TOMORROW TO BE DOUBLY SURE.
BUT WE'LL GET A CA TO MR. SHAW AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, AND THEN HE'LL GO TO PERMITTING.
MR. SHAW, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? WE'RE, WE'RE GONE.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, MR. SHAW.
WELL, CAN I JUST SAY WE'RE, WE'RE MOVING ON, MR. SHAW.
CONGRATULATIONS, UH, COMMISSIONERS OTHER MATTERS.
UH, MAUREEN MULLIGAN IS GONNA BE APPOINTED TO COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE.
UM, SHE IS AN ATTORNEY, I THINK, UH, WORK FOR THE CITY AND IN FACT, UH, MS. MILLIGAN AND PAM THOMPSON CO-AUTHORED THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS.
SO, UH, LOTS OF EXPERIENCE THERE.
SHE'S GOING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE.
UH, BUT I WILL SAY IT AND WE'LL SAY IT NEXT TIME TOO.
WE'RE LOOKING INTO DOING ANOTHER CPC WORKSHOP, UM, BUT BEFORE THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR.
SO WE'RE LOOKING INTO MAYBE SEPTEMBER 7TH OR SOMETHING.
SO THINK ABOUT SOME DATES AND DAYS THAT YOU WOULD PREFER IN SEPTEMBER, AND WE CAN TALK NEXT TIME.
AND ALSO IF YOU HAVE SUGGESTIONS OF WHAT YOU WOULD WISH FOR US TO PREPARE FOR YOU FOR THE WORKSHOP.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY? UH, IT IS 7:19 PM HAVE A GOOD EVENING.