[00:00:01]
IS THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5TH, 2023.IT'S 9 0 4 COMMISSION AS ALWAYS.
A COUPLE MORE QUICK ITEMS. UH, THIS IS A BRIEFING AND IT'S STRICTLY A TIME FOR QUESTIONS FROM TWO STAFF.
WE'LL KEEP ALL OUR, OUR COMMENTS FOR THE HORSESHOE THIS AFTERNOON.
UH, I'D LIKE TO WELCOME TO YOU FROM INSURANCE, MR. CALL.
WE ALL VERY MUCH, UH, AFFORD TO WORKING WITH YOU AND HELP YOU THAT LEARNING CURVE, WHICH I THINK YOU MAY NOT BE AS STEEP AS FOR YOUR NORMAL NEW COMMISSION.
UH, WE HAVE ONE COMMISSIONER ALL CAME FROM ZAC AND COMMISSIONER SMA.
SPENT PLENTY OF TIME AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
UH, SO BOTH OF THEM KNOW KIND OF WHAT WE DO AND NOT FOR.
COMMISSIONERS WILL GET STARTED ON THE DOCKET.
MISCELLANEOUS ITEM WE DO PER, UH, REQUEST THE BRIEFING FOR REQUESTERS.
ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, DEVELOPMENT PLAN? CASE NUMBER ONE? DOES ANYONE THAT'S, I'M JUST CURIOUS.
THERE'S A U-SHAPED DRIVEWAY THROUGH THAT PUPPY.
IS IT ONE WAY? DOES IT MATTER? IT'S ONE WAY.
DOES THAT, THAT TRAFFIC
SO IT'S ALSO A FIRE LANE AS WELL.
AND SO WE WORK WITH THE, UH, FIRE REVIEWER TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS IN COMPLIANCE SO THE FIRE TRUCK CAN GIVE YOU THE PROPERTY IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENED TO THE SECOND BUILDING AND GET BACK AROUND.
BUT IT'S A TWO RACE, IT'S TWO.
OBVIOUSLY IT'S TRIGGERING OUR, AND IT LOOKS LIKE CREATED SOME SIGNIFICANTLY, UH, SIGNIFICANT ISSUES TO LANDSCAPE, UH, BECAUSE THAT'S, AM I READING THAT RIGHT? LOOK LIKE THAT WEST? OKAY.
TO THE WEST THERE IS A R SEVEN FIVE THAT WE DID WORK WITH THE ARBORS AND SO, UH, THEY'RE PROVIDING A FENCE AND ALSO THEY COMPLIANCE WITH THE LANDSCAPING FOR THAT PARKING AND FOR THAT USE ALONG RESIDENTIAL S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMERS OR WOULD ANYONE LIKE THIS ITEM BRIEF ZONING CASES? UH, FIRST CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT, UH, JANUARY THREE 18.
HAVE MEETING DATES FOR THE 24TH.
WHAT'S THE 2ND OF JANUARY? NOT YET.
WE'RE WAITING FOR COUNCIL TO VOTE THEIR AGENDA AND AFTER DATE, THEIR DATES WE GREAT.
SO WE'LL HAVE A, THE SECOND ONE.
UH, THE NEXT CASE HAS BEEN BEFORE, NO, NO CHANGES.
ANY QUESTIONS, ANY COMMISSIONS? NUMBER THREE, UH, CASE NUMBER FOUR HAS BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE.
MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST ON THAT CASE AND THEN TURNING OFF MY VIDEO.
THIS, UH, THIS CASE HAS BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE.
IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, THIS MEETING WOULD BE WITH US AT 10:00 AM WILL THERE BE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HER? NO QUESTIONS.
LET'S SEE, UH, NUMBER FIVE WILL BRIEF TODAY.
[00:05:06]
CASE NUMBER C 2 3 1 9 7.UM, IS A DOUBLE REQUEST FOR IS ONE JOURNALS ONLY CHANGE TO A P ONE BIGGER CONTROL OVERLAY AND A SPECIFIC, A NEW SPECIFIC EXPERIMENT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE THAT IS LESS THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET.
THE PROPERTY IS NOW IS ON CR COMMUNITY RETAIL AND HAS A D CONTROL OVERLAY AND IT'S ON THE SOUTH LINE OF JACOB, UH, LAKE JUNE ROAD, EAST OF NORTH AND
AND IT'S APPROXIMATELY 20 ACRES.
UM, IT'S LOCATED IN SOUTHEAST DALLAS.
UM, YOU CAN SEE ON THE AREA, UM, IT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM, UH, THE CITY LIBRARY.
WE HAVE ANOTHER RESTAURANT, SOME VACANT BUILDINGS, UH, ON BOTH SIDES.
SO IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A PORTION OF A RETAIL CORNER WITH THE LIBRARY FOR THE BACK.
THERE IS A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
UH, YOU CAN SEE ON THE ZONING MAP THE AREAS IN RED ARE THE ONES THAT ARE D MEANING THAT ALCOHOL SALES CANNOT HAPPEN.
THE ONE IN BLUE ARE D ONE MEANING ALCOHOL SALES CAN HAPPEN WITH SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE A DOUBLE REQUEST IN FRONT OF US TODAY.
THERE IS ANOTHER S U P DIAGONALLY TO THE SOUTH THAT HAS ALCOHOL SALES.
UH, THIS IS THE PROPERTY, UM, STRAIGHT ACCESS FROM LAKE JUNE ROAD.
IT'S ONLY THE FRONT PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IN THE BACK IS VACANT.
VACANT, UH, TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST, THERE IS A RESTAURANT, A LARGER VIEW OF THE CORNER, THE LIBRARY ACROSS THE STREET.
AUGUSTINE ROAD, THE UM, LIQUOR SALES.
THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN.
UM, IT HAS, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING, IT'S ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS, NO CHANGES.
THEY ARE NOT PROPOSING TO TOUCH THE SITE IN ANY WAY OTHER THAN JUST UTILIZE THE BUILDING.
UH, THEY DIDN'T OPEN THEIR BUSINESS YET, BUT THEY ARE PLANNING TO OPEN THIS, UH, GENERAL MERCHANDISE STARTING WHOLESALE IMMEDIATELY.
THEY DIDN'T PULL PERMITS OR COS OR ANYTHING.
UH, THE S U P CONDITIONS ARE PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
THE USE THE SITE PLAN, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS FOR TWO YEARS AND THIS IS WHAT THE, UH, UH, APPLICANT REQUESTED AND NORMAL MAINTENANCE AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.
UM, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD OF SUBJECT TO SITE AND CONDITIONS.
WHAT KIND OF BUSINESS IS THIS? IS IT A CONVENIENCE STORE OR IT'S A CONVENIENCE STORE? YES.
IT, WE CALL THE GENERAL MERCHANDISING FOOD STORE BECAUSE THEY CAN, UM, DO SALES OF A LOT OF THINGS AND IT'S SMALLER.
IT'S A SMALL, IT'S THE SMALLEST PACK THAT'S UNDER 3,500.
THE SALE OF ALCOHOL IS THE ONE THAT QUESTIONS INDIVIDUAL CASES BEING CASE NUMBER SIX.
YOU WANT ME TO, THIS IS, OH, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
C 2 2, 3 1 0 6 IS LOCATED UNIT, UH, SCOTT
[00:10:01]
J UM, SOUTHWEST PART OF THE STATE AND IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR ONE A C AS A COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT.RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AND TO A SPECIFIC USE CURRENT OF MOTOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ON THE PROPERTY ZONE, A A AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE TELEPHONE ROAD DETERMINES EVENT ON DRIVE.
THE AREA OF REQUEST IS 5.3 ACRES.
THE FIRST OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ON THE SITE.
HERE'S AN AREA MAP OF THE SITE, UH, AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
AND SO CURRENTLY ZONED I, UM, A AGRICULTURAL AS IS MUCH OF THE SOUTH PART OF THE BLOCK.
SO THE E EXCUSE ME, TO THE WEST BASED AGRICULTURAL USES.
CEDAR VALLEY COLLEGE IS FURTHER, UH, TO THE SOUTH AND THERE'S A NATURAL AREA BEHIND THE SITE, UH, TO THE EAST.
THERE IS FROM SOUTH OCCUPATION, COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT, OUTSIDE MACHINERY, HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR TRUCK SALES AND SERVICE.
UH, BUT COULDN'T CONFIRM BECAUSE THERE'S NO C E O FOR THAT NEWS.
UM, AGRICULTURAL TO THE EAST, WELL, UH, NATURAL AREA TO THE NORTH, KIND OF UP THE CREEK FROM THIS SITE.
THERE'S A SINGLE FAMILY DIRECTLY ACROSS TELEPHONE FROM THIS SITE AND THEN CATTY CORNER, UH, THERE'S A WAREHOUSE AT THIS TIME.
MICHAEL, CAN YOU SEE THE PRESENTATION? NO, WE'RE SHARING, SO WE'RE SHARING JUST IN THE ROOM ABOUT THAT.
IF ANY INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE, I'VE GONE BACK OVER ON BEHALF TO, SO, UM, SO SUBJECT PARCEL IS AN UNDEVELOPED 5.348 LOT PROPOSED USES ARE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING AND MACHINERY, HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR TRUCKS SALES AND SERVICE.
THE LAW WILL BE ACCESSED FROM TELEPHONE ROAD.
PROPOSED USE OF COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT, THE CS THAT'S PROPOSED, UH, BUT REQUIRES AN S U P WITHIN PATTERN REVIEW.
RESIDENTIAL ZONING, UH, AS BLOCKED MANUALLY CONSISTS OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND U CASE REQUIRED IN ADDITION TO THE GENERAL ZONING CHAIN AND THE PROPERTY SURROUNDS THE GENERATED CULTURAL RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER.
ALRIGHT, YOU CAN GET TO THE SIDE.
I'M LOOKING SOUTH ON OF TELEPHONE ROAD AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
IT'S A LITTLE FARTHER DOWN TELEPHONE ROAD AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
AND THAT'S ONE MORE VIEW PART OF SOUTH SOUTHWEST WEST AND THEN THE NEXT LOT, UH, TO THE, TO THE WEST AS WELL.
I BOTH THE LOT TURNING AROUND.
I'M LOOKING, UM, UP THE TELEPHONE ROAD AT SEVEN WAREHOUSE THAT EXISTS TODAY.
MOVING UP, THAT'S THE INTERSECTION OF VAN FOUR DRIVE AND TELEPHONE.
UM, LOOKING NORTH, YOU CAN SEE TREE AREA ON THE RIGHT.
UH, SMALL SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION, UH, IN THERE NOW KIND OF FLIPS ALONG.
UM, GOING UP TELEPHONE ROAD, THIS IS THE CREEK THAT'S ADJACENT TO THE SITE.
THIS IS THE SIDE TO THE EAST TURNED ADD AND TO THE NORTH THERE'S SORT OF THAT CREEK WAY, UM, THAT IS FURTHER UP THE CREEK, UH, SUBJECT SIDE.
SO WHEN WE GET ON DOWN TO THE SITE PLAN, UH, YOU CAN SEE IT, THE LOT ITSELF IS, UM, CONCORDS TO THE CREEK AND SO THEY PROPOSE A CYCLING, UM, THAT SORT OF MATCHES THAT.
UH, BUT GENERALLY YOU HAVE ENTRANCES FROM TELEPHONE ROAD, UM, MECHANIC PHASE, UH, COMMERCIAL TRUCK PARKING SPOTS AND UH, ADDITIONAL SPOTS IN THE REAR.
UH, THEN THEY ENTER AND EXIT OFF OF
UH, SO MOST OF THAT CENTRAL PARKING, A UPDATE OF MAINTENANCE AREA, MAINTEN EXIT PARKING AREA.
AND SO THEY HAVE S P COMPONENT OF IT.
MULTIPLE COMPONENTS TO THIS AND I HAVE TYPICAL CONDITIONS.
THEY'RE REQUESTING FIVE YEARS WITH OTHER RENEWAL AND THEY'RE REQUESTING OPERATIONS BETWEEN SIX AND 9:00 PM MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY.
UH, INGRESS, EGRESS HAS LAN, WHICH IS FROM TELEPHONE.
AND OFFICER PARKING HAS LOCATED ON THE
[00:15:01]
SITE PLAN AND, UH, REQUIRING A SIX FOOT MINIMUM HIGH OFFENSE.AND THOSE, IS THAT NOT IT FOR THE CONDITIONS STANDARD? AS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS, UH, WE HAVE THE EXISTING AG ZONING, UM, AND STANDARDS.
I CAN HIGHLIGHT ANY ONE OF THOSE IF NECESSARY.
UH, BUT GENERALLY CS IS A, A MORE, UH, INTENSE DISTRICT THAN, THAN THE AG IN TERMS OF LOT SIZES, SETBACKS AND COVERAGE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
NOW I RECOGNIZE THIS IS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO READ
UM, THIS IS ALREADY IN THE REPORT, UM, BUT IT IS A LITTLE BIT, IT IS A LITTLE BIT TRICKY, BUT WE HAVE OUR AG USES PRETTY LIMITED TO RESIDENTIAL, RESIDENTIAL KIND OF, UH, ADJACENT USES.
UM, CSS IS FUNCTIONALLY ALIKE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, AND THEN THE CSS WITH THE DR TAKES OUT, UM, GENERALLY AS THE REPORT STATES ALL THAT I I THINK IT'S SIX OR SIX OR EIGHT, UH, PERMANENT USES.
SO THEY CUT DOWN THE USES IN THE CR, UM, TO ONLY A FEW FULL-TIME USES CREATING A PRETTY PRESCRIPTIVE DISTRICT.
I I KNOW THERE'S NO WAY YOU'RE, YOU'RE READING THIS, BUT ANY PARTICULAR USE WE CAN FIND LIKE HAPPY TO, UH, BUT IT IS IN THE REPORT, BUT THIS IS, THIS IS FOR ME TO COME BACK AND BE REFERRED TO MORE THAN ANYTHING.
SO, UH, SELF RECOMMENDATION IS NILE.
UM, WE FOUND THAT BASED ON THE SURROUNDING CHARACTER, UM, THE ASPECT OF THE SITE, UH, WE ON CREEK WE LOCATED GENERALLY ADJACENT TO
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS YOU DO THANK MR. P QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER, WHAT MR. P HOW ARE YOU THIS MORNING? MORNING.
UM, YOU, YOU ARE AWARE THAT THERE IS ADDITIONAL DUTY RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE GONNA BE UH, UH, PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT THAT REVIEW BUFFER AROUND THE UM, CREEK? I'M NOT AWARE OF THOSE AGAINST.
UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT ALSO, UH, WE'RE HOLDING THIS CASE FOR TWO FOR AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
THE 19TH? UH, YES UNTIL JUST ONE.
I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS ACTUALLY.
THE SINGLE FAMILY, UH, ACROSS THE STREET, HOW ROUGHLY HOW MANY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE IN THERE? GO BACK.
I'M GONNA NEED TO ZOOM IN A LITTLE TO, TO MAKE IT OUT.
UH, THERE'S A NUMBER OF LOTS, NOT ALL OF 'EM BEING OCCUPIED.
YEAH, YOU CAN SEE THERE, YOU CAN MAKE OUT FOUR LOTS.
THERE'S PROBABLY FIVE LOTS THERE, BUT I THINK FOUR OF THEM ARE BUILT OUT WITH HOMES AND THAT'S DIRECTLY
YEAH, YOU CAN SEE THE LOTS AND THEIR HOMES HERE AND THOSE ARE GOING TO ADD, UH, A VETERAN BED THAT THEY HAVE SMALL, THEY'RE ZONED TO ADD AND USE A SINGLE FAMILY.
I BE THAT THAT LOT SIZES ARE AS THEY, ARE THEY IZATION OR
AGRICULTURE AGRI, A AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT IS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND IT'S FILED IN ALL THE OTHER SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS.
UM, IT, ITS PRIMARY USE IS SINGLE FAMILY PLUS CROP PROTECTION LIVESTOCK.
AND, AND THE NEXT QUESTION I HAVE WAS, IS THERE ANY LETTERS OF SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION? UH, THE RESIDENTIAL I CHECKED THIS MORNING, UM, AND I HAVE TWO LETTERS.
OPPOSITION, THERE'S A RULE OF THUMB, UH, THE DAY BEFORE CITY GRANT COMMISSION, SO OUR DEADLINE FOR RECEIVING ALL OF THOSE ARE THE LETTERS THAT ARE SENT BY US, THE REPLY FORMS, IT'S UH, IS NOON THE DAY BEFORE.
AND RIGHT AFTER THAT WE CREATE THE PACKAGE WE CALL THE P O N AND WE SEND IT TO YOU.
SO RARELY THE PLANNER HAS TO DO WITH THAT, BUT THEY COME STRAIGHT TO YOU.
AND IF YOU RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE FROM SOMEBODY WHO IS NOT NOTIFIED AND JUST WANTED TO SEND YOU AN EMAIL WHO FORWARD, I JUST HAPPEN TO HAVE TIME TODAY.
[00:20:01]
MY QUESTIONS.AND SO IT IS THE UNDERLYING ZONING STILL ADDING THE RECURRENT USE OF SINGLE FAMILY AND THAT ADJACENT TO THAT, IS THAT LINE INDUSTRIAL? IS THAT WHAT I SEE ON THE ZONING MAP ON EACH SIDE OF YOU'RE SEEING, UM, YOU ARE SEEING ZOOM OUT AND WE SPECIALIZED AND OKAY, SO THE SOUTH SIDE, THE TELEPHONE ROAD, UM, EVERYTHING THAT YOU SEE IN THE, IN THIS HILL, THIS IS OWNED IN AG NORTH SIDE IS SORT OF A PANHANDLE OF AG AND THAT'S, UH, USED WITH SINGLE FAMILY AND THEN TO THE SOUTH EAST OR TO THE SOUTHWEST AND NORTHEAST OF THAT YOU'RE SEEING L ALLIS ZONING? YES, ON THE NORTH SIDE.
IT'S A PRETTY BIG ROAD THOUGH.
AND THE SECOND QUESTION, IT WAS THE OTHER ONE I THINK, UM, COMMISSIONER BLAIR MENTIONED, WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION THE STAFF REVIEWED THIS? I UNDERSTAND IT'S DENIED, BUT IF IT WAS TO MOVE FORWARD BUFFERING OF THE CREEK AND HOW THE CREEK MIGHT BE TREATED, THAT WOULD MAKE IT MORE COMPATIBLE.
IF THAT WAS ANYTHING THAT CAME THROUGH THE STAFF ROOM, I THINK THAT THAT COULD, THAT COULD ALLEVIATE SOME OF WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION WENT IN, AS YOU'VE SEEN IN THE DOCKET.
UM, ISSUES WITH THE, WITH WITH GETTING THE GOALS OF C A I LISTED IN THE DACA AS AS RELATED.
UM, HOWEVER, WE MUST KEEP IN MIND THIS IS NOT ONLY AN S U P APPROVAL, THIS IS ALSO A C ASS BASE DISTRICT APPROVAL, WHICH IT IMPLIES A DEGREE OF UNCERTAINTY BUT MAY NOT BE ONLY, UM, P AND LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN 'CAUSE THEY'LL BE BY PIECES.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, KNOWING THAT THERE'S LI TO THE NORTH OF TELEPHONE ROAD, WAS THERE A DIFFERENT DISTRICT THAT WOULD BE MORE COMPATIBLE AND MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA PLAN VISION FOR THE AREA? THERE IS NOT A LESS INTENSE WAY TO DO THIS KIND OF USE HERE.
YOU MR. UM, I NOTICED IN YOUR, IN YOUR, YOUR CASE REPORT, UM, THAT YOU NOTIFIED US THAT THERE WERE NO, UM, RECENT ZONING CHANGES WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
BUT IS IT NOT CORRECT THAT THIS PARTICULAR, WELL, THIS I, THAT I HAVE APPROVED, I I'VE HAD THREE CASES WITHIN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF, TWO YEARS OF WHICH ONE IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET WHERE THAT SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE IS LOCATED AND THAT C P C AND CITY COUNCIL APPROVED IT FOR A WAREHOUSE AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THAT MR. BALD, MR. BALDWIN RIGHT THERE, UM, WORKED ON THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN I THINK AT THIRTY NINE TWENTY FIVE TELEPHONE ROAD COUNSEL INCLUDED ON THE 7TH OF MARCH IN WHICH WE ARE PUTTING A WAREHOUSE SITE THERE WITH ADDITIONAL BUFFERING THE, FOR THAT RESIDENTIAL, THAT ZONING CASE 2 1 2 3 2 3.
SO AS, AS WE DISCUSSED, I GOT A SLIDE READ THIS ON I HONOR, I, I KNOW THAT YOU SAID IT'S OUTSIDE OF YOUR NOTIFICATION AREA, BUT IT'S STILL WITH, IT STILL LENDS CRED TO THE POINT I'M GOING TO GET TO IS TO GIVE ME SOME TIME TO GET THERE.
I'M NOT
UM, AND THERE, THERE WAS A, A CASE Z 2 1 2 0 1 1 49 THAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL MAY 11 2 1 2.
THAT'S AT THIRTY THREE SIXTY TELEPHONE ROAD THAT IS A SS U P FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING AND THAT THERE IS A CASE Z 2 0 1 3 45 THAT WAS APPROVED ONE 11, UM, 22, UH, WHICH WAS CS, WHICH IS RIGHT THERE AT TELEPHONE ROAD IN TRAVIS TRAIL.
THAT IS ROBERT'S TRUCK IN THIRTY NINE EIGHTEEN TELEPHONE ROAD THAT WAS APPROVED AS, LIKE I SAID, APPROVED 1 11 22.
THE ONLY CASE THAT I, THAT BE DENIED BASED ON RESIDENTIAL USE IS THE ONE THAT WAS ON TRAVIS TRAIL THAT WAS FURTHER DOWN THAT THAT
[00:25:01]
IMPACTED NEGATIVELY IMPACTED, UM, THE RESIDENTIAL LONG TRAVEL TRAIL.IS THAT NOT CORRECT? YES, YES.
AND IS IT NOT TRUE THAT THE RESIDENT THAT IS RIGHT THERE, UH, UM, THAT MR. UH, WHAT'S YOUR NAME? BALD BALDWIN
THAT IS IT THAT IS BEING BUILT RIGHT NOW.
UM, IS IT NOT ALSO, UH, EVIDENT THAT THE LARGEST WAREHOUSE THAT IS A DISTRIBUTION CENTER THAT WAS JUST BUILT WITHIN THE LAST THREE YEARS IS KROGER DISTRIBUTION CENTER, WHICH IS RIGHT AT THE END OF THE CORNER OF TELEPHONE ROAD AND THAT THIS TYPE OF THE LAND THAT THIS AREA, IS IT NOT TRUE? THIS AREA IS IN TRANSITION ONE FROM AG RESIDENTIAL, UM, AND TO A ONE SUPPORTED THE PD 7 61, WHICH IS THE UNION COURT, WHICH IS SUPPORTIVE OF ALL WAREHOUSING AND TRUCKING USES.
IS THAT NOT TRUE? I ABSOLUTELY ACKNOWLEDGE THE NUMBER OF CASES.
UM, FURTHER UP TELEPHONE ROADS, THE EAST THAT IS INTERSECTION OF MON VIEW AND, UH, TELEPHONE ROAD.
UM, SOME OF THE MAXES FROM THAT, SOME OF THE MAXES FROM TELEPHONE, UH, ON THE FAR SIDE OF THE CREEK.
UH, HOWEVER, IN OUR ANALYSIS, LOTS ARE PRETTY BIG OUT HERE, RIGHT? UH, DISTANCE LOOKS, DISTANCE IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN MAY ON PATH HERE.
UH, SO THIS WAS A SIGNIFICANT STRETCH IN, IN OUR ANALYSIS OF CONSISTENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURALLY USED LAND, UM, AND AGRICULTURALLY LAND IN ALIGNMENT WITH THAT.
UM, ZONING OR SINGLE FAMILY, UH, USE THE, UH, TYPICAL USES OF AG ON, UH, SO WE SAW IT AS A, AS A SIGNIFICANT STRETCH, UM, ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TELEPHONE.
UM, NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THE DISTANCE, THE WHICH OF TELEPHONE ROAD BEING SIGNIFICANT MAKES A PRETTY CLEAR, UM, DISTINCTION IN, IN OUR OPINION AND ESTIMATION FROM THE NORTHERN OF THE SOUTH
SO THAT'S, THAT'S HOW THE ONGOING DEVELOPMENT CASES, UM, WAS EVALUATED.
THANK YOU MR K I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP WITH JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS.
SO I UNDERSTAND THERE IS, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A VARIETY OF USES ALLOWED IN FLIGHT INDUSTRIAL CSS DISTRICTS AND WE DO SEE A LOT OF WAREHOUSES TO THE NORTH, TO THE, HOW DOES STAFF VIEW THE IMPACT OF A LARGE WAREHOUSE AT THE PRO WAREHOUSE OR THE WAREHOUSE TO THE NORTH WEST COMPARED TO A COMMERCIAL VEHICLE MOTOR PARKING IN TERMS OF INTENSITY OF USE AND IMPACT IN SURROUNDING PROPERTIES? YES, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY THAT MAYBE THE CONCERNS THAT GOING INTO THEM ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
I UNDERSTAND THAT COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING USE IS LIKELY A, UM, WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR, IT'S LIKELY A SUPPORTIVE USE OF WAREHOUSES.
UH, BUT THAT SAID, IT IS GENERALLY MORE OF AN OUTDOOR USE.
UH, THIS FACILITY, UH, CONTAINS A, UH, COMPONENT OF, UH, VEHICULAR REPAIR.
UM, SO I WOULD GENERALLY FIND THAT THAT IS POTENTIALLY MORE IMPACTFUL ON THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL OR ENTITLED ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL.
UH, THEN WOULD BE JUST A WAREHOUSE.
WAREHOUSE WOULD HAVE SOME DIFFERENT CONCERNS, UM, BECAUSE IT'S A CENTRALIZED, UH, INCOMING TRAFFIC SENSE BECAUSE IT'S MORE CENTRALIZED.
UH, BUT, AND, AND IT SORT OF A, A HUB WHEREAS MAYBE THE PARKING LOTS ARE MORE IN THE ENDPOINT.
UH, BUT IN THIS CASE, UM, I THINK WE HAVE A BIT MORE OF A, OF AN OUTDOOR USE NOISE, UH, CONTAMINANT CONCERN, UH, THAN WOULD BE FOR WAREHOUSE.
UH, WHEREAS THE WAREHOUSE COULD MAYBE BE MORE, UH, DISCREET OR COMPACT IN HOW ITS, UH, ADJACENCY ISSUES ARE SPREADING.
UM, BUT I, I THINK WE EVALUATE THIS ONE, UM, MANDATES, I MEAN COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING MANDATE THAT, UM, SIGNIFICANT IMPERIOUS
[00:30:01]
SURFACE AND THAT IT'S AN OUTDOOR USE GENERALLY I THINK THAT PLAYS INTO A DEGREE ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE ABOUT INTENSITY, UH, THERE, ESPECIALLY IN THE VERSUS THE WAREHOUSE, WE TAKEN MORE LANE OF TRAFFIC FALLING INTO.OKAY,
UM, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S EITHER A, UM, SO COMMERCIAL ABUSE NOW OR CAN INCLUDE A LOT OF THINGS.
I MEAN LIKE A SPORT FACILITY WHERE PEOPLE GATHERED FOR, UM, PARTICULARLY EVENTS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, IT APPEARED LIKE A
UM, SO THAT'S WHY I PROBABLY DOESN'T HAVE A SIGNIFICANT, BUT I DIDN'T, I DID SEE THAT AND IT LOOKS LIKE USE, I WAS ESTABLISHED IN THE PAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS, UH, AND IF YOU LOOK AT GOOGLE MAPS, IT, IT SAYS THAT PROPERTY NEXT DOOR IS OMAR'S TRUCK REPAIR.
SO IT IS, IT IS THAT ILLEGAL OR OKAY, I, I CAN'T BE THE ONE TO ASSESS THAT, BUT BASED ON THE KIND, KIND THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, UM, AND THEN IT APPEARS TO BE A NEW USE STATE, THEY PROBABLY WOULD HAVE DIFFICULTY GETTING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR THOSE TWO USES.
BUT YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT, IT SAYS HOME LOAN TRUCK REPAIR.
SO I ALSO OBSERVED THAT BOTH OF THOSE ARE, ARE INVOLVED FROM OX OBSERVATION.
SO I, CONCERN I HAVE IS TRUCK REPAIR.
I'M THINKING HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS THAT ARE GONNA GET LEACHED INTO THAT CREEK AND DOWN INTO THAT LAKE AT THE COLLEGE.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THOSE PROPOSED BUFFERING WOULD ALLEVIATE THAT.
I THINK THAT MIGHT BE A STRETCH, BUT UH, YEAH, I MEAN THAT USE WITH THE MACHINERY HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR TRUCKS SALES AND SERVICE IS ONE OF THE SAME USES ON, ON THE SUBJECT LOT.
UM, THEY MAY BE DOING IT TO THE EAST BUT IT APPEARS THEY DON'T HAVE THE ZONING FOR IT.
UH, BUT THE TRUCK HEAVY EQUIPMENT, SALES AND SERVICE ALSO A COMPONENT OF THIS SUBJECT SIDE.
SO THE SAME LOGIC OF THE FLASH, I WOULD MAKE COMMENT THAT ALL OF THESE LIKE FISH CHART, WATER FLOW, ALL OF THAT IS USUALLY ADDRESS IN PERMITTING AND THEY ARE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT NOTHING GOES OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
SO THERE ARE RULES IN PLACE, UH, WHEN THEY PUT THEIR PERMIT, THE SITE RETENTION, SITE RETENTION AND ALL OF THAT.
SO WE CANNOT AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME THAT IT'S ALL GONNA BE FA ALL DRAIN TO THE CREEK BECAUSE WE DO HAVE, UH, ENGINEER, UH, MANUALS TO ADDRESS THAT CARPENTER.
I WAS JUST, OMAR
OKAY,
I REVIEW PERMIT TO SEE WHAT YOUR OBJECTIVE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON? OKAY, THE NEXT CASE WE SEE 2 3, 1 9 5, UH, IT'S AGER ZONING CHANGE AN APPLICATION FOR AN NEW ONE MISUSE DISTRICT ON A PROPERTY THAT'S ON R N A.
IT'S ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF SEAVILLE ROAD, SOUTHEAST OF RAVEN VIEW ROAD AND IT'S 3.5 ACRES APPROXIMATELY.
IT'S SOUTHERN DALLAS RIGHT ON THE TOP OF THE BOOTH, UH, CLOSE TO BELTLINE AND UH, SEAGO BELT AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE AERIAL.
UM, IT IS PART OF A LARGER BLOCK THAT UM, HAS A VARIETY OF TYPE OF, UM, OF LOT SIZES AND IT IS DEVELOPED WITH LOOKS LIKE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES MOSTLY OR ARMS. UM, THERE ARE SOME ACROSS THE STREET THERE ARE SOME AUTO AUTO ORIENTED USES ON THE ZONING MAP YOU CAN SEE WAS
[00:35:01]
HIGHLIGHTED IN LU THE ENTIRE CORNER OF RAVEN VIEW AND SEAGO VILLAGES NS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE AND IT HAS A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.UM, AND THEN THE ENTIRE AREA THAT HAD THE LARGER LOTS IS R 10, BUT THERE ARE NEWER SUBDIVISION THAT WERE BUILT, SUBDIVISIONS THAT WERE BUILT MORE RECENTLY THERE ARE R SEVEN FIVE, UM, A LITTLE R 10 ON FURTHER NORTH.
SO THE AREA REQUEST, UM, AS I SAID, IS UH, OVER THREE AND A HALF ACRES.
IT HAS A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN THE FORTIES FOR
THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS FOR THE, UH, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY WITH THE MIX OF USES AND HOUSING TYPES UNDER THE REGULATIONS OF MU ONE.
AND I WILL SHOW YOU WHAT THAT MEANS.
UM, PICTURES FROM SEAGOVILLE, THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, YOU CAN, YOU CAN SEE LIKE VERY LOW DENSITY OF, UM, FARMLAND TYPE OF, UH, DEVELOPMENT, LARGER VIEW WITH THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH.
AGAIN, OCO HILL, UH, FURTHER NORTH, THIS IS ACROSS THE STREET, UM, ANOTHER HOME ACROSS THE STREET.
YOU CAN SEE THAT, UH, ALL ORIENTED TYPE OF USE.
UM, THEN I DID DRIVE A LOT AROUND THE BLOCK, SO THE ENTIRE BLOCK THAT IS BEHIND SEAGOVILLE.
UM, AS I WAS SAYING, IT'S A COMBINATION OF SMALLER LOTS AND LARGER LOTS.
SO BEHIND THERE ARE A LOT OF, UH, VERY CHARMING STREETS WITH, UH, FARMS AND, UH, LARGE, UH, LARGE LOTS.
SO THESE ARE, THIS IS FISH ROCK FOR INSTANCE.
AND IT GOES AND, UH, THAT, THAT ENDS INTO BELT LINE IN THE BACK.
SO THIS IS A CASE THAT I HAD A VERY HARD TIME WITH.
UM, UM, I LOOKED INTO CLEAVER S UH, AREA PLANT.
I DID THINK DEEPLY, DEEPLY ABOUT IT, UM, BECAUSE THE REALITY ON THE MAP AND WHAT AREA PLAN LOOSELY RECOMMENDS VERSUS WHAT'S BUILT AND DEVELOPED THERE RIGHT NOW IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
UH, THIS IS THE EXISTING LAND USE MAP IN THE BERG, UH, WEST LIEBERT PLAN.
AND YOU CAN SEE THIS IS THE AREA WHERE THE PROPERTY IS ON SEAVILLE.
UM, THE CLEAVER PLAN DIVIDES THE AREA COVERED BY THE PLANNING THREE, AND THIS IS PART OF SUB AREA, A ONE, UH, SOUTH AREA ONE, AND IT RECOMMENDS LOOSELY ON THE FUTURE, UH, VISION MAP, LOW TO MEDIUM, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
AND YOU SEE LIKE SOME NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL FOR THE DOWN ON BELTLINE, UH, THE VISION STATEMENT OF THE BERG AND IT'S ALL IN THE STAFF REPORT.
UH, THE COMMUNITY BACK THEN ENVISIONED THIS TO REMAIN, UH, A RURAL TYPE OF, UH, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERN, HOWEVER, AND THEY ARE, THEY WERE VERY PROTECTIVE OF THE RURAL CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY.
HOWEVER, IN THE GOALS THEY WENT ON TO SAY THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS OR OUTDOOR AFFAIRS, THEY WENT TO SAY THAT THEY DO WANT SOME NEIGHBOR PRESERVING USES AND BUSINESSES AND ENCOURAGE LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY HOUSING TO MEET VERY INCOME LEVELS.
BUT THE PLAN GOES ON TO SAY THAT THE LOW TO MEDIUM WOULD BE PREFERRED TO BE, UM, UH, SINGLE FAMILY MAYBE, UM, TO A LOT OF LIKE ZOOM OUT TO, TO SEE AND UNDERSTAND THE PATTERNS.
AGAIN, HUGE, HUGE CHALLENGES THAT HAVE WITH THIS DECISION.
UM, AS I WAS SAYING, NEWLY DEVELOPED, UH, SUBDIVISION R SEVEN FIVE FOR INSTANCE, ONE ACCESS POINT IN SEAGOVILLE.
OBVIOUSLY WAY MORE HOMES, BIGGER, LOTS THE SAME, UH, BIGGER DEVELOPMENTS THE SAME TO THE NORTH A LITTLE BIT.
I KNOW WE HAD SOME ZONING CASES, LET'S SEE IF I ZOOM EVEN MORE.
I WAS LOOKING AT THE SUBDIVISIONS, THE NEW ONES, HOW DO THEY RELATE TO THE THOROUGH PAIRS, HOW MANY ACCESS POINTS THEY HAVE, BECAUSE YOU SEE THEY POP UP JUST MID BLOCK AND IT'S NOT LIKE, OH, NOW WE'RE DIVIDING THE BLOCK, WE'RE CREATING THE STREETS AND IT JUST, IT JUST HAPPENED.
UM, SUBDIVISION BY SUBDIVISION, THIS IS OUR SITE HERE.
SO YOU SEE, I WAS LOOKING TO SEE WHAT THE BLOCK PATTERNS ARE.
SO IN A, IF WE ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE ON BELTLINE AND SEE YOUR GIRL, THIS AREA HERE, WE JUST THREE, FOUR YEARS BACK, UM, THE UM, CITY APPROVED THE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
UM, IT IS TRUE THAT BELMAN AND CVILLE ARE, IT'S A MAJOR
[00:40:01]
INTERSECTION OF MAJOR DOG THERE.SO THIS IS SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT.
IT HAS A SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT CHARACTER.
WE HAD A LOT OF OTHER MORE DENSER TYPE OF, UH, RESIDENTIAL APPROVED ALONG EDGE ROAD.
I WAS LOOKING TO SEE DO WE HAVE THIS AREA BETTER WELL SERVED BY COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER SCHOOLS, STUFF LIKE THAT TO SUPPORT A LITTLE BIT MORE DENSITY.
DOES IT HAVE ENOUGH RETAIL? UM, COMPARISON BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BETWEEN THE USES.
OBVIOUSLY BETWEEN AN R AND AN MU IS A BIG DIFFERENCE OF USES.
LIKE M U COMES WITH RETAIL PERSONAL SERVICE OFFICE COMES WITH A LOT OF USES VERSUS A AN R, WHICH IS SINGLE FAMILY.
BUT IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO SEE HOW UM, HOW INTRUSIVE THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT MASSING WOULD BE.
UM, THERE ARE A FEW THINGS WE NEED AND I EXPLAINED THEM UH, IN MY STAFF REPORT.
I WISH I HAD THE TIME TO DO A LITTLE DIAGRAM FOR R P S BUT I'LL TRY TO EXPLAIN IT.
SO THE FRONT YARD OF R 10 IS 30 OF ONE IS 15, BUT BECAUSE THE BLOCK HAS A LOT OF R 10, IT'S GONNA HAVE THE 30, UM, SIDE YARDS FOR AN MU AND THEY'RE ADJACENT TO R WILL HAVE 20 OR UH, 20 FEET.
SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT, THE CODE TRIED TO ENCOURAGE A LITTLE BIT OF BUFFERING THERE CAN, IS THAT ENOUGH OR NOT? UM, THIS ANY ONE, IF THEY ARE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE INCOME HOUSING BONDS, THEY CAN INCREASE THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNIT DENSITY, BUT THAT'S IT.
BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND THE TYPE OF UH, M B A CATEGORY IT IS.
SO WHAT IS THE LIKELINESS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS BONUS? BUT RIGHT NOW M B ONE HAS A CAP ON DWELLING UNIT DENSITY, THE F A R, NOW IT COMES WITH AN F A R AND WITH A BIG HEIGHT.
HOWEVER, ALL THE R PROPERTIES AROUND IT ARE GONNA GENERATE R P S AND ARE GONNA REALLY SIGNIFICANTLY KEPT THE HEIGHT.
I DIDN'T ESTIMATE MY STAFF REPORT.
I DON'T THINK THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO EVER GO ABOVE 35 FEET.
SO I DIDN'T HAVE BRIEF OVER THE HEIGHT OR MASSING.
UM, THE SAME WITH THE STORIES OBVIOUSLY ATTACKED BY THE UH, I R AND THERE ARE SOME VISUAL INTRUSION AND D I R UM, TO BIG TRIP GENERATION.
THEY HAVE MORE INTENSIVE USES.
THIS IS UM, F Y I CYCLE AND I DIDN'T WANNA INCLUDE IN THE, IN THE STAFF REPORT.
IT'S JUST FOR INFORMATION, IT'S TO JOURNAL ZONING CHANGE.
UH, THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION TO EXPLAIN HIS CONCEPT, BUT UM, THAT WAS SAYING IS AN ARROW LOT THAT'S FACING UM, TO GO REAL.
THEY'RE PLANNING TO UM, DO A LITTLE RETAIL STREET FACING SEAVILLE AND PUT DIFFERENT TYPES OF MULTIFAMILY OR I DON'T KNOW IF HE PLANS TO EVEN DO TOWN HOMES LIKE SINGLE, SINGLE FAMILY OWNERSHIP TYPE.
I THINK HE SAID THAT HE TENDS TO DO MULTIFAMILY.
UM, HE WENT THROUGH A FEW FEW ITERATIONS OF THE CONCEPTUAL IDEA OF WHAT HE WANTS TO DEVELOP.
I THINK HE LANDED ON 20 GROWING UNITS.
UM, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT R P S AND EVERYTHING IS REALLY SIGNIFICANTLY GOING, GONNA DIAL DOWN I DENSITY, UM, AND ALL THE PARKING THAT COMES WITH IT.
UM, THIS IS NOT, AGAIN, I WILL EMPHASIZE THIS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
WE DID NOT REVIEW THIS EXHIBIT.
I DON'T EVEN THINK IT'S GONNA VAST PERMITING.
THERE ARE A LOT OF, UM, DETAILS WHEN IT COMES TO ACCESS POINTS.
THESE DRIVEWAYS ARE TOO WIDE, TOO CLOSE TO ONE ANOTHER, SO FOR SURE IT'S NOT GONNA LOOK LIKE THAT.
BUT HE WAS TRYING TO LIKE SEE OKAY, WHAT CAN I DEVELOP ON THIS PROPERTY AND HOW, WHAT CAN I MAXIMIZE? SO THIS IS WHAT HE HAD IN MIND.
AND YOU SEE LIKE AS I WAS SAYING, EVEN THE HEIGHT, I DON'T EVEN THINK THAT THEY WILL EVER BE ABLE TO LIKE, UH, THOUGH HE'S SHOWING 30 FEET AND I THINK IT SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT TO STAY UNDER THE R P S AND THE R P S IS GONNA UH, FORCE TO BE 26 FEET FOR A LONG CHUNK OF THE PROPERTY.
THIS BEING SAID, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
THANK YOU MR. I WAS ASKING, I WAS READING IN YOUR CASE REPORT IT SAID THAT THEY WERE INTENDING RETAIL AND MULTIFAMILY, BUT I ONLY SAW THE REFERENCE TO THE 20 MULTIFAMILY UNIT CIRCLE CODE, BUT THERE'S NO PLAN ASSOCIATED BECAUSE THIS IS JUST A STRAIGHT ASSESSING CHANGE.
UM, SO WITH THAT IN MIND AND, AND THANK YOU FOR SHARING THE EXHIBIT BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO KIND OF THINK ABOUT IT.
WOULD ARTICLE 10 REQUIRE A BUFFER AT THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL ZONING WITH THE CHANGE? YES.
A LOT OF LIKE, THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING PLEASE DON'T TAKE THE SITE PLAN AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN THIS CONCEPTUAL SKETCH TO THINK WHAT HE CAN DO.
[00:45:01]
I AM, WHEN IT COMES TO ENGINEERING, TO PARKING TO ARTICLE, I THINK IT'S GONNA LOOK A LITTLE BIT, THIS LOOKS WAY MORE HAS THAT I WHAT I THINK REALISTICALLY CAN'T, CAN'T RECALL.AND SO I GUESS HE HASN'T REALLY INDICATED THIS IS AN IDEA THAT THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE INTENDING TO DEVELOP.
AGAIN, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
YES, HE INTENDING TO DEVELOP MULTI-FAMILY WITH A RETAIL STRIP UPFRONT.
BUT AGAIN, AS A IT GOES TO PERMITTING ALL THESE DRIVEWAYS, I WILL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THEY, THEY THEY ARE NOT.
QUESTION, UM, THE SINGLE ENTRY, THIS THIS LOT, CAN YOU PUT THE, THE, THE, THE LOT LAYING THE YEAH.
THE, THE WAY THAT THIS LOT IS BUILT OR BUILT, IT EXISTS, IT ONLY PROVIDES THE ONE ENTRY POINT FROM EXIT POINT, IS THAT I CORRECT? YEAH, BECAUSE IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY RIGHT NOW.
AND BUT IT IS AN, IT HAS A NARROW, A VERY, DOES IT NOT HAVE A VERY NARROW ENTRY INCLUDING THE, THE HOUSE THAT IS CURRENTLY SITTING ON THAT BLOCK? CORRECT.
IT IS A NARROW LOCK AND THEN IT IS EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY DEEP.
CORRECT? IT'S, IT HAS AND IT, WITH IT BEING MID-BLOCK, THERE IS, THERE IS NO WAY TO CONNECTED ANYWHERE BUT THE ONE ENTRY POINT, CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO, TO MAKE THE SAME POINT REGARDING THIS DEVELOPMENT WHERE IT'S THE SAME ONE ACCESS POINT IN SEAGO HILL BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A DEEP AND LARGE BLOCK, THEY DON'T HAVE STREETS RIGHT NOW.
SO IT'S CHALLENGING TO GO IN FIRST AND, AND, AND THANK YOU FOR SAYING IT'S CHALLENGING TO GO IN FIRST.
SO IF THERE WAS A PATTERN THAT WOULD RENDER ACCESS IN THE BACK, THAT THEN IT WOULD BE A FAR EASIER DEVELOPMENT TO APPRO TO GIVE THE RISE TO THE STANDARD TWO ENTRY POINTS.
UM, I MEAN IT WOULD, IT WOULD, AGAIN, IT WOULD MAKE FOR A MORE, UM, NATURAL TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
FOR INSTANCE, IF IT WAS THIS ONE, YOU SEE THIS PROPERTY HERE ALREADY HAS THIS EXACTLY.
SO IT HAS SAID, OKAY, WE CAN ASSUME THAT THE PERMITTING, THEY WILL HAVE THAT CROSS ACCESS, BUT UH, RIGHT NOW, I MEAN IT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BLOCK WITH ONLY ONE FRONT.
SO THEY COULD, UH, JUST, I'M JUST JUMPING IN.
THEY COULD THEORETICALLY EMPHASIS ON THEORETICALLY, UM, GET AN ACCESS EASEMENT THROUGH THOSE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, UH, TO THAT MAJOR STREET TO THE NORTHWEST OR UM, TO THAT EXISTING CONNECTION TO THAT SUBDIVISION THAT'S BUILT OUT TO THE SOUTHEAST.
UM, THEY COULD, COULD, YEAH, THEY COULD.
UM, BUT TO ANDREA'S POINT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SORT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS BLOCK WITH MORE OF A ESTABLISHED STREET GRID AND SHE'S RIGHT AS A HUGE BLOCK, UM, THAT'S LIKE SHE SAID, IT'S HARD TO BE THE FIRST, BUT THAT COULD KIND OF ESTABLISH A NEW PATTERN WITHIN THE BLOCK FOR ACCESS.
ARE YOU, UM, AWARE THAT THERE WAS COMMUNITY MEETING AND I THINK THE APPLICANT MENTIONED AND I WOULD LET HIM, UH, ADDRESS THAT? UM, AND WERE YOU AWARE THAT THAT WELL YOU GUYS, I WILL BE AWARE, I JUST RECEIVED AN EMAIL THE, FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE CRIME WATCH WHO IS SPEAKING FOR THE COMMUNITY AND I ASKED STAFF TO, TO BOARD IT TO, AND THEIR, AND THEY'RE INCLUDING THE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE RIGHT, THINK RIGHT AROUND THERE, THEIR DESIRES ARE FOR SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT.
UM, I AM AWARE NOW
I'M TRYING TO LIKE SAY THAT THIS IS YOUR ROLE AS A COM COMMISSIONER AND I DO APPRECIATE THAT.
I WOULD SAY THAT WE GO BY THE VISION PLAN.
SOME AREAS DO HAVE AN AREA OF PLAN AND IT'S TRUE THAT AS I WAS SAYING IN MY STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION, THE AREA OF LAND THAT THE COMMUNITY IS HOLDING VERY
[00:50:01]
CLOSE THE RURAL CHARACTER.AND IF WE, IF WE WERE BUILDING OUT, IF THIS WAS LIKE YOU SAID, CLOSER TO THAT DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S TO THE EAST, THE, THE ONE THAT'S BUILT UP THAT WOULD YEAH.
THAT WAY IS THAT EAST OR WEST? IT'S YES, SOUTHEAST SOUTH OR WHATEVER.
IF, IF IT WAS NEXT TO IT, IT WOULD GIVE, IT WOULD GIVE RISE TO A PAD TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PATTERN THAT WOULD CONNECT EACH ONE OF THE LOTS IN THE REAR SO THAT YOU WILL HAVE MULTIRY POINTS, MULTI EXIT POINTS OPPOSED TO ONE THAT THAT'S ONLY ON A MAJOR ROAD THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE A CELL DESAL LANE.
I WOULD UM, AND THIS IS, I AM VERY THANKFUL FOR THE CONVERSATION BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE REALITY ON THE GROUND, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT I WAS TRYING TO ALSO MAKE.
BUT I WILL ALSO GO BACK TO THIS BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL ON THE MAP, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT KIND OF LIKE GUIDED, MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE HAVE AN N MS HERE THAT DOESN'T ALLOW RESIDENTIAL.
AND I SAW THAT THIS, IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY AGAIN ON THE MAP TO HAVE AN MU HERE THAT IS A BUFFER BETWEEN WHAT'S GONNA REMAIN A SINGLE FAMILY AND YOU CAN HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE DENSITY AND A LITTLE BIT WHERE RETAIL THERE, BUT YOU ARE CORRECT BECAUSE WHEN YOU PUT THESE TWO SIDE BY SIDE, YOU SEE THE MAPPING HERE SHOWS N MS, BUT THE REALITY ON THE DROP IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
UH, YES, WE DO GO TO YOUR SLIDE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SANDERS CHART PLEASE.
UM, I NOTE THAT UNDER R 10 A IT INDICATES NO DWELLING DENSITY MAXIMUM THAT IS REFLECTIVE OF THE FACT THAT IN OUR DISTRICT'S, UH, THE CODE WAS NOT SPECIFIED THE DWELLING TENTION, IS THAT RIGHT? YES.
WELL THAT'S, THAT WAS WHERE I WAS HEADED WITH A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET.
DOES THAT NOT IMPOSE A BUILDING UNIT DENSITY MAXIMUM OF SOMEWHERE AROUND FOUR UNITS AN ACRE? YES, PROBABLY, BUT IT'S, UH, IT'S A, IT'S A NARROW LOT WITH ONE FRONTAGE.
SO IF THEY ARE TO PLA I THINK THEY NEED TO CREATE SOME SORT OF SHARED ACCESS.
SO IT POSES SOME, UH, CONVERSATIONS THERE.
I DIDN'T, UM, TEST THAT HOW MANY SINGLE FAMILY UNITS THEY, THEY CAN MAXIMIZE.
WELL WHETHER IT'S THREE AND A HALF OR FOUR OR WHATEVER BASED ON GEOMETRY LAYOUT AND PLANNING, WE KNOW IT CAN'T BE MORE THAN 4.356 BECAUSE THAT WOULD USE UP THE ENTIRE PROPERTY AT 10,000 SQUARE FEET PER LOT.
I I I'LL DO A LITTLE MATH QUICK.
PER ACRE DIVIDED BY 10,000 IS 4.356 ANY, MY POINT IS THAT THERE IS A FUNCTIONAL IN R 10 THAT IS IN THEORY AT LEAST, UM, ONLY 25% OR SO IS WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO MONTHS.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT IF IT NEEDS TO BE MAXIMIZED UNDER R 10, UH, IT CAN BE MAXIMIZED WITH LIKE YOU SAID, 25% OF THE UNITS THAT THEY CAN GO UNDER U ONE.
DID I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY? NO, NO, NO, NO.
THAT WOULD REQUIRE A C U D, WHICH DOESN'T INCREASE THE TOTAL DWELLING ENGINE.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS AN ACRE OF LAND IN R 10 CANNOT MATHEMATICALLY ACHIEVE MORE THAN 4.356 DWELLING UNITS.
SO INSTEAD OF GOING FROM NOMAX TO 15 TO 25, WE'RE GOING FROM 4.356 TO 15 TO 25.
THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING, SO WHY CAN'T WE TAKE OUT LIKE I WOULD SAY A 20% FOR STREETS AND STUFF? I, I, I NEED TO LIKE STOP SHARING MY SCREEN.
IT MAY BE LESS THAN 4.356, BUT, BUT IT IS, IT'S NOT NO MAXIMUM, NO, WHAT I WAS, I I AM MEANING IN MY TABLE IS TO SHOW WHAT THIS CODE SAYS AND THE CODE SAYS NO MAXIMUM.
[00:55:01]
MAP AND THEY CAN PUT MORE UNITS BECAUSE IT'S A 3.5 ACRE, UH, LONG, BUT WHAT I, MY, THE INTENT OF MY TABLE IS TO SAY THAT THE CODE DOESN'T HAVE A DWELLING UNIT DENSITY ON OUR 10 BECAUSE WHAT YOU ARE ALLOWED TO IS LIKE BUILD ONE UNIT FOR ONE LOT THAT'S 10,000.BUT YOU, YOU, AND I'M MAKING A BIGGER DEAL OF THIS THAN IT IS.
BUT IF YOU BUILD UP THE ENTIRE SITE WITH LOTS AND HELICOPTERED EVERYONE INTO THEIR S AND MOST YOU COULD POSSIBLY GET IN OUR 10 IS 4.356 WELL UNITS AN 90 YES AND IS THREE ACRES.
SO PROBABLY YOU CAN, YOU CAN GET EIGHT UNITS.
I DON'T KNOW, LIKE I REALLY NEED SOMEBODY WHO'S A SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPER TO MAX IT UP COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES.
WE COMPARE SOME NUMBER WE DON'T KNOW, WHICH CANNOT BE MORE THAN 4.356 TO 15 TO 25 RECOGNIZING THAT THE SITE CONSTRAINTS MAY NOT THEM GET TO 15 TO 25
SO WE'RE SAYING 4.3 TIMES 3.5, THAT'S THE MATH THAT I NEED TO DO, WHICH IS MAXIMUM AND I WOULD EXTRACT A 20% PER PER STREET.
SO I STILL THINK WE, THEY CAN SQUEEZE IN PROBABLY SEATS THE DWELLING UNIT.
THE DWELLING UNIT DENSITY IS IS NOT SIDE BY SIDE.
OH YEAH, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
AND, BUT YOU SEE WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
UH, I WAS JUMPING INTO THE REALITY ON THE GROUND.
SO HE'S PROPOSING TO PUT 20 UNITS OF MULTIFAMILY AND THEN IF HE WOULD BE TO DEVELOP A RIGHT, HE WOULD PUT, I DON'T KNOW, I'M VERY, VERY YES IN P OR C SEVEN SINGLE FOUNTAIN.
JUST A COUPLE OF FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS.
THERE WERE A COUPLE QUESTIONS ON, YOU KNOW, ONE INGRESS AND EGRESS POINT WHERE, YOU KNOW, I THINK TWO, IF THERE WERE, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE STREET FRONTAGES OR AN EASEMENT OR YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, ASSUMING NO NO ACCESS EASEMENT AND ONLY THE STREET BRU ALONG CEDARVILLE, WOULD THEY RUN INTO PERMITTING ISSUES IN TERMS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS? I THINK, I DON'T KNOW THERE IS HERE.
I THINK, UH, I AM NOT SURE THAT THEY CAN PUT TWO THE WAY HE'S SHOWING ON THE SITE PLAN, BUT FOR SURE THEY WILL PUT ONE THAT'S GONNA BE IN AND OUT AND THEN THEY WILL WORK WITH FIRE MARSHAL TO MAKE SURE THAT IT MEET SAFETY OF DEPARTMENTS.
I'VE SEE MS. ALGAR VEHEMENTLY.
YES, THERE'S NO PERMITTING ISSUE WITH.
ONE OTHER THING I WANTED TO GET YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON IS I SEE TWO THINGS IN THE, UM, THE CLEAVER AREA.
I KIND OF WANNA UNDERSTAND HOW YOU RECONCILE THEM.
ONE IS PRESERVE THE RURAL CHARACTER, LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
ON THE OTHER HAND THERE'S ALSO TALK ABOUT ADDING NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING COMMERCIAL AND OTHER AMENDING TYPE USES.
DO YOU THINK THOSE TWO THINGS ARE INTENTION OR DO YOU THINK THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, YOU RECONCILE OUR TOPS IMPORTANT TO GETTING THOSE BUSINESS USES? I THINK SO.
IT WOULD'VE HELPED IF, IF THIS FUTURE VISION MAP WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC.
UM, BECAUSE YOU SEE IT SHOWS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR, BUT THAT'S A HIGHWAY.
THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR THAT'S SHOWING IS NOT GONNA BE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING.
SO, BUT THE PLAN DOES TALK ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING AND THEN LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
FOR ME, THIS REQUEST IS LOW TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, HOWEVER THE PLAN GOES ON TO SAY SINGLE FAMILY.
IT'S UH, A LOT FOR US TO LEAVE SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION WHEN WE GET SOME CASES LIKE THIS.
MADRE, JUST TO CLARIFY, BASED ON YOUR REVIEW OF THE, OF THE SITE PLAN, WHICH IS NOT AN OFFICIAL PART OF THE CASE, YOU SAID 20 UNITS, DID YOU MEAN 20 UNITS TOTAL OR 24 AC? OH, 20 TOTAL.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT HE, HE HE DID, UH, THE, THE APPLICANT DID THAT.
WE, HE STARTED WITH A VERSION THAT WAS WAY MORE INTENSE UHHUH AND WHEN I POINTED OUT THAT, OKAY, YOU HAVE PARKING ISSUES OR P ISSUES, STUFF LIKE THAT, HE STARTED TO FACTOR THOSE IN AND HE CAME WITH 20 IN TOTAL BECAUSE HE'S TRYING TO SHOW HERE HOW MANY PARKING SPOTS HIS NEED AND HE HAS A LITTLE BIT OF BREAKDOWN OF TYPE WHAT TYPE OF UNITS YOU SEE HE'S, UH, SHOWING HER BEDROOM AND HE'S EVEN SHOWING SOME SINGLE
[01:00:01]
FAMILY.THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING I DON'T KNOW IF HE INTEND TO PLA SOME OF THIS.
SO I'VE SEEN SI BASICALLY SINGLE FAMILY OR TOWNHOUSE KIND OF THINGS ON, ON THE, WHAT'S IN THE MIDDLE? I CAN'T, THESE ARE MULTI-FAMILY UNIT AND THESE ARE LIKE YOUR, UH, THIS ITEM 20, I THINK THIS IS WHAT'S IN THE MAIL.
YOU'VE GOT, THERE'S 17, 17, 17.
I DIDN'T SAY THING IS THE RETAIL JUST THE FRONT STRIP? YES, YES.
SO YOU, THAT'S WHAT HE'S SAYING.
YOU'VE GOT TWO MULTI-FAMILY POTENTIALLY AND THEN 17 SINGLE TOWN HALL THINGS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND THEN YOU HAVE ALL OF THIS.
SO IT PROBABLY, MAYBE MORE THIS MATH NOT 20 OR 25.
SO WE WOULD UNDER BASE ZONING MAYBE THERE, THERE MIGHT BE AS MANY AS 12 LOTS AND UH, BY MY MATH AND UH, THEN THIS WAS 30, 40 RESIDENCES, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
DID I HEAR WE HAVE A HOUSING SHORTAGE
SO YOU HAVE THIS AGRICULTURAL PLOT OF LAND, YOU HAVE A HUGE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING HERE, HUGE DEVELOPMENT HERE.
WAS THERE PUSHBACK ON THOSE TWO DEVELOPMENTS THAT SURROUNDED IT? UM, THERE ARE SOME LETTERS THAT WERE RECEIVED YESTERDAY.
I THINK THEY WERE IN OPPOSITION AND WE SENT THEM TO, TO YOU GUYS AND I THINK THERE WERE THREE.
UH, BUT UH, I CAN'T, I CAN BRING THAT UP THEN.
I MEAN IT, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IT'S FAIRLY RAPIDLY GETTING BUILT OUT ALL AROUND THIS WITH, YOU KNOW, SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES AND THIS COULD FOLLOW ON PATTERN.
SO THE QUESTION IS IF THIS WOULD COME UNDER OUR IN FILE, ANDREA, I THINK I REMEMBER READING IN YOUR CASE REPORT, UM, ONE OF YOUR ARGUMENTS FOR THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE DISTRICT LIKE THIS IS BECAUSE IT'S KIND OF A TRANSITION BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVING RETAIL THAT'S AT THE INTERSECTION MOVING AWAY FROM THAT TOWARDS THE SINGLE FAMILY TO THE SOUTHEAST.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS, UH, ALLUDING TO WHEN I WAS TALKING TO COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
LIKE I WAS LOOKING MOSTLY AT THIS MAP BECAUSE THE, THE, WHEN THIS WAS REZONED AND IT HAS THIS COMMERCIAL CORNER, I'M THINKING THAT WAS BASICALLY WITHIN THE VISION OF THE PLAN AND NOW THIS PARCEL IS RIGHT AT THE BORDER OF THAT COMMERCIAL COMES IN FOR REZONING, UH, WITH AN M U ONE, WHICH IS THE LEAST INTENSIVE OF THE MIXED USE WON'T MAKE SENSE CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT ALL THE SINGLE FAMILY AROUND IT IS GONNA KEEP THE HEIGHT AND ALL OF THAT.
IT JUST SORT OF LOOKS LIKE TO ME, I MEAN THE TREND IS IT'S GONNA BE FILLED IN WITH MORE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS AND YOU SEE THIS IN MANSFIELD AND PLACES LIKE THAT AND YOU'VE GOT A TWO ACRE LOT, WE'VE GOT HOMES ALL DOWN.
I MEAN, YEAH, I COULD IMAGINE WHY THEY WOULD WANT TO PUSH BACK AGAINST IT, BUT IT JUST DIDN'T SEEM CORRECTABLE TO ME IN THE LONG WHAT SHALL WE LOOK, GO BACK TO THIS ONE BECAUSE I THINK THIS SHOWS RIGHT, WHATEVER COMMUNITY LEADERS, UM, AROUND ME IS BECAUSE, UM, TIME WAS TIME AGAIN, WE'VE HEARD OUT IN THIS PARTICULAR DISTRICT THAT THOSE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WERE ON SPEAK SOME OF THEIR RULES FIELD WITH THEIR ARTS ZONING AND UM, AND THIS SEEMS LIKE THAT THIS IS GOING AGAINST THOSE AREAS THAT STILL HAVE THOSE
YES, I, I WOULD LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK TO THAT.
HE TOLD ME HE HAD SOME, SO THERE WAS, THERE WAS A FEW, UM, MEETINGS TO, WITH THE COMMUNITY AND WITH WHAT THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS THE COMMUNITY WITHIN ITSELF TO DISCUSS WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE IN THE COMMUNITY, THIS AREA COMMUNITY GO AGAINST ANYTHING THAT IS NOT, OUR TEAM IS GOING WITH A DEVELOPMENT OF, UH, MULTI ESSENTIALLY MULTIFAMILY, SOME RETAIL.
SHE'S SAYING IF THE COMMUNITY IN THIS AREA IS TYPICALLY AGAINST MULTIFAMILY WITH A LITTLE BIT OF RETAIL, AND MY ANSWER WOULD BE THAT FROM WHAT I RECALL, WHICH WHY I INCLUDED THIS LINE, WE DID HAVE THIS MULTI-FAMILY PURELY MF TWO AT THE CORNER OF ABOVE LINE AND SEAGOVILLE AND THE
[01:05:01]
REMEMBER WE HAD FEW ZONING CASES IN HERE BUT THEY DIDN'T FOLLOW THROUGH.SO I, I DON'T KNOW, LIKE I WILL TRUST YOU AS THE COMMUNITY LEADERS OR REPRESENTING THE COMMUNITY TO BASICALLY BE THE VOICE FOR THAT I, THAT EVERYTHING THAT CAME UP IN DISTRICT THAT WAS ANYTHING LESS THAN SINGLE FAMILY OR RT BONDING THAT THAT IT WAS SAID THAT THE COMMUNITY WANTED TO KEEP THAT INTEGRITY OF THAT COMMUNITY AND WE DENIED A LOT OF CASES BASED OFF OCCURRING THAT FROM, FROM POLLUTION.
DAVE COMMISSIONER HEAD, UM, JUST WANNA FOLLOW UP ON THAT AGAIN, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF THE INTENT IS, I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL AND TO SERVE AS A TRANSITION IS YOU, IT JUST, IT SEEMS A LITTLE INTENSE BASED ON THE R 10, THE R 75 CR, WHICH IS SORT OF OUR, WELL IT'S DENSITY IN TERMS OF OUR COMMUNITY SERVICE.
WAS THERE ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION OF WHAT MIGHT BE, UM, MORE IN LINE IF YOU WILL, A MORE GENTLE TRANSITION BETWEEN THAT? I THINK THE GENTLEST TRANSITION, MS IS THE MOST GENTLE COMMERCIAL TYPE OF OR RETAIL TYPE OF DISTRICT.
SO, BUT MS DOESN'T ALLOW ANY RESIDENTIAL SO YOU CANNOT MIXED EXCUSE.
SO I THINK HE'S TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES A LITTLE BIT OF MISUSE AND I WAS HOOKED UP ON THE RETAIL THAT HE PLANS TO PUT IN FRONT.
I THINK NMU ONE IS THE GENTLE LESS DENSITY.
IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT IT ALLOWS OUT BIG HEIGHTS, BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE R P S SO RRP S WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT.
BUT UH, I THINK THAT NMU ONE, IT IT COMES TO LIKE THE COMBINATION, IT ALLOWS SINGLE FAMILY, IT ALLOWS MULTIFAMILY, BUT IT ALSO ALLOWS A LOT OF OFFICE RETAIL, ALL OF THAT.
WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION OF UTILIZING A FOREIGN DISTRICT? AND THERE MAY NOT BE THE DENSITY THAT MAKES THAT VIABLE WITH THIS LOCATION, BUT JUST A QUESTION I WOULD THINK, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE CRITICAL MASS FOR THAT.
AND THEN SECOND IT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH PROMPTED THOUGH.
SO THE FRONTAGE IS GONNA BE TAKEN CARE BY THE RETAIL.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING WHEN I, I THINK THERE'S A WALKABLE MIXED USE, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THAT ALLOWS FOR, UM, LIGHTER, UM, RETAIL AND COMMUNITY SERVING USES WITHIN IT.
WHICH IS, I I DIDN'T THINK OF A FORM BASE JUST BECAUSE AGAIN, I DON'T, IT MAY NOT BE, BUT IT HAS SOME OF THE OTHER TOOLS THAT I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
I LIKE THAT IDEA COMMISSIONER.
I LIKE THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM ABOUT IS IT, IS IT CORRECT DR.
AND THE OTHER QUESTIONS LIKE IS IT THE 20 FOOT SIZE SET BACK UP OF A BUFFER BETWEEN AN
SO YES, THIS IS, UH, BUT IT'S BIG INFO.
IT WAS, IT'S BIGGER INFO, BUT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE ENTIRE AREA IS BIGGER LOTS AT THE SCALE THAT NOW IS AGRICULTURE MEETING SOME NEW RECENT SUBDIVISIONS YOU CAN COUNT
YEAH, I, I'M DEEPLY UPSET ABOUT THE ONE.
I WAS TALKING TO, TO ANDREA ABOUT IT AND I'M LIKE, WHAT'S WITH THIS HEIGHT? WE WERE SUPPOSED TO LIKE ALLOW A LITTLE BIT OF BUFFERING.
THIS IS, THIS IS SPRING ZONING CHANGE ONE THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY OF THIS TO BE RESIDENTIAL.
THEY REQUIRED ANY OF THE PROJECTS, THE RESIDENTIAL OH NO, HE CAN COME IN AND YES.
WAS THERE A CONCERN ABOUT THE LEASES THAT ARE ALLOWED AT ANYONE TO SERVE, PLEASE? THERE ARE SOME, THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE INTENSE.
I WAS HOPING AGAIN, R P S AND ALL OF THE OTHERS AND THAT'S WHY I PUT IN MY, UH, DEVELOPMENT CHART TO SAY THAT IF THEY HAVE A BIGGER NUMBER OF VEHICLE TRIPS, IT WILL TRIGGER P I R.
BUT IF IT'S TRUE, AS I WAS SAYING U ONE, YOU WOULD EXPECT TO HAVE SOME, ANY DISTRICT THAT ARE VERY CONTEXT SENSITIVE, USE WISE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND WE DON'T HAVE, I WAS LOOKING FOR SOMETHING THAT'S THE LEAST INTRUSIVE BETWEEN AN MS AND ALLOWS FOR BOTH RESIDENTIAL.
IF THE APPLICANT WANT TO GIVE GUARANTEE, WOULD THE THE VEHICLE BE JUST D RESTRICTIONS? MM-HMM.
UM, I ALSO JUST WANTED TO ADD TO THE DISCUSSION REAL QUICK.
A LITTLE BIRD TOLD ME THAT, UM, THERE WAS AN AUTHORIZED HEARING, UM, AUTHORIZED,
[01:10:01]
UH, FOR THE C PLEA BIRD AREA BY OUR VERY OWN COMMISSIONER BLAIR, UM, BACK IN 2020, UM, ALLEGEDLY ON YES WE'RE, UH, ALLEGEDLY, UH, TO ALLOW FOR MORE INTENSE DEVELOPMENT THAN WHAT'S CALLED FOR IN A PAPER PLAN CURRENTLY.NO, NO, THAT'S NOT THE, THAT'S NOT THE PLAN OF THE AUTHORIZED HEARING.
THE PLAN OF THE AUTHORIZED HEARING TO REVIEW THE, TO, TO UPDATE THE EXISTING AUTHORIZED HEARING, NOT TO INCLUDE MORE INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT, BUT TO EXCLUDE INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT IS TO TO FURTHER ILLUSTRATE THE DESIRES OF THE COMMUNITY.
TO REMAIN EXTREMELY RULED WITH COURSE, UM, UM, OPPORTUNITIES, MORE COURSE OPPORTUNITIES OPPOSED TO, UM, RESIDENTIAL GENESIS.
THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPER THAT THE RESIDENT HAS REQUEST.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON WE, UH, GIVE YOU MY COMMISSIONER BLAIR STAYING IN DISTRICT EIGHT
CASE NUMBER EIGHT, THIS ONE I GET EASY, I PROMISE.
AND YOU REALLY DON'T NEED, NEED ME FOR THIS ONE, UHHUH.
SO THIS ITEM IS UM, K Z 2 23 20 11.
SO THE PRESENT APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO PLAN ELEMENT NUMBER 10 76, IT IS OKAY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF RILEY ROAD, WEST OF CAR K MARKET ROAD NORTH OF LYNDON B JOHNSON FREEWAY AND EAST OF PROPER ROAD.
IT'S APPROXIMATELY 34.203 ACRES, THE LOCATION OF THE AREA SOUTH OF EASTERN OF DALLAS.
SO THIS IS THE AREA OF THE AREA OF REQUEST.
SO ZONING AROUND, IT'S MOSTLY, UH, SINGLE FAMILY OF PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOLS.
THERE IS A MOBILE HOME PARK ALONG THE EAST NORTHEASTERN, AND THEN, UM, LAB TO THE SOUTHEAST.
A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE AREA REQUEST.
ON DECEMBER 8TH, 2021, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION APPROVED A PLAN DEVELOP NUMBER 10 76 GRAND.
R FIVE SINGLE FAMILY USES SIERRA R REQUESTS IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.
THE PURPOSE OF REQUEST IS TO AMEND THE REFERENCE OF THE CONSENT PLAN AND THE COMPANY CONSENT TIME EXHIBIT TO REFERENCE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ACCOMPANY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, EXHIBIT AND CONDITIONS.
AND TO ADD A SECOND, A ACCESS POINT TO RILEY ROAD, WHICH WILL REPLACE THE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED AXI TWO HAY MARKET ROAD.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE SITE PHOTOS ON THE SITE ON RILEY ROAD, LOOKING SOUTH ON ONSITE, LOOKING SOUTH ON ONSITE, LOOKING SOUTH ON PRADA ROAD, LOOKING EAST, AGAIN, LOOKING EAST, LOOKING EAST.
THEN ALL JOHNSON FREEWAY LOOKING NORTH, YOU HAVE HIM LOOKING NORTH.
AND THEN SURROUNDING USES ON RILEY ROAD LOOKING SOUTHEAST, LOOKING SOUTHWEST, LOOKING NORTHEAST, LOOKING NORTH, LOOKING NORTHWEST.
AND THEN ON DER LOOKING EAST, LOOKING EAST, AND THEN ON POWDER LOOKING SOUTH.
LOOKING NORTHWEST, YEAH, LOOKING NORTHWEST.
AND THEN, UM, SO WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, UH, TO AMEND IS UNDER UH, SECTION 51 P 10 36, 1 0 4 EXHIBITS.
SO AS I MENTIONED, THEY'RE PROPOSING TO REMOVE CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND, UH, AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THEN REMOVING, UM, CONCEPTUAL PLAN
[01:15:01]
AND, UM, DEVELOPMENT PLAN.SO CHANGE CONCEPTUAL PLAN WITH DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO RECOMMENDING TO REMOVE THE WORD OF FIVE YES, UNDER THE SECTION FIFTY ONE TEN SEVEN SIX ONE OH NINE, YOUR LODGE SPACE RELATIONS, AS HAVE MENTIONED, UH, FOR THE FIVE LAWS WITH BRETT YARD ALONG PAD ROAD.
HOWEVER, THERE IS NOT FIVE, THERE'S ACTUALLY SEVEN MILES THERE IS REMOVING THE OF FIVE.
AND THEN UNDER THE OPEN SPACE OF STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, UM, FOR THEM TO EXCLUDE GROUNDWATER RECHARGE RETENTION AREA, UM, FROM THE SECTION 51 P TEN SEVEN SIX TO ONE 14 OPEN SPACE.
AND ONE OF THE REASONING IS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDING AMENDING THE OPEN SPACE PROVISION TO EXCLUDE GROUNDWATER AND DETENTION AREA TO COINCIDE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AS A DETENTION AREA IS MATERIAL DEDICATED AREA AND NOT
AND SECTION 51, 82 0.1 0 2 101 OF THE COACH ADVISED THAT HIS FACE TO MEAN AN AREA THAT IS UN UNRESTRICTED TO THE SIDE INSTRUC OBJECTIONS OF ANCE AND NEEDS.
THIS IS ANOTHER SECTION MR. MENTIONED FROM THE OPEN SPACE.
SO, UH, STAFFS ARE FOR THEM TO EXCLUDE GROUNDWATER RECOVER AREA AND THEN THIS IS THE DIVINE PINE EXISTING.
UH, SO PREVIOUSLY THE AXI, UH, WAS AN ACCESS ALONG RILEY ROAD AND AN ACCESS ON HAY MARKET ROAD.
THEY ARE PROPOSING TO AMEN, UH, TO REVISE IT, UH, TO REMOVE THE ACCESS ALONG HAY MARKET AND ADD AN ADDITIONAL SECOND ACCESS ALONG BRADLEY ROAD.
AND THEN A STATUTE CONDITION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STATUTE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
UM, WERE YOU AWARE AS FAR THAT THE RETENTION DETENTION, I WILL ALSO HAVE A WATER TEACHER SO THAT IT WILL BE AN AMENITY, NOT JUST A RETENTION DETENTION AND A WALKING PATH AROUND IT AS AN AMENITY? NO, IT'S NOT VERY UNTIL THIS ONE
DOES THAT, DOES THAT, UM, GIVE YOU A BETTER APPRECIATION WHY? IT, IT, IT'S, UH, THE DETENTION RETENTION IS, IS BEING REQUESTED THE WAY IT'S YES, BUT I DO HAVE, UH, BILL THE, AND UH, DAVID FROM, I'M SORRY, I CAN'T, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND YOU.
THAT I DO HAVE, UH, THE ARBOR AND DAVID TRANSPORTATION, RIGHT.
WELL, WE, WE WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT, THAT THAT AREA WILL BE FENCED.
AND SO FOR AN AREA IT WILL GREEN AND OPEN.
AND SO FROM AN AREA IT IS GREEN OPEN SPACE FROM THE GROUND, THERE'LL BE A, UNLESS THERE ARE ANY OTHER DEPARTMENTS, THE DEVELOPER WOULD LIKELY PUT A CHAINING FENCE BETWEEN THE GREEN AREA, THE GREEN SPACE, AND THE MOLES WALKWAYS.
WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DIMENSION UNDERSTANDING FROM AN AERIAL LOOKS GREEN AND OPEN FROM THE GROUND, IT WILL BE BEHIND
SO UNLESS, UNLESS THE COMMISSION APPROVES CONDITIONS THAT WOULD REQUIRE TO HAPPEN.
SAY IT AGAIN UNLESS THE COMMISSION, I CAN'T HEAR YOU UNLESS, SAY AGAIN, UNLESS THE COMMISSION INCLUDES CONDITIONS THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR STAFF TO DEVIATE FROM CITY STANDARDS, UH, FOR DETENTION, RETENTION, DETENTION POND WITH, SO DOESN'T THE WATER FE WELL, WOULDN'T THE WATER FEATURE MR. NAVAREZ, UM, AND MAKE, MAKE IT MORE OF A MULTIPURPOSE USE OPPOSED TO JUST RETENTION DETENTION WITH, UM, IS THAT NOT CORRECT? WELL, UM, AND WHAT THERE, THERE IS RETENTION AND DETENTION ARE WE REQUIRING TO THE APPLICANT BECAUSE WE'RE, ARE WE GIVING THE APPLICANT AN OPTION OR NO, IT'S ALL ONE PIECE.
IT, IT'S, IT IS A STANDARD THAT I'VE ALWAYS DONE.
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'M, WHERE WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND EVERY DEVELOPMENT THAT IS IN DISTRICT A THAT HAS A RETENTION DETENTION POND, IT'S BEEN BUILT OUT AND
[01:20:01]
APPROVED THROUGH CITY COUNCIL AS WELL AS C P C THAT THE RETENTION DETENTION IN DISTRICT A HAS ALWAYS BEEN WITH A WATER FEATURE SO THAT IT COULD BE AN AMENITY AND NOT A FENCED IN, UM, THE, THE, THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION AT THE INTERSECTION OF WHEATLAND AND POLK, NO, WOULD BE A GOOD EXAMPLE OF SOCIAL SECURITY.YOU MEAN WHEATLAND AND WHEATLAND AND POLK.
THAT'S, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE GOVERNMENT CENTER THANK YOU HONOR.
THAT HAS A, A DETENTION AREA, JUST YES, IT DOESN'T, AND IT IS, AND IT'S FENCED AND IT'S UGLY.
IT, UM, AND BECAUSE WE, WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT TO MAKE IT LOOK MORE THAT, THAT WE REQUIRE 'EM TO FENCE IT BECAUSE DON'T WANT, I THINK THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN EASY ONE THAT YOU DIDN'T NEED ME.
SO IF I COULD JUMP IN REAL QUICK.
SO, UM, UNLESS THERE HAVE BEEN A NEW SET OF CONDITIONS SENT OUT FOLLOWING THE PUBLICATION OF THE DOCKET, UM, I'M NOT HAVE THERE.
SO I'M NOT SEEING ANYTHING IN, UH, PD 10 76 AS IT'S PUBLISHED IN THE DOCKET.
WHETHER THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONS OR THE APPLICANT AND STAFF CHANGES, UH, THAT REQUIRES A WATER FEATURE FOR THE DETENTION RETENTION POND, THAT'S ALWAYS SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD ADD TO YOUR MOTION.
UM, OTHERWISE IT WOULD NOT IN TEXT BE REQUIRED.
I KNOW THAT'S, THAT'S THE THING THERE.
BUT EVEN BEYOND THAT, AT MOST, THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A DESIGN STANDARD, UM, DIFFERENT FROM THE KIND OF CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT PHIL AND DAVID WILL BE LOOKING AT FOR A DETENTION POND.
UM, ANOTHER THING TO NOTE ALONG WITH THAT IS THERE WAS AN INTERPRETATION ISSUED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
THAT DETENTION POND SPECIFICALLY CANNOT COUNT TOWARDS OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS PER PLATTING REGULATIONS.
SO EVEN IF WE DO THINGS HERE WITH THE ZONING PIECE, THE DETENTION POND STILL CAN'T COUNT TOWARDS OPEN SPACE BENEFITS TO PERMITTING.
UM, THAT'S WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO REMOVE THAT LANGUAGE FROM PV.
UM, UM, WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION.
I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT.
DO I UNDERSTAND THE MS. MAY FOR MR. NAVAREZ? I UNDERSTAND THAT THE TENSION HAS ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS USUALLY BECAUSE OF BIGGER SLOPES OR OTHER, UM, ISSUES THAT REQUIRE THE FENCING TO ADDRESS SAFETY ISSUES.
BUT DID I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, THAT THERE CONSIDERATIONS COULD BE MADE IN TERMS OF DESIGN STANDARDS RELATED TO THAT, THAT WOULD ALLOW IT TO BE CONSIDERED AS OPEN SPACE WELLMONT FUNCTIONAL OPEN SPACE AVAILABLE FOR USE? IS THAT ABSOLUTELY A FAIR ASSESSMENT, WHATEVER? YES, MA'AM.
AND I APOLOGIZE I DIDN'T INTRODUCE MYSELF.
WELCOME TO THE NEW COMMISSIONERS.
UH, I'M HERE, UH, WITH TRANSPORTATION, THE BRIEF ON BEHALF OF THE ENGINEERING DIVISION OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
UH, WE COULD CERTAINLY, WE WE'RE FOLLOWING OUR STANDARDS AND I JUST DON'T WANT THE COMMISSION TO MISCONSTRUE THE IDEA OF OPEN SPACE BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE, IT WOULD, UH, THE DETENTION POND LOOKS EXCITING.
THAT'S WHERE I WAS HANGING OUT WHEN I WAS YOUNGER, YOU KNOW, MY EARLY YEARS IT WOULD NOT BE WHERE I WOULD SEND MY KIDS FOR
I KNOW, BUT, UH, IT, IT'S JUST DANGEROUS AND ALL KIDS HANGING AROUND THAT GOOD OLD DETENTION POND, WE, WE, WE WOULD WANT THAT, THAT THOSE, THOSE INLETS BE PROTECTED NOT JUST FROM LITTLE ONES BUT ALSO EXPLORING, BUT ALSO FROM GARBAGE OR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE, UH, CLOGGING THE DRAINAGE THERE.
SO FOR MANY REASONS, THE CITY STANDARDS REQUIRE US TO IMPOSE APPLICANTS TO BUILD A FENCE.
AND IT DOESN'T SAY WHAT TYPE OF FENCE.
THE APPLICANT CAN COME IN AND SAY DECORATIVE DEFENSES AND IF THEY WANT TO VOLUNTEER THAT WE'VE NEVER SEEN THAT WE SEE CHAINING FENCE IS WHAT THEY GO WITH BECAUSE THAT'S THE CHEAPEST OPTIONS.
SO, BUT IF THE COMMISSION CHOOSES TO, THEY CAN POSE, UM, DIFFERENT ITEMS THAT WE COULD DEFINITELY WORK AT PERMITTING.
AND MAY I ASK THE QUESTION, MR. EARLY AND MR. EARLY, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY WHEN WE HEARD THIS CASE, THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF TREES IN ONE OF THESE OPEN SPACE AREAS, AND HOW DOES THAT FACTOR INTO CONSIDERATION OF ATTENTION AS, AS WE TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE IMPLICATIONS OF THIS MAY BE? WELL, WHETHER IT IS A DETENTION AREA, IT IS CONSIDERED A DEDICATION THAT PARTS THE OVERALL INFRASTRUCTURE.
THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT IT'S NOT CONSIDERED OPEN SPACE.
AND IN THAT, UH, THERE'S ACTUALLY WHEN THE TREES REMOVED WITHIN THAT DETENTION AREA ARE NOT SUBJECT TO LITIGATION OR DEFENSE PROSECUTION BECAUSE THERE ARE NECESS, UH, ENGINEERING STRUCTURE FOR THE
[01:25:01]
PROPERTY.SO ESSENTIALLY ON THAT BASIS, UH, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT OPEN SPACE IS NOT CONSIDER NOT CONSIDERED FOR TENTION.
I MAY HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, BUT THAT'S OKAY.
GIVEN THEN THAT PERMITTING IS NOT GOING TO VIEW DETENTION RETENTION AS OPEN STATES, REGARDLESS OF WHAT AMENITIES ARE INCLUDED IN IT, DOES THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTED MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE, THE THREE THREE ACRES OF OPEN SPACE? THEY'RE PROPOSING, UH, THREE ACRES OR OPEN SPACE, THEY'RE PROPOSING IT, THAT THEY'RE INCLUDING DETENTION.
DETENTION, BUT GIVEN THAT DETENTION RETENTION CAN'T BE COUNTED, DOES THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THEY SUBMITTED MEET THAT THREE ACRE REQUIREMENT? I WOULD ASSUME NOT IF THEY'RE ASKING FOR TO BE INCLUDED.
YEAH, SO, SO IF THE COMMISSION VOTED ON STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND THAT LANGUAGE WAS TAKEN OUT, IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO REDESIGN SOME ELEMENTS OF THEIR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UM, TO THEN MEET THAT MINIMUM THREE YEAR REQUIREMENT, COME BACK WITH A REVISION, MR. TREVOR.
OKAY, SO I SORT OF HAVE A SIMILAR QUESTION ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
IF THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS APPROVED AND THE LANGUAGE TO STRIKE ANY SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENT PLANS IS INCLUDED, THEN MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY, 'CAUSE THERE'S NOT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF DETAIL IN THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN, BUT BY STRIKING THAT LANGUAGE, YOU'RE REQUIRING ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
ARE WE ESSENTIALLY JUST LEAVING IT OPEN-ENDED FOR SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENT? IT HAS BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE STRIKING, I'M ON PAGE EIGHT 10, SO WE'RE STRIKING C ARE THERE ANY OTHER USES? IS THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN ENCOMPASSING ALL OF THE POTENTIAL USES THAT ARE ANTICIPATED BECAUSE BY THE LEADING C WE ARE REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR, UH, AN ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN BEING PRESENTED IF THERE ARE OTHER USES CONTEMPLATED? SO ITEMS A AND WELL, A, UH, WOULD STILL REQUIRE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, RIGHT DANIEL, BECAUSE IT DOES SPECIFICALLY CALL OUT IF THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THE PD, IT'S EXHIBIT 10 76 A, IT TELLS YOU THAT THE TEXT CONTROLS OVER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ET CETERA.
UH, ITEM B YOU KNOW, ISN'T, ISN'T CHANGING.
BUT THAT BASICALLY SAYS WHAT WE DO IN ALL PDS FOR SINGLE FAMILY.
BUT A PLAQUE CAN ALSO FUNCTION AS AN ADULT PLAN.
UM, AS FAR AS STRIKING ITEM C, UM, I BELIEVE THAT'S STANDARD TEXT, UM, IN ALL PDS.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THERE WASN'T AN INADVERTENT DELETION OF SOMETHING THAT WOULD THEN HAVE SOME SORT OF AN OPEN-ENDED PROCESS FOR SOMEONE TO COME BACK AND DEVELOP SOMETHING THAT IS NOT, AGAIN, IT'S MORE OF A QUESTION.
I WAS JUST SURPRISED BY THE DELETION IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S ALL WRAPPED UP STILL.
BUT LIKE ONE OF THE COMMENT LETTERS WE RECEIVED WAS THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT ADDING A TRAILER PARK HERE.
I MEAN, I DON'T SEE THAT IN THIS CURRENT PLAN.
UM, SO MAYBE THAT'S JUST A MISCONCEPTION, BUT I WASN'T SURE WHAT THE ALL OTHER USES IS REFERRED TO IN EIGHT 10 SECTION C, WHICH HAS BEEN DELETED.
YEAH, SO, SO ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PROPERTY WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE PD 10 76 CONDITIONS AND PLAN, WHATEVER THOSE MAY BE.
UM, SO IF SOMEONE DID, YEAH, WE'LL USE A MANUFACTURED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, UM, THAT WOULDN'T COMPLY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN CURRENTLY ON FILE AND IT MAY NOT COMPLY WITH THE OTHER STANDARDS IN THIS PD.
UM, SO EITHER THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WOULD NEED TO BE AMENDED, THAT WOULD BE, UM, EITHER A MINOR AMENDMENT OR DEVELOPMENT PLAN CASE, A MISCELLANEOUS ITEM OR THE TEXT OF THE PD WOULD ALSO NEED TO BE AMENDED, IN WHICH CASE THAT'S ANOTHER FULL SECOND CASE.
SO JUST TO CONFIRM THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US, IF THEY WANTED TO CHANGE ANY ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINTS, THERE'S AN ACCESS POINT REQUEST IN FRONT OF US, BUT IF THERE WERE ANY ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINTS OR OTHER THINGS THAT CAME UP BECAUSE OF ENGINEERING, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
RIGHT? SO, SO THIS CASE IS KIND OF UNIQUE, UM, SIMPLY BECAUSE LIKE THERE ARE VERY FEW TEXTUAL CHANGES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED.
[01:30:01]
ARE, UM, BASICALLY WHAT TRIGGERS THE REQUIREMENT THAT IT COME BEFORE YOU AS A FULL ZONING CASE.UM, IF THOSE TEXTUAL CHANGES WERE NOT NEEDED TO ALLOW FOR THESE CHANGES TO THE PLAN THAT'S ON FILE, IT WOULD BE A MISCELLANEOUS ITEM.
IT WOULD JUST BE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN OR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
UM, THIS MAY PREDATE YOU, MR. MULKEY CERTAINLY PREDATES YOU SO MANY THINGS MS. BUT THIS SITE HAS A LONG HISTORY OF ZONING APPLICATIONS ON, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY, ABSOLUTELY.
SINCE I'VE BEEN, SINCE THE DAY I BECAME A FIVE YEARS AGO, EARLY IN THE PANDEMIC, WASN'T THERE AN APPLICATION TO PUT SOME SORT OF RV RESORT IS WHAT THEY WERE CALLING IT HERE? YES, THAT WAS, THAT WAS THE VERY FIRST CASE.
AND IF I REMEMBER THE LAST THREE NUMBERS WAS THREE 18 AND IT WAS TO BE, UH, A RV RESORT, WHICH MY COMMISSIONERS BAPTIZED ME WITH FIRE IN AND TOLD ME NO.
UM, AND I GRACIOUSLY, NO, I ACCEPTED THE, NO, I LEARNED TO BE GRACIOUS AND WE MOVED ON.
UM, AND THIS IS NOW AN R FIVE BASED PD WITH ACCESSORY COMMUNITY CENTER OR SOMETHING ALLOWED.
SO YOU COULDN'T DO THE MANUFACTURED HOUSING HERE? NO, YOU COULD NOT.
YOU WOULD NEED H SISTER TOO ALLOWED IN R FIVE.
I CAN'T RECALL MANY PDSS THAT WE'VE SEEN FOR ESSENTIALLY SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS SMALL WEEK.
CAN YOU RECALL IN THE TIME I'VE BEEN HERE, I HAVEN'T SEEN A LOT.
UM, WHEN, WHEN I CAN SPEAK OF BEING A SENIOR PLANNER IN THE PAST TENSE NOW, UM, WHEN I WAS A SENIOR PLANNER COMMISSIONER GLARE AND I HAD A, A PD REQUEST FOR SINGLE FAMILY ON HAYMARKET ROAD, THAT WAS
UM, WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED IN THAT INSTANCE WAS, UH, ESSENTIALLY BASED SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS.
UM, THIS IS NEITHER HERE NOR THERE.
UM, BUT I WILL MENTION AS WELL WITH THIS CASE, UM, IF IT HAD COME BEFORE US TODAY, WE PROBABLY WOULD'VE ALSO RECOMMENDED, UH, BASE DISTRICTS RATHER THAN THE PD THAT'S THAT'S IN THE PAST.
SO WE CAN'T REALLY GO BACK AND CHANGE THAT, BUT WHICH WOULDN'T HAVE REQUIRED TO DEVELOP A PLAN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MS. SIMON? BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD? UH, PARDON.
THIS CASE CAME BEFORE THE ONE WE HAD.
SO THIS CASE WAS APPROVED BEFORE THE ONE WAS DENIED? OH, YEAH, NO, THAT, THAT'S THE CHRONOLOGY.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER YOUNG.
UM, I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER TREAD WAY'S QUESTION, I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY IN RESPONSE TO HER QUESTION THAT COME WHAT MAY, UNLESS IT'S FURTHER AMENDED, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY WILL BE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN? THAT IS CORRECT.
HOW THEN COULD THERE BE A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE SECTION 1 0 6 B, MR. FRANKER YEAH, THAT MIGHT, THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT THIS AFTERNOON.
UM, LIKE I SAID, THAT'S, THAT'S VERY STANDARD TEXT THAT WE HAVE IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SECTION OF ALL PDS.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS, THIS IS BOILERPLATE LANGUAGE THAT'S APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
UM, SO I'M, I'M NOT AWARE, AND I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW LI IF YOU'RE AWARE OF, OF WHY THAT LANGUAGE IS PROPOSED TO DESTRUCT.
IT IS, IT IS ONE OF THE PLACE LANGUAGE FOR CASES THAT ARE APPROVED ON A CONCEPTUAL PLAN SO THAT IF ALL WE'RE DEVELOPING IS A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY CAN SKIP THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS AND GOES STRAIGHT TO PRELIMINARY PLAN.
I HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS PROVISION BEFORE IN A PPE WITH AN ATTACHED DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AND I, I COULD SEE A LOT OF CONFUSION AND PROBLEMS. WHAT HAPPENS IF WE APPROVE THIS AND THEN A MONTH OR TWO FROM NOW, THE APPLICANT SUBMITS A PRELIMINARY PLAN THAT DIFFERS FROM THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SAYS, YOU INVOKING 1 0 6 B YET, COMMISSIONER YOUNG, I COULD SEE THAT CONFUSION.
AND IF THE BODY WANTS TO APPROVE THIS AND STRIKE THAT SUBSECTION TO AVOID THAT SITUATION, THAT WOULD PROBABLY MAKE THINGS CLEAR FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LATER ON THAT ROAD.
[01:35:01]
NOT 11 TO AGREE WITH YOU DURING THE BRIEFING, BUT YOU DON'T HEAR ME ASKING ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.UH, FOLLOWING UP ON SOMEONE'S QUESTION, IF IN FACT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOES NOT MAKE MEET THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT, IF DETENTION AREAS ARE NOT COUNTED, THEN IF WE WERE TO NOT COUNT DETENTION AREAS, WOULD THE PROPER MOTION BE TO, UH, APPROVES SUBJECT TO THAT INTO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN? UH, YES.
SO, UM, YOU, THE COMMISSION COULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO STATUS RECOMMENDING CONDITIONS AND A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADDRESSING X, Y, Z, UH, THAT WOULD THEN, YOU KNOW, MOVE FORWARD, GET CLOSER TO GOING TO COUNSEL, UM, BETWEEN C P C AND COUNSEL, UH, THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO, UH, REVISE THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN SO THAT A MINIMUM OF THREE ACRES OF OPEN SPACE ARE PROVIDED OUTSIDE OF THOSE DETENTION PONDS.
UH, ANOTHER OPTION WOULD BE TO HOLD THE CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT, GIVE THE APPLICANT A CHANCE TO REVISE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THAT CONSIDERATION, AND THEN WE'LL GO BACK TO C P C.
YOU GUYS COULD TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND SAY, OH, YEAH, WE'RE GOOD.
WE LOOKED AT IT AND EVERYTHING'S
MR. IRV, I'M GONNA TRY TO PHRASE THIS IN FORM QUESTION.
I SURE, YEAH, THAT'S MORE, THAT'S MORE OF DANIEL'S TERRITORY, BUT, UM, YEAH, ANY O OBVIOUSLY ANYTHING THAT, THAT MAKES US CLEAR AVOIDS HURDLES AT PERMITTING, WE ARE ALL FOR IT.
THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? JUST FIVE B ONE SIX YOU WANT, I DON'T THINK I'VE GOT YES OR NO EITHER WAY.
I JUST PROBABLY NEED TO, WOULD LIKE A YES OR NO? THAT SURE, YES, THAT 8, 10, 10.
COMMISSIONER K MARKET TO MAKE IT POSSIBLE AND HAVE EXIT THERE? YES MA'AM.
UH, THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN HAD REQUIREMENTS FOR DRAINAGE TO, UH, BE WORKED OUT WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER.
THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER WAS, UM, ESSENTIALLY CHANGED THE LINE AND WASN'T WILLING TO PARTICIPATE AS THEY HAD INITIALLY, UM,
SO THEY HAD TO COME BACK AND REASSESS THE ONLY AREA WHERE THEY COULD HAVE THAT, UM, DRIVEWAY NOW TO BECOME A DRAINAGE FACILITY IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH, UH, CITY STAFF.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MA'AM? I'M SORRY, BUT I WOULD ALSO DEFER THAT TO THE APPLICANT AS WELL TO ELABORATE IF YOU DON'T MIND.
THAT WOULD STILL REQUIRE THOUGH A SIDEWALK FACILITY AS A PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, IS THAT CORRECT? HAY.
IT WOULD, A STANDARD SIDEWALK WOULD STILL BE REQUIRED.
UM, UNLESS A WAIVER IS REQUESTED, AND GRANTED IF A MIDBLOCK PORTION OF HAY MARKET, I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK WHAT CONDITIONS EXIST ON BOTH SIDES.
IT COULD QUALIFY FOR A WAIVER THEN, BUT WE WILL ASK FOR THAT SIDEWALK TO BE ENFORCED.
IF THERE IS, SO YOU'RE SAYING, AND I, I'M TRYING TO, TO GO THERE MENTALLY.
UM, I BELIEVE THERE IS ALREADY A SIDEWALK 'CAUSE THERE IS A SCHOOL.
I, I I KNOW THERE'S A SCHOOL, SO THERE WOULD OH, THANK YOU.
UM, MA'AM, THERE, THERE'S A SCHOOL, YOU'RE CORRECT.
THERE'S A SCHOOL TO, TO L NORTH.
THEY WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR A WAIVER.
THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO INSTRUCT MM-HMM.
REQUIRED AS FAR AS THE WAIVERS BECAUSE WHO IS PRESENT THEN THAT THEY MUST WHAT? THEY MUST MORE CLARIFICATION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR SARS? OKAY, MS. NUNEZ IS HERE, SO WE'LL GO BACK TO CASE NUMBER FOUR AND ALLOW COMMISSIONER TO SIGN OFF.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, THIS HAS BEEN BRIEF FORWARD.
DO WE HAVE ANY UPDATES? NO, THERE WERE NO UPDATES OTHER THAN CLARIFICATION POINTS ON THE
[01:40:01]
CONDITIONS.UH, PRIMARILY THAT THE BE 10% SURFACE PARKING, UM, PERMITTED.
AND THEN OF COURSE THE BIG REASON WHY IT'S RETURNING, WHICH IS THE DRY OVERLAY BEING REMOVED INSTEAD.
THOSE ARE THE ONLY CHANGES THAT WE DISCUSSED.
QUESTIONS, QUESTIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY.
UH, COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS OR REQUEST FOR BRIEFING THE, UH, CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATE FOR SIGNS? ANY QUESTIONS ON THE SIGN BASIS? REQUEST FOR BRIEFING.
OKAY, WELL THAT CONCLUDES THE BRIEFING.
IT'S 10:45 AM UH, I SEE YOU ALL AT THE, AT 1230.
THIS NEVER HAPPENED, SO YOU BROUGHT US GOOD LUCK TODAY.
WE'LL SEE YOU AT THE 1230 COMMISSIONERS.
[CALL TO ORDER]
PINA, CAN YOU PLEASE START US OFF WITH THE ROLL CALL? GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.DISTRICT ONE? YEP, BUT LET HIM PUT HERE.
DISTRICT TWO, DISTRICT TWO, PRESENT DISTRICT THREE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. MESSINA.
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
WELCOME TO THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
TODAY IS THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5TH, 1230 1:00 PM COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS BEFORE WE GET TO THE AGENDA.
UH, FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE, WE DO HAVE COPIES OF THE AGENDA HERE ON THE TABLE TO THE BOTTOM RIGHT.
ALSO ON THAT TABLE, YOU'RE GONNA FIND THESE LITTLE YELLOW SHEETS HERE.
WE'D LOVE FOR YOU TO FILL OUT THESE CARDS, UH, TO HAVE FOR US TO HAVE A RECORD OF YOUR VISIT WITH US HERE TODAY.
AT SOME POINT, PLEASE COME DOWN AND FILL ONE OUT AND YOU CAN JUST LEAVE IT RIGHT THERE ON THE TABLE.
WE'LL HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ONLINE.
ALL SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE THREE MINUTES, UH, TO SPEAK.
MS. PACINO WILL KEEP TIME AND WE'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP.
UH, I'LL ASK ALL SPEAKERS, ESPECIALLY THOSE ON YOU, OF YOU ONLINE TO, TO STAY ONLINE AFTER YOU MAKE YOUR COMMENTS, IN CASE THERE ARE QUESTIONS FOR YOU, UH, FOR ALL SPEAKERS, PLEASE BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
AND PER OUR RULES, IN CASES WHERE THERE IS OPPOSITION, THE APPLICANT GETS A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
[ACTION ITEMS]
WITH THAT WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED, UH, WITH CASE NUMBER ONE, MS. BLUE.ITEM NUMBER ONE D 2 23 DASH 0 0 5.
A APPLICATION FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND A LANDSCAPE PLAN ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
DISTRICT NUMBER TWO, THREE, I'M SORRY, 3 27 D WITH A D RESTRICTION Z 8 89 DASH 216 WEST LINE OF GREENVILLE AVENUE BETWEEN FOREST LANE AND ALZ ROAD STAFF.
UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HOUSER? I DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? THANK YOU MR. CHAIR? YES, IN THE MATTER OF D 2 23 DASH 0 0 5, I MOVE THAT WE FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
[01:45:17]
ITEM NUMBER TWO IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT, ONE WITHIN PLAN 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 OAKLAWN AVENUE.RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN, A REVISED EXHIBIT 6 21 B AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. NUNS.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, SUZANNE KEDRON.
WE WOULD ASK YOUR CONSIDERATION IF YOU COULD HOLD THIS CASE TILL THE SECOND HEARING IN JANUARY TO GIVE US ENOUGH TIME TO ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED AT THE LAST HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? UH, DID YOU HAVE A MO A QUESTION, COMMISSIONER YOUNG? UH, NO.
JUST WANTED TO MAKE A STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD THAT I JOINED THE MEETING AT 1233.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER Y ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
IN THE MATTER OF CASES Z TWO 12 DASH 3 53, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND PUT THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL THE SECOND C P C HEARING IN JANUARY, 2024.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND IN JANUARY? YES.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION? SECOND QUESTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
UM, ITEM NUMBER THREE Z 2 2 3 1 0 5 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO A RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVING OR DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE USE ON PROPERTIES ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 8 42 FOR CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT USES WITH AN MD ONE MODIFIED DELTA OVERLAY ON THE EAST LINE OF GREENVILLE AVENUE BETWEEN PROSPECT AVENUE AND ORM STREET STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO DISCIP PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, MY NAME'S ROB BALDWIN, OFFICER 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
WE'RE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER.
UM, THANK YOU, UH, FOR, UH, MOVING THIS ONE FORWARD.
UH, THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND HER CONSTITUENTS.
THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT THE CONFIGURATION AND, UH, AMOUNT OF PARKING DOWN IN LOWER GREENVILLE.
WE'VE WORKED, UH, DILIGENTLY WITH HER AND CITY STAFF AND, UH, WE'VE RESOLVED THOSE ISSUES.
UH, AND I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS CASE NUMBER THREE.
QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH 1 0 5, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC RECORD AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND IF I GET A SECOND, I HAVE A COUPLE COMMENTS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR, UH, FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? YES, THANK YOU.
UM, I WANNA THANK THE APPLICANT FOR WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY TO RESOLVE SOME FAIRLY LONG STANDING, UM, PARKING LOT ISSUES, UH, THAT SERVED NOT JUST THIS BUSINESS BUT SEVERAL OF THE OTHER BUSINESSES ON LOWER GREENVILLE.
AS HAPPENS WITH TIME, THE PARKING LOTS HAD BECOME IMPASSABLE IN SOME PLACES USED FOR INAPPROPRIATE USES OR UNAPPROVED USES IN SOME PLACES, AND WERE NOT STRIPED TO OUR CURRENT PARKING CODE.
AND MOST NOTABLY, THERE WAS A REAL
[01:50:01]
LACK OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING SO THAT PEOPLE WHO NEEDED TO HAVE ACCESSIBLE PARKING COULD ENJOY ALL OF THE AWESOMENESS OF GREENVILLE AVENUE.UM, AND SO WE ARE WELL ON OUR WAY, I THINK, TO SOLVING THOSE PROBLEMS. AND I ALSO WANNA THANK, UM, OUR FORMER TECH GUY SIGN GUY JASON POOLE, WHO HAS MOVED.
AND THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN A CODE COMPLAINT ISSUE FOR TWO YEARS.
AND, UM, THEY ASSIGNED JASON TO IT AND HE JUST TOOK IT, FIXED IT, SOLVED IT QUICKLY COMMUNICATES ABOUT WHAT HE IS DOING.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU LISTENING, BUT SHOUT OUT TO JASON FOR DOING SUCH A GREAT JOB SO FAR ON THIS AND I HOPE THAT YOU ALL WILL JOIN ME IN APPROVING THIS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER HALL? YEAH, THE, ARE ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE THREE PARKING LOTS THAT ARE DIRECTLY BEHIND THESE? ARE WE'RE TALKING OR NOT? NO, NOT ENTIRELY.
THERE'S, THERE'S, UM, SOME ACROSS THE STREET AND THEN THERE'S SOME BACK HERE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 1 0 5, WE HAVE A MOTION ABOUT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BLA TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, FALSE FOR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL 42 YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT.
UM, ITEM NUMBER FOUR, COMMISSIONER YOUNG HAS A CONFLICT AND HAS LOGGED OFF.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND REMOVAL OF THE DLI CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTIES OWNED PD NUMBER NINE AND 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 FAIRMOUNT STREET.
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 REMOVAL OF THE DELIC CONTROL OVERLAY.
MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS SUZANNE KEDRON AND I OFFICE AT 2323 ROSS AVENUE.
UH, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT.
WE HAVE IN THE AUDIENCE A FEW TEAM MEMBERS THAT I'D JUST LIKE TO, UH, LET YOU KNOW THAT THEY'RE HERE IN CASE ANY QUESTIONS COME UP.
WE HAVE JOHN WALTER AND CHASE PROSPERO, BOTH FROM LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY AND RESPECTIVELY.
THEY'RE AN EXECUTIVE AND A SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF THAT COMPANY.
UH, WE HAVE KEVIN CONWAY, OUR LEAD ARCHITECT FROM S O M.
WE HAVE CHANDLER, OUR LEAD LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FROM O J B, AND WE HAVE STEVE STONER, WHO YOU ALL KNOW FROM WESTWOOD PACHECO KOCH.
THIS IS A SITE WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT IN FRONTS ON CEDAR SPRINGS, AND IT'S BETWEEN RUTH AND FAIRMONT, AND IT'S ALSO BOUNDED BY HOW IT'S AN APPROXIMATE FOUR ACRE SITE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF UPTOWN.
AND, UM, WE'VE WORKED VERY HARD.
I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROBABLY FOR TWO YEARS, THE LAST YEAR, VERY ACTIVELY IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND AT THIS TIME WE HAVE NO KNOWN OPPOSITION.
WE HAVE SUPPORT FROM THE OAK LAWN COMMITTEE.
UM, AND THIS IS JUST A REALLY SPECIAL PROJECT, AND I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO KEVIN IN A MINUTE, WHO WILL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE BIG THINGS, WE HAVE A HUNDRED PERCENT UNDERGROUND PARKING.
MORE THAN HALF OF THE SITE IS RESERVED FOR AN UNBUILDABLE OPEN SPACE AREA.
WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT ARE GONNA BE PROPOSED ON RIGHT NOW.
WHAT IS MOSTLY PARKING? UH, WE HAVE MICRO UNITS THAT HELPS WITH THE AFFORDABILITY IN THE AREA.
WE HAVE ACTIVATED GROUND FLOOR USES ALL OF OUR SERVICES, OUR INDOORS, UM, MEANING THE LOADING AND EVERYTHING.
UH, WE HAVE ADDITIONAL SETBACKS AT GRADE TO ENHANCE THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESSIBILITY.
AND AS WELL THOSE SETBACKS PROCEED THROUGHOUT THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.
AND THE PROJECT IS ALSO IN KEEPING WITH THE CITY'S CCAP GOALS.
I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER NOW TO KEN, UH, KEVIN FROM S O M, WHO WILL TELL YOU US A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE PROJECT.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
UH, AN IMPORTANT GOAL FOR THIS PROJECT, AS SUZANNE ALLUDED TO, HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO CREATE A MEANINGFUL PLACE.
UH, AND WE SEE THE FOUNDATION OF THAT AS OPEN SPACE.
UH, SO YOU CAN SEE IN THE IMAGE ON THE SCREEN, UH, CREATING A LARGE CENTRAL OPEN SPACE, UH, THAT IS ENRICHED WITH LANDSCAPE, UH, OUTDOOR DINING, UM, ACTIVE USES, LINING THE SPACE, UH, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, A PEDESTRIAN SCALE.
[01:55:01]
UH, BRINGING A PEDESTRIAN SCALE TO THE SPACE THROUGH THE LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS, AS WELL AS SHADE STRUCTURES, UH, APPROPRIATE PLANTINGS AND THE SCALE OF THE ARCHITECTURE, UH, ITSELF THAT FRAMES THE PLAZA.ANOTHER COMPONENT OF THIS MEANINGFUL OPEN SPACE IS THE CONNECTIVITY TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, YOU CAN SEE IN THIS IMAGE ON THE UPPER LEFT, THE SPACE OPENS UP DIRECTLY TO CEDAR SPRINGS.
ON THE UPPER RIGHT OF THE IMAGE, IT OPENS UP DIRECTLY, UH, TO RUTH STREET.
SO CREATING THOSE CONNECTIONS TO FROM THAT CENTRAL SPACE TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, IS VERY INTEGRAL TO THIS PLAN.
UH, ON THE NEXT SLIDE, WE'LL SEE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE BUILDINGS FRAMING THAT OPEN SPACE AND ALLOWING THOSE SPACES TO FLOW OUT TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO ADDITIONALLY, UH, THE SENSE OF THESE BUILDINGS HAVING AN APPROPRIATE SCALE, UH, RELATED TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD IS A VERY IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF MAKING A ME MEANINGFUL PLACE HERE.
THIS VIEW SHOWING US THE HOWELL STREET FRONTAGE, UH, SHOWS A TWO STORY RETAIL FRONTAGE THAT ADDRESSES THAT PUBLIC REALM AND THE TOWERS ABOVE STEP BACK, UH, INTO THE BLOCK, UH, CREATING THAT STRONG RELATIONSHIP TO THE LOWER CAPABILITIES ACROSS THE STREET.
AND THAT'S DOCUMENTED HERE IN OUR HEIGHT AND SETBACK PLAN.
UH, THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS OUR ILLUSTRATIVE LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND YOU CAN SEE ALL THE ELEMENTS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, THE LANDSCAPING, THE HARDSCAPING, UH, THE SCALE OF THOSE SPACES COMING TOGETHER TO CREATE THAT MEANINGFUL OPEN SPACE.
UH, IN THE NEXT SLIDE YOU'LL SEE KIND OF THE DOCUMENTATION OF THAT AND OUR LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT'S PART OF OUR SUBMITTAL.
AND AS PART OF THIS PROCESS TO FURTHER ENHANCE THAT MEANINGFUL OPEN SPACE, WE'VE WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH THE OAK LAWN COMMITTEE, UH, AND STAKEHOLDERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO ENSURE THAT WE HAD, UH, ADEQUATELY SERVICED FOR THESE BUILDINGS THAT IS PROVIDED INSIDE, UH, AND INTERNAL TO THE BUILDINGS.
SO NONE OF THAT WILL BE DONE ON THE SITE, RATHER ALL INTERNAL, UH, AS WELL AS PROVIDING, UH, APPROPRIATE MEANS FOR VALET DROP OFF AND PICK UP, UH, RIDE SHARE AND SO FORTH, UH, OFF OF THE CITY STREET SO WE CAN ALLOW THE TRAFFIC TO FLOW CLEARLY.
SO YOU CAN SEE IN THIS IMAGE, UH, THAT CENTRAL SPACE FRAMED BY THE BUILDINGS OPENING UP AND VERY CONNECTED TO CEDAR SPRINGS, UH, MAKING IT AN ASSET NOT ONLY FOR THIS PROJECT BUT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE ENTIRE CITY.
UH, THIS DIAGRAM IS ILLUSTRATING THE INTENTION OF OUR 10 FOOT SIDEWALK THAT WILL CONTINUE AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE, UM, AS WELL AS AROUND THOSE VEHICULAR DROP-OFF AREAS TO REALLY FACILITATE FIRST AND FOREMOST THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE ON THE SITE.
THAT'S A VERY STRONG PRIORITY.
WE WILL GO TO OUR SPEAKER ONLINE, MR. PAGE.
CHAIRMAN SHAD AND COMMISSIONERS.
I RESIDE AT 32 10 CARLISLE STREET DALLAS.
I'M APPEARING HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO OFFER OUR FULL, UNQUALIFIED AND ENTHUSIASTIC SUPPORT FOR LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY'S 2,500 CEDAR SPRINGS PROJECT.
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S LAND USE PLANS AND POLICIES PROVIDING THE FOLLOWING TRADE-OFFS, WHICH ARE ACCEPTABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AN INCREASE IN F A R TO 8.0 IN EXCHANGE FOR A MULTIMILLION DOLLAR COMMITMENT TO BURY ALL OF THE PARKING AND EXISTING UTILITIES AND INTRODUCING MARKET RATE, HOUSING AFFORDABILITY VIA THE PROVISION OF MICROUNITS AND AN INCREASE IN MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS IN EXCHANGE FOR SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED LOT COVERAGE RATIO AND INCREASED GREEN SPACE.
WE ALSO SUPPORT THE APPLICANT'S SPECIFIC REQUEST FOR MIDNIGHT CLOSING HOURS FOR ALL ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS, WHICH WAS ONE PRODUCT OF LINCOLN'S COLLABORATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS THE INTENT OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR DALLAS, WHICH IS TO DIRECT A NEW DEVELOPMENT AND DENSITY TOWARDS ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL OFFICE AND MIXED USE AREAS AND AWAY FROM ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.
AND THE OAK LAWN PLAN, WHICH ENCOURAGES CREATIVE ENTITLEMENT TRADE-OFFS IN AREAS ALREADY ZONED FOR HIGH DENSITY ONLY TO ACCOMPLISH DEFINED PUBLIC OBJECTIVES AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 1 0 3 OF PD 1 93.
WE ARE PARTICULARLY IMPRESSED BY LINCOLN'S DECISION TO WORK WITH S O M AND O J B TO THE NATION'S PREMIER ARCHITECTURAL FIRMS RESULTING IN SUPERIOR TREATMENT OF THE GROUND PLANE, INCLUDING SPACE PROGRAMMING, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT, AND TREATMENT OF THE STREET EDGE.
WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT PROVIDING INCREASED DENSITY IN THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION WILL GENERATE ADDITIONAL DAYTIME FOOT TRAFFIC, WHICH WILL, WILL PROVIDE A MUCH NEEDED BOOST TO TOP TOWN RESIDENTS AND RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS.
THE UPTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FULLY SUPPORTS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
[02:00:01]
AND YOUR SERVICE.MY NAME IS ADAM MURPHY AND I ACTUALLY OFFICE ACROSS THE STREET AT 28 28 R ROO STREET.
I AM THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE OAK LAWN COMMITTEE AND THE OAK LAWN COMMITTEE FULLY SUPPORTS, UH, LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY'S ZONING REQUEST AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE THEIR TIME AND WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH US ON, ON, ON MAKING THE PROJECT.
AND YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED OUR LETTER ON SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2022.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? YES, COMMISSIONER
SO WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US IS THE REMOVAL OF THE D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE STAFF REPORT, IS THERE NOT A REQUEST TO ADD THE D ONE OVERLAY AT THIS POINT? WILL THAT COME LATER? NO, IT'S MORE OF A PROCEDURAL QUESTION.
YOU HAVE A QUESTION? OKAY, WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT FIRST AND THEN WE'LL GO TO STAFF COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
WELL, I GUESS MY QUESTION MIGHT BE BE FOR THE APPLICANT, LIKE IS THE INTENT TO ALSO BE ASKING FOR D ONE NOW OR IT'S JUST TO REMOVE D UH, COMMISSIONER THE REQUEST IS TO REMOVE THE D OVERLAY COMPLETELY AND COME BACK AT SOME POINT WITH A D ONE OR NO, MA'AM.
OKAY, SO JUST NO LIQUOR SALES AT ALL? NO, IT'S TO REMOVE THE D OVERLAY.
SO WE'LL BE FOLLOWING THE STATE LAW IN REGARDS TO THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.
SO YOU DO NOT NEED THE D ONE IN ORDER TO SELL ALCOHOL.
IF YOU DO A D ONE, WE'RE GONNA NEED ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS.
SO WE'RE REMOVING IT COMPLETELY AND WE WILL JUST SIMPLY FOLLOW STATE LAW.
AND YOU CAN DO THAT AND NOT HAVE TO GET A SEPARATE SS U P.
YEAH, I WAS JUST GONNA ASK MS OZ, IF YOU COULD JUST GO OVER EXACTLY WHAT IT MEANS TO REMOVE A D OVERLAY AND THE S U P COMPONENT WITH THE D ONE.
UM, COMMISSIONER TR THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTIONS.
BASICALLY THE D OVERLAY IS ALCOHOL REGULATIONS, WHICH ARE MAINTAINED BY THE CITY WHERE THE REGULAR ALCOHOL REGULATIONS ARE MAINTAINED BY THE STATE THROUGH T A B C.
AND SO THESE ARE AN OVERLAY THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN THE CITY.
AND WHENEVER THEY ARE THERE, YOU EITHER HAVE A D WHICH MEANS NO ALCOHOL SALES ARE PERMITTED, OR A D ONE WHERE CERTAIN ALCOHOL SALES ARE PERMITTED WITH A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.
WE THEY HAVE REQUESTED TO COMPLETELY REMOVE IT, WHICH MEANS THEY WOULD ONLY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE STATE STANDARDS RATHER THAN BOTH THE CITY AND THE STATE STANDARDS.
EXCUSE ME, THE CITY DOES NOT REQUIRE COMPLIANCE WITH ITS OWN STANDARDS.
I'LL, I'LL ADD ON TO, TO JEN'S COMMENT JUST A LITTLE BIT.
UM, SO, UH, THE D AND D ONE OVERLAYS WERE ESTABLISHED IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CITY AS AN OVERLAY DISTRICT, UM, I THINK IN THE EIGHTIES.
UM, AND THE WAY THEY WORK IS WE CANNOT ESTABLISH ANY NEW D OVERLAYS OR D ONE OVERLAYS.
UM, THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH SET IN STONE.
HOWEVER, YOU CAN GO FROM A D TO A D ONE, SO NO ALCOHOL VERSUS YOU NEED AN S U P TO SELL ALCOHOL.
YOU CAN GO FROM D TO NOTHING OR D ONE TO NOTHING.
SO YOU CAN GO FORWARD ESSENTIALLY, BUT YOU CAN'T GO BACKWARD.
UM, SO, UH, ONCE THIS D OVERLAY IS TERMINATED, UM, THERE WOULD NOT BE AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE FUTURE TO ADD ANOTHER D OR D ONE OVERLAY TO THE PROPERTY.
SO, SORRY, I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED.
SO THE STATE REGULATES ALCOHOL, BUT THE CITY OF DALLAS AT SOME POINT ALSO DECIDED TO REGULATE ALCOHOL.
THE CITY HAS A FEW DIFFERENT WAYS THAT THEY REG REGULATE ALCOHOL SALES.
UM, ONE WAY IS THROUGH ZONING, AND THAT'S PRIMARILY THROUGH THE D AND D ONE OVERLAYS.
BUT BY NOT GETTING A D OR A D ONE OVERLAY, THIS PROJECT IS NOT GOING TO BE PROHIBITED FROM SELLING ALCOHOL.
THEY WOULD NOT BE PROHIBITED FROM SELLING ALCOHOL UNDER A D OVERLAY OR REQUIRED TO GET AN S U P TO SELL ALCOHOL AS WOULD BE THE CASE UNDER A D ONE.
THEY CAN JUST SELL ALCOHOL, UM, WITHOUT ANY FURTHER ZONING APPROVALS.
BUT THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE STATE STANDARDS AND LICENSING REQUIREMENTS.
OH, I, I I DO UNDERSTAND THAT.
MS. KEDRON, JUST ONE CLARIFICATION.
I, UM, LOOKING AT YOUR RENDERINGS AND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT'S BEFORE US, AM I CORRECT THAT YOUR CONDITION ON SIDEWALKS BEING LEVEL ACROSS ALL DRY VIALS, UM, IS CONSISTENT AROUND THE ENTIRE PERIMETER OF THE SITE? YES MA'AM.
[02:05:01]
AND IT'S JUST, I SAW SOME OF THE WIDER DRY VI, SO JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS COVERED.WELL, IT'S IN THE CONDITION, SO IT'S GUARANTEED TO HAPPEN.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YEAH, UM, THIS IS PROBABLY FOR MS. KEDRON.
UM, I THINK WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THIS AT, AT BRIEFINGS, BUT UM, COULD YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHY IN SECTION ONE 13 SUB C, Y'ALL WANT THE LANGUAGE IN THERE PROVIDING THAT THE FEE IN LIEU IS AVAILABLE? WELL, WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS, UM, AND I UNDERSTAND FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT WHETHER THAT LANGUAGE IS IN OR NOT, THAT IF PROVIDED THAT THE FEE IN LIEU IS AVAILABLE TO US AT THE TIME, WHICH IS NOW THAT WE WOULD STILL BE AN OPTION.
UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S A LAWYER IN ME THAT WOULD LIKE IT VERY CLEAR IN THE ORDINANCE.
UM, BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS REDUNDANT AND THAT IT MIGHT BE REMOVED.
UH, MS. MS. KENDRICK, ROUGHLY HOW MANY, UH, RESIDENTIAL UNITS WILL BE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT AND WHAT PERCENTAGE ARE AFFORDABLE OR MICROUNITS? UH, MICROUNITS ARE 5%.
THERE'LL BE A, A MINIMUM OF 5% ACROSS THE SITE WOULD BE MICROUNITS.
UM, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE'VE REQUESTED WOULD BE 5% AT 81 TO A HUNDRED, BUT THAT WOULD ALSO ALLOW US TO AVAIL OURSELVES AT THE FEE AND LU, SINCE THAT'S THE CURRENT POLICY, UH, THE ACTUAL DWELLING UNIT NUMBERS UP TO 630 IN BOTH BUILDINGS, THAT WOULD BE BUILDING TWO AND BUILDING THREE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE COULD, COULD YOU REPEAT AGAIN, HOW MANY, COULD YOU REPEAT AGAIN? HOW MANY ACTUAL UNITS WILL BE IN THERE? JUST A LITTLE BIT OVER 600 MA'AM.
AND SO YOU ALL ARE ONLY DOING 5% AFFORDABLE HOUSING? IT WOULD BE 5% THAT ARE MICROUNITS, WHICH IS A TOOL IN AFFORDABILITY THAT HELPS WITH AFFORDABILITY.
AND THEN IF THERE ARE UNITS ON SITE, IT WOULD BE 5% OF THOSE UNITS.
AND WE'RE ASKING THAT THEY BE 81 TO A HUNDRED PERCENT.
AND THEN ALSO THOSE BUILDINGS WOULD BE PAYING INTO THE FEE AND LIEU FUND.
AND THE CALCULATION ON THAT CURRENTLY ON BUILDING TWO WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $3.9 MILLION.
AND ON BUILDING THREE IT'D BE JUST OVER $3.6 MILLION IF WE PAID THE FEE AND LIE.
AND THAT IS TO OPT TO PAY INTO AFFORDABLE HOUSING WORK, UH, WITH THE CITY? YES MA'AM.
THAT IS ONE OF THE OPTIONS UNDER THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING POLICY OF THE CITY.
I WAS, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU ALL WILL, UM, COULD INCREASE THAT TO 10% OR, OR, OR A NO, THOSE ARE THE PROJECT NUMBERS THAT WE'VE WORKED ON TO DATE, SO I DON'T WANNA COMMIT TO MORE, BUT THOSE ARE THE, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER'S, LIGHTS ARE ON OVER THERE.
QUESTION COMMISSIONER, TRY AWAY PLEASE.
MS. KEDRON ON THE FEE IN LIEU.
SO IS THAT PAYABLE IF YOU DON'T DO BOTH? THE 5% MICROUNITS AND THE 5% AT 81 A HUNDRED? THE MICRO UNITS ARE A REQUIREMENT REGARDLESS.
AND THEN, SO IS THE FEE IN LIEU IF YOU DO DO THE 5% AT 81 TO A HUNDRED, YOU, YOU DON'T PAY THAT? CORRECT.
THERE'S AN OPTION OF EITHER PROVIDING THOSE UNITS IN THE PARTICULAR BUILDINGS OR IN PAYING THOSE THAT FEE IN LIEU.
AND IS THAT 5% ACROSS BOTH OF THE BUILDINGS? YES MA'AM.
DID STAFF REQUEST A HIGHER PERCENTAGE? UM, I BELIEVE SO.
OR MAYBE AT A LOWER INCOME BAND.
UM, CAN YOU JUST DESCRIBE THE CONVERSATIONS I GUESS MAYBE WITH STAFF AS TO WHY YOU SETTLED ON 5% AT 81 TO A HUNDRED? THOSE WERE THE NUMBERS THAT ARE TYPICAL IN THAT AREA, BUT SINCE THERE IS A FEE IN LIE OPTION, UM, WE'LL MOST LIKELY AVAIL OURSELVES OF THAT OPTION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER HERBERT? NO.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER KINGTON, WE HAVE A MOTION.
YEAH, WE DID IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH ONE 14, MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE WITH, UH, UH, UH, I'M SORRY, APPROVE PURSUANT TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.
UH, IN SECTION 1.03, DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS ADD A DEFINITION FOR HABITAT GARDEN TO READ.
HABITAT GARDEN MEANS ANY PLANTING AREAS WILL BE NATIVE OR NATIVE ADAPTIVE SPECIES TO NORTH
[02:10:01]
TEXAS WITH LOW WATER OR VERY LOW WATER CONSUMPTION CHARACTERISTICS WITH THE INTENTION OF ATTRACTING OR PROVIDING HABITAT FOR BEES, BIRDS, BUTTERFLIES, AND OTHER POLLINATORS OR A COMBINATION THEREOF.THE LANDSCAPING SHALL BE MAINTAINED WITH INDUSTRY'S BEST PRACTICES TO PROMOTE THE HEALTHY DEVELOPMENT.
MAINTENANCE OF POLLINATOR HABITATS, TURF AND LAWN AREAS ARE CONSIDERED PLANTING AREAS WITHIN THIS DEFINITION.
PROVIDED HOWEVER, THAT LAWN AND TURF AREAS MAY USE GRASSES THAT ARE NOT CONSISTENT, CONSIDERED LOW OR VERY LOW WATER CONSUMPTION.
NEXT, CHANGE, REMOVE THE DEFINITION OF PLANTING AREA ENTIRELY.
UM, NEXT CHANGE IN SECTION 1.06.
MAIN USE IS PER PERMITTED IN SECTION B SUBSECTION TWO.
ADD AT THE END THE SENTENCE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE REQUIRED.
SUB SEC, I'M SORRY, SECTION 1 0 8 YARD LOT AND SPACE REGULATIONS SECTION A SUBSECTION ONE TO READ MAXIMUM OBSTRUCTION STRUCTURE HEIGHT IS 240 FEET.
SUBSECTION B TO READ SPECIAL PROJECT PARENT, I'M SORRY, FOR A SPECIAL PROJECT, THE FOLLOWING YARD LAWN SPACE REGULATIONS APPLY B SUBSECTION FOUR HEIGHT ADD A NEW SUBSECTION A TO READ A BUILDING ONE EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS PARAGRAPH, THE MAXIMUM STRUCTURE HEIGHT IS 330 FEET.
FROM THAT POINT, THE REMAINING SUB PARAGRAPHS WILL BE RE-LET SUBSECTION NINE, ALL STREET PARKING AND LOADING SECTION A SUBSECTION 10 SUB SUBSECTION I SHALL BE CHANGED.
TO READ ALL OFF STREET PARKING MUST BE LOCATED UNDERGROUND.
SECTION ONE 11 LANDSCAPING ADD SUBSECTION D FOR A SPECIAL PROJECT.
ALL LANDSCAPING MUST CONFORM TO THE HABITAT GARDEN STANDARDS.
SUBSECTION ONE 13, DEVELOPMENT BONUSES FOR MIXED INCOME HOUSING.
THERE ARE TWO BOXES THERE FOR, UM, I'M RECOMMENDING THAT WE GO WITH APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR B AND STAFF'S REQUEST TO REMOVE SUBSECTION C AND ONE 14 DESIGN STANDARDS REMOVE C AND SUBSECTION ONE UNDER C.
FINALLY, IN SUBSECTION IN SECTION ONE 17, ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS FOR THE BOX SELECTION.
C I CHOOSE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I HAVE COMMENTS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
SOME OF THE CHANGES I JUST, UM, READ INTO THE RECORD ARE REALLY JUST CLEANUP CHANGES AND EXCEPT FOR THE REQUEST TO HAVE CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE PARKING ABOVE GRADE, I BELIEVE THAT THE REST OF THEM ARE ALL AGREED BY THE APPLICANT.
UM, AND THIS PROJECT STRIKES ME AS KIND OF FUNNY BECAUSE MR. PAGE AND I ARE HERE BOTH, UM, EMPHATICALLY SUPPORTING A LINCOLN PROJECT IN UPTOWN DALLAS.
SO MY HOW THINGS CHANGE FROM TIME TO TIME, AND I WON'T REITERATE THE POINTS MR. PAGE MADE, BUT THEY, HE HIT A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WERE ON MY LIST.
UM, I THINK THIS PROJECT IS SO EXCITING AND IT BRINGS SO MANY DIFFERENT THINGS TO THE TABLE THAT COMPLY WITH SO MANY OF OUR DIFFERENT POLICIES THAT I JUST WANNA HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THOSE.
AND MS. KEDRON HIGHLIGHTED SOME OF'EM AS WELL.
I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE NEED HOUSING AND IT BRINGS HUNDREDS OF HOUSING UNITS, 5% OF THOSE WILL BE MICRO UNITS, WHICH ARE DEFINED AS 400 SQUARE FEET OR LESS, WHICH TEND TO BE NATURALLY AFFORDABLE.
AND LINCOLN AT LEAST MANAGES OTHER, UH, COMPLEXES IN DALLAS THAT HAVE MICRO UNITS.
AND SO THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, TELL YOU HOW SUCCESSFUL THEY ARE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY AS WELL.
I DO EXPECT THEM TO GO WITH THE FEE AND LIE.
UM, I KNOW THAT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE AMOUNT OF, UH, HOUSING AND THE BRACKET FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS LESS THAN WHAT STAFF WANTS.
BUT AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED MORE THAN ONCE IN THIS BODY, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RECOMMENDED PERCENTAGES AND BRACKETS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNDER OUR POLICY AND THE AMOUNT OF THE FEE IN LIE IS SO DRASTIC
[02:15:01]
IN NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE THIS THAT DEVELOPERS NEVER PICK PUTTING THE UNITS ACTUALLY ON THE GROUND.AND THE ONLY CHANCE YOU HAVE THAT THEY MIGHT DO THAT IS TO BRING THE RECOMMENDED NUMBER OF UNITS IN THE BRACKETS WITH THE RANGE OF WHAT THAT FEE WOULD BE.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR THE PERCENTAGE IN THE BRACKET OF AFFORDABLE UNITS ON SITE TO GIVE THEM THAT OPTION.
AND I KNOW THAT, I KNOW THAT WE DESPERATELY NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT ALL OF THE BRACKETS, AND 80 TO 100% MAY NOT SEEM LIKE THAT MUCH OF A, A CONCESSION, BUT IT'S A SIGNIFICANT CONCESSION OVER WHAT MARKET RATE IS AT THIS LOCATION.
SO I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, BUT I WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT.
THIS PROJECT ALSO BRINGS SOME GREAT URBAN DESIGN AND IT DID GO THROUGH A NUMBER OF PUBLIC MEETINGS.
THE SITE IS ACTUALLY PARTIALLY PD 1 93 AND PARTIALLY PD NINE.
PD NINE IS ONE OF OUR OLDEST PDS.
IT IS DESIGNED TO PROTECT THE STATE THOMAS AREA.
MOST OF THE STRUCTURES AROUND THIS SITE AND PD NINE ARE, ARE OLD SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR A CENTURY THAT ARE MOSTLY REPURPOSED NOW FOR COMMERCIAL USE.
BUT THAT'S HOW THE LAND IS DEVELOPED.
AND SO FOR THIS DEVELOPER TO COME TOGETHER WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES OF PD NINE AND REALLY ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS, PARTICULARLY ON HOW STREET, UM, I, I THINK JUST GOES TO SHOW TO THEIR CREDIT THE CONCESSIONS THEY MADE AND THE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE TO GET US TO THE POINT WE ARE TODAY.
THERE WERE A LOT OF CHANGES FROM WHERE WE STARTED TO WHERE WE ENDED UP.
UM, I'M SORRY, MY COMPUTER DIED.
UM, AND, AND THAT IS ALSO REFLECTED IN THE ARTICULATION OF THE BUILDINGS, THE SETBACKS AS YOU GET CLOSER TO THE STREET, UM, I'M SORRY, AS YOU GET FARTHER FROM THE STREET WHERE YOU'RE REALLY PUTTING THE HEIGHT, UM, TOWARDS THE CENTER OF THE LOT.
THE OTHER, UH, URBAN DESIGN FEATURE OF THIS IS REALLY HOW WE'VE TREATED THE PARKING AND THE INGRESS AND EGRESS OF VEHICLES ON THIS LOT.
FIRST OF ALL, THE PARKING IS ALL SHARED BETWEEN ALL THE USES.
SO WE'RE MAXIMIZING THE USE OF EACH PARKING SPOT.
ALL OF THE BACK OF THE HOUSE STUFF IS WITHIN THE BELOW GRADE PARKING SPOT.
SO WE'RE NOT CONTEMPLATING DOING LOADING AND UNLOADING ON.
THESE ARE ALREADY NARROW STREETS IN UPTOWN.
THE, UM, WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF THINKING ABOUT WHERE DELIVERIES GO, WHAT KIND OF DELIVERIES.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE IN TODAY'S DAY AND AGE, WE HAVE DOORDASH, AMAZON, FEDEX, EVERYBODY, AND THEY LIKE TO PARK RIGHT ON THE STREET.
AND WE'VE REALLY SPENT SOME TIME TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE GET THEM INTO THE SITE OFF THE STREET AND WHERE THAT GOES.
AND THEN THE OTHER VEHICLE COMPONENT OF THIS THAT WE'D SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON WAS HOW DO CARS COME IN AND OUTTA THE SITE AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE? UM, AND, AND WHAT'S GOING ON AROUND THIS SITE.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF DEVELOP IN THIS AREA AND YOU WANNA FOCUS ON WHERE DOES THE INGRESS AND EGRESS FROM THE NEIGHBORING SITE AND HOW DOES THAT IMPACT INGRESS AND EGRESS ON THIS SITE? AND ALSO WHERE DO YOU PUT YOUR VALET? AND YOU KNOW, WE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS BACK AND FORTH ABOUT USING, UH, CEDAR SPRINGS FOR VALET AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN SOMEWHERE AND SEEN A NATURAL PATH WHERE PEOPLE WALK AND IT'S NOT WHERE THE PEOPLE WHO DESIGNED THE PARK THOUGHT THE PATH WOULD BE.
WELL, THAT'S MY EXPERIENCE WITH UBER.
IF YOU DON'T PUT IT WHERE THEY'RE GONNA USE IT, THEY JUST USE THE STREET INSTEAD.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO WITH PULLING THE VALET IN OFF CEDAR SPRING.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, UM, THE, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHOWS AND THE CONDITIONS SHOW THAT THERE WILL BE, UM, EITHER TREES OR PLANTERS THAT CREATE A BUFFER BETWEEN WHERE THE VEHICLES ARE GOING AND WHERE THE PEOPLE SHOULD BE.
UM, THE OTHER BIG COMPONENT OF THIS PROJECT IS, I, I THINK IT'S EXCITING HOW MUCH GREEN BUILDING AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE CCAP WE HAVE IN THIS ONE PROJECT.
THEY ARE COMMITTED TO DO 6,000 SQUARE FEET OF SOLAR ACROSS THE THREE ROOFS.
THEY'VE COMMITTED TO DO WATER RECAPTURE FROM CONDENSATION AND STUFF TO USE IN THEIR LANDSCAPING.
OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE GONNA MEET THE NEW BUILDING CODE FOR EV PARKING, BUT THEY HAD
[02:20:01]
ALREADY COMMITTED TO DO EV PARKING BEFORE THAT CODE AMENDMENT CHANGED.UM, THEY HAVE A ROBUST, UH, MICRO MOBILITY STORAGE, PARKING, AND CHARGING PLAN FOR THIS SITE THAT'S ALSO GONNA BE PARTIALLY PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.
UM, AND THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO DO WHAT I'VE DEEMED THE HABITAT GARDEN, WHICH ARE LANDSCAPING PRINCIPLES THAT YOU'RE SEEING EMPLOYED MORE IN, MORE IN SOME OF THE NATIONAL STANDARDS.
AND WHAT MY UNDERSTANDING FROM TALKING TO MULTIPLE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FIRMS IS SORT OF THE MODERN WAY THAT THEY TRY TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DO THEIR LANDSCAPING, LOWER WATER CONSUMPTION USING, UM, PERENNIALS INSTEAD OF ANNUALS AND FOCUSING ON HOW WE CAN USE THAT LANDSCAPING TO HELP PROMOTE OUR URBAN HABITATS.
AND THEY'VE DONE A REALLY GREAT JOB WITH THAT.
UM, AND IT'S SITE-WIDE, SO IT'S NOT A, A LITTLE BUTTERFLY GARDEN OFF TO THE SIDE.
THE STANDARDS COMPLY TO THE ENTIRE SITE, UH, WHICH I ANTICIPATE WILL INVOLVE LESS USE OF PESTICIDES AND HERBICIDES AND STUFF.
SO THAT'S LESS CHEMICALS GOING INTO OUR GROUNDWATER AND BEING, UM, SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE INTERACT WITH ON A DAILY BASIS AT THE SITE.
AND IT'S ALSO BY USING PERENNIALS, YOU'RE HAVING LESS, UH, WASTE PLANT WASTE IN THE LANDFILLS.
SO, UH, THEY'RE, UM, THEY MEET A NUMBER OF THE C C A P, UM, REQUIREMENTS OR, OR GOALS, UH, OF COURSE, THESE WILL ALL BE, UM, ENERGY EFFICIENT BUILDINGS.
YOU'VE GOT SOLAR, YOU'VE GOT PUBLICLY AVAILABLE CHARGING FOR VEHICLES.
UM, YOU'VE GOT A REDUCTION IN ORGANIC AND PAPER WASTE.
UM, INCREASED LANDFILL DIVERSION, UH, REDUCED WATER CONSUMPTION.
BUT THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 20 DIFFERENT GOALS OF OUR CCAP THAT THIS PROJECT, I THINK MEETS.
UM, AND JUST A, A FINAL WORD ON THE HABITAT GARDENS.
UM, I KNOW THAT PEOPLE SNICKER ABOUT MY BEE GARDENS.
UM, BUT NOT ONLY ARE POLLINATOR GARDENS A SPECIFIC GOAL OF OUR C C A AND THEY ARE DESIGNED TO MEET THE SPECIFIC GOALS OF OUR CCAP, LIKE CREATING MORE URBAN ARCHITECT, UM, AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, UM, CREATING MORE, UM, HEALTHY FOOD OPTIONS ON SITE OR NEAR ON SITE.
UM, IT ALSO, UM, YOU KNOW, WHY IS IT IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE POLLINATORS THAT SUBJECT I COULD SPEND THE REST OF THE AFTERNOON ON.
BUT I JUST WANNA GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES.
YOU KNOW, OUR, THE INSECTS LIKE BEES PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN OUR FOOD PRODUCTION.
ABOUT 80% OF THE WORLD'S FLOWERING PLANTS NEED A POLLINATOR TO PRODUCE.
AND ABOUT A THIRD OF OUR FOOD COMES FROM FLOWERING PLANTS.
POLLINATORS ALSO, UM, PROVIDE, UH, A MORE ROBUST AGRICULTURAL YIELD, NOT JUST HERE AT THIS SITE, BUT THEY ROAM.
AND SO OUR SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE MORE AGRARIAN ALSO BENEFIT FROM THESE POLLINATORS.
AND IT'S ESTIMATED THAT THE POLLINATORS ECOLOGICAL SERVICE IS VALUED AT ABOUT 2 BILLION, $200 BILLION IN NORTH AMERICA ALONE EVERY YEAR.
THEY'RE ALSO IMPORTANT TO OUR ECOSYSTEM.
THEY PROVIDE A FOOD SOURCE FOR BIRDS, REPTILES, MAMMALS, AND THIS ALSO PROVIDES FOR SOME PRESERVATION.
FOR EXAMPLE, MONARCH BUTTERFLIES, UH, POPULATION HAS PLUMMETED FROM A BILLION BUTTERFLIES TO ABOUT 34 MILLION BUTTERFLIES IN THE PLA LAST 25 YEARS, WHICH IS LARGELY, UM, THE PRODUCT OF DAMAGE TO THEIR HABITAT.
UM, SO I COULD GIVE YOU TONS OF CONSERVATION STORIES ABOUT HOW THESE HABITAT WORK, BUT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS SITE, WE'VE GOT OTHER DEVELOPERS WHO'VE COMMITTED TO DO SIMILAR PLANTINGS, AND HOPEFULLY IN TIME AS THESE GET BUILT, WE'LL IMPROVE OUR ABILITY TO HAVE HEALTHY AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS RIGHT HERE IN THE HEART OF OUR CITY.
SO FINALLY, I KNOW THAT THIS IS A COMPLEX PROJECT AND THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF MOVING PARTS, AND I WANNA THANK STAFF FOR THEIR, UM, WORK ON THIS PROJECT.
I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM WHO'S HERE.
THEY HAVE BEEN OPEN TO NEW IDEAS, THEY HAVE MET CHALLENGES, THEY HAVE, UM, REALLY SAT DOWN AND WORKED THROUGH
[02:25:01]
ISSUES WITH THE COMMUNITY.AND I THINK THAT THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO THE SUCCESS OF THIS PROJECT.
UM, AND WITH ALL OF THAT, I HOPE THAT YOU ALL WERE SUPPORT ME AND SUPPORTING THIS PROJECT.
WOW, THAT WAS QUITE A, A MOTION.
SO THERE'S JUST, I THINK I'M, I'M ON BOARD WITH 98%.
THERE'S JUST 1% THAT I'M A LITTLE UNCERTAIN.
MAKE SURE THAT, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND.
SO, BUILDING TWO IS A ABOVE FLOOR.
THE SECOND FLOOR AND ABOVE IS A RESIDENTIAL AND ACCESSORY USE ONLY.
RIGHT? UM, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NUMBERS OF THE BUILDINGS.
ONE OF THEM IS RESIDENTIAL ONLY.
THE OTHER ONE IS REQUIRED TO HAVE RESIDENTIAL.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE ANTICIPATING THAT NOT ONLY WILL IT HAVE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL AND STUFF, BUT THEY MAY HAVE A HOTEL, AND THAT THAT RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT MAY END UP BEING FOR SALE INSTEAD OF FOR RENT.
SO I NOTICED THE MOTION DROPPED A SPECIAL PROJECT BUILDING TWO FROM, UM, 385 FEET TO 330 FEET.
UM, AND I KNOW, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN GO UP THAT EXTRA 55 FEET, YOU KNOW, WE WILL, YOU KNOW, INCREASE RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE MEANINGFULLY.
YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE 5% MICRO UNITS, THE 5% AT 51 TO 80, OR ALTERNATIVELY, YOU KNOW, FEE IN LIE IS CALCULATED BASED ON RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD ALSO INCREASE THE AMOUNT PAID INTO THE FEE IN LIEU IF THE MAX HEIGHT FOR A SPECIAL PROJECT IN, UM, BUILDING NUMBER TWO WERE TO BE ABLE TO GO UP TO 3 85 AS OPPOSED TO THREE 30 AS IN THE MOTION.
I ALSO, UM, SEE THAT IN THE, UH, DOCKET, THERE'S A PRETTY THOUGHTFUL SETBACK AND HEIGHT PLAN, WHICH IN THE BUILDING DOES ACTUALLY BUILDING TWO DOES TAPER BACK, UM, STARTING AT 179 FEET AND ABOVE.
WOULD THE COMMISSIONER BE WILLING TO GO BACK TO 385 ON, UH, ENTERTAIN A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO GO BACK TO, UH, 3 85 ON BUILDING TWO? I DIDN'T INTEND TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT IN BUILDING TWO.
I THOUGHT MY MOTION WAS REGARDING BUILDING ONE.
THE BASE HEIGHT IN THIS DISTRICT WILL NOW BE 240 FEET, AND IF IT IS A SPECIAL PROJECT BUILDING, ONE WOULD BE 330 FEET.
AND I BELIEVE THAT'S THE OFFICE TOWER.
OH, I, I HEARD BUILDING TWO, SO I, IF IT'S BUILDING ONE, THAT'S, THAT'S OKAY WITH ME.
COMMISSIONER TR AWAY FOLLOW THAT.
SO I ALSO APPRECIATE, UM, THE THOUGHTFULNESS BEHIND THIS PROJECT.
I'M HUGELY EXCITED ABOUT ALL THE GREEN SPACE AND THE POLLINATOR PLANTS.
UH, JUST I WANTED TO, IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THE CHANGES YOU'RE PROPOSING ON THE DEVELOPMENT BONUS AND WALK THROUGH THOSE AGAIN, I WAS WRITING DOWN PRETTY FAST CHANGES ON THE DEVELOPMENT BONUS.
I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.
IF YOU COULD REPEAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SECTION ONE 13, THE DEVELOPMENT BONUS FOR MIXED INCOME HOUSING? YES.
IN SECTION ONE, UH, 13, YOU'LL SEE THAT FOR SUBSECTION B, THERE ARE TWO CHOICES AND I AM RECOMMENDING THAT WE ADOPT THE APPLICANT'S CHOICE FOR SUBSECTION B.
AND THEN THERE ARE TWO SUBSECTION C UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS REMOVING IT.
I THINK IT'S GONNA GET REMOVED TO COUNSEL.
ANYWAY, THAT'S BEEN WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE PAST ONE OR TWO OF THESE THAT THIS HAS BEEN INCLUDED.
I FRANKLY DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY.
I THINK THE CODE OPERATES INDEPENDENTLY OF IT.
AS A LAWYER, I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND MS. TRAN'S DESIRE TO INCLUDE IT IN THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE? SO, IS THE DELETION INTENDED TO REQUIRE, LIKE, IF YOU DELETE C, THEN THEY HAVE TO BUILD THE 5%? NO, I, I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE CODE OPERATES TO ALLOW THEM TO USE THE FEE AND LIE RATHER THAT'S STATED IN THIS ORDINANCE OR NOT.
SO THEY WOULD STILL HAVE THE OPTION TO EMPLOY THE FEED AND L INSTEAD OF ONSITE UNITS.
BUT I THINK THAT THEIR ADDITION, THE APPLICANT'S ADDITION OF SUBSECTION C IS SUPERFLUOUS TO WHAT THE CODE ALREADY PROVIDES.
SO IF YOU CAN EDUCATE ME AND MAYBE OTHERS.
UM, WHERE, WHERE DOES FEE AND LOU COME INTO PLAY OTHERWISE, IN THE CODE? IT'S, UH, 20 A, I BELIEVE, AND THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING UNIT BONUS SECTION.
IN CHAPTER 51 A DIRECTS YOU TO 28, WHICH IS WHERE YOU GET THE CHOICE OF, SO YOUR CHANGES INTENDED TO HAVE, NO, THE DELETION OF
[02:30:01]
C YOU DON'T THINK HAS ANY ACTUAL IMPACT.YOU THINK IT'S SUPERFLUOUS? CORRECT.
JUST ONE QUICK LITTLE CLEANUP THERE.
UH, COMMISSIONER TURNER, IT JUST REFERS THAT PIECE OF THE CODE BACK TO THE, THE ORIGINAL CODE AND NOT TO THE, THE MENTION OF IT IN THE PD.
IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT.
IT JUST SAYS GO BACK TO THE CODE TO REFERENCE.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS DELETED ENTIRELY.
ARE YOU SAYING WE SHOULD LEAVE IN THE SENTENCE PAYMENT OF A FEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 20 A OR YOU CAN DELETE IT ENTIRELY AND 20 A STILL APPLIES? CORRECT.
COMMISSIONER, UH, CARPENTER, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, CAN YOU, UM, CLARIFY FOR ME THE DEFINITION THAT YOU ARE STRIKING? 'CAUSE I HEARD PLANTING AREA AND I DON'T SEE A PLANTING AREA DEFINITION IN THE, IN THE PD.
WELL, I THOUGHT THERE WAS A DEFINITION OF PLANTING AREA.
THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN AN OLD VERSION.
IF THERE'S A DEFINITION OF PLANTING AREA, I MOVE TO, IT'S NOT IN THE REPORT.
I, AND I APPRECIATE THE, UH, THE LENGTHY MOTION THAT, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON GAVE.
UM, I, I WANTED TO ADDRESS SPECIFICALLY AN ISSUE SHE SPENT SOME TIME ON, BUT, UM, AND THAT IS, UM, THE, UM, POLLINATOR GARDENS.
UH, I AM NOT, UM, FOR ONE, NOT ONE, NOT SNICKERING AT IT, BUT AS I'VE STATED ON PREVIOUS CASES, I, I'VE GOT AN ISSUE WITH THIS COUNCIL, THIS COMMISSION GETTING INTO BUILDING PERFORMANCE.
I UNDERSTAND LAND USE, I UNDERSTAND BUILDING FORM WHEN WE STRAY INTO BUILDING PERFORMANCE.
I, I, I THINK THAT WE'RE OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW.
UM, I'VE TALKED TO THE CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT THIS SEVERAL TIMES, AND I THINK THEY TEND TO AGREE WITH ME.
UH, I THINK IF BUILDING INSPECTION STARTED MAKING JUDGMENTS ABOUT ZONING MATTERS, WE WOULD TAKE ISSUE WITH THAT.
SO, UM, THERE'S A QUESTION OF WHERE THAT LINE IS.
UM, YOU KNOW, AS, UH, THE NEW CHAIR OF ZAC, I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO, UH, OPEN UP OUR LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE AND, UH, AVAIL OURSELVES OF THE BENEFITS THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON OUTLINES IN HER MOTION, WHICH, UH, ARE CLEARLY SIGNIFICANT AND IMPORTANT AND, UH, SHOULD BE GIVEN CONSIDERATION.
BUT PASSING CASES, ONE AT A TIME WITH, UH, HIGHLY UNIQUE AND SPECIALIZED REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE NOT ENFORCED IN OTHER DISTRICTS OR IN OTHER CASES OR IN OTHER SITUATIONS, JUST SEEMS LIKE A, A PRECEDENT THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT ON, ON THE COMMISSION.
SO, UM, JUST TO SAY IT ONE MORE TIME ON THE RECORD, THIS IS A GREAT CASE AND, UM, IT'S, THERE'S BEEN SOME GOOD WORK DONE BY A LOT OF, A LOT OF REALLY SMART PEOPLE.
UH, I JUST STILL HAVE, UH, SOME HEARTBURN ABOUT, UH, THIS, WHICH, UH, SEEMS LIKE PERHAPS A SMALL DETAIL, BUT TO ME IT'S, IT'S BECOME A LARGER ISSUE THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER CAREFULLY ON THIS COMMISSION.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, WHEELER, PLEASE.
UM, LOOKING AT THIS PROJECT, IT, IT, IT, IT IS A GREAT PROJECT IN AN AREA WHERE DEVELOPERS ARE MAXIMIZING THEIR LAND WITH BUILDINGS AND NOT UTILIZING AND, AND, AND MAKING PARK SPACE AND, AND SPACES THAT LOOK AT THE WHOLE INCLUSIVE FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY.
SO ON THAT PART, I DEFINITELY, UM, LOVE AND SEEING THAT THERE WAS AREAS FOR PEOPLE TO SIT AND AND TALK.
BUT WHAT I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT OFTEN BEFORE THIS BODY, WE WANT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY WHO NEEDS LESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND, AND BECAUSE THEY ARE ABLE TO REFER BACK TO, UM, TO THE 28 AND THE CODE THAT IT'S ALLOWING FOR AREAS LIKE UPTOWN TO BE AN INCLUSIVE AREA.
I MEAN, UH, AREA THAT ONLY HAS HIGHER PRICE UNITS, UM, ESPECIALLY SURROUNDING THE HISTORY OF THIS COMMUNITY THAT IS BEING BUILT IN THAT ONCE UPON A TIME, IT WAS AN AREA THAT WAS TAKEN BY ENEMY DOMAIN.
I'VE SEEN IN AREAS OF, IN, IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR WHERE WE ASKED FOR MORE THAN 5% AND, AND IT HAD WAY LESS UNITS WHERE THERE WAS TWO, 200 AND SOMETHING UNITS AS 600 SOMETHING UNITS.
I WOULD HOPE THAT THE DEVELOPER AT LEAST COULD HAVE BEEN EIGHT TO 10% WITH NOT IN, NOT WITH THE, AND AND REDUCING SOME OF THE ILU
[02:35:01]
PAYMENT THAT THEY WOULD'VE TO PAY OUT.BUT I AM VERY HAPPY THAT THEY DID NOT CHOOSE TO, UM, MAXIMIZE THE WHOLE FOUR ACRES WITH JUST BUILDINGS AND CREATING A SPACE WHERE WE'RE ALREADY LOWER IN PARKLAND IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
COMMISSIONER RUBIN, I'VE GOT A CASE OF LAWYER BRAINS.
THIS IS LIKE MAYBE A QUESTION FOR MS. MUNOZ, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND THE ORDINANCE.
SO PER THE MOTION, I THINK THE MAXIMUM STRUCTURE HEIGHT OUTSIDE OF A SPECIAL PROJECT IS 240 FEET, RIGHT? SO THEN WE GET INTO, UM, 1 0 8 B, WHICH SPEAKS TO HEIGHT B FOUR, WHICH SPEAKS TO HEIGHT IN A SPECIAL PROJECT, AND THERE'S A HEIGHT PROVISION FOR BUILDING TWO WITH THE MAX HEIGHT OF 3 85, A HEIGHT PROVISION FOR BUILDING THREE WITH A MAX OF FOUR 15.
IF WE WANNA GIVE BUILDING ONE IN A SPECIAL PROJECT, A MAX HEIGHT OF THREE 30, DO WE NEED AN ADDITIONAL PROVISION THERE? UH, A C OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? THAT WAS PART OF MY MOTION, THAT'S PART OF WHAT'S PROPOSED.
SO BOTH THE HEIGHT HAS BEEN LOWERED TO TWO 40 AND, UH, IT HAS BECOME NOW A BONUS IN BUILDING ONE TO GET UP TO THREE 30.
AS I HEAR ALL THIS AT THE, AT THE HORSESHOE, I SOMETIMES HAVE TROUBLE.
THANKS A LOT TO CONSUME AND, AND I THINK SOMETHING THAT MIGHT HELP PEOPLE SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS THIS LOT IS TWO DIFFERENT PDS RIGHT NOW.
SO WE'RE NOT DOING A SUBDISTRICT OF ONE OF THESE PDS, WE'RE CREATING A WHOLE NEW ONE.
AND SO THERE'S GOTTA BE SOME BASE ZONING FOR THIS NEW PD.
AND WHAT I TRIED TO DO WAS BORROW FROM PD 1 93 IN A LOT OF PLACES AND MAYBE A LITTLE BIT OF PD NINE IN PLACES SO THAT IF THIS PROJECT DOESN'T GO FORWARD, THE BASE SUNING THERE STILL HAS A LOT OF THE CHARACTERISTICS THAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS.
FRANKLY, I THINK IF THIS DOES PROJECT DOESN'T GO FORWARD, THAT THE NEXT PROJECT IS GONNA COME BACK AND WANNA DO AN AMENDMENT TO THIS PD ANYWAY.
SO I'M NOT SURE HOW BIG A DIFFERENCE IT MAKES, BUT I DID, THAT'S THE REASON WE'VE GOT TWO DIFFERENT STANDARDS OF DEVELOPMENT HERE IS BECAUSE WE'RE CREATING A WHOLE NEW PD WHERE THERE WERE TWO THAT HAD BASE ZONING THAT WE'RE NOW STRIPPING AWAY.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? YES, SIR.
YEAH, IF THERE WERE NO OTHER COMMENTS, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY ONE THING ABOUT THE MOTION.
UM, SO ASIDE FROM THE CHANGES THAT YOU READ WITH YOUR MOTION, WAS YOUR RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SUBJECT TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS? YES.
AND JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, JUST, AND ALL OF THE EXHIBITS, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, THE SITE PLAN AND STUFF, THEY'RE LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
YES, I THINK I'M GONNA READ IT IN THERE AND, UH, WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S OBJECTIONS.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER IS A MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 1 14.
WE HAVE A MOTION ABOUT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
FALSE TO RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAINTIFF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN SET BACK IN HEIGHT PLAN SLASH A PLAN AND STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF REMOVAL OF THE D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY, AS WELL AS ALL THE OTHER CONDITIONS AS READ INTO THE RECORD BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ONE IN OPPOSITION COMMISSIONER HOUSE.
MOTION PASSES CASE NUMBER FIVE.
WHAT ITEM NUMBER FIVE, AN APPLICATION FOR A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY AND A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE JAR MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE.
3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS ON PROPERTY WITHIN A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LAKE JUNE ROAD, EAST OF NORTH SAINT AUGUSTINE ROAD.
UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.
AND THE CASE NUMBER IS Z 2 2 3 1 97.
UM, I SEE WE HAVE OUR, OUR SPEAKER HERE.
IF YOU, SIR, IF YOU COULD START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
MY NAME IS NAKIA MITCHELL, UM, OWNER AND OPERATOR OF MISS OCCASION L L C.
I'M HERE, I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
I THINK WE HAVE, UH, ALSO GINA CANNON ON THE PHONE.
[02:40:01]
UM, DO WE HAVE GINA CANNON ONLINE? I'M HERE.I DON'T SEE, CAN YOU TURN ON YOUR VIDEO, MA'AM? UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO TURN THE VIDEO.
THE, UM, THE SOUND ON, I'M SORRY.
I, I I WE'VE GOT SOUND JUST FINE.
STATE LAW REQUIRES, UM, YOU TO HAVE VIDEO TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING VIRTUALLY.
TELL ME IF I CLICKED IT ON, UH, NOT SEEING IT JUST YET, BUT MAYBE IF YOU TRY TOGGLING, GET ANOTHER TIME OR TWO.
UM, JILL, DO YOU KNOW HOW TO TURN MY VIDEO ON? I'M HAVING TROUBLE.
I'VE GOT THE CAMERA AND I CAN SEE MYSELF NOW.
WHAT DO I DO? MAYBE YOU COULD TRY LOGGING OUT AND LOGGING BACK IN REAL QUICKLY.
DID THAT WORK? UNFORTUNATELY, NO, WE STILL DON'T SEE YOU, SO, UM, UM, UM, UNLESS YOU'RE ABLE TO GET IT SORTED OUT, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA NEED TO MOVE ON.
WE CAN TRY CIRCLING BACK AROUND TO YOU IN A MINUTE.
UM, BUT, UM, ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MITCHELL? IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO THEY WON'T ACCEPT ME UNLESS THEY CAN SEE ME.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MITCHELL? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MR. CHAIR, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MY OPINION? YES, SIR, I DO.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 1 9 7, I'M OH, YEAH, WE CAN FINALLY SEE YOU.
SO, UM, YEAH, MS. MS. CANNON, UM, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, PLEASE START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE RECORD.
GINA CANNON EIGHT 14 EAST ABRAM, SUITE 200, ARLINGTON, TEXAS, WITH ALL TEXT PERMITS.
I HELPED MR. MITCHELL OBTAIN HIS TEXAS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE COMMISSION PERMITS, AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE IN RELATION TO HIS RESTAURANT AND HIS INTENTIONS IN THE AREA WE'RE REQUESTING TODAY.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR EITHER OF OUR SPEAKERS? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NOW, MR. CHAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO THANK YOU.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 1 97, I'LL MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR TWO YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN, CONDITIONS AND APPROVAL OF A D ONE LIQUID CONTROL OVERLAY AS WELL AS SETTING THE HOURS OF OPERATION.
UH, ARE GONNA BE BETWEEN 12 NOON, 2:10 PM I HAVE A VERY BRIEF COMMENT IF I HAVE A SECOND.
YOU DO HAVE A SECOND FOR COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
UH, MR. CHAIR YOUR COMMENTS? YES, I DO.
UH, I WANT TO THANK MR. MITCHELL.
UH, WE, WE DID HAVE A, A COMMUNITY MEETING ON THIS ITEM, AND I'LL HAVE TO ADMIT THAT, UH, IN THE BEGINNING, THIS APPLICATION GAVE A COUPLE OF US SOME, SOME HEARTBURN, BUT WE'RE, WE WERE ABLE TO HAVE A, A COMMUNITY MEETING AND WE KIND OF TALKED IT OUT AND, UH, WE ALL DECIDED TO GIVE MR. MITCHELL THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT HERE AND, AND GIVE HIM A, A CHANCE TO OPERATE HIS BUSINESS.
AND I'M CERTAIN THAT TWO YEARS FROM NOW, WE'LL COME BACK AND SEE YOU AND WE CAN SET YOU UP IN AN, AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL SITUATION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.
OH, COMMISSIONER YOUNG, MR. YES? UH, YES, CHAIR.
WOULD YOU REPEAT THE HOURS OF OPERATION, PLEASE? NOON TO 10:00 PM OKAY, THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION MEMBERS? ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION BY CHAIR SID SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO FOLLOW STATUS RECOMMENDATION OF
[02:45:01]
APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD WITHOUT AUTO RENEWAL, SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS, APPROVAL OF THE D ONE, UM, LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY AND LIMITING HOURS OF OPERATION TO 10:00 PM UH, NOON TO 10:00 PM ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.CASE NUMBER SIX IS Z 2 2 3 1 0 6.
AN APPLICATION FOR A FOR ONE, A CSS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH THE RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT.
AND TWO, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ON PROPERTY ZONED AND A, A AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF TELEPHONE ROAD AT THE TERMINUS OF VANHORN DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM Z 2 2 3 1 0 6? I DON'T SEE ANYONE ON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ONLINE.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? ALRIGHT, NO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 1 OH DASH 1 0 6.
I MOVE THAT WE HOLD THIS MATTER OVER IN UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 19TH.
UM, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.
UM, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? ALRIGHT, UM, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OUR OCTOBER 19TH, 2023 MEETING.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY OPPOSED, NAYYY, THE MOTION CARRIES CASE NUMBER SEVEN I, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN Z 2 2 3 1 9 5.
AN APPLICATION FOR AN MU MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED R 10, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF SEVILLE ROAD, SOUTHEAST OF RAIN VIEW ROAD STAFF.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM Z 2 23? UH, 1 95.
ARE YOU HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM SEVEN? YES.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
I'M JUST TRYING TO, UH, FIRST OF ALL, I AM, UM, THE VICE PRESIDENT OF CONSTRUCTION OF THIS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY.
SIR, CAN YOU START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? YES.
MY NAME IS ERIC CORTEZ, VICE PRESIDENT OF CONSTRUCTION OF, UH, R H A DEVELOPMENT COMPANY.
JUST TRY TO CONVEY WITH YOU, UH, UH, HOW THE COMMUNICATION WITH COMMUNITY, UH, LET US IMPROVE OUR PROJECT AND JUST SHOW SOME IMAGES THAT I SUPPOSE WE HAVE ON, ON THE SCREEN ALREADY.
UH, THIS IS UNDERSTANDING, THIS IS, UH, SUNNING OUR 10 SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, ASK FOR A CHANGE OF, UH, SUN SUNNING OF MU MIXED USE DISTRICT IN ORDER TO LET US, UH, PROVIDE THIS, UH, MULTI-USE, UH, UH, SITE PLAN.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE A PROPERTY OF THREE 5.5 ACRES.
IT'S NOT THAT BIG, BUT FOR THE AREA IT'S REALLY COMPLEX.
UH, UM, LET ME SHOW YOU NOW HOW IT'S, UH, THE ORIGINAL, UH, CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN.
WE, WE KEEP COMMUNICATION, UM, FULL COMMUNICATION WITH, UH, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSIONER DISTRICT, A MRS. LAURIE BLAIR, AND ALSO
[02:50:01]
WITH MR. DAVID CARRANZA, THE, WHICH IS THE CLEVER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION CRIME WATCH PRESIDENT.AND WE WERE WORKING TOGETHER ON HOW TO IMPROVE OUR INITIAL PROPOSAL.
AS YOU NOTICE, THREE MAYOR COMPONENTS.
IT'S BASICALLY THE RETAIL PART AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, THEN THE MULTIFAMILY, IN THIS CASE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT 52 APARTMENT UNITS AND AT THE VERY END WE PLANNED THE TOWNHOUSES, UH, TOWN HOMES AND, UM, OWNER, UH, CONCEPT.
THE IDEA, THE ORIGINAL IDEA WAS TO COMBINE THIS LEASING TENANTS WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS SO THEY CAN TAKE CARE OF THE PROPERTY AND JUST KEEP IT IN A GOOD SHAPE ALONG THE TIME.
AND ALSO WE ARE PLANNING TO PROVIDE SOME, UM, THANK YOU, UH, SOME SERVICES FOR THE NEIGHBORS AROUND THE AREA WITH THIS KIND OF A RETAIL, UH, SPACE LATER ON.
REVISED SITE PLAN, REDUCING APARTMENT UNITS, IMPROVING ACCESSIBILITY PER RESIDENCE CATEGORIES, SO NEIGHBORS REQUEST A BETTER ACCESSIBILITY AND INDEPENDENT ACCESSIBILITY FOR THE TOWN HOMES.
AS YOU NOTICE, UH, IMPROVE THE ACCESSIBILITY AS WELL FOR THE APARTMENTS.
WE REDUCED THE, UM, THE NUMBER OF APARTMENTS IN 42 TOTAL.
AND ALSO WE, UM, IMPROVE THE, THE ACCESS FOR THE RETAIL AREA.
SO THE, THE APARTMENT UNITS ARE COMPLETELY, UM, PROTECT WITH A SPECIFIC GATE AND THE TOWN HOMES AS WELL.
SO EVERYBODY'S INDEPENDENT SHARING THE MAYOR ACCESS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR MR. CORTEZ? COMMISSIONER BLAIR? MR. CORTEZ, IF YOU WILL, DO YOU HAVE, UM, A FEW MORE WORDS THAT YOU WANNA SPEAK ON AS TO WHAT THE, YOUR DESIGN STANDARDS WERE OR YOUR, YOUR COMPLETE, YOUR, YOUR PRESENTATION? I'M SORRY.
I SAID WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMPLETE YOUR, YOUR PRESENTATION? OH, THANK YOU.
TO GET TO, TO SEE THE FULL JUST OF WHAT IT IS YOU'RE TRYING TO PREVAIL.
WELL, THE, THE VISIBILITY VAL SLOPE IS ANOTHER STANDARD THAT WE MEET WITH THE PRESENTATION.
UH, I TRYING TO PROVE HOW WE ARE REDUCING THREE STORIES, UH, BUILDING IN TWO IN ORDER TO CREATE A BETTER COMFORT AREA.
UH, THIS IS THE CONCEPT, CONCEPTUAL PLAN OF THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL WHERE WE PLAN THREE STORIES.
UH, BUT NOW WE ARE DOING TWO ONLY BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY DOES WHAT THEY REQUEST SAW, WHICH IS MAKE US REALLY, UH, REALLY NICE APPROACH IN TERMS OF THE, WE ARE NOT INVADING THE NEIGHBOR'S PRIVACY.
AND, UM, ALSO WE HAVE THE, UH, UH, PROVIDING, UM, DOG PARKS NOT ONLY FOR THE, THE OWNERS AND TOWN HOMES, BUT ALSO FOR THE MULTIFAMILY AND ALSO, UH, PLAYGROUND FOR KIDS IN BOTH PROJECTS FOR MULTIFAMILY SEPARATE AND FOR THE, UH, TOWN HOMES AS WELL.
UM, MR. CORTEZ, DID YOU HAVE A A COMMUNITY MEETING WITH WITH THE NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY? YES.
WE, WE, WE HOLD, UH, TWO, TWO MEETINGS, I BELIEVE WITH THEM.
UH, WE PROVIDE, UH, REPLY FOR THE, UH, FEEDBACKS AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.
THIS IS THE FINAL OUTCOME THAT WE'RE, WE GOT FROM THERE.
AND THE, THE, THE, THE COMMUNITY, WELL, THE SITE IS LONG, IS IS NARROW IN THE FRONT AND VERY WIDE IN THE BACK? IT, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND HAVE YOU CONSIDERED AND SPOKEN WITH THE NEIGHBORS, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE YOUR WEST, THAT THAT GOES TOWARDS BELTLINE? IF THERE WAS, IF THERE WAS A WAY TO CONNECT TO BELTLINE THROUGH THEIR PROPERTY? NOT AT THIS POINT.
UH, ACTUALLY WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT THERE IS A, AN AVAILABLE AREA AND ACTUALLY THE DESIGN JUST LEFT TO, UM, STREET FUTURE POTENTIAL CONNECTIONS IF THAT'S THE CASE.
SO THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY, ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMUNITY, WITH THE NEIGHBORING UNITS IN ORDER TO, UM, DO ANY TYPE OF CONNECTION FROM
[02:55:01]
YOUR LOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LOT TO GET YOU TO BELTLINE? WELL, IN TERMS OF, UH, SORRY.RAVEN VIEW, BELTLINE, RAVEN VIEW, IPO.
SEAVILLE ROAD, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YEAH, BECAUSE YOU'RE FACING SEAVILLE AND IF YOU'RE GOING WEST, THAT WOULD BE RAVEN VIEW.
UH, THERE IS A, THERE IS A VACANT LOT ADJACENT TO, TO OUR PROPERTY AND WE CAN CONNECT EASILY, BUT DEFINITELY THAT'S ANOTHER, UM, COST IMPACT FOR OUR PROJECT.
WE, WE CAN, WE CAN AFFORD IT AND FOR THAT REASON.
AND ALSO WE SPOKE WITH THE OWNER AT SOME POINT AND HE SHOWED NO INTEREST AND TO CONNECT WITH US AT SOME POINT.
SO THEN YOU DID CONT YOU DID HAVE CONVERSATION WITH THE NEIGHBOR AND HE IS NOT THE NEIGHBOR ADJACENT TO US.
AND HE IS NOT IN ANY FORM OR FASHION AMENABLE TO, UH, MAKE, COMMIT, MAKE, UH, CONNECTION FROM YOUR DEPART, YOUR LOT TO THEIR LOT? UH, YES.
BASICALLY THAT'S, HE'S NOT INTERESTED.
WE ARE TRYING TO KEEP THE LOW DENSITY, UM, UH, SINGLE HOMES AS POSSIBLE, BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT A TREND OF MORE, UH, INCREASE THE DI THE DENSITY AND THAT ARE IS COMING AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, SIR? MR. CORTEZ? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
THANK YOU FOR THE, UM, PRESENTATION.
UM, YOU MAY HAVE HEARD DURING OUR BRIEFING THIS MORNING, THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT YOU WERE, UM, PLANNING AND WHAT APPEARED TO BE, WHAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE ON THE SITE.
AND I THINK I HEARD YOU MENTION 52, UM, PER YOUR REVIEW, BUT DOING THE MATH AND UNDERSTANDING SOME OF THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SITE, I THINK WE HAD HEARD THAT THERE WAS PROBABLY A MAXIMUM OF 20 UNITS.
IS THAT ANYTHING THAT WAS EVALUATED AS YOU WERE LOOKING AT THE SITE AND EVALUATING YOUR PROJECT? UH, YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE, THE APARTMENT UNITS, RIGHT? CORRECT, YES.
WE CURRENTLY, IN THE PROPOSAL WE HAVE 42.
NOW, WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE LIMIT OF 22 UNITS.
SO WHEN, WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE MU ONE, YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU CAN MEET THAT NUMBER OF UNITS? IS IT, IF IT'S LESS, IS THAT ANYTHING THAT WOULD IMPACT YOUR APPROACH? WELL, UH, WE WERE, WE, WE STARTED WORKING WITH 52 UNITS ACTUALLY, BECAUSE THIS IN TERMS OF COST, IMPACT AND PROFITABILITY, BUT, UH, 42 UNITS IS PROBABLY THE BEST WE CAN DO AT THIS POINT.
AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE COMBINING WITH, UH, TOM HOMES AT THE VERY END OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN THIS IS A STRICT, IS THAT WHAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? WELL, I, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND 'CAUSE THERE SEEMS TO BE A DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT WE HAD HEARD IN OUR BRIEFING AND, AND WHAT YOU'VE, UM, PRESENTED TO US TODAY.
UM, ALSO WANTED TO UNDERSTAND IT'S MIXED USE, UM, IS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, WHICH ALLOWS FOR RESIDENTIAL.
UM, BUT, AND THAT'S YOUR INTENT.
THERE WOULD BE NOTHING IN THE PROPOSAL BEFORE US THAT WOULD REQUIRE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
IS THAT CORRECT? I'M SORRY, I, I'M NOT SURE IF I GET YOUR, YOUR QUESTION, BUT NO, AND IT MAY BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I JUST, I THINK AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE YOU ARE PROPOSING RESIDENTIAL, BUT THE ZONING THAT'S BEING PROPOSED WOULD NOT REQUIRE RESIDENTIAL TO BE BUILT.
SO IF YOU COULDN'T MEET THE 42 UNITS THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING, WOULD YOU PURSUE A DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE? YES, DEFINITELY.
AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE PURSUING THE, THE, THE MIXED USE SO WE CAN COMBINE RETAIL, UM, TO HOMES AND MULTIFAMILY AT THE SAME TIME.
SO, UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
DID YOU HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH STAFF ABOUT HOW MANY UNITS YOU WERE WANTING TO PUT ON WITH THE PROPOSED M U ONE ZONING CATEGORY? YES.
UH, THE VERY, SINCE THE VERY BEGINNING, WE STARTED PROCESS, UH, PROBABLY, UM, LAST JANUARY.
AND WE START TALKING ABOUT THE, THE OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE IN THAT AREA.
IF WE, UH, REQUE IF WE WERE GRANTED WITH, UH, A NEW, UH, THE ZONING CHANGE.
SO IF MY UNDERSTANDING'S CORRECT, YOU CANNOT PUT THE NUMBER OF UNITS YOU JUST DESCRIBED ON THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION THAT YOU ARE REQUESTING.
MU ONE DOES NOT PERMIT THAT LEVEL OF DENSITY.
I I WASN'T INFORMED ABOUT THAT.
[03:00:01]
THRESHOLDS FOR DENSITY OF DWELLING UNITS, AND IF THEY DON'T HAVE A MIXED USE PROJECT, THEN MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS, IF THEY WOULD PROVIDE ONLY RESIDENTIAL IS 15 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.BUT IF THEY MIX, FOR INSTANCE, TWO CATEGORIES, THEY CAN GO UP TO 20 UNITS PER ACRE.
SO THEY CAN, UH, BUT LIKE, AGAIN, WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE MASSING AND THE R P S AND THE HEIGHTS AND ALL OF THAT AND THE FIRE LANES, THE PARKING.
SO THAT IS GONNA LIMIT ALSO A LITTLE BIT THE DEVELOPABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO JUST TO CONFIRM, THAT'S PER ACRE AND YOU HAVE EFFECTIVELY A THREE AND A HALF ACRE SIZE? THREE AND A HALF ACRES, YES.
SO THIS NUMBER OF UNITS COULD POTENTIALLY FIT THERE IF IT FITS, BUT WE WON'T KNOW THAT IT FITS UNTIL YOU GET TO PERMITTING.
YES, IT'S A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE.
COMMISSIONER HALL, UH, WHEN YOU SAY UNITS, DO YOU MEAN APARTMENTS, TOWN HOMES? UH, WHAT, WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT WITH UNITS? WE'LL GET TO QUESTIONS FIRST.
DO YOU, IS THAT A QUESTION FOR MR. YES, I'M SORRY.
UH, WHAT, WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT UNITS, I'M REFERRING TO THE APARTMENT UNITS IN TOTAL WE HAVE, UH, 42 APARTMENT UNITS AND 17 TOM HOMES.
AND IF ANOTHER QUESTION, WHAT SORT OF, UH, RETAIL ARE YOU ENVISIONING? UH, SMALL RETAIL NAILS, UH, PET SHOP, THAT KIND OF A SMALL SERVICE DAY TO DAY LIFE FOR THE NEIGHBORS, BASICALLY.
NO, NOT A BIG IMPACT, NO ALCOHOL, JUST WHATEVER THE NEIGHBORS NEED FIRSTHAND.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR MR. CORTEZ? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? HOW, HOW MANY OF THESE UNITS, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING? I COULDN'T HEAR, I'M SORRY.
HOW MANY, HOW MANY OF THESE UNITS ARE YOU PROPOSING TO BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING? THE AFFORDABLE HOUSE? WELL, UH, WE, UH, UH, CALCULATE, UM, ALL OF THEM, THE 42 UNITS FOR THE MULTIFAMILY IS, IS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
AND SO I I'M ONE OF MY CONCERNS THIS MORNING, UM, WAS THAT THE, TRADITIONALLY THE, UH, THIS BODY HAS HEARD THAT THAT PARTICULAR AREA IS, DOES NOT WANNA LOSE THEIR RULE, UM, THE RULE ASPECT.
AND IT'S CONCERNING THAT THEY, THAT, THAT THEY, THOSE THE MEETINGS HAVE CHANGED.
SO WERE, WERE, WERE THOSE, UH, MEETINGS WELL ATTENDED THAT YOU HAD I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T GET, WAS THOSE COMMUNITY MEETINGS WELL ATTENDED? UH, WELL, RELATIVELY, I BELIEVE, UH, WE HAD, UH, THE PRESIDENT AND BOTH OF THEM, UH, 1, 2, 3, AT LEAST, UH, SEVEN MEMBERS.
UH, WE, UH, WE WERE, UH, VERY, UH, UH, CONCERNED ABOUT THE, THE, THE CLAIM PLAN OR THAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE, UH, OUR GUIDANCE IN THIS, UH, DEVELOPMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOMES MEMBERS.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR MR. CORTEZ? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SAYING NONE, MR. CHAIR, OR, I'M SORRY.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? UM, YES.
AND, UH, IN, UM, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 1 95, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND NOT FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, BUT DENIAL.
AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I DO HAVE COMMENTS STRAIGHT, STRAIGHT, UH, WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER.
LOTS OF PEOPLE TRYING TO SECOND THAT.
UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR? ANY DISCUSSION? YES.
UM, YOU GUYS ALL GOT AN EMAIL, UM, FROM THIS MORNING, FROM THE, THE, THE PRESIDENT OF THE CLEAVER RILEY ASSOCIATION CRIME WATCH.
[03:05:01]
STRAIGHTFORWARD AND TO THE POINT.UM, THEY, AFTER THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS THAT MR. CORTEZ WAS, WAS AT, THEY ALSO HAD A, HAD SEVERAL LENGTHY DISCUSSIONS WITH ME AS TO THE THOUGHTS AND THE CONCEPT WITH THE, THE MAIN THOUGHT AND CONCEPT OF THIS, THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS TOO DENSE.
ALL THE, THE RESIDENTS, UM, PROPERTIES THAT ARE ACROSS THE STREET AND TO THE NEIGHBORING SIDES OF THIS ARE ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
THEY MAY BE LARGE LOTS, BUT THEY'RE ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
AND THE COMMUNITY WAS VERY DIRECT WITH ME, UM, INCLUDING THE CONVERSATION I HAD WITH MR. CARRANZA ON MY WAY IN THIS MORNING.
THAT THIS PLAN THAT, UM, IN THE MID-BLOCK IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT THEY WISH TO RE TO HAVE IN THIS PARTICULAR COMMUNITY.
UM, I DO KNOW, AS SOME HAVE SAID, WE KNEW HOUSING IS A NEED.
UM, BUT WHAT THE COMMUNITY STRONGLY, UH, IS REQUESTING IS THAT THE THOUGHTS AND THE CON AND THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT THEY HAVE OUTWEIGH, UM, WHAT IS BEEN PUT UP, WHAT THEY FEEL HAS BEEN PUT UPON THEM.
UH, THEY SPOKE SPECIFICALLY WITH THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS THAT HAVE GONE IN ALREADY, AND THE FACT THAT IT, THAT WAS NOT IN, IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT THEIR, THEIR DESIRES AND THEIR, THEIR, UH, WISHES ARE.
AND AS THEY HAVE SAID THAT, AND I'M JUST GONNA READ ONE PARAGRAPH, WE HAVE BROUGHT, BOUGHT THESE PROPERTIES TO ENJOY OUR RURAL WAY OF LIFE, RAISE OUR ANIMALS, AND LIVE OFF THE LAND.
WE DO NOT WANT MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT ANYWHERE NEAR OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
THEY BRING TOO MUCH NOISE AND POLLUTION, TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION.
THIS AREA CAN SUPPORT MORE DENSITY.
THE TRAFFIC AREA, UH, ALREADY IS AN ISSUE.
WE STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO PLEASE VOTE NO AND STOP LETTING THESE DEVELOPMENTS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
CLEAVER RILEY HAS AN EXTREMELY STRONG NEED FOR INFRASTRUCTURE.
THIS PARTICULAR AREA STILL HAS MAJOR, UM, SANITATION LINE ISSUES.
THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMUNITY IS STILL ON SEPTIC TANKS.
AND MOST OF THE STREETS ARE NO, HAVE NO CURBS, NO GUTTERS.
AND IF YOU GO OUT THERE ON THE WEEKENDS, YOU WILL SEE MORE HORSES, COWS THAN YOU SEE PEOPLE IN CARS.
THEY DON'T LIKE CONCRETE, THEY DON'T LIKE MAJ.
THE, THE HIGH DENSITY FOR THEM 20 UNITS ON AN ACRE IS HIGH DENSITY.
THEY WOULD LIKE, THEY LIKE HOUSES THAT ARE EVEN SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES THAT ARE SINGLE STORY RAMBLERS.
I DO KNOW WE IN, WE ARE IN A CRISIS OF NEED OF HOUSING, BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THESE ARE TAX PAYING CITIZENS THAT HAVE MADE ME FEEL THEIR PAIN IN THE WAY THEY COMMUNICATE WITH ME IN THE WAY THAT THEY COMMUNICATE WITH, UM, OUR LEADERSHIP IN OUR DISTRICT.
SO I, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT WHAT SOME OF YOU MAY WANT, I ASK THAT YOU LISTEN TO THE COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY AND HEAR WHAT THEY HAVE SAID AND VOTE NOT ACCORDING TO MY NEEDS OR YOUR NEEDS, BUT THEIR NEEDS.
UM, I DO SEE THAT THERE MAY BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR AN ALTERNATIVE TO R 10 AT THIS SITE.
WHAT GIVES ME PAUSE IS BASED ON WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS SPOKEN TO US TODAY AND SOME OF THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE GONNA COME ABOUT WHEN THEY GET TO PERMITTING, THAT IT'S GOING TO MEET THEIR DEVELOPMENT GOALS AS WERE PRESENTED TO US.
UM, UNDERSTANDING THAT AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS RESTRAINT ZONING, THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER USES THAT ARE WITHIN M U ONE THAT I DON'T THINK WOULD BE COMPATIBLE
[03:10:01]
WITH THIS SITE.I THINK THERE MAY BE A WAY WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY TO FIND A, A, A MORE TAILORED SOLUTION THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR AN INCREMENTAL INCREASE IN DENSITY THAT WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE.
BUT A STRAIGHT ZONING REQUEST FOR U ONE I FIND VERY DIFFICULT TO SUPPORT AT THIS LOCATION.
I DO APPRECIATE THAT THE MOTION WAS WITHOUT PREJUDICE BECAUSE I DO THINK IT ALLOWS FOR AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A MORE NUANCED REVIEW OF THIS REQUEST.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER THIS MORNING ON BRIEFING.
DEFINITELY WHEN I, WHEN I HEARD WHERE THIS PROJECT IS, WAS WE HAVE HEARD TIME AND TIME AGAIN WHERE OUR COMMISSIONER BLAIR HAS SAID THAT THIS AREA IS WANTING TO STAY RURAL.
AND EVEN LOOKING AT THE LETTER THAT WAS SENT AND SHOWING THAT, THAT, THAT THERE HAS BEEN A STORY SAYING HOW THIS AREA HAS BEEN NEGLECTED, UM, WHERE WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND WHERE WE DO NEED MORE APARTMENTS AND, AND, AND DENSITY.
UM, OFTENTIMES WHEN WE APPROVE DENSITY IS SOUTH OF 30, UM, WHEREAS NORTH OF 30 PEOPLE CAN PAY IN LIE PRICES SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.
AND SO WE GET STUCK IN AREAS THAT, UH, HAVE LAURA PAYING, UM, TAXPAYERS WITH THESE TYPE OF PROJECTS.
UM, I, I'VE BEEN TO THAT AREA AND THAT AREA HAS, I'VE NEVER KNOWN IT TO BE ANYTHING BUT RURAL.
AND WE NEED TO KEEP SOME OF THAT WHERE THAT POLLUTION IS DOWN.
THE WHOLE CITY DOES NOT NEED TO BE CONCRETE JUNGLES.
AND THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS MAXIMIZING THE FULL EXTENT OF THEIR PROPERTY INSTEAD OF REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF UNITS MEMBERS.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, MR. CHAIR, COMMISSIONER YOUNG? MM-HMM.
AND JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE, IF I AM UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, THE APPLICANT CANNOT MAKE AN ECONOMIC SUCCESS OF THIS PROJECT AT LESS THAN 42 UNITS.
AND YET WITH, UH, LAYOUT ISSUES, PROXIMITY, SLOPE ISSUES, SETBACK ISSUES AND SO FORTH, IS UNLIKELY TO BE ABLE TO BUILD MORE THAN 20 UNITS ON THE SITE.
THE RESULT OF THAT WILL, IF WE APPROVE THIS CASE, WILL FAVOR NO ONE.
THE APPLICANT WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD HIS PROJECT WILL, AS COMMISSIONER HAMPTON POINTS OUT, THE PROPERTY WILL BE LEFT WITH STRAIGHT MU ZONING AND, UH, NO CONTROL OVER HOW THAT IS EXERCISED.
SO I THINK THE MOTION TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE IS THE RIGHT ANSWER AND I'M IN FULL SUPPORT OF IT.
AND MEMBERS, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? UM, COMMISSIONER? YEAH.
UM, IS THERE, IS THERE ANY, I I HATE TO DENY THIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN MAKING THIS APPLICANT GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE, TO THE DRAWING BOARD.
I'M, AND THERE'S, UM, THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS IN MY MIND TO SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
AND ONE OF THE, THE THINGS THAT I INFLUENCES ME IS SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY WAS JUST BROUGHT UP BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR, WAS THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IS DESPERATELY NEEDED OUT IN THIS LOCATION.
CITY, UH, SANITATION, SEWER LINES, STREETS, UH, ET CETERA.
IT'S KIND OF WIDELY UNDERSTOOD NOW THAT AT R SEVEN FIVE, UH, DENSITIES, OUR FIVE DENSITIES, THE TAX REVENUE FROM THOSE, FROM THOSE DENSITIES DO NOT, UM, GENERATE ENOUGH REVENUE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CITY SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS OF THE ROADS OF THE, OF THE SANITATION PIPES, ET CETERA.
AND SO IT PLACES THE, THE REVENUE HAS TO BE GENERATED SOMEWHERE ELSE.
AND SO WHEN A COMMUNITY OF R 10 SAYS, WE WANNA LIVE THE WAY WE WANNA LIVE, I CAN APPRECIATE THAT AND I RESPECT SELF-DETERMINATION OF NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT THAT'S ASKING THE HIGHER DENSITY NEIGHBORHOODS TO SUBSIDIZE THEM TO GET THEM THE SERVICES THAT THEY NEED.
AND IT'S NOT, UM, WHAT I'M BRINGING UP IS NOT OFTEN IN THE DISCUSSION.
AND SO I BELIEVE, UM, YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE FRONT AND CENTER ON THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO DENY, UH, APPLICANTS WHO ARE WILLING TO PRO PROVIDE US HOUSING, WHICH IS DESPERATELY NEEDED.
AND I THINK THAT'S BEEN AGREED.
UM, I'VE HEARD SEVERAL COMMISSIONERS ECHO THAT.
[03:15:01]
THIRD AND FOURTH LAYERS OF THE DISCUSSION ALSO, UH, START GOING TO THIS INFRASTRUCTURE PROBLEM AND THE LACK OF TAX REVENUE THAT THESE, UH, THESE ZONING CLASSES, UM, DON'T GENERATE TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES.SO I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S A WAY THAT INSTEAD OF DENYING THIS, UH, IF IT COULD BE, AND IF THE APPLICANT WAS WILLING TO GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD TO GET SOMETHING, UM, THAT DOESN'T JUST WIPE OUT ALL THIS POTENTIAL FOR GREAT HOUSING THAT'S NEEDED, UM, AND GET SOMETHING THAT MAYBE THE COMMUNITY CAN WORK WITH.
WE'RE ON OUR FIRST ROUND, SO COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, THANK YOU.
THE, A LOT OF TIMES AT THIS HORSESHOE WE'RE HAVING DISCUSSIONS ABOUT PROTECTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS AND WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE AND WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE BETWEEN OFFERING PROTECTION FOR SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE EXISTING AND STABLE IN ORDER TO GET THE HOUSING AND DENSITY WE NEED.
NOW, MY DISTRICT'S DOING ITS PART ON DENSITY.
UM, I SAY THAT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FUNNY.
UM, BUT, AND I THINK THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE GONNA BECOME HARDER.
AND I THINK THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT BECAUSE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD REALLY WANTS TO STAY KIND OF RURAL AND AS THE CITY GROWS, I'M NOT SURE HOW REALISTIC THAT IS.
UM, AND I'M NOT HEARING THIS NEIGHBORHOOD SAY THAT THEY NECESSARILY ARE DEMANDING BETTER CITY SERVICES.
THEY'RE JUST SAYING WE DON'T HAVE GOOD CITY SERVICES, SO DON'T, DON'T PILE ON, PLEASE.
AND I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION.
UM, WHEREAS, YOU KNOW, IN THE CEDARS, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY WANT BETTER CITY SERVICES AND YOU'RE SEEING THAT TRANSFORMATION OF THAT COMMUNITY PART IN ORDER TO GET MORE BETTER FUNCTIONING CITY SERVICES.
UH, SO I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION, UM, IN PART ALSO BECAUSE WE CAN'T HAVE IT BE THE RULE THAT WE JUST DUMP ALL THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SOUTH 30.
UM, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DISTRICT 14.
ANYBODY OUT THERE WANNA BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING? DISTRICT 14, COME TALK TO ME.
UM, ALL OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENTS THAT WE HAVE PUT INTO PDS AND DISTRICT 14 IN THE LAST TWO PLUS YEARS HAVE ENDED UP BEING PAID THROUGH FEE AND L I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A SINGLE PROJECT THAT HAS DONE ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE MICRO UNITS, WHICH I, I DO APPRECIATE AND I DO THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
BUT ALL OF THOSE, UM, MIXED INCOME HOUSING UNITS THAT ARE GOING INTO THESE PDS, THE, THE FEE AND LOSE JUST GETTING PAID.
AND UNTIL WE ADDRESS THE DIVERGENCE BETWEEN, IN REALITY, BETWEEN WHAT WE SAY WE NEED AND THE AMOUNT OF THE FEE AND LU, THAT WILL CONTINUE TO BE THE CASE.
AND SO PERHAPS THAT'S A CONVERSATION THAT WE SHOULD TAKE UP SOMEWHERE, BUT, YOU KNOW, THE FEE AND L'S NOT WITHIN OUR PURVIEW, BUT THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO SOME DEGREE ARE THANK YOU MEMBERS.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
I COULD HAVE ALSO SUPPORTED AN ALTERNATE MOTION IF IT HAD BEEN, UM, CONSIDERED TO PUT IT UNDER ADVISEMENT AND LOOK AT AN MU ONE WITH THE RESTRICTIONS ON USES AND, UM, DENSITY AND YOU KNOW, WHERE THOSE, UM, NON-RESIDENTIAL USES COULD BE.
BUT GIVEN, UM, I DON'T THINK THE LIKELY RESULT OF THAT IS GOING TO BE, WAS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD'VE BEEN HAPPY WITH.
SO I, I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION THAT WAS WAS MADE.
HAVE YOU ALREADY SPOKEN IN THE FIRST ROUND? NOPE.
UM, I ACTUALLY SECOND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I THINK, I THINK THE CURRENT PROJECT AS PROPOSED DOESN'T FIT THE AREA, BUT COULD THERE BE A MORE CREATIVE PROJECT? UM, WE DO HAVE AN AUTO CENTER.
WE DO HAVE SOME OTHER HOUSING THAT IS MORE DENSE THAT IS CLOSE BY.
IS THERE A MORE THOUGHTFUL APPROACH TO DEVELOPMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, DOES GET SOME BETTER CITY SERVICES RECOGNIZES THE RURAL CHARACTER? I TEND TO ALSO AGREE THAT THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT MIGHT BE THE NEXT APPROPRIATE STEP FOR THIS PIECE OF LAND AND WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN FRONT OF US MIGHT BE TOO FAR.
UM, BUT I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT A MOTION IF THERE, IF COMMISSIONER BLAIR THINKS THAT A RECONSIDERATION COULD BE BENEFICIAL.
I'M GONNA SPEAK IN THE FIRST ROUND MYSELF.
[03:20:01]
THE MOTION FOR DENIAL TODAY.YOU KNOW, I HAVE WORKED A FEW ZONING CASES IN THIS AREA MYSELF, GIVEN THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT COME IN D EIGHT AND YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HEAR IS WE WANT, YOU KNOW, BETTER HIGHER QUALITY RETAIL.
WE WANT BETTER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA.
IN FACT, WE GOT AN EMAIL THIS MORNING FROM A RESIDENT AREA THAT REFERRED US TO AN N B C FIVE STORY ARTICLE THAT WAS PUBLISHED AT THE END OF LAST MONTH THAT SAID, KLEBERG RESIDENTS SEEK CITY OF DALLAS IMPROVEMENTS.
AND IN ORDER TO GET SOME OF THESE OPPORTUNITIES, WHETHER IT'S INFRASTRUCTURE, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT RETAIL OF A DIFFERENT QUALITY, WHAT WE'VE HEARD IN THE PAST IS THIS AREA IS GOING TO NEED MORE ROOFTOPS TO SUPPORT THAT.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A STRONG DESIRE FOR THIS AREA TO STAY RURAL.
IT'S IN THE, THE KLEBERG AREA PLAN.
IT'S IN THAT COMMUNICATION WE RECEIVED AS WELL.
COMMISSIONER BLAIRS STATED THAT HERE ON THE RECORD.
BUT THOSE TWO DESIRES OF THIS AREA ARE KIND OF IT CROSS PURPOSES.
YOU KNOW, WE CAN EITHER KEEP THIS AREA WITH ITS RURAL CHARACTER TODAY AND THE STATUS QUO WILL BE THE STATUS QUO IN ALL RESPECTS.
OR WE CAN ALLOW GREATER DENSITY AND DEVELOPMENT TO COME INTO THIS AREA AND GET SOME OF THOSE THINGS IN TERMS OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND RETAIL AND THINGS ON, ON THAT FRONT AS WELL.
WHAT TIPS ME TOWARDS SUPPORTING THIS, YOU KNOW, ARE, ARE TWO THINGS.
ONE, YOU KNOW, IF WE DON'T START THINKING ABOUT DENSITY, EVEN IN THESE PARTS OF TOWN THAT HAVE A RURAL AREA, THESE FOLKS WHO MIGHT LIVE THERE AREN'T GONNA GO AWAY.
WHAT'S LIKELY TO HAPPEN IS THEY KEEP PUSHING OUT TO SECOND, THIRD RING SUBURBS, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO END UP AT THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX IN KLEBERG, THEY MAY END UP IN PROSPER, THEY MAY END UP IN WAXAHATCHEE.
AND YOU KNOW, THE COMMUTES THAT COME WITH THAT HAVE TREMENDOUS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
SO, YOU KNOW, ADDING TO KLEBERG, WHILE IT MAY BE SOMEWHAT SPRAWL RELATIVE TO THE CITY OF DALLAS IN THE GRAND SCHEME, THE THING IS PROBABLY WHAT'S BETTER IN TERMS OF MEETING OUR ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS.
UM, I ALSO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WHILE THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, SOME CONCERNS ABOUT ADDING THIS DENSITY, I DO THINK THE POTENTIAL MIXED U USE DISTRICT WITH BUFFERING DOES ADDRESS A LOT OF THOSE CONCERNS.
UM, AND I LASTLY, I WOULD HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, WHILE WE CONSIDER THE NEEDS OF THE KLEBERG RESIDENTS HERE, UM, WHOSE VOICE IS CERTAINLY AN IMPORTANT ONE, WE ALSO CONSIDER THE NEEDS OF THE FOLKS WHO IN THE CITY OF DALLAS WHO NEED HOUSING.
AND THESE POTENTIAL 40 TO 60 UNITS COULD, YOU KNOW, NO, NO SINGLE DEVELOPMENT'S GOING TO SOLVE OUR, YOU KNOW, HOUSING CRISIS, BUT THIS ADDITION, YOU KNOW, LIKE OTHER ADDITIONS COULD MAKE A DENT TO IT.
SO I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF, OF PASSING THE ZONING CHANGE AS PROPOSED TODAY.
ANYONE ELSE IN THE FIRST ROUND? OH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT HERBERT.
WE'RE HAVING TROUBLE HEARING YOU.
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU SWALLOWED SOME HELIUM.
MAYBE TOGGLE YOUR MIC ON AND OFF.
OKAY, SO I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT.
SO THE, THE HISTORY OF THE KLEBERG AREA, AS YOU GUYS HAVE HEARD, UM, THE, THE ARTICLE IN N BBC FIVE, THOSE BY THE OBSERVER, THOSE BY D MAGAZINE FOR YEARS, KLEBERG HAS NOT ASKED FOR RETAIL.
THEY'VE ASKED FOR SERVICES, SANITATION SERVICES FOR A TRASH CAN, FOR THE TRASH PICKUP TO BE ON TIME FOR CODE COMPLIANCE TO PASS BY FOR POLICE TO PASS THROUGH THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS.
THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE MORE ROOFTOPS TO HAVE BASIC SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED TO ALL OF US AS CITIZENS WHO ALL PAY TAXES TOWARDS THAT HIGH.
UM, SO I WANTED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
WE MUST MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO, UM, OF THE NORTH WHEN WE TALK ABOUT DEVELOPMENT IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR, ESPECIALLY IN RURAL AREAS LIKE THIS AND OTHER PLACES.
[03:25:01]
THE PEOPLE HAVE ASKED, THEY'VE PUT INTO PLANS WHAT THEY'VE WANTED AND WE KEEP DIVERTING TO OTHER THINGS.UM, I I I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION ON THE TABLE, UM, FOR DENIAL.
UM, YOU'VE BROUGHT UP THE N B C FIVE.
THE PERSON WHO BROUGHT N B C FIVE AND SPOKE ABOUT THEIR NEEDS FOR CITY SERVICES IS THE SAME PERSON WHO WROTE THE LETTER THAT I, THAT I QUOTED THAT SAYS THEY DON'T WANT THE DENSITY.
AND WHEN THEY'RE SAYING AS WHAT COMMISSIONER HERBERT SAID, WHEN THIS COMMUNITY SAYS THEY WANT SERVICES, THEY WANT THE POLICE TO COME.
AND WHEN THERE'S A MURDER, WHICH HAPPENS ON, UH, MORE OFTEN THAN THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT, IT DOESN'T TAKE THE POLICE OVER AN HOUR TO COME WHEN SOMEONE IS BEING MURDERED.
WHEN THERE ARE CODE VIOLATIONS, THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO LIVE WITHIN, WITHIN CODE VIOLATIONS BECAUSE, AND HAVE TO LIVE WITH ILLEGAL PARTIES BECAUSE CODE WON'T COME AND POLICE WON'T COME WHEN THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT SERVICES.
THEY DON'T WANNA SEE THE CITY WATER RUNNING DOWN THE STREET FOR MONTHS AFTER THEY HAVE CALLED WATER.
AND TO TELL THEM TO TELL THEM THERE IS A LEAK AND THEY HAVE TO COME TO ME OR MAYOR PRO TIM TO GET CITY SERVICES JUST TO COME AND LOOK, NOT TO FIX, BUT JUST TO COME AND LOOK.
WHEN WE, WHEN THEY TALKING ABOUT CITY SERVICES, THEY'RE TIRED OF CALLING ME ON SUNDAY NIGHTS AT MIDNIGHT BECAUSE SOMEONE IS HAVING AN ILLEGAL EVENT RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THEIR RESIDENT OR WHEN THEY'RE CALLING FOR SERVICES, WHEN THEY'RE CALLING ME AT NINE O'CLOCK ON SUNDAY NIGHT AND THEY SOUND LIKE THEY'RE LIVING IN A WAR ZONE BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORS ARE SHOOTING AND THE POLICE WON'T COME, MORE DENSITY DOES NOT BRING MORE SERVICES.
IT JUST BRINGS MORE OF THE SAME.
WHEN THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THEIR NEEDS, THEY ARE TALK.
THEY CAN'T, WHEN, WHEN WE TALK TO ABOUT PARKING, THEY CAN'T GET DART TO EVEN COME.
THERE IS NOT ONE DART LINE IN THE KLEBERG RILEY AREA AT ALL.
SO THEY CAN'T EVEN GET ON THE BUS TO INC TO HANDLE THE DENSITY OF THE APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT THAT WAS IN THIS REPORT.
BECAUSE THERE IS THAT THE STREETS WILL NOT SUPPORT DART BUSES WHEN THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT GETTING THEIR THEIR FAIR SHARE.
IT'S JUST TO BRING THEM UP TO A LEVEL WHERE THEY CAN HAVE DENSITY.
THEY CAN'T EVEN GET A MAJOR DEPARTMENT STORE, UH, KMAR.
I MEAN A GOD TELL HOW OLD I AM.
EVEN THOUGH THE AREA PLAN ASKS FOR A WALMART AND A HOME DEPOT BECAUSE YOU CAN'T GET, UH, A TRUCK A, A BIG RIG TO GO DOWN THE STREETS THAT ARE THERE TO BRING IN THE SUPPLIES.
IF THERE WAS ENOUGH ROOFTOPS TO SUPPORT THAT UNTIL EQUITY COMES TO THIS AREA AND THEY HAVE SIDEWALKS, BASICS, THE BASICS THAT WE ALL LIVE IN TODAY, WHETHER IT'S A SIDEWALK THAT IS FIVE FOOT OR SIX FEET, THEY HAVE BAR DITCHES.
IF YOU GO DOWN SOME OF THEIR MAJOR STREETS, HAYMARKET KIDS HAVE TO WALK IN THE STREET IN ORDER TO GET TO SCHOOL.
AND IF THE, IF SOMEONE DRIVES DOWN THE ROAD, WHICH IS NOT EVEN SUPPORTIVE OF A, OF A FIRE TRUCK GOING DOWN THAT ROAD, THEY FALL IN A FOUR FOOT BAR DITCH WHEN THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT SERVICES, THEY WANT TO HAVE THE SAME BASIC
[03:30:01]
SERVICES THAT EVERYBODY WHO SITS IN ON THIS HORSESHOE SHOE AND YOU TAKE FOR, FOR GRANTED WHEN THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT SERVICES, THEY WANT SANITATION TO COME WHEN THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO COME.THEY JUST WANT THE BASICS THAT WE ALL TAKE FOR GRANTED IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALL HAVE AND WE ALL THINK IS JUST EVERY DAY, EVERY DAY.
MOST OF THE PEOPLE THERE, THEY DON'T EVEN WANT IT A LOT.
WE HAVE RESIDENTS WHO, WHO SAYS, EVEN IF YOU BROUGHT A SANITARY, SANITARY LINE TO MY HOUSE, I DON'T WANT IT BECAUSE THEN IT MEANS I HAVE TO ACCEPT THE NEXT THING.
IF WHAT I DON'T WANT, THEY WANT TO REMAIN RURAL.
THEY WANT TO GET ON THEIR HORSES AND THEY WANT TO RIDE THEIR HORSES.
THEY DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN A WORLD THAT IS A CONCRETE JUNGLE IN A HOT SPOT.
THEY LIKE THEIR, THEIR PAST, THEY, WHAT THEY WANT IS WHEN, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WALKING TRAILS, THEY DON'T EVEN WANT WALKING TRAILS.
THEY WANT ME TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO CONNECT THEIR HORSE, THEIR, THEIR STREETS AND THEIR HORSES TO THE PARK SO THEY CAN GET ON THE PARK, GET TOGETHER AND RIDE THEIR HORSES.
AND THE NEXT CASE, WHICH IS NORTH OF 20, THIS IS SOUTH OF 20, THEN THE NEXT CASE YOU GET THE DENSITY IN THE NEXT CASE, YOU GET TO HAVE R FIVE, R SEVEN FIVE SOUTH OF 20.
THERE MEANS THAT THEY, THEY HAVE, WE HAVE CITIES EMPLOYEES WHO WILL TELL ME ON A REGULAR BASIS, DON'T TELL, DON'T TELL PEOPLE WHERE I WORK BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THEM FUSSING AT ME.
'CAUSE I WORK FOR THE CITY THAT'S TRYING TO TAKE AWAY FROM THEM.
THEY, THE, THE RESIDENTS ONT MARKET, THE RESIDENTS ON HAY MARKET SOUTH OF 20 ON SILVERADO AND EVERYWHERE ELSE THEY SAY THE SAME THING.
THEY'RE SECOND, THIRD, FOURTH GENERATIONS OF ORIGINAL, UM, RESIDENTS IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA THAT WANT WHAT THEY WANT.
THEY WANT RURAL, THEY WANT THEIR, THE AREA PLAN THAT KEEPS THEM RURAL RESPECTED.
THEY WANT THE SAME TYPE OF QUALITY OF LIFE THAT WE ALL HA ARE AFFORDED IN OUR NICE BIG PALOUS HOUSES OR MID, MID, UM, MID MIDLIFE HOUSES.
THEY, WHATEVER IT IS THAT WE WANT AND WE CONSIDER OURSELVES TO HAVE AS STANDARD LIVING AND WHAT WE BOUGHT INTO, THEY WANT TO BE LEFT ALONE.
THEY WANT TO BE RESPECTED WITH THE SAME LEVEL OF RESPECT THAT EACH ONE OF US WHO ARE SITTING AT THIS HORSESHOE IS GIVEN ON A REGULAR BASIS.
THEY DON'T WANT US TO TAKE THEIR RESPECT AWAY.
THEY WANT JUST TO BE LEFT ALONE, TO BE PROVIDED WITH WHAT THEY HAVE, THE LIFESTYLE THEY'VE, THEY'VE BROUGHT INTO.
AND BELIEVE IT OR NOT, A LOT OF THESE, THESE PEOPLE ARE, ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE MOVED INTO SOME OF THESE LARGE, SPACIOUS LOTS WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS BECAUSE IT EXISTS AND IT'S 20 MINUTES, A HALF AN HOUR FROM DOWNTOWN DALLAS.
THEY CAN GO, THEY CAN LIVE TWO LIFESTYLES.
THEY CAN COME DOWNTOWN DALLAS.
THEY GET UP EARLIER IN THE MORNING, THEY GET UP AT FIVE O'CLOCK, FOUR O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING.
THEY FEED THEIR HORSES, THEY FEED THEIR COWS, THEY FEED THEIR CHICKENS, THEY GROW THEIR OWN.
THEY, THEY, THEY, THE SAME GUY WHO SIGNED THIS LETTER, MR. CARRANZA, HE, HE SAYS, COME ON OUT.
I'LL SELL YOU A DOZEN EGGS FOR $3.
CAN YOU GET THREE A $3 WORTH OF FRESH EGGS IN THE CITY? COME OUT THERE, YOU CAN GET FRESH EGGS.
MS. BINGHAM, SHE HAD, EVERY YEAR SHE SLAUGHTERS
[03:35:01]
ONE OF, SHE, SHE SLAUGHTERS ONE OF HER, HER COWS, SO SHE HAS MEAT FOR THE WHOLE YEAR.SHE'S OFFERED TO SELL MEAT, FRESH MEAT.
SHE HAS A SLAUGHTERHOUSE THAT SHE TAKES ONE OF HER COWS EACH YEAR AND SHE GROWS.
SHE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CALL IT WHEN YOU, YOU, YOU, YOU GET COWS AND YOU SELL 'EM FOR SLAUGHTER SO THAT SOMEONE ELSE CAN HAVE FRESH MEAT.
BUT GUESS WHAT? THEY ALSO LIVE A LIFE THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO TAKE MEDICATION LIKE WE DO.
AND WE ARE 15 PEOPLE SITTING IN, UH, SITTING AT THIS HORSESHOE TELLING THEM THEIR WAY OF LIFE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH OUR WAY OF LIFE.
AND BECAUSE IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH OUR WAY OF LIFE, THEY'RE WRONG.
THEY'VE BEEN RIGHT LONGER THAN WE HAVE.
AND I JUST RESENT THE FACT THAT I ALWAYS HAVE TO GET BEAT UP HERE AT THE HORSESHOE.
AND THEN WHEN I GO HOME, BECAUSE HERE AT THE HORSESHOE, WE DIDN'T LISTEN TO THEM.
I AM SICK OF BEING BEATEN UP BY MAYOR PRO TIMM ATKINS, BECAUSE I SIT HERE AND I REPRESENT ONE OF THE LARGEST DISTRICTS, AND I HAVE 14 OTHER PEOPLE WHO TELLING ME, YOU CAN'T, YOUR PEOPLE IN YOUR DISTRICT CAN'T HAVE THEIR LIFESTYLE THEIR WAY, AND THEY PAY THEIR TAXES.
JUST LIKE WE, EACH ONE OF US HERE PAYS OURS REGARDLESS OF THE, THE LEVEL OF TAXES THEY PAY.
THEY DON'T WANT DARK, THEY DON'T WANT CONCRETE.
THEY DON'T WANT SIDEWALKS, AND THEY DON'T WANT SANITATION LINES.
WHAT THEY WANT IS THEIR HORSES.
YOU CAN GO OUT THERE AND FEED STORES ARE THRIVING, BUT YOU CAN'T GET A GROCERY STORE.
'CAUSE THEY CAN GO IN THEIR BACKYARDS, THEY CAN GROW IT, WHETHER IT BE THEIR MEAT, WHETHER IT BE THEIR POULTRY, WHETHER IT BE THEIR, THEIR EGGS AND WHATEVER.
THEY WILL BAKE THEIR OWN BREAD.
I ASK THAT YOU STOP DISRESPECTING THEM, THAT YOU GIVE THEM THE LEVEL OF RESPECT THAT EACH ONE OF US ARE ASKING TO HAVE AS WE SIT HERE TODAY.
AND TRUST ME, I KEEP EXPLAINING TO THEM THAT YOU CAN'T SAY YOU WANT SERVICES SUCH AS A HOME DEPOT AND A WALMART IF YOU WANNA STAY RURAL.
AND THEY HAVE COME BACK AND SAYS, FORGET WALMART, FORGET HOME DEPOT.
SO I'M ASKING YOU, LET 'EM HAVE THEIR DOGGONE HORSE.
LET 'EM HAVE THEIR DOGGONE COWS.
LET 'EM HAVE THEIR DOGGONE CHICKENS.
IT MAY NOT BE MY WAY OF LIFE, BUT BABY, WHEN YOU GO OUT THERE, IT'S PEACEFUL AND QUIET.
SOME MONTHS AGO, WE HAD A, WE HAD SOME, UM, PROPERTY OWNERS OUT IN THE FARTHEST PART OF OUR CITY ON THE BORDERLINE OF DUNCANVILLE THAT HAD RT AND ZONING WHO CAME IN.
AND THE DENSITY THAT THE PERSON WANTED, I WANNA SAY WAS R FIVE.
IT COULD HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN R 7 7 5.
AND WE UNDERSTOOD WE DIDN'T HAVE THE BED.
WE, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE THE PRODS.
WE WERE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WANTED TO KEEP OUR 10.
AND, AND, AND WHAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR WAS THE DEVELOPER THAT WAS GONNA BUILD.
IT WASN'T THAT MANY MORE HOUSES, BUT IT WAS JUST A REDUCTION.
HERE WE ARE, WE HAVE A DEVELOPER WHO HAS THREE ACRES AND HE WANTS TO PUT IN 60 SOMETHING UNITS AND WE'RE HAVING TO BED.
THEN YOU HAVE COM COMMISSIONERS THAT'S SAYING, WELL, THEY, IN ORDER TO GET WHAT THEY WANT, THEY NEED MORE DENSITY.
THIS CITY HAS, HAS, AGAIN, IS ALWAYS A TALE OF TWO CITIES.
A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE WHO MAKE THE DECISIONS FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTOR DON'T VISIT THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.
WHEN WE GO TO TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE NEEDS IS IN THIS CLE BIRD RALLY AREA, WE BENEFIT FROM THE AREA.
RIGHT NOW, IF YOU VISIT BONTON FARMS AND A COUPLE OF OTHER RESTAURANTS, YOU BENEFIT FROM IT BECAUSE BONTON FARMS HAS A 40 ACRE FARM IN THAT AREA.
IF YOU'RE BUYING FLOWERS, THERE ARE CER, THERE ARE NURSERIES THAT ARE IN THAT AREA THAT IS SUPPORTING NURSERIES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS IN IN THE MAIN CITY LIMITS THAT ARE GROWING AND ALSO OFFERING JOBS TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO LIVE OUT THERE.
THERE IS MULTIPLE FARMS THAT ARE SUPPORTIVE TO
[03:40:01]
OUR GROCERIES IN THE, THE FARM TO TABLE RESTAURANTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO, AND THEY'RE COMING FROM RIGHT OVER THERE.SO WHEN WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS, WE ARE CREATING ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS.
WHEN WE'RE BUILDING HIGH DENSITY IN AREAS THAT ARE GROWING.
SOME OF THE FRUITS AND VEGETABLES THAT ARE IN THESE RESTAURANTS THAT WE ARE EATING THAT HAVE VEGAN RESTAURANTS THAT BELIEVE IN FARM TO TABLE, THE FORM TO TABLE IS COMING OFTENTIMES FROM RIGHT IN, IN THE CLE RALEIGH AREA.
SO THAT'S MORE THAN JUST PEOPLE LIVING THERE WITH HIGH DENSITY.
THEY'RE RUNNING SMALL FARMS FOR SMALL NURSERIES.
SOME OF THEM ARE, ARE EVEN SELLING THEIR ANIMALS.
BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WHEN WE GET BEFORE THIS BODY, WE HAVE TO BEG AND PLEAD BECAUSE ANYTHING IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR THAT, THAT HAS ANY TYPE OF DENSITY, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IT'S A GOAL.
WE JUST LOOKED AT A PROJECT, PEOPLE AND, AND, AND NOT EVEN THAT, THE BEING ABLE TO REVERT MONEY SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO, UH, OFFER AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AREAS THAT WANT MULTI-FAMILY IN OTHER SPACES IN THE CITY, THE YOUNGER GENERATION, THOSE WHO DON'T WANT BACKYARDS, THAT IS ALL COOL.
YOU CAN BUILD AS MANY HOUSES, I MEAN MANY APARTMENT COMPLEXES, TOWNHOMES AS YOU CHOOSE TO PLEASE.
BUT WHEN WE GET TO TAKEN AWAY FROM PEOPLE AND IN AREAS THAT SUPPORT IT, AND THEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS AND, AND, AND POLLUTION IN OUR CITY.
AND THEN YOU HAVE AREAS LIKE THIS.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE ANYTHING SOUTH OF 30.
AND THEN THIS BOARD OFTENTIMES GO WITH, WITH WHATEVER, WHATEVER, UM, DENSITY, WHATEVER, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, DUPLEXES.
AND A LOT OF TIMES WE DON'T, A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T COME TO SOUTH OF 30 TO REALLY SEE WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND OUR PEOPLE CANNOT NECESSARILY COME INTO THESE CHAMBERS.
WHEN IT WAS A WHOLE CROWD OF PEOPLE TOOK UP MULTIPLE ROLES.
WHEN WE HAD THAT CASE OUT BY DUNCANVILLE, THAT WAS R T N ZONING.
BUT THE REASON WHY THOSE PEOPLE THAT'S OVER ON CLE BIRD, RALEIGH CAN'T MAKE IT DOWN HERE.
THEY CAN'T TAKE OFF OF THEIR JOB TO COMPLETE.
WE HEARD THIS, THE DEVELOPER SAY THAT HE TALKED TO THE, THOSE PEOPLE AND THAT, UH, THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND THAT THEY WERE, UH, A GOAL WITH THE CHANGES THAT HE DID AND HER WHEELS.
I HADN'T EVEN LOOKED AT THE EMAIL.
AND WHEN I LOOK AT THE EMAIL, THERE'S A DIRECT OPPOSITE.
AND THE REASON THAT A DEVELOPER CAN TELL US THAT A, A COMMUNITY APPROVED IT, AND BECAUSE THAT COMMUNITY CAN'T COME SPEAK FOR THEMSELF BECAUSE THEY'RE AT WORK, THEY CAN'T COME OUT.
SOME OF US THAT'S ON THE, ON THIS COMMISSION REALLY SHOULDN'T BE HERE 'CAUSE WE'RE WORKING.
WE NEED TO BE AT WORK, BUT WE MAKE THE SACRIFICE.
AND IT SEEMS LIKE SOUTH OF 30.
EVERYTHING GOES, IF THIS SAME PROJECT WAS IN A MORE AFFLUENT AREA, WE WOULDN'T EVEN HAVING THIS CONVERSATION, SUCH AS THE AREA THAT WAS ON THE BORDERLINE OF DUNCANVILLE, THERE WAS NO THIS, IT DIDN'T TAKE NO TIME FOR US TO PULL THAT PROJECT AND SAY, NO, YOU WILL NOT, YOU WILL NOT INCREASE IT WITH R 75 OR R FIVE MEMBERS.
ALL RIGHT, WHY DON'T WE TAKE A RECORDED VOTE.
DISTRICT ONE, I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION.
DISTRICT FOUR, ABSENT DISTRICT FIVE.
ALRIGHT, WHY DON'T WE TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK AND COME BACK AT 2 45.
WE'VE GOT A QUORUM BETWEEN THE FOLKS ONLINE AND, UH, HERE IN PERSON.
SO LET'S GO BACK ON THE RECORD.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS CASE Z 2 23 2 11.
[03:45:01]
FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT.DISTRICT NUMBER 10 76 SOUTH OF RILEY ROAD, WEST OF HAYMARKET ROAD, NORTH OF LYNDON B JOHNSON FREEWAY AND EAST OF POWDER ROAD.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STATUS.
3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS.
AND I'M HERE, UH, AS APPLICANT ON THIS REQUEST AT Z 2 2 3, 2, 2, 1.
UM, IT'S NOT FAR FROM WHERE WE JUST LAST SPOKE.
IT'S IN, UH, LIKE, HEY, MARKER.
IN, UH, I 20, UM, SEVERAL OF YOU THAT WERE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION A YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF AGO, SAW THIS CASE.
UH, THE INTERESTING THING IS THAT WE'RE COMING BACK, UM, BECAUSE ORIGINALLY WE HAD THIS APPROVED SINCE IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH A CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
AND, UH, THEN THE, THE PLAT WAS GONNA SERVICE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
WELL, IT TURNS OUT THAT WE COULD NOT TAKE ACCESS TO, UH, HAY MARKET, UH, ON THE EAST SIDE HERE DUE TO AN EASEMENT ISSUE.
WE COULDN'T GET OUR NEIGHBOR TO AGREE TO A GRANITE, AN EASEMENT.
SO WE HAD TO, WE HAD TO CUT OFF THAT ACCESS POINT.
FIRE DEPARTMENT REQUIRES TWO ACCESS POINTS, AND WE'VE ALREADY PROMISED THE NEIGHBORS DURING SEVERAL NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS THAT COMMISSIONER BLAIR HOSTED NOT TO TAKE ANY VEHICULAR ACCESS OFF OF PRATER.
SO THIS SHOWS THE, THE, THE PREVIOUS PLAN WHERE WE HAD ONE ACCESS POINT TO RILEY, ONE ACCESS POINT TO HAYMARKET.
TURNS OUT WE CAN'T DO THE ACCESS POINT TO HAYMARKET.
AND THE QUIRK IN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARE, YOU CAN'T DO A MINOR AMENDMENT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
SO WE FILED A, UH, A REZONING TO, TO CHANGE THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN TO THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN SINCE WE'VE ALREADY DONE A PRELIMINARY PLATT.
AND THAT'S HOW THIS WHOLE ISSUE CAME UP.
AND THEN DURING THE PRELIMINARY PLATT PROCESS, I MEAN, DURING THE REZONING PROCESS, WHICH WE THOUGHT WE WERE JUST CHANGING THE PLAN, IT TURNS OUT STAFF HAD SOME OTHER IDEAS.
AND THAT'S WHERE THIS WHOLE ISSUE WITH, UH, DETENTION CAME UP.
ORIGINALLY IN OUR, OUR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, WE SAID THE DETENTION AREAS COULD COUNT TOWARDS OPEN SPACE.
STAFF DOES NOT LIKE THAT IDEA.
UM, AND SO WHAT WE HAVE AGREED TO DO, AND I'D LIKE TO FORMALLY ENTER THIS INTO THE RECORD, WE WOULD RATHER TAKE THE DETENTION AND MAKE IT A RETENTION.
SO DETENTION MEANS IT'S A DITCH WHERE WHEN, WHEN IT RAINS, IT HOLDS WATER AND THEN THE WATER GOES AWAY, UH, YOU KNOW, BACK INTO THE SY CITY SYSTEM.
SO MOST OF THE TIME IT'S DRY, BUT THEN, UH, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE RAIN COMES, IT SERVES THE PURPOSE OF DETAINING THE WATER.
THOSE HAVE FENCES AROUND THEM.
I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY STAFF DOESN'T WANT TO HAVE COUNT THAT AS OPEN SPACE.
A RETENTION POND ON THE OTHER, UH, HAND RETAINS WATER, SO THERE'S ALWAYS WATER IN IT.
IT'LL HAVE A A FOUNTAIN TO, TO AERATE IT, IT WILL HAVE A TRAIL AROUND IT.
WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT COUNT AS OPEN SPACE.
SO OUR, I'M ASKING THAT OUR APPLICATION BE REVISED TO HAVE THAT SECTION WHERE IT SAID THAT WE WANT TO HAVE A DETENTION POND ACCOUNT TO SAY RETENTION ONLY.
AND THE RETENTION IS BASED ON THE DEFINITION, THE CITY CODE FOR RETENTION.
AND I GOT IT ALL DONE IN THREE MINUTES.
UH, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT.
UH, BACK TO THE RETENTION DETENTION.
SO ARE RETENTION PONDS NOW NOT CONSIDERED INFRASTRUCTURE THE WAY DETENTION, I MEAN, AM I SAYING IT RIGHT? YEAH.
'CAUSE THEY WERE SAYING DETENTION PONDS COULD NOT BE, UM, OPEN SPACE BECAUSE THEY'RE A STRUCTURE.
THE STRUCTURE'S UNDERGROUND, BUT IT'S, IT'S INFRASTRUCTURE.
IS SO RETENTION IS NOT, IT'S STILL INFRASTRUCTURE IN THAT IT, IT DEALS WITH STORM WATER.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE STAFF DOESN'T CLASSIFY DETENTION PONDS AS OPEN SPACE.
'CAUSE THEY HAVE FENCES AROUND THEM AND YOU CAN SEE IT, BUT YOU CAN'T TOUCH IT AND THEY WON'T LET YOU BE IN IT.
A RETENTION POND ACTUALLY WILL HAVE WATER IN IT ALL THE TIME.
SO IT'S A, BECOMES AN AMENITY AND YOU CAN WALK AROUND IT AND YOU COULD, IF I WANTED TO PUT FISH IN THERE, I GUESS YOU COULD PUT FISH IN IT.
NO, MY, MY RECOLLECTION OF THE DEFINITION HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WAS NOT VISIBLE, BUT UNDERGROUND.
[03:50:01]
I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS DIFFERENT FOR DETENTION VERSUS RETENTION.SO NORMALLY THE DETENTION PONDS, UM, HAVE STEEP SIDES.
THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THE, THE FENCES AROUND 'EM.
SO CHILDREN DON'T WALK INTO 'EM OR DAVID AND AVERAGE DOESN'T GO DOWN THERE AND PLAY.
I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD TO THAT.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? MR. UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
UH, MR. BALDIN, JUST ONE FOLLOW UP.
SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE REQUEST IS ON OUR, UM, CONDITIONS THAT WERE STRIKING, GROUNDWATER RECHARGE, RECHARGE, OR DETENTION AREA WOULD BE REVISED TO READ RETENTION, RIGHT? TAKE THE WORD DETENTION OUT OF THERE.
AND THEN IS, WOULD THAT ALSO THEN BE SUBJECT TO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHERE OPEN SPACE IS INDICATED? UM, WOULD YOU NEED TO, I GUESS WE'D HAVE TO REVISE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
WELL, THERE, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN JUST SAYS OPEN SPACE, UH, WHERE OUR DETENTION IS.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO REVISE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BECAUSE IT'S STILL COVERED UNDER THIS DEFINITION.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
MR. BALDWIN DOES HAVING THE ONLY, UH, ENTRANCE ENTRANCES TO THIS DEVELOPMENT IN A FAIRLY NARROW AREA CREATE ANY SAFETY TRAFFIC OR ANY, ANY HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS? WE'VE WORKED CAREFULLY WITH THE, THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.
CLEARLY THAT WOULD NOT BE THEIR FIRST CHOICE.
BUT GIVEN THE CONSTRAINTS BOTH POLITICAL WITH THE GREATER ROAD SIDE WHERE, UH, WE PROMISED THE NEIGHBORS, WE WOULD NOT TAKE ANY ACCESS THERE.
AND THEN ON THE HAY MARKET SIDE, WE JUST HAVE A VERY LITTLE, UH, PLACE WHERE IT TOUCHES AND THE TECHNICAL REASONS, WE CAN'T ACCESS THAT BECAUSE OF THE EASEMENT ISSUE.
IT'S THE ONLY PLACE WE CAN DO IT.
SO, UH, WE WORKED WITH STAFF TO COME UP, UH, WITH A WAY THAT THAT DOES WORK.
AND IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER HERE, IS THERE A SCHOOL? THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO SCHOOLS HERE.
YEAH, THERE'S A, A PRIVATE SCHOOL JUST NORTH OF US.
AND, UM, AND THEN A, A PUBLIC SCHOOL JUST DOWN THE STREET FROM THAT.
SO WE HAVE TWO SCHOOLS IN THAT AREA.
AND, AND SO THE TRAFFIC FLOW PATTERNS AROUND THOSE SCHOOLS DURING DROP OFF AND PICK UP ARE NOT GONNA CREATE, OR, OR PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT OF THE SUBDIVISION WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH THE TRAFFIC FLOW AROUND THE SCHOOLS.
WE HAD TO UPDATE OUR TRANSPORTATION, WELL, NOT OUR, UH, T I A TO ADDRESS THIS MM-HMM.
AND THAT WAS REVIEWED, UH, BY THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AND THEY SAID IT WOULD WORK.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR, UM, MR. BALDWIN? ANYONE ONLINE? IT'S A LITTLE BIT HARD TO SEE Y'ALL.
HERE, SEE HEAD SHAKING QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, YOUR MOTION.
AND THIS IS MY LAST ONE FOR THE DAY IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH TWO 11.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE APPROVE SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS WITH THE CHANGE OF RETENTION DETENTION TO READ JUST RETENTION POND.
YOU ALREADY HAVE A SECOND? OH, I DID.
YEAH, WE HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
WHY NOT? SO JUST TO CLARIFY, SO IF WE HAVE A RETENTION POND THAT CAN COUNT AS OPEN SPACE, BUT A DETENTION POND CANNOT COUNT AS OPEN SPACE.
THAT, THAT WAS THE INTENT OF CHANGING IT TO HER ATTENTION POND.
IT APPEARS IN ARTICLE EIGHT, THERE IS NO DEFINITION OF A RETENTION AREA, ONLY A DETENTION AREA.
SO I'M NOT SURE HOW STAFF WOULD INTERPRET THAT.
I WOULD DEFER TO, UM, DEFER TO THEM.
DANIEL'S SO SICK OF ME, YOU GUYS.
SO I'VE, I'VE BEEN SPEAKING WITH, UM, MR. IRWIN BACK HERE.
UM, HE'S NOT AWARE OF, UH, WHETHER RETENTION POND WOULD BE CONSIDERED OPEN SPACE AT PERMITTING.
UM, AND AS DANIEL SAID, THERE'S NOT REALLY A DEFINITION FOR A RETENTION POND IN, UH, ARTICLE EIGHT.
UM, HOWEVER, I WAS JUST MESSAGING WITH MR. NAVAREZ, UH, AND HE INFORMED ME THAT A RETENTION POND COULD BE CONSIDERED OPEN SPACE AT PERMITTING AS LONG AS THE PD SAYS IT CAN BE.
WHICH, SO YES, IF THAT'S INCLUDED,
[03:55:01]
UM, IN THE OPEN SPACE SECTION OF THE PD REVISIONS, UM, IT WILL BE.UM, I ALSO WANTED TO CLARIFY, UH, HOW THE COMMISSION FELT ABOUT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO STRIKE GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AS COUNTING TOWARDS OPEN SPACE.
UM, THAT'S SOME OTHER LANGUAGE THAT'S KIND OF ALONG THOSE LINES.
AND I'M GETTING A NOD FROM MR. BALDWIN THAT HE'S OKAY WITH THAT.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, IF I MAY ASK, SO THIS WOULD BE SECTION ONE 12 UNDER LANDSCAPING ITEMS, OR EXCUSE ME, ONE 14 OPEN SPACE ITEMS A AND ITEMS C WOULD STRIKE GROUNDWATER RE RECHARGE OR DETENTION AREAS ON BOTH SECTIONS AND BE REPLACED WITH RETENTION.
IS THAT CORRECT? DOES THAT ANSWER THE STAFF'S QUESTION? YES.
SO WE'RE JUST STRIKING ALL OF THAT AND CHANGING IT TO RETENTION POND.
ARE WE, WE OKAY ON THE MOTION? MS. GARZA? MS. MS. PINA.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? UH, HOPE I'LL JUST BRIEFLY SAY, I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A LONG JOURNEY AND HOPEFULLY THIS IS THE LAST TIME WE SEE ALL ON THIS ONE.
UM, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR, UM, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
APPROVAL OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED, AND THE CHANGES READ INTO THE RECORD.
SECTION ONE 14 A AND C, REMOVE DETENTION IN SECTIONS ONE 14 A AND C CHANGING TO REMOVE DETENTION AND LEAVE ORDER, RECHARGE AND REMOVE GROUNDWATER RECHARGE, KEEPING RETENTION.
ALRIGHT, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[SUBDIVISION DOCKETS]
THE SUBDIVISION DOCKET DO I SEE, IS THAT MR. RETA ONLINE? YES.GOOD AFTERNOON, VICE CHAIR AND GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
THE, THAT CONSISTS OF FOUR ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER NINE S 2 2 3 DASH 2 48, ITEM NUMBER 10 S 2 2 3 DASH 2 49.
ITEM NUMBER 11 S 2 2 3 DASH 2 51.
AND ITEM NUMBER 12 S 2 2 3 DASH 2 52.
ALL THE CASES HAVE BEEN PRO POSTED FOR A HEARING AT THIS TIME, AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONAL LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
MR. OR MS. RETA, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON ANY OF OUR SUBDIVISION CONSENT DOCKET ITEMS? LEMME JUST DOUBLE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NOT ANYONE ONLINE.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE ONLINE ON ANY OF THE WE? OKAY.
WHY DON'T WE MOVE THEM OVER? WHAT CASE ARE THEY?
ARE WE HAVING ANY LUCK MOVING THE GENTLEMAN OVER? OKAY, MR. WEAVER.
UM, ARE YOU HERE TO SPEAK ON CASE NUMBER 12 S 2 2 3 2 5 2? UH, YES, I AM HERE.
COULD YOU TURN YOUR CAMERA ON? I SURE THOUGHT I HAD IT ON.
[04:00:01]
OKAY.UM, WELL, WELL NOT START VIDEO.
AND YOU'RE THE LISTED AS THE REPRESENTATIVE ON THIS.
ARE YOU JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS? YEAH.
OR DID YOU HAVE A PRESENT? THAT IS CORRECT.
MY NAME IS MARK WEAVER, I'M PROJECT MANAGER FOR, UH, ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING FIRM, HIXSON IN CINCINNATI, OHIO.
AND WE ARE DOING THE DESIGN FOR THE PARTICULAR PROJECT.
AND AGAIN, WELL, I'M JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. WEAVER? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE.
UM, DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE SUBDIVISION CONSENT? A QUESTION FOR STAFF? OH YEAH.
UM, MS. RETA, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT, UH, NUMBER NINE S 2 23 DASH 2 48.
THE STAFF REPORT SAYS THIS IS A COUNTY STORAGE YARD.
HOW IS THAT OPERATING ON R SEVEN FIVE ZONING? BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THAT STORAGE WOULD BE A, A PERMITTED USE.
IS THIS A NON-CONFORMING USE THAT EXISTED BEFORE THE R SEVEN FIVE ZONING? NO, THERE IS AN SS P 1 49, THE COUNCIL APPROVED, UH, FOR COUNTY STORAGE YARD.
SO THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.
BUT HOW WAS AN SS U P GRANTED FOR USE? THAT'S NOT ALLOWED IN THE ZONING, BUT YEAH, I AM LIKE EVENTUALLY IN MARCH 22ND, 2004, S A P 1 49 WAS GRANTED FOR COUNTY STORAGE YARD.
I WAS JUST TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION AS TO HOW THAT WAS GRANTED.
IF AN S U P REQUIRES THAT A SITE, UM, BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES, IT WOULD SEEM TO HAVE TO, UH, BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING.
AND COMMISSIONER OUR SEVEN FIVE DOESN'T ALLOW ANY STORAGE USES.
IF IT'S S U P 1 49, I ASSUME THAT SOUNDS LIKE IT WAS CREATED A LONG TIME AGO BEFORE THE ADVENT OF CHAPTER 51 A.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UH, COMMISSIONER YA? UH, YES.
UH, BUILDING ON THE PREVIOUS, IS THERE, IS IT ALSO POSSIBLE THAT IT IS AN SS U P FOR A GOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTION OTHER THAN LISTED? NO, IT IS NOT.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER CHAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT? UH, YES I DO.
UH, I MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS. NUMBER 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15? NO, 12.
WE'RE JUST, OH, WE'RE JUST DOING 12, JUST THROUGH 12.
UH, I MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS NUMBER 9, 10, 11, AND 12 SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
COMMISSIONER CHAIR, KNOCK FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND.
THE MOTION CARRIES CASE NUMBER 13 AND I BELIEVE THAT COMMISSIONER TREADWAY REQUESTED TO HAVE THIS ONE BRIEFED.
SO IF YOU COULD READ IT IN THE RECORD AND START US OFF WITH YOUR BRIEFING.
UH, SH I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND SHARE MY SCREEN.
ARE YOU ALL, UH, ABLE TO SEE MY SCREEN? YES.
IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT A 53.2125 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT ONE IN C BLOCK D OVER 71 62, COMMON AREAS TWO, THREE AND FOUR IN C BLOCK B OVER 74, 62 COMMON AREAS 16 IN C BLOCK L OVER 74, 63, AND COMMON AREAS 14, 22 AND 23 IN CITY BLOCK D OVER 74 63 TO CREATE, UH, 111 RESIDENTIAL LOTS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 2002 SQUARE FEET TO 3,991 SQUARE FEET.
[04:05:01]
THAT IS 286, UH, 286, 2 8 6 1 4 9 SQUARE FEET.AND TWO COMMON AREAS ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON FOREST LANE WEST OF PARK CENTRAL DRIVE.
SO THIS REQUEST IS IN PD 3 81, UH, SUBDISTRICT, A, C, D AND D ONE.
AND THE PROPOSED LOT AREA IS 53.5125 ACRE.
THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL LOSS AND COMMON AREAS ARE COMMON AREAS E, B, C, D, E AND 16 R AND NON-RESIDENTIAL LOSS ARE IN SUBDISTRICT C.
AND COMMON AREAS TWO R THREE, R FOUR, R 14, R 22 R, AND 23 R.
THEY ARE IN SUBDISTRICT, A, D AND D ONE.
SO, SO HERE IS AN EXHIBIT 3 81.
SO IF YOU SEE THIS IS, UH, I'M JUST TRYING TO, UM, COMPARE.
SO THE ONE WITH THE HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN, THAT'S, THAT'S OUR REQUEST.
AND THIS PORTION IS IN SUBDISTRICT, WHICH IS SHARE THESE WHOLE COMMON AREAS AND EVERYTHING.
THIS PRIVATE STREET AND THOSE COMMON COMMON AREAS ARE IN SUBDISTRICT A, D ONE, AND D.
AND IN SUBDISTRICT C WE HAVE THIS PORTION, THIS THE, THE BIG LOT THAT'S A CO THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, UH, REQUESTED TO CREATE FOR ONE COMMERCIAL LOT.
AND THE REMAINING PORTION WILL BE A RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT ZOOMED IN, UH, VERSION OF THE, THIS IS A KEY MAP.
IT'S NOT TODAY SCALE, BUT THAT'S A KEY MAP.
UH, THOSE ARE IN SUBDISTRICT, C, D, D ONE AND D AND A SUBDISTRICT A AND THOSE ARE, UH, PROPOSED, UH, RESIDENTIAL LAWS.
AND THIS IS PROPOSED COMMERCIAL LOT HERE.
UH, SO THIS REQUEST WAS TO, UH, IS TO CREATE, UH, TAKE ALL OF LOT ONE AND SOME OF THE COMMON AREAS TO CREATE 111 RESIDENTIAL, ONE COMMERCIAL LAWS AND COMMON AREAS.
SO THIS IS THE PREVIOUSLY PLATTED LOT ONES.
SO THEY ARE TAKING ALL OF LOT ONE HERE AND THOSE, UM, OKAY HERE.
SO, SO THAT'S THE PROPO, PREVIOUSLY PATTED LOT.
AND THERE, THIS IS THE PROPOSED PLAT REQUEST.
SO IF YOU SEE HERE, THEY ARE INCLUDING EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING HERE PLUS THESE COMMON AREAS.
THESE COMMON AREAS ARE INCLUDED BECAUSE THE PORTION, THE KIND OF TAIL THAT CONNECTS TO THE FOREST LANE, THAT USED TO BE 44 FEET WIDE.
BUT NOW, BUT NOW IT IS, IF YOU SEE HERE, IT'S A LITTLE BIT WIDER, WHICH IS 77 FEET, THEN IT GOES TO 56 FEET AND THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF WIDEN HERE.
AND SO THAT'S THE REASON THERE IS A LITTLE BIT TAKEOVER FROM THIS COMMON AREA.
AND SO THIS COMMON AREA WAS INVOLVED TOO.
THAT'S THE REASON THE WHOLE, THESE COMMON AREAS ARE INCLUDED IN THE, IN THE REQUEST AND PDS 3 81 SUBDISTRICT C, SEE WHERE THE LA WHERE THEY ARE, UH, GOING TO CREATE RESIDENTIAL LAWS AND COMMERCIAL LAWS.
SO PD 3 81 SUBDISTRICT C ALLOWS FOR ALL RETAIL, LIKE MEDICAL, UM, COMMERCIAL, THOSE, UH, NON-COMMERCIAL USES, I'M SORRY, COMMERCIAL USES.
FOR EXAMPLE, MEDICAL OR SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY LIBRARY, ART GALLERY, HOTEL OFFICE, INSTITUTIONAL WITH EITHER WITHOUT DRIVING, THEATER, RESTAURANT, ALL THOSE ARE ALLOWED.
PLUS IN, UH, IT ALSO ALLOWS FOR A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, RETIREMENT, HOUSING, HANDICAPPED GROUP, DUAL UNITS.
THOSE ARE THE RESIDENTIAL USE THAT'S ALLOWED IN SUBDISTRICT C AND PER SUB-DISTRICT C UH, PD 3 81 SUBDISTRICT C UH, MINIMUM LOT AREA FOR EITHER FOR HANDICAPPED GROUP DRAWING OR SINGLE FAMILY.
IN THIS CASE, THEY'RE TRYING, THEY ARE GOING TO, UH, THE PURPOSE LAND USES SINGLE FAMILY USERS WITH THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT IS 2000 SQUARE FEET.
AND THE PROPOSED LOT SIZE GOES FROM 2002 SQUARE FEET TO 3,991 SQUARE FEET.
AND, UH, AND MINIMUM LOT AREA FOR OTHER, UH, SO THEY'RE NOT DOING, THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY OTHER RESIDENTIAL USE.
AND FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USE, THERE, THERE IS NOT MINIMUM LOT AREA.
THERE IS A DENSITY, A DOLING UNIT DENSITY REQUIREMENT IN THIS PD, UH, 3 81 SUB-DISTRICT C, WHICH IS $9 UNITS PER GROSS ACRE.
AND THEY DO MEET THE MINIMUM, THEY DO MEET THE MINIMUM DUALING UNIT DENSITY REQUIREMENTS.
[04:10:01]
AND THAT'S THE OVERALL, UH, AERIAL VIEW, AERIAL MAPS.SO THIS GONNA BE HERE, THIS IS THE AREA WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL IS GOING.
THERE'S ALREADY EXISTING STRUCTURES.
THIS IS THE TAIL THAT'S CONNECTING TO THE FOREST LANE.
AND THOSE ARE THE COMMON AREA WHICH ARE, WHICH IS INVOLVED BECAUSE OF TAKING AWAY FROM, UH, BECAUSE OF WIDENING OF THIS, UH, PRIVATE STREET.
AND ALSO I WANTED TO ADD IN THIS, UH, AND IN THIS PD, UH, PD, UH, 3 81, THIS IS A PRIVATE STREET THAT'S FRONTING THE MAIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
SO PUBLIC, UH, PRIVATE STREET AND ALLEYS ARE ALLOWED BY ALLOWED USE, UH, IN THIS PD UH, STAFF RECOMMENDED IS RECOMMEND AS APPROVAL.
ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER TREADWAY? JUST A PROCEDURAL QUESTION.
SO SINCE THIS IS NOW BEING BRIEFED, I THINK THE FIRST STEP IS I CAN ASK QUESTIONS, CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS, CORRECT? YES.
BEFORE WE OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC SPEAKERS, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS CLEAR.
THIS WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED.
SO AS THE COMMISSIONER FOR DISTRICT 11, I'M GONNA ASK SOME QUESTIONS.
UM, CAN, CAN YOU PUT BACK UP THE GRAPHIC ON YOUR FOURTH SLIDE? YES.
SO WE HAD A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY.
'CAUSE I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND, UM, HOW THIS WORKED.
IT IS ESSENTIALLY AN APPLICATION TO REPL, AN AREA OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, MM-HMM.
SO, UM, YOU AND I PULLED IT UP AND WE LOOKED AT THE DETAILS IN THAT PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT YESTERDAY, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO DISTRICT C OR SUBDISTRICT C, WHICH IS THE COMMERCIAL AREA, UM, WE REVIEWED THE REQUIREMENTS TO, UM, BASICALLY WHAT THIS PD HAD ENVISIONED WHEN IT WAS FIRST APPROVED BACK IN 1997.
AND I THINK YOU WALKED THROUGH ON A SUBSEQUENT SLIDE, THE PIECES THAT AS THE COMMISSION'S SITTING TODAY, WE ARE REQUIRED TO LOOK AT WITH A RE PLATING REQUEST.
IS THAT CORRECT? RIGHT, MM-HMM.
SO AS A RE PLATTING REQUEST, THIS IS NOT A FULL ZONING REQUEST, THE ZONING'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.
SO IF THE RE PLATTING REQUEST COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS IN THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY FOR SUB-DISTRICT C, THEN THAT IS THE ONLY THING IN FRONT OF THIS COMMISSION TODAY.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO GOING BACK TO THOSE REQUIREMENTS, UH, WHAT YOU AND I DISCUSSED WERE, DOES THE USE FIT THE USE UNDER SUBDISTRICT C, WHICH IT DID IT SUBDISTRICT C IF YOU WANNA PUT UP THE OTHER, UM, SLIDE PERMITS, COMMERCIAL USE AND SINGLE FAMILY, AND THEN THE DENSITY UNIT, THE DWELLING DENSITY UNIT HAS TO BE NINE DWELLING UNITS PER GROSS ACRE.
SINCE THIS AREA IS 19.5 ACRES, UM, DOES THE PROPOSED DENSITY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PD? YES, IT DOES.
UH, SO FOR THE RESIDENTIAL USE, I DO HAVE CALCULATION HERE.
SO FOR THE RESIDENTIAL USE, IT IS 12.84 ACRE, AND FOR COMMERCIAL LOT IT'S 6.56 ACRE.
SO, UH, PER, FOR DWELLING UNIT DENSITY, THEY CAN GO UP TO 115 UNITS.
UH, BUT THEY ARE PROPOSING 111 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, SO THEY ARE UNDER REQUIREMENT.
SO, AND, AND THERE IS NO DENSITY REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMMERCIAL USE, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THEY ARE MEETING THE CURRENT PROPOSAL MEETS THE DWELLING UNIT DENSITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE PD, AND THEN LOOKING AT THE LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS, DO THE, UM, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS IN SUBDISTRICT C? YES, IT DOES BECAUSE,
[04:15:01]
UH, IN SUBDISTRICT C FOR THEY'RE, THEY'RE PROPOSING SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND THE MINIMUM LOSS SIZE IS 2000 SQUARE FEET AND THEY DO MEET THE PROCESS REQUIREMENT.AND IS THERE ANY SORT OF REQUIREMENT THAT THE COMMERCIAL PORTION IS REQUIRED TO MEET UNDER SUBDISTRICT C? THERE IS NOT.
AND THEN I THINK THE LAST REQUIREMENT THAT FOR A PLATTING REQUEST WE ARE REQUIRED TO LOOK AT IS, UM, THE PRIVATE STREET OR ALLEY.
AND IS THAT, UM, PERMITTED OR REQUIRED UNDER THE CURRENT PD? YES, IT DOES.
PRIVATE STREET OR ALLEY IS PERMITTED BY PD, SUBDISTRICT, UH, SUBDISTRICT C, WHICH WE ARE IN SUBDISTRICT C.
AND LEMME PULL THIS P IN ALSO.
SO, SO IN SUBDISTRICT, UH, IN SUB, EVEN IN SUBDISTRICT A BECAUSE OUR WHOLE REQUEST IN SUBDISTRICT, A, C, D ONE, AND D, SO YEAH, IN ALL THOSE DISTRICT, UH, PRIVATE DISTRICT OR ALLEY ARE PERMITTED BY RIDE.
SO THEN MOVING AWAY FROM SUBDISTRICT C UM, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS REALLY CONFUSED ABOUT WAS THIS IS AN APPLICATION TO REPL 53 ACRES, UM, I GUESS THE OPEN SPACE CONSTANT, YOU'VE GOT THE COMMERCIAL AREA OF SUBDISTRICT C YOU'VE GOT THIS PRIVATE STREET, AND THEN IS THE REMAINDER OF THE REQUEST THE OPEN SPACE? THAT'S CORRECT.
WE HAVE, I THINK IN THIS RE OKAY, IN THIS REQUEST ALL TOGETHER WE HAVE 12 COMMON AREAS.
SOME ARE, THOSE ARE EXISTING COMMON AREAS.
AND UH, WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF WE HAVE, UH, NEW COMMON AREAS LIKE ONE, TWO, THERE ARE FIVE, SIX COMMON AREAS WITHIN THE NEW DEVELOPMENT.
AND ARE THE COMMON AREAS BEING REDUCED? CAN YOU EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THE PROPOSAL IS IMPACTING THEM? THE COMMON AREAS IS NOT BEING REDUCED.
I'M LIKE, IT'S BEEN REDUCED BY LITTLE BECAUSE ALL THOSE COMMON AREAS WILL STAY SAME.
ALL THOSE COMMON AREAS ARE STAYING SAME, BUT ONLY THING THE, THE PRIVATE STREET THAT USED TO BE 45 FEET BEFORE, UH, AS PER THE PREVIOUS, SO THAT'S THE PREVIOUS PLANET LOT.
SO THIS, THIS PRIVATE STREET THAT CONNECTS TO THE FIRST LANE THAT USED TO BE 45, UH, 45 FEET WIDE.
BUT NOW SINCE THEY ARE PLATTING, THEY ARE REP PLATTING THESE TO CREATE ONE COMMERCIAL LOT, A RESIDENTIAL LAWS.
NOW THE PAVING AND DRAINING, THEY REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, FOR TWO DAYS' CODE, THEY, THEY SHOULD MEET SOME STREET REQUIREMENT, WHICH IS 56 FEET.
UH, SO HERE, SO AS OF TODAY, THEY NEED TO MEET TWO, TODAY'S RECORD, TWO TODAY'S CODE REQUIREMENTS.
SO IN THE PAVING AND DRAIN, THEY ARE ARE ASKING 50, THEY'RE PROVIDING 56 FEET HERE, A LITTLE BIT WIDE.
AND ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE PER PAVING AND DRAINAGE.
AND THEY ARE MEETING THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THE PRIVATE WAY, WHICH IS IN THE YELLOW IS GOING TO BE WIDENED, WHICH IS TAKING AWAY SOME OF THE OPEN SPACE THAT SURROUNDS IT IN AREA D ONE AND D, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
WHAT ABOUT THE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE GREEN THAT'S GOING TO THE EAST, IS THAT REFLECTING AN EXTENDED RIGHT OF WAY ALONG FOREST LANE? NO, THAT'S A COMMON, YEAH, IT LOOKS VERY, UM, WHERE, UH, THAT'S A COMMON AREA TOO, BECAUSE THIS IS COMMON AREA THREE R I BELIEVE IT'S TOO TINY.
SO THIS IS COMMON AREA THREE R, WHICH GOES ALL THE WAY TO HERE.
AND BECAUSE THIS USED TO BE 45 FEET, NOW IT'S A LITTLE BIT WIDENED.
SO THAT'S HOW THIS COMMON AREA WAS INVOLVED IN THIS REQUEST.
SO THEY HAD TO INCLUDE THIS REQUEST.
I'M, I'M STILL NOT QUITE CLEAR.
SO THE GREEN IS BEING WIDENED ALL ALONG THE BORDER TO FOREST LANE? NO, IT'S STILL GONNA SEEM THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS TAKING OVER LITTLE BIT OF DEDUCTION SINCE THIS PORTION, THIS OPENING USED TO BE 44 FEET, BUT NOW IT'S 77, 75 FEET, I THINK 77 FEET.
SO THAT'S THE REASON IT'S A LITTLE, SOME 30 FEET TAKEN AWAY BY, BY WIDENING THIS PRIVATE STREET.
SO IT'S LITTLE BIT REDUCTION OR ELSE EVERYTHING IS SAME HERE, IT'S SAME, WHATEVER YOU SHOULD BE.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS D ONE WHERE THE PRIVATE DRIVE IS COMING THROUGH.
WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS IN GREEN.
[04:20:01]
OF THAT BEING IMPACTED BY THIS REPL? NO, IT'S STILL GONNA, THIS IS STILL STAYING SAME.IT'S, UH, THE WHATEVER THE WHEAT AND EVERYTHING IS EXACTLY SAME AS THE PREVIOUS COMMON AREA.
I'M, I'M STILL NOT SURE WHY IT'S GOING THROUGH SUBDISTRICT A BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THE REPL WOULD JUST BE ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
NO, BECAUSE THE WHOLE THING FROM, UH, FROM HERE, JUST FOLLOW ME.
SO HERE, FROM STARTING FROM HERE TO ALL THE WAY TO THE HERE UP TO HERE, THAT WAS COMMON AREA THREE.
SO THE WHOLE THING IS ONE COMMON AREA.
IT'S ONE COMMON AREA THAT CROSSES OVER MULTIPLE SUBDISTRICTS? YES.
I CAN'T SEE THE COMMON AREAS LABELED.
MY GLASSES AREN'T QUITE THAT GOOD.
THEN MY LAST QUESTION, YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE UNDER THE ORIGINAL PD, UM, AND IS WITH THIS RE PLATT AND TAKING AWAY SOME OF THE OPEN SPACE TO WIDEN THE SPACE AROUND THIS PRIVATE DRIVE, DOES THIS PLATT STILL COMPLY WITH THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS? YES, IT DOES.
WE DID CALCULATE YES, IT DOES.
I THINK THAT CONCLUDES OUR QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG, I THINK I SEE A VERY SMALL HAND UP ONLINE.
UH, YES, IT IS A VERY SMALL HAND.
UH, MS. RETA, IS ANY PART OF THIS PROPERTY SUBJECT TO SECTION 8.503? AND IF SO, UH, WHERE IS IT LOCATED? UH, ACTUALLY SUBDISTRICT C THIS PORTION IS A MIXED USE.
IT'S ALLOWED FOR ALL COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL.
SO THIS DOES NOT TRIGGER 8.5 OR THREE, BUT THIS PORTION WITH THE COMMON AREA, WHICH IS IN SUBDISTRICT A, WHICH IS ONLY RESTRICTED TO SINGLE FAMILY, NO ANY RETAILS ARE ALLOWED.
SO THAT'S THE REASON THIS, THIS COMMON, THIS PORTION TRIGGER IS AS A RESIDENTIAL REPLIED.
AND THAT'S WHY WE HAD TO NOTIFY AND GO THROUGH THE WHOLE RESIDENCY PLA PROCESS.
SO THE QUESTION WE SHOULD ASK OURSELVES UNDER 8.503 IS, IS THERE A PATTERN TO WHICH THAT PORTION, UH, DOES OR DOES NOT CONFORM? UH, IT DOES NOT CONFORM BECAUSE WE DO HAVE VARIATION IN THE LOT PATTERN.
IF YOU LOOK ALL AROUND THE, TO THIS PORTION TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE REQUEST, THE AERIAL RANGES FROM 5,337 TO 8,193 SQUARE FEET TO THE EAST TO THIS SIDE.
IT LOT AREA RANGES FROM 3000 TO 4,500 SQUARE FEET.
AND TOWARDS THIS PORTION IT RANGES FROM 4,000 TO 14,000 SQUARE FEET.
AND TO THIS PORTION TO, TO THE WASTE OF THE REQUEST, IT RANGES FROM 4,000 TO 8,500 SQUARE FEET.
SO BASICALLY THERE IS A VARIATION.
IF YOU LOOK FOR THE 8.5, THERE IS VARIATION IN THE, I UNDERSTAND THAT'S, THAT'S THE STAFF ANALYSIS AND I MAY WELL AGREE WITH THAT.
BUT MY QUESTION IS, THE QUESTION WE HAVE TO DECIDE IS WHETHER THAT PORTION, NOT THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY, BUT THAT PORTION THAT IS SUBJECT TO 8.503, WHETHER THERE'S A PATTERN AROUND IT AND WHETHER IT CONFORMS OR CONFLICTS WITH THAT PATTERN.
THOSE, THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES.
AND YOU'VE GIVEN US YOUR RECOMMENDED ANSWER.
AM I UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY? THAT'S CORRECT.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UM, JUST MAYBE ONE OR TWO QUICK QUESTIONS FOR MR. MOORE.
UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER TREADWAY REFERENCED A DISCUSSION THAT SHE HAD WITH MS. RETA YESTERDAY.
IT SOUNDS LIKE IN MY LAYMAN'S UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT SHE, YOU KNOW, DID EVERYTHING APPROPRIATELY THERE.
BUT I KNOW WE DO HAVE QUESTIONS COME UP FROM TIME TO TIME WITH RESPECT TO EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS.
COULD YOU JUST GIVE US YOUR READ ON THAT TO MAKE SURE? CERTAINLY, UH, VICE CHAIR RUBIN, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS A PLATT, IT'S C P C IS WEARING, WEARING ITS QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY OR QUASI-JUDICIAL HAT, THEREFORE EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS WOULD APPLY, BUT, UM, COMMISSIONERS CAN REACH OUT TO STAFF TO, UH, GET COPIES OF THE PD.
IN THIS INSTANCE, THE PD ON THE STAFF REPORT, UH, HAD THE WRONG LINK
[04:25:01]
AND I KNOW COMMISSIONER TREADWAY NOTED THAT AND WAS HAVING TROUBLE FINDING THAT.SO SHE CAN REACH OUT TO STAFF TO GET P PDS AND DISCUSS NON MERITORIOUS PARTS OF THE PLANT.
ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALRIGHT, WHY DON'T WE OPEN OUR, OUR PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, DO WE NEED TO READ IT BACK INTO THE RECORD OR ARE WE ALREADY OKAY.
WHY DON'T WE READ ITEM 13 INTO THE RECORD.
ITEM NUMBER 13 S 2 2 3 DASH 2 5 0.
IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT A 53.2125 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT ONE IN CITY BLOCK D OVER 71 62, COMMON AREAS TWO, THREE, AND FOUR IN CITY BLOCK B OVER 74, 62 COMMON AREAS 16 IN CITY BLOCK L OVER 74, 63, AND COMMON AREAS 14, 22 AND 23 IN CITY BLOCK D OVER 74 63 TO CREATE 111 RESIDENTIAL LOTS RENTING IN SIZE FROM 2002 SQUARE FEET TO 3,991 SQUARE FEET, ONE COMMERCIAL LOT, 286,149 SQUARE FEET AND 12 COMMON AREAS ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON FOREST LANE WEST OF PARK CENTRAL DRIVE.
228 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON SEPTEMBER 18TH, 2023.
AND WE HAVE RECEIVED 23 REPLIES IN FAVOR AND 22 REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST FROM WITHIN THE, FROM THE NOTIFICATION LIST.
IN ADDITION, WE HAVE RECEIVED FIVE REPLIES IN OPPOSITION AND FIVE REPLIES IN FAVOR THIS MORNING FROM, AND THOSE WERE ALL FROM THE NOTIFICATION LIST AS WELL.
AND, UH, THE PD LINK COPIED IN THE CASE REPORT CONNECTS TO DIFFERENT PD AND THE CURRENT PD LINK HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO ALL THE COMMISSIONERS AND OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
MS. ESTA, DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 13? WE'LL START OFF WITH SPEAKERS AND SUPPORT.
IS THIS A LITTLE BETTER? GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
WE'RE THE, UH, UH, 70 75 TWIN HILLS AVENUE IN, IN DALLAS.
WE'RE THE LAND PLANNING AND CIVIL ENGINEERING FOLKS BEHIND ALL OF THIS.
THE, UM, THIS MAY BE A LITTLE BIT SIMPLER IN REALITY THAN WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE SCREEN.
AND I'LL, AND I'LL, I'LL HOPE TO EXPLAIN THAT TO YOU AS WE GO THROUGH IT.
UH, I'LL, I'LL, I WILL BE BRIEF, I PROMISE.
THE, UH, FIRST A COUPLE OF, UH, INTRODUCTIONS.
UH, BEHIND ME IS JACK DAWSON WAS ARIAN AMERICAN, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, ALSO LARRY GINSBURG, THE PRESIDENT OF THE H O A THAT COMPLETELY SURROUNDS THE PROPERTY.
UM, BOTH OF THOSE ARE CO-APPLICANT SIGNATURES ON THE APPLICATION AND LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING.
AND THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THAT MEANS THAT THERE'S BEEN A GOOD BIT OF CONVERSATION THAT'S GONE ON ON THIS.
ACTUALLY, IT'S TAKEN TWO YEARS TO GET TO THIS POINT.
SO WHILE IT'S BEEN A LOT OF DRAWING AND YOU SEE THAT ON THE, ON THE SCREEN, UM, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF, A LOT OF CONVERSATION, A LOT OF, A LOT OF GOOD THINGS AS WELL.
ALSO WITH ME TODAY IS JASON CRAFTMAN WITH ION DESIGN.
IF WE GET INTO THE REALLY NITTY GRITTY TECHNICAL, HE CAN MAYBE HELP US THERE, BUT MAYBE WE WON'T.
UM, THE, THE APPLIED ITSELF WAS DEVELOPED, AS I SAID, OVER TWO YEARS WITH NINE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AND, AND INVOLVEMENT WITH THE H O A, UM, AND A LOT OF SUB-MEETINGS AND CONVERSATIONS ON THE SIDE AND SO ON LIKE THAT.
SO THIS THING HAS BEEN, UH, RATHER THOROUGHLY AIRED, UH, A LOT OF IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE WAY TO WHAT YOU NOW SEE.
UM, AND THEN WHILE THE, THE DRAWING WAS BEING DONE, THAT PART OF IT, WE WERE IN CONTACT WITH AND WE'RE WORKING WITH, UM, THE PLATING STAFF OF THE CITY.
AND I WANT TO GIVE THEM A, A CERTAINLY A COMPLIMENT HERE.
THE, UH, THE PLATING STAFF, MOHAMMAD BOARD BAR, I HOPE HE'S LISTENING IN AND, AND HIS STAFF ARE WONDERFUL TO WORK WITH.
BUT IT, IT, IT BEARS BEARS NOTING HERE BECAUSE THIS IS A TWO YEAR PROCESS AND IT'S EASY TO GET WORN OUT DURING THAT PROCESS.
BUT THEY ALWAYS WERE VERY PROFESSIONAL, THEY'RE ALWAYS AVAILABLE AND THEY GAVE SOME GREAT GUIDANCE.
AND THAT'S WHAT BRINGS US HERE TODAY.
SO THE, UH, THE PLATT ITSELF, LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT.
THE PLATT COMPLIES WITH ALL OF THE PLATTING STANDARDS OF THE CITY OF DALLAS.
YOUR STAFF WILL TELL YOU THAT, BUT WE PUT IT IN THERE.
WE TAKE NO EXCEPTIONS AND WE HAVE NO VARIATION VARIANCES OR NO VARIATIONS.
IT'S, IT'S JUST STRAIGHT UP THE WAY IT IS.
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT YOU ALSO PAY A LOT OF ATTENTION TO THE ZONING BECAUSE ONE HAS TO MARRY WITH THE OTHER.
THIS COMPLIES WITH ALL THE STANDARDS OF PD.
UH, I WANNA MAKE SURE I GET IT RIGHT.
UH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE LOT SIZE,
[04:30:01]
THE DIMENSIONS, THE SETBACKS, ALL THE GOOD THINGS THAT, BECAUSE WE END UP AS CIVIL ENGINEERS LATER ON, HAVING TO CARRY THIS THING OUT AND MAKE SURE THAT YOU GET IT CORRECT ON THE FRONT END.THE PROPOSAL ITSELF IS, UH, REALLY 111 LOTS AS DESCRIBED BY STAFF.
IT'S A COMBINATION OF, OF SINGLE FAMILY AND TOWN HALLS, WHICH ARE REALLY SINGLE FAMILY AS WELL THAT IS ALLOWED IN THE PD.
UM, THE EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING.
'CAUSE THIS WAS ALL LIKE ONE LARGE CAMPUS AT ONE POINT, UH, IS GONNA REMAIN.
ONE'S GONNA REMAIN AS THE OFFICE BUILDING, THE EIGHT STORY PIECE.
THE OTHER, UH, PIECE IS A FOUR STORY, UH, USED TO BE THE DATA CENTER FOR E D S.
IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE RECREATED INTO A PARKING DECK.
THAT WAY YOU CAN TAKE THE PARKING THAT'S NOW ALL OVER THE SIDE.
AND SIR, BRING IT TOGETHER THAT, THAT'S YOUR THREE MINUTES.
SO WE'LL BE OUT, HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS, SIR, HAPPY TO ASK YOUR QUESTIONS IN A MOMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF ITEM NUMBER 13? THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY AND FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMISSIONERS AND THE STAFF ON THIS APPLICATION.
MY PROPERTY IS AT 69 11 OAK MANOR DRIVE, DALLAS.
I'M PRESIDENT OF THE LAKE FOREST COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR THIS TRACK.
UM, I'D, I'D LIKE TO, UH, ADDRESS CLAIMS. I THINK YOU, YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM THOSE WHO DO NOT FAVOR THE APPLICATION.
AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS, UH, ESPECIALLY A CLAIM THAT THE, UH, APPROVAL OF THE RESIDENCE DID NOT INCLUDE APPROVAL OF DESIGN ELEMENTS.
UH, YOU'LL HEAR CLAIMS ABOUT, UH, DENSITY, UH, RESIDENTS, UH, WANTED TO BE ASSURED THAT DENSITY WOULD BE, UH, CONSISTENT WITH ZONING.
THE PLAN COMPLIES WITH ZONING.
UM, THERE ARE CLAIMS ABOUT THE ABSENCE OF A TRAFFIC SURVEY.
UH, THERE WAS A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FILED WITH THE COMMISSION IN MAY, 2021 AS PART OF, UH, THE, UH, UH, LANDOWNERS, UH, SINCE WITHDRAWN REZONING REQUESTS, IT WAS AVAILABLE TO ANYBODY, UH, WHO, WHO LOOKED AT THE FILING PACKAGE.
UM, SOME OF THE, UH, COMPLAINANTS COMPLAINT ABOUT, UH, NOT BEING AWARE OF IT, IT WAS IN THE, UH, FILING PACKAGE.
UH, THERE IS NO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED.
YOU'LL HEAR, TO THE CONTRARY, THOSE CLAIMS ARE INACCURATE.
I'D LIKE TO TURN TO THE ODD ARGUMENT THAT THE RESIDENTS DID NOT APPROVE THAT TOWN HOME IN DENSITY ELEMENTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, UH, THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS AND HOW MANY WOULD BE DETACHED AND HOW MANY WOULD BE TOWN HOMES WAS DESCRIBED.
I'M GONNA REFER TO OUR SUBMISSION.
UM, I ASSUME YOU HAVE, UH, A COPY.
I'M, I'M REFERRING TO THE HANDWRITTEN PAGE NUMBERS.
THERE ARE REFERENCES TO THE TOWN HOMES AND PAGES FOUR AND SIX FROM THE OMNIBUS AGREEMENT.
UH, SEE THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS IN THE OVERVIEW ON PAGE NINE.
SEE THE COMPARISON OF ATTRIBUTES OF TOWNHOMES TO THE EXISTING HOMES IN THE PARK ON PAGES 10 AND 11.
PAGE 13 CONTAINS A SITE PLAN CLEARLY SHOWING TOWNHOMES PAGES 14, 15, AND 16 CONTAIN ELEVATIONS OF TOWN HOMES.
AND A DRAFT OF THE PRELIMINARY PLATT APPLICATION IS AN EXHIBIT TO TWO OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT RESIDENTS APPROVED CLOSING.
I'D LIKE TO REITERATE THE ASSOCIATION SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED PLATT APPLICATION AND I'D BE HAPPY TO RESPOND TO ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS AND SUPPORT ON ITEM 13.
HI, I'M JACK DAWSON WITH CENTURION AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT 1800 VALLEY VIEW FARMER'S BRANCH 7 5 2 3 4.
UH, IS, I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO ADD AS LARRY AND, AND BRIAN SAID WE, WE'VE HAD NINE HOMEOWNER MEETINGS, UH, THAT WERE UP TO TWO HOURS LONG.
UH, WE HAD PLENTY OF PEOPLE THERE.
WE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT THEIR CRITIQUES AT THE TIME.
UH, AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN YOUR FINAL PLATT.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR COMMENTS AND THANK YOU FOR Y'ALL'S TIME AND ASK FOR YOUR, YOUR VOTE OF APPROVAL.
ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? ALRIGHT, WE'LL GO TO OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION NOW ON ITEM 13.
[04:35:01]
OKAY.AND THANK YOU FOR GIVING US A VOICE.
UM, I KNOW I MAY BE A LONE SPEAKER HERE TODAY, BUT I DO REPRESENT, UM, MANY PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY, UH, THAT, THAT HAVE SOME VERY SERIOUS CONCERN.
CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? OH, I'M SORRY.
I'M MARCY ARMSTRONG, 73 35 HILL FOREST DRIVE IN DALLAS.
AND I'M A PROFESSOR AT SS M U AND A RESIDENT THAT LIVES MY PROPERTY ADJOINS, UH, THE REPL AREA.
AND I, UM, AM HERE TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION AND TO REPRESENT SEVERAL OTHERS THAT LIVE NEAR ME IN THE PARK, WHICH IS A, A SMALLER AREA WITHIN LAKE FOREST COMMUNITY.
AND, UM, WE SHARE, UH, THREE MAJOR CONCERNS.
FIRST, THE IMPACT OF THE INCREASED DENSITY.
SECOND, THE CONSISTENCY WITH THE STANDARDS OF THE EXISTING LAKE FOREST COMMUNITY.
BY THE WAY, A COMMUNITY THAT WE ALL LOVE.
NO ONE HERE DEBATES THAT WE ALL LOVE THAT WE JUST WANNA PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF THE COMMUNITY AS IT EXISTS.
AND THEN FINALLY, MISREPRESENTATION OF THE 2023 LAKE FOREST, H O A VOTE.
UH, WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT, UM, IT WAS JUST, I MEAN, IT WAS SIMPLE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT IT WAS EVEN INTENTIONAL, BUT IT WAS MISREPRESENTED THAT WE WERE APPROVING A PLAN TO PUT IT IN COMMON LANGUAGE.
UM, THERE WAS A VOTE AND THAT VOTE IN FAIRNESS, IT PASSED WITH 63%, BUT THERE ARE 37% OF US THAT DID NOT VOTE.
AND THAT HAD SERIOUS CONCERNS.
AND BY THE WAY, IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT VOTE, THE PLAN CHANGED.
THERE WERE IMPROVEMENTS WHEN IT WAS MODIFIED, BUT NONETHELESS, HOW CAN YOU COUNT VOTES WHEN A PLAN WAS, YOU KNOW, HOW CAN YOU SAY WE VOTED ON THAT PLAN WHEN IT WAS, UM, THE PLAN WAS CHANGED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE VOTING ABOUT THE INCREASED DENSITY.
WE HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT SWAN LAKE PARK PARKWAY BECAUSE THAT IS NOT ONLY THE ONLY MEANS OF ENTRANCE AND EXIT FROM THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT, IT IS ALSO THE PRIMARY MEANS OF ENTRANCE AND EXIT FOR THE PARK, THE SMALL COMMUNITY THAT I LIVE IN.
AND SO WE ARE PARTICULARLY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT DENSITY.
AND WHILE WE DO APPRECIATE THE, UM, UM, THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY'RE GONNA BE MADE TO SWAN LAKE PARKWAY, WHEN WE LOOK AT 111 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, THAT COULD BE 222, UH, CARS, WHEN WE LOOK AT FULL RENTAL OF THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, AND I KNOW THAT'S THE INTENTION THAT THAT'S FULLY RENTED.
I BELIEVE YOUR, YOUR RULES REQUIRE 478 PARKING SPOTS, UH, A CAR IN EACH ONE OF THOSE.
FOR THOSE OF US THAT HAVE OUR PRIMARY ENTRYWAY THERE, THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IN OTHER PARTS OF OUR COMMUNITY DO NOT USE THAT ENTRYWAY.
SO IT DOES NOT AFFECT THEM AS DIRECTLY.
IN ADDITION, OUR CONCERN WITH THE INCREASED DENSITY IS PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH THE TOWN HOMES, UH, THAT THE, WE, WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO RESIDENTIAL.
WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO COMMERCIAL.
UH, IT'S, IT'S THE DENSITY MA'AM OF THE TOWN HOMES MA AND THE FACT THAT THEY'RE NOT, THAT THEY ARE ATTACHED TOWN HOMES.
INCONSISTENT WITH LAKE FOREST.
UH, BEFORE WE GO TO OUR SPEAKER ONLINE, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE IN PERSON WHO WANTS TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT, UH, MR. MACKLER ARE, IS THAT YOU ON LINE? YES, SIR.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? UH, COULD YOU SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT? HEY, HANG ON.
IS IS THIS BETTER? MUCH BETTER, THANK YOU.
I'M GOING TO ATTEMPT TO SHARE MY DESKTOP.
UH, IT'S THE WEBINAR WINDOW, ISN'T IT? OKAY.
WE CAN SEE SOMETHING, BUT IT'S MOSTLY GRAY.
[04:40:13]
OKAY, HANG ON.ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE THAT? YEP.
UH, GO AHEAD, START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS THE RECORD PLEASE.
HEY, SIX YEARS OF COLLEGE, NOT WASTED.
I LIVE AT 1 2 1 2 3 EDGE STONE ROAD IN LAKE FOREST AND I'M FORMER, UH, H O I PRESIDENT.
I WANT TO THANK THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT MY OBJECTIONS AND THE OBJECTIONS OF OTHER RESIDENTS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND REPL.
ANYBODY KNOW HOW TO ADVANCE THIS THING? THERE WE GO.
A FEW SLIDES TO ILLUSTRATE THE CHARACTER IN FIELD OF LAKE FOREST, WE FEEL IT'S THE PREMIER GATED COMMUNITY IN NORTH DALLAS.
LAKE FOREST IS A LIMITED ACCESS COMMUNITY, 350 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES.
RESIDENTS TAKE IMMENSE PRIDE IN OWNERSHIP AND CULTIVATE BEAUTIFUL INDIVIDUAL GREEN SPACE.
LANDSCAPING HOMES RANGE IN SIZE FROM 3000 SQUARE FEET TO AN AVERAGE OF 10,000.
A MAX DENSITY OF 8.3 UNITS PER ACRES OCCURS IN AN AREA ADJACENT TO TRACK C.
BUT EVEN IN THAT HIGH DENSITY AREA, ALL OUR HOMES HAVE INDIVIDUALLY LANDSCAPED GREEN SPACE.
MOST CITIES DO NOT ALLOW ATTACHED TOWN HOMES GREATER THAN FOUR UNITS WIDE, SUCH AS IS CURRENTLY BEING PROPOSED BY THE DEVELOPER.
HERE ARE TOWN HOMES AND ANOTHER PROJECT BY THE DEVELOPER.
PARKING IS REPORTEDLY FELT TO BE INADEQUATE AND GREEN SPACE LACKING.
THE REPLANTING APPLICATION INCLUDES A COMMON AREA OF GREEN SPACE AND NOT JUST TRACK SEA.
INCLUDED IN THE RE PLATING IS LAKE FOREST COMMON AREA TO WHICH TRACK SEA HAS NO ACCESS.
THE PLAN TO WIDEN SWAN LAKE PARKWAY BY CONVERTING OUR GREEN SPACE INTO CONCRETE PAVEMENT IS AN ADMISSION THAT TRAFFIC WILL INCREASE ON SWAN LAKE PARKWAY.
30% AS MANY UNITS AS ALL OF LEGACY LAKE FORESTS ARE BEING CRAMMED INTO 10% OF THE SURFACE AREA.
AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT AND CONTRARY TO MR. GINSBURG'S CLAIMS, LAKE FOREST RESIDENTS HAVE NEVER BEEN ASKED TO VOTE DIRECTLY ON THIS PROPOSED SITE PLAN OR THE INCLUSION OF H O A LAND DIRECTLY INTO THE RELA.
NO SURVEY OF RESIDENCE HAS BEEN MADE TO UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH OBJECTION THAT READ TO THE UNIMAGINATIVE RO HOUSE STYLE LAYOUT OR THE LOSS OF COMMON AREA.
LAKE FOREST HAS BEEN A SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOME COMMUNITY SINCE ITS INCEPTION.
WE WANNA SEE IT REMAIN THAT WAY.
THE OPPOSITION IS NOT TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, BUT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF TOWN HOMES AND THE RESULTING DENSITY WHEN COMBINED WITH THESE OFFICE TOWERS.
I PROVIDED DETAILED OBJECTIONS IN WRITING.
MR. GINSBURG HAS THEM AS WELL.
THE REPL AS PRESENTED SHOULD BE DENIED AND THE DEVELOPER BE REQUESTED TO SUBMIT A PLAN WITH LESS DENSITY AND MORE GREEN SPACE IN GREATER HARMONY WITH THE LEGACY ENVIRONMENT OF LAKE FOREST.
SO I THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT.
I THANK CA AND THE BOARD OF LAKE FOREST FOR THEIR HARD WORK TO DATE.
AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN COME UP WITH A BETTER PLAN THAT SATISFIES EVERYONE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ALRIGHT, WHY DON'T WE START WITH QUESTIONS FOR THOSE IN SUPPORT.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE SUPPORTERS? UM, YES.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. GINSBURG.
COULD YOU DESCRIBE THE VOTE PROCESS FOR THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND WHAT EXACTLY WAS BEING PRESENTED AND WHAT WAS VOTED UPON? YES.
UM, WE SENT MATERIALS OUT IN EARLY MAY.
THE VOTING PERIOD EXTENDED UNTIL LATE JUNE.
WE CONDUCTED NINE RESIDENT MEETINGS.
UH, UH, A COUPLE OF THE MEETINGS
[04:45:01]
ACTUALLY, UH, EXCEEDED THE CAPACITY OF THE ROOM.WE MADE, UH, UH, ALL DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE.
UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE CCNRS.
WE PROVIDED A COMPARISON TO THE, UH, CCNRS THAT WERE BEING, UH, AMENDED.
UM, AND, UH, COPIES OF THE PRESENTATIONS, THE POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS, UH, WERE POSTED TO THE WEBSITE.
A, UH, VIDEO OF A PRESENTATION WAS ALSO, UH, POSTED TO THE WEBSITE.
UM, THE, UH, COMMENT WAS JUST MADE ABOUT, UH, UH, THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS, UH, WHO OPPOSED IT.
UH, THAT THAT WAS AN ACCURATE NUMBER.
UH, THE ACTUAL, UH, NUMBERS ARE 63.1% VOTED TO APPROVE.
2.6% RESPONDED WITHOUT A VOTE.
UH, THAT LEAVES 26.6% OF RESIDENTS WHO DID NOT VOTE AT ALL.
SO WE GOT CLOSE TO 70% PARTICIPATION, WHICH IS PRETTY GOOD.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE OPEN SPACE IS BEING LOST? BECAUSE OF THE WIDENING OF THE PRIVATE DRIVE? THAT'S A TECHNICAL QUESTION.
I'M DID BRIAN, DID BRIAN ANSWER THAT? YES.
AND BRIAN, WHAT WAS YOUR LAST NAME AGAIN? UM, BRIAN KLEIN.
SO THE PROPOSAL, WHICH IS IN FRONT OF US, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE, THE OPEN SPACE IS, IS GOING AWAY.
THERE'S TWO PARTS TO THE ANSWER TO THAT, AND I, AND I WANT TO GIVE IT TO YOU AS, AS I BEST KNOW IT, THE SINGLE FAMILY AREA WILL HAVE SOME OPEN SPACE INSIDE OF IT.
UH, I THINK IT'S RIGHT, RIGHT AROUND FOUR TENTHS OF AN ACRE.
UH, IN THERE, THE, THE, THE TAIL, AS WE HAVE COMMONLY CALLED IT, IT'S THIS, THIS ROAD THAT GOES OUT TO FOREST LANE.
IT'S, UH, SWAN LAKE DRIVE HAS TO BE RECONSTRUCTED.
AND I WANT TO GET TO YOUR ANSWER, BUT I I, IT HAS TO BE RECONSTRUCTED.
IT DOESN'T EVEN FOLLOW THE EASEMENT THAT IS IN RIGHT NOW.
YOU CAN DRIVE IT, BUT YOU'RE DRIVING A LITTLE BIT HERE AND A LITTLE BIT THERE.
AND YOU'RE, AND THEN, SO IN ORDER TO MEET STANDARDS FOR THE CITY, WE HAD TO GO AHEAD AND, UM, CREATE SOME AREAS WHERE IT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT WIDER.
SOME AREAS WHERE IT ACTUALLY WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT NARROWER, UM, TO, TO GIVE YOU A PRECISE ANSWER.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT AN THE, THE, THE EXACT, UH, AREA IS.
IT'S THE, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE CONVOLUTED THAN THAT.
AND I, AND I WANNA BE HONEST WITH YOU AS WELL, THE LAND UNDER WHICH THE PRESENT ROADWAY THAT YOU DRIVE ON IS OWNED BY THE H O A.
AND SO WHEN WE GO AHEAD AND PUT A PRIVATE ROAD OVER THE TOP OF THAT, AS WE WILL WITH THE NEW ONE, IT WILL SIMPLY BE A PRIVATE CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT.
IT WON'T BE A RIGHT OF WAY, LIKE REGULAR STREETS.
SO IN TERMS OF LAND LOST, THERE WON'T BE ANY LAND LOST.
THERE WILL, IN SOME AREAS, BE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A MEANDER TO THE RIGHT OR MANNER TO THE LEFT.
UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT QUITE GETS TO EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
SO THERE SEEMS TO BE A PERCEPTION THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS TAKING AWAY SOME OF THE OPEN SPACE THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER THE PD 3 81.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO DISCERN MM-HMM.
BUT WHAT I HEAR YOU SAYING IS THE ROAD IS ON LAND BY THE H O A.
SO I'LL GO BACK TO MR. GINSBURG, THE H O A, AS PART OF THIS VOTE, DID THEY APPROVE WHATEVER CHANGES TO THE PRIVATE ROAD? YES.
THE, UH, THE COURSE OF THE PRIVATE ROAD, UH, WAS INCLUDED IN TWO DIFFERENT EXHIBITS, UH, EXHIBITS TO TWO DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS.
SO, UH, UH, I, I, I CANNOT, UH, TECHNICALLY ADDRESS THE LOSS OF COMMON AREA.
I, I THINK IT IS MINIMAL, BECAUSE I'VE ACTUALLY, ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT CAME UP WAS, UH, WHETHER ANY OF OUR LEGACY TREES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF SWAN LAKE PARKWAY WOULD BE ENDANGERED.
AND I ACTUALLY GOT OUT THERE WITH A, WITH A TAPE MEASURE TO ASSURE THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE THE CASE.
UH, I THINK TECHNICALLY THERE MAY BE A MINIMAL LOSS OF, UH, UH, OF, OF LAND.
UH, THERE WILL BE SOME COMMON AREA LOST TO A SIDEWALK THAT'S GOING TO BE INSTALLED BY, UH, UH, CENTURIAN AMERICAN.
UH, WE HAVE A SAFETY ISSUE ON SWAN LAKE PARKWAY BECAUSE THERE'S NO SIDEWALK, AND OUR STAFF AND, AND OUR
[04:50:01]
RESIDENTS WILL WALK IN THE STREET.SO THERE WILL BE, UH, I SUPPOSE SOME COMMON AREA LOSS TO THE SIDEWALK.
AND THEN ONE LAST QUESTION IN THE DISCUSSIONS WHERE THE H O A APPROVED THE CHANGES TO THE C C R, WHATEVER YOU REFERRED TO EARLIER, WERE THERE SPECIFIC DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE FACT THAT TOWN HOMES WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THIS NEW RESIDENTIAL REPL? YES.
THERE, AS, AS, AS, AS I UH, MENTIONED, UH, THERE WERE ELEVATIONS OF THE TOWN HOMES.
UM, UH, PREVIOUS SPEAKERS SMOKE LIVES IN THE PARK.
WE COMPARED THE, UH, UH, DIMENSIONS OF, UH, TOWN HOMES TO THE DIMENSIONS OF HOMES IN THE PARK.
UM, UH, TO, TO SAY THAT, THAT, THAT THE DESIGN CONCEPT WAS NOT APPROVED WHEN WE HAD ACTUAL ELEVATIONS.
AND THE PAPERS TALKED ABOUT TOWN HOMES TALKED ABOUT THE SPLIT BETWEEN DETACHED HOMES, DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AND TOWN HOMES.
UH, IS, IS IS FRANKLY A LITTLE BIT DISINGENUOUS.
I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS.
MEMBERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THOSE IN SUPPORT? I DON'T THINK I'VE SEEN ANYONE ONLINE.
QUESTIONS FOR, UH, THOSE SPEAKING OPPOSITION.
COMMISSIONER TWAY? UM, EXCUSE ME.
THIS IS A TIME FOR QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSION.
IS SOMEBODY ON, OR DO WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER ONLINE TALKING? I, I THINK IT WAS THE, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION ONLINE.
SO GO AHEAD WITH YOUR QUESTIONS.
MR. UM, I THINK HE'S TRYING TO STOP SHARING HIS SCREEN.
OH, WE CAN STILL SEE HIS PRESENTATION.
SO, UM, MY QUESTION IS FIRST FOR MS. ARMSTRONG.
HE MAY NOT KNOW HOW, SIR, I THINK IF YOU HIT THE, THE RED X AT THE BOTTOM.
AND THEN DOWN TO THE RIGHT, THE RED, MR. VICE CHAIR.
I THINK IT WAS THE RED BUTTON.
OKAY, MR. ARMSTRONG, THANK YOU.
UM, ARE YOU A MEMBER OF THE H O A? YES.
DID YOU PARTICIPATE IN ANY OF THESE MEETINGS? I DID.
BUT YOU'RE AWARE THAT MEETINGS WERE HELD? OH, YEAH.
I, I DON'T DISPUTE ANY OF THE FACT, I MEAN, THOSE MEETINGS WERE HELD AND THEY WERE ATTENDED, AND, UH, PEOPLE VOICED CONCERNS THAT ARE THE SAME CONCERNS WE HAVE NOW.
I THINK THE ONLY THING I DISAGREE IS WE WERE TOLD OVER AND OVER, YOU'RE VOTING ON THE CCNRS.
YOU'RE, WE WERE TOLD, WE SPECIFICALLY ASK AND WE'RE TOLD, YOU'RE NOT VOTING ON THE PLAN.
YOU'RE VOTING ON THE CC AND R CHANGES THAT I WAS STILL OPPOSED, AS WERE MANY OTHERS.
WE WERE ALSO GUIDED THAT A NO VOTE OR OR NOT VOTING AT ALL WAS EQUIVALENT TO A NO VOTE.
AND SO THERE WERE A GROUP OF US, A LARGE GROUP OF US THAT DECIDED NOT TO VOTE AT ALL THAT IT WAS A NO VOTE.
BUT ANYWAY, BUT IN FAIRNESS, UM, I DO NOT DISPUTE WHAT WAS PRESENTED.
WHAT, UH, AND, AND BY THE WAY, MR. GINSBURG HAS DONE WONDERFUL THINGS FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
SO I'M JUST, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT SO MANY OF US FEEL LIKE WE HAD NO IDEA WE WERE VOTING FOR OR AGAINST A PLAN.
WE WERE VOTING TO CHANGE CCNRS, WHICH WERE FAIRLY COMPLEX FOR, YOU KNOW, THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER.
I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR PERSPECTIVE, AND I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE, WHEN YOU DIDN'T VOTE, IT DID ACTUALLY COUNT AS A NO VOTE.
NONE OF THOSE WERE COUNTED IN FAVOR.
SO EXACTLY WHAT YOU WERE TOLD THERE, RIGHT, IS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED.
UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, CLEARLY THERE WERE QUITE A FEW MEETINGS, THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF COMMUNICATION.
THIS IS AN UNUSUAL PLATTING CASE, AND THAT WE RARELY GET THIS NUMBER OF RESPONSES.
UM, IT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN A VERY THOROUGH PROCESS, AND I UNDERSTAND EVERYONE MAY NOT AGREE WITH THE OUTCOME.
BUT IT SEEMS DIFFICULT TO FAULT THE PROCESS HERE.
COMMISSIONER TREVOR, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS SPEAKER? NO, I'M, I'M JUST, I GUESS MY, IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, LET'S SAVE THEM UNTIL A MOTION IS MADE AND WE GET TO DISCUSSION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION?
[04:55:01]
YES.CAN I ASK A SPEAKER, THE SPEAKER, IS HE STILL LINE, OR DID WE LOSE HIM? IS MR. MACKLER STILL ON THE LINE? DOESN'T THAT HE IS? ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? QUESTIONS FOR CITY STAFF? JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION.
UNLESS COMMISSIONER TREADWAY HAS ANY, I'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT A VOTE ON AMENDMENTS TO CC AND RS.
UM, DOES THAT HAVE ANY BEARING ON OUR ANALYSIS OF THE PLATT APPLICATION? IT, IT DOES NOT.
THIS IS JUST A PLATT WHERE IT IS A MINISTERIAL ACT, AS YOU KNOW.
THEREFORE, THIS BODY HAS NO DISCRETION.
IT MUST APPROVE THE PLATT IF IT CONFORMS WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING AND THE, THE RELEVANT LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? UM, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO, I WAS STRETCHING.
I THINK A LOT OF 'EM HAS BEEN STRETCHING AROUND THE HORSESHOE
UM, I DO, I DO YOU WANT ME TO MAKE COMMENTS FIRST OR THE MOTION? NO, MOTION FIRST.
IN CASE NUMBER S 2 2 3 DASH TWO 50, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THIS ITEM, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HOUSE WRIGHT, FOR YOUR SECOND, UH, YOUR COMMENTS.
W UM, I WILL FOLLOW ON WHAT, UM, VICE CHAIR RUBIN JUST SAID.
UM, THIS IS NOT A ZONING REQUEST.
AND SO PART OF MY QUESTIONING EARLIER WAS JUST TO CONFIRM WHAT EXACTLY IS IN FRONT OF THIS COMMISSION TODAY.
UM, I DO THINK THE CITY HAS DONE A VERY THOROUGH JOB.
I DO THINK THAT THIS REQUEST MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF BOTH THE PD AND, UM, 5 0 3.
AND SO, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THERE IS A LOT OF RESPONSE ON THIS REPL, I THINK, UM, WHEN YOU, WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT, IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY CLEARLY SQUARELY, UH, IN COMPLIANCE WITH, UH, THE REQUIREMENTS.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IS IN FRONT OF US TODAY.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? YEAH, AL ALSO JUST BRIEFLY ADDRESS I I WHOLE OR HARDLY ENDORSE EVERY THING THAT COMMISSIONER TREADWAY JUST SAID.
PLATTING IS A VERY LIMITED TOOL IN, IN A LOT OF WAYS.
YOU KNOW, THE ZONING IS THE WAY PRIMARILY THAT WE CONTROL FOR DENSITY AND DESIGN STANDARDS AND THOSE THINGS.
SOMETIMES SOME MINOR ASPECTS OF PLATTING DO COME INTO PLAY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT LOT SIZE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT I DON'T SEE THOSE IMP THOSE ASPECTS THAT THE, THE PLATTING, UM, ORDINANCE, UM, TOUCHED IN A WAY TODAY THAT THAT WOULD LEAD ME TO THINK THAT WE HAVE ANY BASIS TO DENY THIS PLATT, IT'S PLATINGS MINISTERIAL.
UM, I'LL BE HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT TO FOLLOW RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
ALRIGHT, WE'RE GOING ON TO OUR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR SIGNS WHICH ARE ON A CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, ARE EITHER OF OUR SPEAKERS WHO ARE SIGNED UP FOR THE SIGNS ONLINE? UH, THEY WORK NOT ANYMORE.
UM, THEN CAN WE GO AHEAD AND READ THE, UH, CONSENT, UM, SIGN AGENDA INTO THE RECORD, PLEASE? GOOD AFTERNOON.
COMMISSIONER JASON KOOL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR.
UH, THE CONSENT DOCKET CONSISTS OF THREE ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER 2 3 0 8 1 1 0 0 1 0.
AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY ANDRE HAM OF SIGNS UP FOR AN 11.2 SQUARE FOOT ILLUMINATED ATTACHED SIGN AT 1517 MAIN STREET ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION, BOTH STAFF AND S S D A C.
ITEM NUMBER 15, AN APPLICATION OR EXCUSE ME, UH, 2 3 0 8 1 4 0 0 1 7.
AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY MELISSA HALLETT OF MELLOW SIGNS FOR A THREE AND A HALF SQUARE FOOT, NON ILLUMINATED, LOWER LEVEL FLAT, FLAT ATTACHED SIGN AT 2019 NORTH LAMAR STREET, SUITE 100
[05:00:01]
ON THE NORTHEAST ELEVATION, BOTH STAFF AND S S D A C.AND ITEM NUMBER 16 CA NUMBER 2 3 0 8 1 4 0 0 1 8.
AND APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY MELISSA HALLETT OF MELLOW SIGNS FOR A THREE SQUARE FOOT NON ILLUMINATED ATTACHED CANOPY SIGN AT 2019 NORTH LAMAR STREET, SUITE 100, ALSO ON THE NORTHEAST ELEVATION, BOTH STAFF.
AND THIS IS D A C RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THE SIGNS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
JUST ONE CLARIFICATION ON CASE NUMBER 14.
THE SIGN, UM, THAT IS INDICATED IS IT CENTERED WITHIN THE OPENING.
IT'S NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT CLEAR WHAT THE INTENT WAS ON THE MOUNTING LOCATION.
GIMME ONE SECOND TO PULL THAT UP.
IT'S THE LAST PAGE OF OUR DOCKET.
I CAN'T GET THE PAGE NUMBER TO COME UP.
THAT'S AN EXISTING SIGN, THE ONE THAT I'M ASKING ABOUT.
AND THE OTHER ONE, CENTERED ARTS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE SIDE FACE SHIP YOUR YELLOW NECK.
UM, THESE ARE MUCH SMALLER SIGNS THAN WE'RE USUALLY ASKED TO APPROVE.
WHAT DISQUALIFIED THESE FOR, UM, CONSIDERATION FOR DIRECT APPROVAL? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
FOR THE ONES IN THE DOWNTOWN SPECIAL PROVISION SIGN DISTRICT, THEY OVERHANG THE RIGHT OF WAY MORE THAN 18 INCHES, UH, FOR THE OTHER TWO IN THE WEST END.
UM, ANY SIGN IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT REQUIRES, UH, YOUR APPROVAL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON SIGNS? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
IN THE MATTERS? 2 3 0 8 1 1 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 8 1 4 0 0 1 7 AND 2 3 0 8 1 4 0 0 1 8.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC RECORD AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UH, FOR APPROVAL.
THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, UM, FOR YOUR MOTION, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
DID WE DO THE MINUTES? WE DID NOT.
MR. COMMISSIONER, Y THIS COULD BE THE LAST TIME FOR PERHAPS THE LAST TIME I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING OF SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2023 AS REVISED.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER YOUNG FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER TREADWAY FOR YOUR SECOND.
UH, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER, OR SORRY, DR.
AUDREA HERE, WHO'S GOING TO READ THE, UM, COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS INTO THE RECORD.
UM, SO WE SEND, UH, WE SEND THE UH, C P C CHAIR MEMO TO THE ENTIRE COMMISSION ON FRIDAY.
I WILL JUST READ THEM INTO THE RECORD SO WE ARE AWARE OF THEM.
AND I, WE WILL ALSO POST THEM ON THE C P C WEBSITE.
SO FOR THE ZONING ORDINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WE HAVE TIPTON COMMISSIONER TIPTON HOUSER AS CHAIR COMMISSIONER.
UH, LORI BLAIR IS VICE CHAIR, UH, VICE CHAIR BRENT RUBIN, AS MEMBER RYAN BARING.
UM, MARK REEVES, ENRIQUE MCGREGOR AND NATHANIEL BARON.
AND WE HAVE ONE VACANT SPOT FOR THE SUBDIVISION REVIEW COMMITTEE.
WE HAVE COMMISSIONER JOHNNA HAMPTON AS CHAIR COMMISSIONER BRANDI TREADWAY AS VICE VICE-CHAIR COMMISSIONER LAURIE BLAIR, COMMISSIONER DEBORAH CARPENTER AND COMMISSIONER CHRISTIAN CHERNOCK, UH, FOR THE SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
UM, I DON'T THINK WE HAD ANY CHANGES.
WE HAVE COOKIE PETER AS CHAIR.
[05:05:01]
DAMAS, VICE CHAIR, UM, COMMISSIONER ALIYAH HUCK, UH, TODD HARDIN, MURPHY WEBSTER.AND WE HAVE TWO VACANCIES FOR THE ARTS DISTRICT SIGNED ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
WE HAVE, UM, AGAIN, NO CHANGES IF I RECALL CORRECTLY.
COOKIE PETER AS CHAIR, TERA WI BONNER, VICE CHAIR TODD HARDIN, DAVID ALLEN DAMES, UH, SCOTT POTTER.
AND THEN WE HAVE TWO ALTERNATES.
COMMISSIONER TABITA WHEELER, REAGAN, AND MURPHY WEBSTER.
FOR THE THOROUGHFARE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER MELISSA KINGS AS CHAIR COMMISSIONER DARRELL HARBERT AS VICE CHAIR COMMISSIONER LARRY HALL, COMMISSIONER AL ALIA, HUCK COMMISSIONER TABITHA WHEELER, REGAN, UM, JEREMY MCCANN, TOM GRANT, AND JOHN DUM.
I WILL MAKE A COMMENT THAT THE VERSION I SENT YOU WAS, UM, HAD A MISSPELLING.
SO WE CHANGED, WE CORRECTED THAT FOR THE RULES COMMITTEE.
WE HAVE COMMISSIONER BRANDY TREADWAY AS CHAIR, UM, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, THE BRAD CARPENTER AS VICE CHAIR, VICE CHAIR RUBIN, AND COMMISSIONER LARRY HALL.
UM, THE C P C LIAISON TO THE C UH, TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REMAINS UNCHANGED WITH COMMISSIONER JOHNNA HAMPTON AND THEN THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE COMMITTEE REMAIN REMAINS UNCHANGED.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I DID.
I I DIDN'T CATCH WHAT, WHAT I WAS ON AGAIN,
UH, WHO I WILL, I THINK YOU'RE IN THE ART DISTRICT SIGN ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
YOU'RE ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN COMMITTEE AND I THINK THAT'S IT.
BUT I WILL SEND IT, I WILL SEND IT TO YOU AGAIN IF YOU DIDN'T RECEIVE IT ON FRIDAY.
UM, CAN I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN? THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND.
IT IS 4:15 PM AND THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION IS ADJOURNED.
COMMISSIONER YOUNG, IF THIS IS IN FACT FAREWELL, FAREWELL, IF NOT, SEE YOU IN A COUPLE WEEKS.