[00:00:01]
OKAY, NUMBER, NUMBER 1, 2, 2, 3.
THIS IS LOCATED DISTRICT 7 25 CASE DISTRICT WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT SIX LAKE, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2 0 7 5 FOR TOWER AND PER CELLULAR COMMUNICATION ON SOUTH FORM.
SO THIS IS OUR SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY IS AROUND AS WELL.
SO IT'S CURRENTLY DEVELOPED CHURCH AND WE'RE ACTUALLY CHURCH IN THE WEST, NORTHWEST NORTH, NORTHEAST AND EAST.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE SPENDING THE PRESENTATION ONLINE.
IS ANYONE ELSE I SHARED THE ROOM, BUT WEBEX.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER POPKIN.
IT'S NOT SO I THINK ONLY ON OUR SCREEN.
HOW ARE YOU? UH, THE AREA OF THE CLASS IS CURRENTLY THE R 7 1 5 DISTRICT AND HE'S CURRENTLY MEETING ABOUT
SITE ALSO INCLUDE THE, THE S U OF FOR UH, U 6 0 8 AND THAT'S FOR FIVE PRIVATE SCHOOL CENTER AND S U P 2 0 7 5 FOR A TOWER MATTER, UM, ON SITE.
UH, ALTHOUGH THE RIGHTS FOR THE S U P 6 0 8 APPLIED, IT IS THAT THAT S U P IS SPLIT BETWEEN THAT AND
ANYWAY, UH, BECAUSE OF THIS T TERMINATE THAT S TOWER 10 IS PROPOSED TO REMAIN ON SITE FOR PLACE AND THE CURRENT ZONING CANNOT ALTER ITS CONDITION.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TO REDEVELOP THE SITE FOR RETIREMENT, HAS USES VISOR TIME, HAS, HAS A RESIDENT FACILITY, PRINCIPALLY DESIGNED PERSONS 55 PERIOD OF A OLD EXCUSE DOES NOT INCLUDE, AND NURSING HOMES HOSPICE CARE RELATED, WHICH THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TO TIE HEIGHT AND REDUCE THE TARGET TO PROVISION SOME HOUSING AND THE CONDITIONS.
ALSO DESIGN AREAS FROM FOUR SEVEN.
SO YOU'RE GOING ON SSON SOUTHWEST, DOWN ESSON.
SO RIGHT HERE, LEFT THE JUROR THAT EXISTS TODAY, THE SERVICE PARTY, THE CHURCH NOW OF FERGUSON AND WE WALK DOWN SOUTH AT STILL
NOW I'M GOING LOOK AT SOME OF THE AROUND SEE, SEE CHURCH ACROSS THE WAY.
UH, A TREE AREA AND THERE'S MORE CHURCHES, UH, NORTH, NORTHEAST, LAST CROSS FURTHER HERE LOOKING AT OTHER ADJACENT.
IT'S A LIBRARY, UM, DIRECTLY THERE.
AND I'M LOOKING UPPER, DOING MY BEST ACROSS THE STREET.
AND THIS EXPANDS AS PART OF THE CHURCH THAT'S, UH, LASTS.
SO IN ON DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THIS IS WHAT PROPOSED.
IT DOES 1 MILLION RETIREMENT HOUSING USE AND OPEN SPACE WATER WEST.
UH, THAT HELPS EXISTING ONLY OPEN, OPEN SPACE.
AND THE DEVELOP CLAIM INCLUDES SOME IMPROVED ACCESSES, UH, FROM THE SIGN TO THE SIDEWALKS.
THOSE ARE CODED IN CONDITIONS AS WELL.
[00:05:01]
THAT'S VERY SMALL.UM, SO I WILL COME IN ON ANY, UH, SPECIFIC, UH, STANDARD SHOULD SHE ASK.
UH, BUT THEY MODIFY MANY OF THE MF TWO BASE.
UH, THEY CAP THEIR DWELLING UNITS AT 1 64.
IT'S ACTUALLY LESS, UH, GENERALLY LESS DENSE THAN, UH, THAN WOULD BE 10 F TWO.
UM, THEY HAVE 36 FOOT BASE HEIGHT, BUT THAT WOULD INCREASE THAT BY 14 WITH THE M I H.
AND HE SET THE OTHER CONDITIONS OF, UM, TWO.
THE SAME MIXED INCOME HOUSING COMPONENT IS 20% OF UNITS YOU PROVIDE 51 6% FIVE, THAT'S 30 FOR UNITS WHEN WE, UH, APPLY FOR 1 64 UNITS.
AND IT ALLOWS THAT INCREASE IN HEIGHT TO 50 FEET, ZERO POINT POUND SPACES PER UNIT, UM, HELPS LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF, UH, SEARCH PARKING SURROUNDING, SURROUNDING THE FACILITY.
UH, OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS ARE GENERALLY THOSE FOUND IN ONE OR 4.107.
THAT INCLUDES INDUSTRIAL SCALE LIGHTING TRANSPARENCY, IMPROVED SILOS, UH, CROSSINGS AND DRIVEWAYS AND IMPROVED ACCESS POINTS.
UH, THOSE ARE ADDED TO THE PD SPECIFICALLY.
ADDITIONALLY, UH, TO FACILIT CHANGE STATE MOVEMENT BETWEEN FACILITY AND UH, PUBLIC GROUND.
UH, WE GOT 10% MINIMUM AMONG OPEN SPACE, UH, 0.5 SPACES PER REMAIN.
AND THEY DID ADD BEYOND THE ONE STREET FURNITURE, UH, ALONG FERGUSON.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
IS THIS ITEM COMING OFF CONSENT NUMBER TWO? YES, IT'S NUMBER TWO IS I'M SURE.
IS THIS CASE, DO YOU HAVE A DATE FOR THE WHOLE? IT IS GONNA BE BRIEF TODAY.
AND IT'LL BE HELD TO WHAT DAY? DO YOU KNOW? I HAVEN'T FIGURED THAT OUT YET.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS KZ 2 2 3 1 79.
THE REQUESTS AND APPLICATION FOR A C AS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES AND AN ARE INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DISTRICT, N A T THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT.
IT IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF WEST LU BATTER DRIVE WEST OF DUCKLING MILL ROAD.
THIS IS, UH, AS I MENTIONED, IS BY A LOT BATTER.
IT'S A LONG LEAD BATTER ON THE SOUTHWEST OF DALLAS.
SO THIS IS AN ARROW MAP OF SHOWING, OF AREA OF REQUESTS SURROUNDING USES, UM, WITHIN, UH, THE AREA SURROUND SURROUNDING AREAS.
IT IS, UM, SO IT'S OFF THE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE INDUSTRIAL INSIDE ON THE NORTH ACROSS LU GUTTER.
THERE'S ALSO A CHURCH, UH, TEMPLE, UH, ACROSS THAT BETTER ON THE WEST SIDE.
THERE IS ALSO A MISSIONARY HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR TRUCK SALES AND SERVICE ADJACENT ON THE WEST.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO MISSIONARY HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR TRUCK SALES AND SERVICES ON THE EAST ADJACENT.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A MOBILE HOME PARK ALONG THE EAST.
AND THEN THERE'S SINGLE FAMILY, UH, VIEWS, AN UNDEVELOPED AREA ON THE SOUTH OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.
SO THE AREA REQUEST IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AND IS ZONED AN IR INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DISTRICT AND A T H THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT TO ALLOW WAREHOUSE DEVELOPMENT.
SO THESE ARE, UH, SOME OF THE SITE PHOTOS OF THE SITE ON WEST
[00:10:03]
LOOKING SOUTHEAST, LOOKING SOUTHEAST AGAIN AND SURROUNDING USES, LOOKING SOUTHWEST ON LEADBETTER, LOOKING WEST, LOOKING NORTHWEST, LOOKING NORTH ACROSS LEADBETTER, LOOKING NORTHEAST, LOOKING EAST ON LEDBETTER ROAD AND LOOKING SOUTHEAST.AND THEN THE DEVELOP STANDARDS THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.
SO EXISTING IS AS I MENTIONED, IR AND T H THREE A AND THEY'RE PROPOSING CSS AND THEN STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL QUESTIONS.
UM, AS BEST YOU CAN DETERMINE, DID THE T H THREE A, I'LL CALL IT BUFFER STRIPS, UH, PREDATE THE 1987 ZONING TRANSITION? YES.
SO, UM, I GUESS MY BROADER QUESTION IS, TELL ME WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT HOW AND WHY THAT CAME ABOUT FOR THAT I'M NOT CLEAR AS PER HISTORICAL.
UM, AREAS THAT I SAW WAS THAT, UM, ALL AROUND THE AREA WAS MOSTLY UNDEVELOPED SINCE I BELIEVE, SO IN AROUND 2001 IT WAS MOSTLY INDUSTRIAL.
AND THEN IN 2004 IS WHEN THE TOWNHOME, UM, SUBDIVISION WAS INCORPORATED.
I'M NOT SURE WHEN THE ACTUAL DISTRICT NOW IS THAT, IS THAT THE TH TWO TO THE SOUTH OF THE SITE OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE TH THREE? THAT'S PART OF THE SITE, THE T H TWO.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THE T THREE, THE TH TWO WERE AT THE SAME TIME.
SO 2004 AND I GUESS THAT BEING 19 YEARS AGO, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RATIONALE WAS FOR PUTTING TH THREE ON THAT PROPERTY.
SO IT MUST HAVE BEEN A CALL PUBLIC HEARING OR SOMETHING.
I DON'T SEE HOW IT COULD BE OTHERWISE UNLESS ALL THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS JOINED IN.
UM, HAVE YOU HAD ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT REZONING THE IR PORTION TO CS AND LEAVING THE TH THREE PORTION ALONE? NO.
SO WE DON'T KNOW IF THE APPLICANT HAS ANY INTEREST IN THAT AT ALL.
'CAUSE THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS TO CHANGE THE T H U TO I R AND BERMAN DEFERRED TO BE CSS AND FOR THE IR PROPERTY TO ALSO BECOME CSS.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT'S FOCUS IS ON THAT TH THREE PROPERTY.
AND REZONING THE NORTHERN PART OF THE PROPERTY WOULDN'T DO ANYTHING FOR OH, NO QUESTION.
UH, GIVEN THAT THIS IS A STRAIGHT ZONE REQUEST FOR A STRAIGHT ZONE EXCHANGE TO SEE, UM, THAT WOULD MEAN IT WOULD OPEN UP FIRE BY GREAT MANY DIFFERENT USES, NOT JUST EVEN HE ASSUMED THAT WAREHOUSE USE IT WOULD OPEN UP, YOU KNOW, COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING.
I, I'M, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO WHY STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THE STRAIGHT ZONING CHANGE TO CSS GIVEN THE NUMBER OF POTENTIALLY INCOMPATIBLE INTRUSIVE USES THAT ARE ALLOWED IN CS HAVE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE BECAUSE, UM, SO THE SURROUNDING AROUND THE NORTH IS ALREADY IR AND THEN THE PORTION OF THE TH THREE, IT WOULD BE MORE THAN LIKELY IF THEY LEAVE, LEAVE IT AT TH THREE, IT WOULD BE A LANDLOCK PORTION.
SO YOU'RE MORE CONCERNED WITH THAT NEW LANDLOCK THAN THE, THE EFFECT ON THE, THEIR CLINIC SOUTH.
I MEAN, MOST OF THE USES IN COMMERCIAL, THEY DO REQUIRE THE R A R, WHICH IS, UM, RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY REVIEW, AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A 20 FOOT, UM, REQUIREMENT FOR THE REAR SETBACK ALONG IN RESIDENTIAL.
AND SO IT'S YOUR OPINION THAT 20 FOOT SETBACK WOULD BE ADEQUATE TO MITIGATE ANY POTENTIAL NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF A HEAVY COMMERCIAL USE ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THEN THE, THE, AS I MENTIONED, THE RESIDENTIAL
[00:15:01]
AGENCY REVIEW.JUST A QUICK QUESTION TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER YOUNG'S QUESTION.
SINCE THIS IS BEING HELD, I DON'T WANT TO ASK YOU TO GO TO GRAB
SO WHEN, WHENEVER THIS COMES BACK SUGGESTING, YOU SAID AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME ON THIS, BUT IF YOU'RE ABLE TO QUICKLY GET TO THE ZONING HISTORY, THAT WOULD BE ELIMINATED, YOU THINK BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER.
UM, LOOKING AT THE AERIAL PHOTO, UH, IT LOOKS LIKE TO SOME EXTENT ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BUT CERTAINLY ON THE PROPERTIES TO THE WEST, THERE ARE HEAVY DUTY USES EXTENDING DOWNWARD INTO THE TH THREE A AREA.
UH, SEE WHAT LOOKS LIKE SOME COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING.
I CAN'T TELL WHAT ELSE IS GOING ON DOWN THERE, BUT THERE'S SOMETHING GOING ON ON THE SOUTH END OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN THE PROPERTIES TO THE WEST.
DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA OF WHETHER THOSE ARE LEGAL NONCONFORMING USES OR ILLEGAL USES? NO, I'M NOT.
AND I'M, I'M TOLD BY PEOPLE IN THE AREA THAT THE MOBILE HOME PARK TO THE EAST IS INDEED A NON-CONFORMING USE.
YOU DON'T KNOW THAT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER? I KNOW ON THAT ONE THERE WAS AN S U P, UM, BUT I'M NOT TOO SURE WHAT THE S P WAS FOR.
SO ACTUALLY THERE IS, IT'S AN, IT'S AN S U P FROM MOBILE HOME PARK.
YEAH, THAT'S A, THAT'S A PORTION OF IT.
IT'S S U P 5 54 AND 3 98, WHICH, UH, HAS A PERMANENT TIMEFRAME.
SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT S U P EXISTED BEFORE THE CS, SO WAS ESTABLISHED, THE CSS.
SO THERE, UH, YOU KNOW, IF WE LOOK AT OUR G I S MAP, AND UNDER THE CASE NUMBER FIELD, IT JUST SAYS TRANSITION AND IT GIVES THE DATE THAT 51 A WAS ADOPTED, THAT MEANS IT EXISTED.
I BELIEVE THAT MEANS IT EXISTED, UH, PRIOR TO 51 A.
UM, THE CS, THE S U P ONLY APPLIES TO A PORTION OF THAT PROPERTY ZONE CSS.
ALL S U PS WERE CARRIED OVER IN THE ZONING PASSAGE.
AND POINT OF INFORMATION THAT MOBILE HOME HAS BEEN THERE.
THIS IS THE FIRST LAND USE THERE IN THAT AREA, GOING BACK TO THE EARLY FIFTIES.
ONE OTHER THINGS TO NOTE, JUST REAL QUICK, THE IR ZONING THAT'S ON THIS PROPERTY AND SOME OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, THAT'S ALSO A TRANSITION DISTRICT.
UM, BUT THEN I CLICK ON TH THREE A AND IT DOESN'T GIVE A CASE NUMBER OR THE, THE TRANSITION STATUS.
I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHEN THAT WAS ESTABLISHED.
SO, UM, I NOTICED YOU VISITED THE PROPERTY.
COULD YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU, UM, SAW, UM, WHAT THE USE IS CURRENTLY OR WHAT, HOW THEY'RE USING THE PROPERTY FROM? UM, THE CURRENT YES.
UM, RIGHT NOW, UM, WHEN I WENT, THEY WERE JUST, UH, REMOVING ALL, UH, TREES.
BUT THE LOCK PERMIT DO THEY HAVE FOR THAT TRAY GRADING AND REMOVAL RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, MR. MR. EARL, DID THEY HAVEING, DID THEY HAVE A PERMIT FOR I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF ANY GRADING, PERMANENT ENGINEERING APPROVAL.
SO THERE, SO AGAIN, YOU, I'M SORRY.
SO EXHIBITS THE COMMISSIONER HARWOOD CONDITION, THEN WE'LL GO, YEAH, I'M FINISHED.
SO CAN I, COMMISSIONER, SO MR. ERWIN, IF THEY'RE REMOVING TREES, DO THEY NOT HAVE TO MITIGATE THOSE TREE REMOVALS BEFORE THEY CAN DO ANYTHING? UM, IF THAT'S SOMETHING I NEED TO EXPLORE AS TO WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING REMOVED ON THE PROPERTY NOW IF THEY'RE GONE, NOW I HAVE TO IDENTIFY WHAT WAS ON THE PROPERTY AND TO THE BEST OF YOUR ABILITY.
IS THAT CORRECT? TO ABILITY DETERMINE HOW TO PURSUE MITIGATIONS ON, AND I, I I, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, WHEN I DISCUSSED THIS CASE WITH THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT, PRIOR TO MR. HERBERT'S ASSIGNMENT, THERE WAS A CONSIDERATION BEING MADE FOR, UH, LAND TO BE GIVEN TO THE CITY FOR GREEN SPACE AND PARK.
[00:20:01]
IS THAT, HAS THAT NOT BEEN DISCUSSED WITH YOU? THAT HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT TO ME.SO THEY, SO THEN THEY ARE, ARE YOU ARE REQUESTING THAT THE COMPLETE UTILIZATION WOULD BE TO CUT ALL THE TREES DOWN AND, OR I GUESS THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION? THAT'S A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
AND WITH THE, WITH THE, THE WAY THAT THE CITY EXPRESSES THE DESIRE TO REPLACE TREES THAT, THAT ARE CLEAR CUT, LIKE OF IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT WOULD, WOULD NEED TO, TO CONSIDER BEFORE MAKE ANY CLEAR CUTTING AND, AND TREE MITIGATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED? ALL, ALL THESE, WE SHOULD HAVE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR ANY PROJECT THAT GOES UP THAT INVOLVES TREE CLEARING.
THE TREES ARE THE SITES DISTURBED, SO NOW WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHAT WAS THERE.
UM, THEN, THEN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. UH, ERWAY, UM, MS. GARZA, MR. RIGHT.
SO WOULD THERE BE ANY CONSIDERATION WITH THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION TO, UM, ADD ENOUGH BUFFERING TO WHAT THEY WAS ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO ADD ENOUGH BUFFERING TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY, UM, THAT IS ALREADY THERE OR ANY, ANY, ANY WAY TO PROTECT THE, THOSE RESIDENTS FROM GOING BACK INTO THE, THE TRUCKS, FROM GOING COMMERCIAL TRUCKS, GOING BACK INTO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSED TO GOING STRAIGHT OUT TO LUKE 12, NO WEST LED BETTER, WHICH IS ROUTE 12TH TO PREVENT THE, THE, THE, THE TRUCKS.
WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION ABOUT ANYTHING TO PREVENT THE TRUCKS FROM GOING DOWN DUNVILLE ROAD OPPOSED TO, UM, GOING NORTH, UM, TO, UH, WEST LED BETTER AND, AND, AND, AND GOING EITHER EAST OR WEST ON LED BETTER? NO.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, MS. CAR, THE, WHAT LOOKS LIKE A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING LOT BETWEEN THE SIDE IN THE MOBILE PARK, THEY DON'T HAVE AN S U P, I MEAN THEY WOULD, IF THAT IS COMMERCIAL, THEY PEOPLE PARKING, WHICH CERTAINLY APPEARS TO BE FROM AN ARROW HAND, HAVE AN SUV BECAUSE 500 FEET OF RESIDENTIAL, DO WE KNOW IT'S NOT ON THE LIST? IS THAT IT'S CODED HEAVY MACHINERY IN A CLIP, BUT THAT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE WHAT WE'RE DOING.
MR. IWIN, JUST TO BE CLEAR, SINCE THAT IS VACANT RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY, IT IS AN OFFENSE ON THE CITY CODE FOR THEM TO CUT DOWN PROTECTED TREE WITHOUT PREVIOUSLY GETTING A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.
IS THAT RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
WHETHER IT WAS RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL.
SO, UH, IF THERE ARE PROTECTED TREES COMING DOWN AND NO PERMIT HAS BEEN ISSUED, THAT'S A PROBLEM WHETHER THEY LATER MITIGATE OR NOT? CORRECT.
THANK YOU FOR MR. OR HAS, UH, LOTS OF PRACTICE GOING BACK AND DOING THAT KIND OF WORK.
ARTICLE 10 DOES HAVE THAT KIND OF LANGUAGE AND ALLOWS HIM TO GO BACK AND USE HISTORICAL PICTURES AND A WHOLE ENTIRE PROCESS.
MR. USE, HE'S A FORENSIC SHOW.
AND HE BROUGHT UP HIS, HIS, UM, OVERCOAT FOR THE SPY LAST.
ANY LAST QUESTIONS ON THIS PROJECT? COMMISSIONERS.
DO WE KNOW, SO YOU'LL SET THE DATE WE'LL AT, AT, GOT IT.
SO SUSTAIN DISTRICT THREE AND WE'LL GO TO DR.
UM, ITEM C 3 180 9, A RENEWAL AND AMENDMENT OF SPECIFIC NUMBER 23 8
[00:25:02]
FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE THAT IS LESS THAN, UH, 3,500 PER FEET.UH, THE PROPERTY IS ON RR ORIGINALLY THE STREET HAS A E ONE LIQUOR CONTROL ON, UH, AND IT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WEST CAMP WISDOM ROAD, EAST OF MARK MARTIN FREEWAY.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE ON BURIAL THE PROPERTY, LIKE ON THE, OH, I'M NOT SHARING.
OKAY, I'M JUST GONNA LIKE CHUCKLED THROUGH THE SLIDES JUST FOR THE PEOPLE ONLINE, BUT I ALREADY SAID ALL OF THESE THINGS.
SO WE WERE HERE, UH, I APOLOGIZE.
UM, THE PROPERTY, UH, HIGHLIGHTED IN, UM, BLUE IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A TWO UNIT LOW RETAIL STRIP.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE UNIT TO THE LEFT.
THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S, UH, GONNA SELL THE ALCOHOL OR IT'S ALREADY SELLING THE ALCOHOL.
IT'S SURROUNDED BY A GAS STATION THAT ALSO HAS AN S UT FOR ALCOHOL SALES UN DEVELOPMENT TO THE EAST TO THE NORTH.
A COMBINATION OF, UM, BUSINESS COMMERCIAL IN THE HOTEL MOTEL ACROSS THE STREET TO THE SOUTH, UM, AND ORDER RELATED USES RETAIL AND A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY DEVELOPMENT BY THE, THE BACKGROUND.
UH, THE PROPERTY HAD AN S U P BACK IN 2015.
THAT'S WHERE IT WAS RESOLVED FROM D P ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.
BUT THAT S U P EXPIRED IN 2017.
THIS SS U P THAT'S BEING, UM, RENEWED TODAY, WAS INITIALLY APPROVED IN 2019.
IT WAS RENEWED ONCE IN 2021 AND THIS IS THEIR THIRD.
UH, AS I SAID, IT'S A ONE STORY BUILDING IS LESS.
THE BUILDING ITSELF IS LESS THAN, UH, 3,500 SQUARE FEET.
IT HAS TWO UNITS AND IT'S A JAR MERCHANDISE FOOD STORE.
UM, THE UNIT TO THE RIGHT TO THE EAST, UM, IS CURRENTLY VACANT.
UM, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A WIDER ANGLE OF BOTH THE PROPERTY AND THE GAS STATION.
THIS IS THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST GAS STATION TO THE WEST.
UM, THIS IS ACROSS THE STREET, UM, ACROSS THE STREET.
THE S C P CONDITIONS REALLY, UM, NORMAL.
UM, OUR, THEY ARE ASKING FOR THREE YEARS WITH, UH, FIVE YEAR ORDER RENEWALS.
THEY PROPOSE ABSOLUTELY NO CHANGES USUALLY WITH RENEWALS.
UH, KIND OF LIKE GO ALONG WITH THE EXISTING SITE PLAN ON THE RECORD.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THEY THE SAME AS THE APPLICANT FOR YEAR FOR, UH, AND THEN ELIGIBILITY FORMATTED RENEWALS FOR FIVE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER BLAIR? UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE IS A LOT OF, UM, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, UM, UH, UH, HANGING OUT IS A, IT'S A HOMELESS ENCAMPMENT AREA AND THE HOMELESS, THEY CAN'T HANDLE OUT OF THAT LOCATION? NO.
I, I LIKE, YEAH, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE S HARD TO MAKE A RATIONALE AND THE CONNECTION BETWEEN.
ALRIGHT, I CAN LET, LET ME SEE IF I CAN CONNECT THE DOTS THEN.
UM, THERE IS A SEVEN LETTER RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO IT THAT DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF ISSUE.
SO THAT'S THE LAND USE IS, IS A GOOD USE.
THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THIS PARTICULAR LAND BASED ON, ON THE, THE, THE, THE OPERATION OF SEVEN 11 NEXT DOOR AND THE OPERATION, WHICH AT THIS LOCATION, SEVEN 11 DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME, UM, TYPE OF BEHAVIOR AND ACTIVITY AS THIS PARTICULAR, UM, UM, LOCATION IN IT IS NOT A, NOT A GOOD USE OF LAND TO, TO ALLOW MORE LIQUOR CELLS WHEN THEY ARE NOT OPERATING IN A FASHION THAT IS COMMUNITY FOCUSED OPPOSED TO BRINGING IN ACTIVITIES THAT ARE NOT CONDUCIVE TO THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY.
PROBABLY THAT, THE ONE THAT YOU WANTED TO SAY BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IN THE COMMUNITY DOES NOT
[00:30:01]
NEED, UM, ACTUALLY AGAIN, THE LAND USE IS THE SAME LAND USE NEXT DOOR AND IT BASICALLY GOES BACK TO OPERATOR AGAIN.OTHER COMPLAINTS? I WOULD SAY.
UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE.
UM, THE REPORT, THEY APPLIED FOR THEIR BACK IN JANUARY, BEFORE JANUARY.
DID THEY, DID THEY TAKE THE WHOLE, UH, IT, IT STAYED A LITTLE BIT IN THE QUEUE, SO IT TOOK A LITTLE BIT TIME TO BE ASSIGNED TO ME.
I WILL GIVE THAT AND WE KNOW ABOUT THAT TOO.
AND IT DID, UH, TAKE A LITTLE BIT TO HAVE THE CONVENIENCE STORE LICENSE INSPECTION.
WHEN THESE COME UP FOR AUTO RENEWAL, DOES THE STAFF CHECK THE STATUS OF THE 12 FOR AUTO RENEWALS? BECAUSE THE RECOMMENDATION HERE IS FOR THEM TO GET AUTO RENEWAL.
I THINK THEY'RE HAVING TROUBLE.
I HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH THE, OUR RENEWAL TEAM.
I THINK SO WE CHECK, WE WAIT FOR THAT AND THEN WE THE SECOND.
SO, UM, UM, THIS QUESTION'S KIND OF GENERALLY, BUT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT LAND USE AND WE SEE THAT THERE'S URINE, WIND USAGE ALREADY BEING UTILIZED NEXT DOOR ACROSS THE STREET, ACROSS THE HIGHWAY, TWO BLOCKS DOWN, UM, ARE WE NOT ALLOWED TO LOOK AT THOSE OTHER USES TO MAKE OUR DECISION? SURE, BUT I WOULD SAY LOOK AT THE COMP COMPATIBILITY AND, UH, THE IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDINGS.
AND YOU HAVE LIKE, THAT'S WHY WE DO, LIKE, WE LOOK AT THE SURROUNDINGS AND ESTIMATE WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF THIS PARTICULAR LAND USE THAT WE HAVE ON THIS SITUATION.
UH, ITEM NUMBER FOUR, UH, C 2 12, 2 37.
UM, IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 43 TO ALLOW REMODEL ABOUT THOSE SPACE AREAS FOR, UH, TWO PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
UM, J L LONG MIDDLE SCHOOL IN WOODROW WILSON HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS, UH, THE AREA IS A BIG BLOCK FOUNDED BY PETER AVENUE, PAUL AVENUE, COTON LANE, AND NORTH GLASGOW DRIVE.
IT'S APPROXIMATELY, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OVER 18 ACRES.
UH, IT IS IN, UH, EAST DALLAS.
UH, AS YOU CAN SEE ON
JAIL LONG IS ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE.
UH, WEST SIDE IS SURROUNDED BY A COMBINATION OF MULTI-FAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX USES AND THEN BY A PARK TO THE SOUTHWEST AND AGAINST, UH, ZONING DISTRICTS.
A COMBINATION OF D E N F OF A LITTLE D AND THEN R DISTRICT.
I HAVE TOOK LIKE PROBABLY A HUNDRED PICTURES.
I'M NOT GONNA PUT ALL OF THEM.
I JUST FOCUSED ON THE AREA WHERE THERE ARE CHANGES.
SO THE MAIN CHANGE WILL BE AT THIS CORNER, BASICALLY BETWEEN PAUL'S AND, UH, COVINGTON LANE.
THAT'S THE PARKING LOT, UH, THAT BELONGS TO JAY LONG THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO REMODEL.
UM, THIS IS A VIEW FROM COVINGTON TO SEE THE ENTIRE FACADE OF THE SCHOOL.
THIS IS BASICALLY THE PARKING LOT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, ACROSS THE STREET.
MULTI-FAMILY, A BETTER VIEW OF THE ENTRANCE INTO JAIL.
LONG MOVING A LITTLE BIT ON COVINGTON, THE SAME.
ANOTHER VIEW OF THE PARKING LOT.
YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A CURB CUTTING HERE.
THE PROPOSAL IS TO TAKE THIS CURB CUT AWAY AND CREATE A NEW ONE ON, UH, POLICY FURTHER DOWN ON COVINGTON LANE.
'CAUSE I FEEL LIKE ALL THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE MORE IMPACTING THIS SIDE.
I DON'T FEEL THIS IS HOW IT IS.
IT'S IMPACTING MORE THE COVINGTON LANE SIDE.
UM, THIS IS THE WOODROW WILSON AND I THINK IT'S A SHARED ATHLETIC FIELD WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING TO ADD FOUR UH, LIGHT POLES FURTHER, UH, SOUTH ON COVINGTON LANE.
THIS IS ANOTHER VIEW OF THE ATHLETIC FIELD.
THEY'RE PROPOSING TO ADD TWO ON EACH SIDE OF THE FIELD.
AND THIS IS ANOTHER MORE WIDE VIEW OF COTON LANE TO SEE THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY USES AND HOW, UH, CLOSE THEY ARE AND HOW NARROW CURRENT IS.
[00:35:01]
THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN.AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS JAIL LONG.
THIS IS THEIR PARKING LOT WITH THE CURB CUTTING HERE.
THEY, THERE USED TO BE A MULTITUDE OF, UH, PORTABLE STRUCTURES.
THIS IS THE ATHLETIC FIELD, THE PROPOSAL, AND I HAVE 'EM.
YOU, UH, RECEIVED, UH, A REVISED LAST NIGHT.
THE ONLY CHANGE FROM THE, FROM WHAT'S IN THE DOCKET IS A NOTE ON THE SITE PLAN.
SO THIS IS JUST TO SEE SIDE BY SIDE THE PROPOSED AS BRIEF.
UM, AS I WAS SAYING, THE, THE CURB CUT ON COVINGTON IS BEING ELIMINATED RERO TO PAUL'S.
THE PARKING LOT IS BEING REMODELED.
TAKE AWAY A FEW PARKING SPOTS TO GAIN A LOT BIGGER PRACTICE FEEL, BUT THAT'S NOT GONNA BE TWO MONTHS SENSES GONNA BE AN OPEN SPACE.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, ALL THE PORTABLES, ALMOST ALL OF THEM, ONLY THREE ARE, UH, A REMAINDER ON THE SITE, ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AND THEN, UM, WHAT ELSE? OH, THE NOTE IN ON THE JAIL LONG, UH, SURFACE LOT SAYS THAT THAT PARKING SHOULD BE USED FOR WOODROW WILSON HIGH SCHOOL.
UH, AND THEN ON THE ATHLETICS FIELD, I DIDN'T LIKE THIS RED DOT BECAUSE THEY'RE VERY TINY.
THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE CORE PROPOSED, UM, LIGHT POLES.
UM, THE T M P, THE T M P THAT WAS APPROVED WITH, UH, WITH A PD WAS MORE, WAS FOR BOTH OF THEM, BUT MORE FOCUSED ON WOODROW WILSON.
IN THE MEANTIME, THEY SUBMITTED, UH, REVISIONS TO THAT TO STAFF.
THE, THE PROPOSED ONE IS LOOKING MORE INTO HOW IT'S GONNA AFFECT THIS CHANGE IS GONNA AFFECT THE CIRCULATION ON JAIL LONG.
UM, THIS IS WHAT IS BEING SHOWN.
BASICALLY THE BUSES ARE GONNA BE MORE FOCUSED ON POLICY IN COVINGTON NORTH RATHER THAN THE COVINGTON MAINTENANCE, UH, SHARED WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY.
THE PD CONDITIONS I HIGHLIGHTED IN BETWEEN THE CHANGES FROM THE DOCKET YOU RECEIVE THESE CONDITIONS.
UH, YESTERDAY, UM, VERY GOOD IMPROVEMENTS FROM UH, WHAT IS IN THE DOCKET.
THE CHANGES ARE REVISED FLOOR AREA TO AFFECT THE PORTABLES.
IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A, IT WAS A LITTLE BIT COUNTERINTUITIVE FOR ME.
WE DIDN'T USE TO INCLUDE THEM NOW WE DID.
SO THAT'S WHAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, IT DOESN'T IMPLY ANY ADDITION TO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDINGS.
IT'S JUST THE, THE WHOLE UH, MATCH WITH THE PORTABLES, UH, REVISED PARKING TO REDUCE FROM 5 38 TO FIVE 14 SPACES TO ACCOUNT FOR WHAT IS BEING LOST WITH THE PARKING LOT AT THE JAIL LONG.
UM, RESERVE MANAGED PARKING SUPPLY.
THE NOTE, UH, ADDITION OF EV CHARGING STATIONS, UH, ADDITION OF MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR MINIMUM 20 PARKING SPACES FOR MICRO MOBILITY AND ONE CHARGING OUTLET FOR THOSE.
UM, THE T MT LANGUAGE IS FURTHER, UM, UPDATED TO, UH, BASICALLY SAY THAT THE REVISIONS ARE GONNA BE DONE IN MARCH, 2026.
UM, NOW FOR THE LIGHT STANDARDS, THE REQUEST IS TO HAVE 80 FOOT HIGH POLES.
THE CLAR, THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION TO SAY THAT R P S DOES NOT APPLY ONLY TO FALLS.
UM, HOURS OF PREPARATION ARE CHANGING, ARE CHANGED FROM WHAT'S IN THE DOCKET.
UM, AND IT'S BASICALLY SIX DAYS, WEEK 6:00 AM TO 9:00 PM THEY LIMIT THE USE OF THE ATHLETIC FIELDS TO STUDENTS OF THE TWO CAMPUSES.
UH, AND THEN, UM, THERE'S A CONDITION TO SAY THAT THE HOURS FOR ALL OUTDOOR LIVES BASICALLY APPLY THE SAME ON THE TERM CAMP CAMPUS.
UM, THEN THE PD PROPOSES FOR THIS ITIES FOR THREE AREAS.
I WOULD SAY THAT TWO OF THEM ALREADY EXIST, WHICH IS GREAT.
UM, ADDITION, THE REVISED ONE ADDITION OR CHANGED ONE FOR TRASH CAN ON COVINGTON LANE BIKE RACK FOR THE 10 BICYCLES CAN COME TOWARDS THE MICRO MOBILITY REQUIREMENT.
AND THEN A CONDITION TO PROHIBIT AMPLIFIED SOUND BETWEEN 7:00 PM AND 7:00 AM AT NINE.
THIS BEING SAID, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A REVISED EXHIBIT A, WHICH IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REVISED EXHIBIT B, THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND REVISED CONDITIONS AS BRIEF.
MR. YOUNG? UH, YES FOR MR. NAVAREZ.
OH, HE HAD THE MEETING AT NINE 30.
SAID HE SAID HE'S GONNA COME BACK.
THE, I HEARD THE BUILDING CODE, INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE CHANGING, EVOLVING ABOUT SPACES.
IS THE GENERAL BUILDING CODE REQUIRING SPACES, SCHOOLS?
[00:40:02]
OH, I THINK SO.I'LL, I'LL GO BACK AND INTO THAT.
I THINK IT'S, WE, LEMME CHECK.
DOES GST HAVE A POLICY THAT THEY WANNA INCLUDE EV PARKING SPACES AT EVERY CAMPUS BY 2030? I, I WOULD, I WOULD THINK SO.
WE, WE'VE BEEN CONSTANTLY INCLUDING THIS IN PDS AND I WOULD REQUIRE MORE THAT WOULD TRUMP DOES, I THINK IF UM, IS THE MOST RESTRICTIVE THAT APPLIES.
SO I WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS A MINIMUM ONE.
SO BASICALLY IT'S GONNA BE FOR THE BUILDING.
UM, MR. GRAY ONE CLARIFICATION ON THE LIGHTING STANDARDS, THE FOUR POLES THAT ARE GREATER IN HEIGHT.
THERE'S A, UM, PROVISION THAT SAYS THOSE EVENTUAL PROXIMITY SLOPE DOES NOT APPLY TO THE LIGHTS THAT'S CAPTURED WITHIN THE FOUR ATHLETIC STANDARDS, CORRECT? IT'S ONLY INTENDED TO APPLY TO THOSE FOUR POLE.
AND THANK FOR THE CLARIFICATION BECAUSE RATHER, I MEAN, I, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD'VE, UH, GOT ISSUES OF UH, BI, BUT IT'S GOOD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE, OKAY, WE'LL GO CASE FIVE AND SIX.
PLEASE KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE MY SCREEN UP.
SO THIS IS THE COMBINED BRIEFING FOR CASES Z 2 12 2 9 8 AND Z 2, 2 3 3 2.
I WOULD LIKE TO JUST ADVISE C P C THAT THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES MADE TO THIS, THESE TWO CASES SINCE YOU LAST SAW 'EM IN AUGUST.
SO THESE APPLICATIONS WE HAVE ARE BOTH FOR A C S COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH CONSIDERATION OF AN M U ONE EXCUSE DISTRICT AND THE PROPERTY IS OWNED IN AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT.
CURRENTLY, THERE ARE TWO AREAS OF REQUEST.
BOTH ARE LOCATED ON THE NORTH LINE OF
THE SECOND IS JUST OVER TWO ACRES.
HERE'S THE APARTMENT LOCATION OF THE SITE SOUTHEAST AND THEN HERE'S AN P MAP SHOWING YOU THOSE TWO PARCELS.
SO THE LARGER REQUEST BY THE 2 98 THAT CONTAINS OVER 50 ACRES.
AND THEN THE SMALLER SITE THAT FARMS ALONE DATA THERAPY, WHICH IS WHERE THEY PROPOSE TO HAVE A FUEL STATION AND MERCHANDISER FOR FOOD STORE.
THERE IS A ZONING MATCH SHOWING THAT THOSE TWO PARCELS ARE CURRENTLY AGRICULTURAL TO NORTH.
WE DO HAVE AN INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DISTRICT THAT HAS THE RESTRICTIONS, WHICH I'LL SHARE WITH YOU LATER.
AND THEN FURTHER TO THE NORTH WE DO HAVE ADDITIONAL AG AS WELL AS TO THE WEST WHERE WE HAVE A VARIETY OF RESIDENTIAL AND PUBLIC PARK USES AND SOME UNDEVELOPED LAND.
THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH WITH THE IR RESTRICTION.
THE FEED RESTRICTIONS PREVIOUSLY HOUSED THE CASH PLANT, BUT UPON MY SITE VISIT, IT DID SHOW THAT THAT PROPERTY WAS FOR SALE.
SO I'M NOT AWARE OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S CURRENTLY BEING OPERATED.
PRIOR TO THE EAST OF THE SITE, THERE IS ADDITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY USES AND THEN TO THE SOUTH WE HAVE AGRICULTURAL AND SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.
BOTH OF THOSE ARE UNDEVELOPED.
SO FOR 2 9 8, THAT'S THE LARGER OF THE TWO UH, REQUEST AREAS.
THIS IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED LAND THAT AND IT HAS SIGNIFICANT NATURAL FEATURES RUNNING THROUGH THE LAND.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP A SITE WITH ANY PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE CSS DISTRICT AND HAS EXPRESSED A PARTICULAR INTEREST IN WAREHOUSE OR OTHER COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES THAT ARE PERMIT PERMITTED BY THE REQUESTED DISTRICT FOR 3 3 2 MORE SPECIFICALLY, THEY HAVE THIS GOAL OF DEVELOPING THE SITE WITH THE GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE ING STATION, WHICH IS PERMITTED BY RIGHTS IN THE PROPOSED CSS DISTRICT.
[00:45:01]
HOWEVER, IT'S ALSO PERMITTED IN THE ALTERNATIVE AND NEW DISTRICT AND IT WOULD ALLEVIATE THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE ANY OTHER NON-COMPATIBLE USES AT THIS SITE.SO THE REASON ONLY NEED TO, YOU WOULD STILL PERMIT THEM TO DEVELOP IT AS THEY'RE SEEKING TO, BUT IT WOULD REMOVE ANY NON-COMPATIBLE USES OR AREA PLANS AND
SO THE CSS DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY ALLOWS SEVERAL HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES THAT COULD HAVE MAJOR IMPACTS ON THE ADJACENT NATURAL RESOURCES, INCLUDING A PART OF THE FLOOD PLAIN AND SURROUNDING EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES.
ALTERNATIVELY, AS I MENTIONED, THE M U ONE DISTRICT WILL ALLOW 'EM TO BUILD OUT ONE SIDE IF THEY ALREADY HAVE MORE CEMENTED WITH THE PROPOSED LAND USE AND THEN PERMIT THE REMAINING ACREAGE TO BE DEVELOPED.
A VARIETY OF LAND USES THAT ARE MORE CONSISTENT WITH BOTH THE AREA PLAN AS WELL AS THE NATURAL FEATURES OF THE AREA AND THE SURROUNDING LAND USES THAT EXIST.
HERE ARE THE SURROUNDING LAND USES IS THIS SIDE WHERE ACTUALLY USES THE, THE PROPERTY ITSELF.
WE'RE LOOKING AT THE NORTH END OF THE PROPERTY.
SO THE GREATER ON EIGHTH GRADE, YOU SEE THE ZONING SIGN LOCATED RIGHT THERE ON THE FENCE.
AND THEN THIS IS AS WE TURN RIGHT ONTO DADDY FERRY LOOKING NORTHEAST ONTO THE SITE.
AND THESE ARE THE SURROUNDING LAND USES.
THIS IS OFF OF DADDY FERRY LOOKING EAST.
THERE IS A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THERE WITH SEVERAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT WERE BUILT PRIOR TO THE FIFTIES.
AND THIS IS WHAT THEY CURRENTLY ARE RUNNING, LOOKING OVER TO THIS METAL FENCING THAT SEPARATES THAT IR DISTRICT FROM THESE, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT.
AND THEN THIS IS THAT CEMENT OR CONCRETE BATCH PLANT THAT WAS PERMITTED IN THAT IR DISTRICT.
AND YOU CAN SEE AT THE TIME OF MY
AND NOW THIS IS, UM, ANOTHER VIEW OF THE SITE CLOSER TO THE SMALLER SITE.
NOW WE'RE AT THE I 20 INTERSECTION OF D FERRY AND I'M TAKING IT BACK TO THE WEST SIDE OF D FERRY TO LOOK AT THOSE ADJACENT AND USES AGRICULTURAL NATURE OR UNDEVELOPED, FOLLOWED BY THE PUBLIC PARK.
UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE EXISTING AA DISTRICT.
AN OBVIOUS, UH, CHANGE AS THE SETBACKS.
OF COURSE AA IS MEANT TO BE LARGE OPEN LOTS THAT ARE USED FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND UH, AGRICULTURAL USES.
AND THOSE SINGLE FAMILY USES OR LOT SIZE IN GENERAL HAS A MINIMUM ACREAGE, UH, REQUIREMENT.
AND FOR THAT REASON, THESE LOTS ARE OPEN AND GIVE A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY FOR, FOR WIDE OPEN SPACES, BUT THAT ALSO INCLUDES KEEPING THOSE WIDE OPEN SPACES BY HAVING LARGE SETBACKS.
SO THAT WOULD BE CHANGED WITH BOTH THE CSS AND THE M ONE DISTRICT AS PROPOSED.
NOW THE DENSITY OBVIOUSLY IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE CSS DISTRICT, THERE'S NO RESIDENTIAL USE IS PERMITTED, BUT THERE ARE, UM, FLOOR AREA RATIO REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VARIETY OF USES THAT ARE PERMITTED.
THE HEIGHT OVERALL WOULD CHANGE TO, YOU KNOW, BEING 24 FOOT MAXIMUM TO 45 FEET IF THE CSS DISTRICT OR UP TO 120 IF THEY HAD A MIX OF USES AND QUALIFIED AS A MIXED USE PROJECT UNDER THE M U ONE DISTRICT.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES THAT WOULD STILL, UM, IMPOSE UH, RRP S ONTO THE SET.
SO THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THAT, BUT IT IS SUCH A LARGE AMOUNT OF ACREAGE AT AN EITHER SCENARIO THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BUILD UP TO A REALLY GOOD HEIGHT.
NOW THE LOCK COVERAGE, AGAIN, THE A GAVE DISTRICT IS ALL ABOUT THAT WYOMING SPACE AND HAVING THAT GREEN SPACE.
SO IT'S A VERY, VERY LOW BOTTOM COVERAGE OF 10% FOR RESIDENTIAL OR 25% FOR NON RESIDENTIAL.
AND BOTH THE PROPOSED DISTRICTS ARE GOING UP TO 80.
ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION ON THE DENSITY FOR THE ENDING, ONE THAT'S IN LIEU IS THAT OF COURSE IT PERMITS RESIDENTIAL USES, WHICH IS IN LINE WITH NOT ONLY THE SURROUNDING LAND USES BUT ALSO THE AREA PLANS
[00:50:01]
AND OF COURSE OUR NEED THROUGHOUT THE CITY TO ENCOURAGE MORE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.NOW OTHER SPECIAL STANDARDS THAT APPLY ARE FOR THESE TO STRUCTURES IN BOTH THE PROPOSED AND BEACON MOON DISTRICTS.
THERE ARE PROVISIONS FOR VISUAL INTRUSION AND THEN URBAN FORM SET BACK INTO POWER SPACING FOR THE TELE STRUCTURES IN THE
OVERALL, IT IS THE PRIMARY USES THAT ARE PERMITTED THAT HAVE EVEN LARGER VARIETY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THESE THREE DISTRICTS AND WHAT I'VE JUST DESCRIBED IN THOSE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WHICH WERE PRETTY LARGE TO BEGIN WITH, YOU KNOW, AGRICULTURAL, AGRICULTURAL AND SINGLE FAMILY ARE THE TWO USES ALLOWED EXISTING TODAY IT WERE TO BE CHANGED TO A CSS DISTRICT.
WE'D BE OPENING UP A VERY LARGE TRACT OF LAND THAT HAS DIRECT ACCESS TO THE FLOOD CREEKWAY SYSTEM TO HEAVIER COMMERCIAL AND BUSINESS SERVICE USES.
OF COURSE, IT WOULD ALLOW A VARIETY OF SUPPORTING RETAIL PERSONAL SERVICE USES IN OFFICE THAT WOULD BE SUPPORTED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT IF THEIR GOAL IS TO DEVELOP THE SITE WITH COMMERCIAL BUSINESS SERVICE USES WITH WAREHOUSES AND OTHER LARGE FORMAT INDUSTRIAL USES THAT CAN HAVE POTENTIAL NEGATIVE, UM, IMPACT ON THIS AREA OVERALL THAT YOU DO, WHAT DISTRICT PROVIDES A GOOD BALANCE BETWEEN THAT AND GIVES THEM A VARIETY OF PROSPECTIVE LAND USES? SO WHEN THE APPLICANT WHO IS SELLING THIS PROPERTY AND TRYING TO OBTAIN ZONING SO THAT THE SITE IS A BETTER, MORE, UM, EASY TO DESCRIBE ACCESSIBLE LAND USES IS WHAT THEY SEEM TO BE GOING AFTER.
AND IN MY OPINION FOR THIS AREA, OF COURSE WITH THE AREA OF LAND OF CONSIDERATION AND DESCRIBING LAND USES, MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION IS THAT AND ANYONE THAT'S STRICT MAKES MORE SENSE.
THESE ARE THE ADJACENT DE RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH.
THE RESTRICTIONS ARE A GOOD MECHANISM TO ENSURE THAT WE QUALIFY A PROPOSED DISPARATE BY REMOVING POTENTIALLY IN COMPARABLE USES OR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
HOWEVER, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S EVER REQUIRED BY STAFF.
IT IS A NEGOTIATION MECHANISM THAT IS USED THROUGH C P C AND COUNCIL WITH THE APPLICANTS.
FURTHERMORE, THE STAFF'S OPINION, IT DOES OPEN UP AN AREA TO THAT BASE ZONING DISTRICT AND ALLOW FOR THE FURTHER DEGRADATION OF THE OVERALL ZONING IN THE REGION.
AND THIS IS BECAUSE THE RESTRICTIONS ARE A SEPARATE MECHANISM THAT CAN BE ALTERED AND MEMORY PHASE PEOPLE LEAVE AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THINGS ARE BEING CHANGED.
AND WHAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT AT THE END OF THE DAY AS STAFF MEMBERS A LOT OF THE TIME IS WHAT WAS THE BASE RECOMMENDATION IF THEY APPROVED AN IR DISTRICT, AN IR DISTRICT MUST BE COMPATIBLE AND OR SUITABLE FOR THIS AREA.
IT MUST BE WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTED AT THE TIME.
AND THEN THAT'S WHY I SAY IT CAN LEAD TO FURTHER DEGRADATION OF THE BASE SELLING FOR THIS AREA, FOR THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WHILE MAYBE A GOOD, UH, MECHANISM FOR MAKING ARGUMENTS FOR, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO FINISH A CASE AND NEGOTIATE DOWN, IT CAN ALSO CAUSE ISSUES OVERALL.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE IS THE APPLICANT FEELS THAT IT'S SUITABLE TO ENCOURAGE FURTHER INDUSTRIAL ZONING HERE, DESPITE NOT MEETING THE AREA OF FUND RULES OR SURROUNDING LAND USAGE.
THEY FEEL THAT BECAUSE THERE IS THIS EXISTING OTHER DISTRICT TO THE NORTH THAT IT SHOULD BE SUITABLE TO HAVE A CSS DISTRICT, ANOTHER INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO THE SOUTH OF MUCH LARGER ACREAGE OPPORTUNITY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND STAFF JUST DOES NOT AGREE.
SO FOR CONSISTENCY REVIEW PURPOSES TO SHARE WITH YOU THOSE AREA PLANS, AS NOTED IN THE REPORTS, THERE'S THE I 23 CORRIDOR OR LAND USE PLAN, WHICH SHOWS THESE PROPERTIES AS BEING USED, THE DISTRICT TWO AND SHOWS THAT THEY ARE AS RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL AREAS.
IT ALSO IDENTIFIES THE SURROUNDING AREAS HAVING SIGNIFICANT NATURAL IN SPACE OR DUE TO THE PRESENCE OF THE PRAIRIE CREEK AND TRINITY RIVER HAVING, UH, SENSITIVITY.
SO THE PROPOSED DSS DISTRICT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER AS CALLED FOR BY THE PLAN.
THERE ARE NO INDUSTRIAL USES PERMITTED OR RECOMMENDED IN THIS SUBDISTRICT TWO.
HOWEVER, THERE IS AN APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR THEM IN MAJORITY OF DISTRICT ONE, WHICH IS TO THE SOUTHEAST OF I 20 ON BOTH SIDES OF BONNIE VIEW ROAD.
THIS IS NOT THIS AREA AND BECAUSE OF THAT, THAT RECOMMENDS TO KEEP THOSE MISTRIAL USES IN SUBDISTRICT ONE AND HAVE THIS MORE RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD BASED.
UM, IN SUB DISTRICT TWO, WHICH IS WHERE WE'RE LOCATED, WE'RE LOOKING AT, FOR THAT REASON, STAFF RECOMMENDS
[00:55:01]
NEW ONE DISTRICT WHICH WOULD BALANCE THE EXISTING LAND USES AND PROPOSED COMMERCIAL NATURE THAT'S SUGGESTED TO BE ADDED BY THIS FIRM.THEY WILL ALSO PROMOTE THE INVESTMENT ENTITY CASE PUBLIC PARK TRAIL SYSTEM, WHICH IS THE GREAT COMMUNITY FOREST GATEWAY PARKING HORSE TRAILS AND IT WOULD BE RESPECTFUL OF THE LOW DENSITY SINGLE OF THE VICINITY FOR THAT REASON.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON THESE TWO CASES IS DENIAL OF THE CSS DISTRICT BECAUSE THOSE SPIRIT PLANS DO NOT SUPPORT THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING.
THERE IS RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY AND GIVEN NATURAL FEATURES AND
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER BLAIR? UM, MR. MUNOZ, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE, THE VERY IN DEPTH, UM, PRESENTATION OF BOTH 2 98 AND 3 32.
I HAVE THREE QUESTIONS, UM, AND I'M, I'M NEED TO TAKE THEM SEPARATELY INSTEAD OF DOING THEM TOGETHER.
UM, AND 2 98, WELL, WITH BOTH OF THEM WERE YOU AWARE THAT, WELL, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION AND, AND, AND CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT, UH, MR. COPER HAD CHANGED THAT THE DIRECTIONS HAD BEEN CHANGED FROM A CSS TO A M U ONE IN BOTH LOCATIONS AND THAT THE RESTRICTIONS WERE OFFERED UP, UM, IN BOTH LOCATIONS.
SO YOU, UH, AS I NOTED AT THE START OF MY PRESENTATION, THERE HAVE BEEN NO AMENDMENTS TO THESE CASES.
UM, ALRIGHT, UH, LET ME, UH, ASK MR. UM, NO IRWIN, UH, WE AND MR. IRWIN, I, WE HAD A PRE CONVERSATION, UH, OUT IN THE HALLWAY, BUT JUST FOR THE, JUST TO PUT IT ON THE RECORD, DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT ABOUT, UM, UH, GIVEN A 22 ACRE, UH, CONSERVATION AREA IN BOTH 2 98 AND 3 32, SAY FOR CERTAIN I'VE HAD THE CONVERSATION, THE ITSELF CONVERSATION, UM, BUT WE DID WITH THE CASE THAT WAS SOUTH OF 20, THE CASE THAT WAS SOUTH OF 20, THERE WAS A CONVERSATION ABOUT CON CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT WE, THAT CASE DID NOT MOVE FORWARD, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
BUT, AND THIS IS THE SAME APPLICANT, IT'S JUST ONE IS NORTH 20 AND ONE IS SOUTH 20, CORRECT? YES, I BELIEVE SO.
SO IF THE APPLICANT WAS PROVIDING A CONSERVATION EASEMENT TO DONATING 22 ACRES OF THAT, UM, MS. MUNOZ, CAN YOU PUT BACK UP YOUR, YOUR PICTURE WHERE YOU HAD THE, THE, UM, THE, THE WHERE THE GREENS, WHERE ALL THE TREES AND WHAT, WHAT AREA OF THE, THE DEVELOP OF THE APPLICANT'S CASE WAS BEING DEVELOPED FOR ME PLEASE, AND I APOLOGIZE THAT, THAT YOU DIDN'T GET THE SAME MEMO THAT I GOT.
IT SURE WOULD'VE MADE LIFE EASIER HERE.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S TAKING LOAD.
I HOPE IT LOOKS AND, OKAY, SO WILL YOU SEE WHERE THE, THE CREEK IS AND THAT, THAT WHERE GOES DOWN? YEAH, ALL THAT.
WOULD THAT NOT BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE 22? THAT, THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE PART OF THE 22 ACRE, UM, CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND, UM, THE,
[01:00:01]
THE AREA OF, OF CONSIDERATION FOR BOTH 2 98 AND, AND WELL, ESPECIALLY 2 98, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT 3, 3 2, IT WOULD BE IF IT WAS CONSIDERED AS A U ONE, UM, UM, I JUST, OKAY.UM, MS. MUNOZ, I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WERE SUBMITTED TO YOU GUYS TUESDAY, SO YOU HAVEN'T GOTTEN THOSE YET.
I, I THINK I, I I KNOW WHAT I NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO MOVE, IN ORDER TO CONTINUE THE, WE'RE GONNA HOLD THIS CASE THESE TWO CASES BOTH DATE, DATE, UM, OCTOBER THE SECOND, THE SECOND BRIEFING IN OCTOBER 7TH BRIEFING IN OCTOBER.
UM, MS. MUNOZ, I WILL HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH YOU AND THE APPLICANT SO THAT WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
IS THAT FAIR? IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU PLEASE? OF COURSE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? WE'LL GOING.
OKAY, PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU CAN SEE MY SCREEN.
JUST TO UPDATE YOU, THIS CASE WAS PREVIOUSLY BRIEF ON JULY 6TH, BUT THERE ARE SOME REVISIONS SINCE THAT DATE ON AUGUST THE SEVENTH PM IN EXHIBIT, A REVISED SITE PLAN SHOWING A PROPOSED EMERGENCY ACCESS DATE WITH A SIXTH ADE AT THE EASTERN SHEILA LANE FRONTAGE.
PLEASE FORGIVE MY ERROR IN MY REPORT WHERE I CONFUSED MY EAST FROM MY WEST.
FURTHERMORE, THEY PROPOSED AMENDED SITE PLAN, UM,
BUT THEY INCLUDE PROPOSED PARKING LOT SCREENING AT A HEIGHT OF THREE FEET ALONG BOTH STREET FRONTAGES.
HERE IS THE REVISED PLAN AND I MARKED IT UP AND INCREASED THE SIZE HERE FOR YOU TO SEE THAT NOW THAT TRUCK TRAFFIC IS ENTERING ON LAKE VIEW AND ENTERING THE SITE HERE AS PREVIOUSLY SUGGESTED, BUT NOW THEY'VE GOTTEN THE GREEN LIGHT TO TURN LEFT HERE ONTO SHEILA, RATHER THAN COMING OUT OF STEP.
HAD PROPOSED THROUGH A SLIP ROAD ALONG THE INSIDE OF THE INVENTORY STORAGE AREA AND ACCESSING THIS WHAT IS NOW PROPOSED AS EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY.
THAT IS A NEW DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE ON THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE SHEILA FRONTAGE.
INITIALLY, STAFF HAD PROPOSED FOR THEM TO EXIT THIS WAY HEAD NORTHBOUND, BUT THAT WAS NOT SEEN AS THE ALTERNATIVE.
INSTEAD IT WORKED WITH MR. NEVAREZ.
THE APPLICANT FORCE OUR COMMISSIONER TO COME UP WITH THIS PLAN.
HE'S BEEN ACCEPTED BY ALL PARTIES.
SO NOW SUB TRAFFIC WOULD ENTER LAYFIELD AND WHO DECIDES COME INTO THIS WAITING AREA THAT IS FREE OFF WITH A SECURITY FENCE, 16 HEIGHT, THERE IS A CUL GATE AND DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH MANEUVER SPACE FOR A SEMI AND THEN THEY COME OUT ONTO SHEILA LANE, TURN LEFT TO EXIT.
THOSE ARE THE CHANGES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS REQUEST.
AND S RECOMMENDATION IS STILL FOR APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, TO THE PLAINTIFF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 37, SUBJECT TO REVISED COMMISSIONS WITH THE REMOVAL OF THAT REQUIREMENT FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THAT EXISTING SS C P AND RENEWAL FOR THE VEHICLE OPTION STORAGE USE FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO THIS REVISED SITE PLAN AND REVISED CONDITIONS.
[01:05:04]
NO QUESTIONS.THIS ONE HAS BEEN READ BEFORE 1 0 5.
YES IT WAS, BUT IT HAS ONE VERY TWO VERY MINOR UPDATES IF YOU WANT TO, I CAN PLEASE.
UM, JUST THREE SLIDES I HAVE, WHICH ARE BASICALLY CORRECTIONS FROM, UM, SOME UNSOLVED ISSUES LAST TIME.
SO THE SITE PLAN WAS REVISED TO ADD THE, THE WALK-IN PRE COOLER.
UM, I WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT TOLD US THAT THEY HAD PER, THEY HAVE PERMITS FOR THAT, UH, FOR THE PAST FEW YEARS.
IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THAT'S THE REVISION TO THE SITE PLAN.
AND ALSO, UM, THE UNCOVER PATIO IS SHOWING THE CORRECT, THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN WAS 800 FEET, NOW IS 7 0 4.
AND THEN, UH, THE CONDITIONS ARE REVISED TO INCLUDE A PROVISION TO PROHIBIT, UM, TO PROHIBIT THE ROOFTOP PATIO TO HAVE LATE HOURS.
THIS IS AN AREA WHERE YOU CAN SEE THIS.
THERE WAS A DISCUSSION LAST TIME, SO I WANTED TO PLEASE, CAN YOU JUST REFRESH ME? I JUST LEFT THE, SINCE OUR JULY MEETING CONCERN ABOUT THE WALK IN COOLER WAS THE, WASN'T ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, BUT IT WAS EXISTED.
AND, AND THERE WAS ALSO, UM, A CONCERN THAT IT IS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY OF THE ALLEY.
UM, AND THEN KIND LIKE TALKING UNEXPECTED BECAUSE THERE ARE LIKE MM-HMM.
SHE HAS A ON 14 I THOUGHT SO IT WAS JUST, UM, YOU SEE THERE ARE LIKE FOUR UNITS IN THAT YEAH.
IN THAT BUILDING AND WE DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS THE, FOR THIS UNIT.
UM, WHEN I DID MY SITE VISIT, I NOTICED ALL OF THOSE, BUT I ALSO DIDN'T KNOW IS IT FOR THIS UNIT OR NOT.
AND THE APPLICANT CONFIRM IT'S FOR THIS UNIT AND IT'S PERMANENT AND IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE, IT'S A REALITY.
YOU, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? COMMISSIONER'S NUMBER EIGHT, HOLD IT.
ALRIGHT, THIS IS NUMBER EIGHT.
ANY QUESTIONS ON NINE? I CAN, UH, IF YOU WANT, I CAN BRIEF 10.
10 IS GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 21ST.
UH, NUMBER 11 IS ALSO GONNA BE HELD THROUGH SEPTEMBER 21ST.
SEPTEMBER UHHUH, SEPTEMBER 21ST.
WE'RE STILL ON NINE, SO WE'LL ON NINE TO 12.
[01:10:01]
PERMIT FOR MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ON PROPERTY FOUND C S D ONE MARSH SURFACE DISTRICT WITH THE D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE NORTHLINE SILVER BROUGHT IN THE DRIVE CF ON GROVE.IT IS LOCATED OFF OF CF POND, SOUTHEAST DALLAS.
UH, IT'S THE SITE, UH, AERIAL VIEW.
AND SO AS FOR AS FOR THE SURROUNDING USES, THERE'S MOTOR VEHICLE VIEW STATION, VEHICLE DISPLAYS, SURVEILLANCE AND SERVICE TO THE NORTHEAST.
UH, THERE'S SOME VEHICLE DISPLAYS, SALES AND SERVICE IN THE EAST, AN UNDEVELOPED PARCEL.
UH, CROSS
AND THERE'S MACHINERY, HEAVY TRUCK EQUIPMENT OR CHART SALES AND SERVICE HAVE BEEN REQUESTS AND THE AREA REQUEST IS CURRENTLY BUILT OUT AS A SERVICE PARKING FACILITY.
AND ZONE C AS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT, UM, YOU USE A MOTOR VEHICLE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THE, THE DISTRICT, BUT IT REQUIRES AN S U P WITHIN 500 SQUARE, EXCUSE ME, 500 FEET OF A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WHICH THIS PROPERTY B AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SIGN PLAN WITH A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING FACILITY, FORCING TRUCK PARKING SPACES SURROUNDED BY FENCE ACCESS FROM SILVERADO DRIVE, COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING WITH DEFINED 51 A AS A FACILITY FOR THE TEMPORARY DAILY OR OVERNIGHT PARKING OF COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES AS A FINE IN THE USE OF REGULATIONS FOR A TRUCK STOP AND OR MOTOR VEHICLES WITH TWO OR MORE REAR AXLES SUCH AS TRUCKS, TRUCK TRACTORS, AND SIMILAR VEHICLES FOR NO CHARGE OR, OR FEE.
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THAT FEE IS BEING CHARGED INDEPENDENTLY OR ANY OTHER USE ON THE LOT.
DEPARTMENT IS NOT ACCESSORY TO A MAIN USE ON THE LOT WORDY BUT IMPORTANT.
UM, SO TO GET DOWN TO THE SITE, THE SITE SILVERADO, UM, WITH SOME TRUCK PARKING ON IT RIGHT NOW.
UM, THIS IS ALSO MORE OF THE SITE BY LOOKING WEST.
THAT'S GONNA BE, UM, THAT'S ACTUALLY, THAT'S GONNA BE BEYOND THE ENTRANCE FOR THOSE SITE'S.
GONNA BE A DIFFERENT, UH, FACILITY.
THIS IS RIGHT LOOKING IN, I THINK THE, UH, DRIVEWAY AND THIS IS THE EAST MOST PART OF THIS SITE WITH TRUCKS AND KIND OF THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE LENGTH OF THE SITE GOING OVER TO THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE AS IT'S USED TODAY, LOOKING SOUTH, UH, WEST DOWN IN COLORADO MEANS THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO, TO YOUR LEFT.
UH, THIS PROPERTY IS UNDEVELOPED CSS WITH BE UNDEVELOPED AND THAT THERE'S COMMERCIAL TRUCK PARKING OVER THERE TO THE EAST WITH THE, UH, SOUTHERN PROPERTY RIGHT TO MY LEFT.
IT'S THE ADJACENCY OF THE RESIDENTIAL USE AND THE, UH, PROPOSED USE ON THE RIGHT.
UM, AND UH, ACROSS SILVERADO IS RESIDENTIAL USE.
THERE, UM, ENTRANCE THROUGH THAT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY RIGHT NOW RUN BACK, UH, THIS IS KIND OF A FLY OVER THE SILVERADO AS CF ON TRUCK, TRUCK USE.
IT'S A TRUCK STOP EXISTS TODAY.
UH, IT IS PAST THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SIGN THERE, I GUESS I NOTED.
UH, BUT THAT'S, UH, AFTER THE ENTRANCE OF THIS PROPERTY.
UM, HERE'S THE SIDE PLAN AS IT'S PROPOSED, UH, THEY ENTER FROM SILVERADO AND THERE'S 14 SPACES ALONG THE WESTERN BOUNDARY AND FENCE AROUND THE EXTERIOR PROPOSE THE CONDITIONS, UH, PER TYPICAL REQUESTING TWO YEARS ELIGIBILITY FOR TWO YEAR ADMIN AT THAT POINT.
UM, THE LIGHTING LIMITATION, UH, THAT POINTS AWAY.
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, UH, PARKING AREAS SCREEN WITH AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH AND SOLID SCREEN FENCE.
AND THE OTHER TYPICAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL.
QUESTION COMMISSIONER BLAIR, UM, AS YOU SAW, UH, UM, MR. PETTY YES.
UM, WERE YOU AWARE THAT THERE WERE, UH, THAT THERE WAS AN ACTIVE CODE VIOLATION BEING PURSUED ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY? THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, YES.
ARE YOU AWARE THAT THIS, THIS PROPERTY IS
[01:15:01]
PART OF THREE ADDRESSES ALL CONNECTED TO THE SAME PROPERTY OWNER? YES.AND ARE, UH, WERE YOU AWARE, WERE YOU AWARE THAT TWO OF THE THREE ALL HAVE THE SAME CODE VIOLATIONS? UH, YES, I BELIEVE SO.
AND THAT TWO OF THE THREE ARE ALSO, UM, IN ONE STEP, UH, BEFORE GOING TO COMMUNITY PROSECUTION FOR THE CODE VIOLATIONS.
AND UM, SO I KNOW I'M GOING TO IT.
UM, SO MR. PEPPY, UM, IN ORDER TO, TO MAKE THIS, IF, IF, IF THE APPLICANT WANTED TO MAKE THIS SITE WORK, UM, WOULD NOT THERE BE CONSIDER THANK YOU.
THAT'S BEST PICTURE IN THE WORLD.
UM, THAT PICTURE IS WORTH WITHOUT WORDS, THAT'S SILVERADO, CORRECT? YEAH.
UH, ROAD ON OUR LEFT IT SILVERADO AND HAS SOME CURVED GUTTERS? NO, NOT.
AND IT'S NOT CONDUCIVE FOR TRUCK TRAFFIC, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND THAT, THAT ROAD LEADS SILVERADO LEADS RACE STRAIGHT TO CLEAVER ROAD, CORRECT? YES.
UM, I THINK THAT THAT'S ENOUGH.
FOLLOWING UP ON COMMISSIONER BLAIR'S QUESTIONS.
DOES THIS SITE HAVE A CO OF ANY COMMENT? NO, THIS SITE DOES NOT HAVE A CO NO.
AND THAT IS ITSELF A VIOLATION OF THE CODE A CO FOR WHAT? A CO FOR ANYTHING SMELTING FOR ANYTHING COUNTY DOES NOT REQUIRE COS BUT
LIKE WHAT DO YOU ISSUE THE SEAL BASED ON? AND THEN IF THERE IS A VIOLATION AND THEY'RE COMING FOR THE GENERAL ZONING CHANGER FOR THE S U P, IT'S THERE.
THEY'RE SHOWING US, YOU SEE, I'M TRYING TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE, SO WE NEED TO ALWAYS BALANCE THAT.
ALRIGHT, WELL HOW, HOW LONG HAS THE USE BEEN IN, IN PLACE? IT'S BEST, YOU KNOW, UH, UP THE, SO I ACTUALLY, THESE TAKE PICTURES TAKEN A LONG TIME AGO.
UM, I WANT TO SAY THESE ARE TAKEN ONE AND A HALF YEARS AGO WHEN I TOOK THESE PHOTOS RATHER HIM BACK CONDITION PEN UP HERE? SIMILAR.
UM, AND THEN, WELL, I'M MORE INTERESTED IN GOING BACK FURTHER.
THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT UP THE, SO THOSE PICTURES THAT YOU'RE SEEING WERE FROM THEN, UM, THIS AREA I BELIEVE IS FROM THE 20 20 19 OR 2020.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE GAS IS PRETTY RECENT IN, IN THE FULLNESS OF TIME.
UM, AND THERE IS NO, WELL THE, THE ONLY USE ON THE LOT AT PRESENT IS THE PARKING OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES.
THAT'S SO THAT'S NOT ACCESSORY TO ANY OTHER MAIN UNITS? AN INDIVIDUAL LOT.
SO IT'S, I DON'T SEE IT AS ACCESSORY BECAUSE IT'S ON ONE LOT OR WHETHER WAS PRESENT ON THAT LOT AND WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE DEFINITION, UM, OF NORTH FROM OTHER VEHICLE ON THE LINE.
SO THIS ISN'T EVEN A CO FOR A COMMERCIAL FOR, FOR A COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT THAT IS BEING MISUSED FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES AS WE SOMETIMES SEE? NO, IT'S, IT, IT IS NOT THAT.
NO, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT SEAL FOR COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING OR I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING 'CAUSE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING, TALKING ABOUT TRUCKS TRUCK PARKING, RIGHT? YOU'RE THINKING, UM, I I'M THINKING A LOT COMMERCIAL, COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE.
UM, IT'S, IT IS NOT THAT, IT IS NOT BAD.
NOR DOES IT EVEN PRETEND TO NOT BASED ON THE, I I I THINK THAT IT'S DEAD COMMISSIONER AND BERRY COMMISSIONER, SO OH, DID I HEARD RIGHT THAT IT IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT.
IT JUST NEEDS SAY IT SHOULD BE, IT'S
[01:20:01]
NOT SAY IN THE BEGINNING.BROADLY N CS COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING IS A BY RIDE USE, BUT IT REQUIRES AN S U P WHEN IT'S IN 500 FEET OF RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AS ASSIGNED CASE.
SO WE EVALUATED IT'S NOT BY RIDE IN THIS, ON THIS PROPERTY.
SO, UM, IS THERE ANY USES SIMILAR TO THAT IN THE, IN, IN, IN PROXIMITY TO DIFFERENT LOCATION? THERE ARE SIMILAR USES FARTHER TO THE EAST.
UM, THEY MAY EITHER BE THE, AND I WON'T SPEAK TO THE STATUS OF THOSE PROPERTIES.
MANY OF THEM ARE FURTHER FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
'CAUSE YOUR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY'S SOUTH OF THIS ONE.
YOU SEE THE BLACK LINE CUTTING THROUGH A BAG MIDDLE, THAT'S YOUR RESIDENTIAL ZONE.
UM, SO THERE ARE, AS I SAID, UH, SOME FURTHER EAST ALONG CF ON SIMILAR USES.
UH, I DON'T KNOW THE STATUS IF, AS IF EACH OF THOSE HAVE BEEN MEASURED AS 500 FEET.
BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER SIMILAR USES TO, TO THE EAST AND, AND ALSO FREIGHT, PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL.
THOSE ARE OUR, I WOULD SAY MORE SEPARATED.
UM, THE ONES TO THE EAST ARE MORE SEPARATED.
UH, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT OCCURRING HERE.
IS IS, IS THERE A WAY, CAN HE ASK WELL WHY, WHY THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.
UM, THERE'S AN ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USE TO THIS ONE THAT WAS TRIGGERED BY IT.
IT IS TRIGGERED BY ZONING AND NOT USED THAT 500 FEET THING.
UM, HOWEVER, A LOT OF THIS AREA WAS BUILT OUT BEFORE CSS ZONING POTENTIALLY.
SO YOU SEE RESIDENTIAL IN SOME OF THE CSS ZONING, UM, THAT I, AS THE PLANNER WOULD SAY, ALTHOUGH IT'S ZONE CSS, IT DESERVES CONSIDERATION AS EXISTING RESIDENTIAL.
UM, WHEN WE LOOK AT IS IT, IS IT AN APPROPRIATE ADJACENCY, IS IT NOT THAT PLAYED IN? AND SO YOU SEE THAT RIGHT THERE ON UH, SILVERADO TO THE SOUTHWEST.
THE DUST LOT, UM, IS A GENERALLY RESIDENTIAL USE.
IT'S COMMERCIAL ZONING BUT THEN CA CORNER TO THE SOUTH, THAT'S A RESIDENTIAL ZONE RESIDENTIAL USED PROPERTY.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT INFLUENCED THE DECISION AS WELL AS THE INFRASTRUCTURE ON THE STREET, UH, END OF THE SIDE AND THE UM, CONDITIONS AS PROPOSED.
I DON'T THINK THEY NECESSARILY, UH, FORWARD THE, UM, ADJACENCY OR EXCUSE ME, THE UH, APPROPRIATENESS, OH THERE'S NO ENGINES THAT CAN BE CREATED THAT WOULD NOT, UM, ON ANY PART OF THE PROPERTY.
SO THAT WILL ALLOW FOR THEM TO HAVE, I MEAN TO HAVE ENTRANCE INTO THE PROPERTY, THEY, THE USE OR EXCUSE ME, THE PROPERTY CAN BE DEVELOPED NOW IN ANY OTHER CS COMMERCIAL USE.
I'M NOT LOOKING FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE.
IS IT BECAUSE IS THE ISSUE THAT 'CAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY TO THE RESIDENTIAL, IS THERE ANOTHER, IS THERE ANOTHER WAY INTO THE PROPERTY THAT, THAT THE, THE APPLICANT CAN OFFER AS A FEE RESTRICTION FOR ACCESS THAT WILL LIMIT THE CONTACT WITH THOSE IN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
IT DOESN'T FRONT ANY OTHER PUBLIC STREETS IS WHAT I'LL SAY.
UH, THEY COULD, THEY WOULD HAVE TO NEGOTIATE TO GET OTHER KINDS OF ACCESS.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO NEGOTIATE WITH UM, OTHER PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS.
BUT THIS IS THE ONLY PUBLIC STREET THAT IT FRONTS OR COULD POSSIBLY FEASIBLY MAKE AGGRESSIVE.
UM, I CARPENTER MR. PAGE, THE LARGE ADJOINING COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING LOT 2105 SILVERADO.
ARE YOU AWARE THEY DON'T HAVE A C FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER? LAST TIME I CHECKED WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT THEY WERE COED AS MACHINERY HEAVY EQUIPMENT FOR TRUCK SETTING SERVICE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY ON MY RIGHT, BUT THAT'S NOT, I WON'T SPEAK TO THE OPERATIONS ON THE ADJACENT SIDE, BUT LAST TIME WE SPOKE AT CODE ENFORCEMENT, THAT WAS WHAT THEY, OH, IT WAS FOR, THAT'S DATABASE.
BUT OKAY, IF THIS IS A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING LOT, THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE TO HAVE, BECAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY RESIDENTIAL HAVE QUESTION HOW DEEP THOSE WATERS ARE.
[01:25:01]
IT'S THE ADJO IS CS SINGLE PANEL.I HAVEN'T MEASURED FROM THAT, THAT OTHER PROPERTY TO THE RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTHEAST.
BUT YEAH, IT IS, IT, IT IS BEHIND THIS, THIS PROPERTY.
DO WE KNOW IF THIS, THE APPLICANT FOR THIS SIDED QUESTION IS THE SAME OPERATOR AS THE THE OPERATOR? MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S THE SAME OPERATOR.
MR. PROPERTY IS 260 FEET DEEP.
SO THAT WOULD PUT THE NORTHWESTERN PROPERTY WITHIN 500 FEET TODAY.
'CAUSE I MEAN, WELL YEAH, YOU'D BE USING SILVERADO AS YOUR GENERATOR OF THAT 500 FEET.
SO LOOKS LIKE YES, BUT THE, I I JUST WILL SAY THE MACHINERY HEAVY EQUIPMENT ON TRUCK SALES AND SERVICES AT
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CASE 10 OR 11 HELD? SO WE'RE, OKAY, THIS IS Z 2 2 3 1 1 2.
THIS IS THIS MULTI-PART APPLICATION.
UM, ONE FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A MOTOR MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION.
AND TWO, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE.
THAT IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL 3,500 SQUARE FEET LESS THE PROPERTY ZONE.
SUBDISTRICT FIVE, RELEVANT DISTRICT NUMBER FIVE THREE, THE CF PALM AND IT HAS A D ONE CONTROLLED OVERLAY AND THIS IS THE SOUTHWEST CORNER,
THAT STAR IS UH, SHOULD BE FARTHER UP CF O.
UM, BUT THIS IS AT CF O AND UH, ELAM, ELAM, ELAM, UM, EL.
UM, AND THEN THE DOCK STATION IS A LITTLE BIT FARTHER TO THE EAST FOR REFERENCE.
UH, SO HERE'S THE SUBJECT SITE.
THOSE ARE THE PARCELS, UM, AS REQUESTED, UH, CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED AND IT BURNS ALONG US 1 75.
UH, THERE'S UNDEVELOPED SIGN CROSS ELLUM TO THE NORTH.
UH, THERE'S SOME SINGLE FAMILY, UH, TO THE, UH, WEST.
UH, AND THEN THERE'S A AUTO SERVICE CENTER THAT SORT OF WRAPS AROUND THIS PARCEL TO THE WEST OF SOUTHWEST.
AND THERE'S A VEHICLE DISPLAY SALES AND SERVICE USE OF THE SOUTHEAST.
AND THE AREA OF REQUEST IS CURRENTLY ZONE SUBJECT TO FIVE MP 5 33.
AND IT DOES HAVE A D ONE CONTROLLED OVERLAY CURRENTLY DEVELOPED.
THEY'RE PROPOSING A NEW MOTOR VEHICLE STATION FUEL STATION WITH AN ASSOCIATED GENERAL MERCHANDISER STORE BY SQUARE FEET.
LEFT GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE IS PERMIT BY RIGHT.
UM, AND THEN AMONG COMMITTEES IS THE PD MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATIONS PERMITTED IN THIS SUB-DISTRICT ONLY WITH THE S E P AND THE PROPERTY IS ALSO IN S G ONE.
AND, AND SO SHOULD THEY DEVELOP A GENERAL MOTION AS A
SO HERE'S THE CYCLING, WHAT CAN I SAY? UM, IT HAS AN SIDE PLAN DEPICTS AN ENTRANCE ON C F O AND ONE
[01:30:01]
ON ELLUM AS WELL.THEY HAVE GAS PUMPS, UM, PARALLEL TO C F O AND THEN THEY CUT THEIR, UH, RETAIL BUILDING ON THE SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
AND WHEN I GET DOWN DOWN TO THE SITE, IT'S
AND THERE'S THAT DEEPER PART OF THE LOT PICTURED, UM, THE SITE AND FROM ELAM, UH, THE ELAM INTERSECTION SIDE.
SO YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE RIGHT.
AND NOW WE'RE LOOKING NORTH, UH, WEST UP THE FREEWAY.
AND THEN INTERSECTION GENERALLY PICTURED THERE.
UH, THE UNDERPASS OF C POND FREEWAY, THE PRIOR, NOW THIS IS THE SOUTH, UH, SOUTHEAST MOST PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, UH, WHERE LET'S A, UH, VEHICLE SALE AND SERVICE USE, UH, PROPOSED CONDITIONS.
WE'VE GOT ONE H FOR APPEAL USE AND, BUT UH, ALCOHOL SALES BEEN
AND THEN FOR THE GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE, THEY ALSO REQUEST THREE YEARS THE MAXIMUM INQUIRY, 3,500 FOR THE AND OUTSIDE SPEAKERS PERMITTED, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
IS IT, UH, IN THIS PARTICULAR, UM, MATTER THAT, UM, THERE, THE, THE MAIN REASON WHY THE, THAT THE RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL IS THAT THE FACT IS THAT ENTRY POINTS IN THE SETUP OF THIS PARTICULAR LOT, IS THAT NOT CORRECT? YES.
THE, THE SIZE AND ORIENTATION OF THE LOT, I WOULD SAY MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO DEVELOP GIVEN THE NATURE OF THE USE FOR THIS USE MOTOR VEHICLE STATION REQUIRES A GOOD AMOUNT OF SPACE WITH MECHANIC THE BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED PARKING.
SO IT, SO AS LONG AS THIS IS THE DESIGN STANDARD THAT THAT, THAT THIS, THIS APPLICANT IS USING, THIS IS NOT EVEN IF, EVEN IF EVEN IF WE WERE TO TRY TO MOVE THIS FORWARD, IT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED.
IT, IT, IT WOULD HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME GETTING PERMITTED, UM, GOING THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS TO BUILD IT, THIS, THIS LAYOUT.
HAVING A, ONE OF THEM BEING THE ENTRANCE, UH, ON
UH, IT'S PRETTY, IT'S QUITE CLOSE.
I DON'T HAVE A DISTANCE, BUT IT SHOULD BE, UH, CLOSER TO A HUNDRED FEET IN DISTANCE.
UM, SO IT'S, IT'S QUITE A CLOSE DRIVEWAY TO THAT INTERSECTION.
UH, THAT SAID, THERE'S NOT TOO MANY ALTERNATIVES.
SO I, WE DID INFORM 'EM OF THIS, BUT THEY DID NOT, UH, RESPOND WITH ANY CHANGES OR, OR ALTERATIONS 'CAUSE IT IS, UH, POTENTIALLY UNLIKELY THAT THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO BUY
UH, THEY ALSO HAVE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO, UH, BUY THE PD BETWEEN THE FRONT END STREETS AND THE PROPERTY WHERE SERVICE PARKING BEGINS.
UM, THEY DON'T GENERALLY HAVE ROOM FOR THAT, UH, BECAUSE OF WHERE THE PROPERTY LINES ARE AND THE AMOUNT OF SPACE THAT NEEDS TO TAKE IN A BY CANOPY PARKING AND, UH, DRIVEBYS AROUND THEM.
SO THEY WOULD NOT BE, THEY WOULD IN THIS DESIGN STANDARD, THEY CANNOT MEET ARTICLE 10 AS WELL? NO, THEY CAN'T MEET THE, THE, THE DESIGN, THE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PD.
AND THERE WAS NO, UM, ALTERNATE OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT IN ORDER TO MITIGATE THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT ISSUE? NO, NO.
AND I, I DON'T SEE AS FEASIBLE DUE WITH SMALL SIZE SIDE.
SO EVEN, EVEN IF THEY DID MAKE THAT DECISION, DID WOULD BE BASED ON THE, THE SIZE OF THIS PARTICULAR LAYOUT OF THIS PARTICULAR LOT.
THIS IS JUST A DIFFICULT, UM, UH, USE TO BE, TO PUT PLACE AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE WHILE CITY, YES, THANK YOU.
I'M NOT SURE TO ASK WAS IT WAS THE PREVIOUS USE CRIME TEAR DOWN A GAS STATION?
[01:35:01]
THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE WAS A GAS STATION IN, IN A PREVIOUS UH, ITERATION THAT WAS DEMOLISHED.HOW, HOW, HOW LONG AGO WAS IT? UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION? I DON'T HAVE TIME ON IT.
UM, PRETTY RECENTLY COMMITTEE OVER OVER TWO YEARS.
UH, FOLLOWING UP ON COMMISSIONER BLAIR'S QUESTION AND LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN ON PAGE 1211, YOU'VE IDENTIFIED THREE PROBLEMS WITH THAT.
ONE IS THAT THERE ONE PARKING SPACE SHORT THAT MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT BE FIXABLE WITH AN ALTERNATIVE SITE PLAN? CORRECT? THAT'S A FINE WAY TO PUT IT.
LIKEWISE, THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER, THAT'S GONNA TAKE UP MORE SPACE THAN JUST ONE PARKING LOT.
BUT THAT LIGHT OR MIGHT NOT BE FIXABLE WITH THE REVISED CYCLING.
BUT THE DEAL BREAKER, IF YOU WILL, IS THE DRIVEWAY DISTANCE, WHICH IS JAMMED UP TOWARD THE E THE UH, INTERSECTION BETWEEN THE STREET ELAM AND UH, THE FREEWAY SERVICE ROAD.
THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY HERE IS LIMITED, SO I DON'T SEE HOW THAT DRIVEWAY WOULD GET FARTHER WEST.
SO, WELL THAT'S THAT, THAT'S WHERE I'M HEADED NEXT.
UM, THERE IS A DRIVEWAY TO THE, UM, MOTOR VEHICLE USE TO THE WEST, WHICH IS OF COURSE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE INTERSECTION THAN THE APPLICANT'S DRIVEWAY.
IF HYPOTHETICALLY THEY COULD DO A, AN, AN ACCESS EASEMENT FROM THAT DRIVEWAY TO THE WEST, WOULD THAT BE SUFFICIENT DISTANCE? POTENTIALLY, UH, 100 FOOT WAS WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR BASED ON THE UH, DESIGN MANUAL.
THE 79 FEEDS BY STILL NOT, UH, STILL NOT CUT.
IS THE SOUTHEAST BOUND SERVICE ROAD ON CF POND IS THAT WAY ONE WAY SOUTHEAST BOUND? YES, CORRECT.
SO IF THEY WERE TO PUT A SECOND DRIVEWAY ON THE SERVICE ROAD, THEY WOULD LIMIT THEIR EXITING TRAFFIC TO GOING SOUTHEAST TO THE NEXT UH, TURN.
AND AND NOT ONLY THAT, THOSE ENTRANCES ARE ALL AT SUBJECT TO APPROVAL.
I THINK THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS.
SO UM, FOLLOWING UP BEFORE ON COMMISSIONER WHEELER'S QUESTION, THERE WAS PREVIOUSLY A GAS STATION HERE.
WAS IT THE SAME CONFIGURATION? THERE WAS A CANOPY? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE WAS A CANOPY GENERALLY LOCATED KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SITE.
REMEMBER THE BUILDING WAS I, I CAN ASSUME IT WAS IN THE SOUTHWEST PORTION, BUT THAT WOULD'VE BEEN BUILT EITHER ON SIGNIFICANT OLDER CITY CODE OR PRIOR TO CITY CODE.
OKAY, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY QUESTION.
LIKE HOW DID THEY NOT HAVE THE SAME ISSUE WITH THE DRIVEWAY ON E ONE TO READ THE CURRENT CODE, LIKELY IT EITHER PRIOR ANNEXATION, UH, OR PRIOR TO ZONING CURRENT ROAD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO QUESTION.
UH, THAT THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ON CASE NUMBER 13 CO PLEASE LEMME KNOW WHEN YOU CAN SEE MY SCREEN.
[01:40:06]
THIS HAS TWO ELEMENTS TO THE REQUEST.ONE IS FOR A U P D AND THIS PD HAS EITHER AN M U THREE BASE AND THEN ADDITIONAL PROJECT STANDARDS FOR A SPECIAL PROJECT.
AND THEN, AND THEN THE SECOND ELEMENTS OF THE REQUEST IS FOR A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.
THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED, IT HAS SPLIT ZONING SO WE HAVE A GR GENERAL RETAIL STUFF IS REPRESENT PD 1 93 AND PD NUMBER NINE, WHICH HAS A BASE OF N S FOR NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE USES THE ENTIRE, NO THAT PORTION THE AN SS SECTION IN PD NINE DOES HAVE A D OVERLAY, WHICH IS WHY THEY'RE REQUESTING TO GO TO A D ONE.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST CORNER OF CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD AND FAIRMONT STREET AND THERE'S ADDITIONAL FRONT PAGE ON POWELL AND I'LL SHOW YOU THAT IN JUST A MOMENT.
IT'S JUST ABOUT FOUR ACRES AND OF COURSE IT'S LOCATED IN UPTOWN.
UH, AND THEN HERE IS THE PROPERTY AND ZONING IS KIND OF ACTUALLY DIFFICULT TO SEE THE ZONING ON THIS MAP, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
BUT UM, MAJORITY IS ZONED PD 1 93 IN THE VICINITY.
THERE ARE SEVERAL PDSS, OKAY UH, WITH A VARIETY OF SUB-DISTRICT BASES, MOSTLY IN THE GR SUB-DISTRICT BASE WITH A FEW IN THE LC.
AND THEN THE PROPERTY THAT'S RED IS THE REMAINDER OF PD NINE.
AND THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW ITS VERY POSITION CONTAINS OFFICE BAR, A SPOT AND SURFACE PARKING USES, WHICH WE'LL SEE MORE CLEARLY IN THE AERIAL MAP IN JUST A MOMENT.
AND THEN SURROUNDING LAND USES INCLUDE A VARIETY OF OFFICE BAR, MULTIPLE FAMILY AND AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO THE NORTH ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE.
AND THEN ADDITIONAL RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICE USES AND A FEW UNIQUE USES INCLUDING CHAPTER FACILITY AND UM, THE SALE OF CONJUNCTION WITH AN ESTABLISHMENT OF A RELIGIOUS, CHARITABLE OR PHILANTHROPIC NATURE WHICH IS ACTUALLY FOUND IN PD.
WHY IT'S DEFINED SO STRICTLY IT WAS DEFINED BY F P AND THEN TO THE SOUTHWEST ADDITIONAL BANK AND SAVINGS LOAN OFFICE, THE DRIVING WINDOW AND OFFICE USES.
SO HERE IS AN AREA MAP AS I NOTED.
YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT THE SITE IS LARGELY ENGAGED, UM, NOT VERY MUCH GREEN AREA, LOTS OF SURFACE PARKING THROUGHOUT.
AND THE FRONTAGES HAS FOUR STREET FRONTAGES ALONG CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD, RUTH POWELL AND
NOW WE WILL CONDUCT THE SITE VISIT.
THIS IS, I'M NOT SURE WHY I STARTED HERE ON HOW I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, BUT LET'S GO AHEAD AND ENTER THE INTERIOR OF THE SIGN, ALL THE SURFACE PARKING EXISTING OFFICE S WITHIN THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN AS WE TRAVEL NORTHWEST ON THE ROOF, YOU SEE THE OTHER OFFICE USES PHILANTHROPIC USE THAT SELLS ALCOHOL AND THEN OTHER SURROUNDING USES HERE, UM, TO THE NORTH AT CEDAR SPRINGS AND GROUP.
AND THEN AS WE TRAVEL WESTWARD, WE'RE GONNA GO COUNTERCLOCKWISE FOR ONCE, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT BUT I HAD ALREADY SET UP SO I WENT WITH IT.
NOW WE'RE TRAVEL SOUTHWEST ALONG CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD.
YOU SEE THE DEVELOPED NATURE, THE SIDEWALKS IN THE AREA, THE HEIGHT OF THE SURROUNDING, UH, OFFICE STRUCTURES AND MIX OF USES AND TRAVELING SOUTHEAST ON FAIRMONT, SOME REALLY GOOD SCREENING MAGNOLIAS ALL ALONG THE SECTION TURNING ONTO HOWELL AND THEN ADDITIONAL OFFICE USES FOR THE QUAD ARRIVAL.
AND THEN RESIDENTIAL USE AT THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF RUTH ADJACENT TO
NOW THIS CHART IS UH, PROBABLY EASIER TO READ IN THE CASE REPORT AND IT SHOWS IT ALL IN ONE CHART INSTEAD OF BROKEN TWO.
THE WAY THAT IT BROKEN IT APART HERE IS SHOWING THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED COMPARISON DISTRICT AND THEN THE SPECIAL PROJECT AND COMPARISON TO THE M I H CATEGORY BASE UNDER THE MP THREE DISTRICT UM, STANDARDS.
AND THIS WAY YOU HAVE A CLEARER VISION OF WHAT IS PROPOSED SINCE THE SITE COULD HAVE EITHER A BASE DEVELOPMENT TYPE WITH THE M THREE STANDARDS OR A SPECIAL PROJECT AS ALLEVIATE SPECIFICALLY IN THE PPE CONDITIONS.
SO FOR THAT REASON WE HAVE A EVENT, OF COURSE THE DUAL ZONING.
[01:45:01]
SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT TWO THOSE EXISTING ZONING DISTRICTS WHICH ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT IN NATURE.IF YOU LOOK AT THE SETBACKS, THE HEIGHT, THE UM, F A R AND THE LOT COVERAGE, THEY'RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
AND THEN THE LAND USES AS WELL.
OBVIOUSLY PD NINE IS BUILT IN A TIME WHERE THEY ENVISIONED THIS AREA AS BEING MORE NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE, NOT QUITE AS URBAN.
AND THEN NOW WHAT'S BEEN DEVELOPED IN THE VICINITY AND WHAT WE'VE SEEN WITH THE OAK LAWN PD IS THAT WE HAVE A LOT DENSER, MORE URBAN.
THIS IS A CORE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE URBAN CENTER OF THE CITY OF DALLAS.
AND SO FOR THAT REASON THE GI SUBDISTRICT IN IN BOTH UM, CHAPTER 51 AS WELL AS IN PD 1 93 LENDS TO SLIGHTLY LESSENED UM, SETBACKS.
AND THEN OF COURSE ADDITIONAL F A R HEIGHTS AND LOCK COVERAGE WITH THE ADDITION OF DIFFERENT USES TO MAKE OR FORM A MORE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING INSTITUTIONS AND RESOURCES AS WELL AS EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES ALONG WITH UM, THE MCKINNEY RAIL WHICH IS ABOUT A MILE AWAY FROM THE SUBJECT SITES AND
SO THE PROPOSED PD HEAVY THREE PHASE DOES, UM, DOES VENTURE A LITTLE FROM THOSE STANDARDS IN THE G SUBDISTRICT BY TECHNICALLY REDUCING SOME OF THE SETBACKS.
BUT THEN IT DOES HAVE A DIFFERENCE IN HOW THEY'RE SET BACK AT GREATER HEIGHTS AND THAT'S SPECIFICALLY IMPORTANT AS THE MD THREE DISTRICT DOES ALLOW GREATER INTENSITY OF HEIGHT.
AND THEN THE BLOCK COVERAGE MATCHES AND THE MIX OF USES IS PRETTY SIMILAR TO THE DR SUB DISTRICT AS 12.
SO WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS GREATER HEIGHT AND A CHANGE IN HOW SETBACKS ARE REPRESENTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEN FOR THE PROPOSED PD FOR
WHAT THEY'VE DONE IS THEY'VE MATCHED THE SETBACKS MORE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY CURRENTLY EXIST, WHICH DOESN'T NECESSARILY ALIGN THE VISION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH SAYS TO REDUCE SETBACKS.
HOWEVER, THEY HAVE TAKEN TWO OF THOSE THREE FRONTAGES AND REDUCE THEM FROM 25 FEET FOR THE EXISTING PLAN FOR NEW UH, P NINE FRONTAGE DOWN TO 20 FEET.
SO THERE IS SOME REDUCTION ALONG WITH THE GREATER HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE, BRINGING MORE URBAN FORM UP TO THAT UH, STREET FRONTAGE AND INTO THE PEDESTRIAN GROUND.
AND THEN ADDITIONALLY THEY'VE ALLOWED FOR UM, A MUCH GREATER F A R IF THEY DO HAVE THE SPECIAL PROJECT STANDARDS MET, WHICH INCLUDE INCREASED OPEN SPACE AND DESIGN STANDARDS AND MIXED INCOME HOUSING BEING PROVIDED.
THEY COULD GO ALL THE WAY UP TO EIGHT F A R AND HAVE UH, DIFFERENT PLANES PERMITTED IN THE THREE TOWERS AS PROPOSED.
THOSE THREE TOWERS GO FROM 330 FEET ALL THE WAY UP TO 415 FEET AND THAT'S OF COURSE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE FROM THE BASE AND U THREE STANDARD OF 270 AND THEN THE EXISTING GR SUBDISTRICT OF 120 OR THE EXISTING PD NINE THAT GOES ALL THE WAY BACK DOWN TO 36 FEET.
NOW IN ORDER TO UTILIZE THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, THEY DID HAVE TO QUALIFY THAT THE STORY RESTRICTION HAD TO BE REMOVED BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE BASE OF 20 STORIES FOR THE M THREE BASE DISTRICT.
SO THEY HAVE TO MOVE THAT WITH SPECIAL PRODUCT STANDARDS.
AND THEN COMPARISON IS TO THE M I H CATEGORY E INCENTIVES OFFERED.
AND WHILE THERE ARE NO HEIGHT INCENTIVES, WE DO SEE A INCREASE IN LAW COVERAGE AND INCREASE IN F A R, WHICH IS QUITE SIMILAR IF YOU LOOK AT IT IN COMPARISON IT CAN GO ALL THE WAY UP TO THREE ADDITIONAL F A R POINTS WITH ONE EXTRA FOR A T O D OR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.
NOW THIS SITE ISN'T NECESSARILY CONSIDERED A T O B BUT THEY ARE WITHIN ONE MILE AND THEY ARE IN AN URBAN CENTER IN UPTOWN A VERY WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO BY CAPITALIZING ON THOSE ELEMENTS, THEY HAVE REQUESTED UP TO A FOUR POINT F A R INCREASE WHILE PROVIDING THIS INCOME HOUSING EITHER ON SITE OR THROUGH THE BLUE.
NOW HERE IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
IT IDENTIFIES THESE THREE TOWERS AS PROPOSED BUILDING NUMBER ONE IS THE ONE TO THE OUT CURRENTLY LOCATED 89.
IT THEN HAS THE LOWEST HEIGHT OF 330 FEET.
NOW THE ONES IN THE NORTHEAST, IT HAS THE HEIGHT OF 385 AND THEN TO THE NORTHWEST IS 415.
[01:50:01]
FURTHERMORE THIS IS THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN WHICH IS ONLY REQUIRED FOR A SPECIAL PROJECT.AS YOU SEE, THEY HAVE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN LANDSCAPE PLAN ASSOCIATION WITH THIS REQUEST TODAY, WHICH GIVES THE IMPRESSION THAT THEY DO PLAN TO UTILIZE THE SPECIAL PROJECT STANDARDS AND PROVIDE THE NEXT ING AS PROPOSED IN THE MEETING COMMISSIONS.
THIS LANDSCAPE PLAN SHOWS UM, A SITE THAT IS COMPLIANT BASICALLY WITH ARTICLE 10 WHILE UTILIZING SOME OF THE URBAN STREET, UH, URBAN STREET STANDARDS THAT ARE FOUND IN ARTICLE 10.
AND SO AGAIN, THE ESTATE PLAN IS ONLY REQUIRED FOR SPECIAL PROJECT AND THEY SUBMITTED ONE TO US TODAY AND OUR TENANTS REQUIRED OTHERWISE THIS PLANT WAS REVIEWED BY R C ARBORISTS AND FOUND TO BE ACCEPTABLE AND A BUILDING HEIGHT PLANT WAS ALSO PROVIDED TO BETTER PROVIDE THESE SETBACKS THAT ARE PROVIDED FOR THESE TOLERANCE STRUCTURES.
AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO HELP US UNDERSTAND IT BETTER AND I'M HOPING THAT WHAT I PROVIDED IN THE CASE REPORT WAS CLEAR ENOUGH THAT IT, IT COMBINED WITH THIS PLAN YOU WERE ABLE TO GET A GOOD SENSE OF THOSE ADDITIONAL EFFECTS PROVIDED IN THE PROPERTY.
I WON'T LIE, IT WAS VERY CONFUSING AND LUKE DID A FANTASTIC JOB OF TALKING ME THROUGH IT SO I CAN THOROUGHLY UNDERSTAND THIS AND I WANT TO THANK UM, LUKE FRIENDS AND THEIR TEAM FOR WORKING DILIGENTLY ON THIS PROJECT.
OVERALL I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEVIATIONS AND ENHANCEMENTS THAT ARE OFFERED THROUGH THIS PD.
SO ULTIMATELY THEY ARE ADJUSTING SETBACKS WHERE THEY HAVE SLIGHTLY REDUCED IN SOME CASES BUT ACCOMMODATES THE GREATER SETBACK OVERALL FOR THOSE TOLERANCE OF STRUCTURES AS PROPOSED.
AND THEN SPECIFICALLY FOR A SPECIAL PROJECT, THEY INCREASE THE HEIGHT ALL THE WAY UP TO QUARTER 15 FEET AND THEY ARE UP TO 8.0 AND THEN OF COURSE THE BASE DISTRICT HAS THOSE INCREASES BUILT IN AS WELL.
SO THEY'RE STILL GETTING SOMETHING EITHER WAY.
THESE ARE BOTH UP ZONING REQUESTS AND THEN THOSE STORIES TO UTILIZE THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT IF THEY DO HAVE A SPECIAL PROJECT THAT'S PROPOSED.
TWO DEVELOPMENT TYPE REQUESTS.
AGAIN I'M SPLITTING THOSE UP BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO AND WHEN WE PREPARE THOSE TWO THERE ARE ENHANCEMENTS FOR THE ENDING THREE BASE WHICH UM, SORRY THAT'S THAT'S ERROR THERE.
AS WE SPENT THIS ONE SPLITS UP THE ENHANCEMENTS OVERALL FOR THE PD.
SO JUST WITH THE ENDING THREE BASE, WHICH IS AN INCREASE OF HUNDRED 50 FEET IN HEIGHTS AND ADDITIONAL THAT THEY ARE SO JUST FROM THAT INCREASE RIGHT THERE, THEY'RE PROVIDING STANDARDS INCLUDING STRUCTURED PARKING WITH ACTIVE USES, WRAPPING
A MINIMUM 10 FOOT UNOBSTRUCTED SIDEWALKS, SIX TO EIGHT FOOT PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS CONNECTING TO THE STREETS SINCE WE HAVE FOUR STREET FRONTAGES GOING THROUGH THE SITES.
UM, A VARIETY OF PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES ENCLOSED BY PARKING THREE PUBLIC ART INSTALLATIONS.
AND I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE VARYING POWER LINES ARE NOT GOING TO BE REQUIRED AS A STANDARD EVEN THOUGH IT WAS INITIALLY REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE UNABLE TO PROVIDE OUR PDS SO YOU CAN EXPECT TO NOT SEE THAT ANY LONGER EVEN IF IT IS A NEGOTIATED TERM OF THE APPLICANT WHO IS WILLING TO PROVIDE THAT.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ENFORCE AT THE END OF THE DAY AND SO WE DO NOT RECOMMEND INCLUSION IN OUR PD CONDITIONS, THEREFORE IT HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PD CONDITIONS.
HOWEVER, I FAILED TO REMOVE FROM MY CASE REPORT SO I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
ADDITIONALLY, THEY HAVE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS BEING PROVIDED, BREAKING UP FRONTAGES AND PROVIDING 30% TRANSPARENCY FOR THE LOWER LEVELS.
AND THEN FINALLY THEY HAVE PROHIBITED SURFACE PARKING FOR A SPECIAL PROJECT.
WE ALSO GET COMPLETELY UNDERGROUND PARKING AND UNDERGROUND LOADING REQUIRED FOR INTERIOR TO PARKING, WHICH IS ALL UNDERGROUND.
THERE HAVE BEEN PARKING DEVIATIONS FOR REQUESTED, SO AMENDED PARKING RATIOS WHICH COMBINE SEVERAL USES AND THESE HAVE BEEN ASSESSED IN A PARKING STUDY THAT WAS CONSIDERED BY OUR ENGINEERING DIVISION.
THIS IS THE CODE STANDARD AND SINCE WE REFER BACK TO OUR CODE STANDARDS, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND REQUEST THAT THEY INSERT THAT INTO THIS PD.
THEY HAVE AGREED TO THAT RATIO AS AN OPTION.
THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY'LL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THAT, IT MEANS THAT THEY CAN BUILD THAT OVERALL.
WE DID UM, PERFORM CONSISTENCY REVIEW AND LOOK AT
[01:55:01]
THE AREA PLAN.THIS IS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN DALLAS 360 PLAN, WHICH IS ADOPTED AND UPDATED BE 17.
AND AS NEW RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS AREA IS TO CREATE A TRANSIT ORDINANCE IN A WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD BY DEVELOPING NEW PROJECTS AND REDEVELOPING EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS WITH SMALL SETBACKS, GROUND FLOORS WITH HIGH TRANSPARENCY AND RETAIL OR RESTAURANT USES AND TO ADDRESS PROPERLY WHILE SURFACE PARKING FRONT BUILDINGS AND THEY HAVE HIT ALL OF THOSE ITEMS. AND SO SINCE WE HAVE FOUND IT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE POLICY OR GOALS RECOMMENDED IN THE 360 PLAN, UM, THE PROPOSAL GOES AS FAR AS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THAT WALKABLE BY URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD AS DESCRIBED IN THE PLAN.
AND SO WE DO BELIEVE THAT IT IS UM, SUPPORTIVE OF AND GOALS.
NOW IF YOU REVIEW THE CONDITIONS AND THE RECOMMENDATION, IT IS BASED ON STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE DO HAVE TWO BOXES IN THOSE CONDITIONS.
THOSE BOXES ARE RELATED TO HOW WE RECOMMENDED THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING.
UM, WE APPLIED TO THE SITE NOW I DISCUSSED WHY STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO SUPPORT THE INCREASE AT A R AND HEIGHT AND I COMPARE THAT IN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE TO A
OF COURSE THERE'S NO HEIGHT INCREASE BUT AT MINIMUM THAT WOULD REQUIRE BY THIS CODE THAT THERE BE 10% OF MIXED INCOME HOUSING PROVIDED TO THOSE IN THE 61 TO 80 AND FIVE CATEGORY AND 5% AT THE 81 TO 100 AM FIVE CATEGORY.
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS TO ONLY PROVIDE 5% AT 81 TO 100 A M I, CUTTING OUT THAT 10% FOR B PORTION AT 61 TO 80.
AND STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THIS ELEMENT OF THE REQUEST.
ALTHOUGH THIS IS A MAGNIFICENT PROJECT, WE DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S NUMBER ONE APPROPRIATE JUST CONSIDERING THE BASE CODE REQUIREMENTS NUMBER TWO, APPROPRIATE FOR THE FACT THAT THEY'RE GETTING EVEN MORE THAN THE BASE REQUIREMENTS AS REQUESTED.
AND NUMBER THREE, A HIGH PRIORITY NEED FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, ESPECIALLY IN OUR URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS.
FINALLY, IN THIS SPECIFIC BOX THERE'S ALSO A PROVISION TO HAVE FEE IN.
UM, BASICALLY IT'S THE EXACT THING THAT OUR CODE SAYS.
AND SO FOR THAT REASON WE DON'T RECOMMEND HAVING IT THERE 'CAUSE ANYTHING THAT'S EXACTLY THE SAME AS CODE DOES NOT NEED TO BERATED TO A PD RIGHT INTO A PD LEADS TO THE IDEA THAT THERE'S A DEVIATION FROM THE STANDARD AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE AT THIS TIME.
WHAT THEY'VE REQUESTED IS EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE, THEREFORE THERE'S NO REASON TO WRITE IT THERE.
SO WE JUST RECOMMEND REMOVING THAT SECTION.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT INWOOD WOULDN'T APPLY.
AND THEN THERE'S, I THINK THE TATION COMES FROM MORE HOW THAT STANDARD IS APPLIED, WHICH IF WE HAVE IT WE'D LIKE TO DISCUSS FURTHER.
BUT THE ONLY OTHER BOX I'D LIKE TO MENTION IS RELATED TO HOURS OF COOPERATION FOR YOUR RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICE USE, WHICH LIMITS THEM TO THE HOURS OF 6:00 AM TO MIDNIGHT.
NOW THIS PROVISION IS AN OPERATIONAL REQUESTS NOT THIS REQUEST IS NOT A SS P, SO THIS IS THE WRONG PLACE FOR THIS SORT OF PROVISION.
IT LEADS TO FAILURE AND OVERALL ENFORCEMENT.
THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE CITY WANTS TO HAVE AND THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE TYPICALLY PERMIT IN A PE.
SO THIS OPERATIONAL STANDARD SHOULD NOT BE WRITTEN INTO THE CONDITIONS BECAUSE IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WILL BE EASILY ENFORCED.
NOW, UM, AT THIS POINT WE'D LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO DISCUSS AT ANNUAL OR SHOULD I FINISH MY PRESENTATION? AND JUST A FEW MORE SLIDES PLEASE GO AHEAD.
SO AS I MENTIONED, STAFF DID CONSIDER THE OVERALL COMPARISON OF PUBLIC BENEFITS BEING PROVIDED AND THE SURROUNDING REZONING CASES AND BONUSES OFFERED NOT ONLY THROUGH BASE, EXCUSE ME, ZONING THROUGH M I H BUT ALSO THROUGH ALL THE PDSS IN THE VICINITY THAT HAVE REQUESTED ADDITIONAL HEIGHT F A R AND A VARIETY OF LAND USES, BUT MOSTLY IN LINE WITH THE DR SUBDISTRICT OR LC SUBDISTRICTS.
SO THIS REQUEST HAS ADDED EVEN GREATER DESIGN STANDARDS, OPEN SPACE SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS AND INCOME HOUSING, THE INCREASE IN
AND UM, WHILE THEY DIDN'T EXACTLY HIT THE SETBACK ITEM, THEY DID TRY TO INCLUDE SOME OF THOSE UH, REDUCTIONS IN.
THEN OF COURSE THE MASSING OF THOSE STRUCTURES HITS THAT ITEM ON THE HEAD AS WELL.
SO WE ARE SATISFIED WITH IT AND DO BELIEVE THAT OVERALL IT
[02:00:01]
WILL FIT INTO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WORK FOR THE SITE.SO WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, APPROVAL OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, SET THAT PLAN AND THAT STATE PLAN STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF A CONTROL OVERLAY.
BRIEFING QUESTIONS COMMISSIONERS.
COMMISSIONER, WHAT IS A SPECIAL PROJECT? WHY IS USED? THAT'S YOU, YOU BEAT US TO THE QUESTION.
THAT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION MS. MOZ, PLEASE.
SO A SPECIAL PROJECT IS THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT TO DEFINE WHEN CERTAIN ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS ARE MET, CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE PROVIDED FOR IN THIS CASE SPECIFICALLY YOU CAN GO TO OUR PD CONDITION.
LET ME PULL IT UP THAT READ IT SINCE I PUT IT IN THE UM, ACTUAL PAGE REPORT OR IN THE PRESENTATION AND HAVE IT RIGHT HERE AND I CAN READ IT TO YOU IN JUST FOR SECOND.
IT IS SPECIAL PROJECT NEEDS A PROJECT WITH AN F A R
AND THEN IF YOU REFER BACK TO THOSE SECTIONS, IT'LL TELL YOU THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH, I BELIEVE IT'S THE DESIGN STANDARD SUSTAINABILITY OPEN SPACE.
AND BUT, BUT ONCE THEY MEET THEM, WHAT'S THE BENEFIT? EXCUSE ME? I SAID ONCE THEY MEET THEM, WHAT, WHAT'S THE BENEFIT? LIKE WHY, WHAT DOES THE DESIGNATION GET YOU? IT GETS YOU PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
NOT JUST F A R, IT'S ALSO ADDITIONAL HEIGHT.
SO AS WITH AROUND THE PD CONDITIONS, IT'S, IT'S PRIMARILY THE HEIGHT OF THE F A R, WHICH IS WHAT I WAS GOING OVER IN, IN MY DESCRIPTION OF THE COMPARISON OF THE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY HAVE EITHER BASED ANY THREE PD DEVELOPMENT TYPE UP TO 270 B, 4.5 F A R, UM, WITH A VARIETY OF THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS ALREADY APPLICABLE OR BASICALLY WE GET MIXED HOUSING AND THEN THEY GET AN ADDITIONAL FOUR OR THREE AND A HALF POINTS OF F A R AND THEY GET TO GO UP FROM TWO SEVEN ALL THE WAY UP TO 4 29.
SO IS IT LIKE A BESPOKE VERSION OF THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS? I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.
IT'S SO IF I, IF I'M THINKING ABOUT THIS CORRECTLY.
SO MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS, YOU HIT CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS, YOU GET ADDITIONAL DENSITY IS THE SPECIAL PROJECT CONCEPTS CONCEPT SORT OF THE SAME IDEA THAT YOU'RE CRAFTING YOUR OWN ELEMENTS EACH TIME I WOULD TAKE A STAB AT IT AND I WOULD SAY HOW I UNDERSTAND IT.
SORRY JEN, AND THEN YOU IT ALMOST LIKE A PD WITHIN A PD.
EXACTLY, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY.
SO USUALLY LIKE YOU DO A VERY CLEAN PD AND YOU SAY THESE ARE YOUR STANDARDS, THESE ARE THE BONUSES AND THEN THESE ARE THE STANDARDS INCLUDE DESIGN STANDARDS AS WELL.
THIS THING WITH THE SPECIAL PROJECT, IT LOOKS LIKE, OH YOU, YOU STILL HAVE THE BASE PD FOR WHATEVER, BUT THEN WE CREATE THIS LITTLE PD INSIDE THE PD AND NOW YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THIS.
BUT YOU CAN STILL DO ALL OF THAT, WHICH I THINK IS JUST A, IT MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED TO FOLLOW.
'CAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT'S WHAT A PD DOES.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE THERE ARE TWO LAYERS OF A PD ON TOP OF ONE ANOTHER, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY IT, WE CAN SIMPLIFY IT AND CALL IT JUST WHAT IT IS.
THESE ARE YOUR STANDARDS, THIS IS THE BONDS, THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT.
YEAH, I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE HAVE TO OVER COMPLICATE IT BY CALLING IT SOMETHING NEW.
IT TOOK US 11, WE STARTED TO SEE MORE OF THIS IN THE LATEST YEARS.
UH, IT TOOK US A LITTLE BIT TO LIKE REALIZE, OKAY, AND I THINK WE ARE GONNA HAVE TO, LIKE WE ALREADY STARTED DISCUSSIONS INTERNALLY TO REGROUP AND, OKAY, SIMPLIFY THIS THING BECAUSE IT'S, IF IT'S COMPLICATED FOR ALL OF US, INCLUDING US, THEY NEED TO BE, YES, WE NEED TO, IT'S EXTREMELY COMPLICATED AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT TAKES A SHARP EYE TO GO THROUGH AND IT STILL NEEDS US OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITY FOR A GREAT AMOUNT OF ERRORS.
SO WE WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH THE APPLICANT FOR THAT REASON, FOR SEVEN MONTHS GOING OVER
[02:05:01]
THESE CONDITIONS AND LANDED ON THIS FINAL STEP, WHICH I'M PROUD OF THESE TWO BOXES ONLY BECAUSE OF THE APPLICANT'S WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH US ON SEVERAL OF THOSE ITEMS. HOWEVER, LIKE, UH, SOME OF THESE ITEMS, I THINK OPEN SPACE IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST CONFUSING SECTIONS FOR THIS WHOLE PD.UM, IF YOU DO HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, LET ME KNOW.
I DEFINITELY DIDN'T TOUCH ON IT IN MY PRESENTATION, BUT I'M HAPPY TO GO OVER IT AT THIS POINT AND IF NOT, I KNOW THAT UH, SUZANNE WILL BE HAPPY TO OVER IT.
TO REPEAT HERE, WELL YOU'RE CHOMPING AT THE BIT THAT'S
UM, ONE YOU HAVE QUESTION GO FIRST.
WELL, I WAS JUST GOT ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP.
UH, MR I USE TWO INTERESTING WORDS, WHY OVER COMPLICATE, UH, BUT IN, IN TERMS OF THE SPECIAL PROJECT AS IT MAY, UM, I'M HOPING THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE US A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT MAYBE, UH, ON BROADER TERMS, MAYBE NOT SPECIFIC TO THIS PROJECT OR ANOTHER ONE CURRENTLY IN PERMITTING AND YOU COULD MAYBE, UH, TALK ABOUT MAYBE SOME OF THE DIFFICULTIES THAT STAFF HAS SEEN.
I MEAN, AS FAR AS I CAN, I CAN ONLY SPEAK TO MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE REVIEW PROCESS AND IN THE REVIEW PROCESS AND LUKE AND SUZANNE CAN SPEAK TO THIS AS WELL.
UNFORTUNATELY IT DID COMPLICATE HOW WE ASSESSED THE SITE.
IT IS LIKE WE ARE REVIEWED TO REQUESTS AT THE SAME TIME.
AND IF YOU KNOW ANY CASE THAT INCLUDES UH, AN ELEMENT OF ADDITIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS, PD CASES IN GENERAL, ADDITIONAL BENEFITS BEING PROVIDED TO THE PUBLIC WITH A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARD CHANGES, UH, THOSE CAN BE COMPLICATED TO BEGIN WITH.
SO WHEN YOU'RE JUGGLING TWO DIFFERENT IDEAS WITHIN ONE PD, AT TIMES THEY CAN BE AT ODDS.
AND I THINK THAT COMES OUT IN SEVERAL OF THE SECTIONS, EVEN THOUGH WE TRY TO BRING IT DOWN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, WHICH CAUSES DELAY IN THE CASE REVIEW.
AND OVERALL, UM, PRODUCTION OF THESE ITEMS COMING TO C P C AND COUNSEL FOR, FOR ULTIMATE DECISION MAKING.
UM, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THEY'RE BAD, THEY ARE WONDERFUL.
THIS IS A WONDERFUL PROJECT, BUT WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT IT IS COMPLICATED.
IT'S VERY COMPLICATED AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED WITH A HIGH AMOUNT OF DILIGENCE, WHICH ISN'T ALWAYS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE THE TIME TO DO, ALTHOUGH WE TRY, TRY OUR BEST.
SO IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE EXPERIENCE LEVEL OF STAFF, THEIR TIME THAT THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THESE ITEMS AND HOW MUCH THEY'RE ABLE TO WORK WITH THOSE REPRESENTATIVES AS WELL AND WORK WITH THE APPLICANTS.
NOW, WHEN IT COMES TO PERMITTING, THOUGH, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE IF A REGULAR PD CAN CAUSE ISSUES, ONE WITH ADDITIONAL STANDARDS, WOULD AS WELL.
COMMISSIONER, I DON'T WANNA PUT ANYONE ON THE, THE SPOT HERE, BUT I SEE TWO PEOPLE SITTING NEARBY ME WHO HAVE SIGNIFICANT EXPERIENCE WORKING AT JEFFERSON
LIKE A LOT OF MY LIKE PLAN REVIEW EXPERIENCE WHEN I WAS DOING THAT WAS MORE SO YOUR MOM AND POP SHOPS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO THEY DEFINITELY COULD NOT HANG WITH A SPECIAL PROJECT, UM, KIND OF BRAIN, UM, EXERCISES.
BUT, UM, JENNIFER WORKED IN THE Q TEAM AND THAT'S WHERE ALL LIKE THE DANCING WAS WITH TO LIKE CHIME IN ON THE WEIRD QUESTIONS.
USUALLY I JUST, I JUST THINK THAT IF IT'S NOT, OR I SHOULDN'T EVEN, IT'S NOT IN MY EXPERIENCE IF IT'S NOT SO CAREFULLY WRITTEN, UM, IT, IT ENDS UP IN A WEIRD BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHAT DOES THE WORD THE MEAN AND IT JUST, IT BECOMES, IT, IT'S AN INTERPRETATION GAME AND IT BOGS THINGS DOWN.
SO HOW DOES THAT DIFFERENCE FROM JUST A, 'CAUSE THE ALTERNATIVE TO SPECIAL PROJECT IS JUST TO WRITE A FREESTANDING PD FOR THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT? NO FLEXIBILITY, NO NOTHING.
SO I MEAN, HOW IS IT DIFFERENT? ARE YOU STILL GONNA BE BOGGED DOWN IN THE YEAH.
YEAH, I MEAN IT'S JUST PDS IN GENERAL, JUST ANY FLEXIBILITY, ANY DEVIATIONS OR CODE CAUSES.
[02:10:01]
UH, JEN SAID SOMETHING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A STANDARD FROM BASE CODE, WE TYPICALLY DON'T PUT IT INTO THE PD, BUT IT'S WEIRD BECAUSE FOR THE MOST PART THAT'S TRUE.BUT THEN IN OTHER INSTANCES IF YOU DON'T PUT IT IN THERE, IT IT'S, IT'S, IT SOMETIMES DOESN'T APPLY UNLESS YOU PUT IT IN THERE.
SO IT, IT'S A VERY, YOU HAVE TO BE SO CAREFUL YOU'RE REWRITING THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT CODE EVERY TIME YOU'RE DOING A PD BECAUSE EVEN IF IT REFERS TO BASE ANY EXCEPTIONS OR I MEAN THINGS LIKE R P S FOR EXAMPLE, IT'S, IT'S, IF IT'S IN THE PD THEN IT MEANS THIS.
IF YOU DON'T SPECIFICALLY SAY ANYTHING, THEN IT MEANS SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
IT JUST, IT'S AN INTERPRETATION GAME.
AND PDS IN GENERAL, I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING PARTICULARLY EGREGIOUS ABOUT A SPECIAL PROJECT VERSUS JUST A STANDARD PD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OFF THE COMMISSIONER? JUST A FOLLOW UP, SHIFTING GEARS TO THE, UM,
MS. MOZ, YOU SAID EARLIER THAT IT WAS REDUNDANT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF OF 20 A, IS THAT RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
CAN YOU THINK OF ANY REASON WHY, AND PROBABLY HAVE THE SAME QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT ANY REASON WHY THAT PROVISION SHOULD BE INCLUDED OR ANY EFFECT THAT THAT PROVISION MIGHT HAVE DISTINCT FROM 20 A? I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT'S INTENT IS TO ENSURE THAT TODAY'S APPLICABILITY WILL CONTINUE TO APPLY AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE GETTING BY INCLUDING THE BASE STANDARD CODE PROVISION BECAUSE INTERPRETATIONS WILL ALWAYS CHANGE.
I'M NOT SAYING IT'LL CHANGE FROM ONE DAY TO THE NEXT.
I'M SAYING POLICY CHANGES AND SO INTERPRETATIONS CAN CHANGE TIME AND IF THE INTENT IS TO KEEP IT AS IT'S CURRENTLY BEING INTERPRETED, THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE THERE.
WHO YOU, WHOSE INTERPRETATION OF YOU REFERRING? THIS WOULD BE HOW THIS SECTION OF 28 APPLIES WHEN THEY'RE DOING, I BELIEVE PERMIT REVIEW.
SO HOW HOUSING APPLIES WHERE P AND BLUE IS REQUIRED TO BE PAID FOR CERTAIN STRUCTURES, MIXED USES IS WHAT WE'RE SPECIFICALLY TALKING TO, BUT I BELIEVE, UM, MICHAEL
SO YOUR LAST QUESTION WAS WHY WOULD THEY INCLUDE THAT GIVEN THAT IT'S A STANDARD CODE? I CAN'T NECESSARILY SPEAK TO THAT, BUT I I DO KNOW THAT WHEN WE, WHEN WE HAVE SPECIAL PROJECTS, I, I'M ONLY UNDERSTANDING THAT MAYBE ONE UTILITY THAT THE POLICY SEES FOR THAT IS THAT IT, IT BUNDLES EXPECTATIONS, IT BUNDLES RIGHTS, THINGS FROM SETBACK LOT COVERAGE, F A R, IT BUNDLES 'EM AND YOU GET, LIKE, YOU GET A NEED PROJECT, IT'S TIED TO A BONUS.
UM, BECAUSE EVERYTHING INVOLVES IN, IN THE LAW OR THE PD OR THE PDSS IS ALL, IS ALL PROPERTY AND WE ARE ONLY ONE, WE'RE ONLY A YEAR AND A QUARTER OUT FROM THE APPROVAL OF THAT.
THE LAST AMENDMENT TO THE MIXED INCOME HAS AN ORDINANCE.
UM, WE'VE SEEN SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS, UH, COME THROUGH.
THEY, AND, AND AS SHE SAID IT'S CORRECT, THEY ARE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE SUBMITTED FOR PERMIT AND SIMILARLY TO HOW LIKE A PERMIT IS REVIEWED TO, DOES IT MEET FIRE SPECIFICATIONS? ONE OF THE BOXES THEY CHECK WHEN WE WRITE IN MIXED INCOME, UH, BONUSES, ONE OF THE BOX THEY, THE CHECK IS, IS HOUSING WITH YOU.
THEY SUBMIT A MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS APPLICATION, UM, WITH INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROJECTS TO HOUSING AND THEN THEY, UM, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH SETS TWO AND THOSE ARE DESCRIBED IN CHAPTER 28, UM, TO FULFILL THAT AND THEN ONLY THEN THEY GET MOVED FORWARD.
UM, JUST AS A CAUTION, SOMETIMES WHEN WE BUNDLE THINGS UNDER SPECIAL PROJECTS BECAUSE THERE IS AN OPTION FOR BASE ZONING, UM, IF, IF YOU CAN MEET CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE BASE ZONING, THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE IT'S BEING INTERPRETED AND APPLIED AT THAT PHASE AS HERE'S OUR SPECIAL PROJECT, IT'S GOT CERTAIN COMPONENTS OF THE PROJECT, HERE'S THE BASE
[02:15:01]
A PART OF THE PROJECT USING BASE SEWING WHEN I DON'T KNOW, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU GUYS, UM, REVIEWED IT THAT WAY OR STAFF REVIEWED IT THAT WAY.UM, I THINK YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOOD FAITH READING AT THE PDS MIGHT HAVE BEEN THAT THE RIGHTS WERE ALL BUNDLED, UM, WHEN IN REALITY SOMETIMES WHEN IT'S GETTING APPLIED THEY MIGHT BE SPLITTING IT OFF INTO, WELL THIS IS SPECIAL PROJECT, THIS IS NOT SPECIAL PROJECT.
UM, AND THEN JUST HITTING UNDER TARGETS FOR STANDARDS POTENTIALLY IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES.
AND I, I I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S AN ECCENTRICITY, UM, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING, UM, BY A LOT OF PEOPLE IS THAT THE SPECIAL PROJECT MIGHT BE TO, TO GIVE, UM, GIVE CERTAINTY OR PREDICTABILITY YOU GUYS STAFF THE PROJECT, UM, THAT ALL THIS IS TOGETHER WHEN IT, IT MAY NOT AND KIND OF BE THAT WAY IN THE APPLICATION.
UM, HOW THAT RELATES TO THE FEE BEING WRITTEN INTO THE PD.
UH, I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE HOW IT, HOW IT RELATES TO
UM, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP BECAUSE IT TIES TO THE SPECIAL PROJECT AND, AND EXPECTATIONS, I DON'T HAVE A SOLUTION FOR IT TODAY.
WARNING HOUSING DEPARTMENT THING, UNDERSTANDING HOW THESE PROJECTS AND WE DO PIPELINE, YOU KNOW, HOW LONG IT TAKES, BUT UH, UH, A YEAR OUT FROM THE THE PROGRAM WE ARE STARTING TO SEE, UH, THAT YIELD, UM, AND I JUST WANT TO TEMPER EXPECTATIONS AS TO WHAT'S UM, OCCURRING AFTER LANGUAGE IS SUBMITTED AND APPROVED.
I ALL THESE SUPPORT QUESTIONS.
UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, I I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
UM, SO LET'S TAKE A HYPOTHETICAL WHERE THERE'S A SPECIAL PROJECT THAT THERE ARE FOUR HIGHRISE BUILDINGS PROPOSED FOR THERE, RIGHT? IS THAT THAT'S THE MOST COMMON FOR A MULTI-USE NINE FIGURE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW.
AND WHAT A DEVELOPER MIGHT DO IS TAKE BUILDING ONE ONLY BUILD IT TO BASE AND NOT TO SPECIAL PROJECT STANDARDS, RIGHT? POTENTIALLY.
AND IF THEY ONLY BUILD IT TO BASE, THE CURRENT INTERPRETATION THAT CITY STAFF, WHETHER IT'S ON HOUSING OR WHETHER IT'S IN PERMITTING, IS PROVIDING, IS THAT BUILDING ONLY BUILT TO PAGE DOESN'T NEED TO PAY THE FEE AND LOOP FOR THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE, RIGHT? IN SOME CIRCUMSTANCES, YES.
AS YOU KNOW, IT'S CALCULATED BY SQUARE FOOTAGE.
IT'S DIVORCED, THE FEE AND LOOP CALCULATION IS DIVORCED FROM THE 15%, 5%, 10% THAT BE APPROVED HERE.
UM, IT'S, IT'S BASED ON DIFFERENT PROCESS.
HOWEVER, THE SPECIAL PROJECT LANGUAGE, THE TRIGGER FOR MIXED INCOME HOUSING IS IMPORTANT.
SO CASTING A BROAD NET FOR THOSE SORTS OF THINGS, AT THE VERY LEAST GIVE YOU THE PREDICTABILITY OF PRODUCT THAT MAYBE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.
UM, LET ME, CAN I GO TO LEGAL FOR A FEW MORE QUESTIONS? I'M GOING ON SOME.
UM, SO MR. MOORE, YOU REVIEWED THIS FEE IN L LANGUAGE.
AND WE JUST HEARD MS. MOON MUNOZ SAY THAT SHE UNDERSTANDS THE INTENT OF THIS LANGUAGE TO BE SORT OF, TO FREEZE CITY STAFF'S INTERPRETATION OF ORDINANCE LANGUAGE, RIGHT? RIGHT.
CAN CITY CODE FREEZE AN INTERPRETATION OF LANGUAGE WITHOUT ACTUALLY CHANGING CITY CODE ITSELF? TO CLARIFY WHAT IT MEANS, IT CANNOT.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN, SO THIS WOULD BE IN A PD AND ARTICLE ONE OF CHAPTER 51 A GIVES THE BUILDING OFFICIAL THE ABILITY TO INTERPRET CHAPTER 51 AND ALL OF THE PDS THAT COME ALONG WITH IT AND THE BUILDING OFFICIALS INTERPRETATION, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CAN MAKE AN OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION AND THAT OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION CAN CHANGE OVER TIME.
SO THAT LANGUAGE, YOU, YOU CAN'T REALLY FREEZE IT IN BECAUSE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL COULD CHANGE THE INTERPRETATION AT A LATER DATE.
AND WE'RE ABOUT A YEAR INTO THE CURRENT DURATION OF MIXED INCOME HOUSING, INCLUDING
THE BILLING OFFICIALS INTERPRETATION WOULD ONLY APPLY TO CHAPTER 51 A AND ALL THE ASSOCIATED PDS, BUT THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING PORTION IS IN CHAPTER 20 A.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE, THE THE SEPARATION THERE.
AND IF, IF 20 A WERE TO CHANGE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH COUNCIL, RIGHT? CORRECT.
AND I ASSUME AT THAT POINT COUNSEL COULD DECIDE WHETHER TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES RETROACTIVE OR ONLY FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE DON'T FORWARD? UM, YEAH.
YEAH, I WOULD HAVE, I WOULD, THEY COULD
[02:20:01]
COUNSEL'S CHANGE OF CHAPTER 20 A COULD BE BASED ON PROJECTS THAT I GUESS THROUGH IN, IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS, BUT THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GO COMPLETELY RETROACTIVE.IT'S MY, IS WHAT I WOULD THINK OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
IF SOMETHING'S BUILT UP PERMITTED BEFORE COUNSEL MAKES THE CHANGE, THEN THAT IS WHAT IT IS.
BUT LET'S JUST SAY SOMETHING IS ZONED IN A PARTICULAR WAY, BUT ISN'T ACTUALLY BUILT UP OR COUNCIL MAKES A CHANGE.
COUNCIL COULD DECIDE WHETHER IT APPLY TO WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN ZONED THAT HASN'T BEEN BUILT OUT OR JUST SAY IT ONLY APPLIES TO THINGS THAT HAVE ZONING CHANGES RELATING TO M I H ON A GOING FORWARD BASIS.
ASSUMING THAT THEY DON'T HAVE THOSE PERMITS, BECAUSE THEN YOU WOULD START GETTING INTO THE VESTED RIGHTS ISSUES.
THANK YOU FOR GOING DOWN THAT PATH.
UM, BECAUSE MAYBE I'M GONNA ASK, AND I AIN'T GONNA KNOW THIS, SO CLARIFICATION.
SO THIS IS TO HELP JEFFERSON WHEN IT GETS THERE IN A WAY SO THAT THEY WON'T HAVE TO HAVE THAT INTERPRETATION BECAUSE OFTENTIMES JEFFERSON IS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY OR WHAT TO DO, BUT THIS HELPS THEM KIND OF GET, GET, BE ABLE TO HAVE CLARITY, UM, BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT'S, IT'S THE DEFINITION NEEDS, THE NEEDS A LITTLE EXPANDING, BUT IT'S REALLY JUST LIKE TRYING, UM, WE HAVE, EVERYONE KNOWS I'M IN THE WORST PD IN THE WORLD AND THE INTERPRETATION THAT CITY STAFF IS ALWAYS CONFUSED PER SE TAKE OUT, ONLY RESTAURANTS ARE CONSIDERED FOOD AND BEVERAGES.
BUT IF THE DEFINITION, UM, IS A SET JUST FOR TAKE OUT RESTAURANTS, SO THIS IS TO HELP KIND OF HELP JEFFERSON NOT HAVE TO HAVE SO MUCH STRESS OUT AROUND.
I WOULD INTERJECT AND SAY THAT THE BIGGEST HELP WE CAN DO FOR THE TRANSPARENCY OF THE WHOLE PROCESS AND NOT HAVE ANY LANDMINES THAT YOU, I WANT UNWILLINGLY PLAN IS TO BASICALLY BASED ON THE CODE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
BECAUSE ONCE YOU KNOW THAT, THAT'S THE RULE AND THE RULE APPLIES, YOU USE A PD FOR DEVIATIONS WHEN THEY ARE WARRANTED.
SO I WOULD NOT TRY, IT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SAY.
LIKE LET'S NOT REINVENT THE WHEEL WITH EVERY PD.
SOMETIMES THE PDS ARE WARRANTED, SOMETIMES THE BASE CODE CAN WORK AS WELL.
SO I SEE IT MORE LIKE IT'S DEVIATION.
I CANNOT DO THE CODE HERE BECAUSE OF THIS.
AND THEREFORE IT BECOMES A LITTLE BIT OF A NEGOTIATION WHEN WE START TO ADD.
OKAY, IN ADDITION TO THE CODE, NOW WE'RE ADDING DESIGN STANDARDS AND WHAT WE WOULD LIKE, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE CODE IS FROM 87 AND IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO TOUCH ON THE REALITY RIGHT NOW.
SO IT IS, PDS ARE A GREAT, GREAT TOOL.
I WOULD SAY THIS, IT'S, WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL HOW WE USE THE TOOLS ALL THE TIME.
COMMISSIONER, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE OUR LUNCH BREAK COMMISSIONERS.
[CALL TO ORDER]
STARTED.UH, AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, OUR BRIEFING WAS ADJOURNED AT 1239.
UH, WE DO HAVE SOME, SOME CASES LEFT ON THE DOCKET TO BRIEF, WE'LL BRIEF THEM AT THE BEGINNING OF THE HEARING.
MS. PINA, CAN YOU PLEASE START US OFF WITH THE ROLL CALL? YES, SIR.
PRESENT DISTRICT FOUR, DISTRICT FIVE.
DISTRICT EIGHT, PRESENT DISTRICT NINE.
DISTRICT 13, DISTRICT 14 AND PLACE 15.
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
WELCOME TO THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
TODAY IS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 7TH.
[02:25:01]
IT IS 1245.UH, JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS BEFORE WE GET BACK INTO THE BRIEFING.
OUR SPEAKER GUIDELINES, EACH SPEAKER WILL RECEIVE THREE MINUTES, UH, PER OUR RULES.
IN CASES WHERE WE HAVE OPPOSITION, THE APPLICANT WILL GET A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
WE WILL HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ONLINE, AND I'LL ASK ALL OUR FOLKS ONLINE TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE YOUR CAMERA ON.
AND WORKING STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE, UH, MUST BE ABLE TO SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU.
UM, MS. PINA, WE'LL KEEP TIME AND WE'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP.
[BRIEFINGS (Part 2 of 2)]
WE'RE GONNA GET BACK INTO THE BRIEFING COMMISSIONERS.I THINK WE HAD THREE MORE CASES THAT WE NEED TO DEBRIEF BEFORE WE GET INTO THE HEARING.
UM, I THINK WE'RE ON CASE NUMBER 14 AND LET THE RECORD REFER THAT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS A CONFLICT ON CASE, UH, Z 2 2 3 1 26 AND IS STEPPING OUT OF THE CHAMBER.
MR. PEPE, GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR.
THIS ONE IS LOCATED IN LOWER GREENVILLE.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR SPECIFIC NON-RESIDENTIAL USES ON PROPERTY ZONED S C R COMMUNITY, RETAIL COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT, AND AN MF TWO MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT WITH AN MD ONE MODIFIED DELTA OVERLAY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GREENVILLE AVENUE IN MARTEL AVENUE.
HERE'S THE SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
AERIAL VIEW ALONG GREENVILLE AND SERVICE PARKING BEHIND, UM, OUR ZONING AND LAND USE.
SO THERE ARE A MIX OF MULTIFAMILY TO THE EAST AS WELL AS DUPLEXES AS IN THE NORTHEAST.
THERE'S A GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE, GREATER, UH, LESS THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET TO THE NORTH.
THERE'S A RESTAURANT SITE AND MORE SURFACE PARKING OR RESTAURANTS, UH, ACROSS GREENVILLE TO THE WEST.
AREA OF REQUEST IS CURRENTLY ZONED A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT AND IS DEVELOPED WITH A RETAIL STRIP AND TWO SURFACE PARKING FACILITIES WAS SEPARATED BY ALLEYS.
MY S'S ARE RESONATING FOR SOME REASON.
THE EXISTING BUILDING IS ONE 16,047 OR 4 7 5 SQUARE FEET BUILT IN 1940 AND IS DIVIDED INTO FIVE PRIMARY SUITES.
EXISTING USES INCLUDE MULTIPLE PERSONAL SERVICE USES, A GENERAL MERCHANDISE FOOD STORE, LESS THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS.
UM, A VACANT SUITE AND AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT.
THE MD ONE MODIFIED DELTA OVERLAY ON THE PROPERTY LIMITS THE APPLICANT'S ABILITY TO USE DELTA THEORY TO REDUCE THE NEED FOR EXPANDED PARKING AREAS.
MD ONE TERMINATES THE RIGHT TO CARRY FORWARD NON-CONFORMING PARKING AND LOADING SPACES.
AFTER 12 MONTHS OF VACANCY OR TRANSFER BETWEEN USES, THE PROPOSED PD WOULD ADJUST THE REQUIRED PARKING RATIOS IN THE LEGACY BUILDING TO ALLOW OCCUPATION OF THE VACANT RETAIL SUITES BASED ON THE CURRENT PROPERTY AND ITS EXISTING PARKING, THE APPLICANT ALSO PROPOSES CONDITIONS TO PROVIDE SIDEWALKS AND SCREENING WHEN WE GET DOWN TO THE SITE.
UM, HERE'S THE SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
THERE'S HEAD PARKING OFF OF, UH, MARTEL.
THAT'S THE SOUTH FACADE OF THE STRUCTURE AS AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
AND HERE'S THE ALLEY THAT IS TO THE EAST OF THE RETAIL SITE, SEPARATES THE RETAIL SITE FROM THE SURFACE PARKING FACILITIES.
I'LL MOVE UP THE ALLEY LOOKING EAST, UM, TOWARDS THE MULTI MULTIFAMILY THAT'S ADJACENT.
NOW I'M AT THE NORTH PART OF THE SITE LOOKING EAST DOWN.
UH, PENROSE, THAT MULTIFAMILY AS WELL AS DUPLEX SINGLE FAMILY USES.
WE WERE LOOKING SOUTH TOWARDS THE, UM, DOWN THE ALLEY, UH, THAT RUNS BEHIND THE RETAIL STRIP AND THE EXISTING SURFACE PARKING ON THE NORTH PART OF THE RETAIL STRIP MOVING TOWARDS GREENVILLE.
NOW WE'RE AT GREENVILLE LOOKING SOUTH.
THERE IS HEADED INDENTED PARKING ALONG GREENVILLE HERE.
AND THE RETAIL USES ONE SUITE AFTER ANOTHER ON THE LEFT.
AND THIS IS THE SOUTH MOST PART OF THE, UH, RETAIL STRIP.
THE SUITE ON THE CORNER A VACANT AT THE TIME OF, UH, IMAGING AND THERE'S A CROSSWALK THERE AND YOU CAN SEE FURTHER SOUTH, YEAH, FURTHER SOUTH YOU SEE THE RESTAURANT USE, UM, AS WELL AS O OTHER SURFACE PARKING.
YOU CAN SEE RESTAURANTS ACROSS GREENVILLE AS WELL.
SO NOW I'M LOOKING DOWN MARTEL.
AND YOU CAN, YOU CAN SEE THE, THE, UH, SUBJECT PROPERTY SURFACE PARKING ON
[02:30:01]
THE LEFT.YOU CAN SEE MORE SURFACE PARKING ON THE RIGHT.
AND THEN THAT'S THE, THE PENROSE, UH, ADJACENCY LOOKING EAST.
AND THEN TO THE NORTH, THERE'S SOME RESIDENTIAL USES DIRECTLY ACROSS.
AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE, UM, GENERAL MERCHANDISE STORE AT THE CORNER AT THE NORTH CORNER OF MARTEL OR PENROSE AND GREENVILLE.
THEN THERE'S MORE RESTAURANTS ACROSS GREENVILLE AND SOME MORE OF THAT.
THAT'S WHERE, UH, STREET INTERSECTS GREENVILLE.
UH, BUT IT DOESN'T GO THROUGH THE SITE HERE.
OKAY, THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UH, PER THE POSTING, PER THE DOCKET.
I WILL SAY THAT CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE AND THEY'VE BEEN DISTRIBUTED, UH, MORE RECENTLY THAN THE DOCKET.
I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO SHARE THOSE WITH YOU.
BUT I DID WANNA SCROLL THROUGH MY DOCKET, UH, SLIDES.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CONDITIONS.
UH, AND WE WILL BRIEF SOME CHANGES AND THE RECOMMENDATION WILL BE CONDITIONS AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS BRIEFED.
QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER Y I WAS GONNA BRIEF OH, OH, THE, THE CHANGES SINCE THE DOCKET.
I PLEASE HAVE 'EM IN ANOTHER DOCUMENT.
CAN EVERYBODY? NOPE, THERE ARE NOT TOO MANY.
UM, SO I WILL GO THROUGH THE, THE PD DOCUMENT AS BEST AS I CAN.
UM, SO THEY REDEFINED VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
UM, THIS IS DONE IN SOME PDS, UH, THAT ARE MORE URBAN SITUATIONS.
UM, THEY LESSENED THE, UH, LENGTH OF ONE OF THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES OR THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES ALONG GREENVILLE, MARTEL IN PENROSE AT THOSE PRIMARY STREETS.
UM, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT IS A USE THAT'S PROHIBITED OR, UH, NOT PERMITTED BY MEANS OF IT BEING, UM, NOT INCLUDED IN THE, UH, INCLUSIVE LIST OF USES.
HOWEVER, UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, EXPRESSED THAT WE SHOULD INCLUDE IT BACK IN.
IT MAY BE DUPLICATIVE AND IT MAY BE REMOVED, UM, BY A CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, BUT IT IS THERE IN THE PROHIBITED LIST TO BE DOUBLE CLEAR.
UH, THEY CHANGED THE TERM FROM NONCONFORMING TO INDENTED OR HEAD IN PARKING ON GREENVILLE HAS THE HOPE THAT IT CAN BE, UM, BROUGHT TO INDENTED PARKING STANDARD.
UH, THEY SPECIFIED THAT NO REQUIRED LOADING IS, NO LOADING IS REQUIRED, UM, FOR THE, FOR ANY USES, UH, THAT ARE PERMITTED.
UM, HOWEVER, IF LOADING IS TO BE PROVIDED ON SITE, IT, IT MAY NOT OCCUR ON GREENVILLE OR MANEUVER ON GREENVILLE.
IT EXPANDED THE DEFINITION OF THE USES THAT TRIGGER SIDEWALK INCLUSION TO ANY RETAIL OR PERSONAL SERVICE USE AND REST, AS WELL AS THE RESTAURANT USE, WHICH IS THE ORIGINAL TRIGGER, UH, FOR SIDEWALK INCLUSION.
UH, IT ALSO SPECIFIED THAT AT THIS TIME, SIDEWALKS MUST ALSO BE PROVEN TO BE BUFFERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE, UM, SURFACE PARKING REGULATIONS, WHICH ARE 4.301.
UM, SO IT IS THE CODE REQUIRED PARKING, UH, BUT IT IS TRIGGERED HERE BY THIS PROVISION.
AND THEN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WILL SPECIFY WHERE THAT IS TO FURTHER ADD, UH, CLARITY.
UM, THEY ADDED NO USES, MAY OPERATE BETWEEN MIDNIGHT AND 6:00 AM, UH, ACROSS THE BOARD AND ADDED THE SAME TRIGGER FOR THE LANDSCAPING OR THE SCREENING, UH, THAT BEING RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICES AND RESTAURANT USES.
AND THAT IS IT FOR THE CHANGES TO THE CONDITIONS.
I WILL QUICKLY SHOW THE CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND, AND THESE THAT YOU'LL BE SEEING ARE THE SAME THAT WERE DISTRIBUTED YESTERDAY AFTERNOON.
SO IT DID NOT, UM, DID NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE BUILDING IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY.
[02:35:01]
THEIR, THEY DID AMEND HOW THEIR PARKING IS ORIENTED, WHERE THE LINES ARE MARKED AND THINGS SUCH AS THAT, UH, TO BE MORE IN CONFORMANCE WITH MODERN CODE AND THEY ADDED WHERE THEY'RE BUFFERING THEIR SIDEWALK WITH, UH, ZIGZAG LINES.UM, BUT WE WORKED WITH DAVID NAVAREZ AND, UM, THE COMMISSIONER AND THE GOAL IS BRINGING THESE CLOSER TO THE MODERN CITY CENTER FOR PARKING.
AS MUCH OF IT WAS CONSTRUCTED BEFORE, UH, EXCUSE ME, BEFORE, UH, THEY DESIGNED STANDARDS FOR, FOR SURFACE PARKING WERE INTRODUCED.
AND THAT'S IT FOR THE BRIEFING.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL, UH, AS SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
COMMISSIONER Y UH, YES, MR. PEPE FROM YOUR REPORT, AM I READING THIS CORRECTLY THAT THERE'S ONE BAR IN OPERATION ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CURRENTLY THAT WAS THE USE OBSERVED AT THE TIME OF SITE VISIT? I CANNOT SAY IF IT'S IN OPERATION AT THIS TIME.
UH, HISTORICALLY HAVE THERE BEEN MORE THAN ONE BAR ON THIS SITE, OR IS IT AT THE SAME TIME OR JUST ONE AFTER ANOTHER? HISTORICALLY, YES, THERE WERE TWO SUITES OCCUPIED.
BUT THEN THE ONE OF THEM WAS VACANT AT TIME OF VISIT.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, MR. PEPE.
WE GOT QUITE A FEW EMAILS EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THIS REZONING AND MOST OF THOSE, UM, EMAILS OF SUPPORT WERE PREDICATED ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS REZONING WOULD MAKE THESE BARS GO AWAY.
NOW, IF MY UNDERSTANDING IS REZONING DOES NOT REMOVE A BUSINESS'S LEGAL NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS, IS THERE SOMETHING GOING ON HERE THAT I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING? DO THESE BARS OR DOES THIS, DO NEITHER OF THESE BARS? FORMER BAR SPACES HAVE HAVE LEGAL NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS.
IT DOES NOT REMOVE THE REZONING.
DOES NOT ALONE, DOES NOT REMOVE THE NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS.
THERE'S NOT, UH, A METHOD THROUGH CODE HERE TO, TO DO THAT.
UM, THEY WILL BE PROHIBITED THEREAFTER.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE THE SPACES ARE, UH, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IN INTENDED TO BE OCCUPIED BY OTHER USES THAT ARE NOT, UH, BAR THIS CODE AMENDMENT FOR, UM, REDUCING THE PARKING RATIO ENABLES OCCUPATION OF THOSE.
UH, AND THAT'S, THAT'S ONE OF THE PRIMARY MECHANISMS. UH, BUT OTHERWISE I DON'T KNOW THE STATUS OF THE NON-CONFORMING RIGHTS FOR THE NORTHERN BAR.
I'LL ASK LEGAL COMMISSIONER RUBIN.
YEAH, I JUST HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME OF THE USES THAT ARE OR NOT ALLOWED BECAUSE WE'RE STARTING WITH THE OH, GREAT.
WE'RE STARTING WITH A CR BASE AND THEN WE'RE PAIRING BACK.
RIGHT? COULD YOU SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME? WE'RE STARTING WITH THE CR BASE THEN WE'RE PAIRING BACK.
SO AT THE PD, IF YOU HAD SEEN A EARLIER VERSION, UM, WAS BASED ON CR, IT USED CR USES AND IT PROHIBITED OUT USES, UM, IT WAS EXPRESSED TO US THAT THE BEST, THE CLEAREST WAY TO DO IT IS TO INCLUDE USES.
UM, THE USES THAT WERE PROHIBITED IN THE, UH, EXCUSE ME.
THE USES THAT WERE PROHIBITED IN THE PROHIBITED USES SECTION ARE ONES THAT NEEDED TO BE DEFINED BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT CODE USES.
AND THUS, IN ORDER TO, THEY HAD TO DEFINE THEM AND THEN IN ORDER TO, UH, PROHIBIT THEM, UH, THEY HAD TO DEFINE THEM.
BUT THEN OTHERWISE OTHER USES, OTHER USES ARE, UM, PROHIBITED THEIR OWN MISSION.
CAN YOU SCROLL DOWN TO RETAIL PERSONAL SERVICE REAL QUICK? YOU GOT IT.
UM, IS THERE A REASON, WHAT'S YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHY CHILDCARE AND ADULT CARE ARE NOT ALLOWED? THEY WERE NOT, UH, MOVED FORWARD AS ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE REQUEST USES, UH, BY THE APPLICANT.
DO YOU SEE ANY REASON WHY CHILDCARE OR ADULT CARE WOULD BE INCOMPATIBLE HERE? THEY, THEY'RE A BASE CR USE.
UM, THEY'RE CERTAINLY COMPATIBLE IN WALKING DISTANCE TO RESIDENTIAL, AND SO I, I WOULD, UH, I WOULD SAY THAT THEY ARE APPROPRIATE TO INCLUDE IF SO DESIRED.
WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO MIXED USE HERE, ALLOWING, FOR EXAMPLE, RESIDENTIAL ABOVE THE RETAIL PERSONAL SERVICE? YES.
THAT WAS, UH, CONSIDERED BY, BY STAFF.
IT COULD BE AN OPTION THAT COULD WORK.
UM, MIXED USE AS A CATEGORY IN TERMS OF USES IS SIMILAR IN, IN, EXCUSE ME, SIMILAR IN INTENSITY TO CR.
UM, BUT OF COURSE THIS PD, UM, CHOOSES ITS USES SPECIFICALLY.
SO WHERE WHETHER IT'S, UH, DEFAULTING
[02:40:01]
TO A BASE, MU ONE ONE COULD OR IF IT'S JUST INCLUDING, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES, IF, IF SO CHOSE, UM, THAT'S WOULD, WOULD FUNCTION SIMILARLY.EITHER WAY, I WOULD SAY THAT THAT IS APPROPRIATE OKAY.
FOR THE SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA.
AND I WAS PROBABLY USING MIXED USE IN A MORE COLLOQUIAL WAY OF SPEAKING OF IT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE.
MR. PEPE, I NOTICED ONE OF THE USES THAT IS, UM, ALLOWED IS GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE 100,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE WITH AN S U P.
WOULD THAT EVER BE FEASIBLE ON A ONE ACRE LOT? IT'S NOT.
I, I THINK THESE ARE TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE, THE BASE REGULATIONS OF CR THE YEAH, THE LOTS.
45 SOMETHING THOUSAND SQUARE FEET.
EITHER WAY IT WOULD REQUIRE AN S U P.
THERE'S A SCENARIO IN WHICH YOU COULD POTENTIALLY BUILD A COUPLE STORIES, BUT I, WITH RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE YEAH.
AND PARKING, IT'S, IT'S UNLIKELY, BUT IT IS AN S U P SCENARIO ANYWAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? YES, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
MR. PEPPY, JUST TWO ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATIONS.
UM, THANK YOU FOR THE BRIEFING AND ALL OF YOUR WORK, UH, WITH THE APPLICANT TEAM ON THIS.
UM, THE PD IS REALLY STRUCTURED TO FACILITATE THE EXISTING BUILDING, WHICH IS WHY THE LEGACY BUILDING PROVISIONS WERE INCORPORATED.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, BUT IT WOULDN'T PRECLUDE ANY FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT.
UM, IT UTILIZED CR AS THE BASE SIMPLY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WAS THERE TODAY, TRIED TO REMOVE SOME OF THE MORE INTENSE USES, BUT PROVIDE FUTURE FLEXIBILITY.
IS THAT A FAIR ASSESSMENT? YES.
THE USES ARE, THE USES INCLUDED, UH, AT THE TIME ARE, WHETHER YOU'RE IN A LEGACY BUILDING OR NOT, THE PARKING REDUCTIONS ARE TIED TO, UH, THE USE OF A LEGACY BUILDING.
UM, SO A NEW, IF THEY WERE TO SCRAP CLEAN, UM, THEY WOULD BE HELD TO BASE CODE PARKING REGULATIONS, HOW IT'S, HOW IT'S STRUCTURED RIGHT NOW, BUT THAT WOULD REQUIRE THEM COMING BACK WITH A NEW DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
UM, AND ESSENTIALLY WOULD, WOULD BE ABLE TO RESET, UM, CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY TO CON, YOU KNOW, IF THERE WAS CONSIDERATION OF RESIDENTIAL OR OR OTHER USES AT A FUTURE TIME.
AND THEN, UM, THE CHANGES ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, IT ADDED PROVISIONS REGARDING THE, UM, SIDEWALKS DEFINING WHERE THEY ARE AND ESSENTIALLY GIVING MORE CLARITY TO HOW, UM, PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION WILL HAPPEN BOTH FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND FROM WITHIN THE SITE.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND AS STAFF EVALUATED, UM, THIS, IT'S OBVIOUSLY A, A VERY WELL-DEVELOPED SITE, I THINK YOUR PHOTOGRAPH SHOWED IT'S, YOU KNOW, MOSTLY PAVED AT THIS POINT.
UM, A FUTURE, UM, MORE ROBUST REDEVELOPMENT WOULD TRIGGER ARTICLE 10.
UM, THERE'S SOME BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE ADDED IN THE CONDITIONS.
WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION REGARDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR, UM, TREE PLANTINGS OR, OR OTHER MEASURES? NOT, UH, NOT AT THIS TIME.
THEY, UH, WERE LIMITED TO, TO ARTICLE 10 AND THE TRIGGERS THAT, THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT, UM, FOR, FOR MUCH OF THE REVIEW, OBVIOUSLY THEY, THEY, UH, IT WAS VIEWED AS, YOU KNOW, SPACES, SPACES AT A PREMIUM ON THIS SITE.
UM, SO ONLY THROUGH REDEVELOPMENT WOULD ARTICLE 10 AT THIS TIME BE BE TRIGGERED FOR, UH, PLANTINGS, UH, PARKING LOT TREES AND, AND THE, THE LIGHT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE.
MS. GARZA, NUMBER 15, GOOD AFTERNOON CASE.
UH, ITEM 15 IS CASE Z 2 2 3 2 0 2.
THERE REQUESTS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR SURFACE ACCESSORY REMOTE PARKING ON PROPERTY ZONE IN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITH PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT.
[02:45:01]
LOCATED ON THE WEST CORNER.IT IS LOCATED ON THE WEST CORNER OF ROBERT L PARIS SENIOR AVENUE AND LEGO STREET.
THIS IS AN AERIAL MAP OF THE AREA OF REQUEST ON THE PREVIOUS ONE.
THESE ARE, UH, USES AROUND THE, THE AREA.
SO IT'S SINGLE FAMILY ALL AROUND.
THERE ARE A, THE CHURCH ACROSS LEGO STREET AND ACROSS ROBERT L PARISH AVENUE IN ALL DIRECTIONS, AS I MENTIONED.
UM, IT'S AN R F FIVE A SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95.
THE AREA REQUEST IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A SURFACE PARKING LOT.
THE LOT IS BEING USED AS REMOTE PARKING BY A CHURCH TO THE NORTHEAST OF THE REQUESTED AREA ACROSS LEGO STREET.
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR SURFACE NECESSARY REMOTE PARKING TO CONTINUE USING THE SITE FOR THIS PURPOSE.
AND IN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK, SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT SURFACE NECESSARY REMOTE PARKING IS PERMITTED BY SS E P FOR INSTITUTIONAL USES ONLY.
AND THESE ARE SOME, UH, SITE PHOTOS OF THE SITE ON ROBERT L PARISH.
LOOKING NORTHWEST, LOOKING SOUTHWEST, LOOKING SOUTHEAST, LOOKING NORTHEAST, LOOKING NORTHEAST, AND THEN SURROUNDING USES AROUND THE SITE.
LOOKING SOUTHEAST ON LAGO, LAGO STREET ON SIDE, LOOKING EAST ON ROBERT L PARIS SENIOR AVENUE, LOOKING NORTHEAST ON LAGO STREET, LOOKING NORTHEAST ON SIDE LOOKING NORTHEAST, LOOKING NORTHWEST ON SIDE LOOKING SOUTHWEST.
AND THEN ON ROBERT L PARIS, SENIOR AVENUE LOOKING SOUTHWEST.
AND THEN THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS.
SO, UH, APPLICANT'S, UH, REQUEST FOR TIME LIMIT, THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT EXPIRES HAS NO EXPIRATION DATE.
HOWEVER, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, UH, EXPIRES ON FIVE YEAR FROM THE PASSAGE OF THIS ORDINANCE.
AND THEN STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND STATUS, RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS, MEMBERS, QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER, YOUNG? UH, YES, MS. GARZA.
UH, MY QUESTION'S ABOUT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS, IF WE WERE TO GRANT THAT REQUEST FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, IF EVERYTHING WAS IN ORDER, THEY WOULD BE ENTITLED TO, UH, AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.
BUT IF SOME PROBLEMS AROSE THAT DID NOT INVOLVE A VIOLATION OF THE SITE PLAN OR CONDITIONS, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE WAS A HUGE PROBLEM WITH TRASH OR IF THERE WERE DRUG DEALS GOING DOWN IN THE PARKING LOT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, UNLESS THE PROPERTY OWNERS IMMEDIATELY AROUND THE SITE PROTESTED IT, THEY WOULD STILL BE ENTITLED TO AUTOMATIC RENEWAL AS LONG AS THEY WERE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM, I'LL NEED TO VERIFY.
IS THAT, UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, THEY'RE REQUESTING A PERMANENT TIME PERIOD, NOT AUTO RENEWAL.
SO, UH, NO MATTER WHAT PROBLEMS AROSE, UH, THE CITY, THE ONLY CITY'S ONLY REMEDY WOULD BE TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO DETERMINE PROPER ZONING, UH, FOR ANY KIND OF PUBLIC PROCESS.
UM, THEY WOULD STILL BE, UM, HELD TO THE CONDITIONS AND THE SITE PLAN OF THE S U P IF IT WERE A PERMANENT S U P, BUT ANY KIND OF COMPLIANCE WOULD GO THROUGH OUR CODE COMPLIANCE DEPARTMENT.
AND, AND WE ALL KNOW ABOUT THAT.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION?
SO, SO WHY DID STAFF RECOMMEND FIVE YEARS IF THE APPLICANT WAS RECOMMENDING PERMANENT? I, THE STAFF RECOMMENDED A TIME LIMIT OF FIVE YEARS WITH NOT OPTION FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.
UM, THIS TIME LIMIT WILL ALLOW AN INITIAL PERIOD OF THE APPLICANT TO DEMONSTRATE THE OPERATION OF THE SURFACE ACCESSORY PARKING, RE PARKING USE, AND THE PARKING USES FOR,
[02:50:01]
UH, ARE WE ALLOWED TO ASK WHY, WHY ARE THEY BEING 'CAUSE OF THIS? BECAUSE THE, ARE WE ALLOWED TO ASK, BECAUSE THE CHURCH IS NOT IN, UM, IT'S SEPARATE FROM THE CHURCH.THE PARKING LOT IS SEPARATE FROM THE CHURCH, CORRECT? THE, THE SERVICE PACKING IS ACROSS THE, THE CHURCH.
AND HOW, HOW OLD IS THE CHURCH? UM, I BELIEVE AS PER
I THOUGHT IT WAS LONG MORE THAN THAT.
MEMBERS, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE? I'VE GOT QUESTION.
UH, IS THAT COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT? I CAN'T SEE WHO'S HOUSEWRIGHT.
UM, AS, AS I LOOK AT THE EXHIBIT ON, IN THE REPORT ON PAGE 15 DASH EIGHT, UM, AND I SEE THAT THE, THE LOT ITSELF IS 54.5 FEET WIDE.
UM, BY MY UNDERSTANDING OF OUR, THE DIMENSIONS OF OUR PARKING STANDARD, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GET, UH, PARKING DOWN EACH PROPERTY LINE THE WAY IT'S DEPICTED.
SO, UM, THAT NUMBER IS MORE LIKE 58 FEET, UM, LEFT TO RIGHT, NOT 54 AND A HALF, AND THEY'RE, THEY'VE GOT A LANDSCAPE BUFFER.
SO MY QUESTION IS, THERE'S NOTHING IN THIS REQUEST THAT BINDS THEM TO PROVIDING A PARTICULAR NUMBER OF SPACES? IS THERE? UH, CORRECT.
SO WE COULD, WE, WE COULD APPROVE THIS KNOWING THAT THEY PROBABLY WOULDN'T GET THAT CONFIGURATION, UH, APPROVED, UM, GOING FORWARD.
BACK TO YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
BUT IF THAT WERE TO OCCUR AND THIS SITE PLAN SHOWS THE SPECIFIED LAYOUT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME IN FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE SITE PLAN, WOULD THEY NOT? CORRECT.
BUT THAT'S ON THEM, I GUESS IF, IF THEY CAN'T MAKE IT WORK UNDER THE EXISTING LAYOUT.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, UM, SEEING NONE, LET'S GO TO CASE NUMBER 16, WHICH I BELIEVE IS DR.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, DEFINITELY.
I'M BRIEFING ON ZONING CASE Z 2 23 DASH 3 0 6 R D.
THE REQUEST IS FOR AN APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC OVERLAY FOR THE BURGER RESIDENCE CITED AT 41 0 7 TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD ON PROPERTY ZONED R SEVEN FIVE A OR R 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF WYCLIFFE AVENUE.
THE AREA OF REQUEST IS 0.7 9.759 ACRES.
THE LOCATION IS AN AREA ON THE WEST SIDE OF TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD, AGAIN, SOUTH OF WYCLIFFE AVENUE.
IN TERMS OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED SO FAR, THE BACKGROUND OF THIS CASE, LANDMARK COMMISSION AUTHORIZED A PUBLIC HEARING AND INITIATED THE PROCESS ON FEBRUARY THE SIXTH, 2003, UH, DESIGNATION REPORT WAS PREPARED AND SUBMITTED TO THE DESIGNATION COMMITTEE.
THEY REVIEWED IT TWICE AND ON THE SECOND TIME, APPROVED IT AS OF MAY 18TH, 2023.
AND THEN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION ALSO REVIEWED THE, THE DESIGNATION REPORT AT WHICH POINT THEY APPROVED IT SUBJECT TO THE PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
WITH RESPECT TO WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, IT'S LOCATED DUE NORTH OF CITY HALL NEAR THE HIGHLAND PARK BORDER, ROUGHLY FIVE MILES NORTH ALONG TURTLE CREEK.
IN TERMS OF AERIAL VIEWS, THE PICTURE ON THE LEFT WAS PROVIDED BY THE CITY'S G I S DEPARTMENT.
THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT WAS PROVIDED BY GOOGLE EARTH.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SITE IS AGAIN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OR ON THE WEST SIDE OF TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF WHITECLIFF AVENUE, WHICH FORMS THE BORDER BETWEEN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND HIGHLAND PARK AND ALSO NORTH OF AVONDALE AVENUE TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY.
DIRECTLY BEHIND THE PROPERTY RATHER IS PARK CITY'S PRES PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, WHICH IS ON OAK LAWN AVENUE.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE QUITE A BIT OF DEVELOPMENT HAS HAPPENED BETWEEN
[02:55:01]
THE CITY'S AERIAL MAP AND GOOGLE EARTH.THE CITY'S AERIAL MAP WAS TAKEN AROUND 1979.
WITH RESPECT TO ZONING AND LAND USE, AGAIN, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED R 7.5 A, WHICH REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 7,500 SQUARE FEET.
FOR LOT SIZE, IT'S SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR S SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH A MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 25 SEAT 25 FEET.
IT'S ALSO IN PD 1 93, WHICH IS THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT.
AND THE ZONING MAP IS TO THE RIGHT.
THE CURRENT LAND USE IS RESIDENTIAL FOR THE MAIN STRUCTURE.
IN ADDITION TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE BEING HI HISTORICAL, THE GARAGE IS ALSO CONSIDERED HISTORICAL.
THIS REQUEST WILL NOT CHANGE THE CURRENT LAND USE.
THE CURRENT UNDERLYING LAND USE WILL STILL REMAIN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
WITH RESPECT TO NEARBY LAND USES, IF YOU'RE STANDING IN THE FRONT DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS WHERE THIS PICTURE IS TAKEN FROM OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND YOU LOOK TO THE NORTH, YOU'RE LOOKING AT HIGHLAND PARK, WHICH IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH LARGE LOT SIZES SIMILAR TO THOSE ON THE CITY OF DALLAS SIDE.
AND AS YOU CAN ALSO SEE TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD, IT BRANCHES OR AT FORKS JUST NORTH OF THE SUBJECT SIDE TO THE LEFT, IT GOES TO, OR IT BECOMES LAKESIDE DRIVE TO THE RIGHT, IT BECOMES JOHN'S DRIVE.
ALSO, TURTLE CREEK EXPANDS INTO EXL LAKE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE SUBJECT SITE TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY.
YOU SEE ADDITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, BUT THE LOT SIZES ARE A LOT SMALLER WITH INCREASED DENSITY.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THIS AREA THAT YOU SEE HERE, WHICH IS ALSO PICTURED TO THE RIGHT OF YOUR SCREEN, THAT'S ACTUALLY PD THREE 50 WITH VERY SMALL LOT SIZES.
IT'S BASICALLY A PLANNED COMMUNITY, A PLANNED GATED COMMUNITY WITH THE GUARDHOUSE ALSO TO THE EAST OF THE SITE OR DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET IS TURTLE CREEK PARKWAY, WHICH IS A 23.7 ACRE LINEAR PARK ESTABLISHED IN 1913.
AND IT IS A NO BUILD ZONE AND MANAGED BY CITY OF DALLAS PARK AND RICK TO THE WEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS PARK CITY'S PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.
IT'S A MAJOR COMPLEX OR A MULTI-BUILDING COMPLEX AT THIS TIME.
AND AGAIN, IT FACES OR AT FRONTS OAKLAWN AVENUE.
WITH RESPECT TO BACKGROUND AND HISTORY, THE RESIDENCE ITSELF WAS CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1925.
THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE IS 1924 THROUGH 1971, ROUGHLY 50 YEARS BECAUSE OF ITS ASSOCIATION WITH THE BERGER FAMILY.
THE STYLE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE, THE STYLE OF THE STRUCTURE IS SPANISH REVIVAL.
THE ARCHITECTS WERE LESTER FLINT AND THOMAS BROAD.
BASICALLY WE KNOW THEM FOR THE LIGHTHOUSE MUSEUM ON THE CORNER OF HARWOOD AND YOUNG STREET.
THE ORIGINAL OWNERS WERE BALLAD M AND JESSE WILLIAMS BERGER.
UNFORTUNATELY, MR. BERGER PASSED AWAY BEFORE THE HOUSE WAS COMPLETED, BUT HIS WIFE AND THEIR SIX CHILDREN WERE AFFILIATED WITH THE HOUSE AND DID LIVE IN THE HOUSE UNTIL 1971.
THE CONSTRUCTION FRAME PEERING BEAM, UH, THE EXTERIOR CLADDING IS MASONRY STUCCO PAINTED A PRETTY LIGHT PEAK.
UH, THE ROOF IS HIP, BUT ALSO SOME SECTIONS OF THE MAIN CROSS SECTION IS A CROSS GABLE ROOF.
THE ROOFING MATERIAL IS CLAY TILE RED STRAIGHT BARREL MISSION STYLE.
THE HOUSE IS TWO STORIES WITH A PARTIAL BASEMENT UNDER THE DINING ROOM.
THE PICTURE YOU SEE TO THE LEFT WAS TAKEN BY MR. THOMAS BROAD.
HE USED IT AS A PART OF HIS PORTFOLIO WHEN HE WAS NOMINATED TO BECOME F A I A OR A FELLOW IN THE ARCHITECTS ORGANIZATION.
UH, THE AREA WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, IT WAS, WELL CURRENTLY IT'S STILL CALLED OAK LAWN, OAK LAWN NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT OAK LAWN PARK WAS THE PRIOR NAME OF TURTLE CREEK PARK AND TURTLE CREEK PARK WAS CREATED AROUND 1903.
SOME SOURCES SAY 1909, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE
[03:00:01]
WHAT WE SEE OR HOW THE HOUSE IS CITED IS REFLECTIVE OF CITY PLANNER GEORGE E KESSLER'S PLANS FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS.WHAT YOU SEE IN THIS PICTURE ON THE RIGHT IS WHAT THE CITY OF DALLAS LOOKED LIKE WHEN GEORGE E KESSLER WAS COMMISSIONED BY THE PARK COMMISSION TO ESTABLISH, UH, FLOOD PROTECTION BECAUSE THE TRINITY RIVER HAD FLOODED IN 1908, FLOODING MUCH OF WEST DALLAS, BUT ALSO HE WAS HIRED TO COME UP WITH A PLAN FOR THE ENTIRE CITY BECAUSE THERE WERE QUITE A FEW ISSUES AT THAT TIME.
BUT EVERYWHERE YOU SEE GREEN IN THE PICTURE, THAT'S WHERE THE PARKS WERE LOCATED.
WHEN HE WAS HIRED AND TO THE LEFT, YOU SEE WHAT OAKLAWN PARK LOOKED LIKE AT THE TIME OF HIS HIRE.
ALSO, YOU CAN SEE HE DID NOT HAVE A VERY POSITIVE OPINION OF THE CITY AT THAT TIME.
OKAY, THIS PICTURE IS WHAT MR. KENT, MR. KESSLER'S PLAN WAS IN ORDER TO CHANGE AND CONNECT THE PARKS ACROSS THE CITY.
SO HE WANTED TO CONNECT THE PARKS WITH GREEN BELTS, OPEN SPACE, TREES, FOLIAGE, GRASSES.
HE ALSO WANTED TO ESTABLISH GRAND BOULEVARDS AND PARKWAYS.
HE WAS A PROPONENT OF WHAT WE CALL THE CITY BEAUTIFUL MOVEMENT.
AND THE REASON WHY HIS PLANNERS WERE EXCITED ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION OR THIS SITE IS BECAUSE WHAT YOU CAN SEE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN IS THIS IS ACTUALLY AN IMPLEMENTATION OF HIS PLAN FOR THE TURTLE CREEK AREA.
SO THE TURTLE CREEK AREA TODAY IN 2023 LOOKS MUCH LIKE WHAT MR. KESSLER PLANNED IN 1911 ON THE LEFT.
AND AGAIN, OAK LAWN PARK IS NOW TURTLE CREEK PARK.
SO THERE'S TURTLE CREEK PARK, AND THEN THERE'S TURTLE CREEK PARKWAY, WHICH CONNECTS TURTLE CREEK PARK,
UH, THE ARCHITECTS FLINT AND BROAD.
THEY WERE IN BUSINESS FROM 1922 TO 1944.
BASICALLY, WE KNOW THEM FOR THEIR COMMERCIAL PROJECTS, NOT SO MUCH THE RESIDENTIAL.
THE ONLY OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY I CAN FIND FOR THEM IS A HOUSE IN HIGHLAND PARK ON VERSAILLES AVENUE.
BUT OTHER PROPERTIES WHICH ARE ALSO LOCALLY DESIGNATED DESIGNED BY THEM ARE PHYLLIS WHEATLEY SCHOOL, ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND WHEATLEY PLACE, HISTORIC DISTRICT, AS WELL AS THE MASONIC TEMPLE AT THE CORNER OF HARVARD AND YOUNG, WHICH IS NOW THE LIGHTHOUSE MUSEUM.
WITH RESPECT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, IT HAS A VERY HIGH DEGREE OF ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY.
WHAT YOU SEE ON THE LEFT IS THE ARCHITECT'S ORIGINAL DRAWING OF THE HOUSE.
AND WHAT YOU SEE ON THE RIGHT IS THE HOUSE TODAY.
SO IT'S PRETTY MUCH A FULL IMPLEMENTATION EVEN TODAY OF WHAT THE ARCHITECTS HAD IN MIND.
THE FRONT FACES EAST, AGAIN, IT FACES TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD AND TURTLE CREEK PARK.
THE MAJOR ALTERATIONS TO THE HOUSE WERE MADE IN 2013, BUT THEY CANNOT BE SEEN FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THOSE ALTERATIONS WERE MADE IN THE REAR.
SO IN THE REAR WE SEE THAT THERE IS A VERTICAL ADDITION AS WELL AS A HORIZONTAL ADDITION TO EXTEND THE KITCHEN.
THERE WAS ALSO A SLEEPING PORCH TO THE RIGHT OF THE PHOTO, AND THIS WAS ALSO CLOSED IN.
BUT THESE CHANGES, AGAIN, CANNOT BE SEEN FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY.
OKAY? THIS IS THE SOUTH SIDE, THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S SOME MINOR CHANGES THERE TOO.
THERE WAS AN OPEN PATIO ALOGIA HERE IN THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY, BUT THAT HAS BEEN CLOSED IN.
AND ALSO YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE REAR SLEEPING PORCH HAS BEEN CLOSED IN ON THAT SIDE.
BUT WHEN YOU COMPARE IT TO THE ORIGINAL PHOTOS THAT THE ARCHITECTS HAD IN THEIR CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH A MATCH.
AND THEN THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS THE FA, WHICH IS NOT SO MUCH FACING, BUT IN THE DIRECTION OF WHITECLIFF AVENUE, AGAIN, THEY'RE VERY MINOR CHANGES THERE AS WELL.
THE GARAGE IS ALSO A PART OF THIS REQUEST.
AND WHAT YOU SEE IN YOUR UPPER LEFT HAND CORNER, THAT'S THE ORIGINAL GARAGE.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT PRETTY MUCH LOOKS THE SAME TODAY.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS AN ADDITION WAS ADDED TO THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE GARAGE.
SO THIS PROJECTION IS AN ADDITION THAT WAS NOT THERE IN THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION PLANS, BUT AGAIN, THIS CANNOT BE SEEN FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
THE YARD IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE KESSLER'S IDEA AND UM, ALSO THE ARCHITECTS IS BASICALLY KIND OF LIKE GARDEN LIVING OR GARDEN SCAPES.
[03:05:01]
ACTUAL PROPERTY ITSELF IS IN THREE TIERS.THERE'S AN UPPER TIER STARTING AT THE BACK, WHICH IS THE HIGHEST PORTION OF THE LOT, A MIDDLE TIER AND A LOWER TIER.
SO THIS PICTURE IS OF THE UPPER TIER, SO IT'S A PARTEE GARDEN.
AND WHAT YOU SEE IN THE BACK IS A HEN HOUSE.
SO PARTAKE GARDEN WITH HEN HOUSE.
THE SECOND LEVEL, THIS IS ON THE SIDE, THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THE, UH, FORMER LOGIA, WHICH IS NOW CLOSED IN WAS, AND THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
THIS FORMS LEVEL TWO OF THE GARDEN.
AND THEN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A DRIVEWAY COMING OFF OF TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD.
BUT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, THIS FORMS THE LOWER LEVEL OF THE GARDEN, AND THIS IS FACING EAST TOWARD TURTLE CREEK AND TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD.
THE SITE PLAN, WHICH IS, WHICH WILL BE A PART OF THE ORDINANCE, IS HERE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, TWO THIRDS OF THE PROPERTY IS IN A NO BILL ZONE.
ALSO THE FRONT AND FRONT, 50% SIDES, WELL THE FRONT AND THE 50% FRONTAGE ON THE LEFT AND THE RIGHT, THOSE ARE PROTECTED.
ALSO, THE FRONT FACADE OF THE GARAGE, THAT TOO WILL BE PROTECTED WITH RESPECT TO ELIGIBILITY.
UH, FOR US, A PROPERTY HAS TO MEET AT LEAST A MINIMUM OF THREE OF 10, WHICH ARE LISTED IN OUR ORDINANCE.
THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY MEETS SEVEN, SEVEN ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA.
THEY ARE HISTORY, HERITAGE, AND CULTURE.
UH, ALSO TWO REFLECTION OR ASSOCIATION WITH SIGNIFICANT PEOPLE, PEOPLE WHO CONTRIBUTED TO THE CULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT OF DALLAS.
THE ARCHITECTURE IS IMPORTANT HERE.
UH, HISTORIC CONTEXT AS IT RELATES TO GEORGE E KESSLER'S PLAN FOR THE CITY IS IMPORTANT.
AND PART OF THIS PROJECT, UNIQUE VISUAL FEATURE AND HISTORIC EDUCATION ARE ALSO ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY MEETS.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE PRESERVATION CRITERIA, WHICH ARE A PART OF THE DESIGNATION REPORT.
AND LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS ALSO APPROVAL SUBJECT TO PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
AND THAT ENDS MY PRESENTATION.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? SURE.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? I DON'T SEE OUR FOLKS ONLINE, SO YOU HAVE TO JUST SPEAK UP.
OKAY, THEN, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. DONE, LADIES AND GENERAL.
WE'LL NOW HEAD BACK INTO THE, THE DOCKET IN ORDER.
IF YOU NEED A COPY OF THE AGENDA, WE HAVE SOME COPIES HERE ON THIS TABLE HERE AT THE, ON THE, THE BOTTOM TO YOUR RIGHT.
AND THEN ALSO CHAIR, IS IT TOO LATE TO ASK A QUESTION? COMMISSIONER POPKIN, PLEASE.
I JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION REAL QUICK.
UM, WHAT, WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE ON THIS, UH, LAST CASE WE WERE DISCUSSING.
NUMBER 16 IS A HISTORIC OVERLAY.
WHAT DOES THAT GIVE US EXACTLY? IT ALLOWS THE PROPERTY TO BECOME A LOCAL LANDMARK WITH ITS OWN HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
THE UNDERLYING LANDMARK, UH, THE UNDERLYING LAND USE REMAINS THE SAME.
IT'LL STILL BE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, BUT IN THE FUTURE, IF OTHERS BUY THE PROPERTY, THEY WILL HAVE TO ADHERE TO THE ORDINANCE AND THE PRESERVATION CRITERIA THAT APPLY TO IT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT CLARITY.
UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THERE'S ALL THESE LITTLE YELLOW, UH, SHEETS HERE.
IF YOU COULD FILL THEM OUT THERE, THEY'RE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE RIGHT.
THESE YELLOW CARDS ALLOW US TO KEEP A TRACK OF YOUR VISIT WITH US AT SOME POINT.
WE'D SURE LOVE TO HAVE YOU GUYS, UH, SIGN ONE OF THESE AND JUST LEAVE IT RIGHT THERE ON THE TABLE.
UH, AND WITH THAT COMMISSIONERS WE'LL HEAD BACK INTO THE DOCKET,
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
UH, STARTING FROM PAGE ONE AND THE REVISED MINUTES FOR OUR AUGUST 17 MINUTES.MR. CHAIR? YES, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 17, 20, 23 MINUTES AS REVISED.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND FOR THE REVISED AUGUST 17TH MINUTES.
ANY DISCUSSION? C AND ALLS IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[ACTIONS ITEMS]
WE'RE NOW INTO OUR ZONING CASES.THE CONSENT AGENDA CASES TWO AND THREE HAVE COME OFF CONSENT.
SO EACH CASE WILL BE HEARD INDIVIDUALLY, BEGINNING WITH CASE NUMBER ONE AND MR. PPI
[03:10:10]
GOOD AFTERNOON.ITEM NUMBER ONE IS Z 2 23 1 22.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MF TWO.
A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ZONED A PAR 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT, PARTIALLY WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 6 0 8 PER PRIVATE SCHOOL AND DAYCARE CENTER.
AND A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR NUMBER 2 0 7 5 FOR A TOWER ANTENNA FOR, UH, FOR CELLULAR COMMUNICATION ON THE SOUTH CORNER OF FERGUSON ROAD AND HIBISCUS DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON CASE NUMBER ONE? APPLICANT IS HERE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION NUMBER 1 2 2 3 1 22? I MOVED TO CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH 1 22 AND FOLLOW UP STAFF'S APPROVAL, UH, SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR YOUR SECOND.
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS Z 2 2 3 1 79.
AN APPLICATION FOR AC AS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED AN IR INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DISTRICT AND A T H THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF WEST.
LET BETTER DRIVE WEST OF DUNCANVILLE ROAD.
STA RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
GEORGE, IF MY PRESENTATION JUST HERE, DID YOU RENAME IT? UH, LET'S SEE.
I THINK THESE ARE THE RIGHT HERE.
AND THEN WHAT WAS THE CASE NUMBER AGAIN? YEAH, 1 7, 9.
AND THEN FOR ME, YOU'RE NOT A SHARED, CORRECT? YEAH.
ALRIGHT, JUST SO WAIT FOR TO LOAD AND SHARE.
SO ROB BALDWIN, UM, HERE REPRESENTING A PROPERTY OWNER REQUESTING, UM, A CSS DISTRICT FOR A PROPERTY THAT'S CURRENTLY ZONED IR.
AND, UH, TH THREE, UH, IT IS IN SOUTHWESTERN PART OF DALLAS OFF OF WEST LEDBETTER ROAD.
AND, AND THIS IS THE SITE AND IT, IT, IT'S A INTERESTING SITE BECAUSE ALL ALONG WEST LEDBETTER IT'S COMMERCIAL HEAVY COMMERCIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, AND ACTUALLY, UH, A MIXTURE OF USES, SOME OF WHICH APPEAR TO BE LEGAL, SOME WHICH APPEAR TO BE, UH, NOT QUITE PERMITTED PROPERLY.
UM, I'M CURRENTLY WORKING ON OTHER PROJECTS IN THE AREA, WHICH WITH AN INDUSTRIAL FIELD IN, IN THIS CASE WE HAVE A, A TOWNHOME ZONING MYSTERIOUSLY ON THE BACK HALF OF, OF THESE LOTS.
AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE BRIEFING SESSION.
NO ONE QUITE KNOWS HOW IT HAPPENED BECAUSE IT CROSSES SEVERAL LOTS AND SEVERAL DIFFERENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND IT REALLY DOESN'T CONNECT TO ANYTHING.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, UH, THIS EXHIBIT HERE, IT SHOWS THE, THE RED IS THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THE, THE TOWNHOME ZONING, AND IT REALLY DOESN'T CONNECT TO A PUBLIC STREET IF IN THE VERY FAR WEST HAND SIDE, IT, UH, CONNECTS TO THE GIRL SCOUT CAMP, UH, THE ROAD THAT IS IN INSIDE THE GIRL SCOUT CAMP.
AND THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
SO, UH, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL, THERE'S REALLY NO WAY TO GET TO IT.
UM, WE'RE ASKING THAT TO BE REZONED TO, TO MATCH THE CS DISTRICT.
NOW, I KNOW THERE'S OPPOSITION TO THIS CASE AND I'VE SPOKEN WITH ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN,
[03:15:01]
UH, WHO IS IN OPPOSITION AND I UNDERSTAND EDGES ARE IMPORTANT AND I I FULLY EXPECT THAT I WOULD COME BACK WITH YOU.I UNDERSTAND THIS CASE IS GONNA BE HELD, UH, WITH SOME SET OF DEEDED RESTRICTIONS THAT DEAL WITH, UM, HOW WE'RE GONNA DEAL WITH THE EDGES.
AND IT COULD BE, UH, HANDS BUFFER.
IT COULD BE PROHIBIT PROHIBITED OR PROHIBITION AGAINST BUILDINGS WITHIN CERTAIN, UH, DISTANCE FOR THE, THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
BUT WE UNDERSTAND THERE'S RESIDENTIALS BACK THERE AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT RESIDENTIAL NEEDS TO BE PROTECTED.
I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DETAILS LOOK LIKE YET.
I'VE CON UH, COORDINATE WITH COMMISSIONER HERBERT AND WE'RE GONNA SET UP A MEETING WHERE WE CAN WORK OUT THOSE DETAILS.
AND I, I DO BELIEVE THAT WE, I I AT LEAST I CAN OFFER, UH, DEEDED RESTRICTIONS THAT WILL ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS.
SO I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION? PLEASE COME DOWN.
GENTLEMEN, PLEASE BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
I LIVE AT 63 0 6 ELDER GROVE DRIVE.
I'M HERE SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OF THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST BECAUSE THERE WERE TOO MANY THINGS THAT THE STAFF DID NOT TELL YOU IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
NUMBER ONE, IT SAID, WE ALREADY HAVE A PLAN FOR THIS AREA AND THAT PLAN CALLS FOR EXPANSION AND PROTECTION OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
THE OTHER BIG PROBLEM FOR THIS REQUEST IS THAT IT'S, UH, ASKING TO EXPAND A USE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PROVEN TO BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENTIAL USES.
AND THE FACT THAT DALLAS IS TRYING TO EXPAND ITS HOUSING STOCK, ESPECIALLY IN OUR PART OF, UM, THE CITY AND ESPECIALLY HOME OWNERSHIP.
THIS IS ANOTHER REASON WHY IT'S INCOMPATIBLE.
SO BETWEEN THAT AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ISSUES THAT DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS POSE FOR OUR AREA OVER DECADES, IT SEEMS INCONSISTENT THAT SINCE THE FOUR EXISTING FORD DALLAS PLAN AND EVEN THOUGH A DRAFT OF THE CURRENT ONE DON'T SUPPORT DOING THIS SORT OF THING, WE WERE CAUGHT OFF GUARD AND FRANKLY SHOCKED THAT STAFF WITH ALL OF THESE RESOURCES AND FACTS THAT THEY DEVELOPED DIDN'T USE THEIR OWN RESOURCES TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST.
SO IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS THOSE WITH YOU.
I LIVE AT 52 32 MONTA LANE, ABOUT A HALF MILE SOUTH OF THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY.
UM, I SEE SOME FAMILIAR FACES HERE.
UM, I WANT TO ASK YOU TO DENY THIS REQUEST FOR A LOT OF REASONS, BUT THE BIGGEST REASON IS THAT THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRIP THAT'S AT THE BACK OF THAT LOT ACTS REALLY AS A BUFFER FROM WHATEVER INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY THAT OCCURS UP ON THE LEADBETTER SIDE OF THAT LOT.
AND THE HOMES THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH CASA STILL SOLE NEIGHBORHOOD DOWN THERE HAS A LOT OF VERY SMALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
AND THERE, THERE ARE 40 HOMES IMMEDIATELY ON THE SOUTH TO THE SOUTH OF THAT LOT.
AND THERE ARE ABOUT 250 HOMES TOTAL IN THAT AREA.
UM, THAT PARTICULAR STRIP OF LAND BECAME ZONED FOR TOWN HOMES WHEN THAT AREA TO THE SOUTH WAS BUILT OUT FOR TOWN HOMES A LONG TIME AGO.
AND I THINK THERE WAS A PLAN BASICALLY TO EXTEND A RESIDENTIAL STREET UP THERE THAT IT NEVER MATERIALIZED.
I UNDERSTAND THE, THE IDEA TO KIND OF ENSHRINE THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL USE THAT IS OCCURRING UP THERE ON LEADBETTER, BUT I URGE YOU, IF YOU PASS THIS PARTICULAR REZONING, YOU'RE IN EFFECT GOING TO TAKE AWAY THAT BUFFER.
NOW, I SENT ALL OF YOU AN EMAIL A FEW DAYS AGO THAT HAS, UM, A, A STUDY THAT'S PUBLISHED BY PAUL QUINN COLLEGE
[03:20:01]
THAT TALKS ABOUT BUFFERS THAT ARE PUT IN PLACE TO PROTECT RESIDENTS FROM AIR POLLUTION.AND IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT FOR BUFFERS THAT ARE JUST A TEMPORARY MEASURE, AND IT SAYS THAT FOR HIGHWAYS, YOU WANT TO HAVE BUFFERS FROM HOMES OF AT LEAST 500 FEET.
AND FOR DISTRIBUTION CENTERS LIKE WAREHOUSES, YOU WANT SOMETHING LIKE A THOUSAND FEET.
THAT LITTLE STRIP OF LAND IS BASICALLY 450 FEET WIDE.
IT'S A BUFFER THAT PROTECTS THOSE HOMES DOWN THERE AND IT PROTECTS THE HOMES TO THE SOUTH LIKE MINE.
SO I URGE YOU, PLEASE DENY THIS.
AND, UH, IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THANK YOU, SIR.
THANK THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
THANK YOU FOR FILLING OUT THE OTHER CARD.
COULD YOU PUT THE SLIDE ON THAT, UH, SHOWED THE ZONE, PLEASE? THE TH THREE ZONE.
PLEASE BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
THAT ONE, NO, THE, UH, THAT'S THE ZONE THAT SHOWS THE, UH, ACTUAL ZONE THERE.
THAT'S THE ZONE, THAT'S JUST THE AREA.
I'M FRANK BRACKEN 57 17 KIWANIS ROAD, DALLAS, TEXAS.
PLAINLY STATED, THIS REQUEST IS AN ATTEMPT TO EXPAND THE RED BIRD INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE DISTRICT FOOTPRINT AT THE EXPENSE OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY OF SEVERAL HUNDRED FAMILIES BY DISCARDING TH THREE EXISTING ZONING INTENDED IN SERVING AS A BUFFER.
WHILE AMPLE REMAINING AREA WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT LIES UNDEVELOPED AS LONG AS THE TH THREE ZONE REMAINS INTACT AND ADJACENT TO BOTH THE R 10 AREA ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE EXISTING COMMUNITY IN THE MF TWO, A AREA ACCESS CAN BE ASSURED FROM WEST LEDBETTER, FROM CASA DESO, AND FROM WHISPERING CEDARS, ENSURING THAT THE TH H THREE AREA ACTS AS THE SOUTHWEST DALLAS LAND USE PLAN INDICATED, INTENDED, EXCUSE ME, UH, BUFFER BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES.
OTHERWISE, ALLOWING THE TH THREE AREA TO BE BISECTED BY THE REQUEST WILL LEAD TO A DOMINO ME TOO EFFECT, EFFECTIVELY ELIMINATING THE INTENDED BUFFER IN TIME.
WAREHOUSES ARE ABUNDANT ALONG I 20, I 35, I 45 AND ELSEWHERE.
BUT RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES ARE IN SHORT SUPPLY, ESPECIALLY IN DISTRICT THREE.
INDUSTRIAL IMPINGEMENT ON RESIDENTIAL ZONING SETS THE STAGE FOR AN UNQUENCHABLE THIRST FOR MORE, THEREBY JEOPARDIZING EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STABILITY AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, PLEASE DENY Z 2 2 3 1 79.
I'M WITH DOWN WINDERS AT RISK, A 30 YEAR OLD CLEAN AIR AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE GROUP, 1808 SOUTH GOOD LATIMER IN DALLAS, 7 5 2 2 6.
WE'RE HERE AT THE REQUEST OF THE RESIDENCE.
AND ALSO BECAUSE WE'RE DEEPLY INVOLVED IN LAND USE ISSUES AROUND DALLAS AND IN THE AREA, WE OPPOSE THIS CHANGE, UM, AND ASK THAT YOU AT LEAST WAIT ON THESE KINDS OF DECISIONS AND THESE KINDS OF AMBIGUOUS AREAS THAT ARE LEFT OVER FROM THE 1980S UNTIL AFTER THE FORWARD DALLAS PROCESS, UH, TAKES ITS COURSE AND RESOLVES SOME OF THIS.
RIGHT NOW THE MAP IS VERY AMBIGUOUS.
UM, THE MAP IGNORES A WHOLE MOBILE HOME THAT BACKS UP DIRECTLY TO A HUGE WAREHOUSE OPERATION JUST TO THE EAST OF HERE, FOR INSTANCE.
DOESN'T RECOGNIZE THAT AS A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
UM, AND THINGS ARE NOT QUITE SETTLED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LEDBETTER IN THE SAME WAY THAT THEY ARE NORTH OF LEDBETTER, NORTH OF LEDBETTER, ESPECIALLY LONG.
DAN, UM, MORTON, UH, MARTIN THERE, UH, DAN MORTON.
UM, IT'S ALL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE THIS KIND OF OPERATION WOULD FIT IN SOUTH OF LEDBETTER.
ON THE SOUTH SIDE, THINGS ARE NOT SO SETTLED, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE RESIDENTS THERE ALREADY THERE, AND APARTMENTS, NOT JUST THE MOBILE HOME, BUT THE APARTMENTS TO THE SOUTH.
[03:25:01]
THERE, THERE ARE CERTAIN KINDS OF RACIST ZONING THAT WE ARE SEEING AND DEALING WITH IN THE AREA RIGHT NOW.ONE IS CERTAINLY LEGACY RACIST ZONING LIKE YOU SEE IN WEST DALLAS OR PY WHERE PEOPLE OF COLOR WERE PUT THERE AT THE SAME TIME AS HEAVY INDUSTRY.
THE OTHER KIND OF ZONING WE'RE SEEING NOW IN A CASE THAT WE'RE INVOLVED IN IN FORT WORTH IS A, A LOT LIKE THIS.
IT'S ONLY AFTER THE AREA BECOMES MORE BLACK AND BROWN THAT YOU BEGIN TO SEE INDUSTRIAL ZONING CREEP IN.
AND IT'S A, IN THE FORM OF THESE WAREHOUSES AND TRUCKING FIRMS, THE LIST THAT THE STAFF PROVIDED OF CHANGES TO THE ZONING MAKE IT SEEM AS IF IT'S AN IMPROVEMENT.
BUT IF YOU GO THROUGH THAT WHOLE LIST, THERE'S A LOT OF MISCHIEF LEFT THAT THIS SITE COULD GET INTO THAT WOULD PUT THOSE HOUSES IN JEOPARDY.
AND I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO THINK ABOUT THAT.
UM, I WOULD HATE TO THINK THAT IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO RESOLVE A HUNDRED YEAR OLD PROBLEM IN NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND THIS CITY, THAT THEN WE CREATE A NEW 21ST CENTURY STYLE OF INDUSTRIAL RACIST ZONING THAT WE IMPOSE ON NEIGHBORHOODS WITHOUT THINKING VERY MUCH ABOUT IT.
AND I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO CONSIDER PAUSING AND THIS CASE AND ALSO THE ONE, UH, DOWN THE ROAD BY THE CHURCH.
THESE KINDS OF ENCROACHMENTS BY THESE TRUCKING FIRMS ARE GONNA BE OUR VERSION OF HEAVY INDUSTRY, ESPECIALLY ALONG I 20 HERE, WHERE YOU ALREADY SEE THE CREATION OF KIND OF THESE DIESEL DEATH ZONES, AS THEY CALL THEM IN CALIFORNIA, NOTHING BUT ACRES OF WAREHOUSES AND DIESEL TRUCKS.
SO PLEASE PAUSE HERE, TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT YOU HAVE A PLANNING PROCESS IN THE PIPELINE THAT COULD TAKE CARE OF THIS ON BEHALF OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND LISTEN TO THEM FIRST.
ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? MR. BALDWIN? HAVE A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
WELL, CLEARLY I HAVE MY WORK CUT OUT FOR ME.
UM, SO ONE THING I WOULD, I, LIKE I SAY, I COMMIT TO TRYING TO WORK OUT THE BUFFER ISSUE, UH, HYPOTHETICALLY IF THIS PROPERTY STAYS AS TOWNHOME AND HYPOTHETICALLY IF YOU COULD GET ACCESS TO IT, THAT WOULD JUST BE, AND IF IT GOT BUILT AS TOWNHOMES, THAT'S JUST PUTTING PEOPLE NEXT TO IR ZONING INSTEAD OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO IS REZONE THE PROPERTY CSS, WHICH IS LESS INTENSE, AND THEN CREATE, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS TO PROVIDE THE SAME SORT OF BUFFER ZONE THAT THIS, THAT COULD, THIS IS CURRENTLY PROVIDING WITHOUT ALLOWING IT OR ENCOURAGING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT BE IN THERE.
SO I, I THINK THAT WE CAN COME UP WITH, UH, REGULATIONS THAT PROTECT OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS AND AT THE SAME TIME, NOT JUST LEAVE A DEAD ZONE THERE THAT OR A, A ZONE THAT IS ONLY SUITABLE FOR RESIDENTIAL OR THAT WOULD THEN PUT THE RESIDENTIAL CLOSER TO, UH, A HEAVIER INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.
UM, I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU AGAIN AND HOPEFULLY I'LL HAVE THE ISSUES WORKED OUT WITH OUR NEIGHBORS.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG? YES, MR. BALDWIN.
UM, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT IS CURRENTLY GOING ON IN THE THREE A PORTION OF THE SITE? THERE WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ANYTHING, BUT, UH, IT'S, I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, THE OWNER HAS, UH, DONE SOME CLEARING OUT THERE AND I'VE SPOKEN WITH MR. IRWIN ABOUT IT AND, UH, THAT IS GONNA BE STOPPED.
WELL, THERE'S THAT, BUT ALSO LOOKING AT THE AERIAL PHOTO, THERE APPEARS TO BE SOMETHING GOING ON AT THE FAR SOUTH END OF THE SITE.
IT DOESN'T LOOK NATURAL LIKE TREES OR GULLIES OR WHATEVER.
UH, SO SOMETHING SEEMS TO BE GOING ON IN THE TH THREE AREA.
WELL, ON OUR PROPERTY, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING GOING ON ON EITHER SIDE OF THIS.
WELL, THERE, THERE, THERE'S SOMETHING THAT SHOWS ON THE AERIAL AS MANMADE.
THIS IS OUR PROPERTY, UH, ON EITHER SIDE OF US.
THERE'S, THERE'S DEFINITELY, ALL RIGHT, WELL, YOU, YOU'D NEED TO BE AT A MUCH HIGHER RESOLUTION, DEEPER SCALE, REST ASSURED I WILL FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE.
THAT'S ALL I CAN ASK AT THIS POINT.
CAN YOU SHED, YOU, YOU HEARD THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING WHERE WE SAY WE THINK THAT THE, UH, T H THREE ORIGINATED IN 2004, AND YOU PROBABLY HEARD COMMISSIONER, UH, VICE CHAIR RUBIN'S REQUEST TO STAFF TO DIG INTO THAT AND FIND OUT MORE ABOUT IT.
CAN YOU SHED ANY MORE LIGHT ON WHEN AND HOW AND WHY THE TH THREE CAME ABOUT? I WISH I COULD.
I I RAN INTO THE SAME ISSUE THAT MR. MULKEY DID.
LOOKING AT THE ZONING MAP, IT LOOKS
[03:30:01]
LIKE IT JUST KIND OF APPEARED.IT DOESN'T REFERENCE WHEN IT APPEARED.
UH, WELL, WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME, IT WAS UNLIKELY TO HAVE BEEN A, A PRIVATE ZONING OR, OR A ZONING APPLICATION FILED BY A PRIVATE APPLICANT SINCE THERE ARE SO MANY OWNERS? THAT'S CORRECT.
I THINK IT WAS, UH, A, A CITY ACTION OF SOME SORT, EITHER.
EITHER DURING THE TRANSITION AND IT GOT MAPPED THIS WAY.
WELL, IT WAS AN AUTHORIZED HEARING OR SOMETHING THAT WOULDN'T HAVE, THAT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED IF, IF ASSUMING NOBODY SCREWED UP.
WE DIDN'T PAINT AREAS TH THREE THAT WEREN'T RESIDENTIAL BEFORE THAT AS FAR OF THE TRANSITION, IT SEEMS LIKE ZONING, ZONING DISTRICT HERE.
BUT, UH, I'LL WORK WITH STAFF AND WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN GET TO THE BOTTOM OF IT.
AND THEN THE LAST ISSUE IS, WOULD YOU CONFIRM MY SUSPICION FROM THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING? I TAKE IT YOUR CLIENT WOULD HAVE NO INTEREST IN GETTING CR ON THE INDUSTRIAL PORTION WITHOUT GETTING SOME ZONING CHANGE ON THE TH THREE.
HE'D RATHER KEEP THE, THE CURRENT ZONING IF, IF WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING IN THE BACK.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN? YES, I'M SURE WE THERE.
SO IS IT SAFE TO SAY THAT YOUR CLIENT IS GONNA BUILD SOME TYPE OF INDUSTRIAL USE THERE? I'M SORRY, MA'AM.
IS IT SAFE TO SAY THAT YOUR CLIENT IS GONNA GO, GOING TO BUILD SOME TYPE OF INDUSTRIAL USE THERE, EVEN IF THEY CAN'T GET WITHOUT BUILDING ON THE PART THAT'S ZONE T H THREE I I WILL SAY THAT EVEN IF THE ZONING CASE DOESN'T GO THROUGH THE, SOMETHING WILL BE BUILT ON THE, THE NORTHERN PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT HAS THE CURRENT ZONING ON IT.
SO, BUT IF THEY ARE WILLING TO DO A BUFFER, BUT YOU ALL ARE IN TALK, SO DOING A DEEDED RESTRICTION ON THE PART THAT IS TH THREE TO KEEP THAT BUFFER FROM THE CO THE COMMUNITY, I RUN THE, THE CONCEPT BY HIM AND HE'S, HE'S WILLING TO DISCUSS IT.
AND IS HE WILLING TO DO SOMETHING TO PROTECT THE, ON THE, UM, SIDE THAT'S CLOSEST TO THE, UH, THE MOBILE HOMES ALSO TO PUT A BUFFER THERE? YEAH.
WELL, OR IS THAT POSSIBLE? I WOULD THINK THAT THE, THESE RESTRICTIONS WOULD, WOULD COVER THE AREA THAT'S CURRENTLY ZONED.
TH AND WE WOULD COME UP WITH REGULATIONS TO ALLOW SOME PRODUCTIVE USE OF THE PROPERTY AT THE SAME TIME PROTECTING OUR NEIGHBORS.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE, THE SIDE THAT HAS THE, THE TH THREE IS, IS ONE THING, BUT THE SIDE THAT IS IN ADJACENT TO THE MOBILE HOME PARK, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE MOBILE HOME PARK TO THE EAST? IT DOESN'T, NO.
SO THERE'S ALREADY, YEAH, THERE, THERE'S A MOBILE HOME PARK TO, TO OUR EAST, BUT IT'S OKAY.
SO, BUT THERE IS A PROPERTY BETWEEN THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN? COMMISSIONERS? ANY QUESTIONS FROM OUR FOLKS ONLINE? QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? COMMISSIONER YOUNG? UH, YES.
AND, AND I, I'LL LET YOU GUYS DECIDE WHO WANTS TO ANSWER THIS.
IT'S ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I ASKED MR. BALDWIN, CAN YOU SHED ANY LIGHT ON WHEN AND HOW AND WHY THE TH THREE ZONE CAME TO BE THE EVIDENCE? THE EV THE, THE EV THE EVIDENCE IS IN A CLOSET.
WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THE CLOSET IS.
THAT, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE ANSWER WE GOT THIS MORNING.
WE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH RYAN MULKEY HERE TWO WEEKS AGO AND, UH, A G I S, UH, INDIVIDUAL WHO WE DID NOT HAVE MUCH TIME.
IT WAS THE END OF THE DAY, BUT HE COULD NOT FIND, UH, THE SOURCE.
IT WAS A COPY YOU SHARED THAT, THAT SHOWS THAT AREA.
UH, IF YOU CAN PUT THAT SLIDE BACK ON, IT'LL MAKE MORE SENSE.
CAN WE DO THAT? CAN WE DO THAT? CAN WE BORROW YOUR SLIDE AGAIN? I REMEMBER HOW TO DO THIS.
I THINK HE'S LOOKING FOR YOUR AERIAL PHOTO WITH THE, UH, TH THREE AREA HIGHLIGHTED.
THE ONE WITH THE, CAN YOU SEE THAT? HE CAN WITH THE RIGHT.
[03:35:06]
UM, IT GOT THE BE PULLED UP.AH, THAT WAS A, THAT WAS A SECTION IN.
I CAN GO AHEAD AND JUST TRY TO DESCRIBE IT.
YOU WANT THAT ONE? NO, THE ONE WITH THE RED.
ALRIGHT, LOOKING AT THAT, IF WE TAKE THE RE THE QUESTION IN REVERSE, WE'LL HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF PROBABLY FINDING OUT WHAT THE ANSWER IS INSTEAD OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHEN TH THREE GOT IN THERE.
FIGURE OUT WHEN THE IR GOT PUSHED DOWN TWO THIRDS OF THE WAY INTO THOSE LOTS, BECAUSE ORIGINALLY FROM WHAT LITTLE INFORMATION'S AVAILABLE, THOSE LOTS WERE EX THE LEFT HAND AREA THAT'S, UH, THERE'S FOUR LOTS RIGHT THERE NEXT TO THE GIRL SCOUTS.
THERE'S APARTMENTS AND THAT ZONE WENT ALL THE WAY OVER TO WHERE THE, UH, TRAILER PARK IS SOMEWHERE LATER.
AND THIS WAS BACK, UH, ROUGHLY IN THE TIME WHEN HE TRANSITIONED TO COUNTY TO CITY 1976.
SOMEWHERE SINCE THAT TIME, THERE'S BEEN A CHANGE.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT, AND YOU LOOK AT THESE ZONING LINES, YOU SEE AN IMPINGEMENT ON THE WEST BORDER AND THE EAST BORDER WHERE IT JUST ZOOMS DOWN IN, IN IT ACTUALLY BISECTS ONE LOT, WHICH IS NOT NORMAL FOR ZONING.
YOU'RE GONNA ZONE THE WHOLE LOT, NOT PART OF IT.
SO THERE WAS SOME MANIPULATION IN THERE WHO DID THE MANIPULATION? THERE WASN'T A PUBLIC PROCESS THAT I'M AWARE OF, AND I'VE ASKED EVERYBODY THAT'S LIVED OUT THERE FOR A LONG TIME, NOBODY KNOWS HOW THAT GOT THERE.
THERE HAS TO HAVE BEEN SOME KIND OF PUBLIC PROCESS.
YOU CAN'T CHANGE ZONING WITHOUT IT.
UM, I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF WHY THAT'S MAYBE NOT TRUE.
IF WE GO TO GOOGLE MAP AND D A AND LOOK AT THE EXIT AT GRADY NELLO ROAD, THE, UH, OFFICE PER 4 0 8, THE CROSSOVER THOROUGHFARE IS SUPPOSED TO BE GRADY NIBBLER ROAD, BUT IT IS NOW LABELED WEST LEDBETTER EXTENSION.
BUT BUT WHO DID ZONING THAT'S DONE WITHOUT A PUBLIC PROCESS IS NOT VALID ZONING AT ALL.
WELL, UH, THAT'S AN INTERESTING POSSIBILITY THAT THE IR, THAT THE TH THREE OR ITS PREDECESSOR PREDATED THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING IN PART.
UH, BUT IN ANY EVENT, SOUTH OF LEDBETTER YEAH.
IN ANY EVENT, THANKS FOR, THANKS FOR CONFIRMING THAT YOU DON'T KNOW ANY MORE THAN WE DO
AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL FIND OUT BY NEXT MONTH.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER, FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER HARBERT, THE OPPOSITION, OPPOSITION, OPPOSITION.
UM, I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
AND THEN WE'LL GO TO STAFF AT THE END.
STAFF IS WHO? I GONNA HAVE THE QUESTION.
YEAH, WE'LL, WE'LL GO AFTER COMMISSIONER HERBERT.
YOU GUYS SEEM TO HAVE MORE OF A HISTORY HERE.
IT FROM MY HIS, FROM MY RESEARCH.
IS IT TRUE THAT THE FIRST STRUCTURES IN THIS AREA, SPECIFIC SOUTH OF LEDBETTER, IN NORTH OF LEDBETTER, WAS THE MOBILE HOME AND THEN SECOND CAME THE APARTMENTS AT DUNCANVILLE? I WAS NOT.
YOU GUYS KNOW THAT FRANK? ANYBODY? FRANK'S NOT PAYING ATTENTION.
I I WAS STANDING UP TO ANSWER THE TOWNHOUSE ZONING QUESTION.
UH, NOW THAT I'M LOOKING AT THAT PLAT, THAT LOOKS LIKE A PLAT THAT DATES BACK TO THE EIGHTIES.
AND AT THAT TIME IN OUR AREA, WE GOT A LOT OF PLATTS LIKE THAT.
AND WHAT IT RESULTED IN WERE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES, BUT DEVELOPERS USED THIS AS A WAY TO NOT PROVIDE A FRONT YARD OR ANY TYPE OF, UH, SETBACKS, WHICH MEANS THAT YOU HAD THE SMALLER STREETS, YOU HAD A 10 BY 20 PARKING PAD IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO PROVIDE AN OFF STREET PARKING SPACE, BUT IT WAS, UM, NOT THE BEST WAY
[03:40:01]
TO ACHIEVE QUALITY HOUSING.BUT THE MARKET WAS PRETTY HOT BACK THEN AND IT'S SOLD.
BUT TO TODAY, WHEN YOU GO THERE, YOU SEE A LOT OF, OF THE ONE CAR GARAGES IN THAT TOWNHOUSE THREE ZONE CONVERTED TO LIVING SPACE.
THE STREETS ARE PACKED WITH, UH, WITH CARS AND WORK VEHICLES.
AND MY CONCERN HAS ALWAYS BEEN, IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY, HOW WOULD EMERGENCY VEHICLES ACTUALLY GET THROUGH THERE? BUT, UM, MM-HMM.
SO, AND WE HAVE QUITE A FEW OF THOSE IN THAT VICINITY AND QUITE A FEW OF THOSE IN DISTRICT THREE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR OUR FOLKS IN OPPOSITION? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? I DON'T KNOW WHO'S GOING, WHO CAN ANSWER THIS.
SO WE, WE ALL KNOW THAT ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS BOTH VICE VERSA, INDUSTRY MOVING IN IN RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL MOVING IN IN AN INDUSTRY, AND THEN INDUSTRY BEING PUNISHED BECAUSE OF RESIDENTIAL AND VICE VERSA.
SO WAS THE, WAS THE TOWN HOMES THERE FIRST OR WAS THE IR THE INDUSTRY THERE FIRST? I WILL NEED TO, UH, DO A BIT MORE RESEARCH.
I DO KNOW, AS PER HISTORICAL AERIAL, THE TOWN HOME SUBDIVISION WAS, UM, DEVELOPED IN LIKE 2001, 2004.
SO IT WAS AFTER THE, AFTER, UM, SOME OF THE INDUSTRIALS ON THE NORTH.
AND THEN I DO KNOW, UM, THAT THE S E P FOR THE MOBILE HOME PARK, UM, STATES THAT IT WAS AN SS E P FOR A MOBILE HOME PARK AND ZONED INDUSTRIAL.
SO, AND THAT WAS LIKE IN 1986 AROUND THAT.
SO THIS WOULD BE ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WITH THE, THAT WHERE WE COULD SAY AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE HAD IT, IT MIGHT BE OCCURRING, BUT IT'S ALSO WHERE WE ARE CONTINUING TO BUILD INSIDE OF INDUSTRIAL AND, AND, AND WE WANNA PUNISH INDUSTRIAL JUST LIKE WE PUNISH WHEN, IF RESIDENTIAL WAS THERE FIRST, I CAN UNDERSTAND IT, BUT INDUSTRIAL WAS THERE FIRST, SO, OKAY.
SO RESIDENTIAL HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE BEFORE INDUSTRIAL.
UM, F Y I, THE MOBILE HOME WAS THERE 1958 AND NOTHING SURROUNDED IT AT THE TIME.
SO IF INDUSTRIAL ZONING WAS PLACED ON THE MOBILE HOME, THAT'S ANOTHER CONVERSATION FOR ANOTHER DAY.
BUT IT WAS DEFINITELY RESIDENTIAL.
THE AREA IN ITS HOLE WAS RESIDENTIAL, GOING BACK TO THE NIB LOWS, THE SHAAK FAMILIES AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
SO HISTORICALLY THIS WAS A RESIDENTIAL AREA THAT AT SOME POINT, PROBABLY IN THE SEVENTIES, THEY DECIDED TO BRING IN INDUSTRIAL ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LEDBETTER.
UM, AS TIME WENT ON, UH, IT LOOKED LIKE 81, WE GOT THE APARTMENTS ON THIS SIDE, STILL NO INDUSTRIAL, ALL RESIDENTIAL.
UM, THEN COME THE NINETIES IS WHEN THE HEAVY, UH, INDUSTRIAL LIGHT, INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AND TRUCKS STARTED COMING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
JUST SOME HISTORICAL INSIGHT THERE.
UM, THE QUESTION IS TO STAFF, I'M SORRY.
UM, CAN WE CONFIRM IN FACT THE, WELL IT'S ALREADY BEEN LAID OUT THAT WE HAVE WORK TO DO IN FINDING OUT THE HISTORY OF THIS AREA.
UM, BUT CAN WE CONFIRM THOSE TWO ITEMS THAT THE APARTMENT COMPLEX AND THE MOBILE HOME NEIGHBORHOOD WAS THERE BEFORE EVERYTHING ELSE.
UM, BY THE TIME WE GET TO OUR NEXT SESSION, YES, I WILL CONFIRM YOU'LL WORK ON IT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, MR. SORRY, LEMME JUMP IN REAL QUICK.
UM, SINCE I KNOW YOU'RE STILL DELIBERATING ON WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO HOLD THIS CASE TO, UM, I'M GONNA POLITELY REQUEST THAT YOU HOLD IT TWO MEETINGS, NOT ONE.
UM, BECAUSE OUR CASE REPORTS FOR THE NEXT MEETING ARE DUE NEXT TUESDAY, AND THAT DOES NOT GIVE US A LOT OF TIME TO RESEARCH.
UM, AND WHILE I'M UP HERE, UM, JUST TO ADD FURTHER TO THIS DISCUSSION, UM, THE, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE ZONED INDUSTRIAL OR COMMERCIAL SERVICE, UM, SORRY, I'M WAY OUT OF BREATH.
UM, MIGHT IN THIS AREA BE DUE TO THE CITY'S HISTORY OF CUMULATIVE ZONING.
UM, SO YOU COULD SEE, UM, INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS IN THE PAST, UM, THAT ALLOWED RESIDENTIAL USES.
UM, AND THEN THAT RESIDENTIAL ZONING COULD HAVE CARRIED OVER, UM, WITH THE SHIFT TO CHAPTER 51 A.
UM, THAT'S A PRETTY COMMON OCCURRENCE IN DISTRICT SIX AND PARTS OF
[03:45:01]
DISTRICTS OF DISTRICT TWO AS WELL.UM, SO JUST ANOTHER THING TO KIND OF THROW INTO THE MIX.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG, WELL, UM, INDUSTRIAL ZONING WITH RESIDENTIAL USES ON IT WOULD NOT HAVE ORDINARILY TRANSITIONED TO RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
CORRECT? YOU SAID INDUSTRIAL, SORRY, SAY THAT AGAIN?
ALTHOUGH THERE WAS ALWAYS THE OPTION TO BECOME CONFORMING.
SO BARRING THAT, THAT KIND OF SITUATION, UM, PREVIOUSLY IN THE CODE YOU COULD HAVE AN INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS A RESIDENTIAL USE AND THE RESIDENTIAL USE IS CONFORMING THAT PREVIOUS INDUSTRIAL ZONING DESIGNATION WOULD'VE CARRIED OVER, UM, WITH THE NEW CODE.
SO THAT RESIDENTIAL USE COULD STILL BE ON THAT INDUSTRIALLY INDUSTRIALLY ZONED PARCEL.
UM, BUT NOW THE USE WOULD BE NON-CONFORMING.
WELL, AND INDEED YOU SEE THAT ALL OVER SOUTH DALLAS AND WEST DALLAS AND IN INNER EAST DALLAS.
THE SAME THING WITH, UH, SINGLE FAMILY ON MULTIFAMILY ZONING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? WE GET TO A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? SIR? I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL THE OCTOBER, THE SECOND MEETING OF OCTOBER, WHICH IS THE 19TH.
UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BL FOR YOUR SECOND TO HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 19TH, KEEPING THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.
ANY DISCUSSION? ANY DISCUSSION? SEE? AND NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
THE AYES HAVE IT OR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. GARZA.
STAYING IN DISTRICT THREE WITH DR.
ITEM NUMBER THREE Z 2 2 3 180 9 IS AN APPLICATION FOR THE RENEWAL OF AND THE AMENDMENT OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 23 0 8 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS ON PROPERTIES ZONED THAN RR D ONE REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WEST CAMP WISDOM ROAD, EAST OF MARVIN D LOVE FREEWAY.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO DISCIP PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
UDA IS THE APPLICANT HERE? HE WAS HERE.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, OR ON CASE NUMBER THREE? IT'S THE TOP OF PAGE TWO Z 2 2 3 180 9.
DO YOU HAVE HIS CELL NUMBER? OH, FIRST OFF, YOUR MIC IS ON.
OKAY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? AGAIN, THIS IS CASE NUMBER THREE.
[03:50:01]
UH, COMMISSIONERS.ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY, SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? SORRY? UM, I'M SORRY.
IN THE, WHERE IS MY THING? UH, OTHERWISE IT SAID THAT 2 2 3 180 9.
IN THE CASE OF 2 3 2 2 3 180 9, I, UM, MAKE THE MOTION TO HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING UNDER ADVISEMENT AND DELAY THIS CASE UNTIL THE OCTOBER 19TH MEETING, THE SECOND MEETING OF OCTOBER.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER HARBERT AND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION, ALTHOUGH IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
NUMBER FOUR, ITEM NUMBER FOUR Z 212.
2 37 IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER FIVE, UH, 543 IN AN AREA BOUNDED BY RIGGER AVENUE, PAULS AVENUE, COVINGTON LANE, AND NORTH GLASGOW AVENUE, NO NORTH GLASGOW DRIVE.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A REVISED EXHIBIT 5, 4 3, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, REVISED EXHIBIT 5, 4, 3 B, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND REVISED CONDITIONS, ALL AS BRIEFED.
RACI, THAT THE APPLICANT IS ONLINE.
CARL CROWLEY, 2201 MAIN STREET.
UM, AS YOU'RE USUALLY I'M THERE, BUT, UM, I WON'T BE TOO MEAN TO Y'ALL SAY THAT'S 65 DEGREES HERE IN WEST YELLOWSTONE, BUT SORRY.
UM, FIRST I WANTED TO THANK, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, KINGS IN FOR HER PATIENCE WITH US ON THIS REQUEST AND HER HELP FOR SURE, UM, AND GETTING THE COMMUNITY AND EVERYBODY TOGETHER ON THIS.
I THINK THE REQUEST YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY IS MUCH BETTER THAN THE ONE YOU HAD AT THE PREVIOUS HEARING.
WE'VE TIED DOWN SOME LOOSE ENDS ON THE LIGHTING.
UM, WE'VE COME UP WITH, UH, SOME IDEAS ON PARKING, UM, TO BOTH ELIMINATE SOME SPACES TO CREATE PLAY AREAS FOR THE J L LONG STUDENTS AND THE CAMPUS, AND ALSO TO HOPEFULLY RELIEVE SOME OF THE PARKING THAT'S, UM, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, OVERALL, UM, I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR BEING PATIENT WITH US AND, AND PUTTING UP WITH US IN THE LAST FEW DAYS ON REQUESTS BY LONG DISTANCE OR OTHER NATURE.
UM, SO, UM, OTHERWISE I BELIEVE, UM, THERE ARE SOME SPEAKERS THERE AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THEM AT THIS TIME.
GOOD AFTERNOON, KATIE LINNEHAN, 9,400 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.
I'M THE DESIGN DIRECTOR FOR DALLAS I S D CONSTRUCTION SERVICES.
HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE TODAY ABOUT THIS APPLICATION.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION.
WE APPRECIATE THE COMMISSIONERS WORKING WITH THE DISTRICT AND OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND THE NEIGHBORS TO, UH, PUT FORWARD WHAT WE THINK IS GONNA BE A GOOD APPLICATION.
I'M ALSO JOINED TODAY BY OUR, UM, COMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE WILSON LONG FEEDER PATTERN, SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE LET US KNOW.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? IS MR. REIG ONLINE? IS HE ONLINE? NO, NOT ONLINE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MR. YOUNG? UH, YES.
I HAD A QUESTION THIS MORNING FOR MR. NVAS.
UH, MR. NEVA, I'M LOOKING AT THE NEW PROPOSED T M P FOR J L LONG TABLE ONE, THE T M P SUMMARY AND THE QUEUING ANALYSIS, AND I'M SEEING SOMETHING THERE THAT I DON'T THINK I'VE SEEN BEFORE.
NORMALLY YOU HAVE THE OBSERVED QUEUE, THE PROVIDED QUEUE, AND THE DEFICIT, IF ANY.
HERE WE HAVE THAT PLUS THEN A SUBTRACTION OF THE ON-STREET QUEUING IN THE T M P LEADING TO A ANOTHER DEFICIT FIGURE.
AND MY QUESTION IS, HOW DO YOU INTERPRET ON-STREET QUEUING IN THE
[03:55:01]
T M P? ARE THOSE ON STREET AREAS DESIGNATED BY THE T M P FOR QUEUING? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER DAVID NAVARRA, TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.UH, TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR KENAI FOR DETAIL.
WHAT, WHAT LAMBETH AND I AGREE TO BE AN OVERSIGHT MORE THAN ANYTHING.
I THINK IT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO SHOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT EXHIBIT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, AND THERE'S AN EXHIBIT LATER IN THE REPORT THAT SHOWS THE WHOLE EXTENT OF, UM, OF QUEUING.
I ALWAYS SAY, YOU KNOW, ON TMPS, I'D RATHER SHOW A WORST CASE SCENARIO IN THE WORST PICTURE THAT WE CAN SHOW THE COMMUNITY SO THAT THEY'RE NOT SURPRISED OR COME BACK SAYING, WELL, THIS DIDN'T WORK AS PLANNED IN THIS CASE, THE DIFFERENCE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT OR REFERRING TO IS SIMPLY, UM, QUEUING OR PARKING, UH, THAT IS EXTENDING BEYOND THE, THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENT CURB OF J LONG.
UH, IT'S JUST TRAFFIC THAT EXTENDS WELL PAST VICTORY.
WHAT'S THE NAME OF THE STREET TO THE WEST? BUT OH, I'M NOT SURE.
I LOOKED IT UP RIGHT BEFORE I WALKED HERE, BUT IN ANY CASE, I WOULD SAY THAT THOSE NUMBERS SHOULD, UM, ONLY CREATE CON FUSION.
THE OVERALL IS THE THEY'VE SUCCEEDED IN THAT.
AND, AND, BUT, BUT NOT TO DO SO, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE CLARIFY.
UM, EVERYONE IS QUEUING ON THE STREETS AS THEY HAVE BEEN DOING FOR AS LONG AS OKAY, YOU'LL REMEMBER.
AND, AND IF I, THEN, IF I'M READING THIS IN LIGHT OF YOUR INTERPRETATION, THERE ARE 123 VEHICLES QUEUING ON STREET ON STREET.
72 OF THEM ARE QUEUING ON, ON STREETS ADJOINING THE PROPERTY.
AND 51 OF THEM ARE QUEING SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE UNIVERSE, UH, A LITTLE BIT FARTHER BEYOND WHAT THAT EXHIBIT SHOWS, UH, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, THAT MATCHES MY EXPERIENCE AS A JAIL LONG PARENT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
C N M, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
IN MATTER Z 2 12 2 3, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE 2, 3 7.
DID I GET IT WRONG? I'M, IT'S OKAY.
IN THE MATTER, 2 1 2 DASH 2 3 7, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND A BRIEF AND APPROVE THE CASE AS BRIEFED BY STAFF.
AND I WANNA HIGHLIGHT THE AMENDMENTS TO THE PD CONDITIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DO MAKE IT INTO THE RECORD PROPERLY.
UM, SO WITH REGARD TO THE PD CONDITIONS, WHICH YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE UPDATED VERSION BY EMAIL YESTERDAY, THE ITEMS IN GREEN ARE THE CHANGES THAT I'M GONNA READ INTO THE RECORD.
UH, SUBSECTION B SUB SUBSECTION ONE, ADD THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE TO THE END.
USES FOR THE OFF STREET PARKING MUST COMPLY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UM, IN SECTION 51 P DASH 4 53 DASH 1 0 8 0.1.
IN SUBSECTION C, ALL OF THE NOVEMBER DATES ARE CHANGED TO MARCH 1ST OR MARCH 1ST, 26.
IN SUBSECTION 51 P DASH 5 43 5 SUBSECTION C SUB SUBSECTION TWO, ADD TO THE LAST SENTENCE THE WORDS TO THE LIGHTS.
RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE DOES NOT APPLY TO THE LIGHTS.
UH, IN SUB SUBSECTION THREE OF SUBSECTION TWO.
THE HOURS OF OPERATION WILL BE MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY FROM 6:00 AM TO 9:00 PM AT THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE, USE OF THE ATHLETIC PRACTICE FIELDS, THE USE OF THE ATHLETIC AND PRACTICE FIELDS IS LIMITED TO ACTIVITIES INVOLVING EITHER OR BOTH WOODROW WILSON HIGH SCHOOL OR JAIL LONG MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS.
AND THEN IN THAT SAME UH, SECTION YOU'LL ADD SUBSECTION D THAT READS OTHER RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES INVOLVING LIGHTING, LIGHTING FOR OTHER RECREATION OR SCHOOL ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO.
THE BATTING CAGES MUST COMPLY WITH THE SAME DAYS AND HOURS OF OPERATION REQUIREMENTS AS THE LIGHT STANDARDS FOR THE ATHLETIC FIELD.
[04:00:01]
TO SUBSECTION E, SUB SUBSECTION ONE AT A FOURTH BULLET POINT THAT READS COVINGTON LANE PERIN, I'M SORRY, UH, I'VE LOST THE WORD.THE TWO LITTLE DOTS THAT GO OVER ONE ANOTHER COLON.
UM, A MINIMUM OF FOUR TRASH CANS MUST BE PLACED ALONG THE COVINGTON LANE FRONTAGE.
ALSO ADD IN SUBSECTION D SUB SUBSECTION THREE BICYCLE RACKS REQUIRED HEREIN MUST ACCOMMODATE AT LEAST 10 BICYCLE RACKS EACH AND MAY BE USED TO MEET THE MICRO MOBILITY SPACE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DISTRICT.
UM, ADD THE LAST SENTENCE IN SUBSECTION TWO TO READ FINAL LOCATIONS WITHIN THE AREA AND ALONG COVINGTON, UH, LANE TO BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF PERMITTING.
AND FINALLY, ADD SUBSECTION F TO THIS SECTION ENTITLED AMPLIFIED SOUND.
OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED SOUND IS PROHIBITED BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 PM AND 7:00 AM THOSE ARE THE CHANGES THAT I WOULD PROPOSE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONERS.
WE HAVE A, UH, MOTION FOR APPROVAL CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR COMMISSIONER KINGSTON KINGSTON.
SECOND ABOUT COMMISSIONER BLAIR, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AS READ IN DIRECT BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, AS WELL AS THE REVISED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
UM, I WANNA TAKE A A MINUTE TO DE DESCRIBE WHAT HAS HAPPENED AT THIS CAMPUS THAT I'M KIND OF EXCITED ABOUT.
THERE ARE TWO BASIC CHANGES THEY'RE ADDING, ASKING FOR WHAT MICROPHONE IS ON.
UH, ONE IS TO ADD 80 FOOT LIGHT POLES, UH, TO THE PLAY FIELD AT WOODROW HIGH SCHOOL.
AND I JUST WANNA REMIND YOU ALL THAT WOODROW LONG IS A HISTORIC, IT'S A LANDMARK PROPERTY.
AND SO THAT HAD TO GO THROUGH THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FIRST.
THE OTHER BIG CHANGE IS REMOVING PARKING TO CREATE A SECOND PLAY FIELD FOR LONG, WHICH IS IMPORTANT TO THE STUDENTS, BUT IT IS ALSO A, A BIG REQUEST FOR THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE OVERALL THE WOODROW LONG CAMPUS IS UNDER PARKED.
AND SO THEY'RE MAKING A DECISION TO CONVERT ALREADY NEEDED PARKING TO PLACE SPACE.
UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THOSE CHANGES ARE SIGNIFICANT FOR THE NEARBY HOMES.
I'M NOT AWARE OF A D I S D CAMPUS THAT HAS HOMES CLOSER TO THE TOP OF LIGHTING.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT INSTILLING AND THE PLAY FIELDS AT WOODROW AS THESE CAMPUSES.
COVINGTON LANE SEPARATES THE CAMPUS FROM THE CLOSEST HOMES, AND IT'S A 50 FOOT WIDE OF WAY.
AND THESE PARTICULAR LOTS DO NOT HAVE LARGE FRONT SETBACKS.
SO THESE LIGHTS IN THIS PLAY FIELD WILL BE LESS THAN A HUNDRED FEET FROM THE CLOSEST HOMES.
AND FOR THOSE PEOPLE, IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT ADDING LIGHTS, WHICH COULD CREATE LIGHT POLLUTION, IT'S ALSO ABOUT EXTENDING THE HOURS OF USE OF THESE FIELDS, WHICH IN TURN BRINGS NOISE VISITORS, UH, ADDITIONAL VEHICLES, AND OFTEN TRASH.
SO, UM, I I DON'T THINK THAT THESE CHANGES ARE INSIGNIFICANT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE CLOSE TO THE CAMPUS, WHO ARE OFTEN ASKED TO MAKE SACRIFICES IN THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE TO SUPPORT THE SCHOOL.
AND I THINK THESE ARE TWO BIG ASKS.
AND I WAS REALLY IMPRESSED WITH THE ORGANIZATION, THE, UM, EMPATHY AND THE WILLINGNESS TO SUPPORT PUBLIC EDUCATION OF THE NEARBY NEIGHBORS AND HOW, UM, WILLING THEY WERE TO ROLL UP THEIR SLEEVES AND WORK WITH THE DISTRICT.
PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THIS CAMPUS HAS A LONG HISTORY OF, UM, DISCUSSIONS LIKE THIS BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE DISTRICT BEING MORE OF A PARKING LOT BRAWL THAN A CIVILIZED, ORGANIZED, COMPROMISED DISCUSSION.
AND I, I ATTRIBUTE THAT CHANGE TO A COUPLE OF THINGS.
ONE, I THINK WE HAD A REAL SHIFT IN APPROACH BY THE DISTRICT.
UM, THE FIRST MEETING WE HAD ON THIS WAS TERRIBLE.
UM, A LOT OF HURT FEELINGS, A LOT OF THINGS THAT SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SAID.
UM, AND IT WAS REALLY HEADED FOR THE DITCH.
AND I, I WANNA THANK ONE OF THE PARENTS, UH, AT THIS CAMPUS WHO ALSO HAVE, HAS EXTENSIVE PLANNING, UM, AND LAND USE EXPERIENCE BECAUSE HE'S A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER IN TOWN.
UH, WADE JOHNS WITH ALAMO MANHATTAN, HE STEPPED UP AND REALLY, UM, BOTH HELPED EDUCATE THE DISTRICT AND THE PARENT COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW ZONING CHANGES HAPPEN AND SHOULD HAPPEN AND THE BENEFITS OF HAVING A COLLABORATIVE
[04:05:01]
PROCESS AND REALLY FACILITATED THOSE DISCUSSIONS IN A WAY THAT I HAVE NOT SEEN ON A D A S D CASE.AND I THINK THAT THAT WAS IMPORTANT BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE PARENT GROUP TRUSTED HIM AND WERE OPEN TO THE CONCERNS OF THE COMMUNITY.
AND I ALSO THINK THAT WHEN THE COMMUNITY IS TREATED WITH RESPECT AND IS HEARD, AND THAT THERE ARE COMPROMISES MADE BY THE DISTRICT, THAT YOU CAN COME OUT WITH WHAT I VIEW TO BE A, A WIN-WIN.
THE CAMPUS GETS WHAT IT NEEDS WITH BUILT-IN PROTECTIONS FOR THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.
AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH ALL THAT, THERE ARE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT TURNING COVING INTO RESIDENTIAL PARKING ONLY, WHICH THEY'RE WORKING WITH THE COUNCIL OFFICE ON.
SO I HOPE THAT DSDS EXPERIENCE IN THIS CASE, WHICH I THINK IS A GREAT SUCCESS, UM, ENCOURAGES MORE, UM, COLLABORATIVE PROCESSES WITH THE COMMUNITY.
AND EVEN IF IT TAKES A LITTLE LONGER TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, ONE MORE PUBLIC MEETING, UM, I THINK THAT WHEN YOU GET THE COMMUNITY BUY-IN ON WHAT'S HAPPENING AT YOUR CAMPUSES, THOSE PEOPLE ARE MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT THE SUCCESS OF THE CAMPUS AND BE COMMUNITY ADVOCATES FOR YOUR STUDENTS AND YOUR FACULTY AND YOUR MISSION.
AND SO FOR ALL OF THOSE REASONS, UM, I, UH, HOPE THAT YOU ALL WILL JOIN ME IN SUPPORTING MY MOTION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UH, I JUST HAVE A VERY BRIEF COMMENT THAT, UM, KUDOS TO ALL INVOLVED.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP FOR THE SCHOOL, FOR THE PARENTS.
AND IT'S NICE TO HEAR THAT A ZONING CASE BROUGHT PEOPLE TOGETHER FOR ONCE OR YOU SO FREQUENTLY HEAR THE OPPOSITE.
SO, UH, KUDOS TO ALL INVOLVED.
HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE, THE MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
CASE NUMBER FIVE IS AN APPLICATION FOR A CSS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH CONSIDERATION OF AN M U ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES OWNED AN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF DOWTY FERRY ROAD, NORTHEAST OF THE LYNDON B JOHNSON FREEWAY I 20 STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF AN M U ONE DISTRICT IN LIEU OF A CSS DISTRICT.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO'D LIKE TO BE HEARD? YES, SIR.
MICHAEL COKER, 31 11 CANTON STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS CASE IS GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO ALLOW SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE APPLICANT AND THE COMMISSIONER TO MODIFY SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT WE HAVE SUBMITTED IN REGARDS TO THIS.
WE DO ACCEPT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR MU ONE, BUT WE ARE GOING TO VOLUNTEER SOME DEEDED RESTRICTIONS.
I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR MR. COKER.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 1 2 2 2 98.
I MOVE THAT WE HOLD THIS MATTER.
UM, OPEN AND HOPE IT UNDER ADVISEMENT.
YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M UNDER ADVISEMENT.
I'M TRYING TO SAY HOLD UNTIL UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER THE 19TH.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAKE FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION, ALTHOUGH IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
NUMBER SIX IS AN APPLICATION FOR A CSS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH CONSIDERATION OF AN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES ZONE IN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF DOUGHTY FERRY ROAD, NORTHEAST OF THE UNA BEACH, JOHNSON FREEWAY I 20.
AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF AN MU ONE DISTRICT IN LIEU OF A CSS DISTRICT.
COMMISSIONERS MICHAEL COKER, 31 11 CANTON STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE.
WE ARE IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
CAN YOU JUST PAUSE ONE SECOND.
UH, GEORGE, I, I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THERE'S NOTHING SHOWING UP ON THE WEBEX.
[04:10:02]
WE CAN SEE ONLINE.COMMISSIONER HOUSER, CAN YOU, YOU SEE US ONLINE? UH, YES.
UM, I DON'T SEE ANY PRESENTATION BEING SHARED, BUT I DON'T THINK ONE'S BEING SHARED AT THE MOMENT.
I THINK THERE IT MAY BE JUST FOR FOLKS THAT ARE NOT SIGNED ON AS PA, CAN WE CHECK THAT? PARDON ME? ARE WE SHARING? NOPE, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO, NOTHING TO SHARE.
SO, UH, WE ARE IN, IN SUPPORT OF THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR M U ONE.
AND I WANT TO VOLUNTEER SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT I ACTUALLY FILED DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO READ IT INTO THE RECORD IF IT'S OKAY WITH THE COMMISSION.
UH, WE VOLUNTARILY DEED RESTRICT HOTEL OR MOTEL TO A MINIMUM OF 80 ROOMS. NO OVERNIGHT PARKING FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IS ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY.
NO GROUP RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES, NO AUTO SERVICE CENTER, NO CAR WASH, NO COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT.
A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE.
LESS THAN 3,200 FEET IS ALLOWED.
NO GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE GREATER THAN 100,000 SQUARE FEET IS ALLOWED.
NO MORTUARY FUNERAL HOME OR COMMERCIAL WEDDING CHAPEL IS ALLOWED.
RESTAURANTS WITH DRIVE-IN OR DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE REQUIRES ALL QUEUING TO BE LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY.
AND A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN IS REQUIRED.
WHOLESALE DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE USES ARE NOT ALLOWED AND WE VOLUNTARILY SUBMIT THOSE FOR THE M U ONE ZONING CASE.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS? ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE? I'M GLAD TO ANSWER.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE COMING YOUR WAY.
UM, SO DID YOU SAY THAT COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT IS NOT ALLOWED? I DID.
AND DID YOU SAY THAT WHOLESALE, THAT, UM, WHOLESALE DISTRIBUTION STORAGE, STORAGE USES ARE NOT ALLOWED? I DID.
AND NO OVERNIGHT PARKING OF ANY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES? I DID.
SO BASICALLY ANYTHING THAT IS INDUSTRIAL IN NATURE IS NOT PERMITTED.
THE ONLY THING THAT'S GOING TO REALLY BE PERMITTED HERE WILL BE, UM, UM, A FUELING STATION.
WE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH Q QUICKTRIP TO, TO PUT IN A FUELING STATION WITH A STORE AND THAT FUELING STATION WITH A STORE WILL, UM, WILL NOT EVEN, UH, FUEL COMMERCIAL VEHICLES.
NO COMMERCIAL TA UH, FUELING SYSTEM AT ALL.
SO THIS LOCATION WILL BE STRICTLY, UH, MU USE THAT WILL SERVICE RESIDENTIAL TYPE USES AT THAT ONE SITE? YES MA'AM.
AND THAT IS IT ALSO THE, YOUR INTENT THAT THE, UM, TREE CANOPIES THAT IS SURROUNDING THIS PARTICULAR AREA, THERE WOULD BE, UH, LATER ON IN THE PROCESS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT GIVEN TO THIS PARTICULAR COMMUNITY FOR THOSE TREES TO REMAIN IN PLACE AND THE INDIGENOUS ANIMALS TO, TO REMAIN THERE? WE'RE GOING TO, FOR THE PROPERTY IN IN QUESTION, WE'RE GONNA PRESERVE AS MANY OF THE EXISTING CANOPY TREES AS POSSIBLE.
BUT SECONDARILY, AFTER THE ENTITLEMENTS FOR THIS TRACT AND THE SURROUNDING TRACT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL, BUT BEFORE THE ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED, WE ARE ALSO GOING TO, UH, COMMIT TO A, UH, 22 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT TO PROTECT ALL THE CANOPY TREES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE FREEWAY.
[04:15:03]
ON THE RESTRICTIONS ON COMMERCIAL VEHICLE? ARE WE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE LARGER COMMERCIAL VEHICLES OR, OR ALL COMMERCIAL VEHICLES? ALL COMMERCIAL VEHICLES? NO, OVERNIGHT PARKING.SO MAYBE I'M ASKING, SO ON THE, SO NOT THE OVERNIGHT PARKING, SO IT'S A FUELING STATION.
SO NOT, SO IT WON'T BE SOMETHING LIKE A BIG, UM, LIKE WHAT'S THE, ONE OF THE IT WON'T BE LIKE PILOT OR, OR NOT LIKE PILOT, BUT IT WILL ALLOW, BUT IT WILL HAVE SOME LIKE FOUR BOX TRUCKS, SMALLER, SMALLER COMMERCIAL VEHICLES.
I'M RIGHT, WE CAN FUEL, THIS WILL BE A FUELING STATION, A QUICK TRIP FUELING STATION UHHUH THAT CATERS TO AUTOMOBILE AUTOMOBILES AND LIGHT TRUCKS.
SO A BOX TRUCK PROBABLY DOESN'T FIT UNDER THE CANOPY.
AND, AND WE'RE NOT GONNA ALLOW ANY OVERNIGHT PARKING OF ANY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, WHETHER THEY'RE BIG OR SMALL.
SO NO, IT'S NOT JUST FOR THE OVERNIGHT.
THAT WAS JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, 'CAUSE I UNDERSTAND A PILOT NOT HAVING BUT SOME THIS IS, THIS IS JUST SOME LIGHT, LIGHT LIGHTER COMMERCIAL SURE CAN BE.
A LARGE, A LARGE PICKUP TRUCK, YOU KNOW, BOX F THREE 50 SMALLER BOX TRUCKS.
YEAH, THAT'S 'CAUSE I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT THAT NO TRACTOR TRAILERS, NO TRACTOR TO TRAILERS.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER YOUNG? UH, YES FOR MR. MOORE.
UM, A FEW WEEKS AGO I ASKED YOU A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER WE COULD ACCEPT A DEEDED RESTRICTION THAT INCLUDED AN S U P PROCESS THAT THE CODE DIDN'T PROVIDE FOR.
MY QUESTION FOR YOU TODAY IS, CAN WE ACCEPT A DEED RESTRICTION THAT FOR PARTICULAR USES REQUIRES A T M P WHEN THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THE CODE, UH, FOR AN MU UH, FOR A T M P REQUIREMENT? MY ANSWER, COMMISSIONER YOUNG WOULD BE THE SAME.
THAT IF THE CODE DOESN'T PROVIDE A MECHANISM FOR A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, THEN DEEDED RESTRICTIONS CANNOT IMPOSE.
SO, SO TO THE EXTENT THAT THE PROFFERED DEEDED RESTRICTIONS INCLUDE PARTICULAR USES ONLY WITH A T M P, THE T M P REQUIREMENT WOULD NOT BE ENFORCEABLE? YES, SIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEE NONE.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 12 3 3 2.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING AND WE FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR M U ONE, UH, DISTRICT IN LIEU OF A C S DISTRICT WITH THE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS READ IN BY THE APPLICANT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FALSE TO RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF AN A ONE DISTRICT IN LIEU OF A CSS DISTRICT IN ACCEPTING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER HERBERT, SMALL COMMENT SINCE WE ARE ON PRESERVATION TODAY.
UM, I LOVE THE FACT THAT WE ARE PRESERVING A PIECE OF LAND IN THE CITY TODAY, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT DOWDY FERRY, UM, WAS ONE OF THE FIRST FERRIES IN OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IN THE CITY.
UM, AND IT WAS VERY CLOSE TO THIS SITE.
UH, JUST, JUST A MENTION OF OUR HISTORICAL VALUE HERE IN THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HARBERT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SEEING NONE.
ALL THOSE A ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
WE HAD A COMMISSIONERS, UH, WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON THE RECORD.
IT IS 2:56 PM AND, UH, WE'RE HEADING BACK INTO THE DOCKET.
NEXT CASE IS NUMBER SEVEN, TOP OF PAGE FOUR Z 2 1 2 3 46.
[04:20:02]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR.THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR NUMBER ONE, AN AMENDMENT TO TRACK TWO C WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 37 AND NUMBER TWO, AN AMENDMENT TWO AND RENEWAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2047 FOR A VEHICLE OPTION AND STORAGE USE ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 37 ON THE EAST CORNER OF LAKEFIELD BOULEVARD AND SHEILA LANE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO TRACK TWO C WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 37, SUBJECT TO REVISED CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO AND RENEWAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 24 7 FOR A VEHICLE AUCTION AND STORAGE USE FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS, SUBJECT TO A REVISED SITE PLAN AND REVISED CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. MUNOZ.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
I'M NOT GONNA SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON IT.
IT'S A EXISTING AUTO AUCTION, UH, THAT'S BEEN IN BUSINESS.
IN FACT, IT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST CASES THAT I WORKED ON IN, IN DALLAS, UH, BACK IN LIKE 19 94, 19 95.
UM, IT WAS ORIGINALLY FOR, UH, TEXAS CAN ACADEMY.
AT THAT TIME IT WAS DALLAS CAN ACADEMY.
SINCE THAT TIME, UH, DALLAS CAN MOVED ON AND IT'S BEEN IN THE ALLIANCE, UH, OPERATION FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
WE'RE DOING, UM, WE'RE PROPOSING TO RENEW THE S G P AND THEN, UH, AMEND THIS, THE THE SITE PLAN TO, UM, UH, TO ALLOW FOR THE THE PEOPLE WHO COME VISIT THE AUTO AUCTION TO PARK ACROSS THE STREET.
WE HAVE TWO PARKING LOTS OVER THERE THAT ARE SECURED.
THEY'RE ON, UH, APPROVED CONCRETE BASES.
UM, WE'VE WORKED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND VERY HARD WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER ON THIS.
UM, THE ISSUE HERE IS THAT THE TRUCKS HAVE BEEN QUEUING IN THE STREET AND LOADING AND UNLOADING.
UM, CLEARLY NOT AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION.
AND SO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER GOT WITH US TO FIND A WAY TO GET THE TRUCKS OFF THE STREET.
AND WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WHERE WE USED TO HAVE THE PARKING FOR THE, THE DEALERS.
THAT'S NOT GONNA BE A TRUCK LOADING AN UNLOADING AREA.
THEY CAN ONLY LOAD AND UNLOAD AT THAT AREA.
AND ORIGINALLY WHEN WE WERE BACK BEFORE YOU, EARLIER WHEN PEOPLE CAME OUT THERE, THEY COULD TURN RIGHT OR TURN LEFT.
TURNING RIGHT ONTO SHEILA, UH, PROVED PROBLEMATIC FOR OUR NEIGHBORS BECAUSE THAT WOULD PUT CARS IN THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WHAT WE'VE COME UP WITH IS A REVISION THAT YOU SEE HERE BEFORE YOU TRUCKS CAN ONLY TURN LEFT.
NOW, UH, AND WE'VE ALSO INCLUDED A, A GATE HERE ON THE, UH, EASTERN SIDE OF SHEILA LANE THAT IS ONLY OPEN FOR EMERGENCY.
SO VEHICLES CANNOT ENTER AND EXIT FROM THERE.
WE'RE KEEPING 'EM OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WE'VE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR, THAT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE.
AND FROM A LAND PLANNING PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE AS WELL.
SO WE HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS.
WE HAVE, LIKE I SAY, WE'VE WORKED WITH COMMISSIONER CARVERS, YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB WITH THIS AND WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORS IN OURSELVES.
AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE.
MR. BALDWIN, DO YOUR CLIENTS UNDERSTAND THAT THE CHANGE HERE NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE SOONER RATHER THAN LATER? YES, MA'AM.
UH, THE, THE CLIENT IS WELL AWARE THEY WERE ON THAT CALL WITH US IN THE OPPOSITION.
THEY KNOW THAT THEY'RE ON DOUBLE SECRET PROBATION AND THEY HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS WORKS AND THEY'RE WILLING TO DO THAT.
BECAUSE IT, IT'S A MINOR MIRACLE IN OUR TIME THAT WE DO NOT HAVE OPPOSITION PRESENT HERE TODAY.
YOU KNOW, IT'S WITH GRUDGING SUPPORT THAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE WILLING TO GIVE THIS APPLICANT A CHANCE TO STOP BEING A NUISANCE TO GET ALL OF THEIR OPERATIONS ON SITE.
AND IT WOULD BE A A A GREAT PLUS IN YOUR APPLICANT'S, UM, BOOK TO, TO, TO REALLY TURN THIS AROUND VERY QUICKLY.
I SUSPECT THEY'RE WATCHING THIS RIGHT NOW.
WE, WE KNOW WHERE THE RECORDING IS STORED.
CAN YOU ADDRESS SOME OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE TO THE LANDSCAPING HERE? I'M SORRY, MA'AM.
[04:25:01]
OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE TO THE LANDSCAPING HERE? OKAY, SO, UH, WE ARE ADDING, UH, MORE TREES OF THE, THE LA THE TREES THAT WERE ACQUIRED ON THE ORIGINAL, UH, LANDSCAPE PLAN.WE, SO WE'RE BRINGING IN TOTAL 23 CEDAR ELM TREES ON SITE.
WE'RE ALSO PROVIDING, UH, A LANDSCAPES HEDGE BLOCKING ALL THE PARKING ALONG SHEILA.
AND WE ARE, UM, THAT, OKAY, I HAVE HEARING AIDS SOMETIMES THINGS COME INTO THE HEARING AIDS AND IT'S KIND OF JUST, JUST QUIETENING AND, AND WE'RE ALSO, UH, ADDING SIDEWALKS, UH, ALONG, UH, SHEILA AND LAKELAND.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF CASES Z TWO 12 DASH 3 46, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO TRACK TWO C WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 37, SUBJECT TO REVISED CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO AND A RENEWAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2047 FOR A VEHICLE AUCTION AND STORAGE USE FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD WITH NO ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL SUBJECT TO A REVISED SITE PLAN AND REVISED CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER
SO WE'RE NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FIVE YEARS? NO, WE'RE NOT.
THAT WAS AS A RESULT OF, UH, DISCUSSIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
THAT WAS THE LONGEST PERIOD OF TIME THAT THEY WANT TO APPROVE THIS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SEE A RAPID TURNAROUND AND GET ALL THE LOADING AND UNLOADING ACTIVITY THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THIS USE OFF THE PUBLIC STREETS AND OFF IN FRONT OF THEIR HOMES AND THEIR APARTMENTS.
AND TO PROVE THAT THIS, UM, OPERATION CAN FUNCTION HERE WITHOUT BEING A NUISANCE.
SO THE IDEA IS TO GIVE THEM TWO YEARS AND COME BACK AND SEE AT THAT TIME IF THEY ARE DESERVING A LONGER TIME PERIOD.
'CAUSE UH, 'CAUSE AS LONG AS I CAN REMEMBER THIS USED, THIS HAS BEEN AN AUCTION.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY, THAT'S THE THAT WAS MY, THAT WAS MY REASON FOR QUESTIONS BECAUSE AS LONG AS I CAN, THIS USED TO BE THE CITY OF DALLAS' SURPLUS AUCTION SITE ALSO.
SO AS LONG AS I CAN REMEMBER IT'S BEEN AN AUCTION THAT'S, THAT WAS THE ONLY CONCERN.
BUT IF IT'S BECAUSE WELL, AS LONG AS THE NEIGHBORS CAN REMEMBER, IT'S BEEN A NUISANCE.
YEAH, WELL THE CITY OF DALLAS WAS THE ORIGINAL NUISANCE
NOW I LIVE CLOSE TO THE CITY RUN AUTO POUND AND I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE NUISANCES THAT
YEAH, THIS, THIS WAS, YEAH, I CAN REMEMBER MY DAD TAKING ME.
SO IT WAS, IT WAS THE SURPLUS LOT, NOT THE AUCTION.
PERFECTLY CRAFTED, UH, COMPROMISE HERE.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, CAN YOU HEAR US? UH, OKAY.
THAT'S KIND OF, WE WENT DARK FOR A MOMENT, WE THOUGHT.
UH, WE DO HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, SECONDING BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA DO A QUICK AUDIBLE AND, AND MOVE FORWARD IN NUMBER 11 AND THEN COME BACK TO EIGHT.
THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT ONE WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 6 21, THE OLD TRINITY AND DESIGN DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF IRVING BOULEVARD AND THE SOUTHWEST LINE OF MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD NORTHWEST OF OAK LAWN AVENUE.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN, A REVISED EXHIBIT 6 21 B AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD BEFORE WE GO TO OUR TWO SPEAKERS ONLINE IS, UH, MS. MORRIS ONLINE? NOT ONLINE, MR. FRAN.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF CASE Z TWO 12 DASH 3 53, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND PUT THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL SEPTEMBER THE 21ST, 2023.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION AND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[04:30:01]
NOW WE GO BACK TO NUMBER EIGHT.CASE NUMBER EIGHT Z TWO TWO THREE A HUNDRED AND FIVE.
AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO A RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVING OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE USE ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
DISTRICT NUMBER 8 42 FOR A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT USES WITH AN MD ONE MODIFIED DELTA OVERLAY ON THE EAST LINE OF GREENVILLE AVENUE BETWEEN PROSPECT AVENUE AND OREM STREET STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
ROB BALDWIN 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
UH, I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH MY WHOLE PRESENTATION.
I UNDERSTAND THE CITY PLAN COMMISSIONER WILL BE HOLDING THIS CASE.
THERE'S A CONCERN IN LOWER GREENVILLE THAT SOME OF THE PARKING LOTS DON'T MEET CITY, UH, STANDARDS.
AND WE ARE WORKING WITH OUR NEIGHBORS AND THE CITY ON TRYING TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHERE PARKING IS DEFICIENT AND BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE.
SO I UNDERSTAND UNTIL THAT TIME THAT THAT'S DONE.
UH, THE, THE COMMISSIONER'S GONNA HOLD CASES DOWN ON LOWER GREENVILLE BECAUSE SHE WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S ADEQUATE AND ACCEPTABLE PARKING.
THE, THE BALL RIGHT NOW IS IN THE CITY'S COURT, UH, TO REVIEW THE, THE PLANS THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED SHOWING HOW WE THINK WE COMPLY WITH THE, THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
WE'VE NOT RECEIVED THAT BACK YET, SO I UNDERSTAND FROM AN EMAIL FROM MR. POOLE EARLIER TODAY THAT, THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THAT IN THE NEXT COUPLE WEEKS.
SO I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? CASE NUMBER EIGHT, COMMISSIONER'S.
QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO IN MATTER Z 2 23 DASH 1 0 5.
I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN, UH, FOR UNTIL OCTOBER 5TH.
AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I HAVE A BRIEF COMMENT.
UM, WE HAVE, AS MR. BALDWIN SAID, IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF PARKING LOTS THAT OVER, I'M GUESSING DECADES HAVE FALLEN INTO GREAT DISREPAIR TO THE POINT THAT NONE OF THEM PROVIDE A D A COMPLIANT PARKING.
AND SO ALL OF THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE DEPENDENT ON THOSE LOTS ARE IN TURN NOT PROVIDING A D A PARKING.
UM, THERE ARE A BUNCH OF OTHER ISSUES I WON'T BELABOR, BUT, UM, THE OWNER HAS COME FORWARD WITH, UM, PLANS TO REDO THE LOTS.
WE'RE JUST WAITING ON THE CITY'S APPROVAL.
UM, I'M ON WEEK SIX OF ASKING CITY STAFF TO GET THIS OUT.
I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME RECENT DISCUSSIONS AND MR. POOL HAS STATED THAT THEY WOULD HAVE, UM, A RESPONSE WITHIN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
UM, I KNOW THAT, I KNOW THAT NORMALLY WE WOULDN'T ERROR THAT, BUT THIS HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF A CODE COMPLAINT FOR TWO YEARS AND THE WHOMEVER IS IN CHARGE OF MAKING THESE DECISIONS HAS SIMPLY NOT DEALT WITH IT FOR A VERY, VERY LONG TIME.
AND IT IS UNFAIR TO THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO PUT SO MUCH WORK INTO, MUCH INTO, UM, TRYING TO, TRYING TO HELP KEEP LOWER GREENVILLE SUCCESSFUL FOR BOTH THE RESIDENTS AND THE LOCAL OPERATORS AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
AND WE DO HAVE SOME GREAT OPERATORS AND SOME GREAT PROPERTY OWNERS DOWN THERE.
AND IN THIS INSTANCE, I THINK, UM, THE CITY IS THE ONE THAT'S SORT OF HOLDING US BACK AND I'M REALLY HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN TURN THAT AROUND AND GET THESE ISSUES RESOLVED.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHILE WE TALK ABOUT GREATER PARKING ISSUES IN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND WE START TALKING ABOUT HOW TO MANAGE OUR PARKING BETTER.
STEP NUMBER ONE IS KNOWING WHAT PARKING YOU HAVE AND KNOWING WHAT USES YOU HAVE SO YOU CAN MAKE THOSE DECISIONS IN AN EDUCATED WAY.
AND I'M THANKFUL FOR, UH, MR. BALDWIN'S CONTINUED WORK ON THIS AND I HOPE THAT YOU ALL CAN SUPPORT THE MOTION TO HOLD IT FOR ANOTHER MONTH.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS.
NUMBER NINE IS AN APPLICATION IS Z 2 2115.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ON PROPERTY ZONE CSS
[04:35:01]
D ONE COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE NORTHWEST LINE OF SILVERADO DRIVE BETWEEN CF HAN FREEWAY AND CLAYBROOK ROAD STAFF.IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, WE HAVE TWO REGISTERED SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM.
UH, ARE THEY ONLINE? MR. COR? HE'S ONLINE? YES.
CAN YOU PLEASE BEGIN YOUR, WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, UHHUH.
MY NAME IS OLI CARR AND ADDRESS IS 2 1 1 1 SILVERADO DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 5 3.
WE'RE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
UM, MY COMMENTS, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY WAS IT REJECTED? BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S ONLY ONE NEIGHBOR HE HAD ISSUES WITH, LIKE, NOT ONLY WITH US, LIKE EVEN WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER, LIKE HE HAVE ISSUES WITH EVERY SINGLE ONE.
SO I WANTED TO KNOW WHAT WAS DENIED.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS, MA'AM? UHHUH
THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER WHEN NOT MINE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR OUR ONE SPEAKER ONLINE? MS. KORE? COMMISSIONER BLAIR, PLEASE.
UM, MS. K, ARE YOU THE PROPERTY OWNER? YES MA'AM.
UM, I, I'VE SPOKEN WITH YOUR, YOUR PREVIOUS, UM, REPRESENTATIVE CONSULTANT, UHHUH
UM, YOU DON'T HAVE A A YOU DON'T HAVE A A CO FOR THIS USE AT ALL, DO YOU? YES, MA'AM.
I, YEAH, THAT'S WHY WE APPLIED THE CO AND THEN THEY TOLD US LIKE, UH, YOU NEED THE S U P AND WE APPLIED THE S U P IN BACK IN NOVEMBER, 2021.
BUT DID YOU NOT HAVE THAT? DID YOU NOT GET THAT YOUR C BEFORE YOU OPENED YOUR BUSINESS? WE OPENED ON BERG.
UHHUH
WE NEED THE CO LIKE FOR EACH LOT.
SO ON KLEBERG, IT DOES NOT HAVE A C O FOR, FOR PARKING ON THE 1 1 7 5 7 ADDRESS.
THERE IS NO CO FOR, FOR TRUCK PARKING AT THAT LOCATION.
TRUCK REPAIR BUT NOT TRUCK PARKING? YES MA'AM.
BUT THOSE ARE THE SALES TRUCKS ON THE CLE BIRD.
SO WE APPLIED THE S U P FOR PARKING ONLY ON 2 1 1 1 RE DRIVE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR, UH, APPLICANT COMMISSIONERS? YES.
WERE WAS AT THE TIME OF, OF GETTING THAT CO OR WERE YOU AWARE THAT YOU NEEDED ONE ON EACH PLAT OR DID YOU THINK THAT ALL, DID YOU OR WERE YOU WERE UP UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT ALL PLAS WERE INCLUDED? YES, MA'AM.
AND THEN AS SOON WE FIND OUT WE NEED THE CO FOR EACH LARGE IT DID.
AND THEN WE APPLIED THE CO FOR 2 1 1 1 SILVERADO DRIVE.
AND THEN WE WERE, AT THAT TIME WHEN WE WENT TO APPLY, WE WERE TOLD THAT WE NEED SS U P SINCE THEN, WE WERE IN THE PROCESS FOR SS U P FROM SINCE 2021.
AND WHEN DID YOU APPLY FOR YOUR S U P VE BACK IN NOVEMBER, 2021.
YOU APPLIED FOR THE S U P OR DID YOU APPLY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY? NO, THE WENT TO DROP OFF THE APPLICATION PLUS FOR THE C E O AND THEN WE WERE TOLD RIGHT THERE, WE NEED THE S U P FIRST BEFORE WE OBTAIN THE C E O.
AND THEN IN NOVEMBER BACK 2021, WE, WE APPLIED SU S U P.
AND WERE YOU, DID YOU OBTAIN THE SS U P? I'M SORRY, DID YOU, OBT NO, BECAUSE THAT, THAT'S WHAT IS THE HEARING FOR? BECAUSE I GUESS IT'S DENIED YOU WERE DENIED.
[04:40:02]
YES.UH, MS, HOW MANY CODE VIOLATIONS HAVE YOU GOTTEN FOR LEGAL PARKING AT THIS SITE IN THE LAST TWO YEARS? UH, WE GOT, UH, ACTUALLY WE PAID LIKE TWO VIOLATIONS.
ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND TRUST ME, WE WANTED TO BE IN THE COMPLIANCE AND WE'VE BEEN DOING WHATEVER, WHATEVER WE WERE TOLD.
I'M NOT AWARE HOW MANY, BUT I KNOW ONE IS OUTSTANDING.
MA'AM, WE'RE, WE'RE THROUGH TAKING PUBLIC INPUT, MAN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 12 115? I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL.
AND IF I HAVE SECOND I HAVE COMMENTS.
I HAVE SECONDED YOUR MOTION COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER VALLE, THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION HAS BEEN A CHRONIC, UM, ISSUE WITH, UM, ILLEGAL LAND USE.
IT HAS IT, THEY HAVE BEEN NON-COMPLIANT SINCE PRIOR TO 2021.
STAFF AND CITY STAFF CODE HAS WORKED WITH THEM FOR OVER A YEAR TRYING TO GET THEM INTO COMPLIANCY.
UM, AND THEY HAVE NOT, THERE HAS NOT BEEN AN ATTEMPT TO COME INTO ANY COMPLIANCY AT THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION.
THEY HAVE THREE ADDRESSES THAT ARE SEPARATE THAT ARE, THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE, UM, FENCING TO SEPARATE THEM.
THE FENCING WAS REMOVED, SO IF YOU GO INTO ONE LOCATION AND YOU CAN GO INTO ALL THREE OF THEIR LOCATIONS AND ALL THREE OF THE LOCATIONS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS HAD ILLEGAL PARKING.
UM, IT, EACH ONE OF THE LOCATIONS BACKS UP INTO RESIDENTIAL.
UH, THERE, THERE'S A, A CHAIN LINK FENCE AT BEST THAT SEPARATES THE RESIDENTIAL FROM THE, FROM THE RE THE, UM, THIS APPLICANT'S LAND.
THERE IS NO BUFFERING, THERE IS NOTHING TO, UM, TO STOP THE, THE, THE POLLUTION OF EXHAUST AS PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO SLEEP.
SO THERE IS A SPECIAL PLACE CALLED PD 7 61 FOR ALL TRUCKING TRUCK PARKING TO OCCUR.
THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION AND ANYONE IN THE, THE COMMUNITY THAT IS NOT PARK, NOT UTILIZING LAND IN CONNECTION TO THE ZONING THAT THE LAND IS IN, IS TO, UM, TAKE THE, THE LAND USE TO THE APPROPRIATE PD WHERE YOU CAN PARK INTO YOUR HEART'S CONTENT.
SO I ASK THAT YOU THAT, THAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, UM, FOLLOW MY RECOMMENDATION OF A STRAIGHT DENIAL.
UH, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION FOR ALL THE REASONS STATED BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR WITH ONE ADDITION THAT, UH, I FIND THAT IT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN S U P SPECIFICALLY THAT, UH, THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL.
THE PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND GENERAL WELFARE, UH, COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG FILED BY COMMISSIONER RUBIN.
I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING, BUT THAT'S BEEN SAID AND WOULD ADD JUST ONE THING.
THIS USE IS PARTICULARLY EASY TO DISCONTINUE AND COMMENCE.
AND SO UPON FINDING OUT THAT THE USE WAS ILLEGAL, IT WOULD'VE BEEN OPEN TO THE APPLICANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND STOP BEING ILLEGAL ON THAT PROPERTY INSTEAD.
UH, I'M NOT SURE WHY IT'S TAKEN FROM OCTOBER OF 21 TILL NOW TO GET THIS CASE MOVED FORWARD.
BUT INSTEAD THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, RELIED ON THE RELUCTANCE OF THE CITY TO, UH, ENFORCE PENDING A ZONING APPLICATION AND HAS CONTINUED TO VIOLATE THE LAW KNOWING THAT THEY WERE VIOLATING THE LAW SINCE OCTOBER OF 21.
COMMISSIONER RUBEN, I AM DEFINITELY IN SUPPORT OF DENIAL HERE IS ONE QUESTION I HAVE TO ASK IS WHETHER WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS CONTINUING
[04:45:01]
AS A CSS DISTRICT OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS, GIVEN THE, I WOULD CALL A CRITICAL MASS OF, OF RESIDENTIAL, WHETHER IT'S THE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED STUFF TO THE SOUTH OR SOME OF THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES THAT ARE ON LAND CURRENTLY ZONED CS.IF, IF WE'RE SURE WE WANNA DENY THIS STRAIGHT DENIAL L KEEPING IN MIND THAT THAT WOULD IN MOST INSTANCES PRECLUDE A REZONING TO PROPERLY SOMETHING THAT'S LESS INTENSIVE THAN CS, BUT I, I DEFINITELY, YOU KNOW, WOULD WELCOME COMMISSIONER BLAIR'S INPUT SINCE SHE'S MUCH MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA THAN I AM.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER? SEEING NONE.
YOU OPPOSED? ONE, ONE IN OPPOSITION? WE NOT OPPOSITION.
UH, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER ANDERSON LOG BACK ON AT 3:18 PM AND WE'LL KEEP MOVING TO CASE NUMBER 10.
URE, CASE NUMBER 10 AND Z 2 12 2 60.
AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A PUBLIC SCHOOL OTHER THAN AN OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL ON PROPERTIES ZONED AN R 16, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY BOUNDED BY ALTA VISTA, LANE WONDERLAND TRAIL AND NORTH HAVEN ROAD.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN, A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? YES MA'AM.
UH, YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE TO PRESS THE LITTLE BUTTON DOWN THERE.
SO THE MICRO, I'M SHEILA BRIGHT, I LIVE ON AT 39 69 ALTA VISTA, RIGHT WHERE WONDERLAND TRAIL JOINS
I AM A BIG BELIEVER IN THIS SCHOOL.
MY HUSBAND SERVED ON THE LOCAL SCHOOL COUNCIL OR THE SITE-BASED MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, WHATEVER THEY CALL IT, FOR ABOUT 10 YEARS.
AND, UM, I'M A FORMER TEACHER.
I'M ALL ABOUT THE SCHOOL AND IT BEING SUCCESSFUL, IT WAS CLOSED WHEN WE BOUGHT OUR HOUSE.
WE WEREN'T NAIVE ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT IT THINK IT WOULDN'T REOPEN, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT ORIGINALLY THE SCHOOL WHERE THE SCHOOL IS LOCATED WAS NOT ZONED FOR THAT SCHOOL.
IT WAS JUST ZONED FOR SINGLE DISTRICT, A SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
AND I KNOW WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO CHANGE THE ZONE OR TO ADD THE ZONING BECAUSE OF THE ADDITION THAT IS NEEDED.
I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF THE ADDITION FOR 10 ADDITIONAL CLASSROOMS, THE REMOVAL OF THE PORTABLES.
BUT I, WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO COMMUNICATE SINCE APRIL OF 22 WHEN I FIRST HEARD ABOUT THIS.
AND I'VE HAD A WONDERFUL CON CONVERSATION WITH ANDREA AND I WILL SEE HER NEXT WEEK AT A ANOTHER MEETING.
AND SHE JUST FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR ME TO AT LEAST LET YOU KNOW THAT I'VE SAT HERE ALL THIS TIME
I THINK THEY'RE KIND OF NOT TAKING THE NEIGHBORHOOD TOTALLY INTO CONSIDERATION.
BUT AS FAR AS THE ZONING SO THEY CAN ADD THIS NEW CLASS, YOU KNOW, THE NEW CLASSROOMS I'M IN FAVOR.
ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR MS. BRIGHT.
QUESTIONS FOR, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE.
MS. BRIGHT, COULD YOU COME BACK TO THE PODIUM FOR A MINUTE? I'M SORRY, COULD YOU COME BACK TO THE PODIUM FOR A MINUTE? I APOLOGIZE.
AND HEARING THAT I DON'T YOU QUITE WORKING IN THE OTHER EAR PERFECTLY FINE.
[04:50:01]
YOU REALLY GET THREE THREE, YOU ONLY GET THREE MINUTES, BUT COULD YOU GIVE US SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT YOU HAVE? I'M SO SORRY.I CAN'T, COULD YOU TELL US SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT YOU HAVE? THE CONCERNS? YES, MA'AM.
UH, I AM PRIMARILY CONCERNED ABOUT A LONG DRIVE THROUGH PARKING LOT THAT WILL BE BUILT ALONG WONDERLAND TRAIL, WHICH IS RIGHT OUT MY FRONT DOOR.
AND I'VE ALREADY SURPRISINGLY HAD FIVE GIGANTIC NEW STREETLIGHTS ALONG THERE ALONG WITH TWO POLES THAT HAVE NOTHING ATTACHED TO THEM EXCEPT THE WIRES GOING AROUND THE CORNER.
AND I NEVER HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THAT OR EXACTLY WHAT THE PURPOSE IS.
THAT'S ALL WELL-LIGHTED ALREADY.
UM, THE SCHOOL DOES A WONDERFUL JOB WITH CARPOOL PICKUP, BUT IT GOES ALL THE WAY AROUND THE PARK AND ALL THE WAY BEHIND THE SCHOOL AND DOWN WONDERLAND TRAIL.
BUT NO ONE ENTERS FROM THE SITE FROM THE STREET SIDE.
EVERYBODY GETS IN RIGHT THERE BY THE CURB.
I SEE NO PURPOSE IN HAVING THAT LONG DRIVE THROUGH.
I MEAN, THERE'S PLENTY OF SPACE ON THE STREET FOR LANES OF TRAFFIC AS WELL AS THE CARPOOL LANE.
AND IT ONLY LASTS 20, 25 MINUTES AT THE MOST IN THE MORNING AND EVENING.
AND IN ADDITION, I DON'T GET HOW YOU NEED A DRIVE-THROUGH AREA AND A PARKING LOT.
I MEAN, THERE'S SPACES FOR CARS THAT DESIGN TOO.
AND I JUST TALKED WITH HER BRIEFLY.
I HAVE BEEN CALLING DIFFERENT PEOPLE
AND SO I HAVEN'T, YOU KNOW, I'LL ALSO SAY THAT I GOT A, AN INVITATION LAST OCTOBER TO ATTEND I THINK SOMETHING THAT WAS PLANNED BY THE CITY.
I GOT IT A LITTLE POSTCARD AND IT WAS, UH, THE MEETING WAS OCTOBER 10TH AND I MARKED ON THERE THAT I RECEIVED IT OCTOBER 18TH.
IT'S JUST THINGS LIKE THAT THAT CONCERNED ME AND THINGS THAT PEOPLE DON'T, THEY WANT THE SCHOOL TO REMAIN SIMILAR TO HOW IT IS AND NOT AFFECT THEIR PROPERTY VALUES AND, AND HAVE A LOT OF EXTRA THINGS THAT MAYBE AREN'T NECESSARY.
SO ARE YOU SAYING, SO YOU, YOU ARE CONCERNED WITH THE, UM, THEM HAVING ANY TYPE OF, UM, UM, CARPOOLING ON THE ACTUAL PROPERTY.
YOU WOULD RATHER STAY ON THE STREET AND NOT ON THE PROPERTY.
AND ALSO WAS THERE ANY, THERE WAS NOT ANY COMMUNITY MEETINGS? WELL, THE THING ABOUT IT IS THE CARPOOL LANE STARTS WAY OVER ON COX AND IT COMES ALL THE WAY DOWN BY SOME RESIDENTIAL HOMES ALL THE WAY DOWN BY THE PARK THAT ADJOINS THE SCHOOL GROUNDS.
AND SO FOR THAT ONE AREA ALONG WONDERLAND TRAIL, WHICH IS ONLY ONE BLOCK, WHAT, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE IF IT'S THERE BY THE CURB AND NOT A PERMANENT BIG BLOCK OF CONCRETE THAT NEIGHBORS LOOK AT ALL THE TIME? OKAY.
THAT'S UNTIL I LEARN MORE ABOUT ALL OF THAT.
BUT WHAT I'M SEEING, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCHOOL WEBSITE, AND I, AS I SAY, I'VE TRIED TO TALK WITH DIFFERENT PEOPLE, MICHAEL PEPPY I THINK, AND THEN, UH, TIKA, SHE WAS WONDERFUL.
ANYWAY, I HAVE IT WRITTEN DOWN.
OTHER NAMES THAT I'VE TALKED WITH.
I JUST, I DON'T WANT ANY, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY.
ALSO, A THING I SAW ON THE WEBSITE WAS NOT ONLY THIS DRIVE-THROUGH, BUT A HUGE COVER, UH, ON THE WALKWAY GOING OUT TO THAT AND THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT MIGHT BE NECESSARY.
I, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T MEAN TO TAKE A LOT OF TIME, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
[04:55:01]
SO WHAT WE'LL DO IS WHEN THIS, WHEN THE PART COMES FOR US TO ASK STAFF, WE'RE GONNA ASK STAFF.WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HEARD THE CONCERNS THAT YOU HAD SINCE YOU CAME.
MS. BRYANT, I KNOW YOU MENTIONED A FEW PEOPLE THAT YOU'VE SPOKEN TO.
DID YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK TO KATIE LINNEHAN WITH THE DISTRICT? FROM THE DISTRICT? YES.
NO, THE ONLY P PERSON I HAVE MAINLY SPOKEN WITH THROUGH THE DISTRICT IS WENDY MILLER, THE PRINCIPAL.
WHO HAS ALWAYS BEEN, WE HAVE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS AT THE SCHOOL.
I KNOW HER THROUGH CHURCH, SO I HAVE TALKED WITH HER PERSONALLY, BUT I HAVEN'T BEEN GETTING A STRAIGHT ANSWER.
AND HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK TO CARL CROWLEY? THE DISTRICT'S, I BELIEVE IS WHO'S THE DISTRICT'S CONSULTANT ON THIS MATTER? WILL HE'D BE ANDREA, WILL HE BE AT THAT MEETING NEXT WEEK ON THE 12TH? MS. BRIAN, LET ME JUST TOUCH THE CHASE.
I'M GONNA, IF YOU MIND, DON'T MIND STICKING AROUND.
I'LL GIVE YOU THEIR CONTACT INFORMATION SO YOU CAN GET IN TOUCH WITH THEM OR IT SOUNDS LIKE DR.
AUDREA HAS GIVEN IT TO YOU, SO THAT'S FANTASTIC.
I'D ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTACT THE TWO OF THEM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER WHEELER STAFF? SO MY, MY CONCERN IS, UM, 'CAUSE I WAS GONNA ASK DID THEY HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BUT IT SEEMS THAT THEY DO.
WERE THERE ANY MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SURROUNDING, AND, AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT PROBABLY THE, THE, THE WAY THAT PART, UM, PICKUP AND DROP OFF IS BEING ROUTED IS BECAUSE OF HOW WE'RE TRYING TO GET MORE, MORE CARS ON THE PROPERTY AND OFF THE STREET, WHICH IS PROBABLY NOT UNDERSTANDABLE, BUT IT COULD HAVE BEEN UNDERSTANDABLE IF IT HAD BEEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS.
SO WERE THERE ANY COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETINGS WITH THAT COMMUNITY? UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION OR WHATEVER, I WISH THE APPLICANT WAS HERE TO ADDRESS, BUT TO MY UNDERSTANDING I ASKED TOO.
UM, SO THEY DID SUBMIT THE REQUEST A WHILE AGO.
YOU KNOW, IT'S PART OF THOSE SCHOOLS THAT WERE ALL SUBMITTED AT ONCE LAST YEAR.
SO IT DID SIT IN THE QUEUE FOR A LITTLE BIT UNTIL, UH, I, UH, STARTED THE REVIEW.
UM, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING BACK LAST YEAR IN OCTOBER, AND THEY WERE WAITING, UM, TO GET IT SCHEDULED TO SCHEDULE ANOTHER COMMUNITY MEETING.
AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING NEXT WEEK.
SO WHY WASN'T THIS PULLED FROM THE AGENDA UNTIL THEY CAN HAVE SOME COMMUNITY MEETINGS? BECAUSE, UM, MAYBE BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT AS, AS COMMISSIONER, UM, KINGSTON STATED, WAS IT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? OKAY.
DID YOU DO A COMMUNITY MEETING WITH, UM, WORK WITH THE SCHOOL? YEAH.
IT'S, IT'S ONE OF THOSE DAYS, BUT THE ENGAGEMENT REALLY MATTERS, RIGHT? BECAUSE IF, IF THIS PART PARTICULAR YOUNG LADY CAME AND SHE'S SAYING, HEY, WE HAVEN'T HAD ENGAGEMENT, WE GOT A POSTCARD A A WEEK AFTER, IT REALLY IS IMPORTANT THAT D I S D GETS IT RIGHT AT EVERY ONE OF OUR SCHOOLS BECAUSE THEM NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY IT CAN'T BE AS GO AS GO AS IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN, IS A CAUSE FOR CONCERN AND ESPECIALLY WITH A RESIDENT WHO LIVES RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SCHOOL.
SO WE DEFINITELY, IF THERE'S A MEETING NEXT WEEK, WE COULDN'T HAVE SET THIS OFF A WEEK OR TWO.
I KNOW, I THINK IT WAS BASICALLY LIKE I WAS TRYING TO GET IT SCHEDULED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
AND I THINK IT'S HELPFUL FOR THE COMMUNITY MEETING TO HAVE THE STAFF REPORT AND THE DISCIPLINE AND ALL OF THAT AVAILABLE.
I CANNOT SPEAK TO THEIR SCHEDULING OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS.
UNFORTUNATELY, I'M TALKING ABOUT BEFORE IT MADE IT TO OUR AGENDA BEFORE IT, IT MADE IT TO OUR AGENDA.
I I WAS TRYING TO LIKE GET IT FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW, WE DIDN'T HAVE ISSUES WITH IT.
YES, IT WAS READY TO BE SCHEDULED AND I WAS TRYING TO SCHEDULE, AND I ASKED THE APPLICANT IF IT'S OKAY TO BE SCHEDULED TODAY, AND THEY AGREED.
BUT THE TIMING, THE TIMING AND HOW THIS TRACK RUNS PARALLEL WITH THE COMMUNITY MEETING IS MORE ON THE APPLICANT TOO.
IT IS DEFINITELY MORE ON THE APPLICANT, BUT WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE ISSUES WITH THE I S D, THE SUBMITTAL PROCESS, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, AND WHEN WE DO IT RIGHT, WE GET IT RIGHT.
AND SO WE, WE DEFINITELY, IT, IT IS A CONCERN WHEN WE, WHEN WE HAVE, WE HAVE, WE CAN'T SAY WE HAD COMMUNITY MEETINGS BEHIND A D I S D PROJECT.
THIS IS SOMETHING WITH, WITH THE SCHOOLS AND WE'VE HAD THIS, WE'VE, WE'VE HAD COMMUNITY MEETINGS SET UP AND, AND IT'S ONLY MR. CARL, UM, IS THE ONE WHO ALWAYS SUBMIT.
WE NEED TO LIKE MAYBE SET THIS OFF FOR SOMETHING TO HAVE SOME COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
[05:00:01]
THE APP, THE, THE SPEAKER COULD NOT SAY SHE SPOKE WITH ANYONE CONCERNED WITH THIS CASE.AND I WONDER HOW MANY MORE OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE IT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER RUBIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YEAH.
OH, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL, UM, SEPTEMBER 21ST.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
ANY DISCUSSION? I HAD A SUPER BRIEF COMMENT.
I JUST THOUGHT, UH, MS. BRYANT'S INSIGHT ABOUT THE TRADE-OFFS BETWEEN HAVING QUEUING ON SITE AND THE ADDITIONAL, UM, IMPERVIOUS LOT COVERAGE AND CONCRETE PUT ON THE SITE VERSUS THE INCONVENIENCE OF HAVING PEOPLE QUEUE ON STREET FOR, FOR 25 MINUTES TWICE A DAY WAS, WAS PARTICULARLY INTERESTING.
AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN KEEP THAT IN OUR MIND ON THESE CASES MOVING FORWARD.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S A COMMUNITY MEETING SET UP FOR NEXT TUESDAY THE 12TH, AND THAT WOULD ALSO BE THE DEADLINE FOR ANY, UM, SUBMISSION OF ANY CHANGES FOR THE 21ST.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, IS THE 21ST A DATE THAT'S GOING TO WORK? OKAY.
I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THE 21ST, I THINK.
AND IF WE NEED TO POSTPONE IT AGAIN, WE'LL DO SO AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN DO A GOOD JOB OF COMMUNICATING THAT.
I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT COMMISSIONER STANDARD HAD REQUESTED, BUT YEAH, WE CAN, WE CAN ALWAYS HOLD AGAIN.
ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, WE WILL NOW MOVE TO CASE NUMBER 12.
CASE NUMBER 12 IS Z 2 23 1 22.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A, FOR ONE, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION.
AND TWO, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL MERCHANDISE FOOD STORE.
3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT FIVE WITHIN PLANNED BILL IN DISTRICT 5 33 CF HA.
SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT NUMBER ONE WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ELAM ROAD AND CF HAN FREEWAY.
STEP RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES SIR.
PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
I AM, UH, PART OF THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LOCATION.
WE HAVE OWNED THIS, UH, PROPERTY FOR 23 YEARS AND PRIOR TO THAT OF OUR OWNERSHIP, IT'S BEEN A GAS STATION FUELING STATION FOR 50 YEARS OVERALL.
AND OUT OF WHICH, UM, AFTER OUR OWNERSHIP IN THE 23 YEARS, UH, MAJORITY OF THE TIME HAS BEEN A FUELING STATION.
SOMETIME JUST PRIOR TO COVID TIME, THE COVID CITY REQUIRED US TO MAKE SOME IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CORNER, WHICH WE AGREED AND WE CLOSED THE LOCATION, WHICH WAS A SMALLER CONVENIENCE STORE.
WE AGREED TO RAISE SOME MONEY AND, UH, ALLOW THE CITY TO US TO DEMOLISH THE LOCATION AND MOVE FORWARD.
AND WE HAVE BEEN WORKING AT THE STATION POST COVID.
WE HAD CITY, WE HAD APPROVED THE APPROACH THE CITY FOR REMOVING THE TANKS, UM, AND PREPARING OURSELVES FOR BUILDING A NEW LOCATION.
FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVED REMOVING OF THE TANKS, PUTTING NEW TANKS ALL ALONG.
CITY HAS BEEN ON BOARD SINCE 2021 TO THIS DATE.
AND WE WORKED WITH THE NATIONAL FIRMS FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THIS AS A FUELING STATION IN THE CONVENIENCE STORE.
AND WE HAVE A FEASIBILITY STUDY DONE, WHICH WE CAN SUBMIT, WHICH SHOWS IT'LL BE AN EXCELLENT LOCATION THE WAY WE ARE PLANNED IT IN THE SITE PLANT AND A NATIONAL BANK.
CITIZENS BANK HAS APPROVED THE LOCATION FOR BUILDING THIS.
SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING, WE HAVE SPENT OVER $300,000 OF WHICH ALL ALONG CITY WAS WORKING WITH US THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND COMES TO S A P AND WE GET DENIED.
AND THEN WHEN WE WORKED WITH MR. PEPE SINCE ABOUT TWO MONTHS, SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS HAD TO BE MET, WHICH WE AGREED, WE REDESIGNED THE SITE PLAN TO HIS SATISFACTION, AND
[05:05:01]
NOW HERE IT COMES AND WE ARE GETTING DENIED.SO WE WANT TO APPEAL KINDLY AND WE WANT TO REOPEN.
WE WANNA SUBMIT ALL OUR DOCUMENTATION.
WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY IN THIS LOCATION, WHICH MAJORITY OF THE TIME CD WAS WORKING WITH US, APPROVING SEVERAL OF THE PROCESSES.
AND SO WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO WORK TOWARDS A REQUEST FOR CONTINUED REVIEW FOR APPROVAL OF THE SS A P KINDLY.
AND WE ALSO, I ALSO HAVE THE, UH, GASOLINE, NATIONAL GASOLINE, UH, COMPANY, VALERO, UH, GENTLEMAN HERE WHO WILL ALSO SPEAK, UH, HIS OWN COMMENTS ON THIS LOCATION IS A VERY GOOD LOCATION WILL ENHANCE AND GIVE GOOD, UM, FOR THE, NOT ONLY FOR THE PUBLIC AROUND THAT AREA FOR THE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC WILL BE A VERY GOOD SERVICE STATION.
HELLO, MY NAME IS STEVE ROGERS.
UH, I ACTUALLY LIVE IN THE TYLER, TEXAS AREA 4 26 LONE STAR LANE, LYNDALE, TEXAS.
I CAME IN, DROVE IN JUST FOR THIS MEETING TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME, UH, SPEAK TO YOU TODAY.
I ACTUALLY COME FROM A VERY LONG LINE OF DALLAS SITES.
MY GRANDPARENTS WERE RAISED IN SOUTH DALLAS, WENT TO GRADUATED FROM FOREST AVENUE HIGH SCHOOL.
WE'RE IN THE SAME CLASS AS STANLEY MARCUS, IF THAT GIVES YOU AN IDEA HOW LONG AGO THAT WAS? 1921.
UH, MY MOM AND DAD ALSO GRADUATED FROM WOODROW WILSON AND NORTH DALLAS.
UH, I'M A PROUD SKYLINE RAIDER.
SO WE, WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE FIRST ONE D I S D SCHOOL TO WIN THE STATE FOOTBALL CHAMPIONSHIP, BUT THAT GOES TO SOUTH OAK CLIFF.
SO CONGRATULATIONS TO THE GOLDEN BEARS.
AND THE REASON I BRING THIS UP IS BECAUSE I REPRESENT MY COMPANY AS WORLD FUEL SERVICES.
WE'RE A BRANDED DISTRIBUTOR OF VALERO PRODUCTS, AND I'M ALSO HERE TO REPRESENT VALERO.
I REPRESENT THEIR BRAND STANDARDS BRANDED OPERATION.
UH, WE HAVE SPENT AS, UH, ARVIN HAS SAID, UH, OVER $300,000 ON THIS SITE ALREADY, INCLUDING MY COMPANY.
UH, I CARE VERY DEEPLY ABOUT THE SOUTHERN SECTOR OF DALLAS AND ITS OPERATION.
THIS IS MORE THAN JUST A BUSINESS.
THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT I WAS EXCITED TO TAKE ON BECAUSE IT WAS PERSONAL.
IT'S PERSONAL TO MY FAMILY BACKGROUND, UH, TO MY OWN BACKGROUND AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE CITY, UH, THAT I GREW UP IN.
AND I, I LOVE, I WAS BORN IN BAYLOR HOSPITAL, AND AS I SAID, IT'S, UH, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE CONTINUE TO IMPROVE THE CITY EVEN THOUGH I LIVE IN EAST TEXAS NOW.
UH, THE SURVEYS WERE DONE BY MY COMPANY.
IT WAS SURVEYED HIGHEST AND BEST USE AS A FUEL FACILITY, A CONVENIENCE STORE AND GAS FACILITY.
UH, VALERO HAS SIGNED OFF ON IT.
VALERO ENERGY AS WELL AS, AGAIN, MY OWN COMPANY.
A LOT OF RESOURCES, UH, TIME AND EFFORT HAVE BEEN PUT INTO THIS, UH, WANT TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE CITY, UH, THE SITE.
AND WE, UH, WE WERE LOOKING FOR A A AN A ONE SITE TO PUT AT THIS LOCATION ON 1 75, REALLY IMPROVE THE, UH, THE CORNER AND, UH, IMPROVE THE SITE.
UM, ENVIRONMENTAL WORK HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE AT THE LOCATION, SO, UM, WOULD ENJOY ANY QUESTIONS, OBJECTIONS.
AND WE'D JUST LIKE TO, I KNOW IT'S RECOMMENDED FOR DENIAL AND WE'D LIKE TO ADDRESS ANY CONCERNS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER BLAIR? UM, I, I WOULD LIKE, UM, MR. RAM AND BOTH OF YOU GUYS CAN COME UP, BUT MR. RAM, THE OTHER SIDE.
AND CAN YOU MAKE SURE THE MIC IS ON, PLEASE? YES, MA'AM, IT'S ON.
UM, YOU SAID THAT, THAT THIS SITE, THAT THIS HAS BEEN A GAS, UH, A FUELING STATION FOR OVER 50 YEARS, YOUR FAMILY OWNED IT FOR THE, THOSE 50 YEARS.
AND CAN YOU, I, AND I DON'T KNOW IF I, IF I FULLY COULD APPRECIATE WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO, TO CONVEY WHEN YOU SAID IT WAS IT WAS CLOSED.
CAN YOU TELL ME WHY IT WAS CLOSED? THE, UH, THE SITE, UH, OVER TIME, OBVIOUSLY BEING THAT LONG, IT WAS A SMALLER CONVENIENCE STORE
[05:10:01]
AND FOR SERVICING THE LOCATION WHERE THE CITY FELT THAT THAT HAS TO BE IMPROVED, UM, ENTIRELY.AND WE ALSO WERE IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS.
SO WE CLOSE THE LOCATION TO REVIEW AND GATHER FUNDS SO THAT WE CAN WORK TOWARDS IMPROVING THE LOCATION.
SO YOU'RE SAYING, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT WE'RE ALL CLEAR, THAT YOUR, THE SITE WAS CLOSED DOWN FOR IMPROVEMENTS? IT, IT, IT, IT HAD, WELL, THE, THE, THE, THE DESIGN OF THE SITE OR THE ORIGINAL SITE HAD RUN ITS COURSE AND IT NEEDED TO BE MODERNIZED.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S A CORRECT STATEMENT, YES.
AND, AND VALERO, YOU ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH WITH THEIR MODERNIZATION? UH, ABSOLUTELY.
I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT FOR THREE YEARS.
AND SO, SO MR. RAM, WHEN WITH THE MODERNIZATION, THE CURVE CUTS HAVE CHANGED, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT LAYOUT THAT IS MORE, UH, IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE WAY, UM, CURVE CUTS AND, AND THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR FUELING STATIONS HAVE, UM, HAVE THAT THE CITY HAS, HAS LAID OUT FOR THE WAY THAT THIS, THIS LOCATION SHOULD, UH, OPERATE? YES, MA'AM.
IN FACT, WE EVEN HAVE A TEXTILE APPROVAL ON THAT.
BUT TEXTILE APPROVED ONE LOCATION, CORRECT? ONE, ONE CURB CUT FOR THE SERVICE? YES.
RIGHT, BUT ON THE, NO, THAT'S ON THE SERVICE ROAD.
FROM WHAT, UH, WE ARE UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S, THE SPACING IS NOT ADEQUATE FOR THE CURB CUT TO BE ON ELAM THE WAY IT USED TO BE.
WE'RE, UH, WE HAVE WORKED WITH, UH, MR. PEPE ON, ON AND SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT IF CITY REQUIRES US TO WORK, UM, FURTHER ON THE CURB CUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY, WE'LL BE OPEN TO DO THAT.
ANOTHER, ANOTHER QUESTION THERE.
THERE'S A, A CONCERN ABOUT THE, THE PARKING YOU HAVE, YOU ARE SHORT A PARKING SPOT, WHICH THAT DOES, WHICH YOU BE, LOOK, WOULD YOU BE IN, UH, WOULD YOU CONSIDER LOOKING AT A DESIGN THAT WILL CORRECT THAT ISSUE AS WELL? WELL, ACTUALLY, UM, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID WORK WITH MR. PEPE IN THE LAST, UH, 30, 45 DAYS.
UM, SOME OF THE PARKING LOTS HAD TO BE BIGGER AND, AND, AND THE ALIGNMENT HAD TO BE REVISED.
AND I BELIEVE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, MR. FE CAN ANSWER THIS.
WE HAVE ALREADY COMPLIED TO THE CITY REQUIREMENTS.
BUT IF IT TURNS OUT THAT YOUR CURRENT SITE PLAN IS STILL ONE SPACE SHORT, ARE YOU WILLING TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO RESOLVE THAT ISSUE? YES, WE HONOR.
THE THIRD THING THE CITY HAS IDENTIFIED, AND BY THAT I MEAN THE ELAM DRIVEWAY IS NUMBER ONE, THE ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACE IS NUMBER TWO.
AND THE THIRD THING IS THAT YOU DON'T SHOW A REQUIRED 10 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER.
ARE YOU WILLING TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO RESOLVE THAT ISSUE? CERTAINLY.
HAVE YOU CONSIDERED HAVING AN INGRESS AND AN EGRESS OFF OF THE SERVICE ROAD AND CLOSING THE DRIVE ON ELAM? IF THAT WILL ALLOW FOR THE, THE CARS AND, AND SMALLER TRUCKS TO CONVENIENTLY COME IN, IN AND OUT, UM, ACCORDING TO OUR DESIGN FROM OUR ARCHITECT BUILDER, IF IT COMPLIES TO THAT, WE'LL BE OKAY WITH THAT.
YOU DO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WOULD MEAN YOUR INGRESS AND EGRESS WOULD BE ON A ONE-WAY ROAD HEADING SOUTHEASTERLY.
THAT, UH, OBVIOUSLY, UM, I APPRECIATE YOU, YOU, YOUR, UM, POINTING THAT OUT FURTHER BECAUSE THAT WOULD, UM, LESSEN THE FLOW AND POTENTIALLY HURT.
UM, UH, THE BUSINESS, YOU'RE AT LEAST WILLING TO DISCUSS THAT THAT'S WE'RE THE DEALBREAKER, WE'RE WILLING AND DISCUSS IT.
AND IF IT'S NOT GOING TO IMPACT THE FEASIBLY STUDY THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE IN CONCURRENCE WITH VIRO, WE'LL BE OPEN FOR THAT.
[05:15:01]
IF IT DOES MAKE AN IMPACT, WE MAY COME BACK FOR, YOU KNOW, FURTHER REVIEW.HOW MANY PROPOSED PUMPS ARE IS GONNA, ARE GOING TO GET THIS, UH, ADDRESS? SORRY, MA'AM.
HOW MANY PROPOSED PUMPS? UH, FOUR MPDS, MA'AM.
WOULD YOU ALL CONSIDER ALSO PUTTING IN AN EV? YEAH, BUT EACH, EACH M P D WOULD BE TWO SIDES.
AN EV ELECTRONIC ELECTRICAL VEHICLE.
WE HAVE NOT PLANNED ANY EV AT THIS POINT.
WOULD YOU ALL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT YES, WE WOULD.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE THING NOW FOR MOST GAS STATIONS TO HAVE EVS.
I THINK IT WOULD JUST BE A MATTER OF SPACE CONSIDERATIONS.
BUT EV'S, I, I PUT IN EV'S STATIONS ALL THE TIME.
SO PART OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS SPACE COULD BE IF YOU ALL POSSIBLY, UM, LOWER THE, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE, A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS? YES.
HAVE YOUR, YOU HAVE YOUR MIC ON.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR FOLKS ONLINE? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SCENE NONE.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE MOTIONS? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 1 2 2, EXCUSE ME.
I MOVE THAT WE HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL, UNTIL FIRST MEETING IN NOVEMBER.
NOVEMBER 2ND OR 16TH? NOVEMBER 2ND OR 16TH.
AND AT WHICH TIME I, I, I'M GONNA CONTACT YOU AFTER THE MEETING.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.
I SECOND IT TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.
HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT TO NOVEMBER 2ND, 2023.
UH, WE'RE NOW MOVING TO CASE NUMBER 13.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER YOUNG HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM.
AND IS STEPPING OUT OF THE CHAMBER.
AND BACK TO MS. MUNOZ AND ITEM NUMBER 13 Z 2 23 1 14.
AN APPLICATION FOUR ONE, A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND TWO, A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTIES ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER NINE WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY AND A GR GENERAL RETAIL SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
DISTRICT NUMBER 1 93, THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT AT THE EAST CORNER OF CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD AND FERMENT AVENUE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SETBACK AND HEIGHT PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
MEMBERS OF THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
SUZANNE KEDRON, 2323 ROSS AVENUE.
UH, WE HAVE REALIZED THAT THERE IS ANOTHER, UM, ERROR IN THE NOTICE.
WHAT WE HAVE REQUESTED IS A COMPLETE REMOVAL OF THE D OVERLAY.
SO, UH, WE ARE ASKING YOUR, UM, YOU KNOW, INDULGENCE IN HOLDING THIS, UM, FOR AS LITTLE TIME AS POSSIBLE SO WE CAN GET THAT ERROR CORRECTED FOR THE C P C RULES.
IT WILL HAVE TO BE HELD FOR TWO MEETINGS.
[05:20:09]
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? SO WE'RE HERE.
OH, IT CAN BE ON THE SECOND COMMISSIONER'S.
QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE? NONE.
DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? I DO.
IN MATTER TWO Z 2 2 3 DASH HUNDRED 14.
I MOVE THAT WE, UH, HOLD THE MATTER OVER, KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN, HOLD THE MATTER OVER TO OCTOBER 5TH.
AND IF I GET A SECOND, I HAVE A BRIEF COMMENT.
CAN I MAKE A COMMENT? PLEASE? CAN YOU INCLUDE IN YOUR MOTION AND INSTRUCT STAFF TO RE ADVERTISE FOR, UH, REMOVAL? YES.
I ALSO MOVED AND INSTRUCT STAFF TO, UM, RE-NOTICE THIS IN ORDER TO INDICATE THAT THIS IS A REMOVAL OF THE D OVERLAY.
UM, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
YEAH, I'M, UH, EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND I'M DISAPPOINTED WE HAVE TO HOLD IT.
AND, UM, I'M TOLD BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IT NEEDS TO BE FOR TWO WEEKS.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO.
UM, AND I ALSO SENT SOME ADDITIONAL REVISIONS THAT PROBABLY WOULD'VE BEEN A MOTION AND INSTEAD CAN BE INCLUDED WITH THE NEW DOCKET.
SO I SENT THOSE TO STAFF TODAY AS WELL.
SO HOPEFULLY IT'LL BE MORE EFFICIENT WHEN WE DO COME BACK.
UM, BUT SO FAR, UM, THE APPLICANT AND STAFF HAVE BEEN REALLY GOOD TO WORK WITH ON THIS PROJECT, AND I THINK YOU GUYS WILL BE EXCITED IN A MONTH WHEN WE SEE IT AGAIN.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UM, BE HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TO HOLD THE, UH, THIS ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT.
AS, UH, MS. MUNOZ SAID, THIS IS A FABULOUS PROJECT AND I THINK MOVING FORWARD IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, I SURE WOULD LOVE FOR THAT MIXED INCOME HOUSING PERCENTAGE TO, UH, NARROW DOWN AND, AND WE'LL GET A LITTLE CLOSER TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, WITH THAT.
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES THE RECORD.
REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER YOUNG IS BACK IN THE CHAMBER AND COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS A CONFLICT ON NUMBER 14.
OKAY, ITEM 14 IS Z 2 2 3 1 26.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR SPECIFIC NON-RESIDENTIAL USES ON PROPERTY ZONED A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT, AND AN MF TWO MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT WITH AN MD ONE MODIFIED DELTA OVERLAY ON THE EAST LINE OF GREENVILLE AVENUE BETWEEN PENROSE AVENUE AND MARTEL AVENUE STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, ROB BALDMAN 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
AND I REMEMBER REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3 6 0 6 GREENVILLE AVENUE.
UM, IT'S, UH, AT MID, MID GREENVILLE.
IT'S BETWEEN LOWER GREENVILLE AND, UH, MOCKINGBIRD ON MARTEL AND PENROSE.
UM, EXISTING BUILDING, BEEN THERE A LONG TIME.
UH, THE BUILDING HAS HAD A TROUBLED HISTORY AND THIS REZONING IS HELPING INTEND IS TO TRY TO RESOLVE THAT.
UH, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS, UH, DOING A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND WITH THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, THERE'LL BE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AND THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IS, THE INTENT IS TO, UM, ALL RE REZONE IT TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF, UM, USES THAT ARE ALLOWED HERE.
MAKE IT VERY SPECIFIC TO THE SITE, GET RID OF LATE NIGHT USES, GET RID OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENTS IN EXCHANGE FOR A SLIGHT REDUCTION IN THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR THE SITE.
WE'VE WORKED HARD WITH, UH, STAFF, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORS BEHIND ME ON, ON THIS.
AND I THINK WE'RE AT A PLACE WHERE, UM, WE'VE, WE HAVE A A A GOOD PLAN MOVING FORWARD.
SO, UM, WE WOULD HAVE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THIS.
THERE'S, UH, UH, BASICALLY TIED TO A LEGACY BUILDING, WHICH IS THE, THE BUILDING THAT WAS, UH, BUILT IN IN THE TWENTIES.
IT'S, UH, THE, THAT BUILDING GOES AWAY.
THE PARKING REDUCTIONS GO AWAY, SO EVERYTHING'S TIED TO THAT.
UH, THIS IS THE, THE LATEST REVISED PLAN.
WE'VE WORKED REALLY HARD ON IT, AND I'M SORRY YOU JUST GOT IT TODAY, BUT
[05:25:01]
WE JUST GOT IT BACK, UH, LAST NIGHT.SO, UH, IT SEEMS TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING, THE PARKING LOT, STRIPING, UH, SIZING AND LOCATION.
AND I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? UM, I'M IN THE QUEUE.
UM, I HAD SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ONLINE, BUT I'M ACTUALLY HERE IN PERSON.
I LIVE AT 59 11 GDD, WHERE I'VE LIVED FOR 24 YEARS.
I AM VICE PRESIDENT OF THE LOWER GREENVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND I'VE RUN THE CRIME WATCH IN THE AREA FOR 20 YEARS.
UM, I FIND IT A BIT HARD TO CONTAIN MYSELF TODAY BECAUSE I'VE WAITED EIGHT YEARS TO TO SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT THIS.
WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO IT THAT LONG.
UM, IN FEBRUARY OF 2015, ORLANDO POLITO WAS MURDERED IN THE PARKING LOT OF THIS BUILDING.
AFTER ABOUT 40 YEARS OF NUISANCE, YOU'RE GONNA HEAR FROM BOB IN A FEW MINUTES AND TALK ABOUT THE NOISE ISSUES AND GENERAL QUALITY OF LIFE COMPLAINTS HE HAD.
UM, BUT ONCE THIS HAPPENED, IT TOOK IT TO A NEW LEVEL.
FOR THE LAST EIGHT YEARS, WE HAVE BEGGED AND PLEADED FOR HELP WITH THIS BUILDING AND THE, UH, PROBLEMS IT WAS CAUSING US.
WE'VE HAD NUMEROUS SHOOTOUTS IN THE, IN A SIX MONTH PERIOD, WE HAD FOUR SHOOTOUTS.
WE'VE HAD PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN HAVING SEX ON THE SIDE OF PEOPLE'S HOUSES.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST GONE ON AND ON.
ALL OF THIS IS, UM, DUE TO THE LATE NIGHT USE AND THE NON-CONFORMING USE IN A BUILDING THAT'S INTENDED TO BE COMMUNITY RETAIL.
BUT THE CITY SOMEHOW DECIDED THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE AN S U P TO GRANT, AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE USE THERE WHERE IT SHOULDN'T BE.
WE WENT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, UM, UNDER THE CITY ATTORNEY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE, UM, A WHILE BACK.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE PLED OUR CASE WITH THEM.
THEY DECIDED TO JUST LET IT GO AND KEEP THE STATUS QUO.
SIX MONTHS AFTER THAT, CAMERON RAY, AN 18 YEAR OLD KID FROM LOUISIANA, CAME TO VISIT DALLAS TO CELEBRATE HIS 18TH BIRTHDAY.
AND HE WENT HOME IN A BODY BAG BECAUSE HE CHOSE TO GO TO BAR THIRTY SIX OH SIX TO CELEBRATE HIS 18TH BIRTHDAY.
THAT WAS SIX MONTHS AFTER THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS LEFT US WITH THE STATUS QUO.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE FOR THIS PD TO GET RID OF THAT STATUS QUO.
WE DON'T NEED ANY FURTHER DELAYS KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD.
UH, WE NEED TO GET IT DONE NOW.
UM, I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT L G N A IS NOT THE PURITAN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK THAT THEY ARE.
SOMETIMES, UM, WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENTS.
WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENTS.
I VISIT THEM AS OFTEN AS MY LIVER LETS ME.
UM, BUT THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING FOR 40 YEARS, IT'S BEEN ONE BAR AFTER THE OTHER DOZENS OF THEM.
EVERY SINGLE ONE THAT HAS BEEN IN THIS BUILDING HAS BEEN A NUISANCE TO, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE, THERE ARE BARS ACROSS THE STREET THAT HAVE NEVER CAUSED A PROBLEM, BUT WE'VE NOT HAD A SINGLE OPERATOR IN THIS BUILDING NOT CAUSE A PROBLEM.
SO I WOULD ASK THAT YOU PASS THIS.
AND, UM, I THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK ON IT.
UH, MY NAME IS BOB HILDERBRAND AND I LIVE AT 57 32 PENROSE AVENUE.
I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 28 YEARS, AND, UH, MY HOME IS ABOUT A HUNDRED YARDS FROM THIS, UH, 36 0 6 BUILDING.
MY HISTORY WITH THIS BUILDING BEGAN IN THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS WITH THE LATE, THE LATE NIGHT CLUB NAMED THE RED JACKET.
UM, THE RED JACKET USED TO PLAY THEIR MUSIC WHEN THEY WERE THERE, INCREDIBLY LOUD, UH, SO LOUD THAT IT WOULD WAKE ME UP AT NIGHT, UH, OR WOULDN'T ALLOW ME TO GO TO SLEEP AT ALL.
SO, UM, EVENTUALLY WITH, UH, MYSELF, THE L G N A, SOME
[05:30:01]
OTHER NEIGHBORS, WE CONVINCED, UH, A CITY COUNCILMAN AND THE DA'S OFFICE TO PURSUE THE MATTER.AND, UH, FORTUNATELY ABOUT 18 MONTHS LATER, UH, THE RED JACKET WAS SHUT DOWN OWN AFTER THE CLOSING OF THE RED JACKET.
THINGS GOT A LITTLE BETTER FOR A LITTLE WHILE, BUT, UH, IT DIDN'T LAST VERY LONG.
EVENTUALLY IT GOT WORSE, MUCH WORSE.
AS, AS DARREN HAS DESCRIBED, THE LANDLORD STARTED LEASING, UH, TWO OTHER LATE NIGHT ESTABLISHMENTS.
THE WORST OF THESE WERE THE K***Y LOUNGE, THE OT TAVERN, AND THE BAR 36 0 6.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT, UH, PERHAPS ONE OF THE REASONS NONE OF THESE ARE THE FACT THAT THESE BARS WERE PROBLEMS WERE THAT THESE ESTABLISHMENTS HAD PATRONS THAT LIVED NOWHERE NEAR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THE PATRONS THAT CAME TO THESE ESTABLISHMENTS ACTED AS IF THEY COULD CARE LESS ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY'RE ALWAYS SPEEDING AROUND GREENVILLE AVENUE, UP AND DOWN PENROSE MARTEL PARKING ILLEGALLY.
UM, AND AFTER THE, AT LATE AT NIGHT AFTER THE CLUBS WOULD CLOSE, THEY WOULD GATHER IN THE PARKING LOT BEHIND THE BUILDING AND PARTY AFTER HOURS TURN THEIR, THEIR STEREOS UP LOUD DRINK AND, YOU KNOW, CAUSE HAVOC.
UM, IN THE MORNINGS AFTER THESE CLUBS, UH, A THE NEXT MORNING, YOU'D LOOK AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND THE, UH, THE PARKING LOT IN THE BUILDING WAS FILLED WITH EMPTY BEER BOTTLES, BROKEN BEER BOTTLES, EMPTY BEER CANS, ALL KINDS OF TRASH.
UM, PERSONALLY, I WAS, UH, VERBALLY HARASSED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS JUST BY WALKING BY THE BUILDING, HEADED TO A REST, ANOTHER RESTAURANT, OR TO THE SEVEN 11, WHICH IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER.
UM, AS I SAID, THEY PARK ILLEGALLY.
UH, MY DRIVEWAY WAS BLOCKED SEVERAL TIMES WHERE I COULDN'T GET MY CAR OUT.
UM, ANYWAY, THE LOUD MUSIC HAS, HAS NOT STOPPED.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, SIR.
IS THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKER HERE BEFORE WE BROUGHT OUR SPEAKERS ONLINE? OKAY, WE'LL BEGIN WITH OUR SPEAKERS ONLINE.
UM, BRUCE RICHARDSON, 56 0 7 RICHMOND AVENUE.
UH, I'D LIKE TO EXPRESS IMMENSE GRATITUDE AND RESPECT FOR COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
I WOULD NOT HAVE WANTED THIS HOT COLD DROPPED IN MY LAP, AND SHE PUT IN SOME HARD TIME, AND WE ALL VERY MUCH APPRECIATE HER.
AND AS WELL, MR. NEVAREZ AND MR. BALDWIN WORKED UNTIL LITERALLY THE 11TH HOUR TO DELIVER A LEGAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH A LEGAL PARKING PLAN.
SOMETHING OF IMMENSE IMPORTANCE TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AS COMMISSIONER KINGSTON REMINDED US EARLIER, UM, I CAN'T TOP WHAT MR. UH, HILDEBRAND AND MR. DALLOW TOLD YOU ABOUT THE ISSUES WITH THIS SITE.
UH, I FIRST HEARD FROM BOB HILDEBRAND PROBABLY 20 YEARS AGO.
UH, BUT THIS ALL OCCURRED IN LARGE PART BECAUSE THE C P C AND COUNCIL ONCE ROUTINELY APPROVED SUVS WITH NO RENEWAL OR REEVALUATION DATE.
AND I CAN CONFIRM TO YOU AFTER CHAIRING THE, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR EIGHT YEARS, THAT IT IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO TERMINATE AN S U P IN THAT VENUE.
AND I MENTION THAT SO THAT YOU CAN KEEP IT IN MIND WHEN YOU APPROVE SUVS.
THOSE TERMINATION DATES ARE PRETTY IMPORTANT.
UM, SO I'LL WRAP UP AND I WILL SAY THAT I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS PD.
I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT IT ENTHUSIASTICALLY.
I AM, I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT IT.
UNANIMOUSLY, DARREN MENTIONED THAT LG AND A MAY NOT BE THE, THE HARD ASS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT THAT TITLE PROBABLY COMES TO ME.
I BEAT UP ON THAT SITE PLAN UNTIL WE GOT A LEGAL ONE AND IT GOT BY ME.
SO I THINK IT SHOULD GET BY YOU GUYS.
IT HAS BEEN LITERALLY DECADES IN COMING, AND I WILL THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
[05:35:01]
57TH, 10 CAWOOD AVENUE, WHICH IS, UM, MR. SPARKS, YOU MIGHT, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO LEAN INTO YOUR COMPUTER A LITTLE BIT.UM, MITCHELL SPARKS, I'M AT 57 10 KENWOOD AVENUE, UH, WHICH IS ABOUT 250 FEET FROM THE PROPOSED SITE.
UM, I DON'T WANT TO PILE ON TOO MUCH TO WHAT BOB AND BRUCE HAVE SAID TODAY, BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH JUST PILING ON A LITTLE BIT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL CLEAR ON THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS SITE.
UM, I'VE LIVED IN, YOU KNOW, 250 FEET AWAY FROM HERE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND THIS IS JUST FRANKLY, LONG OVERDUE.
AND IT'S A SHAME THAT IT'S TAKEN US SO LONG TO GET TO THIS POINT.
SO WE JUST ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO BE REMINDED OF, UM, YOU KNOW, THE DANGERS THAT DARREN TALKED TO, UH, THE NUISANCES THAT BOB TALKED TO, AND FRANKLY, JUST THE DANGER THAT IT'S PUT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I MEAN, I THINK THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH HOMES, MY FAMILY ABOVE ANYTHING ELSE, AND WE SHOULD BE REMINDED OF THAT WHEN WE MAKE DECISIONS LIKE THIS.
UM, SO I, LIKE I SAID, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S A ABUNDANTLY CLEAR AS WE CONSIDER THIS.
UM, AND IN SUMMARY, OBVIOUSLY SUPPORT THE PROPOSITION.
UH, MS. GUZMAN, IS SHE ONLINE? SHE'S NOT ONLINE.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE ONLINE FOR THIS CASE? OKAY, WE'RE READY.
TO OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION, MS. MAY, MR. MAY, MR. MAY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, GREEN LIGHT ON.
I LIVE AT 57 36 PINROSE AVENUE.
I'M SPEAKING TODAY IN OPPOSITION TO ITEM 14.
I'D LIKE TO START BY SAYING THAT THIS, UH, THIS PD DOES NOT MAKE THE BAR GO AWAY.
THAT WAS SAID EARLIER DURING THE BRIEFING.
MY OPPOSITION TO THIS STEMS FROM THE FACT THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PD DID NOT FOLLOW THE TYPICAL ZONING APPLICATION PROCESS.
THESE PD CONDITIONS WERE NEGOTIATED BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND A GROUP OF, UH, LAYPERSONS THAT ARE NOT PLANNING PROFESSIONALS AND HAVE NO PERSONAL EXPERIENCE IN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES OR CODE COMPLIANCE, AND WILL NOT HAVE ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR IMPLEMENTING THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS.
THESE INDIVIDUALS NEGOTIATED CONDITIONS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, AND WITHOUT ASKING THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS TO THIS SITE FOR THEIR INPUT, NO DOOR HANGERS WERE DISTRIBUTE, DISTRIBUTED, NO EMAIL BLAST OR CONDITIONS LINKED.
UH, AND NO ONE REACHED OUT TO STAFF EXCEPT FOR MY WIFE.
THIS IRREGULAR WAY OF NEGOTIATING CONDITIONS, DEPRIVES NEIGHBORS WHO MUST LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE DECISIONS, A CHANCE TO ASK QUESTIONS, BECOME INFORMED ON THE PROPOSAL, I REMIND YOU THAT WE WERE GIVEN LESS THAN A WEEK TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND THIS VERY COMPLICATED MAJOR ZONING REVISION, WHICH WAS NOT RELEASED INTO THE PUB RELEASED FOR PUBLIC REVIEW UNTIL LAST FRIDAY, LESS THAN A WEEK AGO.
AND OVER A FEDERAL HOLIDAY, EVEN THE REQUIRED SIGNS WERE REMOVED FROM THE BUILDING BEFORE THIS PD WAS RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC.
FURTHER, IT DEPRIVES THE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE STAFF FROM IMPLEMENTING BEST PRACTICES LIKE VETTING PROPOSED IDEAS WITH DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ENFORCEMENT.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS IN AND AROUND LOWER GREENVILLE HAVE A HABIT OF NEGOTIATING SPECIFIC ZONING REGULATIONS AND FLATLY REJECT THEIR VALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE CITY'S PROFESSIONAL STAFF, THE APPLICANT AND L G N A FALSELY CLAIM TODAY THAT THE NEIGHBORS SUPPORT THIS PD AND DEMAND THAT THE CITY AND AND STAFF RUSH THIS ILL CONCEIVED CONDITIONS THROUGH AND PREVENT ANYONE ELSE FROM HAVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND THE CHANGES THEY ARE MAKING.
I AM ASKING YOU NOW TO HOLD THE PD FOR ADVISEMENT, SEND IT BACK TO STAFF SO THEY CAN REVISE THE PD CONDITIONS AND UPDATE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PUBLISH THE CHANGES ON THE NEXT DOCKET WITH ENOUGH TIME FOR THE PUBLIC TO HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW THEM.
THEN THEY CAN FOLLOW THE TYPICAL AND FAIR PROCESS THAT ALL OF THE OTHER CASES YOU HAVE HEARD TODAY HAD TO FOLLOW.
[05:40:04]
HELLO.UM, GEORGE, CAN YOU HELP ME GET THAT UP? OKAY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS SARAH MAY AND I LIVE AT 57 36 PINROSE AVENUE, WHICH IS NUMBER 11 ON YOUR NOTIFICATION MAP.
ALSO, I PREPARED SOME COMMENTS LAST NIGHT, AND I'M ENCOURAGED BY THE REVISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN BRIEFED.
UM, BUT I'M STILL HESITANT TO THINK THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD COULD BE BETTER SERVED BY AND THINK THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE BETTER SERVED BY HOLDING THE ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT TILL OCTOBER 5TH.
UM, IN A NUTSHELL, THE PD IS UNABLE TO CLOSE THE NON-CONFORMING BAR THAT HAS BEEN A MAJOR NUISANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, BUT I'M HOPEFUL IT WILL ANYWAY, YOU KNOW, FINGERS CROSSED.
UM, UH, I'M AWARE THERE'VE BEEN MANY REVISIONS TO THE DOCUMENTS.
UM, BUT STILL I'M CONCERNED THAT THEY'RE SO FRESH AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN VETTED BY BUILDING INSPECTION OR CODE COMPLIANCE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE REALLY ENFORCEABLE.
UM, WITH THE REMAINDER OF MY THREE MINUTES, I WANTED TO SHARE MY BIGGEST CONCERN AS A NEIGHBOR WHO SPENT 16 YEARS NAVIGATING, UH, AROUND THIS DANGEROUS PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT.
UM, THE SIDEWALK ON PINROSE, UM, AT THE SUBJECT SITE IS UNPROTECTED AND BLENDS INTO ITS SURROUNDINGS.
AND WHEN THE VALLEYS START, THEY PARK THEIR CARS.
UM, THEY PARK CARS THAT BLOCK THE SIDEWALK ZONE.
THIS UNIQUE CONDITION TRANSFORMED A PAVED MOONSCAPE INTO A DANGEROUS CHOICE FOR EVERY PEDESTRIAN.
ONE CHOICE IS TO WALK THROUGH THE PARKED CARS WHERE IT FEELS DANGEROUS OR HAZARDOUS.
AND THE OTHER IS TO VENGE AROUND TO A BUSY AND DIMLY LIT STREET, UM, WHERE THE, A SINGLE STREETLIGHT IS THE ONLY LIGHT SOURCE THAT CAN ALERT RECKLESS DRIVERS TO A PEDESTRIAN'S VULNERABLE PRESENCE.
I'M ASKING YOU TO HOLD THIS CASE TO OCTOBER 5TH SO THAT THESE NEW IDEAS CAN BE PROPERLY VETTED, UM, BY ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENTS AND FOR THOSE VETTED CONDITIONS TO BE AVAILABLE TO BE SEEN BY THE PUBLIC BEFORE IT'S MOVED TO COUNCIL.
I KNOW EVERYONE IS IN A RUSH ON THIS APPLICATION, UH, WHICH IS A STORY YOU'VE HEARD MANY TIMES BEFORE, BUT RUSHING THIS THROUGH WITHOUT POSTING REVISIONS IN THE DOCKET ISN'T REALLY FAIR TO THE NEIGHBORS.
UM, PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO ASK THE APPLICANT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE RUSH.
AND PLEASE CONSIDER IF THERE'S ANY OTHER SOLUTIONS THAT COULD ENABLE AN INFORMED NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT, UM, ON THIS LONGSTANDING EYESORE.
UM, WE ALL WANT THEM TO MAKE THESE PROMISED IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, I'M ASKING THE CASE BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENTS FOR THOSE REASONS.
UM, AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND DETENTION TO THIS CASE AND FOR ALL THESE ZONING CASES.
UM, IT'S REALLY HARD TO MAKE THESE TOUGH DECISIONS AND I, I REALIZE THAT.
UM, AND I ALSO JUST WANTED TO THANK COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR ALL THE WORK THAT SHE'S DONE, UM, DOING THIS AND FOR BEING ACCESSIBLE AND RECEPTIVE TO MY THOUGHTS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION, MR. BALDWIN? TWO MINUTES OR GOOD AFTERNOON.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS.
UH, THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR ABOUT A YEAR.
UH, WHEN I'VE FILED THE CASE, I SENT LETTERS OUT TO EVERYBODY WITHIN 500 FEET.
I'VE SPOKEN TO 15 TO 20 NEIGHBORS, AND I'VE OFFERED TO MEET WITH ANYBODY THAT WOULD LIKE TO MEET WITH ME.
AND I'VE OFFERED TO SEND HIM COPIES OF WORKS IN PROGRESS DURING THE, DURING THIS PROCESS.
UH, I BELIEVE THIS PROCESS WAS FAIR AND OPEN TO ANYBODY.
I'M PRETTY AN EASY PERSON TO FIND.
I LIVE THREE BLOCKS FROM HERE, SO I, I DO THINK THAT THE PROCESS WAS HANDLED AND, UM, I'LL, THAT'S WHAT I'LL SAY ABOUT THAT.
UM, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE PD CONDITIONS, THEY WILL GREATLY ENHANCE THE WALKABILITY.
WE HAVE TO, UH, IMPROVE SIDEWALKS.
WE HAVE TO PUT, UH, WHEEL STOPS BETWEEN THE, THE SIDEWALK AND THE, THE PARKING SPACES.
UH, SO I THINK THE PEDESTRIAN REALM IS A MUCH BETTER PLACE.
UM, I THINK THIS IS A WIN-WIN.
AND, UH, THERE IS A BIT OF A RUSH ON THIS.
UH, IT'S NOT YOUR FAULT, IT'S NOT ANYBODY'S FAULT, BUT THERE IS, I UNDERSTAND THE, FROM THE, THERE'S A CASE GOING ON BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE OWNER, AND THERE IS A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT WILL CLOSE
[05:45:01]
THE, THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT.BUT THERE IS A TIME ON THAT, AND THAT'S WHY, UH, THERE IS KIND OF A RUSH ON IT RIGHT NOW.
AGAIN, NOT YOUR, NOT YOUR PROBLEM, BUT THAT, THAT IS, UH, A BACKGROUND ON THAT.
SO I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS REQUEST.
AND, UM, THERE ARE LOTS OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU MR. BALDWIN.
YOU MENTIONED THERE'S A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
WILL THAT SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT SHUT DOWN THIS BAR? THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
I'M NOT PART OF THAT CASE, AND I'VE NOT READ ANY OF THE LITIGATION, BUT I THINK THAT IS, I UNDERSTAND THAT IS MR. BALLWIN, MR. BALLWIN OF IT.
MR. MOORE, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY THE SETTLEMENT.
MR. BALDWIN DESCRIBED IT AS NOT CPCS PROBLEM.
I WOULD CHARACTERIZE IT AS BEYOND C P C SCOPE.
YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THE LAND USE, NOT ANY SORT OF SETTLEMENT THAT MAY BE HAPPENING BEYOND THE LAND USE.
I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IF THERE IS A TIMING CONSIDERATION, CLEARLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SPOKEN AND WANTS THIS BAR CLOSED DOWN, AND IF WE, THE C P C DON'T APPROVE SOMETHING TODAY AND THAT COULD JEOPARDIZE THE SETTLEMENT, THAT WILL SHUT IT DOWN.
I DO THINK THAT IS A FACTOR THAT WE SHOULD KNOW.
I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT THE LAND USE.
YEAH, AND I'LL PIGGYBACK ON THAT.
UM, SO WHAT WE'RE, OH, GOD, WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY IS REGULATION THAT RUNS WITH THE PROPERTY, NOT WITH AN INDIVIDUAL TENANT IN THIS BUILDING OR ANY OPERATOR CURRENTLY ON THE SITE, OR PERHAPS ONE THAT WOULD BE ON THE SITE IN THE FUTURE.
THE REGULATIONS THAT ARE ESTABLISHED HERE TODAY WILL RUN WITH THE PROPERTY.
UM, ANYTHING ABOUT INDIVIDUAL OPERATORS OR THE OPERATION OF THE SITE IS NOT REALLY MATERIAL TO WHAT WE'RE DELIBERATING ON TODAY.
BUT IF WE HAVE TWO DIFFERING OPINIONS IN FRONT OF US, ONE WANTS US TO APPROVE SOMETHING TODAY, ONE WANTS US TO HOLD IT, IF THAT HOLD HAS SOME SORT OF RAMIFICATION THAT WE, I JUST THINK WE SHOULD KNOW THAT, THAT'S MY POINT.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT MR. MOORE IS SAYING, THAT WE, WE SHOULD BE BLIND TO THAT.
WE ARE CONSIDERING THE APPROPRIATE LAND USES FOR THIS PROPERTY.
I, FOR ONE, AM CONVINCED THAT ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE USE FOR THIS PROPERTY.
AND THAT NOT ONLY SHOULD THAT NOT BE PERMITTED TO THE BY THE ZONING, BUT IF THE ZONING FACILITATES THE CESSATION OF THE EXISTING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, I FIND THAT HIGHLY RELEVANT.
AND SO I THINK INQUIRING ABOUT WHETHER THE BAR IS GOING TO, THE EXISTING BAR IS GOING TO GO AWAY IS WELL WITHIN OUR PURVIEW.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YEAH, I WAS GOING TO TRY TO SKIN THE CAT FROM THAT ANGLE TOO.
UM, SO I'LL TRY AND MR. MOORE, IF YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH WHERE I'M GOING, I GUESS IT'S YOUR PREROGATIVE TO CUT ME OFF.
SO, MR. BALDWIN, YOU UNDERSTAND THAT WE WOULD BE CREATING A NON-CONFORMING USE BY PASSING THIS ZONING CHANGE, RIGHT? I DO.
WELL, I THINK IT'D BE CON I THINK IT ALREADY IS A NON-CONFORMING USE BECAUSE IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, UH, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENTS ACQUIRED AN SS U P IN THE CR DISTRICT, AND THIS JUST HAS BEEN THERE FOREVER.
HAS THERE EVER BEEN AN S U P ON THIS, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE? NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
SO IN THE, UH, DOCKET, YOUR, THE APPLICANT IS LISTED AS TWO LLCS, RIGHT? I'M SORRY, SIR.
THE APPLICANT IS LISTED AS THE APPLICANT HERE IS TWO LLCS, UPTOWN VENTURES IN THE HILLCREST TOWERS, RIGHT? CORRECT.
AND THOSE ARE THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY? YES, SIR.
SO AFTER THIS ZONING CHANGE PASSES, IF IT WERE TO PASS COUNSEL, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT WOULD ONLY FURTHER THE NON-CONFORMITY, RIGHT? IT'S NOT ONLY NOT ALLOWED BY S U P, IT'S NOT ALLOWED PERIOD THAT THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, RIGHT? CORRECT.
UM, SINCE YOU REPRESENT THE TWO OWNERS HERE, ARE YOU AWARE OF WHAT THE OWNER'S INTENT IS WITH RESPECT TO THIS NON-CONFORMING USE? SHOULD THE ZONING CHANGE PASS? IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY WILL, UH, TERMINATE THE LEASE AND SHUT THEM DOWN.
I THINK THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT HERE FOR THE MOMENT.
I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU, SIR.
SO, UM, YOU, YOU DID MENTION YOU, YOU LIVE THREE BLOCKS AWAY FROM THIS SITE.
I LIVE IN A 6,000, 6,000 BLOCK
[05:50:01]
OF VANDERBILT AVENUE.AND SO, UH, AND I KNOW YOU SAID THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT DIFFICULT TO FIND, BUT MM-HMM.
SO I'M CURIOUS, DID YOU HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING TO DISCUSS THIS, THIS, UH, APPLICATION? UH, I DID NOT.
I HAD A SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH SEVERAL, UH, DIFFERENT, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS IN LOWER GREENVILLE.
IT'S NOT UNCOMMON TO HAVE A, A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING WITH THREE TO FIVE DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
AND THAT'S THE WAY THAT IT NORMALLY HAPPENS.
THAT'S WHY I SEND OUT LETTERS AS WELL, SAYING IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO MEET, I'M HAPPY TO MEET.
AND IF, IF THERE WAS A DESIRE TO HAVE A MEETING OUTSIDE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, I WOULD'VE HELD ONE.
BUT I NEVER HEARD THAT ANYBODY WANTED ONE.
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AS YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, THE DIFFERENT PLAN COMMISSIONERS AND, AND PLAN COMMISSIONS AND THIS BODY HAVE DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES.
WE, WE HAVE COMMUNITY MEETINGS TO DISCUSS S U P I MEAN, CONVENIENCE STORES WHERE TWO PEOPLE SHOW UP.
I, I'VE BEEN IN, IN COMMUNITY MEETINGS WHERE TWO PEOPLE HAVE SHOWED UP MYSELF AND THE APPLICANT.
SO, YOU KNOW, I'M KIND OF STRUGGLING HERE WHY IN THIS PART OF TOWN WITH THIS, THIS KIND OF ISSUE, YOU WOULDN'T SCHEDULE ONE ON THERE AND, AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS IF ANYBODY SHOWS UP.
BECAUSE MY BET IS THAT A LOT OF FOLKS WOULD'VE SHOWED UP.
WELL, I, I TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR NOT DOING THAT.
THAT'S, UH, MY FUTURE ENDEAVORS IN LOWER GREENVILLE, I WILL DO THAT.
IT'S JUST HISTORICALLY NOT BEEN THE WAY IT'S DONE DOWN THERE.
SO, UH, I WILL
WHAT'S THAT? HISTORICALLY, THERE HAVE NOT BEEN COMMUNITY MEETINGS TO DISCUSS, I MEAN, WITH THE HEADS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
AND, UH, AND THEY WILL INVITE WHOEVER THEY WANT TO INVITE.
SO I WILL CALL THE NEIGHBOR OR CONTACT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SAID, OKAY.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, TALK, TALK
I MYSELF HAVE BEEN A PART OF MEETINGS ON, ON GREENVILLE AVENUE.
IN FACT, MY, I THINK MY SECOND CASE THAT I HANDLED ON THE PLANK COMMISSION WAS ON GREENVILLE AVENUE FOR, UH, I THINK FOR COMMISSIONER RIDLEY.
FIRST THING WE DID WAS HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING, INVITED EVERYONE, AND I THINK MAYBE TWO DOZEN PEOPLE SHOWED UP.
UM, SO YES, SIR, I, I CLEARLY AM USING THIS AS A LEARNING EXPERIENCE.
UH, MR. DILO, I SEE YOU'RE OFF ALSO HERE, AND YOU SAID THAT YOU'RE MR. BALDWIN.
IF I MAY ASK A QUESTION OF MR. DILO? YES, SIR.
UM, I, I KNOW I HAVE PARTICIPATED IN, UM, SOME COMMUNITY OUTREACH ON THIS REQUEST.
I THINK MY CONTACT INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.
COULD YOU SPEAK TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S OUTREACH, UH, REGARDING THIS CASE? ABSOLUTELY.
I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR SOMEONE TO ASK THAT QUESTION.
I HAVE 1200 EMAIL, E EMAIL ADDRESSES THAT I COMMUNICATE WITH EVERY SINGLE MONTH.
UH, KEEPING PEOPLE INFORMED ON WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST COMMON THINGS I EMAIL PEOPLE ABOUT IN THE EIGHT YEARS I'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET THIS DONE.
WE HAVE HAD AT LEAST TWO DOZEN, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS WHERE THIS TOPIC HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IN PUBLIC, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AT EVERY TURN, AT EVERY EMAIL, I ASK PEOPLE TO GIVE ME INPUT ON WHAT THEY WANT ON THIS.
MR. SPARKS UP THERE IS ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAS COMMUNICATED WITH ME VERY FREQUENTLY ON THIS ISSUE TO TELL ME HIS FEELINGS ABOUT IT.
I PROBABLY, WITH BOB BACK HERE, I PROBABLY HAVE 300 EMAILS FROM HIM IN THE LAST 18 MONTHS.
WE HAVE COMMUNICATED EXTENSIVELY WITH THE PEOPLE WHO'VE ENGAGED WITH US.
WE CAN'T HAVE THAT TYPE OF MEETING, YOU KNOW, UH, FOR EVERY ZONING CASE, WE HAVE 25 TO 30 ZONING CASES A YEAR ON GREENVILLE AVENUE.
UM, WE JUST CAN'T DO IT FOR EVERY ONE OF THEM.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE PUT THE FEELERS OUT, WE ASK PEOPLE TO GIVE US THEIR OPINIONS.
IT'S ALWAYS A FACTOR IN WHAT WE DO.
AND THEN WE MEET WITH THE HEADS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND THE NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORHOODS TO GET THEIR FEELINGS ON IT.
AND THEN WE AS A TEAM WORK TOGETHER WITH PEOPLE LIKE MR. BALDWIN TO BRING YOU GUYS A SOLUTION, NOT TO COME TO CITY STAFF WITH A PROBLEM.
WE'VE WORKED WITH THE OTHER SIDE.
WE AGREE ON WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, AND THEN WE BRING IT TO THE CITY.
AND IF, MAY I ASK A FOLLOW UP, MR. CHAIR? OF COURSE.
AND IS IT CORRECT, I KNOW THE MEETING THAT I ATTENDED, THERE WERE, UM, REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE FOUR
[05:55:01]
SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, ASSOCIATIONS THAT HAVE ALSO BEEN INVOLVED IN SIMILAR TYPES OF CONSIDERATION MM-HMM.AND, UM, IN ENGAGED IN ACTIVITIES RELATED TO THIS CASE, WE, WE PROBABLY HAVE SIX NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ABUT OUR ASSOCIATION.
TWO OF THEM DO NOT HAVE ACTIVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
UM, BUT THE OTHER FOUR WE COMMUNICATE WITH REGULARLY.
AND, UM, AND I, IF I MAY ASK ONE FOLLOW UP TO MR. BALDWIN, I BELIEVE I HEARD YOU SAY THAT WHEN THIS CASE WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED, UM, I BELIEVE IT'S YOUR TYPICAL PROCESS THAT YOU MAIL A LETTER WITHIN THE FULL NOTIFICATION AREA.
AND I HEARD YOU SAY, I BELIEVE YOU MET WITH 15 TO 20 PEOPLE OR HAD ENGAGEMENT WITH FOLKS WHO HAD RESPONDED TO THAT OUTREACH AS WELL? YES, MA'AM.
SO IT'S OUR STANDARD PRACTICE TO, UH, BEFORE WE PUT UP THE ZONING SIGNS, OR RIGHT AFTER WE PUT THE ZONING SIGNS OUT, SEND OUT A, A LETTER INTRODUCING OURSELVES IN THE PROJECT TO EVERYBODY WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, NOTIFICATION AREA.
AND WE GET THE NOTIFICATION AREA, UH, LABELS FROM THE CITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY MATCH.
AND, UH, THAT, THAT WENT OUT ABOUT A YEAR AGO, NINE, 10 MONTHS AGO.
AND I'VE HEARD FROM 10 TO 15 PEOPLE, UH, VIA PHONE AND ABOUT ANOTHER 10, 15 PEOPLE VIA EMAIL.
AND I'VE OFFERED TO MEET WITH ANYBODY WHO, WHO WANTED TO, AND, AND NO ONE TOOK ME UP ON IT.
AND ARE YOU AWARE, UM, IF I HAD PERSONALLY WALKED THE SITE AND VISITED WITH YOU AFTER THAT WALK TO SHARE MY OBSERVATIONS? YES.
MAY I, ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP, MR. BALDWIN.
UH, WHEN YOU HEARD FROM THOSE 10 TO 15 PEOPLE, WAS THAT MAYBE A SIGN THAT MAYBE YOU SHOULD HAVE PULLED A PUBLIC HEARING, A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS THE ITEM? OR WAS THAT, THAT YOU FELT SATISFIED AFTER 15 PEOPLE REACHED OUT TO YOU WITH AN EMAIL? I, I FELT SATISFIED THAT GIVEN, UH, MY, MY OUTREACH AND THE, THE WORK I'VE BEEN DOING WITH L G N A AND OTHERS, THAT THE PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO TO KNOW ABOUT IT KNEW ABOUT IT.
AND IF THEY WANTED TO HAVE A MEETING, THEY, THEY COULD, ALL THE NEIGHBORS I SPOKE TO TO A PERSON SAID, THEY ARE SO GLAD THIS IS HAPPENING.
WHAT CAN I DO TO HELP? THAT IS WITHOUT A DOUBT.
BUT AGAIN, YOU, YOU DIDN'T TAKE THAT AS A, AS A RED FLAG WHEN 15 PEOPLE REACHED OUT TO YOU THAT MAYBE THERE WAS, THERE MIGHT BE SOME OTHER FOLKS THAT IF THEY KNEW ABOUT THIS, THEY WANT TO HAVE, THEY MIGHT WANNA HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING ABOUT IT.
BECAUSE THE, THE, THE TENOR OF THE, THE CONVERSATIONS WERE ALL, WE'RE SO GLAD THIS IS HAPPENING.
UH, WHAT CAN I DO TO HELP? OKAY.
IT'S NOT, I HAVE QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE SETBACKS GONNA BE? WHAT ARE THE USES GONNA BE? UH, THAT, THAT WASN'T THAT KIND.
REST ASSURED I GET PAID BY THE HOUR.
SO IF I CAN HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD, A MEETING, I WILL GO HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
AGAIN, IT IS JUST, IT'S GOOD FOR BUSINESS.
WHAT I SAID BEFORE, WE, WE HAVE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, LITERALLY THIS BODY, PARTICULARLY THIS ONE, THIS GROUP WILL HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING FOR EVERYTHING AND ANY, WE HAVE HELD CASES FOR NOT HAVING COMMUNITY MEETING THAT THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION, UH, THAT WE RECEIVED NO LETTERS IN OPPOSITION.
I'M JUST, I I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT HAPPENED HERE.
WELL, IT WON'T HAPPEN NEXT TIME.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER, MR. BALDWIN, LITTLE GREENVILLE IS AN AREA, AND I'M PIGGY BACK BEFORE PIGGYBACK ON THAT.
ONE OF THE, THE REASONS THAT I WILL ASK TO HOLD A CASE OR GO AGAINST THE CASE IS BECAUSE OF THAT ENGAGEMENT.
WE KNOW THAT LORD GREENWELL HAS MULTIPLE ASSOCIATIONS.
THEY'RE HEAVILY INVOLVED, HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS.
IF NO OTHER, UH, AREA HAS BEEN VOCAL, LORD GREENWELL HAS, AND SEPARATING THAT YOU ARE THE A AND THAT YOU ARE THE REPRESENTATIVE, YOU ALSO ARE A RESIDENT.
THERE IS NO WAY THAT YOU ALL EVEN CONSIDER HAVING BIGGER CONVERSATIONS WITH, UH, THAT AREA.
BECAUSE I, I HEAR, I HEAR WHAT ONE OF THE SPEAKERS IS SAYING, BUT I HEARD YOU CLEARLY SAY, I I MADE A MISTAKE.
SO, WHICH MAKES ME BELIEVE YOU, THAT THIS WASN'T AS, AS ENGAGING AS IT SHOULD BE, EVEN THOUGH HE, HE, HE CLARIFIED THAT WE DID HAVE THIS, AND THAT YOU CLARIFIED THAT THAT WAS NOT THAT MUCH ENGAGEMENT.
AND, AND WHEN YOU GO TO TALKING ABOUT PDS D DIFFERENT IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE, WHEN YOU GO TO TALKING ABOUT PDS, THE ENGAGEMENT NEEDS TO HAPPEN BEFORE WE CAN GET TO THE PROCESS OF PASSING THIS.
IT, IT IS NOT, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WE UNDERSTAND THE LAND USE THE APP, THE PERSON WHO IS IN USING THE LAND CURRENTLY IS A NUISANCE.
THAT'S ONE THING TO HAVE A PD FILED WITH OUR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IS ANOTHER.
HOW WOULD YOU EXPECT US, IN YOUR EXPERIENCE PROFESSIONALLY, YOU LIVING IN THE AREA EXPECT US TO EVEN CONSIDER THIS TO BE PASSED TODAY?
[06:00:01]
I, I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.IT, IT JUST WAS NOT, UH, WE DID NOT, I DID NOT HOST A MEETING WHERE I SAID, I'M, I'M GONNA BE AT THIS PLACE AT THIS TIME.
PLEASE COME AND TALK ABOUT THIS CASE IF YOU'D LIKE TO.
UH, BECAUSE MY EXPERIENCE WORKING IN THIS AREA FOR A LONG TIME IS THAT YOU WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND THEY, THEY KEEP THEIR, THEIR NEIGHBORS AND, UH, CONSTITUENTS INFORMED.
AND IF THEY THINK THEY NEED TO HAVE A SEPARATE MEETING, THEY'LL HAVE ONE.
SO WHAT I WAS SAYING IS I MADE A MISTAKE BY NOT HOSTING, UH, A STANDALONE MEETING, AND THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.
AND I, AND ALSO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, THAT I HEARD IS THAT THIS WAS LIKE A YEAR AGO, AM I CORRECT? IT'S TAKEN ABOUT A YEAR TO GET ZONING CASES THROUGH THE CITY RIGHT NOW.
WHEN, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME ANY TYPE OF ENGAGEMENT? WAS IT A YEAR, WAS THE ENGAGEMENT THAT YOU ALL KINDA NOTIFIED PEOPLE A YEAR AGO? I, I FIRST NOTIFIED PEOPLE, UH, A YEAR AGO.
AND, UH, AND HOW MANY, I'VE BEEN IN ACTIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH, UH, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS SINCE THEN.
AND I'VE, THE PEOPLE THAT I'VE ORIGINALLY CONTACTED WITH THE LETTERS, I I'VE HEARD FROM THREE OR FOUR OF 'EM, UH, EVERY TWO OR THREE MONTHS ASKING FOR AN UPDATE BECAUSE I, I'M DEFINITELY, I UNDERSTAND HOW COMMISSIONER TREADWAY THE QUESTIONS SHE ASKED, BECAUSE THIS BODY HAS MADE DECISIONS BASED OFF OF WHAT IS COMING NEXT OR, OR REASON THAT THE APPLICANT NEEDS IT.
SO IN SUCH A READILY MATTER, AND WE'VE DONE THAT.
AND IN THAT PROCESS, WE DIDN'T HAVE FULL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENTS PRIOR TO PASSING.
WE'VE DONE THAT VERY RECENTLY, UM, BECAUSE OF WHAT THE APPLICANT NEEDED AND NOT BECAUSE OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SAID.
SO IS THERE, WOULD YOU ALL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION OF US HOLDING THIS UPON THE ADVISEMENT AND HAVING A PROPER COMMUNITY MEETING SO THAT THE COMMUNITY CAN BE INFORMED AND ENGAGED IN THIS, THIS, UH, PD PROCESS? 'CAUSE THIS IS NOT JUST A SIMPLE ZONING CHANGE.
THIS IS A PLANNED DISTRICT BEING ASKED.
MR. BALDWIN, MR. MAY MADE A COMMENT ABOUT THE SIGNS HAVING GONE DOWN.
COULD YOU TELL US YOUR, UH, HISTORY OF THE POSTING AND IF NECESSARY, REPOSTING OF THE SIGNS? I'VE POSTED 'EM PERSONALLY TWICE, AND MY OFFICE HAS POSTED 'EM AGAIN TWICE.
UM, I'VE ATTACHED THEM, UH, IT'S A, THERE'S A LOT OF CONCRETE ON THE SITE, SO I'VE ATTACHED 'EM TO THE, THE WALL.
UH, AND I'VE PUT 'EM IN AS MUCH AS I CAN.
AND, UH, I GO BY AND IF I SEE THAT THEY'RE DOWN, I WILL ORDER NEW SIGNS.
IT'S VERY HARD TO KEEP SIGNS UP FOR AS LONG AS THE CASES ARE TAKEN TO GO THROUGH THE SYSTEM, BUT WE KEEP TRYING.
AND WERE, WERE THE SIGNS ORIGINALLY POSTED WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME AFTER THE CASE WAS FILED? OH, YES, SIR.
AND HAS THERE BEEN MUCH DELAY EACH TIME BETWEEN YOUR LEARNING THAT THE SIGN WAS DOWN AND THE REPOSTING? NO, SIR.
BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, IT'S CLOSE TO MY HOUSE, AND SO I, I GO BY, UH, ONCE EVERY COUPLE WEEKS OR SO.
UH, MR. MAY, COULD I ASK YOU TO, UH, ELABORATE ON YOUR, UH, COMMENT THAT THE SIGNS GOT TAKEN DOWN? YES.
UH, I WALK MY DOG PAST THERE EVERY DAY.
MY, MY WIFE AND I, I MEAN THE, THEY'VE BEEN DOWN FOR WEEKS.
SO, UH, UH, IT, IT, THEY WERE DOWN FOR SO LONG THAT WE STARTED QUESTIONING WHETHER OR NOT THE CASE WAS PULLED.
I, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE MERITS, BUT I'M DEFERRING THOSE PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE SIGN ISSUE.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE SIGN ISSUE? COMMISSIONERS NOW, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? QUESTIONS? WELL, WOULD WE LIKE TO TAKE UP THE MATTER OF THE SIGN ISSUE? I THINK, UH, MR. MOORE HAS ADVISED THAT THAT SHOULD TAKE PRECEDENT FOR THE MOMENT.
THE, THE NOTIFICATION SIGNS ARE SORT OF A THRESHOLD MATTER BEFORE WE DELVE INTO THE MERIT.
SO THAT ISSUE SHOULD BE RESOLVED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
AND JUST FOR THE REST OF THE COMMISSION'S, UM, KNOWLEDGE, UH, CHAPTER 51 A REQUIRES ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATION SIGNS, AND THOSE ARE NOTIFICATION SIGNS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED BY STATE LAW.
THEY'RE JUST A CREATION OF THE CITY CODE, AND AN APPLICANT MUST POST THE SIGNS WITHIN 14 DAYS OF FILING THE APPLICATION.
IF C P C FINDS THAT THE NOTIFICATION SIGNS WERE NOT POSTED, IT CAN TAKE NO ACTION OTHER THAN TO DENY THE CASE OR HOLD IT FOR AT LEAST FOUR WEEKS.
HOWEVER, IF THE SIGNS WERE ILLEGALLY REMOVED, C P C CAN, UM, THE, IF THE SIGNS WERE ILLEGALLY REMOVED, C P C CAN APPROVE THE CASE TODAY, AND AN
[06:05:01]
APPLICANT HAS COMPLIED WITH THE SIGNED SECTION IF THE NOTIFICATION SIGNS ARE LOST, STOLEN, OR VANDALIZED.AND THE APPLICANT MAKES GOOD FAITH EFFORTS TO KEEP THE NOTIFICATION SIGNS POSTED.
UH, MS. MAY, UH, YOU, YOU SAID SOMETHING OUT LOUD THAT WE ALL HEARD, BUT I'M HEARING FROM SOME FOLKS ONLINE THAT THEY COULDN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAID TO THE, THE QUESTION.
COULD YOU PLEASE JUST STATE IT FOR THE MICROPHONE ON THE MICROPHONE? THE QUESTION WAS ABOUT THE, THE TIME THAT THE, THAT YOU NOTICED THE SIGNS WERE NOT POSTED? SURE.
UM, I DIDN'T GO BACK IN MY EMAILS PAST WEEK TO FIGURE OUT WHEN, WHEN I NOTICED THE SIGNS WERE, I THINK I MAY HAVE REACHED OUT TO MR. PEPE THAT, HEY, THE SI NOTICE THE SIGNS AREN'T THERE ANYMORE.
DO YOU, DO YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE CASE? UM, AND HE SAID, I'M GONNA REACH OUT TO ROB, MAKE SURE HE GETS HIM BACK UP.
AND I THINK WE ALSO, HE, HE MIGHT REMEMBER MORE ABOUT THAT DIALOGUE THAN I COULD REMEMBER.
UM, BUT I, I WANNA SAY THAT WAS LIKE THE SPRING, AND I DON'T REMEMBER IN THE SPRING.
SO I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING IT EVER SINCE THEN.
SO I, I THOUGHT THE CASE WAS DEAD
THANK YOU, MS. MAY, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONER, YOUNG, UH, MS. MAY, YOU SAID THAT MR. PEPE RESPONDED THAT YOU SHOULD REACH OUT TO MR. BALDWIN.
HE RESPONDED THAT HE WAS GONNA REACH OUT TO MR. BALDWIN.
UH, I GUESS WE NEED TO KNOW FROM MR. PEPE.
AND JUST CORRECT THAT WAS, UM, I DO NOT KNOW THE DATE 'CAUSE WE WERE SPEAKING IN PERSON.
UH, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS SPRING, AND THEN I DID LET HIM KNOW TO DO SO.
COMMISSIONER? UH, I'M FINISHED.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR F COMMISSIONER.
IT IS JUST PUZZLING TO ME THAT, THAT THESE SIGNS CAN'T STAY UP, BUT IT'S ALSO, UM, AND I'M GONNA LOOK AT IT DIFFERENTLY, I THINK.
UM, IS IT NOT, UM, POSSIBLE THAT, THAT THERE HAVE BEEN TAMPERED WITH, WITH NOT, NOT BY THE APPLICANT OR THE PROPERTY USER, BUT SOMEBODY ELSE? NOBODY.
BUT NOBODY WOULD EVER PULL DOWN A SIGN WOULD THEY?
SO WE, WE ARE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME, BUT I'M, THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE, WE'RE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME ON WHETHER THESE SIGNS ARE UP, THEY'RE DOWN, WHETHER THEY'RE UP WHEN THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE UP AND DOWN, WHEN THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE UP.
BUT I THINK THAT, THAT THE, THAT THE MORE IMPORTANT CON, UH, UH, MATTER OF CONVERSATION IS, IS THIS A GOOD USE OF LAND AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE? WITH, WITHOUT A DOUBT.
BUT WE, WE FIRST HAVE TO DISCUSS THE, THE ISSUE ABOUT THE SIGN.
AND YES, I, IN MY EXPERIENCE, SIGNS GET PULLED DOWN ALL THE TIME.
UH, BUT IT IS UP TO THE APPLICANT TO, TO REPLACE THEM.
AND NOW WE HAVE TO DETERMINE IF IN FACT THEY'VE BEEN DOWN FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS, THEN THAT BRINGS UP ANOTHER ISSUE.
SO ARE WE AWARE IF THE, IF THOSE SIGNS HAVE BEEN PLACED, BEEN PUT BACK UP AND DID SOMEONE COME IN AND WE HAVE A RECORD OF SOMEONE COMING IN AND GET THE SIGNS TO BE REPLACED? SO CURRENTLY, ARE THE SIGNS UP? I'M SORRY, WITH THAT QUESTION TO MEAN IT'S, THERE'S TWO FACE ARE IS CURLING THE SIGNS UP, ARE THERE ANY SIGNS CURRENTLY UP? UH, I, I DON'T KNOW.
SO WE, SO MONTHS AND MONTHS WENT BY.
THIS IS SO, WELL, WE WERE IN FALL ALMOST.
IS THERE, SO THE COMMUNITY ITSELF, WE DIDN'T HAVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
THAT WHAT WE WOULD BELIEVE IS GOOD SO THAT THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE HAVE PE SOME PEOPLE, REPRESENTATIVES HERE WHO ARE SAYING, HEY, THE SIGNS AREN'T DOWN.
WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT THERE, THAT THIS WAS STILL GOING ON.
WOULD WE AGAIN, THINK THAT WE NEED TO ALSO DELAY THIS SO THERE CAN BE PROPER COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT? BECAUSE IF THE SIGNS ARE NOT UP AND HAVE NOT BEEN UP SINCE MARCH, THAT'S, THAT'S DEFINITELY ROOM FOR US TO, TO, TO FEEL LIKE THAT THIS NEEDS TO BE TAKEN UPON THE ADVISEMENT AND COME BACK TO LATER.
BECAUSE THOSE SIGNS DO MATTER.
THEY, THEY, THEY REALLY MATTERED.
SOMEONE MIGHT NOT, MAYBE SOMEONE IN THE SUMMER WAS WORKING OVERTIME AND DIDN'T SEE THE SIGNS AND, AND MAYBE SEPTEMBER 1ST, THEY WOULD'VE SAW THEM BY THEM BEING DOWN.
HOW DO WE KNOW? THE COMMUNITY HAS TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING THEY WANT.
THAT WAS WHAT THE SIGNS ARE FOR.
I WOULD BE SO, AND MAYBE MR. PEPPER, DID THEY, HAVE THEY COME IN TO GET REPLACEMENTS AFTER THE NOTIFICATION? I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT DAYS THEY WOULD'VE COME IN.
IF THEY HAD, IS THERE A RECORD OF WHEN THE, WHEN THOSE SIGNS WILL BE RE-GIVE OUT OR ANY OF THAT? OUR FRONT DESK IS THE ONE WHO PRINTS, UM, OUR SIGNS, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WOULD BE A
[06:10:01]
RECORD NECESSARILY.WE, WE ARE GONNA NEED A MOTION FOLKS.
MAY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? YES.
MAY I MAKE A MOTION PLEASE? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
SORRY, I WAS CHECKING MY CALENDAR ON WHEN I WAS THERE, BUT MOTION I MOVE TO FIND THAT THE NOTIFICATION SIGNS WERE PROPERLY POSTED AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 51 A 1.106.
AND I HAVE BRIEF COMMENTS IF I HAVE A SECOND.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR SECOND.
UM, AS I STATED EARLIER, UM, I DID WALK THE SITE, I DID SEE THE SIGNS.
I BELIEVE WE HEARD TESTIMONY EARLIER TODAY THAT THEY HAVE BEEN REPOSTED FOUR TIMES.
UM, I THINK THERE THE SIGNS AND POSTED NOTICE HAS BEEN PROVIDED AS REQUIRED PER OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE.
ANY DIS ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? OKAY.
SO HOW, HOW DID YOU SAY THEY'VE BEEN REPOSTED FOUR TIMES? THEY HAVE.
WE, WE'VE POSTED 'EM SEVERAL TIMES.
SO MAYBE WHEN I, I WAS ASKING, THAT'S WHEN I WAS ASKING YOU THE QUESTION.
WE WERE TRYING TO, IF THEY HAD BEEN DOWN SINCE MARCH AS FAR I WAS ASKING, WERE THEY DOWN SINCE MARCH AND BEEN REPLACED OR THEY JUST STILL DOWN? THEY'VE NEVER BEEN REPLACED.
WHEN WERE THEY REPLACED? I, I'VE POSTED 'EM TWO DIFFERENT TIMES AND PEOPLE IN MY OFFICE HAVE POSTED THEM TWO DIFFERENT TIMES.
WE MAKE A GOOD EFFORT TO KEEP THE SIGNS UP.
SO WE WERE, WE WERE LED TO, I MEAN, WE WERE, I I I BELIEVE MOST OF US WAS LED TO BELIEVE THAT IT HAD JUST BEEN DOWN IN MARCH AND NEVER BEEN REPLACED.
WISH THEY WOULD'VE BEEN CLARIFIED.
SO, WELL, I'LL JUST FOLLOW THAT UP.
MR. BALDWIN, HAVE YOU REPLACED 'EM SINCE MARCH THE SIGNS? I'LL MAKE SURE THERE'S SIGNS UP THERE TOMORROW.
HAVE, DID YOU REPLACE THEM SINCE MARCH? YES, SIR.
AND YOU, YOU DID REPLACE 'EM SINCE? YEAH.
I, I WAS SWEATING WHEN I DID IT.
UH, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON SECOND BY, UH, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
NOW WE GO BACK TO THE LAND USE PIECE.
QUESTIONS FOR, UH, THE MACE? YES, PLEASE.
MR. MAY, WOULD YOU COME DOWN PLEASE? I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU IN YOUR REMARKS.
UH, YOU MADE A COMMENT THAT THE DRAFT COMPROMISE THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY WAS PREPARED WITHOUT INVOLVEMENT, UH, BY PEOPLE WITH LAND USE EXPERIENCE OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT.
ARE YOU AWARE HOW MANY DECADES THE LOWER GREENVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN DOZENS OF ZONING CASES A YEAR? ARE YOU ASKING ME HOW LONG THE LOWER GREENVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN NEGOTIATING PLAN DEVELOPMENT USES? UH, YES, IF YOU LIKE, UH, I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
WHAT ABOUT MR. RICHARDSON? DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG HE'S BEEN INVOLVED IN DOING THAT? I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
HOW ABOUT MR. BALDWIN, DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG HE'S BEEN DOING THAT? I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
WOULD YOU, WOULD IT SURPRISE YOU TO KNOW THAT IN, IN ALMOST EACH CASE, UH, THE ANSWER IS ALMOST FOUR DECADES? SORRY TO REVEAL YOUR AGE.
EVERYBODY I CAN BELIEVE MR. BALDWIN HAS BEEN
WELL, I I CAN, I CAN BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE NEGOTIATED ON BEHALF OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN PREVIOUS CASES, DOZENS OF PREVIOUS CASES, LITERALLY DOZENS.
I DON'T, I WILL HAVE TO TAKE YOUR WORD ON THAT, SIR.
AND BECAUSE THEY HAVE ENGAGED IN PREVIOUS MM-HMM.
[06:15:02]
IS A OVERSIGHT BY THEM? A GRAVE OVERSIGHT? THEIR, LET ME, THEIR EXPERIENCE, LET ME, LEMME REPEAT YOUR QUESTION TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.YOUR QUESTION WAS, OR THAT I HEARD YOU ASK WAS DO I FEEL LIKE, UH, THERE EXPERIENCE AS COMMISSIONER YOUNG HAS MM-HMM.
THAT, THAT IS MY, THAT IS MY FEELING.
COULD I COMMENT ON THAT AS AN OPPOSING VIEW? I'M SORRY.
COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS FOR THE MAYS.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? THANK YOU.
UM, I'LL EITHER MR. MAY OR MS. MAY, WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO, UM, FIELD THE QUESTION.
UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, UM, TO, TO VISIT WITH MS. MAY REGARDING THIS CASE AND TO REVIEW THE, UM, CONS, THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE BEFORE US TODAY? OR, UH, THAT WAS JUST TO ME, OR AM I AWARE THAT YOU TALKED OR MS. TALKED TO SARAH? YES.
UH, I HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH SOME OF THOSE EMAILS, YES, MA'AM.
AND I THINK I HEARD YOU MENTION AS, UM, COMMISSIONER YOUNG, A QUESTION ABOUT PROFESSIONAL STAFF AND TYPICAL PROCESS.
UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE CONDITIONS WERE ORIGINALLY DRAFTED BY MR. BALDWIN, UM, AS THE APPLICANT FOR THE CASE AND THEN SUBMITTED TO CITY STAFF FOR THEIR REVIEW AND EVALUATION? YOUR QUE I I'M SORRY, TO REPEAT YOUR QUESTION TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
WELL, YOU SAID THAT THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT TYPICAL PROCESS.
AND SO MR. BALDWIN DEVELOPED THE CONDITIONS, SUBMITTED THEM TO CITY STAFF.
CITY STAFF THEN PERFORMED THEIR EVALUATION MM-HMM.
AND I WAS JUST ASKING IF YOU WERE AWARE THAT, THAT, THAT THAT IS THE TYPICAL PROCESS.
I, I AM, YOU KNOW, THAT QUESTION WOULD BE BETTER TO MY WIFE.
SHE IS MUCH MORE, SHE, SHE IS MUCH MORE EXPERT IN TERMS OF WHAT THE T WHAT THE, UH, TYPICAL ZONING DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS THAN I AM.
WELL, I'M, SHE, SHE'S WELCOME TO TO FIELD THE QUESTION.
UM, I THINK MAYBE THE POINT HE WAS TRYING TO MAKE, WAIT, SORRY TO SPEAK FOR HIM, UM, WAS, UH, THE TYPICAL REZONING PROCESS USUALLY STARTS WITH A PROPERTY OWNER THAT IS, SEES SOME ISSUE WITH THEIR CURRENT ZONING, AND THEY GO TO THE CITY, SUBMIT AN APPLICATION AND SAY, HEY, THIS IS WHAT MY ZONING IS, THIS IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO.
THEY WORK WITH CITY STAFF TO FIND THE MOST APPROPRIATE, YOU KNOW, LAND SENSITIVE SOLUTIONS.
UH, YOU KNOW, AND DURING THIS TIME THE SIGNS POSTED.
NEIGHBORS REACH OUT BY CALLING THE NUMBER ON THE SIGN.
THEY TALK TO STAFF AND THEY SAY, HEY, WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? I'M CURIOUS.
YOU KNOW, STAFF COMMUNICATES WHAT THE APPLICATION IS AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE, THE PERSON CALLING IN AND, UH, LEARNS FROM THEM WHAT, WHAT THE ISSUES ARE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH THAT STAFF CAN DO.
THEY DON'T, THEY'RE NOT ON A 16 YEAR SITE VISIT LIKE I AM.
AND, AND THEN THEY MOVE FORWARD.
THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND THE APPLICANT GET TOGETHER, THEY MAKE AN AGREEMENT.
I UNDERSTAND THERE'S PROBLEMS WITH HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET STAFF TO REVIEW IT, BUT THE, THE BREAK IN THE PROCESS IS THAT STAFF WOULD SAY, HEY, HOW ABOUT THESE THINGS? YOU KNOW, I, I THINK IT WOULD BE NICE IF THESE THINGS WERE DONE.
AND THEY SAY, NO, NO WAY, NO WAY.
THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE NEGOTIATED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND IT'S HARD ON STAFF TO FIGHT FOR SOMETHING NOBODY WANTS
SO YOU'RE STATING THAT THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED HERE.
THAT'S THE TYPICAL PROCESS IN LOWER GREENVILLE.
WELL, UM, I'LL LET STAFF SPEAK TO THAT AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME THEN.
THANK YOU FOR THAT PERSPECTIVE.
QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS AND OPPOSITION COMMISSIONERS.
I WASN'T, I THINK WE GOT A LITTLE OFF TRACK DURING THAT.
SO MAY I ASK A COUPLE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS OF OF COURSE.
MR. CHAIR OF, UM, I'M GONNA START WITH MR. BALDWIN IF I MAY.
SO CAN YOU, UM, PERHAPS SPEAK TO THE QUESTION THAT WE JUST ADDRESSED WITH YOU DEVELOPED THE CONDITIONS, UNDERSTAND
[06:20:01]
YOU MET WITH STAKEHOLDERS IN THE AREA, MET WITH STAFF.WERE THERE CONDITIONS THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED THAT CAME OUT OF THAT DISCUSSION THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THIS, IN THE CONDITIONS BEFORE US? YES, MA'AM.
SO, UM, I ORIGINALLY DRAFTED THE CONDITIONS, UM, RAN 'EM BY, UH, DARREN AT THE L G N A AND THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS.
THEY HAD COMMENTS, TURNED 'EM INTO THE STAFF AS PART OF THE APPLICATION.
UH, WHEN MR. PEPE WAS ASSIGNED TO THE CASE, HE HAD COMMENTS AND CONCERNS AND WE ADDRESSED THOSE.
AND THEN THEY WENT BACK TO WHEN, WHEN SHE GOT INVOLVED, YOU HAD CO COMMENTS AND CONCERNS.
WE INCORPORATED THOSE AND I'LL BE SURPRISED IF WE HAVEN'T INCORPORATED EVERYTHING WE'VE EVEN ASKED TO DO.
SO IT, IT HAS BEEN OUR ITERATIVE PROCESS, BUT IT'S BEEN IN THE OPEN AND EVERYBODY WHO HAS BEEN PART OF IT, UH, KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON BECAUSE EVERY TIME THERE'S CHANGES WERE MADE, IT WOULD GET OUT TO THE L G N A AND WE GET OUT TO YOU.
AND, UM, SO THERE WAS, IT WAS IN THE OPEN.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
UM, IS IT CORRECT THAT THE REVISED, UM, CONDITIONS AND THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS SPECIFICALLY CAME OUT OF COMMENTS, UM, THAT I SUBMITTED TO YOU, UM, REGARDING THE PEDESTRIAN REALM, IN PARTICULAR BUFFER ZONES AND TO WORK TO RESPOND TO STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED TO ME? YES, MA'AM.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? MR. PEPE, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE QUESTION ABOUT STAFF'S REVIEW OF THIS AND THE INTEGRATION OF ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS, UM, WITHIN THE, THE PD AND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN? LET ME SEE.
SO, UM, WE, WE RECEIVED, UH, THE INITIAL PD.
UM, OBVIOUSLY IT HAD, UH, A NUMBER OF CONDITIONS, UM, AT LENGTH.
UM, AND WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT WHEN WE GET, UH, PDS OFTENTIMES, UM, SUCH AS THIS, THEY, THEY DO HAVE A LOT OF THINGS BUILT IN.
AND IT CAN BE A, IT CAN BE A CHALLENGE TO, TO WALK BACKWARDS AND, AND, AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THE TARGET IS, UM, OF THOSE CONDITIONS.
THEN FIND, UM, WHAT'S THE WORD I'M LOOKING FOR, UH, MAKE SURE THEY ARE SOUND, UM, AND, AND WHICH ONES ARE NECESSARY AND SORT THROUGH THOSE.
UM, OR IT HAPPENS, IT HAPPENS OFTEN, UM, WITH PDSS, UH, WHERE WE, WE HAVE TO DO THAT, THAT KIND OF PROCESS.
UM, AND SO THAT'S ME BRIEFLY EXPLAINING MY EXPERIENCE.
UM, WORKING ON THIS, WE DID GET COM, UH, WE DID PROVIDE COMMENT, UM, AFTER Z R T AND STAFF REVIEW, UM, AND INTEGRATED, UM, SOME CHANGES.
AND IT DID GO TO CITY ATTORNEY REVIEW, WHICH IMPLEMENTED, UH, FURTHER CHANGES.
AND IS IT ALSO CORRECT THAT, UM, I, I THINK AS WE HEARD THAT THERE WERE COMPATIBILITY ISSUES WITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES SPECIFIC TO THE SITE THAT WERE THE GENESIS OF THE, UM, ZONING CHANGE THAT IS BEFORE US TODAY? YEAH.
WELL, I, WHILE I WAS CERTAINLY AWARE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CASE, UM, OF THAT CONTEXT AND, UM, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT TO NOT BE AWARE OF THOSE.
UM, COMPATIBILITY REMAINED THE FOCUS, UM, LAND USE AND ZONING REMAINED THE FOCUS, UH, AS WE WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS.
UM, AND PURPOSEFULLY, UM, STEPH DID NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, UH, LITIGATION, UH, BOARD OF BOARD MATTERS, THINGS SUCH AS THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON BE ON MOTION? I DO.
I HAVE A SECOND IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH 1 26, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS SUBJECT TO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REVISED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES UNDER SECTION 1 0 7.
MAIN USE IS PERMITTED ROMAN AT THREE, ADD ADULT DAYCARE AND CHILDCARE FACILITY UNDER ROMAN AT FIVE STRIKE GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE 1,100,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE UNDER SECTION ONE 11 SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS.
[06:25:01]
SENTENCE TO READ, SIDEWALKS MUST ALSO BE BUFFERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 51, A 4.30 1 7, 3 0 1 D SEVEN, ADDING OR OTHER SIMILAR PHYSICAL SEPARATION WHERE SHOWN ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN UNDER SECTION ONE 13, LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING, ADD ITEM D PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT.PERMANENT CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR ANY RETAIL OR PERSONAL SERVICE USES AND RESTAURANT USES.
THREE SMALL TREES MUST BE PROVIDED ALONG MARTEL AVENUE BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND PARKING SPACES.
TREE SPACING MUST BE 30, A MAXIMUM OF 34 FEET ON CENTER AND INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED UNDER ARTICLE 10, DIVISION 51 A TEN ONE HUNDRED IN GENERAL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS IN THE ROBUST DEBATE TODAY.
WE'VE HEARD THROUGH NUMEROUS LETTERS THAT WE HAVE ALL RECEIVED IN THIS WEEK AND TESTIMONY TODAY THAT THIS HAS BEEN A MULTI-YEAR EFFORT BY THE COMMUNITY TO ADDRESS SAFETY AND COMPATIBILITY ISSUES WITH THIS PROPERTY AND ITS SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY UNITY.
THE STRUCTURE OF THIS ORDINANCE IS SIMILAR TO MANY OF THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN UTILIZED ALONG GREENVILLE AVENUE WITH RESTRICTIONS ON LATE HOURS THAT HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED THAT STABILIZE THE COMMERCIAL AREA, FOSTER A VIBRANT MIX OF BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL USES AND BENEFIT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE UNDERLYING GOAL FOR THIS PD, AS WITH ALL PDS, IS TO ALLOW FOR THE FULL USE OF THE EXISTING BILL THROUGH THE LEGACY BUILDING PROVISIONS.
THERE ARE REVISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED BOTH THROUGH MY REVIEW WITH THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, THROUGH THOSE WHO HAVE SPOKEN BOTH IN SUPPORT AND IN OPPOSITION TODAY, AS WELL AS COMMENTS MADE BY THE COMMISSIONERS HERE TO MORE FULLY REFINE AND REFLECT THE GOALS OF THIS PD TO ADDRESS COMPATIBILITY.
THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE BEEN CONTINUOUSLY ENGAGED ON THIS.
I PERSONALLY HAVE SPENT MULTIPLE HOURS MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY, WITH VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS, WITH THE APPLICANT TEAM TO BRING THIS BEFORE US.
IT IS TIME TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS CASE, AND I HOPE THAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WILL SUPPORT THEIR REQUEST.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YEAH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
I'M PLEASED TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TODAY.
I THINK FROM A LAND USE PERSPECTIVE, WHAT WE'VE GOT HERE IS AN APPROPRIATE SOLUTION MOVING FORWARD.
MAYBE IT DOESN'T SATISFY EVERYONE, BUT I THINK WHAT WE'VE GOT IS GOOD.
UM, TWO OTHER COMMENTS THAT I WANNA MAKE.
ONE, I THINK IT'S A REAL SHAME GIVEN THIS LONGSTANDING NONCONFORMITY THAT'S BEEN A USE NUISANCE TO THE COMMUNITY, THAT THERE WASN'T A WAY TO ADDRESS IT THROUGH OUR EXISTING PROCESSES FOR THAT, OR THAT THOSE PROCESSES WEREN'T SUCCESSFUL.
BUT WE ARE WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
UM, THE OTHER MATTER THAT I WANTED TO ADDRESS IS THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS.
I'M FIRMLY OF THE BELIEF THAT THERE IS NO ONE RIGHT WAY TO DO COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ON ZONING CASES, DIFFERENT FORMS OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MAKES SENSE FOR DIFFERENT CASES, AND THAT'S ABUNDANTLY CLEAR FROM WHAT WE SEE TODAY.
I'M OF THE BELIEF THAT A COMMUNITY MEETING IS NOT NECESSARY FOR EVERY PARTICULAR CASE, ALTHOUGH IT CAN BE IMPORTANT AND MAY HAVE BEEN BENEFICIAL HERE.
UM, THE OTHER THING THAT I'LL SAY IS THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ARE OFTEN VALUABLE TOOLS FOR THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS.
BUT LIKE WHAT WE DO HERE AT THE HORSESHOE, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS CAN ALSO TURN POLITICAL.
I THINK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AT THEIR BEST, UM, ARE ABLE TO INCORPORATE A WIDE RANGE OF VIEWS ON LAND USE ISSUES AND FILTER, AND ULTIMATELY COME TO A GOOD SOLUTION.
AND I'M NOT IN A POSITION HERE TO SITTING HERE TODAY TO FIGURE OUT WHO IS IN THE RIGHT, WHO IS IN THE WRONG BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND SOME OF THE DISSENTING VIEWPOINTS THAT WE HAVE.
I'M NOT ABLE TO SORT THAT ALL OUT HERE TODAY.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION INPUT IS INCREDIBLY VALUABLE, UM, IN THIS ZONING PROCESS.
BUT WE ALWAYS DO NEED TO BE SENSITIVE THAT SOMETIMES
[06:30:01]
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS DO THIS PROCESS VERY, VERY WELL AND DO THIS PROCESS VERY RIGHT.OTHER TIMES, AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED HERE, SOMETIMES VOICES GET SQUELCHED AND THE PRODUCT ISN'T NECESSARILY, YOU KNOW, ISN'T NECESSARILY, YOU KNOW, REFLECTIVE OF ALL INTERESTED PARTIES.
UM, SO TO WRAP IT ALL UP, I THINK WE'RE THERE ON THE LAND USE PIECE, I THINK WE'VE REACHED AN APPROPRIATE SOLUTION, BUT THAT WE ALWAYS NEED TO BE CAREFUL AND, AND THOUGHTFUL IN EVALUATING HOW THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WORKED IN A PARTICI PARTICULAR PROCESS OR ON A PARTICULAR CASE.
UM, RECOGNIZING THAT THERE IS NO ONE RIGHT WAY TO DO COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
I ENDORSED VICE CHAIR RUBIN'S COMMENTS.
I WANT TO COMMENT BRIEFLY ON THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE, UH, PROPOSAL THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY.
THE PEOPLE THAT KNOW MOST ABOUT AN INDIVIDUAL CASE ARE THE STAKEHOLDERS THAT INCLUDES THE APPLICANT AND THE PROPERTY OWNER.
AND IT INCLUDES THE SURROUNDING, UH, HOMEOWNERS OR OTHERS THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THE CASE.
THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE DECISIONS THAT WE, AND ULTIMATELY THE COUNCIL MAKE.
THOSE DECISIONS ARE LITERALLY SET IN STONE OR STEEL OR WOOD OR WHATEVER THE BUILDING MAY BE BUILT OUT OF.
SO I FIND IT NEITHER SURPRISING NOR DISTURBING THAT WHERE YOU HAVE AN APPLICANT THAT IS WILLING TO ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY IN A COMMUNITY THAT IS WILLING TO ENGAGE THE APPLICANT, THE BEST SOLUTIONS COME FROM THAT INTERACTION.
AND THAT'S WHY, UH, WE ROUTINELY GIVE OUR APPROVAL TO NEGOTIATED SOLUTIONS, USUALLY PRAISING THE PARTICIPANTS FOR THEIR CIVIC MINDEDNESS AND REASONABLENESS AND WILLINGNESS TO COMPROMISE IN REACHING THOSE, UH, RESULTS.
NOW, THERE'S AN IMPORTANT ROLE THAT CITY STAFF PLAYS IN THAT PROCESS.
UH, AND I DON'T MEAN TO SUGGEST THAT IT SHOULD STIFLE THE CITY STAFF'S OPPORTUNITY TO RAISE CONCERNS, SUGGESTIONS, COMMENTS, AND OBJECTIONS.
I'M QUITE CONFIDENT IN THIS CASE THAT MR. PEPE WAS NOT STIFLED.
UH, I THINK WITH MOST OF OUR PLANNERS, I AM CONFIDENT THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE STIFLED.
AND THAT IF THERE WERE, UH, SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSAL BEFORE US, WE WOULD'VE HEARD THOSE CONCERNS.
SO WITH THAT, I'M DELIGHTED TO SUPPORT THIS COMPROMISE BY REASONABLE PEOPLE, KNOWLEDGEABLE PEOPLE, AND THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE DECISION.
I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION COMMISSIONER.
WE, IT, I, I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A GOOD PLAN, BUT I'LL ALWAYS BRING CAUTION TO MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE INCLUSIVE OF EVERYONE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, AND WHEN YOU DOING THE WORK, IT'S A SACRIFICE.
UM, BUT YOU'RE DOING THE WORK.
AND EVEN THOUGH IT'S A GOOD WORK, SOMETIME WE CAN BECOME SOMEWHAT TERRITORIAL IN A, IN A SENSE, AND WE MIGHT NOT EVEN KNOW THAT WE'RE DOING THAT 'CAUSE WE ARE JUST DOING THE WORK.
SO I WOULD, I WOULD HOPE THAT BEFORE COUNCIL, THAT THERE IS A, A, A COMMUNITY MEETING THAT IS INVITING TO ALL THAT.
MIGHT HAVE SOME, UM, THAT, THAT, THAT WILL GIVE UPDATES AND, AND GOING FORWARD, I KNOW THIS LOAD IS PROBABLY HEAVY IF YOU'RE DOING 15 A YEAR OR HOWEVER LONG, BUT SOME NEW PEOPLE ON THE BLOCK MIGHT EVEN WANNA BE INVOLVED.
AND THAT COULD BE A SENSE OF FRUSTRATION.
BUT I DEFINITELY, IT'S A GOOD, GOOD PLAN.
I DON'T THINK, NO ONE NEVER THOUGHT THAT IT'S THE ENGAGEMENT PORTION.
SO I WOULD ASK, LIKE WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST TO HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING IN BETWEEN NOW AND COUNCIL.
WOULD THAT BE, I WOULD HOPE THAT WOULD BE OF, UH, UH, SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL WERE WILLING TO DO.
I WILL ALSO BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION FOR ALL THE, THE REASONS MENTIONED BY MY COLLEAGUES.
UH, I THINK IT IS A GOOD SOLUTION AND ALL THE SPEAKERS WERE VERY COMPELLING TO ME.
UH, AND IN, IN TERMS OF THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, I'M FRANKLY DISAPPOINTED THAT WE HAD TO HAVE THIS KIND OF DISCUSSION.
UH, IT'S, IT'S HARD TO BELIEVE THAT IN THIS PART OF TOWN, UH, WE WOULD HAVE AN OVERSIGHT LIKE THAT.
AND FRANKLY, THAT'S WHAT I CONSIDER IT AN OVERSIGHT.
[06:35:01]
UH, I THINK BECAUSE THIS AREA, IN FACT, AS COMMISSIONER YOUNG STATED, DOES HAVE A LOT OF VERY SMART PEOPLE AND HAVE FOLKS WITH THE EXPERIENCE AND, AND KNOWLEDGE OF MR. RICHARDSON, UH, THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE SHOULDN'T ENGAGE OTHERS.THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE SHOULDN'T, UH, PUT AN OUTREACH OUT THERE TO HAVE A KIND OF ENGAGEMENT THAT FOLKS THAT MIGHT WANNA KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND SO, UH, ALTHOUGH I FIND THAT PART DISAPPOINTING, I, I DO SUPPORT THE MOTION AND I THINK THIS IS A, IT'S A GOOD SOLUTION FOR THESE FOLKS THAT HAVE HAD, UH, TO LIVE WITH THIS KIND OF USE, UH, FOR A LONG TIME.
SO I'M VERY HAPPY, UH, THAT YOU GUYS WILL GET A SOLUTION HERE.
I HOPE IT DOES SERVE AS A SOLUTION MOVING FORWARD.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? SAY NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
COMMISSIONERS, I THINK WE WE'RE GONNA GO IS A WE'RE OUR DINNER IS HERE, FOLKS, SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE A 30 MINUTE BREAK.
COMMISSIONER SAID IT'S 5 48 AND WE ARE BACK ON THE RECORD.
MOVING ON TO CASE NUMBER 15, MS. GARZA.
AN APPLICATION FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR SURFACE ACCESSORY REMOTE PARKING ON PROPERTY ZONE IN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY SUB DISTRICT WITH PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 5 95.
THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE WEST CORNER OF ROBERT L PARIS SENIOR AVENUE AND LAGO STREET STAR RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO THE CPLAN AND STATUTE RECOMMENDATION CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. GARZA.
COMMISSIONER, I THINK WE HAVE TWO REGISTER SPEAKERS ONLINE.
WELL, IT'S ONE REPEAT MR. CAMPBELL.
HE'S NOT ONLINE AND THERE IS NO ONE HERE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MARCH ON, UM, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH 2 0 2? I MOVE TO CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE S U P FOR A PERMANENT TIME PERIOD, SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND APPLICANT.
RECOMMENDATION CONDITIONS, RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR SECOND, UH, COMMISSIONER.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER.
SECOND ABOUT COMMISSIONER HERBERT TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, APPROVE THE S U P FOR A PERMANENT TIME PERIOD.
ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER YOUNG? YES.
I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.
UM, I SUSPECT EVERYTHING IS GOING TO GO SMOOTHLY AND THIS PARKING LOT WILL BE JUST FINE AND NEVER NEED TO BE REVISITED AGAIN.
BUT IF IT WERE TO TURN OUT THAT, UH, LET'S SAY THE CHURCH GOES AWAY OR SOMETHING AND UH, SOMEBODY ELSE COMES IN THERE WHO IS LESS RESPONSIBLE AND FIVE YEARS GOES BY AND WE HAVE PROBLEMS, WHETHER THEY BE TRASH OR DRUG DEALS OR WHATEVER, UH, I'M JUST NOT COMFORTABLE LEAVING THE CITY WITH NO MECHANISM OTHER THAN CODE ENFORCEMENT COMMISSIONER.
ARE WE THERE? UM, ORIGINALLY I WAS GONNA DO FIVE YEARS WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWAL 'CAUSE THAT'S ALL I THOUGHT THAT I COULD DO.
THIS IS NOT A PAR FREE, I MEAN A NEW PARKING LOT.
UM, THEY DID KNOW AT THE TIME THAT THEY NEEDED A CO BUT THEY HAVE OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
THEY'RE A STAPLE IN THE COMMUNITY.
THE CHURCH IS NOT A SMALL CHURCH.
THEY'VE CREATED A BASKETBALL, UH, A GYM FOR THE CHILDREN IN THE COMMUNITY THAT CAN'T GET TO ANY TYPE OF, UM, GET TO ANY TYPE OF A CITY FACILITY.
AND THEY ARE, ARE A STAPLE IN THE COMMUNITY.
UM, AND IT HAS BEEN A PARKING LOT FOR WELL OVER 10 YEARS AND PAVED, THEY DID NOT KNOW THAT THEY NEEDED IT.
SUCH A CO CODE ENFORCEMENT INFORMED THEM AND THEY DID IT IMMEDIATELY RECTIFIED THE SITUATION IF IT WAS A NEW CHURCH POSSIBLY.
BUT THIS HAS BEEN A CHURCH HAS BEEN A STAPLE SINCE THE EIGHTIES.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YEAH, I'M ALSO NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.
I PROBABLY COULD HAVE SWALLOWED THIS FOR, UM, THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD
[06:40:01]
THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED.BUT, UM, I, I GENERALLY THINK THAT SURFACE PARKING LOTS ARE ONE OF THE LEAST DESIRABLE LAND USES.
AND HERE IT'S PROBABLY A NECESSARY FOR THE CHURCH TO SITTING HERE TODAY.
BUT AS THINGS CHANGE IN THE AREA AND AS OUR, YOU KNOW, FORMS OF MOBILITY CHANGE OVER THE NEXT 10, 15, 20 YEARS, IT MAY TURN OUT THAT THIS, UM, SURFACE PARKING LOT ACTUALLY MIGHT NOT BE NECESSARY.
AND I THINK CONTINUING TO EVALUATE THAT PERIODICALLY THROUGH THE S U P PROCESS IS AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO GO.
SO I'D PROBABLY BE OKAY FOR FIVE YEARS, BUT I'M NOT OKAY WITH PERMANENT, SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION WITH GREAT RESPECT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? DID YOU, UH, CONSIDER MAYBE A LONGER TERM S U P UM, ON, ON THIS SITUATION? THERE'S TIMES THAT I WOULD CONSIDER, BUT BECAUSE THIS, NOT ONLY IS THIS CHURCH, IT, IT, IT'S THE MOST OF THE STREET IS TWO CHURCHES AND BOTH OF THESE CHURCHES WORK TOGETHER AND THEY ARE STAPLES IN THE COMMUNITY.
THIS IS A FLY BY NIGHT CHURCH THAT COMES AND GO.
THEY HAVE PROVEN, AND THIS WAS REALLY JUST A OVERSIGHT ON THEIR PART.
AND OUR AREA PLAN IS IT WILL ELIMINATE THESE BY SS U P IN THE FUTURE.
UM, IT FEELS MAYBE ANOTHER CHURCH, MAYBE ANOTHER, AND THEY HADN'T ALREADY BEEN THERE, PROBABLY WOULD CONSIDER IT.
BUT THIS PARTICULAR CHURCH USES ALL THE FUNDS THAT THEY HAVE TO HELP CHILDREN IN OUR COMMUNITY.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? I HAVE SIMILAR RESERVATIONS AS THOSE EXPRESSED BY COMMISSIONER YOUNG AND VICE CHAIR RUBIN.
UM, YOU KNOW, I I WE JUST HAD A CASE WHERE A PERMANENT SS U P I THINK WE'VE HAD THEM COME THROUGH IN THE PAST THAT HAVE REALLY BEEN ISSUES IN THE COMMUNITY.
NOT THAT THERE'S ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS ONE HAS BEEN, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE MAY BRING AS NOTED BY, UM, VICE CHAIR RUBIN.
YOU KNOW, EVEN IF IT WAS A 20 YEAR PERIOD, I THINK I WOULD CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT EXAMPLES WHERE WE HAVE DONE MUCH LONGER S U P PERIODS TO NOT BE A BURDEN ON, UM, ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE SUPPORTING COMMUNITY EFFORTS.
AND I, I THINK I WOULD WOULD BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THAT.
BUT A PERMANENT S U P REALLY DOES GIVE, GIVE ME PAUSE AS WELL.
I, I'LL TAKE UP ON THE ADVISING.
WOULD THAT BE BETTER? DID YOU SAY 30, 30 YEARS? S U P.
'CAUSE THIS CHURCH HAS PROVEN THIS IS, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THE ADJUSTMENT? COMMISSIONER HERBERT? I AM.
SO WE HAVE A NEW MOTION ON THE TABLE COMMISSIONERS FOR A 30 YEAR PERIOD.
UM, DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONER RUBEN, 30 YEARS IS DEFINITELY AN IMPROVEMENT OVER PERMANENT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO REEVALUATE THE PROPRIETY OF THE SURFACE PARKING LOT MUCH SOONER THAN 30 YEARS.
I MEAN, IF I, IF I HAD MY DRUTHERS, I THINK I COULD PROBABLY GET COMFORTABLE WITH 10, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT OTHER FOLKS MAY HAVE DIFFERING VIEWS.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, I'M SUPPORTING A MOTION.
UM, THE CHURCH AND ITS PART PARTNERING CHURCH HAS BEEN A STAPLE FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AND, UM, ONE LOCATION IT FROM MY, HIS, UM, RESEARCH HAS BEEN AT 30 YEARS AND ONE LONGER THAN THE 30 YEARS.
THEY HOLD DOWN SO MANY PEOPLE WHO CAN'T GET TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
THEY BRING FOOD PANTRIES INTO THE COMMUNITY.
UM, I THINK IT'S ESSENTIAL LIVING IN OAK CLIFF, SEEING THE MULTITUDE OF CHURCHES THAT APPEARED IN THE SEVENTIES SOMETIMES AND SEEING SO MANY PEOPLE DRIVE INTO CHURCH AND THEN DRIVE OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITHOUT THE CARE OF THE PEOPLE.
THIS, THESE CHURCHES ARE DIFFERENT.
UM, THEY'VE PROVIDED GREAT SERVICES, FINANCES, UM, RESOURCES TO THE COMMUNITY FOR OVER 30 YEARS.
AND SO I DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH SUPPORTING A THIRD YEAR MOTION.
UM, I HAVE SOME OF THE SIMILAR RESERVATIONS AS COMMISSIONERS RUBEN YOUNG IN HAMPTON.
AND MY TAKE IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
WE ARE DEALING WITH DEAD CHURCHES ALL OVER THE CITY.
CHURCHES THAT WERE ONCE VERY VIBRANT.
THE THINGS THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE SAID ABOUT THEIR CHURCH, PEOPLE WOULD'VE SAID ABOUT THE CHURCH ON SHORELINE.
THEY WOULD'VE SAID ABOUT THE CHURCH ON PENROSE.
THEY WOULD'VE SAID ABOUT OTHER CHURCH PROPERTIES THAT HAVE JUST BECOME OTHER USES, UM, WITHOUT BEING COMPLETELY REDEVELOPED.
AND A 30 YEAR LOOK IS A LONG TIME.
SO I THINK LIKE COMMISSIONER RUBIN, I COULD SUPPORT A 10 YEAR, BUT JUST A PERMANENT
[06:45:01]
S U P I DON'T LIKE ANYWAY.SO I ALREADY DIDN'T LIKE THAT SUGGESTION, BUT I THINK 30 YEARS IS TOO LONG.
HOW ABOUT SPLITTING IT, COMMISSIONER WHEELER FROM 10 TO 30, 20? WOULD THAT GET YOU? SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT CHURCHES IN OTHER PARTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WHAT I DO KNOW WHAT CHURCHES DO.
WELL, THOSE CHURCHES WHO ALREADY SEE THAT IN THE FUTURE AND START MAKING ALTERNATIVE USES FOR THEIR CHURCHES PRIOR TO COVID, INSTEAD OF JUST BEING A CHURCH, THEY BUILD A GYM FOR THE CHILDREN.
THE PRIOR TO IT BECOMING, UH, BEFORE COVID, THEY TAKE CHILDREN ON BUS TOURS PRIOR TO COVID.
THEY DO HAVE COUNSELING ON SITE.
SO IT'S USED ALREADY FOR MULTIPLE USES THAT GO BESIDE.
EVEN WHEN THE CHURCH ITSELF WAS CLOSED, THE USES WERE STILL OPEN FOR THE PUBLIC.
AND, AND SO WHEN A CHURCH IS JUST A CHURCH, THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS.
WHEN THE COVID COMES, THE CHURCH SHUTS DOWN.
BUT WHEN A CHURCH IS A STAPLE IN A COMMUNITY AND DOES THE WORK, THEN IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
AND SO THE COMMUNITY PAID FOR THE SS U P.
THAT'S HOW, BECAUSE THIS WAS AN OVERSIGHT.
THIS HAS BEEN THE NAME OF THE STREET IS AFTER IT IS A PART IS THAT'S HOW YOU KNOW HOW PEOPLE DON'T CHANGE NAMES OF STREETS? I DON'T.
I I DON'T, I JUST WANT IT TO BE EASY FOR THEM.
UM, AND, BUT IF IT'S GONNA BE DENIED, IF IT WAS BECAUSE OF WHAT PEOPLE MIGHT THINK CHURCH YEAH.
AND NOT NECESSARILY WILL BE DENIED, BUT WE, WE, YOU COULD JUST MAKE ANOTHER MOTION AFTERWARD.
SO LET'S, LET'S TAKE A RECORDED VOTE PAC PLEASE.
THIS IS FOR A, A 30 YEAR S U P DISTRICT ONE.
UH, DID SHE, I THINK SHE SAID YES.
I THINK SHE SAID WE DIDN'T HEAR YOU.
DISTRICT FOUR, DISTRICT FIVE? YES.
DISTRICT SIX, ABSENT DISTRICT SEVEN.
CAN I HAVE ANOTHER MOTION? UM, 20 YEARS.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR SECONDED YOUR MOTION COMMISSION.
NOW THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A 20 YEAR PERIOD.
I GET A WITH NO AUTO RENEWALS SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND STAFF OR COMMITTED CONDITIONS.
WITHOUT 20 MS. PINA, CAN WE TAKE GROUP DISTRICT ONE? YES.
DISTRICT FOUR ABSENT DISTRICT FIVE? YES.
DISTRICT SIX, ABSENT DISTRICT SEVEN? YES.
COMMISSIONERS WILL MOVE ON TO CASE NUMBER 16.
JUST READ INTO THE RECORD FOR ME PLEASE.
ITEM NUMBER 16, ZONING CASE NUMBER Z 2 23 DASH 3 0 6 R D.
THE REQUEST IS FOR AN APPLICATION FOR A HISTORIC OVERLAY FOR THE BURGER RESIDENCE.
CITED AT 41 0 7 TURTLE CREEK BOULEVARD ON PROPERTY ZONED A 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF TURTLE CREEK
[06:50:01]
BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF WYCLIFFE AVENUE.STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO PRE TO PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION IS ALSO APPROVAL SUBJECT TO PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, UH, COMMISSIONERS THAT OUR TWO SPEAKERS HAD TO GO.
UH, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NO.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? COMMISSIONER RUBIN, JUST TO OUTTA CURIOSITY, WHAT'S THE APPLICATION FEE FOR ONE OF THESE HISTORIC OVERLAYS? WELL, IT DEPENDS ON WHO'S RECOMMENDING IT IN.
IN THIS CASE IT WAS ON BEHALF OF THE DESIGNATION COMMITTEE, SO IT WAS FREE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, JUST A QUESTION OF CLARIFICATION.
WHO WAS THE ORIGINAL OWNER OF THE PROPERTY? DID, DID, COULD YOU MENTION IT IN A BRIEFING? I BELIEVE THE, WHICH BUELLER? UH, THE CURRENT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN MATTER TWO, I'M SORRY, Z 2 23 DASH 3 0 6.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF AND LANDMARKS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR SECOND TO FALL STAFF AND LANDMARK RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, PLEASE.
I KNOW MS. RAY HAS ALREADY LEFT.
UM, SO MAYBE SHE'S LISTENING TO THIS IN THE CAR ON THE WAY BACK HOME.
UM, BUT I REALLY, UH, APPRECIATE HER WILLINGNESS TO BE A STAR WAR PRESERVATION.
I KNOW THIS IS NOT HER ONLY PROPERTY THAT SHE'S HAD DESIGNATED.
UM, AND I HOPE THAT SHE IS PLEASED WITH, UM, THE RESULT.
IF YOU ALL WOULD PLEASE JOIN ME IN PASSING IT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT, YOU GUYS KNOW I'M A FAN OF PRESERVATION.
UM, THIS HOME IS ALMOST A HUNDRED YEARS OLD.
UM, AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE OTHER BUILDINGS AND HOMES THAT ARE ALMOST A HUNDRED YEARS OLD DESIGNATED THIS WAY AS WELL.
UM, AND EVEN UH, A CITY ORDINANCE TO THAT.
BUT NEITHER HERE, THERE DALLAS HAS NOT BEEN KNOWN FOR PRESERVATION.
ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? SEE, NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[SUBDIVISION DOCKET]
SUBDIVISION DOCKET CONSENT AGENDA.THE ITEMS CONSISTING OF CASES 17 THROUGH 23.
TODAY'S CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF SEVEN ITEMS. ITEM 17 S 2 2 3 DASH 2 2 3.
ITEM 21 S TWO S 2 2 3 DASH 2 29.
ALL 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 OR AS AMENDMENT AT THE HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THESE ITEMS? 17 2 3 23.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF THE SUBDIVISION CONSENT AGENDA, ITEMS 17 THROUGH 23.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAKE FOR YOUR MOTION.
I SECONDED ANY DISCUSSION? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
YOU OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES NUMBER 24, ITEM 24 S 2 23 DASH 2 21.
AN APPLICATION TO REPLY A 0.377 ACRES TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING
[06:55:01]
ALL OF LOT ONE AND LOT TWO IN CITY BLOCK B OVER 3, 4, 3, 1 TO CREATE A 10 LOT SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT WITH LOTS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 1,215 SQUARE FEET TO 1,721 SQUARE FEET ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON NEELY STREET AT CRAWFORD STREET NORTHEAST CORNER.15 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY ON OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON AUGUST 18TH, 2023.
WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE IN THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED ON THE HEARING.
UH, THANK YOU FOR, UM, READING THAT OF THE RECORD.
IS THERE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? NONE.
I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS, UM, MAINLY ABOUT HOW THIS PROCESS WORKS, BUT, UM, HOW IT RELATES TO THE SPECIFIC SITE.
I'M CURIOUS, IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE CASE REPORT THAT THERE HAVE BEEN VARIOUS ATTEMPTS TO REPL, UM, MANY OF THE PROPERTIES IN VARIOUS DIRECTIONS FROM THIS SITE, INCLUDING THIS SITE.
UM, AND SOME OF THEM HAVE BEEN APPROVED OR DENIED AND SOME OF THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN APPROVED, UM, HAVE NOT BEEN RECORDED YET.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN EXACTLY? AND HOW LONG DO THEY HAVE TO GET SOMETHING RECORDED? UH, IT DEPENDS ON, UH, THE PLANNING PROCESS WHEN THEY'RE COMPLETE.
UM, SHE WANTED TO PROCESS FOR THE SHARED ACCESS
UM, SO, UH, SO ALL THOSE, UH, WHICHEVER WAS NOT RECORDED.
UH, THAT'S STILL AN ACTIVE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
SO ALL THOSE PRELIMINARY CHECK WAS APPROVED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
SO IT DEPENDS ON HOW THE SURVEY, NOW, THE SURVEY NEEDS TO GO THROUGH ALL THOSE CONDITIONS, SUBMIT THOSE REVISED TO, UH, ALL THOSE, UH, UM, INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENTS AND WANTS TO REVIEW IT LOOKS FINE.
THEY WILL, UM, RELEASE THE PLA.
SO IF IT'S NOT RECORDED MEANS IT'S NOT, UH, THEY HAVE NOT MADE ALL THOSE CONDITIONS YET.
SO THEY ARE STILL IN THE PROCESS.
SO IF WE APPROVE A REPL AND THERE'S NOT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT MEETS ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS, THEN IT BASICALLY EXPIRES AND THEN WE MAY HAVE ANOTHER CASE BEFORE US TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED, FOR EXAMPLE.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, UH, IF, UH, ONE OF THE CASE, UH, WHICHEVER, LET'S SAY SAY ONE OF THE EXAM PRELIMINARY PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED.
SO THEY HAVE FIRE DEPENDING ON MAJOR OR MINOR PLAN, THEY HAVE TWO YEARS OF FIVE YEARS FOR EXPIRATION.
SO LET'S SAY WITHIN FIVE YEARS NOTHING WORK HAS BEEN DONE.
LIKE NO ENGINEERING, NO RELEASES, NO WORK HAS BEEN DONE.
THEN AT THAT POINT OF TIME WE LIKE WE SUBDIVISION CAN EXPIRE THOSE, UH, ACTIVE PLAT, WE WILL LET THEM KNOW, HEY, IT HAS ALREADY BEEN FIVE YEARS, NO ANY WORK HAS BEEN DONE.
SO WE ARE EXPIRING THE, UH, EXPIRING THAT PLAT.
SO WE EXPIRE IN ARCHIVE, UH, ARCHIVE D, THOSE AND IN FUTURE IF THEY WANNA COME BACK AND UM, AGAIN GO PRO, GO WITH THE PROCESS, THEN THEY HAVE TO START WORK THE WHOLE NEW PROCESS AGAIN.
OKAY, THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.
AND I ALSO WANNA CLARIFY, RELAS ARE SEPARATE FROM ZONING OR TO WHAT EXTENT IS IT RELATED TO ZONING? UH, IT'S SEPARATE.
I'M LIKE PLATING IS WE ARE JUST CREATING THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY ZONING IS LIKE CHANGING THE ZONING, UH, WHATEVER THE ZONING FROM ONE ZONING TO DIFFERENT ZONING.
AND UH, UH, IN THE PROCESS OF PLATING, WE DO LOOK FOR ZONING BECAUSE INDIVIDUAL, LIKE EACH ZONING, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN REQUIREMENTS.
UH, FOR EXAMPLE, MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT.
SO IF, IF WE HAVE ONE, OKAY, THERE IS ONE CASE, IF IT'S AN R 7.5 MINIMUM REQUIREMENT IS 7,500 SQUARE FEET.
SO WE, THEY DO HAVE TO, EACH LOT DO HAVE TO MEET ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
SO WE DO CHECK THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
IN SOME PD THERE MIGHT BE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH, UM, SOME LIKE DENSITY.
SO YEAH, THOSE, UH, WE DO CHECK, UH, WITH THOSE ZONES.
WOULD IT, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR EXAMPLE TO REPL THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT SINGLE FAMILY LOTS INTO ONE PROPERTY AND THEN BUILD THREE OR FOUR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES
[07:00:01]
ON THAT RE PLATTED PROPERTY? UH, IT DEPENDS ON ZONING.IF IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY ARE COMBINING THREE, FOUR LOTS INTO ONE LOT, AND IF IT'S ZONE S R 7.5, WHICH ONLY ALLOW FOR A SINGLE FAMILY, THEY CAN ONLY DO ONE SINGLE FAMILY NO MATTER HOW BIG IS THE LOT.
THEY CAN ONLY HAVE LIKE ONE UNIT ON ONE LOT.
AND SO IT'S DIFFERENT FOR TOWN HOMES THOUGH, RIGHT? YOU CAN REPL INTO ONE PROPERTY AND THEN BUILD 20 TOWN HOMES ON A PROPERTY? YEAH, IF IT'S A MULTIFAMILY, LET'S SAY MULTIFAMILY IS THREE OR MORE UNITS AND SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, AND THEY MIGHT BE LIKE, THEY MIGHT MAY, IT MAY THEY MAY REPLY INTO ONE BIG LOT AND CREATE A TOWNHOUSE, BUT UH, YEAH, IN MULTIFAMILY THEY CAN HAVE MORE THREE OR MORE THAN THREE UNITS, WHICH IS, WE CALL IT APARTMENT, BUT SOMETIMES THEY MIGHT HAVE AS A TOWNHOUSE BUT STILL WITHIN ONE LOT.
SO IT DEPENDS ON ZONING, WHAT ZONING ALLOWS FOR THOSE USERS.
AND I'M LOOKING AT THE ZONING FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, FIGURE OUT WHAT THIS REPL MEANS IN TERMS OF WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WILL LOOK LIKE AND WHAT THE INTENTION OF THE EXISTING ZONING IS AND WHETHER THIS REPL FITS THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, I GUESS PLATTING, UH, PATTERNS THERE.
THIS PLATING, I'M JUST NEW AND PLATTING PROCESSES LOW, THANK YOU.
DIFFERENT BUT FOR THIS DISTRICT, UH, IT'S, IT IT HAS A MINIMUM LOT AREA.
UM, THIS IS PD 4 68 SUB AREA A, SO MINIMUM LOT AREA WAS 1200 AND THEY ARE PROPOSING TOWNHOUSE.
AND THIS DISTRICT IS ALSO INFORMED DISTRICT, IT FALLS, FALLS UNDER FORM DISTRICT R T N.
SO WE LOOKED FOR DEVELOPMENT TYPE FOR THAT DISTRICT AND IT WAS TOWNHOUSE, THEY PROPOSED, SO IT WAS MEETING THE REQUIREMENT OF THE ZONING.
SO WE ACCEPTED THIS PLA FOR THE SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT.
SO WHEN I TALKED TO MY NEIGHBORS IN THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD ABOUT WHY THERE'S CONDOS POPPING UP IN THE MIDDLE OF A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD, SHOULD I TELL THEM THAT IT'S BECAUSE THE ZONING WAS ALREADY CHANGED TO TOWNHOUSE BEFORE PROPERTIES WERE BEING BOUGHT UP AND RE PLATTED, UM, FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOT WHERE, WHERE WE TOOK THIS LOT, IT'S, IT'S SHOWN AS R T M, WHICH ALLOWED TOWNHOUSES.
SO R T M IS A ZONING CATEGORY OR IS THAT JUST A SPECIFIC CATEGORY WITHIN THIS PD? YEAH, I WASN'T ABLE TO FIND IT IN THE PD ORDINANCE.
OH, LIKE MU IT'S A, IT'S A TYPE OF FORM.
UM, SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THIS PD HAS THAT ENTIRE SUBDISTRICT A AS MM-HMM.
AND WE HAVE DIFFERENT ZONING REGULATIONS, A LOT AREA REGULATIONS, AND THEY MEET THAT REQUIREMENT.
THAT HELPS CLARIFY EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME ON THAT.
IF YOU NEED WANT NO MORE, I CAN TALK TO
I, I THINK THAT CLARIFIES THE SITUATION, WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE PROCESS FOR ME.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER POPKIN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS.
IN THE MATTER OF SS 2 23 DASH 2021 I MOTION TO, UM, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER POPKIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THE 0.877 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING PART OF BLOCK 38 8 6 1 7 TO CREATE FOUR LOTS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 0.22 ACRE.
THAT IS 9,584 SQUARE FOOT TO 0.251 ACRE.
THAT IS 10,932 SQUARE FOOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON COLLO DRIVE SOUTH OF MALLORY DRIVE.
15 NOTICES WERE SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON AUGUST 18TH, 2023.
WE HAVE RECEIVED DUE REPLYING PAPER AND DUE REPLYING OPPOSITION TO THIS
[07:05:01]
REQUEST.STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED IN THE HEARING.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER BLAIR, PLEASE.
UM, ON, ON THE PROPERTY, WHEN YOU GUYS, WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY LINE, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THAT PROPERTY LINE, THAT FROM THAT FIRST UH, LOT IS JUST GOING TO BE VACANT LAND? OR IS IT, WHAT IS THAT? I I, I'M NOT FOLLOWING THE, THE MAP ON THE NORTH SIDE OF, OF KILO, KILO DRIVE, UH, LET ME IS WHERE IT SAYS BLOCK LINE IS THERE? YES.
SO THE NORTH SIDE IS A VACANT LOT.
NO SOFT STRUCTURE ON THE BLOCK, ACTUALLY.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE, UH, THEY WERE, THEY CAME TO PLA AND THEN WE LOOKED ON THE NORTH SIDE BECAUSE THERE CANNOT BE STRUCTURE AT LEFT.
UH, SO THERE WAS NO STRUCTURE ON THE BLOCK.
SO RIGHT AFTER THE, SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT IN THE, UM, RE PLATING AND MAKING THESE 1, 2, 3, THESE FOUR DIFFERENT PLATTS YOU'LL HAVE? YES MA'AM.
A PIECE OF LAND FROM THE BLOCK LINE TO THAT FIRST PLAT, UM, THAT IS NON-USABLE LAND FIRST LOT, RIGHT? FROM THE FIRST LOT.
FROM THE BLOCK LINE TO THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE FIR FIRST LOT.
SO YOU ARE MEANING RIGHT? UH, UH, UH, UPPER PART OF OUR LOT ONE, CORRECT? YEAH, THAT, THAT WAS THE PART, THIS WAS PLANTED WITHIN THE PART OF BLOCK.
SO IT'S USABLE, BUT THAT IF THEY HAVE TO COME FOR THE PLA TWO, IT'S A, THIS WAS A BLOCK AND THEY, UH, PLANTED PIECE OF THE BLOCK.
SO WE TAKE PART OF BLOCK AS A LOT TWO.
SO NO STRUCTURES SHOULD BE REMAINED ON THE REMAINDER OF THE BLOCK THAT WE LOOKED AT IT.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR ANSWER PLEASE? SO THIS PIECE OF THE PROPERTY IS A PART OF A BLOCK, UM, 13 PART OF THE BLOCK, 38 OVER 8, 6 1 7.
WHEN THEY COME TO PLAT A PLAT A PART OF THE BLOCK WILL TAKE IT AS A PART OF THE LOT TWO PLATTED, LOT TWO.
SO THIS PIECE WHERE THESE FOUR LOTS WERE NOW WE ARE GOING FOR PLA IS A PART, UH, PART OF A BLOCK.
SO THE REMAINDER OF THE BLOCK IS ON THE TOP.
PART OF THE PORTION OF THE PORTION IS ON THE TOP PART LEFT.
SO FOR THAT, FOR PLA PURPOSES, WE JUST LOOKED IF THERE WAS A STRUCTURE OR NOT.
THAT'S WHY WE PLA WE PLOTTED REMAINDER OF THAT BLOCK IN THE PLATING PROCESS, WE ACCEPTED THE PLATT.
SO THE TOP NORTH OF THE, UM, THE LOT IS ACTUALLY A, A PIECE OF PROPERTY? YES.
SO THE PROPERTY THAT'S, THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL REPL NOT AN INITIAL PLAT IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, RIGHT? YEAH, IT'S A RESIDENTIAL REPL BECAUSE OF THE PLATTED BLOCK.
SO THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY IS ALREADY PLATTED LOT AND THEN THAT AREA BETWEEN THE EDGE OF OUR EXISTING LOT, THAT'S THE SUBJECT OF THE RE PLAT AND THE BLOCK LINE THAT ALREADY EXISTS TODAY.
AND WE'RE NOT ALTERING THAT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE AREA OF REQUEST AND THE PARCEL TO THE, I'M LOOKING AT THE PLAN, I GUESS NORTH, RIGHT? SO THE REQUEST NOW IS PAT OF THE PORTION OF THE BLOCK WHEN PLA BLOCK.
WHAT WOULD BE THE BLOCK FACE ON THAT FIRST, THAT SECTION THAT IS NOT PART OF THIS, THESE FOUR PLOTS, HOW MUCH SPACE WOULD THAT BE? WHAT IS, WHAT IS THAT LOT SIZE THAT THAT, THAT YOU'RE MAKING IN LOT ZERO.
I'M GONNA CALL IT LOT ZERO BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE A LOT NUMBER.
[07:10:08]
YEAH.BASICALLY THAT THE NORTH PORTION IS A REMAINDER PORTION OF THE BLOCK.
CAN YOU SPEAK UP TO THE, THE MIC PLEASE? OH, SORRY.
SO THE REMAINDER PORTION OF THE NORTH SIDE OF THE, UH, LOT THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS A REMAINDER PORTION OF THE LOT.
SO WE CAN GO AHEAD AND JUST GIVE AN S LIKE ROUGH CALCULATION.
LET'S SEE, DO WE HAVE CALCULATION? IT'S 187 LENGTH BY 75, ALMOST 30.
YEAH, WE WANTED TO KNOW THE AREA OF THIS MM-HMM.
SO YOU CAN CALCULATION AROUND 30.
DO YOU HAVE SCALE? IF YOU CAN JUST SCALE OUT.
SO IT'S ALMOST, UH, APPROXIMATE 7,500 SQUARE FEET, 7,500.
SO THE REMAINDER WILL BE ALMOST AROUND 7,500 SQUARE FEET.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, LEAD THE WAY, PLEASE.
WELL, I JUST, UM, I, I THINK WHAT THE UNDERLYING QUESTION IS, OR WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT THERE'S, ON THE, UM, CASE REPORT 25 H THERE'S A BLOCK LINE, JUST A GRAPHIC LINE THAT IS CREATING A, UM, I'M GONNA CALL IT A VOID BETWEEN THE AREA OF REQUEST AND THAT BLOCK LINE.
BUT IS IT CORRECT THAT THE BLOCK LINE IS SIMPLY A DESIGNATION FOR THE AREA? THAT IT'S NOT RELATED TO THE, TO THE PLATT? YEAH, IT'S NOT RELATED TO THE PLAT.
AND SO IT, BECAUSE IT'S THE REMAINDER OF THE, UH, NO, GO AHEAD.
IT'S THE REMAINDER OF THAT BLOCK AND IT'S NOT, IT'S IT'S PART OF THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.
SO AT WHATEVER POINT THAT HOWEVER, AND I, THERE'S NOT A FEE DESIGNATION, BUT IT'S HOWEVER MANY FEET WOULD BE PART OF THE ADJACENT PARCEL.
WELL, AND I, I'M, I'M GONNA TRY TO SAY THIS, UM, MS. SHARMAN, CORRECT ME IF I'M SAYING THIS INCORRECTLY, THAT THE BLOCK LINE DESIGNATION IS SIMPLY A LEGAL DESCRIPTION RELATED TO THE PROPERTY.
AND I'LL USE AN EXAMPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S QUITE COMMON THAT THE BLOCK LINE, UM, IT, IT CAN DISSECT A LOT AND THEN THE LOT IS DESCRIBED BY
[07:15:01]
HOWEVER MANY FEET OF THAT BLOCK.SO YOU MIGHT HAVE TWO BLOCKS WITHIN A LOT.
AND I, I AND MS. SHARMA, I WILL LET YOU CORRECT ME IF THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS NECESSARILY CREATING.
THAT'S WHAT I'M READING IT TO SAY.
AND THE, SOME OF THE TIME THE BLOCK ARE NOT PLATTED, BUT AT THE, AT THIS TIME IT WAS A PLATTED BLOCK.
SO WE, UH, THEY CAME UP WITH THESE FOUR LOCKS, WHICH HAD THE REMAINDER OF BLOCK, WHICH YOU ARE SEEING RIGHT NOW.
SO THERE'S GONNA BE REMAINDER PARCEL OF BLOCK 38 SLASH 86 19.
AND IT'S PART OF THE ADJACENT PARCEL.
YES, PART OF ADJACENT REQUEST OF REQUEST.
THE ONE WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW.
UM, I, I SEE A PROPERTY TO THE, WE'LL CALL IT PLAN NORTH OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S OWNED BY AN INDIVIDUAL NAMED JUSTINA WALKER.
WALFORD IS THE AREA BETWEEN THE AREA OF REQUEST AND THE BLOCK LINE PART OF THE WALFORD PROPERTY.
UM, IT'S NOT OH,
THE BLOCK IS 38 OVER 8 6 1 7 AND THAT ONE IS 39 OVER 8 6 1 7.
CAN I ASK A FOLLOW UP QUESTION? OF COURSE, PLEASE.
IS THE CREATION OF A REMAINDER A CRITERIA THAT WE CONSIDER OR CAN CONSIDER UNDER 8.503? OR IS THAT OUTSIDE OF OUR VICE CHAIR? RUBIN? I KNOW SOMEWHERE IN ARTICLE EIGHT AND I WOULD HAVE TO FIND IT, BUT WE CAN, WE CANNOT CREATE REMAINDERS.
I GIMME A SECOND TO FIND THAT SECTION OF THE CODE, RIGHT.
MR. BBAR, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THIS DISCUSSION, SIR? GOOD EVENING.
SO YOU HAVE PLAID LOT AND YOU HAVE PLAID BLOCK, UH, PLAID BLOCK.
THEY ALL TREATED THE SAME AS LONG AS THERE IS NO STRUCTURE ON THE REMAINDER OF THE PLAID PORTION OF THE LOT OR PLAID BLOCK, YOU CAN LEAVE THAT PORTION OUT AND NOT INCLUDE IT WITH YOUR PLAID.
THE PORTION THAT IS BEING LEFT HERE FROM UH, BLOCK 38 OVER 8 6 1 7 IS APPROXIMATELY, UH, 7,500 SQUARE FEET MEETS THE MINIMUM LOT AREA.
SHOULD SOMEBODY IN THE FUTURE WANNA PLANT THAT INTO A LOT, SO THEREFORE WE CAN LEAVE IT OUT BECAUSE THERE IS NO STRUCTURE UNDER REMAINDER OF THE PLA, THE LOT OR PLAID BLOCK.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEE NONE.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF S 2 2 3 2 2 2.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC CLEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCK.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLA FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
26 ITEM 26 SS 2 2 3 DASH 2 2 5.
AN APPLICATION TO REPLIED A ONE 14001.42448 ARE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING OLIVE LOTS ONE THROUGH FOUR SEVEN AND PARTS OF LOT EIGHT THROUGH 11 IN CITY BLOCK 13 OVER 1 1 5 9, AND A PORTION OF A 15 FOOT ABANDONED ALLEY TO CREATE ONE LOT AND PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND PEABODY.
EAST OF HARWOOD STREET, SEVEN 10 NOTICES WERE SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON AUGUST 18TH, 2023.
WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR
[07:20:01]
AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED ON THE HA AT THE HEARING.
I SEE THE APPLICANT IS HERE AF GOOD EVENING.
THESE NEXT TWO PLATS ARE FOR FOREST FORWARD IS MY CLIENT.
ON THIS FOREST FORWARD IS THE, THE GROUP THAT IS REHABILITATING THE FOREST THEATER, HISTORIC FOREST THEATER.
AND THIS IS FOR THE PROPERTY JUST SOUTH AND WEST OF THAT WE'VE, WE HAD TWO OTHER, UH, PLATTS EARLIER IN THE, ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, FOR THE SAME PROJECT.
UM, THE REASON WE'RE BRINGING THESE FORWARD NOW IS THAT THEY'RE GONNA SERVE AS THE INTERIM, UH, SURFACE PARKING FOR THE THEATER WHEN IT OPENS.
WE ARE WORKING DILIGENTLY WITH TDOT IN THE CITY OF DALLAS TO ACTUALLY GET OUR PARKING PUT UNDERNEATH I 45.
AND WE THINK IT'S GONNA HAPPEN VERY AT SOME QUICKLY IN THE CITY AND TDOT TERMS, BUT, BUT, UH, WE NEED, UH, PARKING IN ORDER TO OPEN THE THEATER.
AND THAT'S WHAT THESE TWO PLA ARE FOR.
UM, THE, YOU'LL BE SEEING A REZONING IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS, BRING THE ENTIRE PROPERTY INTO A SINGLE, UH, PLAN DEVELOPMENT SUBDISTRICT TO PD 5 95.
WE HOPE THAT WE NEVER HAVE TO USE THIS PROPERTY FOR PARKING, BUT IN CASE WE NEED IT, WE NEED TO DO IT NOW BECAUSE WE HAVE CIVIL ENGINEERING TO DO.
AND THOSE INVOLVED IN THE CIVIL ENGINEERING PROCESS KNOW THAT TAKES EIGHT TO 10 MONTHS TO, TO GET CIVIL PLANS DONE AND WE CAN'T.
SO WE, WE NEED TO GET THIS DONE NOW IN ORDER TO, TO KEEP THIS CIVIL ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE TOGETHER IN THE ZONING CASE.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON EITHER ONE OF THESE CASES.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALLING? COMMISSIONER? YEAH, I DON'T WANT TO GO TOO FAR BEYOND THE SCOPE OF PLATTING, BUT UH, TO USE THIS AS REMOTE PARKING FROM THE, FOR THE THEATER, YOU'LL NEED A REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENT.
AND DOES THE ZONING PERMIT REMOTE PARKING FOR THE THEATER? YES, SIR.
RIGHT NOW THEY WILL NEED SUVS, UH, TO PROVIDE THE PARKING.
AND THAT'S THE ZONING CASE THAT YOU, AND THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN FILED, REFERRED TO AS PART OF THE PD.
WE SAY THAT YOU CAN DO REMOTE PARKING BY LEASE RATHER THAN A PARKING AGREEMENT LIKE THEY DO.
SO WE DO RECOGNIZE WE'LL NEED PAR REMOTE PARKING AGREEMENTS.
THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT BEFORE US TODAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN? COMMISSIONER? WE, UM, IS THESE ARE, WE CAN ASK WHAT HE'S AT NOW, RIGHT? RIGHT.
SO THESE ARE THE, ARE THESE THE ONES BEHIND FAR FORWARD, FORWARD? YES.
THESE ARE THE, THE, THE, THE, THE PROPERTY THEY OWNED THAT IS, UH, OFF IT'S SEPARATED BY HARWOOD ONES.
I HAD THAT, UH, ARCHIE'S GAMBLING HOUSE ON IT.
AND THE OTHER, UH, IS JUST, IT IS ALL VACANT.
THE, THE FUTURE IS TO PLAN, RE REDO THAT WITH, UH, PD, SOME COMPLIMENTARY USE TO THE THEATER, BUT FOR THE TIME BEING, IT'S GONNA BE PARKING IF, IF NEEDED AND IT WILL GO INTO THE PLAN DISTRICT.
AND YOU'LL SEE ALL THIS WHEN WE BRING THE, THE ZONING CASE THROUGH.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE ONE.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I MOVED TO? OH, IS THIS BOTH OF 'EM OR JUST ONE? ONE? JUST THE ONE.
OKAY, I MOVED IN THE CASE OF 2 2 3 2 2 3.
I MEAN TWO THREE DASH 2 2 6 7 2 2 5.
WHERE MY BRAIN, OKAY, HOLD ON.
IN THE CASE OF TWO TWO SS, 2 2 3 DASH 2 2 5, I'M ABLE TO CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING, UM, AND FILE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, SERVICE OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HARBERT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? I SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
NUMBER 27, ITEM 27 S 2 2 3 DASH 2 2 6 AND APPLICATION TOLAT 0.99.
ONE ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT 5, 6, 10, 11, AND 12 IN CITY BLOCK 12 OVER 1 1 5, 8, AND A PORTION OF 15 FOOT ABANDONED ALLEY TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND PEABODY AVENUE WEST OF HARVARD STREET.
NOTICES WERE SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON AUGUST 18TH, 2023.
[07:25:02]
WE HAVE RECEIVED JURY REPLY IN FAVOR AND JURY REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED IN THE HEARING.
OR AB ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? UM, MR. BALDWIN, JUST A QUESTION AND I'LL HAVE A SIMILAR ONE FOR STAFF.
SO THIS IS THE SECOND PARCEL, IT'S ACROSS HARWOOD STREET.
UM, IF IT IS NOT UTILIZED FOR SURFACE PARKING, CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHAT IT, I MEAN, HOW IT WOULD SUPPORT THE THEATER IF THERE'S A LONG-TERM PLAN FOR IT OTHER THAN PARKING? THE LONG-TERM PLAN, UH, IS EITHER, UM, IT'S A MIXED USE, UH, RESIDENTIAL OR, UM, SPECIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.
IT WILL, IT'S ALL GONNA BE BROUGHT INTO A SINGLE PD THAT YOU'LL SEE HERE PROBABLY IN THE NEXT THREE OR FOUR MONTHS.
SO BEFORE I'M ADVISED THAT THIS IS BEYOND OUR PURVIEW.
I WILL THANK YOU FOR THAT CONTEXT.
IS THIS GONNA BE A GREAT PROJECT?
IS THIS GONNA BE A GREAT PROJECT? IT'S GONNA BE A GREAT PROJECT.
IT'S GONNA BE A GREAT PROJECT.
HAS THIS HAS AMAZING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT? UH, NO.
OF ALL THE PROJECTS I'M INVOLVED WITH, THIS ONE HAS THE MOST ENERGY AND IT'S A REALLY GOOD PURPOSE.
AND WITH, UH, 1 75 COMING BACK TO GRADE, IT'S ALL GONNA TIE IT ALL TOGETHER.
IT'S A PART OF A GREAT EYESORE TURN AROUND.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS FOR OUR STAFF? COMMISSIONER HAMDEN? I, UH, THE USE THE FUTURE USE OF THE SITE.
IT WAS FUTURE USE OF THE SITE, BUT IT HAD TO DO WITH THE, UM, LOT CONFIGURATION.
I'VE LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT SO I KNOW.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF
COMMISSIONER WHEELER, YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
IN THE CASE OF S 2 23 DASH 2 26, I MOVE TO, TO CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE, THIS ITEM SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DI DOCKET.
FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OR APPROVE WITH SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION PLEASE? COMMISSIONER? WE, I, I, I'M THIS PROJECT, I MEAN I KNOW THESE ARE REPL, BUT THE, THE GRAND SCHEME IS GOING TO TURN A A WE REALLY NEED HISTORICAL.
WE, WE NEED, WE NEED REALLY NEED A BUILDING TO BE DEEMED HISTORICAL, BUT IT'S BRINGING BACK TO LIFE AN EYESORE AND IT'S A PART OF A BIGGER PLAN AND I CAN'T WAIT TILL THE PD IS PRESENTED FOR THIS, FOR THIS GRAND SCHEME.
NEVER HAVE, I HATE PDS BUT THIS IS ONE THAT I RECOMMENDED.
I RECOMMENDED IT SO JUST, IT IS GONNA BE AMAZING.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, VERY BRIEFLY, UM, EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT.
UH, AS COMMISSIONER WILLER MENTIONED, UM, THIS WAS THE BEE'S KNEES AT ONE POINT FOR ENTERTAINMENT FOR THIS AREA.
UM, AND HONESTLY, RIGHT, ME AND MR. BALDWIN WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO WALK IN THAT DOOR TOGETHER BECAUSE OF RACIAL BIASES.
SO I'M EXCITED THAT THIS HAS RETURNED BACK TO THE PEOPLE WHO, UM, WERE ABLE TO PERFORM THERE BUT NOT ABLE TO WITNESS THE PERFORMANCE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
UH, COMMISSIONERS WE HAVE UH, THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE FOR SIGNS.
WE HAVE ITEM 28, ITEM 28, ITEM 28 SS 2 2 3 DASH 2 3 2.
AND APPLICATION TO REPORT A 0.46 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING PART OF LOT NINE IN CITY BLOCK ONE OVER 4 3 4 0 TO CREATE ONE 0.22 ACRE.
THAT IS 9,531 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND ONE 0.24 ACRE.
THAT IS 10,381 SQUARE FOOT LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON ANN ARBOR AVENUE.
NOTICES WERE SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET AFTER PROPERTY ON AUGUST 18TH, 2023.
[07:30:03]
WE HAVE RECEIVED DUE REPLY IN FAVOR AND DUE REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED IN THE HEARING.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER WHEELER GONNA HAVE A MOTION.
PARDON ME? COMMISSIONER BLAIR? MAKING SURE EVERYBODY'S AWAKE HERE.
COMMISSIONER BLA UH, YES, IN THE MATTER OF S 2 2 3 2 3 2, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FILE A STATUS RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.
NOW WE GO TO OUR CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS FOR SIGNS.
WE HAVE, UH, TWO ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT I BELIEVE WE ARE NOT BRIEFING.
UH, MR. POOLE, I THINK WE HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU SIR.
COMMISSIONER THE, I'M SO SORRY.
YOU GONNA READ INTO THE RECORD WE DIDN'T READ 'EM THE RECORD? YES.
MR. POOLE, CAN YOU PLEASE READ THOSE IN THERE FIRST I'M GETTING AHEAD OF MYSELF.
GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER JASON POOLE, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
ITEM NUMBER 29 IS, UH, APPLICATION NUMBER 2 3 0 6 0 7 1 0 9 5.
AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY JIM DECICCO OF SIGN BUILDERS D F W FOR A 117 SQUARE FOOT ILLUMINATED ATTACHED SIGN AT 2020 SOUTH HARWOOD ON THE SOUTHWEST ELEVATION, BOTH STAFF AND SS S D A C, RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
AND ITEM NUMBER 30 AND APP, UH, APPLICATION NUMBER 2 3 0 6 7 1 0 9 6 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY JIM DECICCO OF SIGNED BUILDERS D F W FOR 117 SQUARE FOOT ILLUMINATED ATTACHED SIGN AT 2020 SOUTH HARWOOD ON THE SOUTHEAST ELEVATION.
UH, BOTH STAFF AND SS S D A C RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
NOW WE DO HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
MR. POOLE, AND I'LL APOLOGIZE AS YOU SAID THAT, UM, ON CASE NUMBER 30 IS THE ORIENTATION OF THAT SIGN, THE SOUTH ELEVATION.
IT'S LISTED IN OUR DOCKET AS THE SOUTHEAST AND THEY'RE ON AN OPPOSING CORNER, NOT OPPOSITE FACADE.
SO JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT ORIENTATION WAS CLEAR.
IT'S NOT POINTING STRAIGHT SOUTH, BUT NO THANK, THANK YOU.
I JUST WANTED SOUTH SOUTHEAST.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS CLEAR THAT THEY'RE NOT ON OPPOSING FACADES.
UM, THEY'RE GRAPHICALLY INDICATED IN OUR DOCKET AS BEING CENTERED ON THE FACADES.
IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PLACEMENT? THERE WAS NO DIMENSIONAL OR OTHER, UM, INFORMATION ON HOW THE LAYOUT WOULD ACTUALLY BE ACHIEVED.
SO FOR INSTANCE, I'M ON PAGE 29 DASH 12.
YES, THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
AND THEN, UM, AND THIS APPLIES TO BOTH SIGNS AS WELL.
IT THEY'RE MOUNTED ON A RACEWAY PER THE DETAIL THAT RACEWAY IS GRAPHICALLY INDICATED AS BEING BLACK WITHIN OUR DOCKET.
DO YOU KNOW IF THERE'S A COLOR DESIGNATION FOR THAT? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT IS BLACK.
EVERYTHING BUT THE FACES ARE TO BE BLACK.
YEAH, I SAW ON THE NOTE ON THE END PIECES, SO WANTED TO CONFIRM.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON COMMISSIONERS.
ANY OTHER OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. POOLE? SEE NONE.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON I MOTION? I DO.
IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FOR SIGN 23 DASH 2 27 OH AND ITEM 23 2 2 7 1.
I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST PER STAFF AND S S D A C RECOMMENDATION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
JUST QUICK ITEM ON THE OTHER MATTERS.
[OTHER MATTERS]
A, AN ADJUSTMENT TO OUR, UH, C P C MEETINGS.COMMISSIONER RUBIN IS GONNA POINT OUT YES, THERE IS A COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE ON THIS TUESDAY, THE 12TH OF SEPTEMBER AT EIGHT 30.
DIDN'T LOOK LIKE IT MADE IT ON THERE, SO I JUST WANTED TO REMIND EVERYONE.
AND AS ALWAYS, ALL C P C MEMBERS, LIKE MEMBERS, THE PUBLIC ARE WELCOME TO ATTEND.
UH, COMMISSIONER RUBIN, UH, COMMISSIONERS AS ALWAYS, UH, THANK STAFF FOR, UH, A VERY LONG AND AMAZING DAY.
UH, AND THANK ALL OF YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK,
[07:35:01]
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR BRINGING PEOPLE TOGETHER THROUGH ZONING.COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR STEPPING INTO AN EASY CASE ON GREENVILLE AVENUE AND COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR FOUR ZONING CASES TODAY.
GOOD FOR YOU AND, UH, HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, WHEREVER SHE IS.
I HOPE SHE'S HAVING A GREAT BIRTHDAY.
IT IS 6:47 PM AND OUR MEETING IS ADJOURNED.