Jan 18, 2024 City Planning Commission

FIRST OFF, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE ON YOUR AGENDA.

IT IS DONNA, I THINK THE MICROPHONE'S NOT ON.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? NO.

DIDN'T HAVE IT POSTED.

NOT YET.

WORKED COURT IS PROPOSED.

THIS IS, UH, MISCELLANEOUS ITEM M 2 34 DASH 0 0 3.

I APOLOGIZE, IT'S NOT LOOKING THROUGH IT.

THE REQUEST IS A MINOR IS FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON PROPERTY ZONED PD NUMBER 10 53, WHICH IS THE ZION LUTHERAN CHURCH IN SCHOOL.

IT'S 7.29 ACRES AND IT'S IN COUNCIL DISTRICT NINE.

IT IS LOCATED NORTH AND EAST OF DOWNTOWN ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SKILLMAN STREET AND EAST LOVER'S LANE.

THE ZONING OR ZONING AND LAND USE AROUND IT IS SINGLE FAMILY, UH, TO THE NORTHEAST SOUTH.

UH, A LITTLE MULTIFAMILY TO THE SOUTHWEST AND MULTIFAMILY TO THE WEST, AN AERIAL VIEW.

AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A PAVED SPORTS GAME COURT.

UH, THERE IS TO BE NO EXTERIOR LIGHTING BEING ADDED AND NEW SCREENING AND HEDGE SCREENING HEDGE AND TREE IS TO BE ADDED, UH, NORTH OF THE PROPOSED GAME COURT, UH, BETWEEN THE, ON THE PROPERTY JUST SOUTH OF THE ALLEY.

THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

CIRCLED IN RED IS WHERE THE, UH, PROPOSED SPORTS COURT IS TO GO.

UM, BEING LOCATED, LET'S SEE, I THINK I'VE GOT IT, UH, IN AN AREA JUST NORTH OF THE PARKING LOT, UH, IN AN, IN A, CURRENTLY IT'S THE EXISTING PLAY FIELDS, UH, AND TO THE LEFT OF THE PLAYGROUND, JUST NORTH OF THE PARKING AREA.

UM, AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE, WHERE THE

[00:05:01]

AND THIS IS THE CURRENT EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

THE AREA CIRCLE IS WHERE THE SPORTS COURT IS PROPOSED, AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.

MS. MORMAN QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, MS. MORMAN.

WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION, UM, ON THE APPLICANT'S SIDE TO ROTATING THE SPORTS COURT TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL, UM, SPACE BETWEEN THE, THE NEW LOCATION AND THE, UM, EXISTING RESIDENCES TO THE PLAN NORTH OF THE SITE? WE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS, UM, AND THEN ULTIMATELY THEY DECIDED TO GO THIS DIRECTION AND I WOULD, UM, SUGGEST THAT YOU MAY WANT TO ASK THAT QUESTION TO THEM DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AND THEN YOU MENTIONED THE NEW SCREENING AND THE HEDGE.

IS THAT A REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFER? UM, NO.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? YES.

COMMISSIONER HALL, UH, MS. MORMAN, YOU KNOW, WE RECEIVED A BIT OF COMMUNITY FEEDBACK, BOTH IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION.

UH, ONE OF THEM SENT A PHOTOGRAPH.

IT LOOKED LIKE MAYBE THE COURT HAD THE CONCRETE PAD HAD ALREADY BEEN POURED.

SO, UH, I BELIEVE THAT INITIALLY THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION, UH, NOT REALIZING THAT THEY NEEDED A, UH, PERMIT TO DO SO.

AND ONCE THEY FOUND OUT THEY DID GO FOR THE PERMIT, WHICH IS AT THE TIME WHEN, UH, PERMITTING SENT THEM TO US FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO SHOW THE, UH, SPORTS COURT.

BUT, BUT THERE IS A PAD OR SOMETHING THERE.

I BELIEVE THAT THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION BUT DID NOT FINISH.

DID NOT FINISH.

BECAUSE THEY WERE SENT TO US FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT RIGHT.

TO THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

UH, THANK YOU MR. CAN STEP.

INCREASE THE HEIGHT THAT DOESN'T APPLY, DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THAT DOESN'T APPLY, OR REDUCE BUILDING SETBACKS THAT DOESN'T APPLY.

I'M STRUGGLING WITH HOW THIS IS A MINOR AMENDMENT.

'CAUSE UNDER OUR STANDARDS, THIS SEEMS LIKE IT'S GONNA ADVERSELY IMPACT THE NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN? SO SURE.

WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS, UM, IT IS, THIS IS A, AN A USE AN ACCESSORY USE INCIDENTAL TO THE MAIN USE OF THE SCHOOL.

AND, UM, IT WAS RELOCATING OR BASICALLY RIGHT NOW THEY PLAY BASKETBALL IN THE NORTH SECTION OF THAT, OF THE PARKING LOT.

AND THEN THEY WERE JUST, THEY WERE INTENDING TO PAVE AN AREA FOR THE SPORTS COURT THAT IS ALREADY EXISTING, UH, PLAY FIELDS.

UH, SO TO JUST GO FROM THE BRAS FIELD TO A PAVED PORT.

AND THE, THE AREA IS ALREADY USED FOR PLAY AND FIELDS, FIELD PLAY, COMMISSIONER SPER, UM, MS. MORMAN, UH, WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS CASE AND I I KNOW THAT, UM, STAFF IS OF THE OPINION THAT THIS IS A, A LEGAL USE WITHIN THE, THE PD.

AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE, THE ONLY BASIS THAT, UH, YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO DETERMINE TO, TO DENY THIS WOULD BE IF IT HAD, UM, A SOMEWHAT ILL-DEFINED ADVERSE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

IS THAT BASICALLY CORRECT.

IF PLANNING COMMISSION WERE TO DECIDE THAT THIS WAS NOT, DID NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOR BEING A MINOR AMENDMENT, THAT WOULD BE, UH, WHAT YOU WOULD DETERMINE THAT YOU WANTED TO DENY IT ON THE BASIS UP.

AND, UM, I DO HAVE, I CAN SHOW YOU THAT CRITERIA.

UH, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, COMMISSIONER, AND TO YOUR POINT, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, IT'S NOT ADVERSE EFFECT.

IT'S ALTERED THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

SO SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT LANGUAGE, BUT THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE STANDARD.

CAN CAN YOU REPEAT? SURE.

SO IT'S, UM, THAT IT, A BASIS TO DENY WOULD BE TO ALTER THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ALTERS THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

SO I DO HAVE IT ABOVE THE, THE CRITERIA ON THIS SLIDE.

SO ALTER THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP, AND, UH, SO IT

[00:10:01]

SO REALLY IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ALTER THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP IS THE, IS THE ONLY CRITERIA ON UPON WHICH IT COULD BE DENIED? THAT'S CORRECT.

NER YES.

CAN I, CAN I ASK THIS QUESTION? I, I, I KNOW THAT, UH, WE HAD A CASE EARLIER THIS YEAR, MAYBE JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, THAT AND INVOLVED A, A PROPERTY IN NORTH DALLAS THAT WAS LOOKING AT PUTTING IN A PICKLEBALL COURT AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS WERE UNHAPPY ABOUT THAT.

AND, UH, SAME BASIC ISSUES APPLIED THE CONCERN ABOUT THE PROXIMITY AND, AND NOISE.

UM, AND SOMEONE REMIND ME OF HOW THAT CASE GOT RESOLVED.

COMMISSIONER IT, I, I, I DON'T SEE THE, THE STANDARD IS THE, WHAT THE STANDARD IS AND SORT OF WHAT CPC DID IN THE PAST WITH OTHER PROPERTIES, I DON'T THINK IS NECESSARILY RELEVANT.

I THINK THE QUESTION FOR THE BODY IS WHETHER OR NOT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, UH, ALTERS THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP.

SO I WOULD, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT THAT AND NOT WHAT CTC CONSIDERED IT OTHER SITES USING, UH, A, A MINOR AMENDMENT IN THE PAST.

WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT ANSWER.

I THINK, UM, UH, MAYBE IF I WERE TO NOT ASK STAFF, BUT ASK IF ANYBODY ELSE AROUND HERE SORT OF REMEMBERS BECAUSE IT WASN'T THERE SOME DIRECTION TO HAVE THE PARTIES MEET AND DISCUSS THIS EVEN AFTER THE CASE WAS DECIDED.

AM AM I REMEMBERING THAT CORRECTLY? I, I, I KNOW WE, I, I'LL, I'LL TRY TO STAY WITHIN THE BOUND.

IF I GO OUT, YOU'D SLAP ME DOWN AGAIN.

BUT, UH, UM, DOES ANYONE RECALL THAT, UM, THAT RESOLUTION OR FEEL, RECALL IT AND FEEL COMFORTABLE DISCUSSING IT WITHOUT GETTING IN TROUBLE WITH, UM, THE STAFF? I GUESS THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NO.

THERE'S THE CPC FOG.

I'M SORRY, I, I DON'T REMEMBER THAT.

JUST DON'T KIND OF BLEND TOGETHER AFTER COUPLE.

YOU'VE, YOU'VE SEEN A FEW CASES BETWEEN NOW AND THEN.

YEAH, IT'S JUST THE, UM, WELL, OKAY.

WELL, UH, THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND, UM, I GUESS WE'LL, UM, WE'LL WAIT FOR THE DISCUSSION TO TAKE PLACE AT THE, UH, END OF, AT THE .

I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.

OH, WHERE ARE YOU GOING, DANIEL? ALTER THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP.

DO YOU HAVE ANY, UM, SUPPORT FOR WHAT THAT MEANS? UM, IN TERMS OF, I, THE, THE PHRASE IS NOT DEFINED IN CHAPTER 51 A, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

WELL, HOW, SO IT COULD BE NOISE, UH, AN INCREASE IN NOISE OR AN INCREASE OF HOURS OF USE.

THOSE COULD ALL ALTER THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP, RIGHT? I, I SUPPOSE, YES.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY,

[4. 24-260 An application requesting relief from the street frontage requirements along Parker Street per the site plan on property zoned Subdistrict 3 within Planned Development District No. 317, the Cedars Area Special Purpose District, located along the west line of Parker Street between Parnell Street and Botham Jean Boulevard. (Part 1 of 2)]

WE'LL KEEP GOING FORWARD.

THANK YOU MR. MOORE.

WE'LL GO TO CASE NUMBER FOUR.

MR. SALU.

GOOD MORNING COMM COMMISSIONERS.

HAPPY NEW YEAR.

UM, LEMME SHARE MY SCREEN.

CAN YOU SEE MY PRESENTATION? YES, WE CAN.

HERE'S ENLARGED AREA REQUESTS.

THIS IS M 2 23 DASH 0 3 6.

UM, IT'S FOR, IT'S A REQUEST FOR A CPC RELIEF TO THE STREET FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS ALONG PARKER STREET DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS, UH, PER SECTION 51 P DASH THREE, 17.12 C, LITTLE C FOUR LITTLE V.

IT'S IN PD THREE 17, SUB AREA THREE.

UM, IT'S AROUND 6.7577 ACRES IS IN COUNCIL DISTRICT NUMBER TWO.

IT IS LOCATED ALONG THE WEST LINE OF PARKER STREET BETWEEN PARNELL AND HAM JEAN BOULEVARD.

HERE'S DETAILS OF THE SECTION THAT I CALLED OUT EARLIER.

IT'S BASICALLY SAYING THAT CPC CAN APPROVE A SITE PLAN AT A PUBLIC HEARING THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR STREET FRONTAGE REGULATIONS.

IF THESE THREE THINGS, UM, APPLY OR IT, YOU KNOW, SO MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT IMPARTIAL DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS, MEANING THE REQUIREMENTS WILL RESULT IN A SUB SUB SUBSTANTIAL HARDSHIP AND, UH, THE RELIEF WILL NOT AFFECT THE SURROUNDING

[00:15:01]

PROPERTY.

AND THEN ALSO, UM, WHATEVER THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, IF, IF FURTHERS THE PURPOSE OF ACTUALLY THE DISTRICT, WHICH IS, UM, TO ENCOURAGE HIGH DENSITY OFFICE LODGING, RETAIL, AND RESIDENTIAL USE ALONG THE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 30 FRONTAGE TO ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT THAT TAKES ADVANTAGE OF THE REGIONAL HIGHWAY, UM, ACCESS AND THE EXCELLENT DOWNTOWN VIEW, WHILE PRESERVING THE VIEW FOR OTHER SUB-DISTRICTS IN THE CEDARS AREA OF SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT.

UM, SO AS OF RIGHT NOW, THE CODE CALLS OUT FOR A MEN MAX.

IT'LL BE A MEN, UH, FIVE FEET AND A MAX OF EIGHT FEET, WHICH MEANS THE STREET FRONTAGE FACADE OF THE BUILDING HAS TO BE WITHIN THAT, BUT 70%.

UM, SO HERE'S A COUPLE OF RESPONSE FROM THE APPLICANT'S SITE RESTRAINTS.

UM, FRONTAL ALONE, PARKER SITE ONLY RUNS 117 POINT 0.47 FEET, UH, DUE TO ADJACENCY TO A DART OFFICE.

AND THEN ALSO FRONT STREET FRONTAL ALONE.

PARKER IS NOT FEASIBLE DUE TO MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE ACCESS AND ALSO THE MAIN INGRESS AND EGRESS ONTO THE PROPERTY.

HERE ARE SOME DETAILS FROM THE APPLICANT CALLING OUT THEIR RESPONSE.

UH, AS FAR AS MEETING THE STANDARDS FOR THE THREE THINGS THAT WERE CALLED OUT IN THE CODE, UM, THE FIRST THING I TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, AS FAR AS THE FIRE ACCESS INGRESS AND EGRESS, IT'S NOT FEASIBLE.

THAT'S WHY THEY CAN'T MEET THE STREET FRONTAGE.

THE SECOND ONE TALKS ABOUT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OF THE DART, UM, STREET FRONTAGE ALONG PARKER WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES DUE TO THE ADJACENCY TO THE BUSY DART RAIL AND ALSO THE SMALL SERVICE OFFICE.

ALSO TRAFFIC ALONG PARKER STREET WILL BE MINIMUM AND WILL SERVE FIRE RESCUE WHEN NEEDED IN THE SMALL DART OFFICE AND ALSO ACCESS TO THE DEVELOPMENT.

AND SO FOR NUMBER THREE, HERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY PUT IN THAT SAID THEY CAN DO TO KIND OF, UM, BEAUTIFY OR RESERVE THE AREAS ALONG CORINTH AND HAM GENE SINCE THEY DON'T HAVE AN INGRESS AND EGRESS GOING ON TO THE PROPERTY ON THOSE STREETS.

SO THE FIRST THING THEY'RE PROPOSING, UM, SO THEY'RE PROPOSING TO RESERVE PEDESTRIAN, PEDESTRIAN WALKABLE EXPERIENCE ALONG HAM GENE AND CORINTH BY NOT INTERRUPTING THE PEDESTRIAN FLOW WITH ANY INGRESS AND EGRESS ONTO THE PROPERTY ON THESE TWO STREETS.

THEY'RE ALSO, UH, PROPOSING TO, UM, ACTUALLY UPDATE THE SIDEWALKS ON BOTTOM JEANS AND CORIN, UM, UP TO CURRENT CODE TO ALLOW FOR SMOOTH WALKABLE JOURNEY FOR THE PEDESTRIANS.

UM, THEY'RE ALSO WANNA CREATE A WELCOMING STREET SCAPE, UH, ALONG BOTTOM GEN COR, UH, BY INCORPORATING LANDSCAPE ALONG BOTH STREET FRONTAGE.

UM, THIS WILL BE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE FROM WHAT THE CODE IS REQUIRE.

AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO ADD SOME BENCHES ON BOTTOM JEANS AND CURRENT.

UM, SO THE TENANT AND ALSO PEOPLE WAITING FOR THE DART WILL BE COMFORTABLE, UH, AND IT'LL BE A CONVENIENCE FOR THEM ALONG THOSE TWO STREETS.

HERE IS THE NUMBERS.

UH, SO HERE'S THE NUMBERS FOR PARKER IS ONLY, AS I SAID EARLIER, 117.7 FEET.

SO WITH THE 70%, 82.22 FEET, SUPPOSED TO BE IN THE MEN MAX.

AND RIGHT NOW THE APPLICANT IS ONLY PROPOSING 34 POINT 10 FEET.

UM, SORRY, I HAD INCHES INSTEAD OF FEET THERE.

AND SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, ONLY 29% OF THE REQUIRED, UH, FACADE IS IN THE MEN MAX.

AND SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A RELIEF OF 41% TO ACTUALLY BRING THEM UP TO CODE AND COMPLIANCE.

SO THEY CAN ONLY HAVE THAT 29% WITHIN THE MINMAX.

HERE IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN WITH THE AREA REQUEST.

HERE'S THE BOTTOM GENE RUNNING HERE.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE MY MOUSE OR NOT.

AND THEN THE AREA REQUEST IS A LOAN.

PARKER.

HERE'S A AREA VIEW WHICH CALLS OUT PARKER.

HERE'S THE BUSY DART STATION AND UP NORTHEAST YOU CAN SEE, UM, WHERE THE PROPERTY IS KIND OF CUT OUT CLOSE TO THE DART STATION.

THERE'S WHERE THE DART OFFICE IS.

AND SO I ALSO HAVE SOME PICTURES OF THE SITE.

SO THIS IS AT BOTTOM, JEAN AND PARKER AT THAT CORNER.

THIS IS AT THE OTHER CON CORNER OF BO PARKER AND PARNELL.

UM, YOU CAN SEE THIS LITTLE METAL BUILDING HERE.

THAT'S THE DART OFFICE, UH, SERVICE OFFICE HERE IS LOOKING WEST DOWN.

BOTTOM JEAN HERE IS LOOKING NORTHEAST DOWN, COR.

UM, AND HERE'S JUST SOME PHOTOS OF THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.

UH, THIS TOP ONE IS SHOWING THE DART STATION, UM, THAT RUNS BEHIND THE PROPERTY.

AND THEN THIS ONE SHOWS THE CORNER OF, UH, PARNELL AND HAM JEAN.

AND SO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN.

[00:20:01]

THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. BLUE QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THANK YOU MS. BLUE.

UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET INTO OUR, UM, WELL, LET'S DO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

UM, WHY DON'T WE TABLE THAT JUST FOR THE MOMENT.

COMMISSIONER WHEELER IS, IS ON HER WAY.

SO LET'S, LET'S SKIP OUR DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND, UH, AGAIN, OUR ZONING

[ZONING CASES – CONSENT (Part 1 of 4)]

CASES.

AND HERE'S WHERE WE ARE WITH THE DOCKET COMMISSIONERS, UM, UH, TO THE SURPRISE OF NO ONE, SOME CASES HAVE COME OFF CONSENT.

UH, ALL D FOUR CASES WILL COME OFF CONSENT.

THERE ARE FIVE OF THEM AND ALL WILL BE HELD TO FEBRUARY 15TH.

ALL OF THEM, THE ALL D FOUR CASES.

YEAH, UH, I'LL GIVE YOU THOSE NUMBERS.

UH, BUT AT THIS POINT, UH, THESE ARE THE CASES THAT HAVE COME OFF.

CONSENT NUMBER 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16.

17, 8, 18, 23 AND 25.

AND OF, OF COURSE, NOT ALL OF THOSE WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT.

SOME OF THOSE, UH, A COUPLE OF US HAVE CONFLICTS.

UH, SOME OF SOME OF THOSE ARE AS OPPOSITION AND SOME OF THEM, UH, THERE WERE SOME, UH, A NEED TO TAKE 'EM OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA TO CORRECT SOME LANGUAGE.

BUT, UM, WE'LL GET TO, UH, ONE AT A TIME.

UH, THE, THE ONES THAT ARE GONNA GET HELD, WE WILL BRIEF, UM, AT A FUTURE DATE.

SO THAT TAKES US TO CASE NUMBER SIX WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT OF FEBRUARY SEVEN 15TH.

SO THAT TAKES US TO CASE

[7. 24-229 An application for an MU-1-D Mixed Use District with a D Liquor Control Overlay on property zoned a CR-D Community Retail District with a D Liquor Control Overlay, on the southeast corner of Prichard Lane and Scyene Road. (Part 1 of 2)]

NUMBER SEVEN.

MR. PEPE, CAN YOU SEE MY PRESENTATION ONLINE? LOOKS LIKE IT.

ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS SIDE.

SO THIS IS Z 2 2 3 2 1 2.

AND THIS IS LOCATED, UH, UH, NEAR BUCKNER ROAD, SOUTH BUCKNER.

AND IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN MU 1D MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTY ZONED A CRD COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PRITCHARD LANE AND SAE ROAD AT 6.49 ACRES.

AND THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO PERMIT HER RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE SITE.

HERE'S THE SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY, AND IT'S GENERALLY UNDEVELOPED.

SO TO THE NORTH THERE'S CEMETERY, THERE'S ANOTHER, UH, PORTION OF THE CEMETERY TO THE EAST, UH, AS WELL AS TO THE EAST.

THERE'S A, UH, RETAIL STRIP WITH A GROCERY STORE, OTHER PERSONAL SERVICE USES.

UM, THERE'S MULTI-FAMILY TO THE SOUTH.

UH, IT BUILT OUT UNDER CR UH, TO THE WEST, THERE'S AN OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL.

AND TO THE NORTHWEST THERE'S A CHURCH.

SO IT IS CURRENTLY THAT CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.

THEY'RE PROPOSING RESIDENTIAL USES, UM, BECAUSE THEY ARE SURROUNDED GENERALLY, UH, BY CR THAT'S, UM, EITHER BUILT OUT OR UNDEVELOPED, UM, BUT COULD EASILY BE DEVELOPED AS COMMERCIAL.

UH, THEY WERE REQUESTING MU TO PERMIT THOSE RESIDENTIAL USES TO, UH, NOT TO FORM THAT APPROPRIATE TRANSITION BETWEEN COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING.

WHEN I GET DOWN TO THE SITE REALLY QUICK, HERE WE ARE ON SINE AND MOVE WEST, FURTHER WEST, TURNING THE CORNER ON PRITCHARD AND LOOKING, IT'S ACTUALLY LOOKING EAST.

UM, YEAH, A LITTLE FARTHER DOWN ON PRITCHARD.

THERE'S THE MULTIFAMILY THAT'S BUILT OUT UNDER THE CR OR THE SOUTH.

THEN TURNING AROUND, LOOKING WEST AT THE OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL TO THE WEST OR

[00:25:01]

THEN TO THE NORTH IS CEMETERY, MORE CEMETERY TO THE NORTHEAST.

AND THEN THAT'S AS YOU RIGHT HEADED TOWARDS BUCKNER BY ABOUT A BLOCK.

YEAH, AND THAT'S, UH, THERE'S MORE CEMETERY ON MY RIGHT HERE.

SO JUST QUICKLY, THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UH, BETWEEN CR AND MU, UM, HAVE SOME SIMILARITY.

UM, BUT THE USES THAT THEY'RE GONNA DO ARE GONNA BE RESIDENTIAL.

UH, HOWEVER, THE MU IS NOT GONNA IMPOSE, UM, CERTAIN ADJACENCY ISSUES ON THE ADJA CR AS WOULD MAYBE A RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

AND HERE'S THAT ADJACENCY THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, JUST TO, TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

THE, UH, THE D DRY OVERLAY, LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY WILL REMAIN IN PLACE.

AND MOVING ON STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, MR. HALL? COMMISSIONER HALL, PLEASE.

UH, DO WE KNOW WHAT TYPE RESIDENTIAL THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT? THEY INITIALLY PROPOSED, UH, TOWNHOME USES, WHICH IS NOT A USE, THAT WOULD BE A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, WHICH WOULD BE ALLOWABLE UNDER THE MU ONE, BUT THEY'D HAVE SOME OPTIONS UNDER NEW ONE AS WELL.

ANY, SO IT COULD, COULD BE SINGLE FAMILY A APART, COULD IT BE APARTMENTS OR ANYTHING LIKE MIXED USE WOULD ALSO ALLOW MULTI-FAMILY? YEAH.

BUT NOT, NOT TOWN HOMES.

WELL, TOWN HOMES ISN'T A USE IS WHY I SAY THAT I'M BEING PARTICULAR, BUT THEY PROPOSED TOWN HOMES.

HOMES.

SO WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS IS MAYBE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED WITH SMALL LOTS, UM, IN A ROW.

THAT'S WHAT WHAT, WHAT NORMAL PEOPLE WILL CALL TOWN HOMES.

WE CALL SINGLE FAMILY IN THE CODE.

YES, MR. PLEASE.

IS THE CEMETERY ACTIVE AND HOW INTRUSIVE IS THE COMMUNITY GOING TO BE ON THE CEMETERY? WELL, THE CEMETERY IS MOSTLY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD.

I THINK THE, UH, THE FACILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CEMETERY ON THE SOUTH SIDE, UM, MIGHT BE SOME OF THE, UH, CREMATORIUM USE KIND OF ON THE SOUTH PART.

SO MAINLY THE CEMETERIES ON THE NORTH PART, AND THEY'RE SEPARATED BY A PRETTY, PRETTY WIDE ROAD.

I CAN'T REMEMBER THE, THE REQUIRED RIGHT OF WAY, BUT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO IMPROVE, UH, THE SOUTH SIDE AND OF THE ROAD TO, UH, BRING IT UP TO STANDARD, UH, AS THEY BUILD OUT.

UM, AND SO THAT'S A PRETTY, PRETTY SIGNIFICANT, UH, DISTANCE CEMETERY.

ALSO ABUTS BUCKNER ON THE EAST SIDE, SO IT'S, IT'S NOT EXACTLY IN A, UM, IN AN ISOLATED OR, OR RURAL AREA OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

SO, UH, COMPARED TO CR YOU MIGHT SEE SOME LOWER INTENSITY OR TRAFFIC USES COMPARED TO WHAT'S BUILT OUT OR COULD BE BUILT OUT UNDER THE CR.

UH, MR. PIPPI, AS, AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE AND UH, I THINK AT ONE POINT THE APPLICANT HAD A, UH, A POTENTIAL SITE PLAN FLOATING AROUND.

WERE YOU AWARE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE A COMMITMENT TO GO BEYOND THE, THE GREEN SPACE REQUIREMENT AND UM, AND SHAVE OFF SEVERAL UNITS TO ADD MORE GREEN SPACE? I WAS NOT AWARE.

SOUNDS GOOD.

OKAY, SIR.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE'LL KEEP GOING TO, UH, CASE

[8. 24-230 An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 2325 for an alcoholic beverage establishment limited to a microbrewery, microdistillery, or winery on property zoned Subarea A within Planned Development District No. 741, on the northeast corner of Olympus Boulevard and Wharf Road. (Part 1 of 2)]

NUMBER EIGHT.

NUMBER EIGHT HAS COME OFF CONSENT AND WILL BE, UH, HEARD INDIVIDUALLY.

IT'S, NO, IT'S HAS COME OFF CONSENT.

MR. ROBERTS? YES.

GOOD MORNING, COMMERS.

CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN.

WONDERFUL.

STILL LEARNING THIS WEBEX.

GIMME ONE MOMENT HERE.

I'LL GET THIS PULLED UP.

WELL, CONNOR IS PULLING UP, I'M GONNA TAKE A MOMENT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT.

UH, CONNOR, ROBERTS AND WILSON KERR ARE, UM, ACTUALLY STAFF AUGMENTATION AND THEY'RE PART OF OUR TEAM.

UM, AND THEY'RE DOING, HELPING US TO BRING UP THE CASE LOAD.

SO YOU WILL SEE THEM PRESENTING AT CPC AND YOU'LL SEE THEIR NAMES, UH, FOR REACHING OUT TO YOU ON CASES.

WONDERFUL.

THANK YOU, ANDREA.

AND CAN EVERYONE SEE MY SCREEN? HOPEFULLY THIS WORKS.

AND LET'S SEE, IS IT IN PRESENTATION MODE OR IS IT STILL IN DISPLAY MODE? IT'S, IT'S NOT IN PRESENTATION MODE.

YOU COULD ZOOM IN A LITTLE.

IT'S MICHAEL.

YEAH, THANKS MICHAEL.

GIMME ONE MOMENT.

APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

[00:30:01]

GO.

HOW ABOUT NOW? BETTER.

AWESOME.

UH, THANK YOU CHAIR.

THANK YOU COMMISSION, UH, FOR HAVING US THIS MORNING.

UH, THIS IS CASE, UH, Z 2 2 3 215.

UH, IT IS AN AMENDMENT TO SEP 2325 ALLOWING FOR THE CONTINUATION AND EXPANSION OF AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE, UH, ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO A MICROBREWERY MICRO DISTILLERY OR WINERY.

UH, IN THIS CASE, IT IS A WINERY.

UH, IT'S LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLYMPUS BOULEVARD AND WHARF ROAD THAT'S IN THE CYPRESS WATERS DISTRICT.

UH, THE EXPANSION IS FROM A 900 AND WHERE 901 SQUARE FOOT, UH, UNIT TO A COMBINED 3,173 SQUARE FOOT UNIT, UH, WITHIN, UH, A BUILDING.

UH, THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING IS, UH, 19,580 SQUARE FEET.

IT IS WITHIN, UH, COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX, UH, SOME ZONING CONTEXT FOR YOU.

IT IS WITHIN SUB AREA A OF PD 7 41.

AGAIN, THAT'S THE CYPRESS WATERS.

UH, THE EXISTING SUP 2325 WAS ADOPTED IN, UH, MARCH OF 2019.

I CAN SEE ITS RELATIONSHIP THERE TO THE REST OF THE CITY, CYPRESS WATERS DISTRICT, UH, FAR NORTHWEST.

AND ON THE RIGHT YOU'LL SEE, UH, THE SITE SPECIFICALLY.

UH, THAT SITE DOES ENCOMPASS THE FULL BUILDING, UH, AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO, UH, CYPRESS BOULEVARD AND MORPH ROAD.

THERE.

UH, YOU'LL SEE ITS RELATIONSHIP TO SURROUNDING LAND USES HERE ON THE AERIAL, UH, THE PRIVATE RECREATION SPACE SOUTHEAST.

UH, AS FAR AS ZONING DISTRICTS, IT'S, UH, ALL WITHIN SUB AREA.

A, UH, THE USE BREAKDOWN, UH, YOU CAN SEE IT'S SURROUNDED ON, ON SEVERAL SIDES BY OFFICE USES, UH, MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTHWEST.

UH, SO RESTAURANT USES TO THE NORTH.

AND AGAIN, THAT, UH, PRIVATE OPEN SPACE OR RECREATION CENTER IS THE WAY THE CODE LISTED, UH, TO THE SOUTHEAST.

UH, DURING OUR SITE VISIT.

UH, THIS IS A VIEW OF THE UNIT, UH, LOOKING TO THE NORTHWEST FROM A PEDESTRIAN PATH.

UH, JUST FURTHER UP THAT PEDESTRIAN PATH.

LOOKING FURTHER SOUTHWEST BACK AT THE UNIT, UH, THIS IS FROM THE, UH, REAR OF THE BUILDING, UH, SOME OFF STREET PARKING LOOKING, UH, TO THE SOUTHEAST AT THE UNIT.

UH, AGAIN, THIS IS A, AN AMENDED SITE PLAN.

SO YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK.

THIS IS THE, UH, EXISTING SITE PLAN.

YOU'LL SEE THE 901 SQUARE FEET HIGHLIGHTED IN RED THERE, UH, ON THE LEFT, AND THEN ZOOMED IN ON THE RIGHT.

FOR CONTEXT, UH, YOU'LL SEE THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN HERE, UH, WITH THAT SAME 901 SQUARE FEET, UH, THE LOWER OF THOSE RED BLOCKS, UH, THEN THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FEET ADDED BY THIS APPLICATION, UH, JUST NORTH OF THAT IN THE SAME BUILDING.

UH, WITH THAT STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL, UH, FOR THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD, UH, WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, UH, FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR PERIODS.

THAT IS SUBJECT TO ADMITTED SITE PLAN AND AMEND CONDITIONS.

UH, AND WITH THAT, UH, CHAIR I HAVE, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS AS I CAN.

QUESTIONS MR. CARPENTER? UH, MR. PEPE? OH, I'M SORRY.

IT'S NOT MR. PEPE'S CASE.

I APOLOGIZE.

UM, AGAIN, MR. MULKEY, I SUPPOSE I'M ASKING THIS QUESTION.

THE ONLY REASON THIS WAS TAKEN OFF CONSENT IS BECAUSE WE HAD TO CHANGE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL TO ACCOMMODATE AN AMENDED SITE PLAN.

IS THERE ANY REASON WHY IT CAN'T STAY ON CONSENT WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AS IN THE DOCKET AND BRIEFED? UH, CAN EVERYONE HEAR ME WITH MY MASK ON? OKAY.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I COULDN'T FIND.

YEAH, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY, DANIEL AND I, UM, AND WE AGREED THAT IT WOULD, UH, ESSENTIALLY BE CLEANER TO TAKE IT OFF CONSENT.

AND, UH, HEAR IT INDIVIDUALLY.

WE'LL BRIEF IT THEN TAKES US TO CA TO CASE NUMBER 10.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE'LL KEEP GOING.

CASE NUMBER NINE.

UH, COMMISSIONERS HAS COME OFF CONSENT AND WE'LL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO MARCH 7TH.

[10. 24-232 An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 1464 for a refuse transfer station on property zoned IM Industrial Manufacturing District, on the south line of California Crossing Road, east of Wildwood Drive. (Part 1 of 2)]

IT'S ALSO COME OFF, CONSENT WILL BE HEARD TODAY.

SO THE LANGUAGE, UH, ALSO SUBJECT TO AMENDED SITE PLAN AND, UH, AMENDED LANDSCAPE PLANNING CONDITIONS.

SO THERE'S JUST A LITTLE WORDING THERE.

COMMISSIONER ONLY REASONS COMING OFF CONSENT.

[00:35:29]

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT, UH, TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1464 FOR A REFUGE TRANSFER STATION ON PROPERTIES ZONED.

IM INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING DISTRICT.

IT'S LOCATED ON THE SOUTHLINE, CALIFORNIA CROSSING ROAD, EAST OF WOOD WOOD DRIVE.

UH, SO SOME OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS, UM, TO THE NORTH IS, IS IT'S AN OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE, INDUSTRIAL INSIDE WAREHOUSE USE, UM, TO THE EAST INDUSTRIAL, UM, INSIDE.

AND THEN TO THE SOUTH IS VEHICLE STORAGE LOT.

AND THEN, UH, TO THE SOUTHWEST, UH, COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING.

UM, SO THE AREA REQUIRES AS WELL WITH THE FERENCE, UH, TRANSFER STATION.

UM, IT DOES RE, UH, RAPID REFUSE TRANSFER STATION REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.

ON APRIL 10TH, 2002, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED HIS UNDER REQUEST FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1464.

UM, AND THEN, UH, FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBLE FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR PERIODS.

THE SEP WAS AUTOMATICALLY RENEWED FOR AN ADDITIONAL 10 YEARS IN 2012.

AND THEN ON AUGUST, UH, 2018, UH, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED AN AMENDMENT TO SUP FOR AN ADDITIONAL 10 YEARS.

AND THEN ON OCTOBER OF 2021, CITY PLAN COMMISSION APPROVED A MINOR AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING SITE PLAN.

AND LASTLY, PLAN.

AND THEN THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO AMEND THE SUP NUMBER 1464 TO ALLOW THE FOLLOWING, ADD PROPOSED BAYLOR UH, BUILDING TO ENABLE MORE EFFICIENT MANAGEMENT OF RECYCLED PRODUCTS.

UM, INCREASE THE EXPANSION OF THE BUILDING ON THE WEST SIDE.

UPDATE THE SUP PLANS TO REFLECT COMPLETED, UH, BUILDING STRUCTURES WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY SHOWN ON SUP PLANS, PROPOSED AND UPDATE OFF AND ONSITE PARKING SPACES AS SUGGESTED FOR BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS.

UH, SINCE, UM, THE DOCKET WAS PUBLISHED, THE APPLICANT IS, UH, NOW REQUESTING A CHANGE TO THE TIME PERIOD OF THE EXISTING SUP.

UH, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO REMOVE CONDITIONS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL THAT ARE REDUNDANT TO THE EXISTING CODE.

SO THESE, THESE ARE SOME OF THE SITE PHOTOS.

AND THEN AROUND THE, THE AREA, AND THIS IS THE EXISTING SITE PLAN, UM, THAT IS CURRENTLY, AND THEN THIS IS NOW THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN OF WHICH THEY ARE AMENDING AND THEN AS WELL AS THE EXISTING LANDSCAPING PLAN.

UM, AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO UPDATING THE, THE LANDSCAPING PLAN TO SHOW THAT THE NEW BUILDINGS AS WELL.

AND THIS IS A PROPOSED ON SKIPPING PLAN.

AND THEN, UM, SO AS I MENTIONED FROM, UH, THE DOCKET BEING PUBLISHED, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED FOR IT, UH, 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT DOES EXPIRE UNTIL 2028.

HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR, SO A 10 YEAR FROM THE PASSAGE OF THE ORDINANCE.

AND THEN, UM, THESE ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE BEING REMOVED.

UM, THE PLANNING OBJECT, PARKING AND LOADING SOLID WASTE STORMWATER ORDINANCE, WHICH ARE REDUNDANT TO THE EXISTING CODE.

AND THEN SITE RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR AN ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED SITE PLAN AND AMENDED LIFESAVING PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. GARZA, AGAIN, COMMISSIONERS THIS, THIS CAME OFF CONSENT JUST FOR THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE OF AMENDED LANDSCAPE PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS.

QUESTIONS MR. HANTON? THANK YOU MS. GARZA.

JUST ONE QUESTION ON THE REMOVE CONDITIONS.

UM, WHILE I UNDERSTAND REMOVING LISTING OF THE NUMBER OF PARKING REQUIRED, BECAUSE THAT'S REDUNDANT IN CODE, BUT IT ALSO STATES THE LOCATION WHERE IT IS REQUIRED ON THE PLAN.

UM, WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION OF THAT MOVING ON THE SITE TO AN AREA THAT MIGHT NOT BE APPROPRIATE OR DESIRABLE? UH, NO.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. GARZA.

COMMERS, UH,

[00:40:01]

LET'S MOVE TO NUMBER

[11. 24-233 An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 2304 for a bar, lounge, or tavern on property zoned Subdistrict 2 within Planned Development District No. 317, the Cedars Area Special Purpose District, on the northeast line of Harwood Street, southeast of Hickory Street. (Part 1 of 2)]

11.

THANK YOU CHAIR AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONS.

SLIDE UP HERE, TRY THAT AGAIN.

CAN ANYONE SEE THAT WE CAN? PERFECT.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? OKAY, THANK YOU MR. ROBERTS.

CHAIR.

UH, THIS IS CASE Z 2 2 3 2 75.

THAT IS A, UH, REQUEST FOR RENEWAL OF SEP NUMBER 2304.

UH, THAT'S ALLOWS FOR A ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, UH, BAR, LOUNGE, OR TAVERN.

IT'S LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 80 FEET SOUTHEAST OF THE CORNER OF SOUTH HARWOOD STREET AND HICKORY STREET.

UH, IT'S APPROXIMATELY A 1700 SQUARE FOOT, UH, UNIT WITHIN A TOTAL 5,075 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING.

AND IT IS WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO.

IT'S SOME ZONING BACKGROUND, 40 YOU, IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED WITHIN SUBDISTRICT TWO, UH, PD THREE 17.

THAT'S THE CS SPECIAL, SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT.

UH, IT HAS A FEW OVERLAYS APPLICABLE INCLUDING THE, UH, DEMOLITION DELAY, THE AIRPORT HEIGHT OVERLAY FOR LOVE FIELD, UH, AS WELL AS THE, UH, DOWNTOWN PERIMETER.

UM, THE ORIGINAL SEP 2304 WAS ADOPTED, UH, IN OCTOBER OF 2020.

I CAN SEE ITS RELATIONSHIP THERE, UH, DENOTED BY THE STAR.

UH, THEN ON THE RIGHT YOU'LL SEE, UH, ITS RELATIONSHIP TO THE BLOCK AROUND IT, INCLUDING, UH, SOUTH HARWOOD HERE.

UH, UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT RELATIONSHIP AGAIN ON THE AERIAL MAP.

IN RELATION TO, UH, THE ZONING, UH, DISTRICTS.

THERE ARE SEVERAL SUBDISTRICTS, UH, TO THE CEDARS, UH, IN THE AREA.

UH, THOSE ARE IN RED FOR REFERENCE.

UH, IN BLUE YOU'LL SEE THE SURROUNDING USES, UM, SOME VACANT, UH, LOTS AND UNITS, UH, NOTED TO THE SOUTH.

UH, SOME MULTIFAMILY ACROSS THE STREET.

UM, SOME LIGHT, UH, INDUSTRIAL ALSO ACROSS, UH, THE WAY SOME, UH, PERSONAL SERVICE USES TO THE NORTH.

AND THEN A, UH, MULTI-TENANT RETAIL BUILDING TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY OVER AN ALLEYWAY.

UH, TAKING A LOOK AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, UM, FROM SOUTH HARWOOD, LOOKING NORTHEAST, UH, LOOKING BACK DOWN SOUTH HARWOOD, UH, TO THE SOUTHWEST, YOU'LL SEE A CLIP OF THAT MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURE, THIS CATTYCORNER.

AND THEN LOOKING UP, UH, SOUTH HARWOOD TO THE NORTHWEST THE UNIT JUST TO THE RIGHT OF THAT.

UH, TAKING A LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, UH, NOTED ON SITE.

UH, AND WITH THAT, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD, UH, SUBJECT TO AMENDING CONDITIONS.

AND WITH THAT, I'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, MR. ROBERTS.

UH, WE'LL MOVE ON TO CASE NUMBER 12.

THAT WILL BE, UH, HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH.

COMING OFF, CONSENT

13 WILL BE HEARD TODAY, BUT IT'S ALSO COMING OFF CONSENT PURCHASE.

ON OAK LAWN AND THEY PROPOSE TO UTILIZE THE EXISTING DRIVE-THROUGH AT A BANK OR SAVINGS AND LOAN OFFICE.

THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z 2 2 3 2 9 7.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A BANK OR A SAVINGS AND LOAN OFFICE WITH A DRIVE THROUGH ON PROPERTIES ZONE GR GENERAL RETAIL SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 1 93, THE OAKLAND SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OAKLAND AVENUE AND AVONDALE AVENUE.

THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP, THIS IS THE AREA MAP AND THE AREA OF REQUEST IS OUTLINED IN BLUE.

THIS IS THE ZONING MAP.

YOU HAVE PERSONAL SERVICE, OFFICE AND RETAIL SURROUNDING THE AREA OF REQUESTS.

IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED PD 1 93, THE GENERAL RETAIL.

UM, THE LOT HAS FURNISHED

[00:45:01]

AND TO ACCOMPLISH THIS, THEY ARE REQUESTING AN SUP.

THE NEXT FEW, UH, PHOTOS WILL BE OF THE SITES, UM, AND SURROUNDING USES.

THIS IS THE INTERSECTION OF AVONDALE AND OAKLAND AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR AN ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR PERIOD, AND IT'S SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.

QUESTIONS, MICHELLE? NO QUESTIONS.

UH, THANK YOU.

MS. BRIDGES.

COMMISSIONER'S CASES 14 AND 15 WILL COME OFF.

CONSENT WILL BE HELD IN OUR ADVISEMENT OF FEBRUARY 15TH.

CASE NUMBER 16 WILL BE HEARD TODAY, BUT HAS COME OFF CONSENT.

MR. CLINT, GOOD MORNING.

A NEW TO YOU, SIR.

GOOD DAY.

HOW'S EVERYONE? GREAT, THANK YOU.

ALRIGHT, THIS IS CASE Z 2 2 3 3 0 3.

IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR THE RENEWAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2 2 7 8 FOR AN EXTENDED HOURS HISTORIC HOUSE MUSEUM MEETING SPACE AND FUNDRAISING ON A PROPERTY ZONE.

TRACK G WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 63, THE SWISS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT WITH HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY ON SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SWISS AND PARK MY STREET.

THIS RENEWAL OF, UH, THE SUP WOULD BE TO ALLOW CONTINUED OPERATION OF THE HISTORIC HOUSE MUSEUM AND IT IS APPROXIMATELY ONE POINT 17 ACRES IN SIZE.

HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP WITH THE SITE.

THIS IS OUR AERIAL ZOOM IN.

HERE'S OUR ZONING MAP WITH THE SURROUNDING USES.

UM, TO THE NORTH WE HAVE SINGLE FAMILY TO THE NORTHEAST, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HISTORIC DISTRICT TO THE EAST, SOUTHEAST.

WE HAVE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY AND PLAN DEVELOPMENT.

NINE NINE.

AND THEN TO THE WEST.

THERE'S ALSO SINGLE FAMILY HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, PD 63.

UH, BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THIS, UH, PROPOSAL.

SO IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED UNDER PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER SIX THREE, AGAIN WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY.

UM, THIS LOT HAS FRONTAGE ON BOTH SWISS AVENUE AND PARK MOD STREET.

UM, HOURS OF OPERATION WOULD BE, UH, BETWEEN 5:00 PM AND 10:00 PM MONDAY THROUGH SUNDAY AT A MAXIMUM TOTAL OF 36 DAYS PER CALENDAR YEAR.

THE APPLICANT PROPOSES NO OTHER CHANGES TO THE LAND USE OR THE SITE PLAN.

AGAIN, IT IS A, UH, SUP RENEWAL.

THE CURRENT SUP EXPIRES, UH, 1 24 OF THIS YEAR AND THEY FILED FOR RENEWAL LAST YEAR, JULY 7TH, UH, FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD.

HERE WE HAVE SOME, UH, SITE VISIT PHOTOS ON PROPERTY.

LOOKING TOWARDS THE, THE SITE HERE, WE'RE ON PROPERTY LOOKING DOWN, UH, SWISS AVENUE.

THIS IS ALSO ON PROPERTY LOOKING, UH, ADJACENT TO THE SITE.

THIS IS ON PROPERTY LOOKING DOWN SWISS AVENUE TO THE WEST HERE.

WE'RE ON THE CORNER OF SWISS AVENUE AND PARK MY STREET LOOKING NORTH NORTHWEST.

UM, AGAIN ON THE CORNER, LOOKING SOUTH ON THE CORNER, LOOKING SOUTH, THIS IS, UH, ADJACENT TO THE SITE TO THE WEST.

THIS IS ON PARK MY STREET.

LOOKING DOWN, UH, THE DRIVEWAY.

[00:50:01]

UH, SO THE BACK ALLEY OF THE SITE.

UM, HERE ARE THE SUP CONDITIONS.

UM, AGAIN, NO OTHER CHANGES.

UM, HERE'S THEIR EXISTING SITE PLAN AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.

LOOKING AT THE SUP CONDITIONS, UNDER THE FIRST CONDITION IS USE, ARE ALL OF THOSE USES DEFINED BY THE CODE, HISTORIC HOUSE, MUSEUM, MEETING, SPACE AND FUNDRAISING? YES.

THOSE USES ARE, UM, DEFINED UNDER THEIR BASE, UH, THE BASE ZONING.

WHAT IS THE BASE ZONING? WHAT, SO THEY ARE UNDER THE, UH, PLAN DEVELOPMENT, UH, NUMBER 63.

WHAT IS THAT? IN LOOKING AT THIS, I WAS TRYING TO FIND IN THE CODE THOSE THREE USES SO I COULD UNDERSTAND THE PARAMETERS AROUND THOSE USES.

FOR INSTANCE, WHAT PART OF THE CODE WOULD I GO TO TO DEFINE WHEN THIS, UM, ESTABLISHMENT CAN BE OPEN? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

I WILL HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT ONE.

I'VE GOT A COUPLE OTHERS I CAN ACTUALLY, UH, JUMP IN ON THAT ONE REAL QUICK.

UM, SO THE USE HISTORIC HOUSE, MUSEUM AND MEETING SPACE IS SORT OF A CUSTOM USE THAT'S DEFINED WITHIN PD NUMBER 63.

SO IT'S SPECIFIC TO JUST THAT PD.

UH, IT'S NOT A STANDARD USE IN CHAPTER 51 A.

AND IS, IS THERE ANYTHING IN THAT DEFINITION THAT DEFINES WHEN THEY CAN OPERATE? I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME LIMITATIONS ON OPERATIONS, BUT, UH, NO, AND I CAN, I CAN JUST READ THAT DEFINITION ALOUD.

UH, HISTORIC HOUSE, MUSEUM AND MEETING SPACE MEANS A FACILITY THAT OFFERS TOURS AND HOST EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AND OFFICIAL MEETINGS OF NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS, EXCEPT FOR THE USE OF THE PROPERTY FOR PORTRAIT PHOTOGRAPHS AND HISTORIC HOUSE, MUSEUM AND MEETING SPACE DOES NOT INCLUDE COMMERCIAL EVENTS OR RENTING THE SPACE FOR A FEE.

UH, AND THERE'S ACTUALLY A SECOND USE RIGHT ABOVE THAT ONE USE 14.1 FOR FUNDRAISING.

UH, THAT MEANS THE ACT OR PROCESS OF GATHERING VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS, BUSINESSES, CHARITABLE FOUNDATIONS, OR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES FOR THE BENEFIT OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.

FOR POLITICAL CAUSES OR CANDIDATES.

UH, EITHER OF THOSE USES, IT DOES NOT MENTION HOURS OF OPERATIONS SPECIFICALLY.

UM, REALLY THE PURPOSE OF THIS SUP ISN'T REALLY FOR EITHER OF THOSE USES.

IT'S FOR IT TO BE AN EXTENDED HOURS USE, MEANING THE SUP IS TO STAY OPEN PAST 5:00 PM A MAXIMUM OF 36 CALENDAR DAYS PER YEAR.

I SEE THAT, BUT WHERE DO I FIND IN THE CODE THE HOURS THEY CAN OPERATE? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, IT IS IN THE USE REGULATIONS FOR AREA G.

THAT'S 51 P 63.1 32.

SO FOR A HISTORIC HOUSE AND MUSEUM AND MEETING SPACE, IT IS BY RIGHT BETWEEN 9:00 AM AND 5:00 PM MONDAY THROUGH SUNDAY BY SUP FROM 5:00 PM UM, LET'S SEE, BY SUP ONLY BETWEEN 5:00 PM AND 9:00 AM MONDAY THROUGH SUNDAY.

AND THEN FOR THE FUNDRAISING, IT IS ALLOWED BY SUP ONLY.

AND SO MY NEXT QUESTION IS LOOKING AT, UM, CONDITION FOUR, THE AFTER HOURS OPERATIONS, HOW DO WE TRACK COMPLIANCE WITH THAT? IS THAT A QUESTION FOR ME, COMMISSIONER? OH, NO, IT COULD BE A QUESTION FOR ANYONE.

ANDREA, DO YOU WANNA TAKE THAT ONE? OKAY, SO NUMBER FOUR.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND MY QUESTION? YEAH, BUT DOESN'T, ISN'T IT LIKE, UH, TRACKED BY THE MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT? WELL, THAT WAS GONNA BE MY NEXT QUESTION.

WHAT GOES IN THE REPORT? YES.

I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE INTENT TO BE TRACKED BY THE MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT.

AND WE REACHED OUT TO COUNCIL MEMBER RIDLEY'S OFFICE.

HE CONFIRMED THAT HE RECEIVES THE MONTHLY REPORTS AND I WILL LEAVE THE APPLICANT TO SAY WHAT'S IN THE REPORT.

I DON'T KNOW IF WE RECEIVED ANY OF THE REPORTS TO SEE WHAT'S IN THAT.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE AT THIS TIME.

RECEIVE ANY COMMUNICATIONS ON THAT, ON WHAT THE CONCERNS WERE? I DID.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HAN, PLEASE, IF I CAN JUST ASK ONE.

MR. LAQUAN, I SAW THAT WE RECEIVED SOME, UM, REPLY FORMS AND OPPOSITION, BUT I DIDN'T SEE THAT THERE WAS ANY STATEMENTS.

DID YOU

[00:55:01]

I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANYTHING IN TERMS OF OPPOSITION.

I ACTUALLY RECEIVED MULTIPLE SUPPORTING.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, COMMISSIONER KING, STAFF FOLLOWER, COMMISSIONER HALL.

UM, DID STAFF RECEIVE ANY OF THE FORMS? BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT THE, UM, NOTIFICATION AREA, IT LOOKS LIKE 90% OF THE PEOPLE WHO RESPONDED IN AN OPPOSITION DID.

USUALLY WE GET THE LITTLE BLUE FORMS WITH PART OF OUR PACKET AND I DIDN'T SEE THAT.

I DON'T KNOW.

LET ME LET, OKAY.

IT MAY I, ISN'T IT THE CASE THAT WE ONLY GET THE COPIES OF THE BALLOTS IF THERE ARE COMMENTS? 'CAUSE IT, THEY DON'T INCLUDE THEM IF IT'S JUST CHECKED IN SUPPORT OR IN OPPOSITION, BUT THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY.

WE JUST GET THE TOTAL .

WE CAN MOVE ON.

THEY CAN GET THAT TO ME OUTTA BREAK OR SOMETHING.

WE DID SEND ALL THE REPLY FORMS THIS MORNING.

IT WAS A LITTLE BIT, UH, A LOT YESTERDAY.

WE SCANNED THEM TOWARDS THE END OF THE DAY AND WE SENT ALL OF THEM TO THE ENTIRE COMMISSION THIS MORNING.

YOU MIGHT CHECK, I THINK THERE WAS AN EMAIL WITH THREE SEPARATE ATTACHMENTS.

MAYBE IT'S IN THERE.

YEAH, I'LL, I'LL LOOK AT THEM.

WILL YOU CONFIRM COMMISSIONER HALL? YEAH.

I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD.

WE, WE DID RECEIVE A LOT OF, UH, COMMUNITY COMMENT IN SUPPORT, BUT NOW, NOW I'M HEARING WE DID RECEIVE COMMENT IN OPPOSITION IS THAT WE RECEIVED SOME PHONE CALLS, UH, OF PEOPLE ASKING HOW TO SUBMIT REPLY FORMS. THEY DIDN'T SAY IN SUPPORT OF OUR OPPOSITION.

I THINK THEY WERE LEANING TOWARDS OPPOSITION, BUT IT ALL COMES DOWN TO THE REPLY FORMS THAT WE RECEIVED AND SCANNED.

UM, LET ME CHECK AND IF YOU CAN CHECK YOUR EMAILS IF YOU HAVE ANY WAY TO OKAY.

TO SEE WHAT WE RECORDED.

I WILL PUT IT FOR THE RECORD.

UM, OUR DEADLINE TO RECEIVE REPLY FORMS FOR CPC IS AT NO THE DAY PRIOR.

UH, THAT'S WHEN WE COUNT.

THEY ENTER THEM INTO THE SYSTEM AND THEN WE SCAN AND SEND IT TO YOU.

HOWEVER, WE TOLD THE PUBLIC, AND I WANT THIS TO BE ON THE RECORD, I WILL SAY IT A FEW TIMES TODAY.

UH, THE PUBLIC HAS A CHANCE TO SEND THOSE LETTERS, THE REPLY FORMS, CONTINUE TO SEND THEM IN.

IF THE CASE IS RECOMMENDED FOR CCB CITY PLAN COMMISSION, WE WILL COUNT ALL OF THEM, INCLUDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION REPLY FORMS. SO I WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT, OKAY, IF I MISS MY DEADLINE FOR CBC AND IT DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THE CBC, UH, TO SEE THE REPLY FORM, THEY WILL SEE IT AT COUNCIL.

CITY COUNCIL IS GONNA SEE IT ANYWAY.

I'LL, I'LL CHECK MY EI DID GET THE EMAIL THIS MORNING.

I JUST, I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT YET.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

COMMISSIONER HALL, JUST JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.

UH, I THINK WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, THE REPLY FORMS THAT ARE MAILED IN, UH, AND THEN SEPARATELY WE'RE, UH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE EMAILS THAT WE RECEIVED.

AND, UH, YOU KNOW, AT THIS POINT, UH, I KNOW I HAVE ONLY RECEIVED EMAILS IN SUPPORT AND ALL THE EMAILS I RECEIVE EITHER WAY, I ALWAYS FORWARD TO MS. YOLANDA FOR, YOU KNOW, MS. FAINA FOR HER TO FORWARD A PLAN COMMISSION.

SO THERE, THERE MAY BE SOME OTHER EMAILS FLOATING AROUND.

UH, BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, UH, THE EMAILS THAT I'VE RECEIVED HAVE ONLY BEEN ON THE ONE SIDE OF SUPPORT.

I DON'T KNOW WHERE THERE MAY BE SOME, UH, BALLOTS IN OPPOSITION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. CLINTON.

COMMISSIONERS NUMBER 17 OFF CONSENT HELD TO FEBRUARY 15TH, NUMBER 18, OFF CONSENT.

UM, WILL GET YOU THE DATE TO WHERE THAT'S GONNA BE HELD.

YES, PLEASE, PLEASE THE COURT PLEASE.

ALL MY APOLOGIES.

I FOUND THAT, UH, AND I'LL MAKE AN EXPLANATION.

SO IF YOU LOOK INTO, I THINK THE, ONE OF THE THREE ATTACHMENTS, UH, YOU'LL SEE THE MAP, UH, FOR THIS CASE.

WE RECEIVED 17 REPLIES IN OPPOSITION AND TWO REPLIES IN FAVOR.

WE DIDN'T SCAN THE BLUE FORMS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THEM.

SO THAT'S WHY YOU WON'T SEE ANY OF THE BLUE FORM SCANNED.

BUT WE RECEIVED, AND YOU WILL SEE THE IN THE PACKETS IS RIGHT THERE, AND IT HAS LIKE AN ASTERISK ON THE ONES THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION.

UH, DO, DO WE KNOW HOW MANY, UH, SUPPORT LETTERS CAME IN BY EMAIL? THE ONES THAT WERE RECORDED VALIDATED BY US? IT'S TWO OF THEM.

OR BY EMAIL?

[01:00:01]

UH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE REPLY FORMS RIGHT NOW.

RIGHT? BUT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT EMAILS.

DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHAT THE TOTAL EMAIL SUPPORT COUNT ENDED UP BEING? THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT.

I NEVER RECEIVED ANYTHING IN OPPOSITION BY EMAIL OR FROM STAFF .

WE DO, JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU WERE ASKING HOW MANY EMAILS AND SUPPORT WE RECEIVE? YES.

DOES ANYBODY KNOW THAT? OKAY.

I DON'T THINK WE, I WOULD SAY THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE BODY.

YEAH, BECAUSE THEY DON'T ALWAYS EMAIL STAFF.

THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO REACH OUT DIRECTLY TO YOU.

UH, I WAS SAYING FROM YOLANDA, THE FORWARDED ONES AT AT LEAST 14.

AT LEAST 14, YEAH, I'VE GOT 14 ABOUT THAT.

YEAH, THAT SOUNDS ABOUT WHAT I, I RECEIVED.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, OR WE'LL KEEP GOING.

CASE NUMBER 19.

UM, SHERIFF, SHE DID, SORRY TO INTERRUPT REAL QUICK.

DID I HEAR YOU SAY, UH, 18 IS GOING TO BE HELD TODAY? YES.

AND WE DON'T KNOW THE DATE YET.

WE DON'T HAVE A DATE YET.

UM, LET'S, LET'S TABLE NUMBER, UH, 19 FOR THE MOMENT, UH, AND GO TO CASE NUMBER 20.

[20. 24-242 An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 2408 for a manufacturing laboratory on property zoned Tract A within Planned Development District No. 269, the Deep Ellum/Near East Side Special Purpose District, on the east line of South Walton Street, between Virgil Street and Taylor Street.]

BAIT.

GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU, SIR.

MORNING Y'ALL.

MY NAME IS MARTIN BATE.

THIS IS CASE Z 2 23 DASH THREE 11.

CAN Y'ALL SEE THIS? ALL RIGHT.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? YES, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.

UH, THIS APPLICATION IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2 4 0 8 FOR A MANUFACTURING LABORATORY.

IT IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH LINE OF TAYLOR STREET, EAST OF SOUTH WALTON STREET IS APPROXIMATELY 22,898 SQUARE IN SIZE.

WE SEE IT'S RIGHT HERE, UH, DEEP IN THE HEARTUM.

HERE'S MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THIS FACILITY.

THE ZONING MAP.

IT SHOWS THE LAYOUT OF THE AREA.

AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S SOMEWHAT CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS SECTION OF DEEP ELLUM WHERE YOU HAVE A MIX OF DIFFERENT USES.

SORT OF HARKENING BACK TO THAT, UH, THE OLD WAY THAT DEEP ELLUM WAS WAY BACK IN THE DAY.

BUT YOU HAVE OFFICE BUILDINGS OVER THERE TO THE EAST, A VARIETY OF OFFICE, SHOWROOM, WAREHOUSE, AND PERSONAL SERVICE USES TO THE NORTH AND NORTHEAST SURFACE PARKING IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE WEST, UH, VARIOUS OFFICE BUILDINGS TO THE SOUTH AND ALSO MULTIFAMILY TO THE SOUTHEAST.

SO IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED TRACKED A WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2 6 9, THE DEVELOP NEAR EAST SIDE DISTRICT.

UH, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH THE MANUFACTURING LABORATORY.

THE SEP WAS INITIALLY APPROVED FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD FOR MANUFACTURING LABORATORY ON JANUARY 27TH, 2021.

THE SEP EXPIRES THIS MONTH ON THE 27TH AND WAS FILED FOR RENEWAL ON AUGUST 1ST OF LAST YEAR.

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THE RENEWAL FOR A THREE-YEAR PERIOD TO CONTINUE THE USE OF THIS LABORATORY AND DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY CHANGES TO THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OR THE SITE PLAN OF SUP 2 4 0 8.

TAKING YOU TO THE LITTLE PHOTO TOUR HERE, THIS IS ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TAYLOR AND SOUTH WALTON, LOOKING NORTHEAST AT THE FACILITY ITSELF, AND THEN LOOKING SOUTHWEST AWAY FROM THE FACILITY THERE, WE SEE SOME OF THESE OFFICE USES THAT I MENTIONED IN THE MAP.

THIS IS ON SOUTH WALTON STREET LOOKING SOUTHEAST AT THE FACILITY.

THIS IS SORT OF THE, UH, YOU'D CALL IT THE BACK OF THE FACILITY AS IT WERE.

THIS IS ON TAYLOR STREET LOOKING SOUTH AWAY FROM THE FACILITY, LOOKING NORTH TOWARDS THE FACILITY.

UH, LOOKING EAST ON TAYLOR STREET, THAT'S THE FACILITY OVER ON THE LEFT AND THEN LOOKING WEST ON TAYLOR STREET.

THE FACILITY, UH, I BELIEVE IT ENDS THERE WHERE THAT BLUE PART OF THE WALL IS.

THIS IS THE EXISTING SITE PLAN.

THERE ARE NO CHANGES PROPOSED TO IT.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS.

UM, THIS SEEMS LIKE A PRETTY BENIGN USE.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY? UH, WE'RE ONLY OFFERING THREE YEARS AND WHY THERE'S NO AUTOMATICS.

WHY, WHY, WHY DOES THIS NEED TO, WHAT WHAT ABOUT THIS USED MEANS THEY'D HAVE TO COME BACK EVERY THREE YEARS? UH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

I WENT WITH THE THREE YEAR PERIOD AS THAT WAS WHAT THE APPLICANT HAD REQUESTED, AND I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T THINK TO PUT IN A LONGER USE PERIOD.

UH, CERTAINLY I'M SURE THAT THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO THE, TO A LENGTHIER PERIOD.

I WOULD'VE TO DEFER TO THE APPLICANT ON WHAT THEIR BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND PLANS ARE AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY INTEND TO BE THERE LONGER TERM OR,

[01:05:01]

UH, IF THEY MAY JUST BE USING THE FACILITY AS IT IS FOR NOW.

UH, BUT I WOULD DEFER TO THAT ON THAT, BUT CERTAINLY I THINK IT COULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR SO YOU'D HAVE NO, NO OBJECTION TO A LONGER TERM OR AN AUTOMATIC EITHER OR.

I WOULD NOT, NO.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, MR. BAT, ARE YOU AWARE IF THE FACILITY, UM, IS CURRENTLY IN OPERATION? I, IS IT CURRENTLY IN OPERATION? SO THIS, THIS IS THEIR, THIS IS THEIR FIRST RENEWAL, IS THAT CORRECT? IT IS, YES.

AND IT IS IN OPERATION.

AND AND IT IS CURRENTLY IN OPERATION? CORRECT.

SO DO YOU KNOW IF THEY ARE, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THEY ARE COMPLETING SOME OF THEIR APPROVALS, UM, AS A PART OF THEIR OPERATIONS? UM, IMMINENTLY.

WELL, COULD YOU CLARIFY THE QUESTION? UH, APPROVALS IN TERMS OF WOULD THIS BE CERTAIN PERMITS AND SUCH WITH DEVELOPMENT OR NOT WITH DEVELOPMENT REGARDING TO THE MANUFACTURING OF THE, UH, PHARMACEUTICALS? UH, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY OF APPROVALS REGARDING THAT OF THEIR OPERATIONS, NO.

I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH THE APPLICANT AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE ACTIVELY UNDERWAY WITH.

UM, I INTERESTING.

UM, DO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY, UM, ARE CERTAINLY OPEN TO A LONGER PERIOD, UM, THROUGH MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM.

I THINK THEY'RE ALSO JUST BEGINNING THEIR PRODUCTION, IF YOU WILL.

INTERESTING.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HALL? SO ARE, IS THERE ACTUALLY SYNTHETIC CHEMISTRY GOING ON HERE? UH, ARE, ARE THEY JUST PACKAGING THINGS INTO PILLS AND, UH, FORM? I CAN'T SPEAK WITH A AUTHOR AUTHORITY ON, UH, THE EXACT NATURE OF THE OPERATIONS.

I DO KNOW THAT I BELIEVE THEY DO PACKAGING, UH, THE SUP CONDITIONS AS I RECALL 'EM, IT DOES ALLOW FOR COMPOUNDING IN ADDITION TO PACKAGING.

UH, BUT I AM, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE INTRICACIES OF THE OPERATION.

YEAH, I, AND I GUESS WHERE MY QUESTION IS COMING FROM, UH, AS, AS SOMEONE WHO HAS A DEGREE IN CHEMISTRY, IS, UH, IF THEY'RE SYN ACTUALLY SYNTHESIZING STUFF THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A POTENTIAL TO RELEASE, UH, CHEMICALS AND OTHER THINGS THAT MIGHT BE HARMFUL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENT.

I'M JUST SORT OF CURIOUS IF, IF THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON HERE OR IF IT'S, IF IT'S MORE BENIGN PACKAGING.

YEAH, CERTAINLY.

AND UNFORTUNATELY I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE SPECIFICS OF THAT.

UH, THAT WOULD BE A GREAT QUESTION, I THINK FOR THE REPRESENTATIVE OR THE APPLICANT.

UM, BUT THE WAY THAT THE, UH, THE WAY THE USE IS DEFINED IN THE CODE, UH, I THINK IT WAS ORIGINALLY ENVISIONED AS SOMETHING THAT WOULD NOT HAVE AS MUCH OF THAT RISK FOR VOLATILE RELEASES AS IT WERE.

UH, BUT I WOULD ALSO IMAGINE THAT SOME OF THAT IS REGULATED BY OTHER REGULATORY AUTHORITIES REGARDING THE MANUFACTURER OF, UH, THE PHARMACEUTICALS OR CHEMICALS.

PERHAPS WE CAN ASK LATER.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

HAVE THAT PLEASE.

I WAS JUST GONNA NOTE THAT IT IS ON CONSENT.

I DO NOT HAVE A DEGREE IN CHEMISTRY, SO I CAN SPEAK WITH THE AUTHORITY, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT IS THE MORE BENIGN PRODUCTION THAT THERE IS, THERE IS, UM, FABRICATION IS THE RIGHT WORD, BUT THEY ARE PRODUCING ON SITE, BUT NOT TO THE LEVEL THAT REQUIRED ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS FOR THROUGH MY PRIOR CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM.

TO ADD TO THAT, UH, I THINK THE FIRST TIME AROUND THAT WE HAD THIS APPLICATION, THERE WAS AN EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT EXACTLY THAT POINT.

UH, WERE YOU AWARE OF THAT? I WAS NOT, NO, BUT THAT SOUNDS THANK YOU, SIR.

LIKE SOMETHING THAT SHOULD DEFINITELY BE CONSIDERED BEFORE HAVING A MANUFACTURING FACILITY.

UM, THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE'LL KEEP GOING.

UM, BEFORE WE MOVE ON FROM THAT ONE, PLEASE.

IS THERE A DESIRE FOR A DIFFERENT TIME PERIOD THAN WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING? 'CAUSE WE'LL HAVE TO TAKE IT OFF CONSENT IF THERE IS.

UM, MY APOLOGIES.

I MISSED THE QUESTION.

IS THERE A DESIRE FOR A DIFFERENT TIME PERIOD THAN THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING? LET'S TAKE IT OFF.

CONCERN.

NO, N NOT AT THIS TIME.

OKAY, COOL.

AND UNDER THE NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION OVERLAY.

UH, COMMISSIONERS CASE NUMBER 21 TO MR. CLINTON.

THIS IS CASE Z 2 23, 316.

IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE L OH ONE, LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT AND MF TWO, A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT, THE OAK LAWN AND EAST DALLAS DEMOLITION DELAY DISTRICT WITH D OVERLAY.

[01:10:01]

NUMBER SIX, COCHRANE HEIGHTS, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HOMER STREET BETWEEN NORTH GARRETT AVENUE AND NORTH HENDERSON AVENUE.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO R FIVE, R FIVE A TO ALLOW FOR THE RENOVATION OF AN ADDITION TO, UM, AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, APPROXIMATELY 18,000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE.

HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP AND A AERIAL ZOOM IN.

THIS IS, UH, THE ZONING MAP SURROUNDING USES OUR MULTI-FAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY, AND A FEW, UH, RETAIL USES TO THE EAST.

UH, LOCATED, UH, GEOGRAPHICALLY NORTH DALLAS, AGAIN, UH, CURRENTLY ZONED LL ONE AND MF TWO.

UM, DEVELOPED AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH EXTENDED GARDEN GARAGE WITH STORAGE ROOMS AND STUDIO APARTMENT.

UM, A PORTION OF, UH, THIS IS KIND OF AN INTERESTING ONE, BUT A PORTION OF THIS IS A CORNER LOT AND HAS A FRONTAGE ON BOTH HOMER STREET AND NORTH HENDERSON AVENUE.

UM, AGAIN, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE PROPERTY BE REZONED TO RESIDENTIAL AND THEY ARE REQUESTING A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE.

UM, HERE WE ARE, UH, ON SITE ON HOMER STREET.

THIS IS LOOKING TOWARDS THE PROPERTY.

UH, WE'RE LOOKING DOWN HOMER STREET, UH, TOWARDS THE SOUTH, LOOKING DOWN HOMER STREET, UH, TOWARDS THE NORTH HERE.

WE HAVE SURROUNDING USES.

UH, THIS IS ADJACENT TO THE SITE.

THIS IS ON NORTH HENDERSON, THIS IS ALSO ON NORTH HENDERSON AVENUE.

AND, UH, BONITA AVE.

HERE IS A BRIEF, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UH, COMPARISON STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS.

OKAY, NOW QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM.

THANK YOU, MR. CLINTON.

COMMISSIONERS WILL MOVE ON TO NUMBER 22.

[22. 24-244 An application for a TH-3(A) Townhouse District on property zoned a CR Community Retail District, on the southwest corner of Genstar Lane and Davenport Road. (Part 1 of 2)]

UH, WE DO HAVE A REGISTERED SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION ON THIS CASE, COMMISSIONER, SO WE'LL TAKE THAT OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AND THAT WAS NOT IN THE, THE LIST THAT I READ OUT IN THE BEGINNING, SO WE'LL ADD THAT TO THE LIST OF CASES COMING OFF.

CONSENT NUMBER 22.

STAY WITH YOU MR. CLINTON.

YES, THIS IS CASE Z 2 2, 3, 3 2 1 AND APPLICATION FOUR A TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE, UH, COMMUNITY RETAIL ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF GENSTAR LANE IN DAVENPORT ROAD.

THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO TH THREE A, UM, TO ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF, UH, TOWN HOMES APPROXIMATELY, UH, 2.5 ACRES IN SIZE.

HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP.

THIS IS THE, UH, AERIAL MAP, OUR ZONING MAP HERE WITH SURROUNDING USES BEING SINGLE FAMILY.

UM, THERE'S A MONTESSORI SCHOOL TO THE DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH.

AND, UM, OTHER COMMERCIAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT.

UM, AGAIN, THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED, UH, CR FOR COMMUNITY RETAIL.

UM, A CORNER LOT.

SO IT HAS FRONTAGE ON BOTH GENSTAR LANE AND DAVENPORT ROAD.

UM, AGAIN, THE, UH, APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE.

HERE WE ARE ON GENSTAR, GENSTAR LANE, LOOKING SOUTH, LOOKING SOUTH ON GENSTAR LANE, LOOKING EAST.

UH, HERE WE'RE ON THE CORNER OF GENSTAR LANE AND DAVENPORT ROAD LOOKING EAST.

SAME CORNER LOOKING SOUTH, SAME CORNER.

LOOKING BACK TOWARDS THE WEST AGAIN, LOOKING WEST ON DAVENPORT ROAD, LOOKING NORTH.

UH, THIS IS THE, UM, SCHOOL DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH HERE.

WE HAVE SURROUNDING USES.

UM, THIS IS LOOKING TOWARDS THE WEST OF THE SITE, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO THE NORTH HERE IS, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UH, CHART STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL MEMBERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? RIGHT.

LET'S MOVE ON TO

[23. 24-245 An application for a Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise or food store 3,500 square feet or less on property zoned Subarea 2 within Planned Development District No. 366, the Buckner Boulevard Special Purpose District, with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the northeast corner of South Buckner Boulevard and Lake June Road. (Part 1 of 2)]

OUR NEXT CASE, NUMBER 23.

AND, UM, COMMISSIONER DID, HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS CASE AND IS STEPPING OUT OF THE ROOM.

MR. CURT, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.

[01:15:05]

JUST A MOMENT PLEASE.

AND, UH, CAN YOU SEE THIS IN PRESENTATION MODE? IT LOOKS GREAT.

SO THIS IS CASE, UH, Z 2 23 3 22.

IT'S FOR A NEW SUP LOCATED AT 1310 SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD.

JUST A MOMENT.

NOT LETTING ME, THERE WE GO.

UH, SO THIS IS A NEW SUP TO ALLOW FOR THE SALE OF BEER AND WINE FOR A GENERAL MERCHANDISE STORE LESS THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET.

IT'S LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST INTERSECTION OF SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD AND LAKE JUNE ROAD WITHIN, UH, SUBDISTRICT TWO OF PD 360 6, THE BUCKNER BOULEVARD SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT.

IT IS LOCATED WITHIN A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY, AND IT'S ON ROUGHLY HALF AN ACRE IN COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE IS THE LOCATION, UM, WITHIN THE PLEASANT GROVE AREA IN SOUTHERN DALLAS.

SO THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS, UH, THE SALE OF ALCOHOL WITHIN THE GENERAL MERCHANDISE STORE OF 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS.

AND, UH, THE REQUEST IS FOR AN APPROVAL PERIOD OF TWO YEARS WITH, UH, NO AUTO RENEWALS.

SO HERE'S THE AERIAL AERIAL MAP SHOWING THE ZONING, DISTRICT SURROUNDING AND, UH, ZONING MAP, SHOWING THE USES.

THERE'S A RETAIL CENTER WITH SIMILAR USES TO THE NORTH, UM, AND A CATTY CORNER ACROSS LAKE JUNE ROAD.

THERE IS A RETAIL WITH SIMILAR USES AS WELL.

HERE'S SOME SITE PHOTOS, UH, LOCATED ON LAKE JUNE.

UH, HERE'S FROM THE SITE, LOOKING SOUTH ON SITE, LOOKING NORTH, LOOKING SOUTHWEST.

AND HERE'S THE SITE PLAN FOR SITE AS WELL, UM, AS AN ENLARGED, UH, VERSION OF THE SITE PLAN.

AND, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR THE TWO YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO, UH, SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.

DO MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? MR. CARPENTER? YES.

IS, IS THIS A, UM, A STORE THAT HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE BUT JUST NEVER SOLD ALCOHOL AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN SUP NOW? IT, IT'S, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING, YES, THAT, UH, THE STORE HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE.

IT WAS, UH, BUILT IN, UH, THE MID EIGHTIES, I BELIEVE.

UM, AND I DON'T HAVE A RECORD OF, UH, AN SEP FOR ALCOHOL SALES PRIOR TO THIS EVER.

ARE YOU AWARE POTENTIALLY OF AN SUP THAT WAS IN EFFECT THAT, THAT EXPIRED AND WAS NOT RENEWED IN THE PAST? I'M NOT SURE.

UH, I CAN ASK THE APPLICANT ABOUT THAT.

AND, UM, ALSO, YOU WENT OUT AND DID A SITE VISIT, RIGHT? MR. KERR? YES, I DID.

WERE THEY SELLING ALCOHOL WHEN YOU WENT ON YOUR SITE VISIT? THERE WAS NO VISIBLE, UM, SALE, UH, THAT I COULD, THAT I COULD TELL ON THE SITE.

AND ANY INVISIBLE SALES THAT YOU WERE AWARE OF? NO, I, I DID, UH, I, I DID NOT SEE ANY.

LET'S MOVE ON TO CASE NUMBER 24, UH, MS. BRIDGES AND, UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER SHAAD WILL BE STEPPING BACK INTO THE ROOM IN JUST A MOMENT, BUT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON WITH CASE NUMBER 24.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU MR. KERR.

[24. 24-246 An application for an MU-3-D Mixed Use District with a D Liquor Control Overlay on property zoned an LO-1-D Limited Office District with a D Liquor Control Overlay, on the southeast line of Abrams Road, between Fisher Road and East Lovers Lane.]

THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z 2 23 DASH 3 35.

THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR, UM, MU THREE MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A D UM, LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTY ZONE L 1D LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.

THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP OUTLINE IN BLUE IS THE AREA MAP IS THE, UM, SUBJECT PROPERTY SURROUNDING A PROPERTY.

YOU HAVE SINGLE FAMILY, MULTI-FAMILY.

UM, YOU HAVE A PUBLIC SCHOOL, WHICH IS DISD.

[01:20:01]

YOU ALSO HAVE, UM, A CHURCH AS WELL.

THE AREA OF REQUEST IS CURRENTLY ZONED L OH ONE LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT WITH A LIFT CONTROL OVERLAY.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A ONE STORY, UM, BUILDING.

IT'S APPROXIMATELY 37,000 SQUARE FEET.

IT WAS BUILT IN 1978.

UM, IT CURRENTLY HAS ABOUT 20 PLUS TENANTS IN THERE WITH THE MIXED USES SUCH AS PERSONAL SERVICE, MEDICAL CLINIC, AND OFFICE.

AND THE LOT HAS FRONTAGE ON ABRAMS ROAD AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY WITH 111 MULTIFAMILY UNITS WITH SOME RETAIL.

AND TO ACCOMPLISH THIS, THEY REQUEST A MU THREE MIXED USE DISTRICT.

THE NEXT FEW PHOTOS WILL BE THE AREA OF REQUESTS AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

THESE ARE SURROUNDING USES DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES SURROUNDING USES.

I'M LOOKING WEST.

UM, THAT IS THE PUBLIC SCHOOL THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER, SURROUNDING USES, I'M LOOKING EAST, THERE'S SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY.

THESE ARE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

RYAN, DO I NEED TO GO IN DETAIL ABOUT THOSE OR, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, UH, MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM, MR. HAMPTON? THANK YOU.

UM, MS. ES, JUST ONE QUESTION.

I KNOW THAT IN YOUR CASE REPORT, UM, UH, PAGE 24 DASH FOUR, IT SAYS THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP 111 MULTIFAMILY USES WITH RETAIL.

UM, I DIDN'T SEE ANY OTHER MENTION OF RETAIL WITHIN THE REPORT, OR IS IT, DO WE KNOW HOW THAT IS INTENDED TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT? AS OF RIGHT NOW, WHEN I ASKED THE APPLICANT, THEY SAID THEY DIDN'T KNOW LIKE WHAT SPECIFIC RETAIL USES, BUT THEY DID KNOW THAT THE RETAIL IS GONNA BE ON THE BOTTOM.

BUT I THINK MR. ROB CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN I CAN.

MEMBERS ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

WELL, I, I KNOW IT'S ON CONSENT, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT INTENT WAS, SO THANK YOU.

YOU ARE WELCOME.

YES, BUT I WANT TO JUST, UM, CONFIRM THAT THIS IS A STRAIGHT ZONING CHANGE SO THEY WOULD BE ENTITLED TO DO ANY USE THAT'S ALLOWED IN ANY THREE.

YES MA'AM.

COMMISSIONER SLEEPER.

JUST A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

IT THAT THIS IS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT UPZONING, UM, BUT I GATHER THERE HAS BEEN STAFF HAS APPROVED IT AND THERE'S BEEN NO COMMUNITY OPPOSITION.

IS THAT CORRECT? NO, SIR.

THE ONLY EMAILS THAT I RECEIVED THERE WAS MAKING SURE THAT, UM, THEY KNEW WHAT THE REQUEST WAS, SUCH AS THE BUILDING OF THE MULTIFAMILY UNITS AND THE RETAIL, BUT NOBODY REACHED OUT TO ME IN OPPOSITION OF IT.

YOU ARE WELCOME.

ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION.

I SEE, UM, SORRY, I'LL GET TO Y'ALL.

AND, AND RPS DOES APPLY TO THIS, RIGHT? IF THERE IS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT? YES SIR, IT IS.

UH, COMMISSIONER HALL, SO 111 UNITS WITH RETAIL, THIS IS GONNA BE A, A MIDRISE, A MID-RISE APARTMENT COMPLEX OR WHAT? I THINK THAT'S AN APPLICANT SPECIFIC QUESTION, LIKE HOW IT'S GONNA LOOK BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEE LIKE ANY SPECS ON WHAT THEY THINK IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE.

THEY JUST TOLD ME IT'S GONNA BE 111 UNITS, SO WHAT IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER THAT.

TO, TO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER'S POINT, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE.

THIS IS NOT A PD WHERE WE WOULD GET SOME SORT OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH A SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL.

UM, THIS IS JUST TO CONSIDER, UM, YOU KNOW, THE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF AN MU THREE DISTRICT AS WELL AS THE USES THAT ARE PERMITTED WITHIN THAT DISTRICT.

ANY SPECIFICS AS FAR AS SITE CONDITIONS, HOW HIGH THE BUILDING IS, WHERE THE RETAIL'S GOING TO BE? UM, THAT IS, UH, NOT SOMETHING THAT THAT STAFF WOULD HAVE, UM, AVAILABLE AS PART OF THIS CASE.

WHAT ABOUT DEMOLISHING THE CURRENT STRUCTURE? WOULD THAT BE DONE? YES SIR.

THEY DO PLAN TO DEMOLISH THE CURRENT STRUCTURE, SO THEY'RE GONNA DEMOLISH THAT AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA BUILD THE 111 UNITS.

YOU ARE WELCOME MR. HAMPTON.

SO JUST ONE FOLLOW UP IF I MAY.

UM, IN OUR REPLY FORMS, THERE WAS A REPLY RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION, BUT THERE WERE NO COMMENTS.

SO STAFF DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY INDICATION OF WHAT THE CONCERN MAY HAVE BEEN RELATIVE TO THAT? NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.

WE KEEP IT ON? ANYONE REQUESTING TO TAKE IT OFF? CONSENT.

AND ARE YOU AWARE IF THERE HAVE BEEN COMMUNITY MEETINGS? I SPOKE WITH MR. ROBIN.

HE SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE ONE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? DO WE WANNA PULL THIS ONE OFF CONSENT OR SHOULD

[01:25:01]

BLAIR, IS THERE A NEED FOR A BRIEF OR AN UPDATE ON THAT ONE? WOULD YOU LIKE IT BRIEFED? OKAY, GREAT.

UM, SEEING NO ONE ASKING TO TAKE IT OFF CONSENT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.

UM, ON NUMBER 25, I THINK COMMISSIONER TREADWAY IS GONNA JOIN US, UM, MOMENTARILY.

SO LET'S SWING BACK AROUND TO THAT ONCE SHE GETS HERE.

UM, I THINK WE'RE ALSO WAITING ON COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

SO LET'S, UM, WE WERE TO OUR UNDER ADVISEMENT CASES, UM, ON NUMBER 27.

COMMISSIONER

[27. 24273 An application for a CS Commercial Service District with consideration of an MU-1 Mixed Use District on property zoned an A(A) Agricultural District, on the north line of Dowdy Ferry Road, northeast of the LyndonB. Johnson Freeway [I-20]. (Part 1 of 2)]

UH, MS. MUNOZ, MS. MUNOZ, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY HERE TO ALL, LET ME GET THIS PRESENTATION SHARED REAL QUICK.

, ARE YOU SEEING THE PRESENTATION VIEW RIGHT NOW? NOT YET, NO.

LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU SEE IT.

IT'S UP.

THIS HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED AND THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE REQUEST AT THE TIME OF THE PRINTING OF THIS REPORT.

UM, IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A CS, UM, COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT AND WITH CONSIDERATION OF AN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY THAT'S CURRENTLY ZONED IN AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT.

IT'S ALMOST 52 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH LINE OF DOWTY FERRY ROAD.

NORTHEAST OF LBJ MS. MUNOZ? YES.

LET ME, LET ME STOP YOU RIGHT THERE.

UH, I THINK WE HAD THOUGHT THAT THERE WERE CHANGES TO THIS, BUT SINCE THERE ARE NO CHANGES, THERE'S NO NEED TO RERE IT, BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH.

PARDON THE INTERRUPTION.

NO PROBLEM.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO WE NEED NUMBER 14 BRIEFED OR UPDATED? 28.

[28. 24-275 An application for an amendment to and a renewal of Specific Use Permit No. 1898 for a late-hours establishment limited to a general merchandise or food store 3,500 square feet or less and a motor vehicle fueling station, on property zoned Planned Development District No. 842, the Lower Greenville Avenue Special Provision District, with an MD-1 Modified Delta Overlay, on the southeast corner of Greenville Avenue and Richmond Avenue. (Part 1 of 2)]

DISTRICT 14.

I I'VE NUMBER TROUBLES.

IT'S NOT IT.

WELL, WE'VE MADE SOME CHANGES AS OF YESTERDAY, SO I THINK WE WANNA BRIEF IT SO EVERYONE KNOWS.

OKAY, MR. ANDREA? THANK YOU.

I'LL TRY TO GO VERY QUICK.

THE PRESENTATION HAS A LOT OF, UH, SLIDES WITH PHOTOS.

UH, ITEM Z 2 12 3 52 IS THE RENEWAL OF SUP NUMBER 1898 FOR A LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENT.

LIMITED TO A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FEEDS FEED FOOD STORE 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS.

AND A MORE VEHICLE STATION.

IT'S IN PD NUMBER 8 42, THE LOWER GREENVILLE AVENUE SPECIAL PROVISION DISTRICT.

IT'S AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GREENVILLE AVENUE AND RICHMOND AVENUE.

IT'S APPROXIMATELY POINT 38 ACRES, AS I SAID, IS IN EAST DALLAS.

THIS IS THE AERIAL IS SURROUNDED BY RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS TO THE EAST AND SOUTH COFFEE SHOP, TO NO, TO THE WEST AND SOUTH COFFEE SHOP TO THE EAST AND MULTIFAMILY FURTHER DOWN THE STREET AND A GROCERY STORE TO THE NORTH.

UM, ON THE ZONING MAP, UH, THERE ARE SIMILAR SUVS ACROSS INTO THE SOUTH BACKGROUND.

UM, THIS SPECIFIC USE PERMIT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL FIRST TIME IN 2011, UM, AND THEN IN 2016 IT WAS AUTOMATICALLY RENEWED IN 2022, IT WAS APPROVED FOR ONLY ONE, UH, ONE YEAR.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED AND THEY HAVE A A CO THAT WAS ISSUED IN 2016.

UM, THIS IS THE PICTURES, QUICK

[01:30:01]

PICTURES FROM THE SIDE.

AND I WILL JUST POINT IN THE SPIRIT OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE SUBMITTED YESTERDAY.

THERE ARE AN IMPROVEMENT.

I WILL POINT TO THE TREES THAT ARE ACTUALLY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

YOU CAN SEE THEM, UM, LARGER CURB CUTS, BUT THAT'S AN EXISTING CONDITION ALLEY IN THE BACK, UM, ALLEY IN THE BACK.

UM, A, A VIEW FROM SOUTH SOUTHERN PORTIONS ALLEY IN THE BACK.

RETAIL RESTAURANTS, UM, ADJACENT MULTIFAMILY AND COFFEE SHOP ADJACENT THE BACK OF THE, UM, OF THE STORE AND THEN ACROSS THE STREET ON GREENVILLE AVENUE AND ACROSS, UH, ON GREENVILLE.

AND THEN, UM, THE GROCERY STORE ACROSS, THIS IS THE SUP SITE PLAN.

THE FIRST TIME WE JUST AMENDED IT A LITTLE BIT TO, UM, A TABLE THAT WAS UPDATED AND RELEVANT AS OF YESTERDAY.

AND I CIRCULATED THIS, UH, WITH ALL OF YOU.

UH, IT WAS UPDATED TO ADD, YOU CAN SEE FOUR TREES THAT ARE EXISTING, BUT THEY'RE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

THE APPLICANT, UM, AGREED TO MAINTAIN THEM.

IT USUALLY THE TREES IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, THE MAINTENANCE FALLS ON THE APPLICANT, BUT THEY'RE ALSO SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.

UM, THEY'RE MARKED ON THE LEGEND THAT SAYS EXISTING TREE AND TREE.

WELL, I CAN MAKE A SUGGESTION TO MAYBE UPDATE THE LANGUAGE TO SAY EXISTING, UM, MEDIUM OR LARGE CANOPY TREE TO BE PRESERVED, UH, ENTRY.

WELL, AND THEN AGAIN, YESTERDAY I CIRCULATED THEY ALSO ADDED A CONDITION FOR STREET TREES, UM, TO SAY THAT THEY WILL BE, UH, MAINTAINED IN LIVING CONDITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 10, WHICH IS A CHANGE FROM LAST TIME.

AND THE REQUEST IS FOR THREE YEARS.

STAFF WITH THIS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, UH, FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED, UH, WITH THE CHANGES JUST MENTIONED.

RUB QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.

DR.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHY THIS CASE IS BEFORE US.

I MEAN, TYPICALLY WE GET S FOR LATE HOURS WITH A BAR OR A RESTAURANT.

THIS IS JUST SIMPLY A FACT THAT THIS CONVENIENCE STORE SITS IN THIS PD.

THEY WANNA STAY OPEN LATE, THEREFORE THEY'RE HERE.

THE, THE LATE HOUR, THE SUVS FOR THE LATE HOURS, NOT FOR THE USE.

SO ANY TYPE OF USE THAT WANTS TO BE LATER NEEDS AN SUP.

ALRIGHT, THANKS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, WE WILL GO TO, UH, CASE NUMBER 29.

UH, COMMISSIONERS.

THE APPLICANT WISHES TO WITHDRAW THIS APPLICATION, SO HAS REQUESTED A DENIAL OF THAT PREJUDICE.

DO WE NEED TO, UNLESS THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, WE'LL KEEP ON GOING ON THIS ITEM OF COMMISSIONERS.

TO CASE NUMBER 30, MR. PEPE.

LET'S GO

[30. 24-277 An application for 1) a Specific Use Permit for a motor vehicle fueling station; and 2) a Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise or food store 3,500 square feet or less on property zoned Subdistrict 5 within Planned Development District No. 533, the C.F. Hawn Special Purpose District No. 1, with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the southwest corner of Elam Road and C.F. Hawn Freeway. (Part 1 of 2)]

WAIT, UM, COMMISSIONER BLAIR ACTUALLY STEPPED OUT FOR THE MOMENT.

UM, ARE THERE ANY UPDATES ON THIS ONE AT ALL? THERE IS, THERE ARE SOME MINOR CHANGES TO THE TWO PLANS AND I THOUGHT IT WAS VALUABLE TO, TO PUT IN FRONT OF EVERYONE.

IF, IF YOU DON'T MIND, LET'S, UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER BLAIR JUST STEPPED OUT FOR A MOMENT.

UH, LET'S ALLOW HER TO GIVE ROLL TIME TO COME BACK IN.

SO WE'LL GO TO CASE NUMBER

[31. 24-279 An application for a Specific Use Permit for an auto service center and vehicle display, sales, and service on property zoned Subarea 2 within Planned Development District No. 366, the Buckner Boulevard Special Purpose District, with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the west line of Conner Drive; between Bruton Road and Stonehurst Street. (Part 1 of 2)]

31 AND LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT, UH, ISHA RUBEN HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM AND STEPPED OUT OF THE CHAMBER.

AND I KNOW THAT THERE IS A ONE UPDATE TO THIS ONE.

MR. PEP? YES, THIS IS EVEN, EVEN SMALLER CHANGE TO THIS ONE, BUT ONE NONETHELESS, JUST AS A REFRESHER, THIS IS 1 1 6, UM, 2 2 3 1 1 6 OFF OF BUCKNER IN THE BUCKNER PD.

UM, THAT'S THE PROPERTY.

AND I JUST WANTED TO SKIP AHEAD TO THE NEW SITE PLAN.

YEAH, SO THIS IS SITE PA SITE PLAN.

PREVIOUSLY, IF YOU'LL RECALL, THIS IS FOR VEHICLE, UH, DISPLAYS, SALES, IT'S STORAGE OR IN SERVICE.

AND THE CHANGE TO THE SITE PLAN ADDS A NOTE ABOUT A NEW ENTRANCE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY FROM OTHER, UH, OTHER PRIVATE PROPERTY, UH, THAT WE, WE UNDERSTAND TO BE A SIMILAR OR THE SAME OWNER, UH, AS THIS ONE.

UH, AND THEN THEY KIND OF NOTE AN ACCESS TO, TO BURDEN ROAD.

IT'S, UM, IT'S MINOR, BUT IT'S, IT'S A NOTE THERE NONETHELESS.

BUT I DID WANNA PUT THAT IN FRONT OF Y'ALL.

AND THEN NO OTHER CHANGES TO THE CONDITIONS OR REQUEST.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, MR. , WE'LL COME BACK TO, UM,

[01:35:01]

OH YES, PLEASE.

MR. CHERNO.

WAS, IS THE APPLICANT PROPOSING TO DO A MUTUAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT ON THAT ADDED ENTRANCE? THAT'S, THAT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME.

UM, I THINK IN PRACTICE THEY MAY DO THAT ALREADY THROUGH THEIR EXISTING OWNERSHIP.

UM, BUT THAT WOULDN'T BE TIED TO THE, TO THE CASE.

UM, SO I, I'M NOT SURE OF THE ANSWER TO THAT.

WHEN YOU SAY IN PRACTICE, THEY USE THAT ENTRANCE, BUT THEY DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE THE LEGAL DOCUMENT FILE WITH THE CITY, THE MUTUAL EASEMENT, JUST AN OBSERVATION THAT IT, IT APPEARS THAT WAY IN PRACTICE THAT THEY, THEY ACCESS IT THROUGH THEIR TWO LOTS 'CAUSE THEY EITHER OWN OR, OR HAVE DEAL WITH WITH EACH OF 'EM.

BUT, UH, DIDN'T CHECK FOR ANY EXISTING MUTUAL AGREEMENT, BUT I ASSUME NOT.

UM, BUT IF THEY FORMALIZE IT, THEN THEY COULD USE THAT, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE TIED TO THE SONY CASE.

SO IF THAT SECOND, IF THAT OTHER PROPERTY SOLD AND THERE WAS A MUTUAL EASEMENT AGREEMENT IN PLACE, THAT AGREEMENT WOULD STAY IN PLACE.

THEN IF THERE WASN'T AN AGREEMENT IN PLACE AND THAT PROPERTY SOLD, THEN THEY WOULD NO LONGER HAVE THAT EGRESS.

THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 32.

[32. 24-248 An application for a Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a restaurant without drive-in or drive-through service on property zoned Subarea 1 within Planned Development District No. 366, the Buckner Boulevard Special Purpose District, with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the west line of South Buckner Boulevard, between North Scyene Road and Blossom Lane.]

ONE MOMENT.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT THE VICE CHAIR IS BACK IN THE CHAMBER.

APOLOGIES ON THE DELAY THERE.

UH, THIS IS CASE Z 2 23 2 56.

UH, THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE-IN OR DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE ON PROPERTY ZONE COMMUNITY RETAIL CR SUB AREA ONE WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 3 6 6, THE BUCKNER BOULEVARD SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT WITH A D ONE OVERLAY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD BETWEEN NORTH CYAN ROAD AND BEARDEN LANE.

UH, THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON SITE, APPROXIMATELY 41,000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE.

HERE IS, UH, THE LOCATION OF THE SITE, UH, EAST DALLAS.

HERE'S OUR AERIAL MAP, UH, OUR ZONING MAP WITH SURROUNDING, UH, USES.

UH, MOST OF THE SURROUNDING USES ARE COMMERCIAL RETAIL, AND THIS SITE IS, UH, SITUATED OR HOUSED IN A, UH, UH, COMMERCIAL PLAZA.

UM, IT'S CURRENTLY A VACANT SUITE WITHIN A SHOPPING CENTER.

UM, HOURS OF OPERATION WOULD BE FROM 9:00 AM TO 10:00 PM SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND 9:00 AM TO 11:00 PM FRIDAY AND SATURDAY.

AGAIN, THE REQUEST IS FOR AN SUP, UH, FOR THE RESTAURANT TO BE ABLE TO SELL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON SITE.

UM, HERE WE HAVE SOME SITE VISIT PHOTOS.

THIS IS ON SA BUCKNER LOOKING TOWARDS THE PROPERTY.

AND THIS IS, UH, SUITE 300.

THIS IS ON PROPERTY LOOKING NORTH, LOOKING SOUTH.

UM, HERE WE HAVE SOME SURROUNDING USES.

IT SAYS, LOOKING NORTHEAST, THIS IS, UH, ADJACENT TO THE SITE.

LOOKING, UM, EAST HERE IS THE SITE PLAN AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD.

NO AUTO RENEWAL QUESTIONS.

COMMERS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. CLINTON.

WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 33,

[33. 24-249 An application for an O-1 Office Subdistrict with deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant on property zoned an MF-2 Multiple-Family Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 193, the Oak Lawn Special Purpose District, H/115 Talley/Polk House Historic District Overlay, on the west corner of Reagan Street and Dickason Avenue.]

MS. GARZA.

[01:40:10]

ITEM NUMBER 33 IS KZ 2 23 2 98 THERE REQUESTS AN APPLICATION FOR AN OH ONE OFFICE SUBDISTRICT WITH DATE RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON PROPERTY ZONED AND MF TWO, MULTI, MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1 93, THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT WITH A HISTORIC OVERLAY, DISTRICT NUMBER ONE 15.

IT IS LOCATED ON THE WEST CORNER OF GAN STREET AND DICKINSON AVENUE.

THIS IS A LOCATION MAP.

THIS IS THE AERIAL MAP.

THIS IS THE ZONING MAP SURROUNDING USES AROUND THE SIDE ARE SINGLE TO THE NORTHWEST, MULTI-FAMILY TO THE TO THE WEST, SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY TO THE SOUTH.

THERE'S A SURFACE PARKING TO THE EAST, AND THEN THERE'S RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE-IN SERVICES, ALCOHOL BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT TO THE NORTHEAST.

THE AREA OF REQUEST IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A HOME, WHICH HAS BEEN USED AS A BED AND BREAKFAST.

ON OCTOBER 8TH, 2002, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE ESTABLISHING OF HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT NUMBER ONE 15, WHICH IS A TALLY P*****K HOUSE.

IT IS COMPROMISED OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, WHICH ALLOWS THE FOLLOWING USE BY RIDE, BED AND BREAKFAST, A BED AND BREAKFAST AS USED IN THE HISTORIC OVERLAY.

DISTRICT NUMBER ONE 15 ORDINANCE MEANS A LODGING USE THAT HAS NO MORE THAN FIVE GUESTROOM.

PROVIDES ACCOMMODATIONS FOR PERIODS NOT TO EXCEED FIVE NIGHTS, SERVES NO MEALS OTHER THAN BREAKFAST, AND IS A MEMBER OF OR A CERTIFIED BY RECOGNIZED BED.

AND BREAKFAST ASSOCIATIONS SUCH AS THE NATIONAL BED AND BREAKFAST ASSOCIATION, OR HISTORIC AND HAS HOSPITALITY ACCOMMODATION OF TEXAS.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ADD AN OFFICE USE ALONG WITH THE CURRENT USE OF A BED AND BREAKFAST.

THUS, THEY ARE REQUESTING AN OH ONE OFFICE.

SUBDISTRICT STAFF RECOMMENDS IT BASED OF OH ONE SUBDISTRICT 'CAUSE THE D RESTRICTIONS AS PROPOSED DO NOT OFFER SIGNIFICANT REGULATORY OVERSIGHT BEYOND THE BASE DISTRICT SO THAT THESE ARE SOME OF THE SITE PHOTOS OF THE SITE TO THE SOUTHWEST.

AND THEN SURROUNDING USES ON REAGAN STREET LOOKING NORTHWEST, LOOKING SOUTHEAST, LOOKING NORTHEAST ON DICKINSON AVENUE, LOOKING SOUTHEAST, LOOKING NORTHWEST.

AND THEN THESE ARE THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE BEING CHANGED FROM EXISTING MF TWO SUBDISTRICT TO PROPOSED OH ONE SUBDISTRICT.

AND THEN, UM, THE APPLICANT'S VOLUNTEER DUE RESTRICTIONS, THE OWNER DOES HEREBY PRESS ALL THE PROPERTIES WITH THE FOLLOWING DUE RESTRICTIONS.

UH, THE FOLLOWING USES ARE NOT, UH, PERMITTED, UH, HALFWAY HOUSE, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOL, BUSINESS, SCHOOL, BANK OR SAVING AND LOAN OFFICE.

UM, IT IS WITHIN THE 360 POND.

THE SITE IS WITHIN THE UPTOWN COMMUNITY SITUATED ON THE NORTH OF DOWNTOWN DALLAS.

UPTOWN HOUSING BECOMING PUBLIC DESTINATION FOR EMPLOYERS AND RESIDENTS SEEKING SUCCESSFUL BALANCES OF JOBS, JOB HOUSE, UH, JOBS, HOUSING AND SERVICES AS STAFF RECOMMENDED IS APPROVAL OF THEIR REQUEST.

UM, BUT AS WE MENTIONED, UM, STAFF FINDS THAT THE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS DO NOT COME TO WHAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REFER AS ZONING POSSIBILITY ENOUGH TO RESPOND TO CHANGING ECONOMIC CONDITIONS, NOR DOES THEY ACCOMPLISH THE GOAL OF LONG-TERM LAND USE PLANNING DEED RESTRICTIONS, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT REMOVE USES DESIRE BY AN OPERATOR IN THE IMMEDIATE TERM CAN SERVE AS A REPLACEMENT FOR THOUGHTFUL DISTRIBUTION OF ZONING DISTRICTS THROUGHOUT THE CITY IN CONFLICT WITH THE INTENDED FUNCTION OF ZONING DISTRICTS ALTOGETHER.

QUESTIONS QUESTIONERS? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, MA'AM.

IS THE WORDS THAT YOU JUST READ ABOUT DUE RESTRICTIONS, ARE THEY TAILORED FOR THIS CASE OR IS THIS A BLANKET OBJECTION TO DUE RESTRICTIONS? BECAUSE IT SOUNDS PRETTY BLANKET YEAH, THAT THIS IS FOR THIS CASE AND THIS CASE ALONE.

THAT'S ALL WE'RE CONSIDERING RIGHT NOW.

IT'S JUST THIS ONE ITEM.

WELL, BUT WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT, UM, DEEDED RESTRICTIONS, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT REMOVE USES DESIRED BY AN OPERATOR IN THE IMMEDIATE TERM, THE OPERATOR IS, OR THE PROPOSED OPERATOR IS OFFERING THESE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS.

SO THESE APPARENTLY ARE NOT USES THAT, THAT, THAT THEY ARE WANTING TO DO.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING DEEDED RESTRICTIONS AND THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS JUST FOR THE STRAIGHT OFFICE SUB-DISTRICT WITHOUT THE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS.

OVERLAY REMAINS IN EFFECT EVEN WITH THIS GENERAL ZONING CHANGE, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.

UM, MS. GARZA, JUST ONE QUESTION.

THE H

[01:45:01]

AND AS IT'S LISTED IN THAT HISTORIC ORDINANCE, I BELIEVE IT SPECIFICALLY NOTES THE BASE ZONING APPLIES AND ALLOWS THE, UM, BED AND BREAKFAST USE.

SO AGAIN, THAT BED AND BREAKFAST USE IS STILL AN ALLOWED USE EVEN WITH THIS CHANGE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. GARZA.

COMMISSIONERS, WE'LL GO BACK AND PICK UP SOME OF THE CASES THAT WE TABLE.

WE'LL BEGIN WITH NUMBER 30, MR. PANO, THAT THERE'S SOME, UH, UPDATES TO THIS ONE.

YES, THIS WAS, UH, CERTAINLY WORTH, UM, PUTTING BACK IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS AND JUST CLOSED IT.

SO THIS ONE IS, UH, AS A REFRESHER, Z 2 2 3 1 1 2, AND JUST GONNA GET THERE.

THIS ONE IS AN SUP FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION, AS WELL AS AN SUP FOR SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.

UH, THOSE ARE NECESSARY IN THE PD THAT THEY'RE IN AND IN THE OVERLAY.

JUST AS A REFRESHER.

AND THIS ONE WAS OFF OF ELAM AND, UH, CF HAN HERE AGAIN, BUT I WILL SCOOT RIGHT ALONG TO THE, UH, NEW PLANS.

SO I HAVE THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, THE ORIGINAL PROPOSED SITE PLAN, TRYING TO MOVE THIS ALONG.

AND THEN THE UPDATED SITE PLAN, THIS, THIS SITE PLAN HAS, WAS NOT IN THE PREVIOUS DOCKET.

IT WAS, UH, BUT WE TRIED TO GET IT DISTRIBUTED.

THIS ONE HAS THIS, UM, DECORATIVE PAVING, UM, TO PRESENT, UM, ON THE, IN THE FRONT OF THE STORE.

SO THAT THAT IS A CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS POSTING.

THE OTHER CHANGE FROM THE PREVIOUS POSTING WAS, UH, THEY PROPOSE A LANDSCAPE PLAN NOW AND, UH, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SERVES IN, IN LIEU OF, UM, MEETING THE BASE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS.

UH, WHEREAS IN THE EXISTING PED, UH, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO MEET ARTICLE 10 PLUS A LITTLE MORE, INCLUDING A, UH, LANDSCAPE BUFFER.

THIS IS A, A REMEDY TO THAT IN TERMS OF, OF GETTING THEM OUT OF EXEMPTING THEM FROM THE, THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND OTHER CONDITIONS.

AND THIS, THIS IS STILL ACCURATE FROM THE CHANGE FROM THE ORIGINAL REQUEST AND THE CONDITIONS HAVEN'T CHANGED.

UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL QUESTIONS.

COMMISSIONER BLAIR, UM, MR. PEPE, WITH THE CHANGES THAT THEY HAVE MADE, IF THOSE CHANGES HAD BEEN SUBMITTED UPFRONT, WOULD YOU STILL HAVE A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL THE, UH, OF, UH, SUBMITTED UPFRONT EARLIER IN THE QUE? IT, I THINK I, I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT.

I MEAN, THE ANSWER, THE ANSWER IS, THE ANSWER IS THE REC, YES, THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD STILL BE DENIAL.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ABOUT THE, THE NATURE OF HOW THE REQUEST IS PROCEEDED.

UM, IT'S KIND OF, THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS PLAYING INTO THE DENIAL AS NOTED IN THE REPORT, INCLUDING THE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL, THE GENERAL SITE CONSTRAINTS.

UH, BY, BY NO MEANS DO WE THINK IT'S AN UNDEVELOPABLE SITE, BUT THIS PARTICULAR USE, SPECIFIC USE, UH, ESPECIALLY WHEN LAID OUT BY A, A PD, UH, SINE SHOULD BE SPECIFICALLY SUITED TO THE SITE.

UM, GIVEN BOTH THE PD THING, THE PD REQUIREMENTS, THEY MAY OVERCOME THEM THROUGH EXEMPTION, THROUGH LANDSCAPE PLAN, UM, THROUGH, UM, THE, THE, UH, I, THE REPORT NOTES, UM, A PREVIOUS, UH, ENGINEERING PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THEY, THEY MAY BE ABLE TO DEFAULT TO.

UH, BUT THAT, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY CHANGE HOW WE, HOW WE LOOK AT IT IN TERMS OF THE, THE OVERALL.

BUT THERE'S, THERE'S ALL OF THOSE FACTORS PLAY INTO THE RECOMMENDATION.

UM, AND SO IT, IT IS STILL DENIAL FOR THAT REASON.

UM, YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THE ENGINEERING AND I REVIEW IF, IF MEMORY SERVES ME, AND I'VE BEEN ASLEEP A COUPLE OF TIMES SINCE THEN.

UM, PART OF THE, THE ENGINEERING CONCERN WAS THE EGRESS INGRESS OFF OF THE SERVICE ROAD AS WELL AS THE

[01:50:01]

ELAM, CORRECT? YES.

THE ELAM ENTRANCE IS TOO CLOSE TO THE TRAFFIC LIGHT AT, AT ELAM.

AND, UM, CF HA AS WELL AS THE ONE ON CF HA IS, IS TOO CLOSE FOR THAT BASED ON THE STANDARDS THAT ENG THAT ENGINEERING LOOKS FOR WHEN MAY, UM, WHEN THEY APPROVE PLANS, THE REPORT NOTES THAT, UM, THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED AN ENGINEERING PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2017.

SO THE PLAN IS SIMILAR TO THAT.

UM, SO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY, THEY COULD POTENTIALLY MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.

MAYBE SOME MINOR AMENDMENTS.

IT'S, IT'S UNCLEAR.

WE'D HAVE TO SEE AFTER, AFTER PERMITTING.

UH, BUT IT'S STILL IS GOOD LAND USE AND DESIGN PRINCIPLE TO HAVE THOSE, THOSE DISTANCES AND, UM, EVERYTHING ELSE THAT PLAYS INTO THE REQUEST.

BUT THAT'S, THAT'S THE ANSWER ON THE ENGINEERING SIDE.

SO THOSE ARE STILL PART OF THIS SIDE PLAN? YES.

UM, MAY I ASK MR. NAVARRA SOME QUESTIONS, PLEASE? HE'S HERE, BUT HE'S GONNA BE BEHIND YOU IF IT'S, IF IT'S OKAY.

HE'S BE HERE.

GOOD.

A MORNING COMMISSIONERS.

I'M RIGHT BEHIND YOU IF YOU ALLOW ME.

SO MR. NAVAREZ, UM, THE ENTRY, THE, THE ENTRY POINTS ON ELAM AND THE SERVICE ROAD, UM, BEFORE WE, THE CONCERN WAS THAT THEY WERE TOO CLOSE TO, UM, THE COS, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.

THAT, THAT, THAT'S A CORRECT STATEMENT.

HAS THE APPLICANT MADE ANY ALTERATIONS TO THE ENTRY POINT OR ARE THERE ANY CHANGES THAT HAS OCCURRED THAT, UM, FROM YOUR, UH, RECOMMENDATION FROM PREVIOUS REPORTING, THE APPLICANT IS NO LONGER PURSUING AN ACCESS DIRECTLY FROM ELAM BROAD.

THAT'S ONE CHANGE THAT IS COMING TO YOU THIS, THIS MORNING.

SO THERE'S NO MORE, UM, ACCESS ON ELAM, JUST ON THE SERVICE ROAD.

THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE PLAN WE ARE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, PLEASE? I BELIEVE I RECALL IN THE PREVIOUS, UM, MEETINGS WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS, THAT THEY WERE DEFICIENT ON THEIR PARKING COUNT.

IS THAT STILL THE CASE? THIS, THIS PLAN HAS THEM DOWN ONE.

I THINK THAT THEY MAY HOPE TO, UM, SHRINK THEIR BUILDING A LITTLE BIT TO, TO MAKE IT WORK.

UM, IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE AREA ON THE SITE, IT'S THE AREA THAT THEY HAVE TO SHARE WITH THE, THE GAS STATION CANOPY AND THE DRIVE VIALS THAT GO AROUND THAT.

BUT I THINK THAT THEIR SOLUTION IS, IS GOING TO BE TO CUT THEIR BUILDING, UH, 100 OR 200 FEET.

OKAY, 200.

BUT AS DEPICTED ON THE PLAN IN FRONT OF US, THEY'RE SHORT ONE SPACE ON THEIR PARKING COUNT.

THIS, THIS ONE? YES.

AND THEN BACK TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION THAT MR. DEVAR WAS ANSWERING, UM, I SEE, I STILL SEE A CURB CUT ON ELAM ON THIS PLAN, BUT I COULD BE MISTAKEN, I SUPPOSE IF I'M, IF I MAY, THEY HAD A, A LATE BREAKING PLAN COME THROUGH AFTER THE DOCKET, AND I DID NOT GET THAT DISTRIBUTED.

AND I, I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, THE CHANGE THAT THEY, UM, AND I CAN HAVE IT DISTRIBUTED STILL, BUT THE CHANGE THAT, THE ONLY, THE ONLY ONES THAT I CAN FIND ON THAT, THAT LATE BREAKING PLAN, WERE THEY, THEY CLOSE OFF THE ACCESS ON ELAM ON THAT PLAN AND THEY REDUCED THE PARKING OR THEY REDUCED THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING BY 200 TO, TO MEET THEIR PARK.

I CAN GET THAT DISTRIBUTED, BUT IT CAME IN LATE AND IT'S BEEN A, IT'S BEEN A WEEK.

SO, UM, I DID MISS THAT.

I APOLOGIZE, BUT THOSE ARE THE TWO CHANGES ON THAT.

BUT ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION, PLEASE.

I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM WITH, UH, MR. NAVAREZ, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, OKAY, LET'S SAY WE'VE CLOSED ELAM, THAT THE CURB CUT ONTO THE SERVICE ROAD OF HIGHWAY 1 75 STILL DOES NOT CONFORM TO SPACING REQUIREMENTS OFF THE INTERSECTION.

IS THAT CORRECT? MAY, MAY I ASK, IS THIS A PD OR AN SUP? AND I SHOULD KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT PLEASE, IT'S AN SUP IN A PD.

UM, IF THE, THE, THE PD CONDITIONS WILL STATE AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF IT THAT, THAT THE, THAT NO PORTIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAY CONTRADICT OR BEING CONFLICT WITH, UH, CITY STANDARDS.

AND SO IN THAT CASE, IF THERE IS A CONFLICT SUCH AS A DRIVEWAY LOCATED WHERE IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE, THEN UH, STAFF WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO APPROVE, UM, EVEN IF IT'S APPROVED BY COUNSEL, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT UNLESS THE PD IN WRITING EXPLICITLY STATES THAT, UH, FOR PURPOSES OF THIS DISTRICT, THE DRIVEWAY DESIGN STANDARDS DO NOT

[01:55:01]

APPLY.

UH, SO AS IT STANDS TODAY, STAFF WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ADMINISTRATIVELY BE ABLE TO APPROVE ANY DRIVEWAY ON IT'S A SMALL SITE.

AND, UM, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT FOR A LONG TIME.

UH, THEY HAVEN'T, AS FAR AS I KNOW, THERE HASN'T BEEN A COMMUNICATION WITH TDOT.

SO THAT'S A, A THIRD LAYER, LET'S JUST SAY THAT.

AND FORGET CITY STANDARDS.

I MEAN, IF YOU PICK PICTURE YOURSELF, THE ONE VEHICLE ATTEMPTING TO EXIT OUT AND GOING OUT EAST ON EEN ROAD, PICTURE YOURSELF, NOT YOURSELF, BUT THE OTHER VEHICLE E EXITING ONTO THE SERVICE ROAD AND THEN TURNING LEFT SO THAT THEY CAN VERY QUICKLY JUST OUT ON IT'S, I KNOW IT'S MINOR, BUT IT BECOMES A REAL, A REAL ISSUE.

UM, THAT'S, I DON'T THINK THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THAT WITH TXDOT AND TXDOT WOULD HAVE A STRONG OPINION ABOUT, BUT SO WHAT YOU'RE CONFIRMING IS THAT NEITHER OF THOSE PROPOSED CURB CUTS CONFORMED TO CITY STANDARD? THAT IS CORRECT, SIR.

AND SO WHAT WE ADVISED THE APPLICANT THAT WAS TO PROCEED WITH THE REQUEST FROM A LAND USE PERSPECTIVE, THAT, UH, WE WOULD WORK WITH THEM AT PERMITTING TO FIGURE SHOULD IT, SHOULD THE COMMISSION MOVE FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL THAT WE WOULD WORK WITH THEM, CONTINUE WORKING WITH THEM TO IDENTIFY THE RIGHT LOCATION FOR THAT ONE DRIVEWAY TO DISCOURAGE THAT LEFT TURN OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY.

AND THEN AT ONE POINT, UM, CONTINUE THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH, WITH TECHOPS.

COMMISSIONER RUBIN, JUST A FOLLOW UP QUESTION.

I WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SAID IT, THE NEW PLAN CAME IN LATE AND IT'S BEEN A WEEK.

YOU'RE REFERRING TO YOUR WEEK BEING HECTIC, NOT THAT YOU'VE, YOU'VE HAD THE PLAN FOR A WEEK AND DIDN'T SEND IT, RIGHT? YES.

IT'S A GOOD, IT'S A GOOD CLARIFICATION.

I'LL GET IT.

I'LL GET IT OUT.

UM, LEMME SIT BACK DOWN, BUT IT'S BEEN, KATE, WHEN DID IT COME IN? AFTER THE DOCKET WOULD BE THE, THE END, UM, DOCKET CAME IN.

I'LL, I'LL, I'LL FIND THE DATE, THE TIME FOR YOU.

AND WE'VE LAST HAD THIS CASE OFF AT THE PLAN COMMISSION EARLY NOVEMBER, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

THANK YOU MR. PEP.

AND MS. SINGLETON, GOOD MORNING.

WE'LL, UH, WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR,

[34. 24-263 DCA189-001(KS) 1. Suspension of CPC Rules of Procedure Section 13(f)(7) to not require ZOAC to make a recommendation to the commission regarding amendments to Article IV, “Zoning regulations.” If #1 is approved, then consideration of #2. 2. Consideration of amending Chapter 51A of the Dallas Development Code, Subsection (i), “Certificates for demolition for a residential structure with no more than 3,000 square feet of floor area pursuant to a court order,” within Section 51A-4.501, “Historic Overlay District,” and related sections with consideration to be given to remove this Subsection and other appropriate standards.]

UH, CODE AMENDMENT.

WE'LL COME BACK AND, AND PICK UP THE D SEVEN AND THE 1D 11 CASE, UH, IN A BIT.

SUBSECTION I OF SECTION 51, A 4.501, CURRENT REGULATIONS, AND SUBSECTION I, WITHIN CHAPTER 51, A 4.501 WAS DEVELOPED TO ADDRESS SUBSTANDARD AND NUISANCE STRUCTURES, THE SUBSECTION ORDER DEMOLITION OF HOMES AND BUILDINGS UNDER 3000 SQUARE FEET PURSUANT TO A COURT ORDER.

WE WERE HAVING, UH, WE WERE SHUFFLING CHAIRS AND MAKING SURE I KNEW WHAT I WAS DOING.

UM, DC A 180 9 DASH ZERO ONE KS, THE PROPOSAL IS A CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING CHAPTER 51 A OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE SEC, UH, SUBSECTION I CERTIFICATES OF DEMOLITION FOR RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WITH NO MORE THAN 3000 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA PURSUANT TO A COURT ORDER WITHIN SECTION 51, A 4.501 HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT AND RELATED SECTIONS WITH A CONSIDERATION TO BE GIVEN TO REMOVE THIS SUBSECTION AND OTHER APPROPRIATE STANDARDS.

SO THIS WAS ADOPTED, THE BACKGROUND AND HISTORY.

JUNE 23RD, 2010.

UH, THIS SUBSECTION WAS ADOPTED FOR CERTIFICATES OF A DEMOLITION OF A FOR A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WITH NO MORE THAN 3000 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA PURSUANT TO A COURT ORDER.

IN OCTOBER, OCTOBER 4TH, 2018, CPC INITIATED AN AMENDMENT TO THIS SECTION.

AND THEN IN AU AUGUST 14TH, 2019, THE CITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY PASSED A RESOLUTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER NOT TO SPEND ANY CITY FUNDS OR RESOURCES DEMOLISHING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE 10TH STREET DISTRICT UNLESS THE DALLAS FIRE MARSHAL FOUND THAT THE STRUCTURE WAS HAZARD AS TO LIFE PROPERTY AND PRESENTED A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DALLAS FIRE CODE IN DEVELOPMENT CODE ON SEPTEMBER 5TH, 2023.

THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REQUESTED THAT CPC RESCIND

[02:00:01]

THE SUBSECTION STATES THAT LANDMARK COMMISSION MUST GRANT DEMOLITION.

THE COMMISSION DOES NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS, WHICH MAY TAKE LONGER THAN THE SUSPENSION PERIOD ALLOWS.

AND THE SUSPENSION PERIODS THERE ARE, UM, THERE ARE TECHNICALLY TWO SUSPENSION PERIODS.

THE FIRST ONE IS FOR, UH, FROM ONE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO THE NEXT.

SO THAT'S 30 TO 35 DAYS.

THE SEC SECOND ONE IS A 60 DAY SUSPENSION PERIOD.

SO THAT'S ABOUT 90 TO A HUNDRED DAYS IN A SUSPENSION PERIOD.

THERE'S NO OPPORTUNITY TO DR.

ADDRESS THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OR THE INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING OR CONDUCT A CONDITION ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPERTY, THE IMPACT OF THE REGULATIONS.

UM, PLEASE NOTE THAT, UH, THESE REGULATIONS ACTUALLY IMPACT ABOUT 90% OF THE HOUSES IN THE 21 HISTORIC DISTRICTS THAT ARE 3000 SQUARE FEET OR LESS.

AND FROM 2010 TO 2019, WHEN THE OTHER SUSPENSION OCCURRED, THE 10TH STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT ALONE LOST AT LEAST 30 HOMES TO, UM, THE, THE SUBSECTION UNDER THE CODE OF THOSE 30 17 WERE CONTRIBUTING TO THE 10TH STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT.

SO, UM, THE MAP ON THE RIGHT SHOWS THAT, UM, THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES THAT HAVE BEEN TORN DOWN IN SOME OF THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.

THIS IS ONE OF THE SUCCESS STORIES WHEN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, UM, WE DON'T WANNA SAY GOES ROGUE, BUT, UM, PUSHES TO SEE IF THEY CAN GET A BUILDING REHABILITATED.

AND THIS WAS ONE THAT WAS TAKEN OVER AND WAS REHABILITATED.

THE PROPOSED ACTION AND IMPACT IS TO, UH, IMPACT IS TO REMOVE SUBSECTION I IN SECTION 51 A DASH 4.501, AND ALLOW THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO UTILIZE OTHER SECTIONS OF THE CODE TO ADDRESS NEW NUISANCE OR UNSAFE PROPERTIES.

THERE ARE ACTUALLY WITHIN THE ENABLING, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY THREE DIFFERENT, UM, SECTIONS THAT ADDRESS DEMOLITION OF HAZARDOUS AND SUBSTANDARD HOUSING.

THIS WOULD ALLOW THE LANDMARK COMMISSION STAFF AND PRESERVATION PARTNERS, NEIGHBORHOOD ADVOCATES TO WORK TOGETHER TOWARDS BETTER OUTCOMES.

THE STAFF RATIONALE IS THE CURRENT CODE IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE OF PRESERVATION AND BEST PRESERVATION, UH, PRACTICES.

ABATING NUISANCES BY DEMOLITION IS INCONGRUOUS WITH PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS.

THERE'S NO OPPORTUNITY, AGAIN, TO ADDRESS THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE AND INTEGRITY OR CONDUCT A, A CONDITION ASSESSMENT.

AND IT ENCOURAGES DEMOLITION OF HOUSES THAT COULD BE REHABILITATED.

AND I WILL SAY, I WILL ADD TO THIS, THAT ONCE YOU START DEMOLISHING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, THE ONLY THING THAT HAPPENS IS MORE DEMOLITIONS, OTHER SECTIONS OF THE CODE ADDRESS SUBSTANDARD OR UNSAFE PRACTICES.

THE FIRE MARSHAL AND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL CAN ALSO, UM, MITIGATE BY, UH, IF IT'S A HAZARDOUS SITUATION.

THE SUBSECTION STATES THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION MUST GRANT DEMOLITION.

THE COMMISSION DOES NOT HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS BECAUSE THERE'S LITERALLY NOT ENOUGH TIME TO DO SO.

IT IMPACTS OUR LOW INCOME HISTORIC DISTRICTS, MUCH MORE THAN ANY OF THE OTHER ONES.

AGAIN, UM, WE'VE LOST 30 HOUSES IN 10TH STREET AND FIVE IN WHEATLEY PLACE, AND, AND WHEATLEY IS A VERY STABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO THAT, THAT HAS BEEN VERY CONCERNING THERE TOO.

THE LOSS OF HISTORIC FABRIC IS IMPORTANT IN THESE DIVERSE, HIS, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICTS, AND WE CANNOT GET THEM BACK.

AND WE ALSO ARE LOSING LOW

[02:05:01]

TO MODERATE INCOME HOUSING FROM THESE NEIGHBORHOODS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. TON QUESTIONS MR. RUBEN? YEAH.

JUST, UH, UH, A FEW QUESTIONS.

YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT EVERYTHING HAS TO GO THROUGH THE NORMAL PROCEDURE EVERY TIME, BUT THERE IS A REQUEST TO BYPASS ZAC HERE.

WHAT'S STAFF'S RATIONALE FOR DOING THAT? WE HAD, UH, A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS WITH THE SENIOR PLANNING STAFF AND WITH THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, AND IT WAS FELT THAT SINCE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION THOROUGHLY VETTED THIS AND THOROUGHLY DISCUSSED IT, THAT THEY FELT THAT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO GO FROM LANDMARK COMMISSION TO CPC.

AND ONE OTHER QUESTION.

WE TALK ABOUT COURT ORDERED DEMOLITIONS UNDER THIS PROVISION.

COULD A PRIVATE CITIZEN GO INTO COURT AND GET AN ORDER TO DEMOLISH? WHO IS, WHO WOULD BE THE ONE GOING INTO COURT? OUR, MOST OF THEM HAVE BEEN THE CITY ATTORNEY, BUT WE HAVE HAD INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE COME IN AND DONE COURT ORDERED DEMOLITIONS.

AND I WILL NOTE AGAIN THAT THERE ARE OTHER PROVISIONS IN THIS CODE THAT ALLOWS, IF IT, IF IT'S SUBSTANDARD OR THERE'S BEEN A FIRE OR IT'S A HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUE, THEN IT CAN BE TORN DOWN.

AND IT'S THE INDIVIDUALS THAT OWN THE PROPERTY THAT COME IN TO GET THE COURT ORDER.

BUT THE MAJORITY ARE THE CITY ATTORNEY, THE CITY ITSELF COMING IN.

COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, FOLLOW BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.

AND THERE SEEMS TO BE THIS TENSION WHERE MAYBE THE LEFT HAND OF THE CITY WASN'T TALKING TO THE RIGHT HAND OF THE CITY WHEN, WHEN THESE THINGS WERE BEING CONSIDERED IN SOME OF OUR LOWER INCOME HISTORIC DISTRICTS.

I JUST WANTED TO PURSUE THAT QUESTION A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.

UM, SO LET'S SAY THAT A COURT ORDER IS PUT IN PLACE TO DEMOLISH THE HOUSE.

HOW WOULD THIS CHANGE THAT WE'RE CONTEMPLATING TODAY PLAY OUT? IT WOULD JUST SIMPLY MEAN WE'VE GOT MORE TIME.

OR WOULD IT JUST MEAN THAT YOU COULDN'T GET A COURT ORDER? HELP ME UNDERSTAND.

NO, YOU COULD STILL GET A COURT ORDER AND IT WOULD BECOME THE ITEM ON THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AGENDA, AND THEN THE PROPERTY WOULD BE ASSESSED AS TO IF, IF IT WAS, SAY SOMEONE BROUGHT A COURT ORDER BECAUSE THE HOUSE WAS IN VERY BAD CONDITION AND THERE HAD BEEN A FIRES IN IT OR WHATEVER, THEN IF IT WAS BAD ENOUGH, THE FIRE MARSHAL CAN GO AHEAD AND AND APPROVE IT RIGHT AWAY.

THE BUILDING OFFICIAL DOES HAVE, UH, A PROCESS BY WHICH THEY CAN DO IT.

AND THEN THIRD ONE IS IF IT IS IN BAD SHAPE AND AN INDIVIDUAL COMES IN WITH COURT ORDER, THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THE REGULAR DEMOLITION, UH, PROCESS WITH THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION COULD, COULD APPROVE IT BECAUSE IT WAS CONSIDERED SUBSTANDARD OR IN VERY BAD CONDITION.

AND THEN, UM, ANOTHER QUESTION PIGGYBACKING ON COMMISSIONER RUBIN.

UM, WE COULD, IF WE WISH, MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, UM, RUN THIS THROUGH ZO OAC AND STILL TAKE THE, AND STILL DELETE THIS LANGUAGE, BUT RUN IT THROUGH ZAC FIRST.

WE COULD MAKE THAT, YES, SIR.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS PROCESS STARTED WITH THE, THE PROCESS TO REMOVE THIS ORDINANCE STARTED WITH A CPC MEMO IN BACK IN 2018.

WHY IS IT JUST NOW COMING TO US IN JANUARY OF 2024? I WOULD SAY STAFF TURNOVER IN THE, IN THE COMMISSION, IN THE, UM, HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION.

AND I THINK IT JUST, IT JUST, AND I WILL TELL YOU THIS, I WAS HERE WHEN THIS WAS FIRST INITIATED BACK IN 2008, 2009, AND WE, WE AS STAFF, THE PRESERVATION COMMUNITY AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DID NOT WANT THIS SUBSECTION IN THE ORDINANCE.

AND SO I WILL TELL YOU THAT EVERYONE IN THE PRESERVATION COMMUNITY AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS REALLY HAPPY THAT THIS IS FINALLY COMING FORWARD.

AND WE'VE HEARD FROM 10TH STREET AND, UH, SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE WHO, WHO ARE GLAD THAT WE ARE FINALLY MAKING THIS HAPPEN.

APPRECIATE IT.

IT WAS IN 2019, IT WAS ON THE NATIONAL REGISTERS MOST ENDANGERED PLACES.

UM, JUST ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THIS QUESTION OF TIMING.

YOU KNOW, I THINK WE HEARD THAT CPC HAD A MEMO IN 2018.

I KNOW IN THE CASE OF 10TH STREET SPECIFICALLY, THERE HAD BEEN A NUMBER OF DEMOLITIONS THAT HAD TAKEN PLACE.

UM, I BELIEVE

[02:10:01]

IT WAS THEN FOLLOWED BY THE CITY ACTION IN 2019 THAT REMOVED THE PUBLIC FUNDS.

BUT THIS HAS BEEN ESSENTIALLY AN ONGOING DISCUSSION POINT AT LANDMARK COMMISSION SINCE 20 18, 20 19, PROBABLY EVEN BEFORE THAT TODAY.

SO WE'VE HAD FIVE YEARS EITHER THROUGH CASES OR THROUGH, UM, CONSIDERATION BY THAT BODY ON THE LANGUAGE, THE IMPACT OF IT, AND WHAT MIGHT BE THE APPROPRIATE COURSE.

IS THAT FAIR TO SAY? I WOULD SAY IT WOULD EVEN GO BACK TO ABOUT 2011.

RIGHT AFTER THIS WAS IMPLEMENTED, WHEN THEY, WHEN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION STARTED TO SEE THE DEMOLITION REQUESTS COME IN, THE COURT ORDERED THE, UM, THEY WERE VERY CONCERNED THEN.

AND SO WHEN LANDMARK CONSIDERED THIS LAST FALL AND ASKED FOR IT TO BE BROUGHT FORWARD ON THE AGENDA, THEY ASKED FOR AN EXPEDITED REVIEW BY THIS BODY, REALLY RECOGNIZING THAT KIND OF, THAT THAT HOMEWORK THAT YOU WOULD SEE COMING OUT OF ZAC HAS BEEN PART OF THE ONGOING PUBLIC DEBATE REGARDING THIS.

AND I, I BELIEVE ALSO THAT, UM, BECAUSE OF THE 2019 ACTION BY CITY COUNCIL TO, UH, REQUEST THAT FUNDS NOT BE USED FOR COURT ORDERED DEMOLITIONS, I THINK THEY FELT THAT COUNSEL WAS SENDING THEM THE MESSAGE THAT IT'S TIME TO RESEND THIS AND REMOVE IT FROM THE SUBSECTION.

AND I THINK I HEARD VERY CL CLEARLY, BUT JUST WANTED TO YOU MAYBE RESTATE THE PROCESS FOR DEMOLITION IS STILL THERE.

OH, YES.

AGAIN, NOT THAT I THINK THAT'S ANYONE'S PREFERRED OUTCOME, CLEARLY IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT AGAIN, THAT PROCESS STILL EXISTS AND REMOVING THIS LANGUAGE DOESN'T REMOVE THAT DISCUSSION POINT.

RIGHT THERE, THERE'S STILL OPPORTUNITY IF, IF IT'S NEEDED TO DEMOLISH.

OF HEARING AND JUST A, A PEEK AHEAD.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MS. SINGLETON.

COMMISSIONERS WILL MOVE ON TO OUR AUTHORIZATION

[35. 24-262 A City Plan Commission authorized hearing to determine the proper zoning for the area to include but not limited to use, development standards, and other appropriate regulations in an area generally, along both sides of Edgefield Avenue from Tennessee Avenue to the alley south of Newport Avenue, both sides of Balboa Drive between Pioneer Drive and Berkley Avenue, both sides of Ferndale Avenue from the alley east of Tennessee Avenue to the alley east of Balboa Drive, both sides of Brunner Avenue, between Balboa Drive and Edgefield Drive, and both sides of Newport Avenue between Balboa Drive and Edgefield Drive, and containing approximately 14 acres.]

UH, WE'LL TRY TO PICK UP THE CASES IN DISTRICT SEVEN AND 11, HOPEFULLY BEFORE LUNCH.

WE ARE GONNA HAVE A WORKING LUNCH TODAY, COMMISSIONERS, WHERE WE'LL DO OUR UPDATE TO FOR DALLAS AND THE ANNUAL REPORT COMMISSIONERS.

WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA, UH, PUNT ON THAT ONE UNTIL OUR NEXT HEARING WHERE WE'LL HAVE THE REPORT AND, UM, COUPLE ADMISSION STATEMENTS FOR US TO, TO VOTE ON.

AND WITH THAT, WE ARE READY FOR AUTHORIZED HEARING.

GOOD MORNING, GENTLEMEN.

AND WE ARE GIVING CONSIDERATION TO THE USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD AND OTHER APPROPRIATE REGULATION.

THE AREA OF REQUEST IS APPROXIMATELY 14 ACRES AND THE AUTHORIZED HEARING IS BEING IMPLEMENTED.

THE AUTHORIZED HEARING IS BEING IMPLEMENTED AS PART OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WEST OAKLEY, UH, AREA PLAN.

SO HERE'S THE LOCATION MAP AND THE VICINITY MAP AND THE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA OF REQUEST HERE AT THE AERIALS OF THE AREA.

UH, THE ONE ON THE TOP ARE OF THE TAKEN, UH, PHOTOS TAKEN ON EDGEFIELD LOOKING NORTH AND ON THE BOTTOM LOOKING SOUTH.

THESE ARE ADDITIONAL PHOTOS TAKEN ON DALE AVENUE, WHICH IS ONE OF THE STREETS IN THE AREA.

AND THEN THE PHOTOS TAKEN OF MAJOR INTERSECTIONS IN THE AREA OF REQUEST.

SO, UH, JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING, UH, THE PRIMARY IMPETUS WAS TO IMPLEMENT, UH, WEST OAKCLIFF AREA PLAN, WHICH WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE COUNCIL IN 2022.

AND IT PROVIDES THE REVITALIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT VISION FOR THE AREA OF REQUEST.

THAT PLAN DID IDENTIFY SEVERAL FOCUS AREAS AND PROVIDED LAND USE AND ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SOME OF THOSE AREAS, OF WHICH THE AREA OF REQUEST IS ONE OF THEM.

[02:15:01]

UH, WE DO HAVE ABOUT FIVE, UH, AUTHORIZED HEARING IN THIS AREA, AND THIS IS THE FIRST ONE THERE THAT IS COMING TO YOU.

WE'RE GONNA BE HAVING ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZED HEARING COMING TO THIS BODY.

UH, THIS IS A DESCRIPTION OF THE REVITALIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT VISION FOR THE AREA.

IT GIVES SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION FOR LAND USE AND ZONING, AND THAT CALLS OUT, UH, FORM DISTRICT FOR THE AREA.

IT ALSO KIND OF SPECIFIES THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS AND THE TYPE OF USES THAT THE COMMUNITY VISION, UH, RECOMMENDS FOR THE AREA.

AGAIN, UH, WORKUP IS MEANT TO ENCOURAGE, UH, THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS AREA AS OUR WALKABLE MIX USE DISTRICT.

UH, THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC THINGS THAT WERE CALLED OUT IN THE PLAN.

UH, UH, THEY DID RECOMMEND THAT WE LOOK INTO THEM WHEN WE ARE DOING THE REZONING.

SO ONE OF THOSE THINGS WAS TO LOOK AT AMENDING THE CURRENT ZONING CR TO PERMIT RESTAURANTS TO SELL ALCOHOL NEAR SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES BY SUP.

AND THIS WAS MEANT TO ENCOURAGE, UH, ATTRACTION OF, UH, THESE USERS INTO THE, THE AREA.

IT ALSO TALKED ABOUT, UH, PACKING IN GENERAL AND HOW WE CAN LOOK AT, UH, REDUCTION OF PACKING IN THE DISTRICT.

SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT WE DID LOOK AT, WHICH TYPICALLY ARE NOT PART OF THE AUTHORIZED SHARING, BUT BECAUSE WE WERE IMPLEMENTING AN AREA PLAN, WE DID TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE.

UH, HERE IS AN AREA OF THE LAND USE IN THE AREA, ALTHOUGH THE DISTRICT IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE.

UH, YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF USES THAT ARE BORDERING THE DISTRICT, UH, RANGING FROM, UH, RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, OPEN SPACE, AND, UH, CIVIC INSTITUTIONS.

UH, THE MAP TO THE RIGHT IS THE ZONING MAP FOR THE AREA.

IT DOES HAVE A SINGLE, UH, ZONING DISTRICT, COMMUNITY RETAIL.

UH, I DO HAVE HERE TABLE AND CHART THAT KIND OF SUMMARIZES THE LAND USES IN THE AREA.

AND IT GIVES YOU A SUMMARY OF WHAT, UH, DO EXIST WITHIN THE AREA OF REQUEST.

UH, LIKE I SAID, IT DOES HAVE A SINGLE ZONING DISTRICT, UH, COMMUNITY RETAIL, AND IT'S CURRENTLY DEVELOPED MOSTLY WITH COMMUNITY SERVING RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICES.

UH, THERE ARE SOME INSTITUTIONAL USES AND ALSO A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IN THE AREA.

SO WHAT STAFF IS PROPOSING FOR THIS AREA IS A FORM DISTRICT, UH, WALKABLE URBAN MIX USE DISTRICT THREE.

AND, UH, IT'S, WE DID PICK THAT BECAUSE IT'S THE LOWEST INTENSITY OF THE SIX WORKABLE MIXED USE DISTRICT, UH, IN THE FORM DISTRICT, UH, AREA.

ALSO, THAT TYPE OF ZONING DISTRICT WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING PRESIDENTIAL USERS.

AND IT DOES ALIGN WITH WORKUP'S GOAL OF TRANSFORMING THE AREA INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE MIXED USE CENTER THAT IS PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY.

SO TYPICALLY A FARM DISTRICT HAS BOTH DEVELOPMENT TYPES AND USE THAT ARE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT.

UH, THE, THE, THEY'RE LISTED HERE ON THE CITY, I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THEM, BUT IT KIND OF IDENTIFIES THE DEVELOPMENT TYPES THAT ARE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT AND THE PRINCIPAL USES THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IF THIS WERE TO BE IMPLEMENTED.

UH, THIS TABLE KIND OF GIVES A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAILS ON THOSE PRINCIPAL USES THAT ARE ALLOWED.

SO IT GIVES A BREAKDOWN, UH, OF THE USE CATEGORIES THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT UNDER WM U THREE.

AND THIS TABLE KIND OF SUMMARIZES, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT TIME AND GIVES A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE EXISTING, UH, COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT VERSUS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING, WHICH IS THE WMU THREE.

AND JUST KIND OF TO GIVE A HIGHLIGHT ON THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UH, WE ARE RECOMMENDING A W UH, MU THREE, WHICH IS WALKABLE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT.

UH, IT HAS A HEIGHT RESTRICTION OF 50 FEET.

UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE WORKUP RECOMMENDED VISION FOR THIS AREA, IT CALLS THAT THE BUILDING HEIGHTS BE LIMITED TO WHAT IS CURRENTLY AROUND UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING, WHICH IS 54 FEET.

SO THAT WAS THE CLOSEST THAT NSUS URBAN DISTRICT THAT WE DID FIND A MOST APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA.

[02:20:03]

AND THEN, LIKE I SAID, WE ARE IMPLEMENTING THIS AS PART OF, UH, THE COMMUNITY VISION FOR REVITALIZING THE AREA.

WORKUP SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT DURING THE REZONING WE SHOULD CONSIDER INFRASTRUCTURE ENHANCEMENT.

AND SO A PART OF THIS EXERCISE HAS BEEN, UH, UH, IN, HAS INVOLVED LOOKING AT INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT IN THE AREA.

AND WE DID PARTNER WITH, UH, TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TO TAKE A LOOK AT POTENTIAL, UH, UH, IMPROVEMENT THAT WE COULD MAKE IN THE PUBLIC REALM.

SO WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH A TEAM OF, UH, STAFF ON A NUMBER OF THINGS.

AND WE DID LOOK AT THE AREA AND THE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LAND THAT IS DESIGNATED AS PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR IMPROVEMENT.

SO THE NEXT PAGE, UH, GIVES YOU, UH, A VISUAL KIND OF A PLAN, A CONCEPTUAL PLAN OF SOME OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ENHANCEMENT THAT WE'VE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THAT EXERCISE.

UH, SO WE DID LOOK AT PARKING IN GENERAL 'CAUSE THE COMMUNITY POINTED OUT THAT THAT WAS CRITICAL FOR THEM.

AND, UH, WE, UH, MADE, UH, AN OUR ANALYSIS AND FOUND OUT THAT IF WE DO IMPLEMENT, UH, THE FORM DISTRICT, UH, WALKABLE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE, UH, THE AREA WE'VE, UH, REALIZED SIGNIFICANT PARKING REDUCTION.

UH, WE DID A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS LOOKING AT THE EXISTING USES, AND WE DID FIND THAT THERE WOULD BE, UH, A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PARKING REDUCTION THAT WOULD BE REALIZED IF WE DID IMPLEMENT THIS.

AND THEN ALSO IN THE LONG TERM, WE ARE LOOKING AT TRACK COMING MEASURES THAT WOULD BE IMPLEMENTED AS PART OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ENHANCEMENT, SIDEWALK ENHANCEMENT, EARLY ACTIVATION TO BE, UH, TO ALLOW THE BUSINESS TO ACCESS PACKING IN THE BACK AND THEN IMPROVEMENT OF ALICE IN GENERAL.

SO ANOTHER THING THAT WAS POINTED OUT IN THE WORKUP PLAN WAS TO TAKE A LOOK AT, UH, UH, HOW WE CAN ACTIVATE THE STREETS HERE.

AND SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING A SHOPFRONT OVERLAY THAT TO DO CREATE AN ACTIVE SHOPPING DISTRICT.

AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT FOR TWO MAJOR STREETS IN THE DISTRICT THAT IS, UH, SOUTH EDGEFIELD AND FINDEL.

AND THE MAP ON THE SCREEN SHOWS WHERE THOSE ARE LOCATED.

UH, THIS KIND OF JUST GIVES YOU AN GENERAL OVERVIEW OF WHAT WOULD BE THE IDEAL SITUATION IF THIS WERE IMPLEMENTED.

THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

IT WOULD HAVE ACTIVE USES THAT WOULD MAKE THE, UH, THE STREETS MORE VIBRANT FOR RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY.

AND THEN THE OTHER THING ALSO THAT WAS POINTED OUT IN THE WORKER PLAN WAS FOR STAFF TO LOOK AT AMENDING THE SIERRA ZONING TO PERMIT RESTAURANT TO SELL ALCOHOL NEAR SCHOOLS.

UH, SO PART OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE ARE MAKING IS THAT WE DO KEEP THE, UH, ALCOHOL CELL SEPARATION DISTANCE IN PLACE.

WE DID DO A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS TO LOOK AT THE AREAS THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED IF YOU WERE TO IMPLEMENT IT.

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE ENTIRE DISTRICT.

THE, THE AREA THAT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN, UH, UH, PURPLE IS WHAT WOULD BE IMPACTED IF WE WERE TO IMPLEMENT THIS.

AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT BUSINESSES THAT ARE LOCATED IN THOSE SHADED AREAS, UH, CONSIDER GOING FOR A VARIANCE IF THEY WANT TO SELL ALCOHOL.

OTHERWISE, UH, UH, I THINK, UH, THE MAIN PRIMARY STREETS WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO SELL ALCOHOL.

THEY WON'T BE IMPACTED BY THE ALCOHOL SEPARATION DISTANCE.

AND THEN WE DO HAVE RESIDENTIAL PRO PROXIMITY SLOPE THAT WOULD BE APPLICABLE IN THIS AREA TO PROTECT THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL AREA.

THERE IS AN EXISTING RPS OF THREE TO ONE THAT WOULD ALLOW, WOULD RESTRICT THE HEIGHT OF BUILDING HERE TO GO NOT MORE THAN 50 FEET AS RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.

SO IN GENERAL, WE ARE PROPOSING A FORM DISTRICT WALKABLE URBAN MIX USE DISTRICT THREE, UH, BECAUSE IT ALIGNS WITH WORKUP.

UH, WE ARE ALSO, UH, RECOMMENDING THAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT BUILDING BE REDUCED FROM 54 FEET.

THAT IS CURRENTLY AROUND UNDER CR UH, COMMUNITY RETAIL ZONING TO 50 FEET.

UH, WE ARE ALSO REMA RECOMMENDING THAT THE EXISTING RPS OF 3, 2 1 BE RETAINED.

AND ALSO WE ARE RECOMMENDING A SHOP FRONT OVER OVERLAY IN TWO OF THE MAJOR STREETS IN THE DISTRICT.

AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF OUR WORKABLE MIX USE, UH, WORKABLE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT THREE, UH, WITH A SHELF FRONT OVERLAY ON A PORTION OF THE DISTRICT.

[02:25:01]

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES.

UM, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT IS ACHIEVABLE AND A STRAIGHT ZONING CHANGE AND WHAT THE WOKE CAP RECOMMENDATIONS WERE.

SPECIFICALLY THE WOKE CAP RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT THE, THE AREA WANTED TO LIMIT, UM, MULTI-FAMILY TO 12 UNITS OR LESS AND TO TOWN HOMES.

WHAT KIND OF, OF, UM, RESTRICTIONS ON MULTIFAMILY OR WHAT, WHAT HOUSING OPTIONS ARE THEREBY, RIGHT? I MEAN, IS IT GOING TO GET ANYWHERE CLOSE TO WHAT THE, UM, THE COMMUNITY WAS, WAS ASKING? YEAH, SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT SITES, IT WOULD ALLOW TOWN HOMES, WHICH IS WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTED, AND IT WOULD ALSO ALLOW, UH, MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING.

BUT BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION, THOSE BUILDINGS MAYBE MIGHT NOT GO AS HIGH FOR MORE THAN THREE STORIES.

SO YOU'D STILL BE ABLE TO GET SOME MULTIFAMILY, SMALL SCALE MULTIFAMILY BUILDING, BUT NOT NECESSARILY THE HIGH RISE OR ANYTHING BEYOND 12 UNITS.

BUT A A THREE STORY MULTI, UH, FAMILY BUILDING COULD STILL HOLD CONSIDERABLY MORE THAN THAN 12 UNITS.

SO THERE IS NO SPECIFIC NUMBER OF UNITS MM-HMM.

THAT IS RESTRICTED.

THEY JUST WANTED THEM TO BE KIND OF, UH, LIMITED IN SCALE.

MM-HMM, , UH, THE WAY THE LOTS ARE, THEY'RE NOT LARGE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL UNITS UNLESS THEY GO AND ACQUIRE PROPERTIES AND REPORT THEM.

SO I THINK THE, THE ZONING RECOMMENDATION THAT STAFF IS MAKING IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH WORKUP VISION FOR THE AREA.

IN TERMS OF MULTI-FAMILY UNITS, UH, I THINK THE RPS ALSO PLAYS A ROLE, YOU KNOW, THEY, FOR YOU TO GO UP TO THREE STORIES, YOU REALLY HAVE TO BE AT THE, AT THE CENTER OF THE DISTRICT.

MOST OF THEM WANT TO BE ABLE TO GO BEYOND TWO STORIES AND WHERE THE, THEY ALSO EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO ENABLE, UM, BUSINESSES SELLING ALCOHOL TO NOT BE AFFECTED BY THE 300 FOOT SEPARATION.

I KNOW, AND WHEN I READ THE REPORT, UM, IT INITIALLY, I MEAN, INITIALLY STRUCK ME THAT IT WAS JUST A, A SMALL PORTION OF THE EASTERN PART OF THIS, UM, AREA THAT WAS AFFECTED.

BUT WHEN I WENT FURTHER INTO THE REPORT, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT PORTION, ABOUT HALF SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

UM, AND ASKING PEOPLE TO GO TO A VARIANCE PROCESS JUST SEEMS LIKE ANOTHER BARRIER.

GRANTED, AN SUP CAN BE A BARRIER ALSO, BUT IT DOES GIVE THE NEIGHBORS AN OPTION TO, UH, POTENTIALLY PUT AN END TO BAD OPERATORS.

COULD YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON THAT? SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MAP, I THINK THE AREA THAT IS AFFECTED IS, UH, NOT REALLY THE, THE, THE, THE MAJOR STREETS AND UH, OUR, OUR ARGUMENT WAS THAT TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, IF YOU ARE ABOUT A RESTAURANT, YOU WANT TO BE LOCATED IN AN AREA THAT IS MORE PROMINENT.

MORE ACCESSIBLE.

SO IDEALLY, WE DON'T EXPECT A LOT OF THESE BARS WANT TO LOCATE IN THOSE AREAS.

LOOK ME THAT THEY'LL GO FOR THE PRIMARY.

BUT I THINK THE MAIN REASON WHY WE DID RECOMMEND WHAT WE DID WAS BECAUSE, UH, ALCOHOL SALE IS NOT NECESSARILY A ZONING ISSUE.

, IT'S MORE OF A, A, A, A B, A E ISSUE.

SO, UH, I THINK, UH, PROBABLY THEY NEED TO PURSUE A DIFFERENT AVENUE THAN AN AUTHORIZED HEARING PROCESS.

, WE ALSO DID REALIZE THAT THAT WAS GONNA DELAY THE PROCESS BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF GROUPS, YOU KNOW, INTEREST GROUPS THAT WERE NOT KEEN ON SEEING ALCOHOL BEING SOLD NEXT TO A CHURCH OR A SCHOOL, AND THEY WOULD BE IN OPPOSITION.

SO TO, TO KIND OF STRIKE A BALANCE IN GAINING SUPPORT FOR THE ZONING CHANGE.

WE DID SET UP FOR A MIDDLE GROUND, BUT THE PRIMARY REASON WAS THAT THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY A ZONING OR AN AUTHORIZED ISSUE ISSUE, BUT FERN, BUT FERNWOOD AND EDGEFIELD WERE THE STREETS THAT ARE DESIGNATED AS, UM, SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

SO THOSE PRESUMABLY WOULD BE THE STREETS THAT THAT TYPE OF BUSINESS WOULD, WOULD GRAVITATE TOWARD, OR, YEAH.

THOSE TYPE OF BUSINESS WOULD PROBABLY GRAVITATE TOWARDS THE EDGE FIELD, WHICH IS THE PRIMARY STREET WHERE A LOT OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND AMENITIES EXIST TO SUPPORT THAT, THOSE TYPE OF USE.

ANOTHER, MAY I CONTINUE? CHAIR? OKAY.

JUST, YOU KNOW, BY DOING THE ZONING CHANGE, UH, TO A FORM DISTRICT, MOST OF THE, THE, THE, THE STRUCTURES WOULD, WOULD REALIZE REDUCTION IN PACKING REQUIREMENTS.

I HAVE ALL QUESTIONS.

UM, ANOTHER THING THAT I DISCERNED IN, IN WHAT, UH, THE WCAP NEIGHBORS WERE WANTING, UM, WAS, UM, A WAY TO INCENTIVIZE PRESERVATION OF LEGACY STRUCTURES THROUGH, YOU KNOW, UM, PROVISIONS THAT WE'VE WRITTEN INTO OTHER PDS.

YOU KNOW, THAT IF YOU HAVE A LEGACY STRUCTURE, YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE ZONING.

AND I MEAN, I, I FOLLOWED THE, THE PARKING ARGUMENT THAT YOU HAVE HERE, BUT DOES THIS STRAIGHT ZONING CHANGE, INCENTIVIZE RETENTION OF LEGACY BUILDINGS ANY OTHER WAY? IS THERE ANOTHER AVENUE TO GET THERE? IT DOES, BECAUSE

[02:30:01]

UH, ALSO, I, I I I, I ALSO THINK ALSO THAT, UH, A LOT OF THE BUILDINGS THAT EXIST IN THE DISTRICT WHO ARE BUILT JUST ABOUT THE SAME TIME BETWEEN THE THIRTIES AND FIFTIES MM-HMM.

AND SO IF WE TALK ABOUT LEGACY BUILDING, UH, THE DEFINITION WOULD BE KIND OF TRICKY BECAUSE MOST OF THE BUILDING FIT THE SAME DEFINITION.

THEY ALMOST LOOK ALIKE.

THEY WERE BUILT AROUND THE SAME TIME.

AND THAT WOULD BASICALLY MEAN THAT YOU ARE, UH, CREATING THAT PROVISION FOR ALMOST ALL OF THEM.

BUT I THINK THE MAIN REASON WHY WE DIDN'T GO THAT ROUTE WAS BECAUSE WE ARE CURRENTLY CONSIDERING A PARKING CODE AMENDMENT THAT WILL LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, EITHER REDUCING OR ELIMINATING PACKING COMPLETELY IN DISTRICT LIKE THIS.

AND I THINK WE'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE EXERCISE THAT WE ARE DOING WITH THE OTHER PLANNERS TO LOOK AT THE INFRASTRUCTURE ENHANCEMENT AND PACKING IN THE AREA, WE DID HAVE THE PACKING PLANNER THAT IS OVERSEEING THAT CODE AMENDMENT AND RECOMMENDATION DEVELOPMENT.

AND HE WAS KIND OF GUIDING US AND SHOWING US THAT MAYBE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T NEED TO CONSIDER THIS BECAUSE THE DISTRICT OVERALL HAS EXCESS PARKING.

THERE ARE A LOT OF USES THERE THAT ARE OVERPACKED AND THEY HARDLY EVER USE THOSE PARKING AND THE CONDITIONS ARE NOT REALLY IDEAL.

SO, YOU KNOW, DOING, UH, I THINK OVERALL, YOU KNOW, THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR ANY BUSINESS THAT'S LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING TO ACCESS THOSE PARKING, NOT TO VERIFY FROM THE LOCATION OF THEIR PROPERTY.

SO MAYBE THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR HAS ACCESS PARKING, THEY CAN DO A PARKING AGREEMENT WITH THEM.

SO A LOT OF THE BUSINESS THERE ARE WAY UNDER PARKED, AND YOU CAN EVEN SEE THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE, THOSE PRIVATE PACKING THAT ARE INSIDE THE PROPERTY.

UM, I, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT SHOPFRONT OVERLAYS.

THERE WAS A, A STATEMENT THAT SAID THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY DOES NOT HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LOT LINES OR THE, OR THE PARCEL BOUNDS.

HOW DOES IT, HOW DOES THAT WORK? HOW, HOW DO YOU KNOW WHERE THE BOUNDARIES OF A SHOPFRONT OVERLAY ARE? SO THE, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, A SHOPFRONT OVERLAY IS ONLY APPLICABLE 30 FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE OF THE BUILDING OF THE STRUCTURE.

SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A PARTICULAR BUILDING THAT PROVISION, THAT OVERLAY IS ONLY APPLICABLE 30 FEET INWARD FROM THE FRONT FACADE OF THE STRUCTURE.

SO THAT IS WHERE THOSE RESTRICTION WOULD APPLY.

WHATEVER YOU DO BEYOND THAT IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE SHOW FRONT OVERLAY.

UH, I SAW IN THE, UH, DESCRIPTION OF THE COMMUNITY MEETING, I BELIEVE THE FINAL COMMUNITY MEETING THAT TOOK A VOTE OF PEOPLE PRESENT, AND IT, I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NUMBER, MAYBE 36 TO 17.

CAN, CAN YOU SUMMARIZE WHAT THE, UH, THE MAIN POINTS WERE OF THE PEOPLE IN OPPOSITION? SO WHEN WE WENT TO THIS MEETING, YOU KNOW, WE WERE KIND OF, UH, THAT'S, UH, WHEN WE WERE ACTUALLY PROPOSING, YOU KNOW, THE ZONING RECOMMENDATION FROM SAP, WHAT WE WERE GOING TO RECOMMEND.

AND WE HAD ANTICIPATED THAT THERE'S GONNA BE ANOTHER MEETING, A FOLLOW UP MEETING TO DO TO, AFTER THAT, THE MEETING WAS ATTENDED BY, I THINK ABOUT 60 SOMETHING, 64, UH, PEOPLE.

THE ROOM WAS FULL.

AND WE, AFTER THE PRESENTATION, WE DID SAY THAT, UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE ANOTHER MEETING.

AND I THINK A COUPLE PEOPLE DID OPPOSE THAT WE SHOULD JUST TAKE THIS BECAUSE IT'S TAKEN TOO LONG TO THE CPC.

AND, UH, IT WASN'T STAFF THAT RECOMMENDED, ONE OF THE ATTENDEES DID RECOMMEND THAT LET'S TAKE A VOTE.

AND BY A MAJORITY OF 34 BY 17, MOST OF THEM WERE IN AGREEMENT THAT THEY SHOULD BE ADVANCED TO THE CPC.

THAT'S ALL FOR THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CHERNO.

UH, I'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS, UM, PERTAINING TO EXISTING BUILDING PROTECTIONS, IN PARTICULAR THE VEHICLE SERVICES.

UH, ON, UH, SIX PAGE 16 OF YOUR REPORT, THERE'S A PERMITTED USES CHART.

COULD YOU BRING THAT UP AGAIN? DID YOU SKIP THIS ONE? UH, NO.

IT'S, UH, PAGE 16.

IT'S, IT'S EARLIER.

IT'S FOUR PAGES EARLIER.

THERE YOU GO.

SO UNDER THE FACT, WHERE, WHERE DID THIS CHART COME FROM? IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A SCREENSHOT WITH SOME DROPDOWN BOXES.

IS THAT CHAPTER 51 A OR, THAT'S A SUMMARY OF, UH, 51

[02:35:01]

WMU THREE, IT'S A USED CHART.

UH, BASICALLY JUST STAFF SUMMARY OF THE CHART THAT I WAS SHOWING.

SO, BECAUSE WE COULDN'T FIT THIS IN ONE PAGE, YOU KIND OF SUMMARIZE THIS.

ON THAT, IT KIND OF GIVES DOWN THE BREAKDOWN OF WHAT SPECIFIC USE WOULD EXIST UNDER THE PRINCIPLE USES.

AND THEN IF YOU GO TO THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY, OR EXCUSE ME, ON PAGE 21, THERE'S, THERE'S, UH, ON SHOPFRONT, THERE'S A HYPERLINK INTO THE CHART OF THE ARTICLE 13, AND IT'S, UH, 51 A DASH 13 3 0 4.

SO THAT HYPERLINK RIGHT THERE.

DO YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO HYPERLINK OUT OF THAT OR PROBABLY NOT, RIGHT? I DON'T, WELL, IT TAKES YOU TO THE DEVELOPMENT TYPES IN ARTICLE 13, THIS, WELL, YOU DON'T HAVE IT IN YOUR REPORT, BUT YOU HAVE THE HYPERLINK TO IT IN YOUR REPORT.

SO IT TAKES YOU TO THE DEVELOPMENT TYPES.

AND IN THERE ON SHOPFRONT OVERLAY, IT DOES IT, YOU KNOW, THAT CHART HAS BOXES THAT ARE CHECKED ON WHAT'S ALLOWED AND WHAT'S NOT ALLOWED.

AND UNDER SHOPFRONT OVERLAY IT SAYS MIXED USE, SHOPFRONT ALLOWED SINGLE STORY SHOPFRONT ALLOWED, BUT THEN YOU GET THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL NOT ALLOWED.

I JUST WANNA CON CONFIRM THAT THE VEHICLE SERVICES ARE ALLOWED IN THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

IT IS, IT IS, LIKE I SAID, THE SHORT FRONT OVERLAY IS ONLY APPLICABLE 30 FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE OF THE BUILDING.

SO TYPICALLY WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, WHAT IS INTENDED TO DO IS THAT YOU'D HAVE YOUR, YOUR WAITING ROOM AND THE, THE FRONT OFFICE IN THE FRONT WITHIN THE 30 FEET, AND THEN WHATEVER HAPPENS BEHIND THERE HAS TO BE ALLOWED AS ONE OF, OF THE USE THAT IS ALLOWED ONE.

SO YOU, YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE USE CHART, UH, VEHICLE SERVICE AND VEHICLE SALE IS ALLOWED.

SO THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE BACK.

I GOTCHA.

BUILDING.

AND SO THEN WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS TO, UM, HOW DOES IT WORK FOR, FOR A PROPERTY OWNER OR A BUSINESS OWNER WHO CHANGES OWNERSHIP OR, UM, DOES A RENOVATION AND ARE THEY GRANDFATHERED IN? IS IT, IS THERE POTENTIAL FOR THEM TO LOSE THEIR USE IN PARTICULAR IN THE VEHICLE OWNERSHIP OR THE VEHICLE SERVICES? NOT REALLY.

WHEN THIS, IF THIS IS ADOPTED, MOST OF THE, THE, THE STRUCTURES, UH, ARE GONNA BE NON-CONFORMING, LEGALLY NON-CONFORMING FROM A DEVELOPMENT TIME STANDPOINT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE, UH, THE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT STANDARD FOR, UH, HOME DISTRICTS ARE VERY HIGH.

AND IF YOU, YOU KNOW, THE STRUCTURES, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THEM WON'T REALLY CONFORM.

AND SO WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT WHEN THAT STRUCTURE IS TORN DOWN, OR IF YOU'RE BUILDING A NEW BUILDING, THEN THE NEW STANDARD WOULD APPLY.

BUT FOR THE EXISTING STRUCTURES, EVEN IF THEY SELL THE PROPERTY, AND I'M NOT REALLY THE, THE, THE, I'M NOT REALLY THE ONE TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION, THAT WILL BE A BI THING.

BUT I THINK THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO CONTINUE OPERATING AS LEGALLY NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE.

AND I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION FOR MR. RAINS.

MAYBE AN HOUR IF YOU DROP OFF YOUR CAR TO GET WORKED ON IN THE CAR, THEY SAID FOR DAYS.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE PROCESS IS, UH, SHOULD THIS BE APPROVED, THIS, THIS PLAN? WHAT'S THE PROCESS ON THE PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE FROM THERE TO GET IT IMPLEMENTED? THANK YOU.

WE WORK WITH TRANSPORTATION ABOUT THIS, AND, UH, I THINK, UH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

AS FAR AS THE PROCESS AND HOW TO GET THIS ON THEIR WHEEL SET, THEY'VE ALREADY SET ASIDE SOME MONEY, I BELIEVE, UH, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND TOO, YES.

TO GET THINGS STARTED, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, RIGHT.

ESPECIALLY AT THE INTERSECTION, VE FIELD DALE AS THE BEGINNING.

UM, BUT WHAT WE DID THAT WAS, UH, IMPORTANT IS WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE LEVERAGES THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.

WE LIMITED THE, UH, DRIVEWAY ACCESSES AROUND 24 FEET WIDE, NOT 60 80.

UH, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE WALKABILITY COMPONENT WORKS WELL TOO.

SO THERE IS A PROCESS.

IT MAY TAKE A LITTLE WHILE, BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S IN PLACE.

WE'VE HAD GOOD RATE SUPPORT WITH TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ABOUT THIS, UM, JUST SIMPLY GETTING THE STOP SIGN, , UH, THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT INTERSECTION TOO.

UM, BUT ONE THING THAT WE LEARNED, AND IT'S BEEN A, A REAL HONOR TO WORK WITH SETH HERE, IS THAT, UH, WE LEARNED EARLY ON THAT THERE'S DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS OF PARKING.

UH, IF YOU PARK AT A COFFEE SHOP, YOU'RE THERE FOR

[02:40:01]

SO, UH, WE TRIED TO COMPARTMENTALIZE THE PARKING, YOU SEE IN RED ON THE MAP HERE, THERE'S A, A SPECIFIC TYPE OF SERVICE PARKING THAT'S, UH, WE DON'T WANT CARS TO PARK HALFWAY ON THE STREET AND HALFWAY NOT.

UH, WHAT WE REALIZED IS THERE WAS A OBLIGATION IN THIS PLAN, IF YOU LOOK EARLIER IN THE MAP, 50% OF THE LAND WAS PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

I DON'T THINK OF ANY DISTRICT IN DALLAS HAD THAT MUCH PUBLIC RIGHT OF AWAY, UH, BECAUSE IT WAS A, ABOUT 50% OF THAT 14 ACRES.

SO IT WAS ALL UTILIZED INCORRECTLY.

IT WASN'T LEVERAGED IN SUCH A WAY.

SO THERE'S A COMPARTMENTALIZED TYPE OF SERVICE PARKING IN RED, AND THEN THE ORANGE IS MORE LIKE THE STOREFRONT TYPE PARKING, WHICH IS THE PULL IN, UH, GO FOR AN HOUR LEAVE.

AND, UH, SO WE THOUGHT THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO CREATE, I GUESS YOU MIGHT SAY, GOOD FENCES, CREATE GOOD NEIGHBORS, CREATE SUCH A TYPE OF SYSTEM, UH, TO WHERE YOU HAVE A CERTAIN TYPE OF EXPECTATION.

IF YOU GO TO GET YOUR CAR SERVICED, NO PROBLEM.

YOU CAN, YOU CAN GO IN OFF THE STREET, BUT YOU COULD ALSO GO IN OFF THE ALLEYS BECAUSE WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE IMPROVE THE ALLEYS TO WORK, UH, FOR THOSE BUSINESSES.

UM, KIND OF LIKE HOW KNOX STREET WORKS TODAY, YOU CAN'T GO TO KNOX STREET WITHOUT DRIVING ON AN ALLEY TO GET TO THE PARKING BEHIND IT.

UM, SO IT'S INTERESTING HOW, UM, ALL THESE TYPE OF THINGS, UH, HELPED US TO COMPARTMENTALIZE THE SERVICE INDUSTRY VERSUS THE STOREFRONT, I SHOULDN'T SAY, VERSUS IT ACTUALLY, THE WAY OUR GOAL WAS, IS TO, UH, TO CREATE SUCH A GREAT PATTERN THAT IT WOULD BE HIGHLY WALKABLE, HIGHLY SAFE, AND YOU KIND OF KNOW YOUR BOUNDARIES.

AND JUST TO ADD ON WHAT HE SAID, UH, I DID SIT ON A MEETING LAST WEEK WHERE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT WAS BRIEFING THE COUNCIL MEMBER, AND THEY DID SAY THAT THEY'RE GONNA BE ISSUING AN RFP FOR THE ACTUAL DESIGN.

WHAT WE DID WAS A CONCEPTUAL, WHICH IS GONNA FORM THE BASIS FOR THAT, BUT THEY'RE GONNA BE DOING AN RFP FOR ACTUAL DESIGN THAT IS GONNA ENCOMPASS OTHER AREAS IN THE CITY.

THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? NO.

COMMISSIONER DEN.

SORRY, I HAD MY MICROPHONE A LITTLE LODGED IN THERE.

UM, I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON SOME OF THE QUESTIONS ABOUT STREETSCAPE AND HOW THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY IS GOING TO WORK.

AS I UNDERSTAND IT, ONCE YOU PUT THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY THAT LEADS TO ITS DESIGNATION AS A PRIMARY STREET, COULD YOU SPEAK? I MEAN, I THINK, AND, AND WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS THE GOAL IS WALKABILITY.

UM, THAT'S BEEN A STRONG, YOU KNOW, COMMENT THAT I'VE HEARD COMING OUT OF THE DISCUSSION.

SO HOW, HOW IS THAT GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED WHEN YOU'VE GOT AN EXISTING, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY STREET CONFIGURATION, LAYOUT, EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT ARE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE NEW DEVELOPMENT? HOW, HOW DO YOU ENVISION THAT BEING IMPLEMENTED AND WHAT ARE, WHAT IS IN THE BASE CODE ON WHAT'S GONNA BE EXPECTED? SO I THINK I, I THINK THE WHOLE IDEA IS TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE ENCOURAGING OR ATTRACTING ACTIVE USES NON-RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE STREETS THAT ARE DESIGNATED WITH THE OVERLAY.

AND, UH, ENSURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE TYPE OF BUSINESSES THAT ARE LOCATED THERE, THE DESIGN FROM A DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT ENCOURAGES, YOU KNOW, THAT KIND OF WORKABILITY.

UH, IF YOU COMPLEMENT THAT WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE ENHANCEMENT SIDEWALK, YOU KNOW, UH, THAT ARE WIDER LIGHTING AND EVERYTHING, THEN IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.

AND I JUST, I WANNA FOLLOW UP ON THAT A LITTLE BIT.

AND I THINK I HEARD SOME OF THE, AND CLEARLY THERE'S EXISTING BUSINESSES I KNOW IN MANY OF THE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH, THERE'S ALWAYS A STRONG SENSE OF MAINTAINING THOSE EXISTING, UM, BUSINESSES WHILE ALLOWING FOR GROWTH AND NEW DEVELOPMENT TO COME IN AND A TRANSITION.

BUT I'M GONNA TAKE THE EXAMPLE OF PARKING.

AND I THINK IF I UNDERSTAND IT CORRECTLY, THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY WILL REQUIRE THOSE ACTIVE USES ON THE FIRST 30 FEET.

SO THAT THEN PUSHES ANY PARKING BEHIND THAT FIRST 30 FEET.

AND IS THAT TRIGGERED WITH REDEVELOPMENT? IS THAT THE TRIGGER FOR THAT? SO THAT WOULD BE THE STRUCTURE.

THE ACTUAL BUILDING, THE 30 FEET WOULD APPLY TO THE ACTUAL BUILDING, NOT THE PARKING.

UH, PART OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN A ENHANCEMENT IS TO ACTIVATE THE ALLEY SO THAT THEY CAN ACCESS ANY PARKING SPACES THAT ARE IN THE BACK OF THE BUILDING THAT IS CURRENTLY NOT HAPPENING.

THEY DO HAVE SPACES THAT COULD BE USED FOR SERVICE PARKING IN THE BACK, BUT THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO UTILIZE THOSE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ACCESSIBLE.

THE ALLEYS ARE NOT ACTIVE.

DO APPLY, BUT THEY DON'T APPLY TO THE BUILDING LINE OR NECESSARILY THE, THE PROPERTY LINE.

AND THEY'RE NOT OPEN.

SO WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS TO ENSURE THAT THOSE ARE ACTIVATED SO THAT THEY CAN ACCESS THE PACKING, THE SPACE THAT IS IN THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.

THE SHOW FRONT OVERLAY APPLIES TO THE BUILDING 30 FEET FROM THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING INWARD.

SO THE FIRST 30 FEET INWARD INSIDE THE BUILDING IS SWELL.

THE SHOW FRONT OVERLAY

[02:45:01]

AND I MAY HAVE A FOLLOW UP ON THAT BECAUSE I KNOW SPECIFICALLY IN THE W DISTRICTS, PARKING IS PROHIBITED IN THE FIRST 30 FEET.

I THINK IT ALSO APPLIES TO WNU, BUT I HAVEN'T READ THAT RECENTLY TO HAVE THAT TOP OF MIND.

SO I'LL FOLLOW UP ON THAT.

UM, AND THEN I HEARD YOU MENTION IN YOUR PRESENTATION, IT WAS ONE THING I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.

SO RPS IS BUILT IN RPS WILL STILL APPLY.

THERE'S ALSO BUILT INTO FORM-BASED CODE, A RES OR RTN RESIDENTIAL TRANSITION.

UM, IT'S ESSENTIALLY AN OVERLAY SIMILAR TO A SHOP FRONT.

WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION OF THAT BEING APPROPRIATE AND SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN THE CONTEXT OF ANY NEW DISTRICTS? I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THAT WAS EVALUATED.

SO WE DID HAVE CLEAR BOUNDARIES ON WHERE THE AUTHORIZED HEARING AREA WAS AND ALL THAT WAS COMMERCIAL, THOUGH THERE ARE A FEW, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL BUILDING THAT EXISTS WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO EXTEND TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD MAKE ANY CHANGES, YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE OF THE, THE ACTIVE ENGAGEMENT AND INTERACTION THAT HAD HAPPENED.

YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY WERE DEVELOPING THE AREA PLAN, WE WANTED TO PROTECT AND KEEP RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AS THEY ARE.

BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THEM, MOST OF THEM ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES.

AND THEY, THEY, THEY'RE FAIRLY COMPACT.

THEY DEVELOP, THEY'RE VERY CLOSE TO EACH OTHER.

THERE'S NOT A LOT OF OPEN SPACE.

SO THERE WAS NO NEED.

THEY'RE WALKABLE, MOST OF THEM DO HAVE SIDEWALKS.

SO THERE WAS NO NEED FOR US TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, WALKABLE RESIDENTIAL, UH, UH, AS A BUFFER.

AND THEN TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER CARPENTER'S, UM, QUESTION ABOUT LEGACY BUILDINGS AS A STRAIGHT ZONING CHANGE, THERE'S NO EXISTING LANGUAGE IN FORM-BASED CODE THAT SPEAKS TO THAT.

IS THERE ANY, I MEAN, IS THERE ANY ABILITY TO CRAFT SOMETHING THAT WOULD RECOGNIZE THAT LEGACY BUILDING STRUCTURE? I'M NOT AWARE OF IT.

I'M JUST, I'M WONDERING IF STAFF HAS STARTED TO THINK ABOUT ANY OPPORTUNITIES THERE MIGHT BE.

SO, I, I THINK THE ISSUE, ONE OF THE THINGS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I READ IN THE FORM DISTRICT IS THAT IF YOU DO HAVE, UH, DELTA CREDITS AND UM, YOU APPLY FOR, UH, THAT PARKING REDUCTION, YOU LOSE THOSE DELTA CREDITS.

UH, SOME OF THE LEGACY BUILDINGS THAT EXIST IN THE AREA DO HAVE THOSE DELTA CREDITS.

AND, UH, WHEN WE MENTIONED THAT TO THEM, THEY BECAME VERY HESITANT ON PURSUING ALTERNATIVE ROUTES TO ACHIEVE THOSE PARKING REDUCTION.

SO THEY PREFER WHAT THEY HAVE, AND LIKE I SAID, MOST OF THEM HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING IS THE TYPE OF USE THAT WOULD GO INTO THOSE STRUCTURE THAT MIGHT MAKE IT A CHALLENGE FOR THEM TO MEET THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES.

BUT IF THERE WERE, IF THAT WERE TO HAPPEN, THERE'S PLENTY OF PARKING THAT EXISTS WITHIN PROXIMITY CLOSE, MAYBE IN THE, WITHIN THE DISTRICT ITSELF.

AND I MAY HAVE SOME FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS ON THAT, BUT ONE FINAL QUESTION IF I MAY.

UM, I, I KNOW ON OTHER CASES WHERE WE'VE HAD FORM-BASED DISTRICTS AS THE BASE, THERE ARE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVISIONS BUILT IN, I'VE UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY REALLY DON'T WORK THE WAY THEY WERE INTENDED TO.

WAS THAT ANYTHING THAT STAFF HAD EITHER EVALUATED OR THAT THE COMMUNITY HAD EXPRESSED IN THE DESIRE TO TRY TO ENCOURAGE, UM, YOU KNOW, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND MIXED HOUSING AS THEY'RE LOOKING AHEAD TO A FUTURE TRANSITION IN THE DISTRICT? SO ONE OF THE, THE, THE THINGS THAT WE MENTIONED IN THE REPORT, THE CASE REPORT WAS THAT DENSITY BONUS WOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA.

THAT IS A POSSIBILITY THAT WE PUT THERE INTENTIONALLY FOR SUPPORTING OR ENCOURAGING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THE PLAN ACTUALLY CALLS FOR THAT WORKER PLAN CALLS FOR CONSIDERATION OF MIXED INCOME HOUSING DENSITY BONUS.

ALSO, THE, THE, THE WMU THREE DISTRICTS ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

SO IF, YOU KNOW THERE'S SOME KIND OF ARRANGEMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN WORK WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO REALIZE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE DISTRICT, UH, THE ZONING DOES ALLOW THAT EITHER AS TOWN HOMES OR STOCK HOUSES OR, OKAY.

SO, OKAY.

SO YOU'RE THINKING OF IT THROUGH, BY INTRODUCING IT AS WALKABLE MIXED USE, IT ADDS THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT, WHICH THEN AS IT CAN BE DEVELOPED, IS HOW IT WOULD BRING IN THAT MIXED INCOME COMPONENT? YES.

THAT WE GOT FROM DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT TRANSPORTATION.

BUT ALSO, I, I HAVE TO MENTION SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY TRIED NOT TO DO A PD IN THIS AREA.

THAT'S A REQUEST

[02:50:01]

SAY IT WOULD BE A NIGHTMARE, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF TRYING TO, UH, AMEND THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN.

YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD REQUIRE A WHOLE DIFFERENT PROCESS.

ALSO, IT WOULD MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WANT TO MAKE CHANGE BECAUSE THEY WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THE PD.

SO ONE OF THE OBJECTIVES THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH AS WE WERE MAKING THIS RECOMMENDATION IS TO TRY TO GO WITH THE STRAIGHT BASED ZONING WITHOUT NECESSARILY ADDING ADDITIONAL PROVISION LIKE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WOULD TURN THIS INTO A PD.

UNDERSTOOD.

AND AGAIN, I KNOW THERE'S LANGUAGE THERE, IT'S JUST ONE I'VE LEARNED UNFORTUNATELY THROUGH THE YEARS, THAT DOESN'T WORK THE WAY I THINK IT WAS INTENDED TO.

SO JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WAS BEING EVALUATED.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? WILL WE GO TO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR SECOND ROUND? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? UH, BACK TO THE ISSUE OF NON-CONFORMING USES, ANOTHER CHART SAYS THAT YOU, UM, THERE ARE FOUR OTHER BUSINESSES THAT DIDN'T FALL INTO ANY OF THE CATEGORIES OR BUSINESSES THAT DIDN'T HAVE COS DID, DID YOU GET ANY, UM, FEELING FOR HOW MANY BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO BE MADE NON-CONFORMING BY USE WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE, OF THIS NEW FARM DISTRICT? I'M NOT A AWARE OF ANY BUSINESS THAT WOULD BE NONCONFORMING AS OF USE.

I'M AWARE OF THE STRUCTURES, THE BUILDINGS.

THAT WOULD BE NONCONFORMING.

THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IS NOT ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT.

AND WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF THOSE IN THE AREA.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, MOST OF THE USES THAT I SAW IN THE AREA WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED.

CAR WASHES AND AUTO SERVICE CENTERS AND COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENTS INSIDE AND YES, THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD BE USED.

I, I MEAN, BUT I, WE, I MEAN THE BUILDING SERVICES MAKES THE DETERMINATION AS OF USE.

BUT AS FAR AS WE KNOW, YOU KNOW, THERE IS NO USE THAT I CAN THINK OF THAT WOULD BE OKAY BECAUSE IT NOT PERMITTED.

IT WAS NOTED THAT THERE WERE SOME BUSINESSES THAT DIDN'T HAVE COS SO IF, IF YOU NEVER GOT A CO AND YOU'RE DOING A USE THAT'S NOT ALLOWED, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT GRANDFATHERED.

WE WERE GOING BY WHAT IS ALLOWED, WHAT IS PERMITTED IN THE DISTRICT.

THERE THEY'RE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

UM, MOVING ON JUST TO THE, THE WM U THREE, THE WAY THAT THAT CODE IS WRITTEN, UM, IT SEEMS LIKE, I MEAN, IT'S NOT THAT I'M OBJECTING TO THE, THE, THE BASE ZONING.

I MEAN WME THREE SEEMS AS CLOSE AS ANYTHING'S GOING TO GET, BUT THE WAY THE THE CODE IS WRITTEN IS THAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE EMBEDDED IN A LARGER AREA THAT'S INTENDED TO BE, I DON'T KNOW, 25 TO 40 ACRES OF SIMILAR DENSITY.

AND IT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS A BIT OF A STRETCH TO JUSTIFY THE, THE SURROUNDING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAD SOME SCHOOLS OR DIFFERENT THINGS TO, TO MEET THAT STANDARD.

UM, IS THIS A PROBLEM WITH THE WAY THAT THE WMU THREE IS WRITTEN? I MEAN ARE, IS IT, DOES THIS ALL, I'LL JUST MOVE ON TO THE KIND OF A RELATED QUESTION ALSO.

UM, THE REPORT DOES POINT OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS DOESN'T HAVE THE BEST TRANSIT PROXIMITY.

YOU'VE GOT A DART LINE THREE BLOCKS SOUTH ON ILLINOIS AND THEN SEVERAL BLOCKS TO THE EAST ON VERNON.

DOES WMU THREE UM, REQUIRE OR SUGGEST THAT, YOU KNOW, GOOD TRANSIT PROXIMITY IS, IS AVAILABLE? IT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT.

I MEAN, IT WOULD SUPPORT, IT WOULD RECOMMEND, IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE IT, BUT IT DOESN'T REQUIRE TRANSIT TO BE AVAILABLE.

IT DOES WANT THE DISTRICT TO BE WORKABLE AND, UH, SAFE, BUT IT DOESN'T REQUIRE ACCESS TO PUBLIC TRANSIT.

AT LEAST I DIDN'T SEE THAT IT ENCOURAGES IT, BUT IT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT.

BUT IS IT A PROBLEM? 'CAUSE THE, THE CODE SEEMS TO SAY THAT THIS, YOU KNOW, ANY NEW AREA THAT BECOMES WALKABLE MIXED USE SHOULD BE KIND OF SURROUNDED BY OTHER AREAS THAT ARE ALREADY THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT OR ARE INTENDING TO BE.

AND THE WAY I LOOK AT THE AREA, THE, THE, THE SURROUNDING AREAS LARGELY, YOU KNOW, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

SO THERE SEEMS TO BE A BIT OF A DISCONNECT THERE.

THAT'S HOW IT WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED AS A SUBDIVISION.

BUT WE DO HAVE A LOT OF BUSINESSES THAT ARE OPERATING, THERE ARE LIKE COMMERCIAL USES THAT EXIST WITHIN THOSE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, ESPECIALLY AT THE INTERSECTION WHEN YOU WALK AROUND, WHEN YOU DRIVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU SEE A NUMBER OF THOSE IN THE AREA.

AND IT WAS DEVELOPED AS A MAJOR SUBDIVISION THAT WAS MORE THAN 50 ACRES WITH OVER 3000 HOMES.

BUT IF YOU DRIVE AROUND, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS CHANGED OVER TIME.

AND YOU DO HAVE THIS NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.

I THINK THIS BODY CONSIDERED ONE OF THE, THE, THE, IT WAS A SINGLE FAMILY THAT WAS, UH, CONVERTED TO MULTI-FAMILY USE AND THEY WERE CONSIDERING, UH, HOUSING VETERANS NOT VERY FAR FROM HERE.

SO YOU HAVE THOSE TYPE OF USES WHERE IT WAS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND IT HAS BEEN MODIFIED AND NOW IT'S MULTIFAMILY OR

[02:55:01]

YOU HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT HAS BEEN CONVERTED TO NON-RESIDENTIAL USE.

WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF THOSE IN THE AREA.

AND MY, MY LAST QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH, UM, THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE, THE FORM-BASED ZONING, UM, THAT HAVE TO DO WITH REMODELING OR, OR ENLARGING YOUR STRUCTURE.

IT SEEMS LIKE THE ONLY CRITERION HERE IS IF YOU ENLARGE YOUR, UM, FLOOR AREA BY MORE THAN 35%, THEN YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH BOTH THE CURRENT STANDARDS.

IS THAT CORRECT? NOT ALL THE CURRENT STANDARD.

I THINK THE, THE HEIGHT OR THE, THE, THE, YEAH, THE HEIGHT.

SO IT HAS TO BE SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT.

AND THAT SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT IS, UH, CONSIDERED EITHER ADDITION TO CONSTRUCTION OR THAT WOULD, UH, IMPACT, THAT WOULD AFFECT UP TO 35% OF THE FLOOR AREA.

SO I, I, I THINK THAT KIND OF ALLOWS, THE EXISTING USES STILL CONTINUE OPERATING UNLESS THERE'S A MAJOR IMPROVEMENT ON THE STRUCTURE, THEN THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED NOW TO COMPLY WITH THE BUILDING STANDARD, THE HEIGHT SPECIFICALLY.

AND THEN A LOT OF THEM PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, WOULD, IF YOU GO TO THE, THE BUILDING TYPE ROUTE, MOST OF THEM WOULD NOT COMPLY.

NONCONFORMING COMMISSIONER , JUST ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP QUESTION.

I KNOW THE LEGISLATURE ENACTED A BILL LAST SESSION REQUIRING NOTIFICATIONS TO GO OUT IF WE ARE MAKING ANY USES NON-CONFORMING WITH THE ZONING CHANGE, I KNOW IT'S, IT'S A PRETTY RECENT CHANGE IN, IN A LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENT.

JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT THAT ANALYSIS WAS DONE HERE.

I THINK THE NOTIFICATION AND DANIEL YOU CAN HELP US WITH THIS WOULD BE IF THE USE IS NOT ABLE TO OPERATE ANYMORE.

AND WE DID DO AN ANALYSIS AND WE FOUND OUT THAT A LOT, I, AS I SAID ALL THE, THE PERMITTED, THE ONES THAT HAVE CEO ARE ABLE TO CONTINUE OPERATING.

THEY MIGHT BE LEGALLY IN UNCON CONFORMING, BUT THEY CAN STILL OPERATE.

IS GUIDANCE, IT IS FUTURE LAND USE, WHICH IS NOT ZONING, IT GUIDES ZONING, BUT IT DOES NOT ZONE ANYTHING.

THANK YOU MEMBERS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE? ALRIGHT, WE WILL TAKE A QUICK BREAK AND DO A WORKING LUNCH.

WE'LL BE BACK, UM, IN 12 MINUTES AT 12:20 PM THANK YOU GILIS.

I'M THE INTERIM DIRECTOR WITH PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN.

UM, I HAVE LAWRENCE AGU WITH ME WHO IS OUR CHIEF PLANNER AND PATRICK BLADES WHO'S ALSO OUR CHIEF PLANNER.

UM, BOTH OF THEM BEING KEY FOLKS INVOLVED IN THE FORWARD DALLAS PROCESS.

UM, SO WITH THIS, I JUST WANTED TO, WE WANTED TO COME TO YOU TODAY TO PROVIDE YOU A RELATIVELY BRIEF UPDATE.

UM, I'M NOT EVEN CALLING IT A BRIEFING, BUT AN UPDATE ON FORWARD DALLAS OF WHERE WE'RE AT AND WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT, UM, TO SORT OF , KINDLY SAY TO START MENTALLY PREPARING FOR THIS NEXT PHASE OF FORWARD DALLAS.

NOW THAT WE'RE MOVING INTO CPC, UM, WE ARE, UM, SO WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE PROCESS, THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE, THE COMMITTEE OF THIS BODY RECOMMENDED THE DRAFT OF THE DOCUMENT TO YOU ALL TO CPC TO START YOUR REVIEW ON THE NINTH JANUARY 9TH.

SO WE HAVE NOW MADE IT THROUGH THE COMMITTEE PHASE AND THIS DOCUMENT WILL BE COMING TO YOU ALL TO START YOUR REVIEW.

SO ONE THAT'S THE BIG PIECE OF THE UPDATE THAT WE WANTED TO PROVIDE WITH YOU.

I WANNA PROVIDE A TIMELINE AS WELL.

UM, AND I ALSO WANNA ADDRESS A FEW THINGS.

YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, I GUESS THE NEXT COUPLES YOU CAN, YEAH, I WANT TO GO THROUGH A FEW ITEMS FIRST.

'CAUSE I KNOW I'M SURE ALL OF YOU OR MOST OF YOU HAVE SEEN, THERE'S JUST A LOT OF ARTICLES GOING AROUND.

THERE'S A LOT OF SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS, THERE'S A LOT OF WHAT FORWARD DALLAS IS WHAT IT ISN'T, WHAT IT'S DOING TO CERTAIN PARTS OF THE CITY.

AND I SORT OF WANNA ESTABLISH A BASELINE FOR ALL OF US TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

UM, THE ARTICLES WILL CONTINUE, I'M ASSUMING THE POSTING WILL CONTINUE, BUT I'M HOPING THAT IDEALLY WHAT WE CAN DO IS CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH AN OPEN DISCUSSION, UM, AND REALLY HOPEFULLY GET INTO THE MATTER OF THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, WHAT IT IS PROPOSING, WHAT IT ISN'T PROPOSING.

UM, WE CAN PROBABLY GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE ON THIS ONE.

SO I THINK ONE OF THE CLEAREST THINGS, AND THIS IS, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY FOR YOU ALL, BUT ANYONE LISTENING AS WELL, IS THAT FORWARD DALLAS, I CAN'T EMPHASIZE ENOUGH, IT IS A VISION DOCUMENT, IT

[03:00:01]

SO WE'VE BEEN HEARING A LOT THAT FORWARD DALLAS IS GOING TO DEFACTO MAKE ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS ALLOW UP TO, IT'S GONNA REZONE OUR NEIGHBORHOODS TO ALLOW UP TO FOUR UNITS.

AND THAT'S JUST NOT THE CASE.

IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE THAT RECOMMENDATION IN THE DOCUMENT.

UM, IT DOESN'T HAVE A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION LIKE THAT IN THE DOCUMENT.

IT DOES TALK ABOUT HOW WE THINK ABOUT HOW WE ACCOMMODATE MORE HOUSING THROUGHOUT THE CITY, BUT IT DOES NOT GET INTO THOSE SPECIFIC ISSUES.

YOU'VE PROBABLY ALSO ALL HEARD THAT THERE IS A ANOTHER PROCESS OR A SEPARATE ITEM GOING ON WHERE WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING, WE'VE GOTTEN A FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS WHERE THEY'VE ASKED US ASKED STAFF TO BRING FORWARD SORT OF A, AN ITEM, A FRAMEWORK, AN AGENDA ITEM TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THREE PLEXES, FOUR PLEXES MINIMUM LOT SIZES MOVING FORWARD.

I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR THAT THAT IS A COMPLETELY SEPARATE PROCESS FROM FORWARD DALLAS.

FORWARD.

DALLAS IS FACILITATING THOSE CONVERSATIONS, BUT FORWARD DALLAS IS NOT GOING INTO THE WEEDS ABOUT THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

IT'S TWO SEPARATE PROCESSES.

SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR ON THAT BECAUSE WE, I FEEL LIKE EVERY 10 MINUTES I'M GETTING SOME QUESTION ABOUT THIS.

IN FACT, CHECKING THIS AND DOING THIS.

AND SO THERE'S A LOT CIRCULATING RIGHT NOW.

UM, WHICH YOU KNOW, IN A WAY IS EXCITING.

, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE, THE WORD I WANNA USE.

I MEAN, IT JUST MEANS THAT PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION, RIGHT? AND, AND WE DO WANT PEOPLE PAYING ATTENTION TO THE ISSUES.

WE DO WANNA HAVE A CONVERSATION, BUT I WANNA CLARIFY SOME OF THOSE SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY HAVE SOME CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS.

'CAUSE I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE CONFUSED.

AND PART OF OUR JOB IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE HELPING WITH THAT CONFUSION.

SO, YOU KNOW, AS I SAID, IT DOES FORWARD.

DALLAS DOES NOT CA DOES NOT CALL FOR THE ELIMINATION OF SINGLE FAMILY NE NEIGHBORHOODS.

IN FACT, OUR PLACE TYPES TALK ABOUT HOW THE, IT BEING VERY REAL THAT THERE ARE AREAS OF THE CITY THAT ARE PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

THEY WILL REMAIN PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

BUT WITHIN OUR AREAS, HOW WE ARE ADDRESSING HOUSING MOVING FORWARD, IT IS PLANTING THE SEED THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE HAVING THESE FIGURE, THESE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE HOW IT DOES NOT GIVE THE PRESCRIPTION OF THE HOW IT, IT BASICALLY IS ENCOURAGING AND CONTINUING TO ENCOURAGE THE CONVERSATION.

UM, AS I SAID, IT DOES NOT PRESCRIBE ONE SPECIFIC ANSWER.

NOW I WILL SAY THERE IS ONE PRES RELATIVELY PRESCRIPTIVE RECOMMENDATION IN THE PLAN AS IT RELATES TO HOUSING.

AND THAT IS ADDRESSING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND THAT WE ALLOW ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS BY RIGHT AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR IN ALL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

NOW, AGAIN, I WILL SAY THIS IS WHERE YOU'VE GOT A PRESCRIPTIVE, VERY DETAILED RECOMMENDATION, A COUPLE OF THINGS ON THAT, THAT IN AND OF OF ITSELF DOES NOT ZONE ANYTHING.

AGAIN, THAT'S A RECOMMENDATION.

WE WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND HAVE A SEPARATE PROCESS THEN THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE THE REZONING OR THE CODE AMENDMENT PROCESS, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE FORWARD.

DALLAS, JUST BECAUSE IT RECOMMENDS THAT THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS DOES NOT MAKE IT SO IN AND OF ITSELF, A SEPARATE PROCESS NEEDS TO HAPPEN.

AND FOLLOWING UP ON THAT AS WELL, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THERE, THERE IS STILL PLENTY OF TIME NOW AS WE GET TO TO CPC GET TO THIS BODY OF STILL HAVING DIALOGUE ABOUT HOW THE LANGUAGE IS ACTUALLY EXPRESSED IN THE PLAN.

IT IS NOT DONE.

THERE IS NOT CONCRETE, THE LANGUAGE ISN'T BLACK AND WHITE UNTIL CITY COUNCIL ADOPTS THAT DOCUMENT.

SO IF THERE ARE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT RECOMMENDATION, LET'S HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT.

ARE THERE WAYS IN WHICH WE ADJUST SOME OF THE LANGUAGE TO MAKE IT LESS CONCERNING? I GIVE THAT EXAMPLE BECAUSE I JUST, THERE'S ALSO THIS, YOU KNOW, IDEA THAT IT'S ZONING ONE THAT DELS MAKES IT HAPPEN OR THAT TWO, SOMEHOW WE'VE SHUT THE DOOR TO ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION AND WE HAVE NOT, UH, SHUT THE DOOR TO ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION.

AND I HOPE THAT THROUGH THIS BODY, I THINK THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE, UH, COMMITTEE HAS DONE AN INCREDIBLE JOB GETTING US TO THIS SECOND DRAFT THAT'S COMING TO YOU AND NOW YOU GET TO PUT YOUR MARK ON IT AS WELL.

AND I THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO MAKE IT AN EVEN STRONGER DOCUMENT.

AND SO THAT IS THE PLAN COMING FORWARD TO YOU WITH THIS DOCUMENT.

SO I'LL GIVE A PROJECT UPDATE AND FROM THIS POINT WHERE WE'VE SORT OF ALREADY GONE THROUGH, I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH WHERE WE'RE AT IN THE DOCUMENT THAT THERE ARE THEMES BECAUSE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT.

I'VE GIVEN A BRIEFING ON THAT.

THERE ARE THE DRIVING THROUGH THEMES IN THE DOCUMENT, WHICH YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE.

BUT I DO WANNA GIVE THE, THE LARGELY THE UPDATE AND NOW THE NEXT STEPS AND ALSO THEN OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS AND SPECIFICS THAT YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE FOR US OR EVEN REQUESTS AS WE'RE COMING TO YOU ALL WITH THIS DOCUMENT.

[03:05:01]

SO, UM, AS I MENTIONED, AGAIN, WE MADE IT THROUGH CLUB.

UM, WE'VE GOT TWO MEMBERS OF THIS BODY THAT WERE ON THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE, UM, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND SORRY, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER AND, UM, COMMISSIONER RUBIN, WHO'S CHAIR OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE.

SO THEY WILL BE, UM, REALLY GREAT RESOURCES FOR US MOVING FORWARD.

UM, THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE MET COUNTLESS TIMES, HONESTLY.

I MEAN WE DO HAVE THE NUMBER COUNTED, BUT YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE ON THIS SCREEN THAT MANY TIMES, UM, TO GO OVER FORWARD DALLAS.

NOW, WHEN IT REALLY RAMPED UP WAS IN SEPTEMBER WHEN WE PROVIDED THEM WITH THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE DOCUMENT AND THEY MEANT AT LEAST TWICE, THEY MEANT TWICE A MONTH SINCE SEPTEMBER TO GO THROUGH THAT DOCUMENT.

AND WE HAD MULTIPLE ALL DAY LONG MEETINGS.

SO I HOPE THAT YOU CAN TRUST IN THE WORK THAT THEY DID AND HOW MUCH COMMITMENT THEY PUT INTO REALLY SCRUBBING THIS DOCUMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD A SOLID DRAFT TO BRING FORWARD TO CITY PLAN COMMISSION.

AND THEN WE ALSO MET WITH THE TECH TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

SO WE, OUR INTERNAL DEPARTMENTS, UM, AND OUR EXTERNAL AGENCIES THAT TOUCH UPON THE RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT HAD THEM REVIEW THIS DOCUMENT SPECIFICALLY TO THEIR AREAS OF EXPERTISE.

SO TRANSPORTATION, UM, HOUSING INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, YOU KNOW, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, PARKS, UM, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REALLY GOING THROUGH AND THEN OUR EXTERNAL AGENCIES AS WELL AND HAVING DART AND THE COUNTY LOOK AT THIS DOCUMENT.

SO THERE, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF TOUCH POINTS AND THEN WE'VE GONE OVER OBVIOUSLY THIS TOO.

YOU'VE SEEN THIS DOCUMENT ABOUT THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, UM, THAT'S GONE THROUGH IN THIS PROCESS.

AND WE'RE FLESHING THIS OUT, WE'RE MAPPING ALL OF THE DIFFERENT AREAS.

SO WE'LL HAVE THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU AS WELL.

UM, AND JUST UPDATING SO THAT WE CAN BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHERE WE'RE GOING, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE'VE BEEN.

UM, AS FAR AS THE ENGAGEMENT IN THIS DOCUMENT, AS I MENTIONED, WE ARE STILL HAVING, WE'RE HAVING ROUND TABLE DISCUSSIONS.

WE HAD ONE ON TUESDAY BECAUSE WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE AWARE AS THERE HAVE BEEN CHANGES SINCE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE GOT THEIR FIRST DRAFT.

AND SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE TO HIGHLIGHT FOR THOSE WHO HAVE FOLLOWED US THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS, WE WANNA MAKE SURE TO HIGHLIGHT THOSE CHANGES SINCE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE COMMITTEE HAS RECOMMENDED THE DRAFT.

SO WE'VE BEEN HAVING ROUND TABLE CONVERSATIONS.

WE HAD ONE ON TUESDAY AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE ONE TOMORROW AT NOON JUST TO TALK ABOUT THE KEY HIGHLIGHTS OF CHANGE SINCE THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE DOCUMENT WENT OUT IN SEPTEMBER.

AND ALSO, AGAIN, SO PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE TIMELINE IS AND WHAT THE OPPORTUNITIES STILL ARE FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.

UM, AND I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THESE PIECES UNLESS WE HAVE QUE THIS, THIS WILL BE FOR THE, THE WE'LL GO THROUGH THE TIMELINE OF, OF WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT FOR THIS DOCUMENT.

SO WE HAVE CURRENTLY WHAT STAFF IS WORKING ON RIGHT NOW ARE THE, ALL OF THE UPDATES THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE, INCORPORATING THOSE INTO AN UPDATED DOCUMENT.

WE WILL, AND, AND I WILL SAY THERE'S BEEN QUESTION ABOUT, WELL, HOW WILL WE KNOW WHAT WAS CHANGED? WE HAVE A SERIES OF DRAFTS THAT SHOW THE MAJOR CHANGE AREAS IN THE DOCUMENT SO THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO TRACK THE CHANGES IN THE DOCUMENT.

IT'S IN DIFFERENT COLORED TEXT, UM, OF WHAT HAS CHANGED OVER THE PROCESS.

WE WILL ALSO, WHEN WE COME TO YOU, WE WILL HIGHLIGHT WHAT THOSE MAJOR CHANGES ARE AND ANY OUTSTANDING ISSUES THAT WE KNOW WHERE MAYBE THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMMITTEE WAS NOT COMPLETELY 100% POSITIVE THAT THIS WAS THE DIRECTION THAT THEY WANTED TO GO IN, OR THIS WAS THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY WANTED TO SEE AND THOUGHT THAT IT JUST, THEIR TIME WAS DONE WITH THE DOCUMENT AND IT NEEDED TO BE MOVED ON TO CPC.

SO WITH THAT, WE'VE GOT, UM, A GROUP OF STAFF WHO'S WORKING ON THOSE FINAL UPDATES TO GET A NEW DRAFT UPDATED.

WE HOPE TO HAVE THAT NEW DRAFT UPDATED BY MID-FEBRUARY, UM, OR THE FIRST PART OF FEBRUARY.

ON FEBRUARY 1ST, WE PLAN TO COME TO YOU WITH A FULL BRIEFING OF THE CONTENT OF THE DOCUMENT.

WE WON'T HAVE THE DOCUMENT SET ITSELF, BUT WE WANNA PREPARE YOU FOR WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IN THE DOCUMENT.

HIGHLIGHT SOME AREAS THAT WE THINK THAT YOU SHOULD, YOU KNOW, FOCUS ON.

OBVIOUSLY IF YOU WANT TO READ EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF THE DOCUMENT LINE BY LINE, WE ARE ABSOLUTELY ENCOURAGING THAT.

BUT WE WILL LET YOU KNOW SOME OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, MORE SIGNIFICANT TOUCH POINTS WHERE IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO PAY A LITTLE CLOSER ATTENTION.

UM, AND THEN ALSO HOW, TALK ABOUT THE STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT AND HOW WE MAY APPROACH THE REVIEW PROCESS OF THIS DOCUMENT.

SO THAT'LL BE

[03:10:01]

FEBRUARY 1ST TO AS THE PRIMER LEADING INTO FEBRUARY 15TH, WHICH PRIOR TO THAT WE WILL SEND OUT THE UPDATED DRAFT OF THE DOCUMENT FOR YOU ALL TO START REVIEWING THAT DOCUMENT.

AND THEN WE WILL COME TO YOU ON THE 15TH.

AND THE 15TH WILL BE A BRIEFING AND PUBLIC HEARING.

AND THIS IS RELATIVELY TENTATIVE, UM, BUT THIS IS KIND OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.

AND SO THEN LEADING INTO, DO WE HAVE, OH YEAH, THIS IS THE NEXT PART LEADING INTO IDEALLY OUR IDEAL SITUATION.

I JUST WANNA RE JUST REITERATE THAT WE STARTED THIS IN FALL 2021.

WE HAD OUR FIRST KICKOFF IN FALL 2021.

WE ARE EAGER TO HAVE A, AN UPDATED PLAN ADOPTED, ADOPTED FOR THE CITY.

OUR GOAL IS THAT CITY COUNCIL WILL BE ABLE TO ADOPT THE FORWARD DALLAS PLAN BEFORE IT GOES INTO RECESS IN JULY OF THIS YEAR.

SO BY JUNE OF 2024, THAT IS OUR GOAL.

THAT MEANS THAT WE HAVE ABOUT THREE MONTHS WITH YOU ALL AND WE'RE HOPING THAT WE CAN DO THE REVIEWS WITHIN YOUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS IF, DEPENDING IF YOU REALLY ALL WANNA GO INTO THE WEEDS ON THINGS OR FEEL THAT THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE REALLY NEED TO UNDERTAKE THAT IT MAY SEEM THAT WE CAN'T GET TO THOSE WITHIN OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS.

STAFF WOULD LIKE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU ABOUT POTENTIALLY HAVING SPECIALLY CALLED MEETINGS JUST TO DISCUSS FORWARD DALLAS.

SO AGAIN, PLANTING THAT SEED FOR YOU ALL JUST TO THINK ABOUT.

UM, AND JUST SO THAT WE'RE FRAMING OUT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THE GOALS FOR THIS TIMELINE, UM, WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THINK ABOUT WAYS THAT WE MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE COMMENT, POTENTIALLY THINKING ABOUT TIME, CERTAIN MEETING TIMES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT SO THAT, YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE HAVE TO WAIT AROUND ALL DAY AND THEN WE GET TO IT AT THE END OF THE AGENDA.

SO THINKING ABOUT DIFFERENT OPTIONS, WE ALSO WANNA MAKE IT EASIER FOR YOU ALL TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC AND FOR THE IT TO BE MORE PREDICTABLE FOR THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE COMMENT.

SO THAT IS WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THIS PROCESS.

UM, I'M, WE'RE HERE TO, IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THAT AND WE'RE HAPPY TO, TO, YOU KNOW, DIVE FURTHER INTO THOSE QUESTIONS.

AND THERE ARE QUESTIONS MR. RUBIN? YEAH.

UM, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.

THANK YOU MS. MS. GILLIS FOR YOUR GREAT UPDATE.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON FORWARD DALLAS FOR A LONG TIME.

I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO, TO CLARIFY.

THANK YOU ADDRESS A LOT OF WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK ABOUT FIRST.

YOU SAID THAT FORWARD DALLAS IS NOT A ZONING CHANGE.

I WANTED TO DRILL INTO THAT MORE A LITTLE MORE.

IS IT CORRECT THAT FOR DALLAS UNDER STATE LAW AS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAN'T BE A ZONING CHANGE AND ANY CHANGES TO OUR ZONING MAP OR YOU KNOW, ORDINANCE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH, YOU KNOW, STANDARD PROCESSES FOR APPROVING ZONING CHANGES? THAT IS CORRECT.

THERE'S LANGUAGE ALL OVER STATE LAW AND I THINK EVEN AT THE LOCAL LEVEL IT THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLANS DO NOT CONSTITUTE ZONING.

AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE SORT OF MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING THAT THE, THE, UM, PLAN ADDRESSES WITH A FEW, YOU KNOW, VERY SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS BUT ALSO SOME LARGER, YOU KNOW, O OBJECTIVES BUT ALSO SOME LARGER, YOU KNOW, HIGHER LEVEL THOUGHTS.

DO WE TALK ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, THIS MISSING MIDDLE SHOULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPED AND ALLOWED TO THE EXTENT THAT WE ALLOW IT IN A SORT OF CONTEXT SENSITIVE MANNER? YES, WE TALK ABOUT IT IN GENERAL ABOUT ALLOWING IT THROUGHOUT OUR CITY IN A CONTEXT SENSITIVE MANNER, HOW IT GETS APPLIED.

WE DON'T GO INTO THE DETAILS IN FORWARD DALLAS.

WE SAY THAT WE, WE PROVIDE SOME SHAPING OF WAYS TO START THE DISCUSSION IF WE WENT DOWN THE ZONING AND THE CODE AMENDMENTS PATH, WHICH WOULD BE A SEPARATE PROCESS AFTER FORWARD DALLAS WERE TO GET ADOPTED.

WE TALK ABOUT SOME LO LOCATION, YOU KNOW, SHOULD WE BE LOOKING AT CERTAIN LOCATIONS FIRST, UM, YOU KNOW, CERTAIN AREAS THAT MAY ALREADY HAVE A CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT.

UM, BUT IT DOES NOT SAY, IT DOES NOT DICTATE THE EXACT ANSWER TO HOW IT GETS APPLIED.

THAT EXAM EXACT ANSWER COMES THROUGH FUTURE ZONING AND ORDINANCE CHANGES.

THEY BECOME PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

COMMISSIONER, WHERE YOU ON, HOW WILL THE AREA PLANS COINCIDE WITH FORWARD, UM, IN, UM, WITH, UM, FORWARD DALLAS? SO AREA PLANS, ANY AREA PLAN THAT WOULD GET, UH, ANY PLAN WITH A FUTURE, UM, LAND USE PLAN, AREA PLAN, CORRIDOR PLAN, NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THEY WOULD ALL GET ADOPTED AS COMPONENTS INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

[03:15:01]

THEY STAND ON THEIR OWN, BUT THEY ALSO BECOME A COMPONENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SO YOU KNOW THAT THE ONE I'M IN PARTICULAR IS YES, THE SOUTH DALLAS AREA PLAN.

SO WILL WE BE ATTEMPTING TO ADOPT THAT AT THE SAME WITHIN THAT TIMEFRAME OR AFTER THE FORWARD DALLAS? I THINK THE TIMING OF IT, AND PATRICK MAYBE YOU CAN, THE TIMING OF WHETHER OR NOT IT CAN, IT CAN HAPPEN EITHER WAY BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH, JUST DEPENDS ON THE TIMING OF THE AREA PLAN.

NOW AT THIS POINT, WELL ACTUALLY BOTH , UM, BUT IT CAN HAPPEN BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN WORKING IN A COORDINATED EFFORT WITH BOTH SO THAT THEY BOTH SPEAK TO EACH OTHER THAT, UH, THERE IS NO INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE TWO PLANS.

UM, SO IT COULD, IT COULD HAPPEN BEFORE OR IT COULD HAPPEN AFTER.

AFTER.

UM, AND ONE LAST THING.

SO ARE WE, ARE, IS FORWARD DALLAS ADDRESSING, UM, POSSIBLE, UH, ADUS OR IS THAT A ZONING ISSUE OR, OR IS THAT A RECOMMENDATION WITHIN FORWARD DALLAS? FORWARD DALLAS MAKES A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE SHOULD ALLOW THEM IN OUR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

IT WILL NOT MAKE IT HAPPEN IN AND OF ITSELF.

THAT'S A SEPARATE PROCESS.

THAT'S ZONING FOR SURE.

A RECOMMENDATION.

THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.

AND I GUESS PATRICK, ANYTHING TOWARD WINDOWS, THOSE AREA PLANS AND HOW CLOSE, UH, JUST FOR THE SOUTH HOUSE? SO, UH, THE ONLY ACTIVE, UM, AREA OR NEIGHBORHOOD OR CORRIDOR PLAN THAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IS THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK PLAN.

UM, AND BECAUSE STAFF HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THAT PLAN AND MOVING FORWARD DALLAS, UH, WE PREPARED TO, UM, BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD AS MS. GOA SAID EITHER WAY.

SO IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH, UM, SOUTH DALLAS BEFORE FORWARD DALLAS, WE'RE, WE'RE ABLE TO MANAGE THAT PROCESS AND ALSO IF IT'S VICE VERSA, WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT AS WELL.

ARE YOU ALL CLO YOU ALL ARE CLOSE WITH THE SOUTH DALLAS AREA CLAIM Y? YES.

YES MA'AM.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR.

UM, THANK YOU SO MUCH, UM, FOR THE OVERVIEW AND, AND THE EXPLANATIONS, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT IT IS AND WHAT IT'S NOT AND HOW IT IS APPLIED AND HOW IT WILL NOT BE APPLIED.

I THINK THAT IS VERY HELPFUL.

BUT I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MOVING FORWARD.

UM, WILL IT BE A MORE, AT THE BEGINNING YOU GUYS WENT OUT INTO THE COMMUNITIES AND, AND SHARED WHAT'S GOING ON AND HOW IT, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

WILL THAT STILL HAPPEN AS WE MOVE FORWARD? SO THE PROACTIVE, TELL US WHAT YOU THINK.

ENGAGEMENT, WE'VE SORT OF MU MOVED BEYOND THAT PHASE NOW.

WE'VE GOTTEN TO THE POINT OF, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPING THE DRAFT THAT IS NOW GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

SO WE'RE NOT GONNA UNDERTAKE ANOTHER BIG HEAVY LIFT IN THAT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, THESE ROUND TABLE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING RECENTLY.

WE DO WANNA KEEP PEOPLE UPDATED ON ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES THAT OCCUR IN THE DRAFT FROM ONE REVIEWING BODY TO THE NEXT.

SO THAT IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING.

WE WILL BE DOING IF UPON REQUESTS, WE'VE ALREADY STARTED GETTING SOME, YOU KNOW, INKLINGS OF REQUESTS FROM NEIGHBORHOODS THAT MAY WANNA FURTHER UNDERSTAND WHAT WE MEAN BY X IT UPON REQUEST, WE CAN GO OUT AND MEET WITH NEIGHBORHOODS AND HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

DISTRICT HAS, UH, SPOKEN OUT, UM, WITH A CONCERN ABOUT UNDERSTANDING THE PLACE TYPES AND HOW THE PLACE TYPES ACTUALLY FIT INTO WHAT'S ACTUALLY ON THE GROUND AND WHAT IS, HOW IT FITS IN WITH THE RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHAT YOU GUYS THINK SHOULD BE ON THE GROUND.

UM, SO HOW IS THESE, THESE MEETINGS THAT YOU'RE HAVING LIKE ONE TOMORROW, HOW ARE THEY BEING NOTIFIED IN, WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE RESIDENTS? UM, I'M FINDING THAT I DIDN'T, I'M, I SIGNED UP FOR IT ONE TOMORROW, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW NOTHING ABOUT IT.

SO WE ARE, IT, THE NOTICING WENT OUT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD NEWSLETTER, WHICH IS A COMPILATION OF THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP AS PART OF, THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY ATTENDED A, A FORWARD DALLAS MEETING IN THE PAST.

WE'VE GOT A WHOLE CONTACT LIST.

I THINK THAT'S, I DON'T KNOW, 3000 PEOPLE OR SOMETHING MORE 3000 PLUS ON THE LIST.

UM, IT'S GOING THROUGH THAT AND IT'S GOING THROUGH OUR VA VARIOUS SOCIAL MEDIA AND ALL OF THE, THE INFORMATION GOING OUT NOW, IF WE NEED TO HAVE MORE, WE CAN HAVE MORE.

THIS WAS THE INITIAL TOUCH, UM, FROM THIS WE SCHEDULED TWO IF THERE IS A REQUEST AND A NEED BECAUSE PEOPLE WANNA HEAR MORE ABOUT IT OR THEY HAVE MORE QUESTIONS.

I THINK I'M, I DO HOPE THAT AT THIS POINT THAT EVERYONE HAS AN UNDERSTANDING, THAT UNDERSTANDING IF WE HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT AND IF ASKED, WE GO OUT, WE MEET WITH Y'ALL.

SO IF WE NEED TO DO MORE, WE WILL DO MORE.

UM, WHEN IT COMES.

NOW CAN I SWITCH OVER TO YOUR PLACE TYPES? MM-HMM, , UM, MY

[03:20:01]

SO IS THERE A WAY TO BETTER EXPLAIN THE PLACE TYPES SO THAT MORE GET A, A CLEARER PICTURE OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO EXPRESS? SURE.

I MEAN IF THERE ARE, WHAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US IS IF WE HAVE THIS AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE WE'VE DONE A LOT OF THAT, IF THERE ARE A SPECI IF THERE'S A SPECIFIC AREA OR A SPECIFIC ISSUE WITHIN THE PLACE TYPE, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THE SPECIFICS OF THAT SO WE CAN, WE CAN TALK IN VERY SPECIFIC TERMS AT THIS POINT.

UM, BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND ENGAGEMENT SO FAR THAT I THINK WE'RE NOW DOWN TO THE POINT OF I NEED YOU TO EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THESE TWO LINES MEAN OR I'M, WHAT IS IT, WHAT DOES THIS BOUNDARY HERE MEAN, OR FOR THIS AREA WE NEED TO GET INTO THOSE SPECIFICS SO WE CAN BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT IT AND KIND OF WHITTLE IT DOWN FROM THE MORE ABSTRACT.

I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT.

THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

UM, THEN, THEN THE, OH MY, I JUST FORGOT.

UM, EXCUSE ME.

AND I, I THINK I'M GONNA HAVE TO COME BACK 'CAUSE I FORGOT.

WE, WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO, TO COME BACK.

ALTHOUGH FOR THE, THE MORNING SECTION HERE, COMMISSIONERS, WE DO HAVE A HARD STOP IN ABOUT SIX MINUTES, UH, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO CONTINUE THE DIALOGUE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF, OF THE HEARING.

UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, WITH MY APOLOGIES, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A HARD STOP HERE IN ABOUT FIVE MINUTES, SO PLEASE, UH, THIS IS A QUICK ONE, I'M SURE.

UM, MY, MY RESIDENTS HAVE, UH, YELLED ABOUT, UM, A PLAN THAT WAS DEVELOPED IN 88, THE SOUTHWEST DALLAS LAND USE STUDY, UM, THAT WAS EVENTUALLY ADOPTED INTO A PLAN.

UM, HAVE THOSE OLDER STUDIES BEEN INCLUDED OR RESEARCHED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN? THANK YOU.

YES, THEY ALL HAVE.

SO THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE MAP INCORPORATED ALL OF THE PLANS THAT WE KNOW THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED TO DATE.

SO THAT WAS THE FIRST WORKING DRAFT OF THE FORWARD DALLAS UPDATE.

UM, AND THAT'S WHERE OUR STARTING POINT WAS.

AND SO THEN IT WAS BASED ON THAT, THOSE EXISTING ADOPTED PLANS, INCLUDING FORWARD DALLAS AND THAT PLAN AS WELL AND ALL THE OTHER ONES THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

THEN WE STARTED WORKING FROM THERE.

I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR MY CREW EVENTUALLY IS A MORE SPECIFIC PLAN ON WHAT, WHAT FROM THAT SOUTHWEST PLAN THAT THEY'VE STUDIED FOR SO MANY YEARS.

UM, WHAT ABOUT THAT IS COMING OVER? BUT WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT LATER.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, I THOUGHT AND JUST ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION.

UM, AS YOU'RE CONSIDERING AREA PLANS, AND I THINK I HEARD THIS, BUT I WANTED TO ASK YOU IF YOU COULD RESTATE IT, .

UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION CERTAINLY COMING OUTTA MY COMMUNITY ABOUT TRYING TO LOOK AHEAD TO WHERE, UM, PLACE TYPES I THINK ARE GETTING DOCUMENTED, BUT WHERE CHANGE IS LIKELY ANTICIPATED OR THEY WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE IT.

COULD YOU SPEAK TO HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE FOLDED IN AREA PLANS THAT ESSENTIALLY HAVEN'T BEEN INITIATED YET, HOW THAT PROCESS MIGHT GO MOVE FORWARD AS WE LOOK AHEAD TO FUTURE ADOPTION OF THIS PLAN? SURE.

SO AS WE'RE, UM, THIS IS ONE OF THE BENEFIT OF HAVING, UM, PATRICK INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS AS WELL, THE CHIEF OVER NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, PART OF WHAT THE DISCUSSION THROUGH FORWARD DALLAS WAS TO IDENTIFY THOSE CHANGE AREAS, RIGHT? AND EITHER DO THEY NEED ZONING CHANGE AREAS, DO THEY NEED MORE NUANCED PLAN OR DETAILED PLANNING? SO ONCE FORWARD DALLAS IS ADOPTED, WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE AREAS THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO INTO TO DO SMALLER SCALED PLANNING.

IS IT A NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, IS IT A CORRIDOR PLAN, IS IT A COMMUNITY PLAN? WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.

AND THEN THOSE WILL WORK OFF OF YOU BUILD OFF OF FORWARD DALLAS, YOU GET YOUR MORE DETAILED PLAN, UM, WITH THE SMALLER AREA PLAN AND EITHER IT GETS ADOPTED RIGHT INTO FORWARD DALLAS BECAUSE IT WAS CONSISTENT ENOUGH WITH THE BIGGER PICTURE OR IT AMENDS FORWARD DALLAS BECAUSE THE DETAIL WAS, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER CHANGING CONDITIONS WERE SO SIGNIFICANT THAT IT CHANGED FORWARD.

DALLAS, DO YOU EACH OTHER, DO YOU MOVING AHEAD KIND OF FALL OR SUMMER FALL? YES.

SO IT WOULD ESSENTIALLY MOVE FROM ONE INTO THESE MORE DETAILED CONVERSATIONS.

YEP.

WE'RE READY TO MOVE INTO THE NEXT PHASE ONCE FORWARD DALLAS IS ADOPTED.

[03:25:01]

UH, COMMISSIONER, LET'S JUST GO AHEAD AND JUST, UM, BEGIN THE HEARING.

WE'LL CONTINUE THE QUESTIONS.

THERE IT IS.

1251.

AND THAT CONCLUDES THE BRIEFING FROM THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.

UH, WE'LL BEGIN THE HEARING NOW WITH THE ROLL CALL MS. BESINA, PLEASE.

PRESENT DISTRICT FOUR.

DISTRICT 14 AND PLACE 15.

I'M HERE.

OF COURSE, SIR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. SINA.

UH, GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

WELCOME TO THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.

TODAY IS THURSDAY, JANUARY 18TH, 2020 4, 12 50 2:00 PM A COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS WHERE WE HEAD BACK TO, UH, SOME QUESTIONS FOR MS. GILES AND THE TEAM.

UH, UH, HAWK COMMISSIONER HAWK.

I CAN HEAR YOU NOW.

UM, LET'S JUST MAKE SURE WE HAVE THEM TURNED OFF UNTIL WE, UH, WE SPEAK.

OUR SPEAKER GUIDELINES ARE, UH, TYPICALLY WE GIVE THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER.

UH, BUT OUR RULES DO ALLOW US TO CHANGE THAT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

SO WE'LL HAVE A CASE TODAY OR TWO THAT WE'LL RECEIVE ONE MINUTE PER SPEAKER.

UH, ALSO PER OUR RULES, UH, OUR, UH, IN CASES WHERE THERE IS OPPOSITION, THE APPLICANT WILL GET A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.

WE DO HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ONLINE.

I'LL ASK ALL OUR SPEAKERS ONLINE TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE YOUR CAMERAS ON.

AND WORKING STATE LAW REQUIRES US THAT WE SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU.

UH, AND I, UH, ASK ALL SPEAKERS TO PLEASE BEGIN THEIR COMMENTS WITH THEIR NAME, ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

AND LASTLY, UH, STAFF IS GETTING THE FLAG ROOM THERE IN THAT LITTLE DOOR TO YOU TO THE LEFT READY FOR YOU FOLKS, IF YOU, THERE ARE GONNA BE SEATS THERE AND YOU CAN WATCH, UH, THE HEARING, UH, ON THE SCREEN AND WHEN THE CASE THAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN COMES UP AND YOU CAN COME BACK IN.

UH, AND LASTLY, I SEE THAT THERE'S SOME, UH, ABLE-BODIED FOLKS THAT HAVE TAKEN SOME CHAIRS.

IF YOU KIND OF MAYBE TAKE A LOOK AROUND AND SEE SOMEONE THAT MAY BE IN NEED OF A CHAIR, I APPRECIATE IF YOU SWITCH THAT OUT.

UM, AND WITH THAT COMMISSIONERS WE'LL BACK TO CASES FOR 'EM, MS SKILLS AND WE'LL BEGIN WITH.

UH, COMMISSIONER AIRE.

I THINK I HAVE ONE, ONE MORE QUESTION.

YES, I REMEMBER MY QUESTION.

COMMISSIONER HERBERT.

UM, WITH THE AREA PLANS AND YOU MERGED THOSE THAT ARE ALREADY IN, IN EFFECT, HOW, BUT HOW DOES THAT IMPACT, IMPACT THE AREA PLANS THAT ARE IN QUEUE? WILL THOSE BE, HAVE THOSE BEEN APPRECIATED IN THE, FOR DALLAS DO YOU MEAN THE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS THAT ARE IN QUEUE? I KNOW IT'S THE, THE LAND USE VERSUS ZONING.

YOU GOT THE A.

REZONING OR MORE OF A ROLE, I SHOULD SAY.

UM, SO IT WILL, WHAT WE ARE ALSO DOING, UM, SOMEWHAT RELATED TO THIS PROCESS.

BUT REALLY SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT WE NEED TO DO FOR A LONG TIME IS UPDATING HOW WE PRIORITIZE OUR AUTHORIZED HEARINGS AND TYING IT MUCH MORE CLOSELY TO ADOPTED PLANS VERSUS THE OTHER PIECES.

AND SO WE'RE HOPEFUL WE WILL BE BRINGING SOMETHING FORWARD, UM, AS IN A NEW REPRIORITIZATION PACKAGE, UM, AND RECOMMENDATION.

UM, WE'RE TRYING TO GET THROUGH FORWARD DALLAS AND THEN MOVE INTO THAT.

UM, SO EARLIER IN THIS, YOU KNOW, BEFORE SUMMER, WE'D LIKE TO BRING SOMETHING, UM, FORWARD SO THAT WE CAN, GIVEN THAT AREAS THAT WE'VE POTENTIALLY IDENTIFIED THROUGH FORWARD DALLAS THAT WE KNOW HAVE GREAT NEED FOR A REZONING THAT FORWARD DALLAS PLAYS A ROLE IN THAT

[03:30:01]

THAT'S PERFECT.

COMMISSIONER TREAD WHITE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

THANK YOU ALL.

UH, JUST, UH, A QUICK NOTE MOVING FORWARD COMMISSIONERS, UH, ONCE WE GET MOVING WITH THE FORWARD DALLAS PLAN, UH, OF COURSE WE'LL HAVE EXTENSIVE, UH, OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC INPUT AND WE'LL HAVE, UH, PROBABLY A SPECIAL CALL MEETING OR TWO.

YEAH, WE'LL GET THOSE, MAYBE OUR NEXT HEARING.

WE'LL, UH, WE'LL BAT A COUPLE OF DATES AROUND, UH, COMMISSIONERS.

WE'RE GONNA GO BACK BEFORE WE BEGIN THE HEARING PIECE.

UH, LET'S GO BACK AND PICK UP THE BRIEFING ON CASES IN DISTRICT SEVEN AND THE ONE IN 11, AND THEN JUST AN FYI COMMISSIONERS.

UH, WE'LL GO THROUGH AND, UH, DISPOSE OF THE CASES AND CONSENT, AND THEN WE'LL BEGIN, UH, FOR THE RECORD ON CASES IN DISTRICT EIGHT FIRST, ALL CASES IN D EIGHT FIRST AFTER THE CONSENT.

TO CASE NUMBER FIVE AND BRIEF THAT.

[5. An application for a development plan for a general merchandise or food store greater than 3,500 square feet on property zoned Planned Development No. 605, on the southwest corner South Buckner Boulevard and Samuel Boulevard. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: HEB, LP Representative: Joe LaCroix, Baird Hampton & Brown, Inc. Planner: Wilson Kerr Council District: 7 D234-003(WK)]

SO WE'LL GO BACK

[19. An application for a Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise of food store greater than 3,500 square feet on property zoned Planned Development District No. 605 with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the southwest corner of South Buckner Boulevard and Samuell Boulevard. Staff Recommendation: Approval, for a five-year period with eligibility for automatic renewal for additional five-year periods, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: H-E-B, LP Representative: Joe LaCroix, Baird, Hampton & Brown Inc Planner: Wilson Kerr Council District: 7 Z223-310(WK)]

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE, THERE WAS A COUPLE OF CASES THAT WE DID NOT GET BRIEFED DURING OUR BRIEFING SESSION IN THE MORNING.

WE'RE GONNA BRIEF THOSE NOW AND THEN WE'LL GET TO THE VOTING SECTION.

MS. KERR? YES.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

JUST A MOMENT.

ARE YOU ALL ABLE TO SEE MY SCREEN? WE CAN.

AND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS APPROVAL.

UH, SO THIS IS, THESE ARE, UH, TWO CASES.

SO THIS IS CASE, UH, NUMBER FIVE ON THE AGENDA AS WELL AS 19.

UH, THERE'S A ZONING CASE, 2 2 3 DASH THREE 10, AS WELL AS A DEVELOPMENT PLAN CASE, UH, D 2 3 4 0 0 3.

SO THE ZONING CASES FOR, FOR, UH, ALCOHOL SALES, UH, BEER AND, UH, BEER AND WINE FOR A GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE, GREATER THAN 350, OR SORRY, THREE 500 SQUARE FEET, AND A NEW DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON A SITE LOCATED AT THE, UM, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD AND SAMUEL BOULEVARD.

THIS IS IN PD NUMBER 6 0 5.

IT HAS A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.

IT'S ON ROUGHLY 7.91 ACRES, AND IT'S LOCATED WITHIN COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE LOCATION MAP ON SOUTH BUCKNER.

SO SOME OF THE BACKGROUND FOR THIS CASE, UH, THIS, ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS, UH, WITHIN, UH, PD NUMBER 6 0 5.

UM, SO THE, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT THIS CASE IS, UH, ACCORDING TO 51 A DASH 4.219, UM, A SPECIAL AN SUP CAN BE APPROVED ALONG WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN.

AND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN CAN BE USED AS THE SITE PLAN FOR THE SUP.

SO, UH, THIS IS FOR A NEW SUP REQUEST TO PERMIT THE SALE OF ALCOHOL IN THE D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE STORED GREATER THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET.

THE, UH, IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT THE STORE IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT WITHIN THIS PD.

SO HERE'S AN AERIAL MAP OF THE SITE.

THERE, UM, IS, THERE ARE TWO RETAIL STORES TO THE NORTH.

THERE'S A SAM'S CLUB AND A WALMART.

THE REAR OF THE SITE THERE IS SINGLE FAMILY, AND ACROSS BUCKNER THERE IS AN INSTITUTIONAL USE.

THERE'S THE ZONING MAP, AND HERE ARE SOME OF THE SITE PHOTOS.

SO IT, THE SITE IS CURRENTLY VACANT.

HERE'S LOOKING EAST ON SAMUEL AND THEN SOUTHEAST ALSO ON SAMUEL, HERE'S THE, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SITE.

WE'VE, UM, WORKED WITH THE, THE APPLICANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS MEETING ALL STANDARDS, AND IT HAS MET OR EXCEEDED ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN THIS PD.

SO THE SEP CONDITIONS, UM, THEY'RE ASKING FOR A FIVE YEAR SUP, UH, WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR PERIODS.

AND, UM, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN MUST BE APPROVED IN CONJUNCTION, ACTUALLY, IT MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO THE SUP AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR PERIODS, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS,

[03:35:01]

QUE QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? WE ARE, IS THERE ANY REASON, UM, ON THE ITEM 19, WHY THE FIRST, UM, ISSUE THE FIRST ROUND WAS NOT, WAS NOT, UH, WAS GIVING A, UM, FIVE YEAR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL INSTEAD OF WAITING UNTIL THE SECOND, UM, TILL THE FIVE YEAR EXPIRE AND MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION? UH, THERE IS NOT, WE, WE, UM, BELIEVE THAT THE, THIS WAS WORTH ALLOWING FOR THE, THE, UH, AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.

IT WAS WORTH ALLOWING, UH, SORRY.

EXCUSE ME.

COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YES.

AND, AND WHY WAS IT WORTH ALLOWING? UH, WE, WE DIDN'T SEE ANY ISSUES WITH ALLOWING THE, THE FIVE YEAR, UH, AUTOMATIC RENEWAL PERIODS ON THE SITE.

UM, THERE ARE OTHER, UH, USES SURROUNDING THIS AREA THAT, THAT ALLOW THAT AS WELL.

SO WE, UM, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS USE.

UM, OKAY.

WERE THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS OF ABOUT PROTECTING THE FAMILIES, UH, THE, THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES THAT THIS PROPERTY WILL BE ABUTTING? I SEE THE PLAN HAS SOME LANDSCAPING THERE.

WAS THAT A DEEPER DISCUSSION? SURE.

YES, IT WAS.

WE, UH, WORKED WITH THE, THE APPLICANT TO ENSURE THAT THEY, THEY, UH, DID FOLLOW ALL OF THE, UH, REQUIREMENTS LAID OUT IN THE PD, INCLUDING A MASONRY WALL AND LANDSCAPE BUFFER.

UM, IT FALLS WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPES THAT THEY, THEY'RE MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE, UM, MEETING ALL THE CRITERIA TO, UM, TO NOT IMPOSE ON THE, ON THE NEIGHBORING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.

MM-HMM, , COMMISSIONER HALL, UH, BOTH OF THESE CASES INVOLVE A, A NEW HEB STORE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, IT'S, UH, IT'S, IT IS AN HEB? YES, IT'S, UH, NOT THEIR FLAGSHIP, HEV.

IT'S, UM, I, I BELIEVE, UM, EXISTENCE.

MM-HMM, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.

THANK, UH, THANK YOU.

UM, THANK YOU MR. KER.

I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

IS COMMISSIONER HAMPTON MM-HMM, , UM, ON THE SITE PLAN WHERE THE TWO DRIVES OFF OF BUCKNER AND THEN THE EAST DRIVE OFF OF SAMUEL, THEY'RE NOT IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE INTERNAL CIRCULATION DRIVE OFF OF BUCKNER.

IT CERTAINLY SEEMS LIKE IT MIGHT CREATE A CONFLICT POINT.

WERE THERE ANY COMMENTS THAT CAME OUT OF TRANSPORTATION REVIEW OR YOUR REVIEW WITH THE APPLICANT? UH, THERE WERE NOT, THAT CAME OUT OF TRANSPORTATION REVIEW ON THIS.

UH, WE MADE SURE THAT THE FIRE LANE OFF OF BUCKNER AS WELL AS THE, UH, VISIBILITY TRIANGLES WERE, UM, WERE APPROPRIATE FOR, FOR THE USE.

THERE, THERE WEREN'T ANY CONCERNS FROM TRANSPORTATION.

SO COULD YOU JUST SPEAK TO, I MEAN, PRESUMABLY THERE MIGHT BE SOME STACKING THAT HAS TO GO ON TO EXIT ONTO BUCKNER.

COULD YOU OUTLINE HOW YOU WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN? THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I CAN SPEAK WITH TRANSPORTATION TO GET A MORE ACCURATE, UM, UH, ANSWER ON YOU FOR THAT.

AND, UM, JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION ON THE SUP REQUIREMENTS, I NOTED THAT, UM, THERE AREN'T PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THAT DUPLICATION OF BASE CODE, UM, IT SEEMS SOMETIMES WE LOOK AT DEFINING WHERE ACCESS OCCURS AS BEING AN IMPORTANT PART OF COMPATIBILITY.

AND WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION IN STAFF REVIEW OF INCLUDING THAT? THERE WAS NOT.

THEY DID, UM, THEY DID JUST TALKING ABOUT PARKING, THEY, THEY, IT WAS REQUIRED FOR 220 SPACES.

THEY ARE PROVIDING 335, UM, OR THE, THE NEXT QUESTION I CAN ONCE AGAIN SPEAK WITH, UM, TRANSPORTATION ABOUT HOW THAT, THEY'LL MAKE THAT COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA.

AND THEN FINAL QUESTION, FOLLOWING UP ON COMMISSIONER HERBERT ON THE, UM, BUFFER BETWEEN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A FIRE LANE DRIVE EFFECTIVELY AT THE PROPERTY LINE.

IS THAT NOT ALSO REQUIRED TO HAVE A RESIDENTIAL BUFFER, A LANDSCAPE BUFFER? SO THE PROPERTY LINE IS, UH, ACTUALLY ABOUT 25 FEET FROM WHERE THAT FIRE LANE IS, UM, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST PORTION HERE.

YOU ARE CORRECT.

SORRY, I SEE THAT NOW I SEE THE 25 FEET.

I OVERLOOKED IT WITH THE SHADING.

FROM THE APPLICANT THAT, UH, THERE IS A DRAINAGE DITCH BETWEEN THE MASONRY WALL AND THE FIRE LANE.

AND I DID THINK, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

AND I DID GET CON CONFIRMATION

[03:40:01]

AND, UH, THAT WILL BE LANDSCAPED, UH, AS WELL, WHICH IS REQUIRED.

THANK, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER .

CHAIR.

CAN WE GO BACK TO PARKING? CAN YOU REPEAT THOSE NUMBERS? WHAT'S REQUIRED AND WHAT IS PROPOSED? SURE.

UH, REQUIRED OR 220 SQUARE FEET, UH, SQUARE FEET, EXCUSE ME, 220 SPACES.

IT'S ONE SPACE FOR 250 SQUARE FEET.

UM, AND THEY ARE PROVIDING 335, SO THEY'RE EXCEEDING THE REQUIRED PARKING.

UM, THEY'RE NOT JUST EXCEEDING IT, THEY'RE, SO HAVE THERE BEEN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHY THAT MUCH PARKING IS REQUIRED OR NEEDED BY THE APPLICANT? THERE HAVE NOT.

UM, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING I CAN, I CAN ADDRESS WITH THE APPLICANT.

I HAVE A CONCERN WITH PUTTING THAT MUCH CONCRETE ON THE GROUND WHERE, I MEAN, WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE TOWARDS, UM, MORE GREEN SPACE, LESS CONCRETE, MORE, I MEAN, YOU OBVIOUSLY NEED TRANSPORTATION TO GO TO THE GROCERY STORE AND TAKE STUFF HOME, SO I APPRECIATE THAT.

ARE THERE ANY SPACES FOR LIKE RIDE SHARE OR OTHER MODES OF TRANSPORTATION TO GO TO THE STORE? NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN ADDRESS WITH THE APPLICANT.

I HAVE SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH THE AMOUNT OF OVER PARKING IN THIS AREA.

WHEN WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT IN SOME OTHER CASES.

MR. RUBIN? YEAH.

THANK, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

UM, THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, RIGHT? SO WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT IF IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PD, CORRECT? YES, THAT IS, YES.

AND IF WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT OVER PARKING AT THESE LARGE BIG BOX STORES THAT ARE ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY IN PDS, IS IS ONE WAY THAT WE COULD ADDRESS THAT TO BE INCLUDING A PARKING MAXIMUM IN THE PD TEXT ITSELF? THAT'S SOMETHING I MIGHT, UH, NEED EITHER RYAN OR ANDREA TO, TO ANSWER.

WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? WHEN WE SEE THESE LARGE BIG BOX IN GROCERY STORE PDS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CONSIDER IS INCLUDING A PARKING MAXIMUM IN A PD, UH, POTENTIALLY, BUT THAT WOULD, WOULD REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT TO THE PD COMPLAIN? YEAH.

NOT, NOT, NOT FOR TODAY, BUT JUST FOR FUTURE PDS THAT WE CONSIDER.

COMMISSIONER, WE THERE, ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN THAT AREA THAT MOST OF, UH, WHEN YOU ALL WENT OUT FOR SITE VISITS, WERE YOU AWARE THAT IN THAT AREA, MOST OF THE GROCERY STORES, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE, UM, THAT UM, A LARGE AMOUNT OF PARKING IS ALWAYS FULL? NO, I WAS NOT AWARE.

AND HOW MANY COMMUNITY MEETINGS WERE, UH, WERE HAD AROUND THIS PARTICULAR, UH, UM, STORE BEING BUILT? I BELIEVE, UH, I'LL NEED TO CHECK THE, THE, UM, CONVERSATION THAT I HAD WITH THE APPLICANT, BUT I, I BELIEVE THERE THAT THERE WAS ONE.

AND WERE YOU, ARE YOU AWARE OF THE COMMUNITY WAS, UM, UM, REALLY GOT BEHIND THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, ESPECIALLY THE TYPE OF STORE THAT'S COMING? UH, I WAS NOT, NO.

MM-HMM, , ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, WE'LL, WE'LL GO TO, UH, CASE 18, THEN 25, THEN 26 18 IS, UH, BEING HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, SO WE DON'T NEED TO BRIEF THAT ONE.

UH, DO YOU HAVE A DATE ON THE HELD, UM, NUMBER 18 TO WHAT DATE? NUMBER 18 IS BEING, IS BEING RECOMMENDED TO BE HELD INTO JANUARY 2ND AFTER THE JANUARY MEAN? FEBRUARY 1ST AFTER THE JANUARY 29TH COMMUNITY MEETING.

WE'LL BRIEF IT THEN.

SORRY, THAT WAS ITEM 18.

FEBRUARY 1ST.

TAKES US TO NUMBER 25, UH, 19.

SO THAT

[25. 24-247 An application for an MU-1 Mixed Use District on property zoned an R-16(A) Single Family District, on the north line of LBJ Freeway, between Preston Road and Copenhill Road. (Part 1 of 2)]

WE JUST DID SCENE IS BEING TAKEN OFF THE SCENE ALSO.

YES, IT IS OFF.

I'M NOT ABLE TO HEAR ONLINE.

SO WE GO TO 25 AND JUST, UH, FYI, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE FLAG ROOM IS OPEN NOW.

UH, YOU LOTS OF SEATS IN THERE.

YOU'RE WELCOME TO WAIT FOR YOUR CASE IN THERE WHEN YOUR CASE COMES BACK UP THERE.

THERE ARE SHOULD BE SCREENS THERE WHERE YOU CAN WATCH AND HEAR US.

SO IF YOU DO NEED A SEAT, IT'S RIGHT THERE TO MY LEFT IN THE BACK.

AND, UH, WE'LL WAIT FOR YOU TO COME BACK IN WHEN YOUR CASE OF INTEREST COMES BACK UP.

CASE NUMBER 25, MS. BURGESS, PLEASE.

[03:47:04]

SORRY.

COMMISSIONER HAWK, WE'RE HAVING SOME, SOME TECHNOLOGY ISSUES.

MY APOLOGIES.

THE POWERPOINT POSTED.

THIS IS Z 2 23 DASH 3 42.

THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A MIXED USE ONE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE R 16 SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.

IT'S NORTH LINE OF LBJ FREEWAY BETWEEN PRESTON ROAD AND COPEN HILL ROAD.

AND THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP OUTLINE IN BLUE IS THE AREA OF REQUEST.

THIS IS THE ZONING MAP SURROUNDING THE SITE.

YOU HAVE UNDEVELOPED LAND, UM, HOTEL, SINGLE FAMILY MULTIFAMILY, AND YOU ALSO HAVE A DEPRESSED FREEWAY.

THE AREA REQUEST IS CURRENTLY ZONE R 16, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.

THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE.

THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT IN 2002 AND IT'S APPROXIMATELY 5,632 SQUARE FEET.

THE LOT ONLY HAS FURNISHED ON THE LBJ FREEWAY AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE A PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE FOR AN OFFICE TO ACCOMPLISH THIS.

THEY REQUEST A M1 MIXED USE DISTRICT.

THE NEXT FEW SLIDES WOULD BE, UH, PICTURES OF THE AREAS OF REQUEST AND SURROUNDING USE.

THIS IS, UM, A SURROUNDING USE DIRECTLY NEXT TO THE AREA REQUEST IS A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

ALSO NEXT TO THE AREA REQUEST, YOU DO HAVE A HOTEL AND SOME RETAIL.

FURTHER DOWN HERE ARE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

HI MS. BRIDGES, HOW ARE YOU? HELLO, HOW ARE YOU? SO I WANTED TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION WE HAD EARLIER THIS WEEK, UM, AND SEE FIRST OF ALL, WHAT IS THE PROPOSED USE BY THE APPLICANT? THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO USE, UM, THE SPACES ABOVE THE GARAGE AS AN OFFICE, BUT THEY STILL WANNA UTILIZE THE MAJORITY OF THE SPACE AS A RESIDENCE.

QUESTION, QUESTIONS.

[03:50:02]

SO IF IT WAS, OKAY, AND CAN YOU REMIND ME, IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE A BUSINESS OUT OF A HOUSE? NO, MA'AM.

IT'S NOT ALLOWED.

SO THERE'S NO USE WHATSOEVER THAT COULD PERMIT THIS HOUSE TO BE USED FOR AN INSURANCE BUSINESS.

NOW WE DID SPEAK ABOUT NOA, BUT IF THEY DO THAT DISTRICT INSTEAD OF THE MIXED USE, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO HAVE THE, UM, HAVE A RESIDENCE THERE.

IT'LL ONLY BE FOR OFFICE.

SO THE REASON THAT THE PROPOSAL IS MIXED USE IS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BOTH HAVE A RESIDENCE AND AN OFFICE AT THIS LOCATION? YES, MA'AM.

CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE MAP WITH THE PROPERTY TO THE LEFT OF IT, PLEASE? OR TO THE, TO THE WEST.

SO IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS A STRIP OF LAND THAT I BELIEVE IS A BUFFER TO THE DIRECTLY TO THE WEST OF THIS.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.

ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE HISTORY OF THAT BUFFER? UH, NO MA'AM, I'M NOT.

UM, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE CASE THAT CAME BEFORE THIS COMMISSION, UM, IN 2021, THAT IS THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY TO THE EAST OF THIS ONE? YES.

WE BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THAT, BUT I DIDN'T TAKE THAT INTO MY ANALYSIS.

HAVE YOU SINCE LEARNED MORE ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THAT CASE? A LITTLE BIT, BUT I DIDN'T DIG DEEP INTO THAT.

DID YOU TALK TO THE PLANNER THAT WORKED ON THAT CASE? NO, I DIDN'T SPEAK WITH MICHAEL ABOUT IT.

ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE IS A 6 35 CORRIDOR PLAN? NO, I'M NOT.

SO I, I THINK I ALSO HAVE BEEN EDUCATED BY SEVERAL PEOPLE ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THIS AREA.

I TOO DID NOT SIT ON THIS COMMISSION WHEN THE LAST CASE WAS BROUGHT UP, BUT, UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT OPPOSITION TO THE CASE IN 2021? I BRIEFLY HEARD ABOUT THAT, YES.

AND ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE REQUEST WAS THE SAME TO CHANGE A RESIDENTIAL, A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE REQUEST FROM R 16 TO MU ONE? YES, MA'AM, I AM.

ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE BEEN HAD WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ABOUT THIS REQUEST? NO, MA'AM.

I AM NOT.

I WASN'T AWARE OF ANY TYPE OF MEETINGS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

UM, YOU'VE SPOKEN TO THE APPLICANT, CORRECT? I HAVE SPOKEN TO THE APPLICANT SEVERAL TIMES.

ARE YOU AWARE IF THE APPLICANT HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORS? NO, MA'AM.

THAT DID NOT COME UP IN CONVERSATION.

IF SHE DID, I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT.

BUT IS THERE A 6 35 CORRIDOR PLAN? I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT AREA PLAN.

SO I THINK, AGAIN, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE FOR CASES IN MY DISTRICT THAT WE WOULD HAVE SORT OF IRONED SOME OF THIS STUFF OUT BEFORE THE WEEK OF THE HEARING, BUT IT'S BEEN THE HOLIDAYS, SO, UM, IT'S, IT'S AS MUCH MY FAULT AS EVERYONE ELSE'S THAT WE ALL DIDN'T GET TOGETHER.

BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT I THINK YOU MAY NOT HAVE KNOWN, THE APPLICANT MAY NOT HAVE KNOWN, UM, THAT HAS COME UP IN THE LAST COUPLE DAYS.

AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE THAT THIS HISTORY IS EVALUATED BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO THINK THAT THE DECISIONS WE MAKE SITTING AROUND THE HORSESHOE ARE NOT MADE IN A VACUUM, THAT WE DO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF VERY SIMILAR SITUATIONS, UM, LITERALLY NEXT DOOR AND THE SAME EXACT ZONING REQUEST.

AND I ALSO THINK THAT WE NEED TO BE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION AREA PLANS.

I MEAN, WE TALK ABOUT THAT A LOT AND I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION VERY DIRECT MR. CHAIR NEIGHBORHOOD.

YES, MR. I HATE TO INTERRUPT, BUT THIS IS THE BRIEFING.

IS THERE A, I JUST WANNA TO CONFIRM QUESTION.

I JUST WANNA CONFIRM WITH THE, WITH THE PLANNER THAT NONE OF THAT HAPPENED.

UM, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, UH, MS. BRIDGES DID A FULL ZONING ANALYSIS OF THIS CASE.

UM, SOME OF THE CONCERNS YOU VOICED, UH, HAVE MORE TO DO WITH THE COMMUNITY, WHICH AS I'M SURE YOU'LL RECALL FROM OUR WORKSHOP IN DECEMBER, UH, IT'S REALLY THE ROLE OF THE COMMISSIONERS TO ADVOCATE FOR THEIR COMMUNITY STAFF'S ROLE IS TO DO, UH, THAT NEUTRAL, NEUTRAL TECHNICAL ANALYSIS, UH, BASED ON ZONING AND USE.

AND THAT WAS CERTAINLY DONE HERE WITH THIS CASE, WHICH IS WHY THE CASE REPORT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY.

[03:55:01]

THAT'S NOT ONE I'M FAMILIAR WITH, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO THAT BECAUSE I'M BEING TOLD THERE IS OKAY.

UM, I CAN LOOK INTO THAT ON OUR, UH, ZONING MAP AND GET BACK TO YOU.

THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER HALL, PLEASE.

DOES THE APPLICANT PLAN TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING HOME? NO, SIR.

NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF, BUT JUST SORT OF REMODEL IT FOR HIS OFFICE FOR PURPOSES? YES.

YOU ARE WELCOME.

I THINK WE'LL BE HOLDING THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT, IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, I, I'D LIKE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THE 6 35 CORRIDOR PLAN.

COULD YOU GIMME JUST ONE SECOND? I CAN LOOK THAT UP.

UM, AND SO I THINK UNTIL WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION, I THINK THIS IS A CASE THAT MORE INFORMATION'S NEEDED.

LET'S DO THAT THEN.

LET'S, LET'S HOLD OUR ADVISEMENT.

SO I PLAN TO HOLD IT UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL SECOND ONE IN FEBRUARY, FEBRUARY 15TH.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, I'LL, I'LL DEFER MY QUESTIONS.

I CAN SEND YOU STATS.

I THINK WE HAVE ONE MORE CASE.

IT, IT HAS BEEN A WHILE, BUT I, THE, THE AREA PLANNED FOR THAT AREA MAY NOT HAVE INCLUDED THIS PROPERTY.

I DON'T THINK IT DID, BUT IT IT COULD HAVE, I COULD HAVE MY GEOGRAPHY WRONG, BUT I'M BEING TOLD THAT INCLUDED THE ONE NEXT TO IT.

OH, WAS IT? OKAY, SO THEN I, I HAVE THE WRONG CORNER.

UM, COMMISSIONER, SO LET'S GO.

[26. 24-268 An application for a Specific Use Permit for an auto service center on property zoned a CC Community Commercial Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 595, the South Dallas/Fair Park Special Purpose District, on the west corner of Scyene Road and Lagow Street. (Part 1 of 2)]

IS THAT RIGHT? NUMBER 26.

MR. PEPI, I THINK HE WAS GONNA GIVE US SOME UPDATES.

THIS ONE HAS BEEN BRIEFED AND THE UPDATE IS THERE IS, THERE HAVE BEEN NO UPDATES.

QUESTIONS TO THE NO UPDATES.

COMMISSIONERS, NONE IS IN DISTRICT SEVEN.

THIS IS Z 2 2 3, UH, EXCUSE ME.

2 1 2 2 8 2 8 1.

GREAT MEMORY.

COMMISSIONER HALL DOES HAVE A QUESTION.

UH, I'M SORRY FOR MY IGNORANCE HERE.

COULD YOU EXPLAIN JUST A BIT MORE WHY THE, THE DECISION FOR STAFF TO SAY DENY? YES.

THIS, THIS CASE, UM, IS LOCATED CATTYCORNER TO, UM, HATCHER STATION.

UM, IT HAS A HATCHER STATION AREA PLAN, WHICH CALLS FOR, UM, GENERALLY A MIX OF USES, WHETHER THAT'S VERTICAL OR HORIZONTAL AND PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION.

THIS IS A VERY SMALL SITE, AND THIS USE IN THIS PD AUTO SERVICE CENTER REQUIRES AN SUP WITHIN THE PD.

AND SO IT'S A COMBINATION OF THE SMALL SITE KIND OF CONSTRAIN THEM TO, UM, LIMITS, OR, EXCUSE ME, ACCESS TO THE, TO THE SMALLER STREET IN THE BACK, UM, LIMITS WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH, UM, SCREENING AND, AND LOCATION AND DUMPSTERS, DUMPSTERS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

UH, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY IT CIRCLES BACK.

WE HAVE THE, THE HEDGER STATION AREA PLAN, WHICH CALLS FOR PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION AND ESUP FOR, FOR THIS USE.

UH, DOESN'T, DOESN'T FURTHER THAT.

COMMISSIONER WHEELER QUESTION.

SO IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T FIT THE PLAN PUT FORWARD BY THE CITY FOR THE AREA THAT IT TECHNICAL ISSUES AS WELL? YES, IT'S THAT, AND, AND IT, I MEAN, IF WE DIDN'T HAVE A PLAN, THE ADJACENCY TO, OR THE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL WOULD ALSO BE A FACTOR THAT THE INGRESS EGRESS TO THE SITE WOULD BE ON THE SAME STREET RIGHT ACROSS FROM RESIDENTIAL AS WELL.

SO WITHOUT JUST THE PLAN, THAT PLAYS A FACTOR AS WELL.

THANK YOU MR. PEPPER.

UH, FOR THOSE OF YOU IN THE FLAG ROOM, WE'RE BEGINNING WITH CASE NUMBER 3M 2 3 4 0 0 3.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER, BEFORE WE BEGIN THE HEARING? OKAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. PEPE.

COMMISSIONER.

SO LET'S GO BACK TO, UH, THE TOP OF THE DOCKET.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU HAVE TO STAY WITH US HERE A LITTLE BIT.

WE'RE GONNA JUMP AROUND A, UH, WE HAVE A LOT OF MOVING PARTS.

UM, HAVE SOME, UH, COMMISSIONER AVAILABILITY.

SO WE'RE GONNA JUMP AROUND A LITTLE BIT, BUT WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE TOP OF THE DOCKET ON, ON, UH, THE FIRST PAGE WITH CASE NUMBER THREE.

AND THIS WOMAN,

IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN, UH, BEING HEARD IN THAT CASE, PLEASE MAKE YOUR WIFE BACK

[04:00:01]

INTO, UH, THE CHAMBER.

ALL RIGHT, YOUR FIRST ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER 3M 2 34 DASH 0 0 3 DMM, AN APPLICATION FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 10 53, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SKILLMAN STREET AND EAST LEVERS LANE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. FOREMAN.

IT'S THE APPLICANT HERE WOULD WISH.

HOW MANY FOLKS INTEND TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I'M NOT SURE.

UM, WE PROBABLY HAVE FOUR OR FIVE.

AT LEAST THREE I KNOW OF.

PERFECT.

YES SIR.

COULD YOU PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? YES, SIR.

UH, THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS JAMES COOLMAN.

I AM AN ARCHITECT HERE IN DALLAS.

I'M ALSO A MEMBER OF ZION LUTHERAN CHURCH AND SCHOOL.

UM, AND I'LL BE REPRESENTING THE SCHOOL.

UM, JUST TO GIVE YOU A QUICK BIT OF HISTORY, OUR CHURCH AND SCHOOL HAS BEEN ACTIVE IN DALLAS COMMUNITY FOR NEARLY 150 YEARS AND OUR SCHOOL, CHURCH AND SCHOOL HAS BEEN LOCATED AT THIS CORNER FOR 70 YEARS.

UM, WE'VE GOT ABOUT 275 STUDENTS ENROLLED.

UM, AND 80% OF THOSE STUDENTS ARE NOT CHURCH MEMBERS.

SO WE, WE CONSIDER OURSELVES A COMMUNITY SCHOOL.

UM, THE REASON FOR THIS SPORT COURT, THIS NEW, UM, CONCRETE PAD WAS REALLY DRIVEN BY STUDENT SAFETY.

UM, OUR CURRENT, UH, BASKETBALL COURTS ARE LOCATED ON OUR PARKING LOT AREA.

AND SO, UM, WHAT WE, WHAT WE PROPOSE TO DO IS LOCATE, UH, THE NEW SPORT COURT, UM, JUST TO THE NORTH OF THE EXISTING BASKETBALL COURT AREA.

UM, IT SHOULD BE IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE ARE NOT CHANGING ANY CURRENT USE, WE'RE NOT INCREASING THE NUMBER OF USERS.

WE'RE SIMPLY TAKING AN EXISTING ACTIVITY THAT OCCURS ON SITE IN THE PARKING LOT.

WE'RE MOVING IT INTO OUR EXISTING PLAYGROUND.

UM, SO I THINK THAT SHOULD BE HIGHLIGHTED THAT, THAT WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE CURRENT USE OR INCREASING THE NUMBER OF USERS, AND SO WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

UM, AND MAYBE EVEN THERE MAY BE LESS ACTIVITY BECAUSE OUR CURRENT BASKETBALL COURTS, BECAUSE THEY'RE PART OF THE PARKING LOT, THEY'RE LIT, THAT CAN, UM, ENCOURAGE SOME USERS TO USE THOSE COURTS AT NIGHT.

THE NEW COURT AREA THAT WE HAVE, UM, ESTABLISHED WILL NOT BE LIT.

SO I WOULD ANTICIPATE EVEN LESS ACTIVITY PROBABLY ON THIS COURT THAN WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

UM, JUST TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF CONCERNS THAT I HEARD THIS IN THIS MORNING'S BRIEFING, UM, REGARDING THIS SLAB LOCATION, UM, THE CURRENT SLAB IS ORIENTED LIKE IT IS TO MAXIMIZE, UM, THE AREA FOR OUR ADJACENT SOCCER FIELD.

YOUR TIME IS UP, SIR.

THAT'S IT.

BUT PLEASE STAND BY THERE, THERE ARE GONNA BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

SO, UH, OKAY.

TAKE A SEAT AND, AND HANG IN FOR HIM.

JUST A SECOND.

UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THERE ARE OTHER FOLKS, APPARENTLY WE HAVE REACHED THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY FOR THIS ROOM AND THERE ARE NOT LETTING FOLKS IN THAT WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE.

UH, SO I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOU FOLKS THAT ARE NOT SPEAKING ON THIS CASE TO MAYBE TAKE A STEP OUT OF THE CHAMBER FOR JUST A MOMENT.

ALLOW SOME OF THOSE FOLKS THAT WANT TO BE HEARD ON THIS CASE TO, TO TAKE YOUR PLACE FOR A MOMENT.

GREATLY APPRECIATE IT.

WE ARE, WE'RE TAKING OUR SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF THE ITEM.

FIRST, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION? THIS IS AGAIN, CASE NUMBER 3M 2 34 0 0 3.

QUESTION WHY THIS IS EVEN ON THE AGENDA AS A MINOR AMENDMENT.

COULD YOU PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? AND THIS WE'LL KEEP TIME.

WE'LL HAVE ONE MINUTE.

MY NAME IS MARCUS WOOD, 53 35 BRIDGE LAWN DRIVE.

I HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF ZAC IN YEARS PAST.

I, MY HOME SINCE 1967 HAS BEEN BEHIND ZION LUTHERAN CHURCH AND SCHOOL.

I LOVE IT.

THEY'RE THE BEST NEIGHBORS.

I DON'T WANT ANY SCREAMING, I DON'T WANT ANY HEDGES.

I CONSIDER THOSE TO BE SAFETY PROBLEMS IF THOSE HAPPEN.

I AM THRILLED TO SUPPORT THE SCHOOL AND THEIR PLAN.

IN FACT, I

[04:05:01]

NEXT SPEAKER.

HE'S IN SUPPORT.

NEXT SPEAKER IN SUPPORT, PLEASE.

MY NAME IS BRIAN WENT.

I'M AN OFFICER OF, UH, ZION LUTHERAN CHURCH.

I HAVE PROVIDED EACH MEMBER WITH A, A HANDOUT WITH FOUR EXHIBITS.

IT LOOKS LIKE THIS.

THE FIRST EXHIBIT IS LETTERS FROM FOUR OF OUR NEIGHBORS WHO ARE ALSO IN SUPPORT OF OUR, UH, SPORT COURT, NONE OF WHICH ARE AFFILIATED WITH ZION.

UH, I THINK MR. COOLMAN ADDRESSED THE, UH, ISSUE OF ALTERING THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT AND, AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

BUT I DO WANT TO ADDRESS WHAT I THINK IS GOING TO, UH, BE IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSIONERS WHO I THANK FOR THEIR SERVICE.

UH, THERE HAVE BEEN COMPLAINTS IN THE PAST BEFORE AND, AND THIS HASN'T BEEN USED, UH, FROM, UH, THE SARNO FAMILY, UH, ABOUT, ABOUT THE NOISE ON OUR EXISTING PLAYGROUND.

AND WE HAVE, UH, ENTERTAINED THE FOLKS FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT WHO HAVE BEEN OUT IN RESPONSE TO THOSE.

AND WE'VE NEVER BEEN CITED FOR ANYTHING.

AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.

UH, THANK YOU, SIR.

YOUR TIME IS UP, SIR, PLEASE STAND BY.

OUR NEXT SPEAKER IN SUPPORT.

HELLO, I'M JEFF THORMAN.

I'M THE PRINCIPAL OF THE SCHOOL.

UM, JUST WANTED TO TALK ABOUT MAIN REASON WHY THIS SUPPORT COURT WENT IN IS BECAUSE IF YOU KNOW LOVERS OF SKILLMAN, IT'S ONE OF THE BUSIEST INTERSECTIONS IN DALLAS, AND THERE ARE MANY ACCIDENTS THAT HAPPEN AT THAT INTERSECTION.

A LOT OF TIMES WHEN THAT TRAFFIC GETS BACKED UP, PEOPLE WANNA CUT THROUGH OUR PARKING LOT AND SCOOP AROUND THE BACKSIDE, UH, RUNNING ALONG OUR PROPERTY.

UH, MANY TIMES WE'VE HAD KIDS OUT THERE PLAYING BASKETBALL ON THE PARKING LOT WHERE THEY TRY TO DRIVE THROUGH.

UM, SOME OF THEM ARE NOT VERY CAUTIOUS.

SO WHEN THE IDEA OF PUT THE SPORT CORD IN, UM, TO ALLEVIATE THAT ISSUE, AND THAT WAS OUR BIGGEST, UH, REASON WHY WE WANTED TO DO IT, UH, TO GET THE KIDS OFF THE PARKING LOT AWAY FROM POTENTIAL ISSUES THAT COULD HAPPEN.

WE DO SET CONES OUT THERE, BUT CONES DON'T STOP CARS.

UM, SO, UH, IN SAYING THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S THE MAIN REASON WHY WE WANTED TO SUPPORT COURT FOR OUR KIDS.

AND, UH, AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T ANTICIPATE HAVING ANYTHING HAPPENING AT NIGHT.

UM, WE WILL POST SIGNS AND SAY, YOU KNOW, NO TRESPASSING, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.

NEXT SPEAKER IN AND IT'S NOT LIGHTED.

NO SPEAKER.

NEXT SPEAKER IN SUPPORT.

ARE THERE ANY MORE SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM? IS THERE ANYONE IN THE FLAG ROOM? IF YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF THIS, NOW'S YOUR TIME TO PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY INTO THIS CHAMBER.

WE'LL JUST PAUSE A COUPLE OF MINUTES HERE TO GIVE ANYONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE ITEM, A FAVORABLE OPPORTUNITY TO COME ON IN HERE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR CONSIDERING THIS REQUEST.

MY NAME IS AMBER CORDOVA.

I'M A PARISHIONER AT ZION AND MY CHILDREN ATTEND THERE, THEY'RE THREE AND FIVE.

THE SPORTS COURT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP OUR CHILDREN SAFE.

NUMBER ONE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THREE AND FIVE YEAR OLDS, BUT THEY BOLT A LOT.

AND SO TO HAVE THEM IN AN AREA WHERE THEY'RE ABLE TO PLAY AND NOT BE ON A PARKING LOT WHERE A CAR COULD BE COMING THROUGH, SETS MY MIND AS A PARENT AT EASE.

UM, WE ALSO LIVE IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PLACE WHERE KIDS WHO AREN'T EVEN PART OF ZION CAN COME AND PLAY WHEN SCHOOL'S NOT IN SESSION OR ON THE WEEKENDS.

AND SO IT ADDS TO BOTH TIME AWAY FROM SCREENS AND HELPS KIDS WITH MAINTAINING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY.

UM, AND IT CAN ALSO BE USED BY ADULTS.

SO OVERALL, I THINK THAT THIS IS GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S GOOD FOR ZION, IT'S GOOD FOR OUR KIDS HERE IN DALLAS.

SO THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING, UH, MY COMMENTS AND SUPPORT.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US

[04:10:02]

THERE.

ANY MORE SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM? I, THERE'S ANYONE IN THE FLAG ROOM? PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU, YOU COME NOW.

WE'LL GO WITH OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.

SIR, PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE, ONLY ONE MINUTE.

MY NAME IS, UH, JOE SARNO.

UH, I LIVE AT, UH, 61 14 TOWN HILL LANE.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MYSELF AND MY WIFE, ALLIE, AS ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS IN OPPOSITION ZION'S MINOR AMENDMENT APPLICATION UP FOR VOTE.

TODAY WE ARE ASKING THAT YOU NOT APPROVE THIS AMENDMENT IN ITS CURRENT FORM, OR ALTERNATIVELY, CONTINUE THE VOTE TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL EXPLORATION OF THE ISSUES AND ALLOW FOR THE POTENTIAL POSSIBILITY OF REACHING A COMPROMISE SOLUTION.

THIS MINOR AMENDMENT IS ANYTHING BUT MINOR.

IT WILL ALTER THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN OUR AND ADJACENT PROPERTY BY CREATING AN ADDITIONAL SOURCE OF NOISE CLOSER TO OUR PROPERTY.

THE NOISE IS OUR MAIN CONCERN.

IT'S THE INTENSITY AND FREQUENCY OF THE NOISE.

GIVEN PMI PROXIMITY OF THE PROPOSED COURT AND THE NEW USE IS CREATED, NEUTRAL STUDIES PROVIDE US WITH SUCH GUIDANCE, EVEN THOUGH IT SHOULD ALSO BE OBVIOUS TO THE CASUAL OBSERVER.

I THINK WHEN PEOPLE GET INTO THESE FIGHTS, EACH SIDE IS, IS ASSURED IT HAS THE HIGHER GROUND.

I HAVE BEEN OPEN TO DISCUSSIONS WITH ZION FROM THE BEGINNING, BUT THEY HAVE NOT ENGAGED.

I'M A STRONG BELIEVER THAT IF PEOPLE ARE WILLING TO DO THE WORK, AGREEABLE SOLUTIONS CAN BE ACHIEVED.

VOTE TODAY TO UNCONDITIONALLY APPROVE THE, THE MINOR AMENDMENT APPLICATION WILL ONLY WORSEN THE EXCESSIVE AND OFFENSIVE NOISE SITUATION AND WILL NOT BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NOTION OF NOT REWARDING A NON-COMPLIANT APPLICANT.

ALTERNATIVELY, WE ASK THAT YOU CONTINUE THIS VOTE AND HOLD THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT OF THE ISSUES, PERHAPS A PERSPECTIVE NOISE STUDY AND THE POSSIBILITY OF THE TWO SIDES REACHING A COMPROMISE SOLUTION.

I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT ZION IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE.

UH, ZION IS ALREADY VIOLATING ARTICLE SIX, NOISE RE REGULATIONS WITH THE, WITH THE, UH, PLAYGROUND, WHICH IS A SEPARATE.

TIME IS, UH, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

MY NAME IS AINA SAUNA AND I ALSO LIVE AT 6 1 1 4 TOWN, HER LANE.

UM, FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT, UM, YEAH, YOU NEED TO STEP RIGHT UP TO THE MICROPHONE.

WE'RE NOT AGAINST THE SCHOOL, WE'RE NOT AGAINST THE CHURCH.

WE'RE NOT AGAINST THE CHILDREN.

OUR MAIN CONCERN AND OUR OWN, OUR CONCERN IS THE NOISE, EXCESSIVE NOISE.

CURRENTLY THERE IS A PLAYGROUND RIGHT BEHIND OUR HOUSE AND WE ARE HEARING, SCREAMING AND YELLING ALL DAY LONG ON SCHOOL DAYS.

AND THIS NEW COURT, IT'S, IT'S BEEN MENTIONED THAT IT'S NOT GONNA INCREASE OR IT, IT'S NOT GONNA BE A DIFFERENT USE OF COURT, THAT IT'S GONNA BE JUST ADDING TO THE PLAYGROUND.

I DON'T THINK SO.

I THINK ADDITIONAL NOISE WILL BE PRODUCED BECAUSE OTHER CHILDREN, OLDER CHILDREN THAT I SEE PLAYING CLOSER TO THE SCHOOL CURRENTLY WILL BE PLAYING ON THIS NEW BASKETBALL COURT OR PICKLEBALL COURT OR WHATEVER THEY'RE GONNA MAKE IT.

AND ALSO, I THINK WE ARE GONNA HAVE NEW NOISE ISSUES ON THE WEEKENDS AND IN THE EVENINGS, MAYBE EVEN GOING LATER INTO THE NIGHT WHEN OTHER PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF THE SCHOOL, MAYBE EVEN ADULTS, NOT EVEN CHILDREN WHO ARE ATTENDING THE SCHOOL WILL BE PLAYING BASKETBALL.

NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

ARE THERE ANY MORE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION ON THIS ITEM? IF THERE'S ANYONE IN THE FLAG ROOM, PLEASE MAKE YOUR WAY THIS WAY NOW.

ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THEY HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THE NOISE ON OUR, FROM OUR PLAYGROUND AS RECENTLY AS A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.

UH, PER OUR ROLES, THE APPLICANT GETS A THREE MINUTE REBUTTAL.

I THANK YOU.

UH, I'D LIKE TO START WITH THE EXHIBITS THREE AND FOUR TO THIS, TO OUR HANDOUT.

AND THE REASON THOSE ARE INCLUDED IS, AS YOU CAN SEE IN EXHIBIT THREE, MR. SARNO HAS REPRESENTED TO US THAT HIS, THAT MRS. SARNO SUFFERS FROM A CONDITION CALLED HYPERACUSIS, UH, WHICH IS A, A HYPERSENSITIVITY TO NOISE.

AND I'VE INCLUDED AS EXHIBIT FOUR, AN EXCERPT FROM THE CLEVELAND CLINIC ON THIS, UH, THIS CONDITION WHERE, UH, IT SAYS COMMON, SOME COMMON SOUNDS IN EVERYDAY LIFE THAT MAY FEEL INTOLERABLE OR PEOPLE CHATTING THE CAR ENGINE RUNNING.

AND YOU, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE, I BRING THAT UP ONLY TO SAY THAT THE STANDARD FOR AN UNREASONABLE NOISE IN, IN, I BELIEVE IT'S CHAPTER 30, IS SOMETHING THAT'S DISTURBING LOUD OR IS OFFENSIVE TO THE ORDINARY SENSIBILITIES OF THE CITIZENS.

AND HERE, UH, THE SARNO'S HAVE, HAVE STATED THAT THEY DON'T FALL INTO THAT CATEGORY.

IT'S

[04:15:01]

AND CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS BEEN OUT.

IF THERE'S AN UNREASONABLE NOISE THAT IS THE JOB OF CODE ENFORCEMENT TO LOOK AT.

AND RESPECTFULLY, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT'S THE, THE FUNCTION OF THIS COMMISSION.

I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE COMPLIED, UH, WITH THE, UH, AS, AS MR. COOLMAN POINTED OUT, WE ARE IN THIS, THIS OUGHT TO BE GRANTED IN ACCORD WITH THE, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

AND IF IN THE FUTURE WE VIOLATE THE NOISE ORDINANCE, THEN CODE ENFORCEMENT WILL HANDLE THAT AND WE WILL DEAL WITH IT.

AND AGAIN, WE, WE'VE NEVER HAD A COMPLAINT UNT IN THE 20 YEARS THAT THE SARNO'S HAVE LIVED THERE UNTIL LAST SPRING.

AND I, I JUST THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT AND, UM, ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE, THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE.

UH, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR ANY, OR ANY OF THE SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT COMMISSIONER WHEELER? I, I HAVE A COUPLE OF CONCERNS.

ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS, IS THE, IS THE PLAYGROUND COMPLIANT? IS THE LOCATION OF THE PLAYGROUND COMPLIANT OR IS IT NON-COMPLIANT? IT'S, IT'S COMPLIANT.

IT'S BEEN THERE FOREVER.

1957.

UM, IS IT, CAN I, BECAUSE I I WANNA SAY THAT, UM, POSSIBLY THE, THE PERSON IN DENIAL, THE PERSON THAT WAS UH, WAS, UM, OPPOSITION, HE HAD SOMETHING TO FURTHER TELL US ABOUT THE PLAYGROUND AND WAY WE CAN MAKE SURE WE, WE CAN ASK THAT, THAT GOOD QUESTION FOR STAFF WHEN WE GET TO STAFF QUESTIONS.

UM, 'CAUSE WELL, HE HAD, I MEAN, HE DIDN'T GET TO READ THAT PART.

MAYBE THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

WHO DIDN'T GET TO READ, UM, THE PART, HE HAD SOMETHING THAT WAS STATING THAT IT WAS NOT COMPLIANT, BUT WE CUT HIM OFF BEFORE.

WE CAN ASK HIM WHEN WE GET TO THE QUESTIONS OF OPPOSITION AND THEN WE CAN ASK STAFF.

UM, ALSO, UM, YOU ALSO SAID SOMETHING ABOUT, UM, NORMALCY.

UM, SHE, UH, THE SERRA, WHAT'S HER NAME? HOLD ON, LET ME GET IT.

S SERRANO BEING, BECAUSE THEIR, THEIR COMPLAINT WAS THAT THE NOISE IS THE OFFENSIVE TO THEM.

THAT IT'S NOT NORMAL FOR IT TO BE, UM, FOR EVERYONE ELSE.

AND WELL, I, IF I MAY CLARIFY, THE, THE NOISE ORDINANCE IN DALLAS SAYS YOU'RE IN VIOLATION IF YOU'RE MAKING A LOUD OR DISTURBING NOISE THAT IS OFFENSIVE TO THE, TO A CITIZEN OF ORDINARY SENSIBILITIES.

AND I, I BROUGHT THAT UP TO SHOW THAT ACCORDING TO THE CLEVELAND CLINIC AND MR. SARNO'S OWN REPRESENTATION, THEY ARE NOT, AT LEAST MRS. SARNO IS NOT A PERSON OF ORDINARY SENSIBILITIES.

AND I BELIEVE THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S DRIVING THEIR OPPOSITION, IF THAT MAKES IT ANY CLEARER.

SO, UM, HAVE THERE BEEN A NOISE STUDY DONE? DID YOU ALL HAVE A NOISE STUDY DONE? I, I'M SORRY, I'M NOT, DID YOU HAVE A NOISE STUDY DONE? WE'VE NEVER HAD A NOISE STUDY DONE THAT I KNOW OF.

DID WE? NO.

BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE THAT IS MOVING CLOSER TO WHERE THE HOMES ARE AT, THAT IT WILL NOT BE A NOISE ISSUE? I DO NOT.

NOW, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE, UH, UM, MAYBE, AND NOT NECESSARILY THE PLAYGROUND, BUT WHEN YOU GO TO MOVING INTO SPORTS LIKE PICKLEBALL BASKETBALL, THAT THEY, THOSE I THOSE CAN PRODUCE, UM, ADDITIONAL NOISE THAT IS OFFENSIVE TO THE COMMUNITY.

IF NO NOISE STUDY IS DONE, THEN HOW DO WE NOT KNOW THAT IT IS NOT? UM, WELL, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE USE.

IF YOU'RE MOVING IT CLOSER TO THE HOUSE, IT'S, IN FACT IT'S PROBABLY LESS THAN IT WOULD BE.

SO, 'CAUSE WE'RE PRIOR TO THIS, OUR BASKETBALL AREA, IT WASN'T EVEN A COURT.

IT WAS JUST PART OF THE PARKING LOT WAS LIGHTED.

AND THIS SPORT COURT WILL NOT BE LIGHTED.

SO IT WON'T BE IN USE FOR ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN'T DO IN THE DARK.

SO IT AM AM I CORRECT IS THESE SMALLER LINES ARE, I MEAN, ARE THESE HOUSES PARCELS THAT'S CLOSER, THAT'S AT THE BACK PART, UM, CLOSE TO WHERE THE NEW, THE NEW SCREENING FENCE IS GOING IN.

IS THOSE PARCELS BEHIND THERE WITH HOMES, MAYBE I'M LOOKING THESE LINES OR, OR IS NOT, THESE ARE HOMES.

SO WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE THAT THE NEW COURT IS MOVING CLOSER TO THE HOMES THAN THE WHERE THE EXISTING COURT WAS BEING HELD.

THAT IS CORRECT.

AM I CORRECT? YOU ARE CORRECT.

SO YOU DO NOT

[04:20:01]

AND IN FACT, AGAIN, UH, WITH RESPECT, WHETHER THERE WILL, COULD BE OR WILL BE ADDITIONAL QUOTE UNQUOTE ADDITIONAL NOISE IS NOT, IS NOT THE ISSUE IN WHETHER THIS, UH, THIS OUGHT TO BE APPROVED.

THE ISSUE IS IF IT COMES UP THAT WE ARE MAKING AN UNREASONABLE NOISE THAT IS ACTUALLY FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT TO, TO DEAL WITH.

AND THEY'VE BEEN OUT A NUMBER OF TIMES ON THOSE COMPLAINTS AND HAVE NEVER CITED US.

SO MAYBE I NEED TO ASK THE CITY ATTORNEYS THIS QUESTION BECAUSE IF IT'S OUR, OUR POSITION, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT IN THE PAST WE HAVE ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS AND BE, YOU CAN'T ASK.

SO, SO IN YOUR, IN YOUR BELIEF MOVING A BASKETBALL COURT PICKLEBALL, WHAT WOULD, WHAT WHAT THIS COURT WOULD BE USED FOR EXACTLY WHAT TYPE OF SPORTS ARE, ARE, WOULD BE ON THIS COURT BASKETBALL, POSSIBLY ONLY BASKETBALL, POSSIBLY AND POSSIBLY PICKLEBALL AND WHATEVER OTHER CHILDREN'S GAMES, YOU KNOW, THAT GAMES THAT CHILDREN MAY PLAY ON A HARD SERVICE.

AND AGAIN, YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THOSE TYPE OF SPORTS MOVING CLOSER IN PROXIMITY TO THE HOMES WILL CALL AN ADDITIONAL NOISE ISSUES TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.

I PERSONALLY REALLY DON'T.

BUT AGAIN, MA'AM, THIS THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON BY COMMISSIONER HAN.

WE HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS.

CAN YOU DESCRIBE FOR ME, I, I UNDERSTOOD THERE'S SOME NOISE MITIGATION, UH, CONTEMPLATED ON THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

CAN YOU TELL ME EXACTLY WHAT IT IS? THE NOISE MITIGATION.

NOISE MITIGATION, WHAT NOISE MITIGATION EFFORTS DO YOU PLAN TO INSTALL TO REDUCE THE IMPACT OF LOUD GAMES LIKE PICKLEBALL ON THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL HOMES? WELL, WE'VE, AND AND YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT? YEAH.

UM, SO WE HAVE, UH, CURRENTLY PLANNED LANDSCAPING, A LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THAT PROPERTY LINE, BUT WE CURRENTLY HAVE NOT CONSIDERED ANY SPECIFIC NOISE MITIGATION PLANS BECAUSE WE DON'T, WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY NOISE ISSUE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD DEAL WITH WHEN WE UNDERSTAND THE, THE ISSUE, I GUESS IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

RIGHT NOW, THE CURRENT PLAN IS FOR THIS TO BE A BASKETBALL COURT TO SERVE THE SCHOOLCHILDREN DURING RECESS, THE SAME WAY THAT THEY'RE PLAYING IN THE PARKING LOT.

NOW WE'RE JUST MOVING THAT EXISTING CURRENT ACTIVITY 80 FEET NORTH TO THIS NEW LOCATION.

AND HOW FAR IS IT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE? WELL, IT DEPENDS.

IT'S FROM THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY LINE.

IT VARIES FROM 35 FEET TO 64 FEET.

AND YOU DON'T, DO YOU PLAY PICKLEBALL? I DO NOT.

YOU BEEN TO PICKLEBALL GAME? I HAVE NOT.

BUT IT IS THE CHURCH'S INTENTION THAT THIS MAY BE USED FOR PICKLEBALL AT SOME POINT.

WELL, HONESTLY, I HAVEN'T.

UM, I MEAN, IF YOU'RE ASKING ME TO GUARANTEE THAT WE'LL NEVER USE IT AS A PICKLEBALL COURT, I CAN'T DO THAT.

BUT THAT HAS NOT BEEN IN THE DISCUSSIONS I'VE BEEN IN.

THIS HAS BEEN A COURT TO ACCOMMODATE SCHOOL RECESS ACTIVITY.

WERE YOU HERE A FEW MOMENTS AGO WHEN YOUR COLLEAGUE SAID THAT YOU MIGHT USE IT FOR PICKLEBALL? YEAH, I WAS HERE.

OKAY, I HEARD THAT.

TO THE EXISTING PLAYGROUND.

I BELIEVE THIS WILL BE FOR MR. COLEMAN.

UM, YOU WERE, I THINK, GOING TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION ABOUT THE ORIENTATION OF THE NEW SPORT COURT.

THERE WAS, I WOULDN'T, THE ONE WHO ASKED THE QUESTION DURING THE BRIEFING, IF IT WAS CONSIDERED TO ROTATE AT 90 DEGREES, WHICH WOULD INCREASE THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE, UM, ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL, I THINK I HEARD YOU START TO SAY IT WAS TO ALLOW FOR MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY FOR THE EXISTING SOCCER COURTS.

BUT IS THAT LAYOUT ANYWHERE HERE? I MEAN, IS IT ENCROACHING ON THEM OR IT'S JUST CLOSER TO IT? SO YES, MA'AM.

UM, THERE ARE TWO SITE PLANS THAT I HAVE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE COMMITTEE, I BELIEVE, AND THE LARGER OVERALL SITE PLAN, WHILE THE SOCCER FIELD LAYOUT IS NOT ARTICULATED, UM, IF WE WERE TO ROTATE THAT COURT 90 DEGREES, IT WOULD IMPEDE ON THE ABILITY TO HAVE, UM, A REGULATION SIZE SOCCER FIELD.

KEEPING THE COURT ORIENTED NORTH SOUTH ALSO ALLOWS US TO KEEP IT CLOSER

[04:25:01]

OUR INTENTION IS TO FENCE THIS ENTIRE SPORT COURT AND PLAYGROUND AREA, UM, SO THAT IT, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, BETTER MANAGE THAT.

UM, AND SO THOSE ARE THE REASONS THAT DROVE THE CURRENT ORIENTATION NORTH SOUTH? WELL, I, I DON'T HAVE THE OVERLAY.

I WAS TRYING TO DO THE MATH TO SEE HOW IT WORKED OUT.

UM, I GUESS YOU ALSO HAVE SOME ADJACENT PARKING SPACES, UM, THAT ARE SHOWN.

IT, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU MAYBE HAVE SOME AREA, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT JUST DIDN'T WORK WITH HOW YOU'RE CURRENTLY UTILIZING THE SITE.

AND SO YOU WERE USING AVAILABLE LAND IF YOU THAT'S, THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT.

WE'RE JUST MAXIMIZING THE, WHAT WE SAW AS THE CURRENT USE AND FUTURE POTENTIAL USE OF THE PROPERTY.

AND THEN COULD YOU SPEAK TO JUST NORTH OF WHERE YOU'RE SHOWING THESE, THERE'S A LEAVE OUT AND WHAT LOOKS LIKE THE FENCE LINE, YOU'RE SHOWING THE NEW ROAD OF HEDGE SCREEN, WHAT IS IN THAT FENCED AREA? SO IN THAT FENCED AREA, THERE IS A, UH, SCHOOL GARDEN.

SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY GREEN OPEN SPACE? YES, MA'AM.

BACK TO THE USE OF THE COURT.

UH, I MEAN, BUILDING IT AS A BASKETBALL COURT'S GONNA REQUIRE GOALS ON EACH END OF IT, I SUPPOSE.

AND IT'S GONNA BE STRIPED FOR BASKETBALL? YES, SIR.

I'M THINKING HERE THAT TO PLAY PICKLEBALL, YOU NEED A NET AND YOU NEED DIFFERENT STRIPING.

I MEAN, YOU'D, YOU'D HAVE TO GO SORT OF OUT OF YOUR WAY TO PLAY PICKLEBALL BY PUTTING UP A NET ANYTIME SOMEBODY WANTED TO DO IT.

I GUESS SO I'M NOT, PERHAPS IT'S MORE LIKELY IT'S ONLY GONNA BE USED FOR BASKETBALL, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT.

THAT'S THE CURRENT PLAN IS TO HAVE GOALS AT EACH END AND THEN SOME NETTING TO MANAGE BALLS TO GET AWAY.

WE ALSO HAVE INDOOR .

SORRY, CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? WE HAVE SOME FOLKS ONLINE THAT WON'T BE ABLE TO HEAR YOU.

ZION HAS JUST CONSTRUCTED A NEW GYMNASIUM THAT HAS TWO INDOOR PICKLE BALL COURTS AS WELL.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE, WE WOULD DIRECT THAT.

AND SO THIS IS NOT LIGHTED.

SO YOU DON'T ANTICIPATE PEOPLE WOULD BE USING IT FOR SPORTS AFTER, AFTER DARK? NO, SIR.

NO SIR.

AND WE ALSO, IT SHOULD ALSO BE SAID THAT WE HAVE NO TRESPASS SIGNS ON AROUND THE PROPERTY, UM, THAT ENCOURAGE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT, YOU KNOW, SCHOOL RELATED, UM, TO NOT USE THE FACILITY AND THE INTENT IS TO FENCE THIS AREA.

UM, AND WHAT AGE GROUP OR STUDENTS DO YOU HAVE AT YOUR SCHOOL? WE HAVE, UM, PRESCHOOL CHILDREN THROUGH GRADE EIGHT.

THROUGH GRADE EIGHT.

UH, ARE THERE, IS THERE ANY USE, UH, BY OUTSIDE ENTITIES? ANY, ANY SPORTS LEAGUES OR, NO, NOT CURRENTLY.

SO YOU IN GENERAL, WOULD YOU IN GENERAL ANTICIPATE THIS BASKETBALL COURT WOULD BE USED ONLY DURING SCHOOL HOURS? THAT WOULD BE WHAT WE ANTICIPATE.

NOW, THERE ARE TIMES WHERE AFTER SCHOOL THERE ARE CHILDREN IN, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT COME AND USE THE PLAYGROUND, UM, AND ON THE WEEKENDS.

BUT THE HIGH DENSITY ACTIVITY THAT SARNO'S HAVE REFERENCED, YOU KNOW, THAT COMES ALONG WITH SCHOOL CHILDREN AT RECESS TIME, OBVIOUSLY ONLY DURING SCHOOL HOURS THAT OCCURRED.

SO YOU DO HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD CHILDREN COMING, COMING ON YOUR PROPERTY TO YOU ANTICIPATE THEY COULD COME AND PLAY BASKETBALL? IT, IT WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE.

YOU HAVE NO, NO PARTICULAR OBJECTION TO THAT.

I'M ASSUMING WE DON'T.

WELL PERHAPS IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO PLAY PICKLEBALL YOU WITH BASKETBALL OUTSIDE, BUT, OKAY.

FOLLOW COMMISSIONER HERBERT.

YOU SIR? UH, COMMISSIONER RUBIN.

THEN BLAIR, JUST A VERY QUICK QUESTION FOR THE GENTLEMAN WEARING THE TIE, WHOSE NAME I'M, I'M BLANKING ON.

IS THIS YOUR HANDOUT? YES, SIR.

IT'S INTERESTING READING, UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT.

UM, COUPLE QUESTIONS.

UH, THE, WHAT WAS THE REASON OR YOUR DECISION MAKING ON NOT RE REDOING THE ACTUAL PARKING LOT? WHETHER THIS SPACE WAS TAKEN? MAYBE THINKING ABOUT REDUCING YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND PUTTING THE BASKETBALL GOAL THERE? UH, SAFETY AND IT'S FINANCIAL.

I MEAN, SO TO DO THAT WOULD REQUIRE, UM, A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF MORE, MORE WORK, RIGHT.

DEMO DEMOLISHING THE EXISTING PARKING LOT, REROUTING PARKING, AND THEN POURING BACK A NEW, UH, PLAY AREA.

UM, AND I'M NOT TOO SURE EXACTLY.

I BELIEVE WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO OUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS RIGHT NOW, SO TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PARKING MIGHT IMPACT US FROM

[04:30:01]

THAT ASPECT AS WELL, SO.

THAT GIVES ME SOME HELP WITH, UM, YOUR DECISION MAKING.

THE LAST ONE, UM, YOU SAID THERE WAS A NEW GYMNASIUM BUILT.

IS THERE A BASKETBALL GOAL THERE? YES.

YES, YEP.

COMMISSIONER BELAY, IN OUR BRIEFING, WE HEARD THAT THERE'S POSSIBLY THAT, UM, BEFORE YOU GUYS ENTERED INTO THIS PROCESS, THAT CONCRETE HAS ALREADY BEEN POURED FOR THIS SITE.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

THAT CAN GIVE YOU SOME HISTORY ON THAT.

SO WHEN WE DECIDED TO, UM, PROCEED WITH THE SPORT COURT, OUR CONCRETE SUBCONTRACTOR REACHED OUT TO A BUILDING OFFICIAL THAT HE WORKS WITH REGULARLY DOWN AT JEFFERSON STREET.

THAT BUILDING OFFICIAL SUGGESTED THAT WE DID NOT NEED A PERMIT BECAUSE WE'RE IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA WHERE WE'RE SIMPLY POURING CONCRETE SLAB, UM, IN THIS AREA.

SO WE PROCEEDED, UM, WITH FORM WORK AND ABOUT TWO OR THREE DAYS INTO THAT PROCESS, THEN WE GET A RED FLAG FROM THE, UM, BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT THAT SAID, YOU DO NEED A PERMIT, BUT YOU CAN PROCEED WITH THIS CONSTRUCTION.

JUST YOU NEED TO FILL OUT THE PAPERWORK, SUBMIT THE, UM, APPLICABLE MATERIALS AND ENGINEERED SITE PLAN.

WE NEED TO RUN IT THROUGH LANDSCAPE AND ZONING, UM, SO THAT YOU CAN GET YOUR BUILDING PERMIT KIND OF AFTER THE FACT.

THAT'S WHAT WE WERE TOLD.

SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE KIND OF WHERE WE, WHERE WE ARE NOW.

UM, THEN AS SOON AS WE GOT THAT CONCRETE POURED, THEN WE STOPPED WORK AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE IN THIS PROCESS NOW.

WE HAD A CIVIL ENGINEERING FIRM CREATE A SITE PLAN WHERE THEY STUDIED DRAINAGE, PERMEABILITY, UM, PAVING, ET CETERA.

UM, THAT WAS APPROVED BY BUILDING INSPECTION.

THE, UM, CITY'S UM, UM, LANDSCAPE DEPARTMENT REVIEWED IT AND, AND NOTED THAT WE WERE REQUIRED TO ADD THE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING THAT'S SHOWN.

UM, SO WE HAD LANDSCAPING PLANS CREATED, UM, AND REVIEWED, UM, BY THE CITY AND APPROVED.

AND SO THAT PROCESS, UM, HAS BEEN STARTED AND ALL WE LACK NOW TO GET OUR BUILDING PERMIT TO CONTINUE IS THIS MINOR AMENDMENT APPROVAL.

SO WHERE YOU HAVE YOUR EXISTING COURT AREA, YOU HAVE TWO, TWO SQUARES? YES.

AND IS THERE A WALL OR ANYTHING IT THAT THERE'S A LINE THAT DELINEATES BETWEEN THE EXISTING COURT AREA AND THE NEW COURT AREA.

IS THERE ANYTHING THAT SEPARATES THEM OTHER THAN THIS, THIS IMAGINARY LINE ON THIS PAPER, THERE'S A, SO THE LINES YOU SEE LOOKING AT THE EXISTING CORE AREA TO THE LEFT, RIGHT BELOW THE NEW COURT.

SO THE FIRST LINE YOU SEE IS A CURB BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT AND THE LAWN AREA.

THE SECOND LINE, WHICH IS OUTLINING AROUND THE NEW COURT, THAT WILL BE A NET FENCING THAT'S ON EITHER END OF THE COURT TO JUST CONTROL MANAGED BALLS THAT MIGHT OVERSHOOT.

SO THE EXISTING COURT AREA, YOU, YOU ARE GOING TO REUSE THAT FOR ANOTHER PURPOSE THAT WILL, THAT WILL REMAIN PARKING THAT.

SO ARE YOU, AND AND FORGIVE ME, ARE YOU, IS YOUR PARKING AT, ARE YOU A, UM, DO, DO, IS YOUR PARKING, DO YOU NEED MORE PARKING? WE NEED THE EXISTING PARKING.

WE HAVE, WE ARE IN CONFORMANCE IF THAT'S THE QUESTION.

SO ANYTHING, ANY ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES WILL GIVE YOU EX EXTRA PARKING, NOT BRING YOU INTO COMPLIANCE.

THE EXISTING PARKING PLACES NOTED INCLUDE THE PARKING PLACES THAT ARE ON THIS EXISTING COURT.

WHEN I, WHEN I DELINEATE THIS AS EXISTING COURT AREA, ALL THAT MERELY MEANS IS THERE'S A BASKETBALL GOAL AT THE END OF ONE OF THE PARKING SPACES.

IT'S DELINEATED AS PARKING.

IT'S IMPROVISED USAGE FOR BASKETBALL.

SO WHAT, WHAT I'M I'M SAYING IS THE EXISTING COURT AREA THAT THE PINK BOX THAT'S UNDERNEATH YOUR NEW COURT? YES.

IS THAT EXISTING PARKING SPACE? YES.

YES MA'AM.

DOWN TO SOME OF THE EXISTING COURT AREA, WOULD THAT NOT STILL GIVE YOU WHAT YOU NEED TO HAVE YOUR BASKETBALL AS WELL AS MORE SPA MORE, MORE BUFFERING BETWEEN THE RESIDENTS AND THE NEW COURT? WELL, THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS IT STILL WOULD REMAIN IN THE PRIMARY CIRCULATION AREA OF OUR PARKING LOT.

SO, AND ARE, DO YOU HAVE O ARE YOU OVER PARKED OR AT CAPACITY FOR PARKING? I THINK WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO CAPACITY.

UM, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT.

WE MIGHT HAVE A FEW SPACES, BUT I'M NOT, SO LET ME ASK A QUESTION, ANOTHER QUESTION AND, AND TO, AND IT'S A WHAT IF MM-HMM.

WE HAVE, I'M HEARING, OKAY.

WHAT IF, UM, YOU MOVE YOUR NEW COURT

[04:35:01]

IF LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN, YOU CAN SEE HOW, UM, IF YOU WOULD WANT TO, UM, LEAVE THIS EAST PARKING LOT AND GO NORTH ON SKILLMAN, YOU TYPICALLY DRIVE NORTH AROUND THROUGH THESE EXISTING CORE AREAS AND THEN USE THIS FIRE LANE THAT RUNS EAST WEST.

YOU WOULD, YOU KNOW, TAKE THAT WEST TO SKILLMAN STREET.

AND WHAT, WHAT PRINCIPAL THORMAN WAS DESCRIBING EARLIER IS THAT WHEN THE TRAFFIC AT SKILLMAN AND LOVERS GETS BACKED UP AND EVEN JUST TRAFFIC FROM AROUND ON CHURCH CAMPUS, WHEN PEOPLE WANT TO LEAVE AND USE THAT ROUTE, THEN THEY'RE DRIVING RIGHT THROUGH THIS WHAT IS NOW USED AS A BASKETBALL COURT AREA.

IT'S, IT'S A SAFETY CONCERN IS WHAT'S REALLY DRIVING THIS STILL FIRST ROUND COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER SLEEPER.

SO, UM, SEVERAL COMMENTS IF YOU BEAR WITH ME.

UM, I, I, I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO GO OUT TO THE SITE AND VISIT WITH MEMBERS OF, UH, ZIONS, UM, UH, BOARD AND SOME OF THEIR EMPLOYEES.

AND SO I HAVE A PRETTY GOOD SENSE OF WHAT'S GOING ON HERE AND I, I I THINK IT SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD.

THIS HAS BEEN A VERY IMPERFECT PROCESS.

UH, COMMISSIONER SLEEPER, JUST, JUST, UH, AN FY THAT AT THIS POINT IT'S JUST QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

YEAH, IT'S JUST IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, THEN WE'LL GO.

IT'S NOT FOR I'LL, I'LL TRY TO, I'LL TRY TO STREAMLINE THAT THEN.

UM, IT, I WANT TO CLARIFY, IS IT, IT, IT IS CORRECT.

IS IT NOT THAT THE COURT WAS POURED WITHOUT A PERMIT, YOU DIDN'T UNDERSTAND YOU NEEDED TO PERMIT, BUT YOU DID, BUT YOU POURED IT IN ADVANCE OF GETTING A PERMIT OR GETTING THE MINOR AMENDMENT, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

WE BOARDED THE COURT WITH THE VERBAL, UM, PERMISSION GRANTED BY THE CITY OFFICIAL TO SAY, GO AHEAD, PROCEED, BUT ALSO PROCEED WITH GETTING YOUR PERMIT APPLICATION IN PLACE.

UM, THE, THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS THAT, UM, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE COURT, WHICH I THINK IS THE, THE SIDE THAT, UM, BORDERS MR. SARNO'S PROPERTY, UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE A FENCE OF SOME KIND BUILT THERE.

IS THAT CORRECT? THERE WILL BE A FENCE THAT'S BUILT ON THE VERY NORTHERN EDGE OF THE COURT ITSELF, YES.

AND THEN BEYOND THAT WE HAVE A FENCED GARDEN.

AND THEN BEYOND THAT, THERE IS A SIX FOOT CHAIN LINK FENCE THAT IS ALONG OUR PROPERTY LINE.

AND, AND, AND, AND BETWEEN THAT CHAIN LINK FENCE AND OUR GARDEN IS WHERE WE'LL BE INSTALLING A LANDSCAPE BUFFER.

BUT JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE, THE FENCE THAT YOU INTEND TO BUILD ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE COURT AS OF RIGHT NOW, IS THAT A, SOMETHING AKIN TO A CHAIN LINK FENCE OR IS IT A FENCE THAT HAS SOME SOUND MITIGATION QUALITY? RIGHT, RIGHT NOW IT'S, UH, IT'S, IT'S JUST A CHAIN LINK FENCE.

IT'LL BE TRANSPARENT.

AND, UM, THANK YOU.

I, I, I GUESS I HAVE A, A QUESTION FOR MR. SARNO.

IF I, IF I COULD WE'LL, WE'LL GO TO QUESTIONS FOR OPPOSITION.

DO YOU WANNA STAY WITH THE APPLICANT RIGHT NOW? YES, SIR.

TO CONTINUE WITH THE PROCESS THAT YOU ALL DID ILLEGALLY? WELL, WE PROCEEDED WITH THE WORK WITH THE UNDERSTANDING BASED ON WHAT THE CITY OF WHAT THE BUILDING INSPECTION OR BUILDING DEPARTMENT WAS TELLING US WAS THAT YOU CAN PROCEED WITH THIS WORK, BUT YOU NEED TO GET A ENGINEERED SITE PLAN AND GO THROUGH THE PERMIT PROCESS SO THAT WE COULD SHOW A BUILDING PERMIT.

I THINK, 'CAUSE THERE'S A SECOND ROUND.

ALRIGHT, I'LL THEN I'LL THEN I'LL THEN I'LL PAUSE THAT QUESTION UNTIL LATER.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE WE GO TO SECOND ROUND, ANY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FIRST ROUND FOR THE APPLICANT OR THOSE IN SUPPORT, THEN WE'LL BEGIN THE SECOND ROUND WITH COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

SO YOU, YOU'RE TELLING THIS BODY WHO, UM, YOU GAVE US MANY, YOU TOLD US THAT WE KINDA OR NOT, UM, WE SHOULD NOT MAKE OUR DECISION BASED OFF OF NOISE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT OUR POSITION.

UM, THAT YOU ALL HAVE THAT, THAT KNOWLEDGE, BUT YOU ALL DO NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE THAT YOU WERE NOT IN COMPLIANCE ON POURING A SLAB.

WELL, WE WE POURED THE SLAB WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DID NOT NEED A BUILDING PERMIT.

THAT WAS, THAT THAT MISINFORMATION WAS GIVEN TO US OR TO OUR CONCRETE SUBCONTRACTOR BY A BUILDING OFFICIAL DOWN ON JEFFERSON STREET.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU ALL DID THE WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT AND THEN HAD TO COME TO THIS BODY IN HOPES THAT WE WILL MAKE IT OKAY FOR YOU ALL TO FORCE

[04:40:01]

IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN THEY WERE LOOKING AT WHAT WE INITIALLY SUBMITTED, THEY DIDN'T SEE ANY CONCERN WITH WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING FROM A BUILDING STANDPOINT.

ARE, ARE YOU A CONSULTANT OR ARE YOU JUST A REPRESENTATIVE? I MEAN, ARE YOU A PART OF THE CHURCH? I'M A PART OF THE CHURCH.

UM, ALSO, IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON WHY YOU ALL DIDN'T MOVE THE COURT CLOSER TO SKILLMAN? WELL, SO MOVING IT CLOSER TO SKILLMAN IN THAT AREA, THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE AN EXISTING SOCCER FIELD.

IT'S COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

AND DO YOU ALL NECESSARILY NEED A OUTSIDE COURT WHEN YOU HAVE A GYM? WE DO.

I THINK THAT QUESTION IS REALLY GETTING OFF TOPIC AND NOT WHAT'S BEFORE THE BODY.

THANKS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT GO AROUND? COMMISSIONERS? GREAT.

SO WE'LL GO TO OUR QUESTIONS FOR THE OPPOSITION.

THANK YOU GENTLEMEN.

COMMISSIONER SLEEPER.

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. SARNO.

MR. SARNO, UM, I THINK IS IS HAS BEEN STATED FOR BY BEFORE, BY STAFF AND BY YOU, THE, THIS, UH, APPLICATION HAS, UM, EVERY GROUNDS FOR APPROVAL EXCEPT FOR THE POSSIBILITY.

THE, THE ONE CONDITION IS IF DOES IT ALTER THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY? UH, STAFF'S POSITION HAS BEEN THAT IT DOES NOT, AND I THINK YOUR POSITION IS THAT IT DOES.

SO PART OF MY CONCERN IS THIS, UM, YOU COULD, UM, IT, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT SOME KIND OF FENCE COULD BE BUILT THAT COULD MITIGATE THE SOUND TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.

BUT IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY FROM YOUR PREVIOUS COMMENTS AND FROM SOME OF THE, YOUR WRITTEN COMMENTS TO, UH, THE, THE PLAN COMMISSION THAT YOU HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THE EXISTING LEVEL OF NOISE FROM THE PLAYGROUND SO THAT WHATEVER'S DONE ON IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, UH, IS NOT GOING TO RESOLVE THAT ISSUE.

SO I, I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT, WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE ON THAT.

IF, IF, IF THEY, IF THEY, IF THEY DID SOMETHING HERE TO MITIGATE THE SOUND FROM THIS COURT, IS THAT REALLY GONNA SOLVE THE PROBLEM THAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE WITH, UH, NOISE FROM THE PLAYGROUND? UH, I, I GUESS THE QUICK ANSWER TO THAT IS IT, IT, IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY SOLVE THAT PROBLEM, BUT I, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS COURT IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S CL CLOSER AND IT'S GONNA PRESENT MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADDITIONAL NOISE.

IT'S GONNA BRING OTHER STUDENTS THAT DON'T USE THE PLAYGROUND TYPICALLY OVER TO THAT AREA WHEN THEY'RE USUALLY CLOSER TO THE SCHOOL.

I BELIEVE IT'LL BE A DRAW TO PEOPLE, WHETHER IT'S BASKETBALL OR PICKLEBALL, UH, FROM OUTSIDE FROM THE COMMUNITY, WHICH YOU HEARD, UH, ONE OF THE, UH, PERSONS FOUR SAYING, HEY, THIS IS GREAT, BUT PEOPLE CAN COME USE IT FROM EVERYWHERE.

UH, KIDS THAT DON'T EVEN GO TO ZION, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, GREAT.

AGAIN, WE'RE NOT AGAINST THE KIDS, JUST THAT THIS, THIS PARTICULAR FACILITY IS TOO CLOSE TO THE REST.

UM, AND I, I, I DID WANNA ADDRESS SOMETHING THAT WAS SAID ABOUT THE LIGHTING.

UH, THE, THE PARKING LOT HAS LIGHTING, UH, THIS COURT, THE AMBIENT LIGHTING IS ENOUGH TO LIGHT UP HA HALF OF THIS COURT ANYWAY.

SO EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT DIRECTLY PUTTING IN LIGHTING SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS COURT, THE LIGHTING ISN'T SPECIFICALLY FOR THE HOOPS THAT ARE OUT IN THE PARKING LOT EITHER.

BUT IT'S BRIGHT ENOUGH THAT PEOPLE CUT.

WE'VE HAD PEOPLE PLAYING THERE TILL THREE IN THE MORNING, UH, AT TIMES.

AND, YOU KNOW, YOU CALL THE POLICE AND THEY DON'T, THEY DON'T EVER GET THERE.

UM, I'VE DONE NOISE READINGS AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY ALSO REFERENCED CODE COMPLIANCE.

THEY HAVEN'T DONE NOISE READINGS.

THERE ARE NOISE REGULATIONS THAT EXIST IN CHAPTER 51 A THAT ARE DIFFERENT AND DISTINCT FROM THE, THE GENERAL NOISE ORDINANCE THAT MR WENT CITED AND REFERENCED.

AND THESE, SO, SO YES, THE PLAYGROUND IS IN VIOLATION OF THOSE PARTICULAR NOISE REGULATIONS, WHICH IS WHY I SAY THESE ARE, THIS SCHOOL'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE.

I ALSO WAS POINTING OUT, OR WAS GOING TO POINT OUT THAT THEY DID BUILD THIS WITHOUT OBTAINING PERMITS, UM, AND ALSO CONTINUED TO WORK ON IT AFTER THE, THE PRO THE, UH, THE AFTER IT WAS ASSAULTED.

AND THEY, THEY ALSO HAVE A BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY THAT'S NOT DOCUMENTED ON THEIR PD SITE, WHICH MAY ENABLE US TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THEY HAVE TO OPEN UP THEIR PD.

[04:45:02]

UM, ALSO IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE SITE PLAN, AND WE'VE DISCUSSED THIS, THE, THE GARDEN IS, IS, IS SHAPED SUCH THAT IT FITS PERFECTLY WITH THE, WITH THE BASKETBALL COURT.

THAT GARDEN'S BEEN IN THERE SINCE 2019.

WE BELIEVE THE COURT SHOULD HAVE PROBABLY, IF IT WAS, IF IT WAS PLANNED, AND THIS IS SPECULATION, SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED AS PART OF THE PD PLAN IN THE FIRST PLACE.

AND FINALLY THEY'RE USING THE, UM, THE PROPERTY FOR, FOR DAYCARE AFTER HOURS WITHOUT AN SUP AND WITHOUT, UH, IT BEING AUTHORIZED BY THE PD PLAN, WHICH IS AGAIN, ANOTHER INSTANCE OF NOT BEING IN COMPLIANCE.

AND SO WITH THAT, THE, THE THOUGHT IS THAT CURRENT RULES IN THE CODE STIPULATE THAT THE CITY SHOULD DENY NEW DEVELOPMENT TO AN APPLICANT THAT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE AND NOT OTHERWISE EXPAND A NONCONFORMING USE.

COMMISSIONER.

QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION, MR. WEEN, HOW CLOSE IS THE NEW COURT TO WHERE YOU ALL ARE? WELL, YOU, YOUR HOUSE IS AT, UH, WELL, IT'S, IT'S LIKE THEY SAID 35, SO ABOUT 10 YARDS AT, AT ITS CLOSEST.

IT IS A BIT OF SKEW FROM THE PROPERTY.

UM, AND SO AT ITS CLOSEST IT'S ABOUT 10 YARDS.

UM, OUR, FROM OUR HOUSE, I WOULD ESTIMATE, WE DON'T HAVE A HUGE YARD, BUT IT IS BEEN FOR, FOR BEING IN THE CITY, IT'S, WE HAVE A YARD, UM, I'M GONNA ESTIMATE ANOTHER 10, 10 15 YARDS FROM, FROM THE, FROM THE BACK OF OUR PROPERTY.

'CAUSE THAT, SO OUR, OUR BEDROOM, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE, SO IS YOUR CONCERN MORE WITH THE OUTSIDE USAGE BEING COMING ONTO THE PROPERTY, USING IT MORE THAN DURING DAYTIME HOURS WHEN THE SCHOOL IS OPEN? WELL, THE DO IS LOUD ENOUGH.

WE HEAR IT ANYWHERE IN THE HOUSE ALL DAY LONG.

THAT'S WHY I SAY IT'S, IT'S, IT'S EXCESSIVE.

IT'S EXCEEDINGLY NOISE REGULATIONS BY, UH, BY MY MEASUREMENTS, BY, YOU KNOW, FOUR OR FIVE ACCESSIBLES SOMETIMES, WHICH IS A LOT BECAUSE IT IS, YOUR, YOUR SOUND IS, IS LOGARITHMIC.

WHAT THOSE, THE DECIBEL SCALE LOGARITHMIC, WHEN YOU GET UP TO THREE DECIBELS DIFFERENCE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A, A DOUBLING OF SOUND INTENSITY.

SOUND INTENSITY.

IT'S LOUD ALREADY.

SO YOU ALL ARE WILLING TO, UM, JUST HELD, HELD ON ADVISING FOR WHATEVER REASON, AND A NOISE STUDY DONE WITH YOU ALL THEN? IS THAT WHAT YOU PRETTY MUCH ARE SAYING? YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT YOU DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE DENIED RIGHT OUT.

YOU, YOU WANTED TO APPROVED.

I I, I, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE APPROVED, BUT IF, IF NOTHING ELSE, ALTERNATIVELY, I THINK IT SHOULD BE CONTINUED SO THAT WE CAN FURTHER, UH, SO THE CITY CAN, I DON'T THINK THE CITY DID ANY KIND OF NOISE STUDY EITHER.

AND I DO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, I I, I BELIEVE I'VE SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSION, UH, ONE NEUTRAL NOISE STUDY THAT I FOUND, AND IT WAS NEUTRAL.

UM, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THESE ARE, THESE ARE SCIENCE.

IT'S SCIENCE, RIGHT? UH, BUT NOISE PRODUCED BY A, BY A, A BOUNCING BASKETBALL, UH, YOU KNOW, AND A PADDLE BALL BEING HIT BY A PADDLE, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT GONNA FLUCTUATE FROM CALIFORNIA TO TEXAS OR, YOU KNOW, OKLAHOMA TO TEXAS.

IT'S GONNA BE THE SAME.

SO, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S VERY CLOSE.

I JUST THINK YOU DON'T NEED TO SOUND STUDY TO KNOW THAT IT'S GONNA BE, UM, NOISY IN, IN OUR BACKYARD AND IN OUR HOUSE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OSH QUESTION? I HAVE, I HAVE A QUESTION.

THE, THE SOUND READINGS THAT YOU DID WERE FROM MEASURING THE EXISTING PLAYGROUND THAT'S RIGHT NEXT TO THE PROPOSED COURT OR OF THE ACT, THERE'S, THERE'S, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE, THE COURT IS NOT FULLY BUILT OUT SUCH THAT THERE'S PLAY RIGHT NOW ON IT.

SO THE, THE MEASUREMENTS THAT YOU'VE BEEN TAKING ARE, UH, THE NOISE IS COMING FROM THE PLAYGROUND NEXT TO IT.

AND, UM, SO THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, DOES YOU, IT'S TRUE THAT YOUR WIFE HAS A CONDITION THAT MAKES HER SENSITIVE TO NOISE? YES.

IT'S CALLED HYPER EXCUSES.

AND WHETHER THE COURT IS BUILT OR NOT, ARE THE EXISTING CONDITIONS SUCH WHERE YOU'LL STILL BE ABLE TO LIVE THERE? 'CAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE, FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD IN, IN, AND I DID READ EVERYTHING THAT YOU PRESENTED TO US, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S, IT'S AT THE POINT NOW THAT'S UNLIVABLE REGARDLESS OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE, IF THE COURT GOES THERE OR NOT, OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD, IN YOUR OPINION, MAKE IT WORSE.

YEAH, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S TOUGH FOR HER TO, TO EVEN FOCUS WORKING AT HOME.

UM, SHE'S A CPA

[04:50:01]

CANDIDATE.

SHE'S BEEN GOING TO CLIENTS A FEW TIMES A WEEK NOW.

UM, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, SHE DOES GET A BREAK ON THE WEEKENDS.

SHE GETS A BREAK IN IN THE EVENINGS AS WELL.

I MEAN, THERE ARE TIMES I THINK SOME, SOME ZION PARENTS HAVE A BIRTHDAY PARTY ON THE PLAYGROUND, AND THEN THE, THE NOISE IS THERE AGAIN.

UM, YOU KNOW, THE HOPE IS TOO, THAT IF WE CAN GET IT, UH, HAVE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH ZION, WE CAN MAYBE FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION.

I MEAN, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT SITES.

THE BASKETBALL COURT COULD HAVE BEEN PLACED.

OBVIOUSLY IT'S POURED.

UH, I, I MADE IT KNOWN TO THEM THAT I THOUGHT THEY NEEDED A PERMIT BEFORE THEY POURED IT A FEW DAYS BEFORE THEY POURED IT, SO THEY AT LEAST WERE PUT ON NOTICE AND COULD HAVE DOUBLE CHECKED.

UM, BUT I, YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT THE SITE AND I SEE THIS, THE, YOU KNOW, 18 SPACES WHERE THE, WHERE THE GYMNASIUM IS.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THE PULL IT UP, BUT THE COURT WOULD FIT PERFECTLY THERE.

UM, NOW IT'S SEPARATED FROM THE PLAYGROUND, BUT IT WOULD, BUT, YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S CLOSE TO THE GYMNASIUM.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE LOCKER ROOMS IN THERE.

I'VE NEVER BEEN IN THE, IN THE PLACE, BUT IT WOULD, IT WOULD FIT PERFECTLY THERE.

UM, AND I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THEY, THEY STARTED BUILDING IT WITHOUT A PERMIT.

'CAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE MIGHT'VE BEEN SOMETHING.

PARDON ME, MR. SAR, I'M SORRY.

WE'RE WE'RE WAY OFF HERE FROM THE, THE ORIGINAL QUESTION.

THE ONE FOLLOW QUESTION I WANT TO ADD TO GET BACK ON THAT ORIGINAL POINT IS THE, YOU'RE NOT IN A POSITION WHERE YOU FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE TO LEAVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD NOW, OR IS IT, 'CAUSE IT, IT SOUNDED LIKE, FROM THE THINGS THAT I READ, IT WAS LIKE YOU WERE AT WIT'S END WITH THE SITUATION, UM, REASONABLY SO.

SO FROM WHAT YOU TESTIFIED, BUT, OR WHAT YOU PRESENTED TO US.

BUT, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU CONSIDERING LEAVING REGARDLESS WHETHER THE COURT IS MR. SHENIK? I THINK THAT QUESTION IS ALSO WAY BEYOND THE BOUNDS.

AGAIN, THIS IS ABOUT A MINOR AMENDMENT.

IT'S A NARROW QUESTION THAT YOU GUYS HAVE TO DECIDE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, MR. MOORE, IS THERE JUST ONE QUESTION THAT CPC MEMBERS HAVE TO ANSWER, WHICH IS WHETHER THIS CASE MEETS THE STANDARD FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT.

SO WE HAVE TO DECIDE, DOES THE PLACEMENT OF THIS COURT ALTER THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP TO THE ADJOINING PROPERTY? YES.

UH, THE QUESTION BEFORE THE BODY IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS MINOR, THE, THE MINOR AMENDMENT, AND AS YOU ALLUDED TO COMMISSIONER, THERE'S FOUR, UH, STANDARDS THAT HAVE TO BE MET.

THE ONLY ONE THAT I THINK REALLY IS IN CONTENTION IS WHETHER OR NOT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ALTERS THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP.

SO THAT'S THE QUESTION.

THE ONLY QUESTION WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING.

YES, MA'AM.

COMMISSIONER TREADRIGHT, FOLLOWING UP ON THAT, THE FACT THAT, UM, THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE THEY WERE TOLD BY BUILDING INSPECTION HAS NO RELEVANCE TO OUR DECISION, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

IT'S ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT ALTERS THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP.

COMMISSIONER, THANK YOU.

AND COMMISSIONER HER, SINCE WE'RE ON A LEGAL ROLL, UM, NOISE ORDINANCES IN SCHOOLS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, ARE THEY, OR ARE THERE ANY EXEMPTIONS OR RULES AROUND DAY TO DAYTIME NOISES FROM, UM, FROM SCHOOLS OR OTHER, UH, GOVERNMENT ENTITIES? I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYTHING IN STATE LAW.

COMMISSIONER HERBERT, IF YOU KNOW SOMETHING OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT.

BUT I, I'M NOT AWARE OF AN EXEMPTION THAT STATE LAW CREATES, SIR.

I KNOW DALLAS HAS A RULE ABOUT NOISE AND TIME IN THE DAY, SO I WAS KIND LEANING FOR THAT.

AND THERE'S CHAPTER 30, WHICH WAS DISCUSSED, AND THERE'S ALSO A SECTION IN ARTICLE SIX OF CHAPTER 51 A, WHICH WAS ALSO MENTIONED.

BUT I'M, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYTHING IN STATE LAW THAT WOULD EXEMPT SCHOOLS FROM THAT, FROM THOSE REQUIREMENTS.

COMMISSIONER , I, CAN WE NOT HOLD ON ADVISEMENT UNTIL ILLINOIS STUDY IS DONE? OR THE, OR WE SHOULD NOT CONSIDER THAT, EVEN THOUGH THAT IN MOST OF THE CASES WITH THESE, WHEN IT COMES TO THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF, UH, UM, ASK, WE, I THINK WE HAD AN AMENDMENT CASE WHILE BACK BEHIND PICKLEBALL COURTS AND THAT WE, THERE WAS A NOISE STUDY DONE.

WE MADE, AM I RIGHT? AM I MAY BE CONFUSED.

THAT WAS, IT WAS AN AMENDMENT.

AM I RIGHT? IT WAS THE SAME TYPE OF AMENDMENT, KIND OF, AND IT WAS, IT REALLY CAME ABOUT THE NOISE STUDY OR SOMETHING.

UH, I'LL, I'LL DEFER TO COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE A NOISE STUDY WAS CONDUCTED.

I THINK THAT THE BODY VOTED ON THAT AMENDMENT, THAT MEETING.

EXPLAIN TO ME, 'CAUSE I'M, MAYBE I'M CONFUSED WHEN WE SAYING WILL IT, WILL IT CHANGE? HUH? IT WOULD, WILL IT CHANGE? YES.

COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

I THINK YOU MIGHT BE TALKING ABOUT THE COOPER CLINIC CASE.

UM, AND WHICH IS VERY SIMILAR TO THIS ONE, IN MY OPINION.

THEY ALSO WERE GIVEN ERRONEOUS ADVICE THAT THEY COULD START CONSTRUCTION AND THEN THEY NEEDED TO COME IN AND GET A MINOR AMENDMENT.

IT IS VERY LIMITED WHAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO LOOK AT.

AND A NOISE ORDINANCE, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, IS NOT PART OF WHAT IS PART OF OUR SCOPE.

[04:55:01]

SO, SO IF, IF THE NOISE WOULD CHANGE THE RELATIONSHIP, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THE, THE, THE GETTING TO THE BOTTOM OF IT IS PRETTY MUCH THE, THE NOISE, THE NOISE ISSUE OF IT.

AND IT THAT CAN CHANGE THE RELATIONSHIP, UH, OF THE COMMUNITY.

BECAUSE AGAIN, WORD'S MOVING TO I AND I I AND IT OR IS THAT UP UNTIL INTERPRETATION? BECAUSE THAT WOULD CHANGE, UM, CHANGE THE, UH, RELATIONSHIP.

UH, REMEMBER ALREADY.

SO IT, IT'S A MINOR AMENDMENT AND THE MINOR AMENDMENT SECTION SAYS THAT TWO, THE, THE MINOR AMENDMENT LAYS OUT FOUR WAYS THAT CPC CAN DENY THE MINOR AMENDMENT.

AND THE FIRST ONE IS THAT THE, IT ALTERS THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

SO IT'S NOT REALLY LIKE ANYTHING ABOUT NOISE IN PARTICULAR.

IT'S ABOUT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

AND IT SOUNDS LIKE NOISE IS THE CONTENTION THAT THE, THE, UH, MR. SARNO AND HIS MS, MR AND MRS. SARNO ARE SAYING, YOU KNOW, THAT ALTERS THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP.

IT IS THAT, IS THAT HELPFUL? SO I THINK THAT'S, YEAH, BECAUSE MEAN, I, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE ALL CAN IMAGINE THAT WOULD CHANGE THE RELATIONSHIP.

DEPENDS ON WHAT, BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF COURT IT IS.

IT'S CHA THE NOISE HITTING THE GROUND BEING THAT CLOSE, THAT WOULD NOT BE, AND IF IT'S NOT, I MEAN, I CAN UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I CAN, I MEAN, IT'S 10 FEET FROM YOUR HOUSE, AND I DON'T THINK WHETHER SHE HAS A A, UM, WHAT ARE WE CALLING IT? SHE HAS A HEALTH ISSUE.

UM, OR NOT ANYONE 10 FEET CHANGES WHETHER OR NOW TO WHERE THEY'RE MOVING IT, IT COULD CHANGE THE RELATIONSHIP.

SO WE, WE NEED TO JUST STICK TO THE QUESTIONS.

DO WE HAVE A QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THAT, THAT, THAT IS THE QUESTION I'M ASKING.

THAT'S THE QUE I'M ASKING THAT QUESTION.

WAIT, THAT, THAT'S THE QUESTION FOR THE BODY.

I DON'T WANNA SAY LIKE, THE ANSWER IS X AND YOU GUYS MUST NO, I'M NOT SAYING THAT.

IS IS THAT, COULD THAT BE A, A PART OF? WILL THAT CHANGE THE, THE, UM, BASIC RELATIONSHIP? I, I, I MEAN, I'LL GIVE YOU THE SAME ANSWER I GAVE COMMISSIONER KINGSTON THIS MORNING.

I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, AND I THINK CERTAINLY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S CLEVER ENOUGH TO COME UP WITH SCENARIOS WHERE IT WOULD ALTER THE BASIC RELATIONSHIP.

UM, WOW, THAT SOUND LIKE A D .

THAT WAS A COMPLIMENT.

IT WA IT WAS INTENDED TO BE A COMPLIMENT.

COMMISSIONER TREAD COMMISSIONER WHALER, IF IT'S HELPFUL, WHEN WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION IN CONNECTION WITH MY CASE, IT'S REALLY THE USAGE.

WE ARE THE CPC.

SO WE ARE LOOKING AT USAGE.

THERE IS A DIFFERENT PART OF THE CITY THAT LOOKS AT NOISE.

SO WHEN WE LOOK AT MINOR AMENDMENTS, WHEN I THINK ABOUT ALTERED THE RELATIONSHIP, IT'S REALLY, ARE YOU LOOKING AT ALTERING THE USES THAT ARE ALREADY PERMITTED BY THIS PD? THAT'S MY ANALYSIS.

THAT'S THE SUBJECTIVE DETERMINATION.

LET'S JUST STICK WITH QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FOR THE MOMENT.

WE'LL GET TO THE DISCUSSION LATER.

MR. CHAIR, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE DON'T HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE AT THIS MOMENT, SO I CAN'T TECHNICALLY CALL THE QUESTION.

I WISH YOU COULD.

MIGHT IT BE AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO GO TO COMMISSIONER SLEEPER FOR A MOTION? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION COMMISSIONER SLEEPER? WELL, UM, IT'S, IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME, DESPITE ALL THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS, WHETHER OR NOT THE, THIS I HAVE YOUR MICROPHONE OFF.

I THINK IT'S ON.

SOME FOLKS ONLINE CAN'T HEAR YOU.

MAYBE KIND OF LEAN IN U USUALLY PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TROUBLE HEARING ME, SO I'M, I'M JUST SURPRISED.

UM, UM, IS THIS BETTER? I, I, I THINK THE QUESTION REALLY GETS BACK TO THIS, THE SAME THING THAT WE'VE JUST BEEN DISCUSSING, THAT DOES THIS USE, DOES THIS CHANGE IN THE, USE THIS ADDITION OF THE COURT CHANGE THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY? AND I THINK THERE IS SOME POTENTIAL THAT IT DOES.

HOWEVER, UH, IT, IT SEEMS TO BE THAT THERE ARE OPPORTUNITIES TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE SO THAT IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THAT RELATIONSHIP.

AND JUST FROM MY LAYMAN'S OBSERVATION, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT COULD BE DONE THAT WOULD PROBABLY KEEP THIS FROM CHANGING THAT RELATIONSHIP.

ONE IS, UM, I'M MORE COMMISSIONER.

THIS SOUNDS LIKE

[05:00:01]

IT'S A DISCUSSION.

I THINK WE NEED TO LAY OUT A MOTION, GET IT PROPERLY SECONDED, AND THEN WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

BUT WE NEED A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.

WELL, I WAS BUILDING UP TO THAT, BUT IF, UH, , IF, IF YOU, THE SUSPENSE WAS AMAZING.

IF, IF, IF YOU WANT, IF YOU WANT THE MOTION FIRST AND THEN THE DISCUSSION, THEN, THEN I GUESS WE COULD DO THAT.

MY, MY INCLINATION IS TO SU I'M SORRY, I MOVE WELL, , I'M NOT GETTING ANY WIGGLE RIGHT HERE.

AND I, I'D LIKE, I, I'D LIKE TO, TO MOVE IN THIS CASE THAT WE SUSPEND TAKING ANY ACTION.

LET'S, LET'S LET HIM GET IT OUT.

PLEASE, SIR.

CO.

PLEASE CONTINUE.

COMMISSIONER SLEEPER FOR, UH, FOR 30 DAYS TO GIVE THE PARTIES INVOLVED.

UH, BOTH PARTIES ARE, ARE VERY DILIGENT IN THEY'RE CONCERNED.

I'D LIKE TO GIVE THE PARTIES INVOLVED THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE IF THEY CAN'T COME TO SOME SORT OF COMPROMISED SOLUTION THAT WOULD DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE.

SO THAT'S MY MOTION.

COMMISSIONER SLEEPER.

CAN I HAVE A SECOND? THANK YOU.

AND I'D JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY FEBRUARY 15TH.

YEAH, THAT, THAT THANK YES.

IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER SLEEPER? FEBRUARY 15TH.

I MISSED THAT.

I HOLD IT TO A DAY CERTAIN.

FEBRUARY 15TH IS 28TH DAYS.

UH, IF, IF, IF THAT'S THE NEXT LOGICAL DATE, FEBRUARY 15TH, IT'S ROUGHLY, ROUGHLY 30 DAYS.

I, I, I WOULD, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE HOLD IT UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH.

EXCELLENT.

UH, COMMISSIONER, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SLEEPER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? CNN? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED, NAYYY? NAY.

WE HAVE, UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.

ANY OTHERS IN OPPOSITION? I HEARD MORE THAN ONE COMMISSIONER.

SHERLOCK IN OPPOSITION? YES, PLEASE.

DOES ANYBODY NEED A BREAK? AND HE'S UNDERSTOOD MY, I'M SORRY, WHO WAS THAT? LIKE MY SPEECH PATTERN? SO IT'S BEEN GOOD.

I, YOU GUYS HAVE SITTING ON THAT BACK ROOM DOWNSTAIRS.

OKAY, LET'S, UH, COMMISSIONER, LET'S TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK.

WE'LL COME BACK AND GET, UH, 2 29.

LET'S BE BACK AT 2 35.

SO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, FOLKS, WE CAN'T HEAR CASE NUMBER M TWO TWO THREE ZERO THREE SIX AND APPLICATION THE MICROPHONE.

IS IT NOT WORKING? CORRECT.

OOPS.

ITEM NUMBER FOUR M 2 2 3 0 3 6.

AN APPLICATION REQUESTING RELIEF FROM THE STREET FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS ALONG PARKER STREET FOR THE SITE PLAN ON PROPERTY ZONE SUB-DISTRICT THREE WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 3 1 7, THE CEDARS AREA SPECIAL PUR, UH, PURPOSE DISTRICT LOCATED ALONG THE WEST LINE OF PARKER STREET, BETWEEN PARNELL STREET AND B AND JEAN BOULEVARD BEING, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ACCORDING TO SITE, ACCORDING TO THE SITE PLAN.

UH, LADIES, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR M 2 2 3 0 3 6? YES, SIR.

UM, I HOPE, I THINK MS. BLUE DID A GREAT JOB EXPLAINING THAT WITH THE EXHIBITS.

ROB BALDWIN, 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET SUITE.

BE IN DALLAS.

I'LL KEEP THIS QUICK SINCE IT'S YOUR SECOND CASE AND WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR TWO HOURS.

UM, PD THREE 17 IS ONE OF THESE PDS HAS THE MINAX FOR, UH, YOUR FRONT YARD SETBACK.

AND YOU HAVE TO HAVE 70% OF YOUR BUILDING, IN THIS CASE, BETWEEN FIVE AND EIGHT FEET TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

UH, WE CAN'T MAKE IT BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR DRIVEWAY.

WE ONLY HAVE 117 FEET AND WE HAVE A, A 26 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE.

AND THEN OUR UNITS ARE ACTUALLY FACING BOTHAM JANE, AND, UH, THEY'RE REAR LOADED.

SO THAT MEANS THE CARS COME IN THROUGH THE BACK AND WE HAVE TO HAVE 24 FEET BEHIND THAT TO HAVE THE CARS BE ABLE TO BACK OUT AND CIRCULATE.

SO WHEN YOU ADD THE, UM, THE SETBACKS, THE CIRCULATION AREAS, THE DRIVEWAYS, WE CAN'T MEET THE 70%.

[05:05:01]

UM, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.

IN THE MATTER OF M 2 2 3 DASH 0 3 6, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE REQUEST FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION SUBJECT TO THE SITE PLAN.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

OPPOSED? THANK YOU.

AYE, HABIT CASE NUMBER FIVE.

THIS IS ITEM NUMBER FIVE, CASE NUMBER D 2 34 DASH 0 0 3.

THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE GREATER THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET ON PROPERTY ZONED PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 6 0 5 ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD AND SAMUEL BOULEVARD.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS CASE NUMBER FIVE, THE AFTERNOON.

GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRMAN.

MEMBERS MISSION.

MY NAME IS JOE LACRO.

I'M WITH BAR HAMPTON BROWN ENGINEERING.

OUR OFFICE IS LOCATED AT 6 3 0 0 RIDGELEY PLACE IN FORT WORTH.

I'M HERE.

UH, WE ARE THE CIVIL ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS ENGAGED ON A PROJECT.

BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? UH, YES, SIR.

JOHN ROSE, 41 35 CALCULUS DRIVE DOWN.

I'M HERE TO ANSWER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS JUST IN CASE.

SO THANK YOU FOR JOINING US COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? YES, COMM .

ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN BRIEFING WAS AMOUNT OF PARKING WHEN YOU ALL PUT IN, UM, WHEN YOU ALL MADE THE DESIGN STANDARD DESI DESIGN PLAN AND PUT IN OVER THE AMOUNT OF PARKING.

DID YOU ALL DO ANY SURVEYS OF THE AR OTHER, UM, STORES IN THE AREA SUCH AS SAM'S AND WALMART, AND HOW MUCH? OH, UH, USAGE WAS, UM, IN THOSE PARKING LOTS? WE DID NOT.

WE DID SURVEY OUR, OUR COMPETITION.

WE'VE GOT, UH, QUITE A FEW STORES AND WE'VE LEARNED OUR LESSONS.

REAL, REAL HARD ONE LESSONS.

UM, ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE IS WE HAVE GREAT FRESH FRUIT AND GREAT, UM, MEATS AND PRODUCE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

AND PEOPLE COME AND WHEN THEY COME, THEY WANT A PARKING SPACE.

AND I'D LOVE TO TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE BLANK PARKING SPACES ON SATURDAY.

WE DON'T HAVE BLANK PARKING SPACES.

WE HAVE PEOPLE LOOKING FOR PARKING SPACES.

ONE OF OUR BIGGEST CONCERNS IS WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE SOMEBODY NOT BE ABLE TO FIND A PARKING PLACE, BECAUSE WHAT IT DOES IS IT CAUSES TRA PEOPLE TO STOP AND THAT BACKS TRAFFIC UP AND CAN GET OUT INTO THE STREET.

SO WE, IT MAY SEEM EXCESSIVE, BUT IT'S NOT EXCESSIVE IF, IF YOU USE IT AND WE DO USE IT AND, UH, UH, WE INVITE ALL OF Y'ALL TO GO UP TO, UH, ONE OF OUR STORES AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT ON SATURDAY.

AND YOU WILL SEE THAT WE USE ALL OUR PARKING.

SO RESPECTFULLY, I, UH, WE, WE KNOW WHAT WE HAVE TO HAVE FOR PARKING THESE STORES.

JUST A LOT OF LONG TIME WORKING.

MAY I SHOULD ASK? AND Y'ALL, I JUST, OKAY.

UH, I UNDERSTAND.

UM, I HAVE ONE QUESTION ON YOUR DRIVE LOCATIONS.

UM, YOU MAY HAVE HEARD IT DURING THE BRIEFING, WHOEVER WANTS TO FIELD THE QUESTION.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THE ALIGNMENT AT BUCKNER IS LIKELY DUE TO THE MEDIAN CUT, HOWEVER IT APPEARS TO CREATE A BIT OF A QUEUING CHALLENGE, UH, FOR FOLKS EXITING THE PROPERTY.

WAS THERE ANY EVALUATION OF THAT AS YOU WERE DOING YOUR SITE PLAN LAYOUT? WE, WE DO EVALUATE THAT ON A REGULAR BASIS.

WE'RE CAUGHT BETWEEN THE DEVIL AND THE DEEP BLUE SEA BECAUSE WE HAVE A HEIGHT LIMITATION BASED ON HOW FAR WE ARE FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

THE PROPERTY HAS AN ANGLE ON IT.

SO YES, I WOULD LIKE TO PUSH THE BUILDING FURTHER OVER.

I CAN'T DO THAT WITHOUT DECREASING PARKING AND WITHOUT, UM, WITHOUT ENCROACHING INTO THE SETBACK.

THE, THE, THE VERTICAL SETBACK THAT WE HAVE ON THIS PROPERTY, IF YOU LOOK AT HOW THAT COMES IN, THAT SETS WHERE WE HAVE TO HAVE THE BUILDING AND TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THE PARKING ON THE BACKSIDE.

SO YES, WE DID LOOK AT IT.

WE ARE COMFORTABLE WITH IT BECAUSE WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE.

I ALWAYS WANT MORE.

I'M, I'M A I'M TERRIBLY, I WANT MORE OF EVERYTHING ALWAYS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE'RE ABLE TO GET IT HERE AND WE'RE COMFORTABLE THAT IF ANYTHING, WE, WE WORRY MORE ABOUT THE QUEUING ON OUR PARCEL, UH, ACROSS THAT MAIN DRIVE.

SO, SO WE WATCH THAT VERY CAREFULLY.

SO YOU'LL HANDLE IT THROUGH AN OPERATIONS.

AGAIN, IT'S JUST THAT LACK OF ALIGNMENT AND THERE'S NOT A MEDIAN CUT THERE.

IT CERTAINLY SEEMED LIKE YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY.

WELL, ACTUALLY WE'RE ADDING A MEDIAN CUT.

THINK I OH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE EASTERN ONE? MY APOLOGIES.

SO, OH, AT BOTH LOCATIONS.

[05:10:01]

NO, THAT'S A RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT.

WELL, THANK YOU.

YES, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HUT.

A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

UM, IT, IT CAME UP EARLIER ABOUT THE RESIDENCES, UH, BEHIND YOUR, YOUR, YOUR PROPERTY.

UM, DO YOU HAVE A, A A HISTORY OF DEALING WITH NEIGHBORS, UM, IN PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENTS OR A PLAN FOR DEALING WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS? UH, MY, MY NEIGHBORS ARE MY CUSTOMERS AND EVERY, EVERY NEIGHBOR HAS A COMPUTER AND THEY HAVE 10 FRIENDS.

SO WE ABSOLUTELY WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THOSE NEIGHBORS ARE STILL CUSTOMERS STILL LOVE US.

IT'S PART OF WHO WE ARE.

IT'S PART OF OUR NATURE AS IN TERMS OF THE COMPANY.

WE ARE, WE'RE EXPECTED TO DO THE RIGHT THING IF ANYBODY'S LOOKING OR NOT.

AND SO, YES, SIR.

MY NEXT QUESTION IS, YOU'RE, YOU'VE DECIDED TO BUILD IN A HEAT DESERT OF FOOD DESERT, ALL TYPES OF DESERTS, RIGHT? UM, HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT, OR DO YOU HAVE A LANDSCAPE PLAN ON YOUR PARKING LOT THAT KIND OF SUCKS UP SOME OF THE CONCRETE? WE DO.

WE HAVE, WE, WE'VE MET THE CRITERIA.

NOW, I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE KEEP TREES, UH, 150 FEET AWAY FROM THE FRONT DOORS.

AND YOU, YOU MAY NOT KNOW THE REASON WHY, BUT IT'S BECAUSE WE DON'T LIKE BIRDS AND WE LIKE TREES, WE DON'T LIKE BIRDS.

AND BIRDS TEND TO DEFECATE ON THINGS LIKE SHOPPING CARTS.

AND NOBODY WANTS TO PUT THEIR CUCUMBERS WHERE A BIRD IS DEFECATED.

SO THAT'S KIND OF OUR THINKING ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

THANK YOU, .

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE.

COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I HAVE A MOTION AND COMMENTS.

UM, I'M, UH, IN THE MATTER OF, UM, D 2 3 3 4 DASH ZERO THREE.

I MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPROVAL.

AND I HAVE COMMENTS.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.

COMMISSIONER WEAVER , FIRST OF ALL, I, WE, WE, THE, THE STYLE OF, UM, OF, OF GROCERY STORE THAT YOU ALL ARE BRINGING IS GONNA DEFINITELY HELP US CURB THE FOOD DESERT.

UM, I'M UNDERSTANDABLE ABOUT THE PARKING ISSUES, BUT IN THAT AREA OVER, UH, MORE THAN ENOUGH PARKING IS GREATLY NEEDED.

UM, WALMART AND SAM'S IS ALWAYS OVER.

UH, THERE'S AL IT'S HARD TO FIND PARKING PERIOD IN EITHER ONE OF THOSE DURING THAT DAY.

SO HAVING THAT OVERAGE AND WITH NOTHING REALLY IN THE BACK OF YOU ALL AND THE HOUSES, THAT THAT IS A GREAT ADD.

WE, WE DON'T LIVE IN AN AREA THAT SHARED RIDE IS YET A THING.

WE DRIVE THROUGH THE STORES.

AND SO BUCKNER TERRACE WAS VERY MUCH, UM, ENTHUSED TO HAVE YOU ALL THERE AND MORE GROCERY STORES.

SO, UM, KUDOS ON TO MAKING SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT WASN'T, THAT IT DEFINITELY WAS INVOLVED AND THAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER WOULD DEFINITELY PLAY A PART IN THAT.

SO WE THANK YOU ALL FOR BRINGING, UH, FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES TO A FOOD DESERT.

MR. KINGSTON, I'LL BE SUPPORTING MOTION.

AND IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS INITIATIVE TO THIS PART OF OUR CITY COMMISSIONER HERBERT.

I SECOND, I SECOND THAT I WILL APPROVE THIS MESSAGE.

UM, THANK YOU.

UH, WE ALSO HAVE A SIMILAR STORE COMING IN DISTRICT THREE THAT WE'RE JUST A PART OF.

UM, WE'RE HAPPY ABOUT IT.

UM, BUT I WILL SAY ON RECORD, THINK BIGGER.

WE DESERVE BIGGER HEB, BUT WE'LL PROVE THAT WE'LL PROVE THAT WITH THESE, THESE COMING IN.

SO THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SEEING NONE.

GENTLEMEN, WE'RE NOW MOVING ON TO OUR ZONING CASES.

LADIES AND

[ZONING CASES – CONSENT (Part 2 of 4)]

CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, UH, THERE CONSISTS OF CASES SIX THROUGH 25 AT THIS POINT.

15 OF THOSE CASES HAVE BEEN TAKEN OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE VOTED ON INDIVIDUALLY LEAVING CASES 7, 11, 20 21 AND 24.

THOSE CASES WILL BE DISPOSED OF IN ONE MOTION, UNLESS THERE IS SOMEONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ONE OF THOSE CASES.

AND THEN WE WILL PULL THAT CASE OFF, OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

CAN YOU REPEAT THOSE PLEASE? AND, UH, WE WILL THIS, SO AGAIN, THE, THE CASES THAT WE'VE DISPOSED OF IN ONE MOTION ARE CASES NUMBER 7 11, 20, 21, AND 24.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE FIVE CASES? OKAY, LET'S GET THOSE RIGHT INTO THE RECORD PLEASE.

I'LL SPEAK ON THEM.

ITEM.

OKAY, SO THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT IS ITEM SEVEN, WHICH IS Z 2 23 2 12.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN MU 1D MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH THE D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTY ZONE A CRD COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON

[05:15:01]

THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PRITCHARD LANE SIGN ROAD.

UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.

ITEM 11

IS Z 2 23 2 75.

IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2 3 0 4 FOR A BAR, LOUNGE OR TAVERN ON PROPERTY ZONED SUBDISTRICT TWO WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 3 1 7 CEDARS AREA SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF HARWOOD STREET, SOUTHEAST OF PICKERY STREET.

RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS.

ITEM 20 IS Z 2 2 3 3 1 1.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2 4 2 4 0 8 FOR MANUFACTURING LABORATORY ON PROPERTY ZONED TRACT A WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2 69, THE DEEP ALUM NEAR EAST SIDE SOCIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE EAST LINE OF SOUTH WALTON STREET BETWEEN VIRGIL STREET AND TAYLOR STREET.

RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS.

ITEM 21 IS C 2 2 3 3 16.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR ONE IN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.

AND TWO, THE TERMINATION OF A DE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTY ZONED A L ONE LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT WITH A DE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY AND AN MF TWO MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON THE EAST SIDE OF HOMER STREET BETWEEN NORTH GARD AVENUE AND NORTH HENDERSON AVENUE.

RECOMMENDATION IS ONE APPROVAL OF AN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT, AND TWO APPROVAL OF DETERMINATION OF A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.

ITEM 24 IS Z 2 2 3 3 3 5.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN MU 3D MIXED USE DISTRICT FOR THE D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTIES ZONED AND L OH 1D LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF ABRAMS ROAD BETWEEN FISHER ROAD AND EAST LAB LANE.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY LAST QUESTIONS IN ANY OF THESE FIVE ITEMS? SEEING NONE, CAN I HAVE A MOTION? YEAH.

ON THE CONSENT, UM, A ZONING CONSENT IS AGENDA ITEM 7 11, 20 21 AND 24.

I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON OF, OF APPROVAL ON EACH OF THESE ITEMS AS BRIEFED.

THANK YOU MR. CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR MOTION AND UH, COMMISSIONER HINTON FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY COMMENTS? STAND ON.

ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT.

UH, COMMISSIONERS AND UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, NOW WITH YOUR INDULGENCE, WE'RE GONNA KIND OF SKIP AROUND A LITTLE BIT HERE.

UH, IN FACT WE'RE GONNA TAKE ALL, ALL THE D EIGHT CASES FIRST BEFORE WE GET BACK TO THE ORDER OF THE DOCKET.

SO THE FIRST D EIGHT CASE IS CASE NUMBER, IS IT 27TH? 27.

SO WE'LL SKIP AHEAD TO CASE NUMBER 27

Z TWO 12.

2 98.

DID MS APPLICATION, CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME OKAY? WE CAN.

ITEM 27 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH CONSIDERATION OF AN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES OWNED AND AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF DOWTY FERRY ROAD, NORTHEAST OF THE LYNDON BEACH, JOHNSON FREEWAY I 20 STAFF.

RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF AN MU ONE DISTRICT IN LIEU OF A CS DISTRICT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. MUNOZ.

LET'S SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

AND THE MU ONE AND PLUS I WANT TO INCREASE THE, THE NUMBER OF, UH, UNITS FOR A HOTEL FROM 80 TO A HUNDRED.

MICHAEL COKER, 31 11 CANTON STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE.

MR. COOKER, MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE, WE HAVE SOME FOLKS ONLINE, YOU HAVE TO KIND OF GET CLOSE TO THESE MICROPHONES.

THEY'RE NOT AS SENSITIVE AS THE ONES ON THE HORSESHOE BETTER, SO I THINK IT'S OFF.

YOU SHOULD CHECK TO SEE IF YOU NEED TO TURN IT BACK ON.

LIGHT'S ON.

YOU HAVE TO GET REALLY CLOSE.

YEAH, SURE.

YEAH, THAT CLOSE LITERALLY.

OKAY, ARE YOU READY? WHEN I WAS HERE LAST TIME, YOU JUST SENT ME BACK TO CONSIDER SOME ALTERNATIVES TO THE APPLICATION THAT WE HAD PROVO PROVIDED FOR YOU.

I HAVE DONE THAT.

UM, THERE ARE FIVE THINGS I'D LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER.

THE FIRST THING IS THAT WE HAVE AGREED TO BASICALLY SPLIT OUR RE OUR REQUEST INTO, UH, 15 ACRES OF CS THAT FRONTS ON DOWTY FERRY AND THE REMAINING PROPERTY ALL THE WAY TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, I'VE GOT A GRAPHIC I'M GONNA SHOW YOU IN A SECOND.

MU ONE.

WE HAVE SUBMITTED A LIMITED NUMBER OF, UH, DEEDED RESTRICTIONS FOR THE CSS WILL APPLY THOSE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS TO BOTH THE CS

[05:20:01]

SO THERE'S TWO MORE THINGS THAT YOU ASKED ME TO CONSIDER.

THEY WERE ALL TO DO WITH THE TREES.

AND SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING, WE ARE AGREEING TO PROTECT ALL OF THE A HUNDRED YEAR OLD TREES AS IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY ARBORIST.

AND IF WE CAN'T SAVE THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE IN A DRIVEWAY, A ROADWAY, A PARKING LOT, OR A BUILDING SITE.

AND WE WILL REPLACE THOSE ONSITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 10 OR, UH, CALIPER BY CALIPER.

LASTLY, UH, WE WILL DEDICATE A CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

I'M GONNA SHOW YOU NOW THIS GRAPHIC, SEE THAT BIG GREEN SWASH DOWN THE MIDDLE, THAT'S PANTHER CREEK AND THAT'S FLOODPLAIN.

WE'RE GONNA DEDICATE EVERYTHING FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS BASICALLY ADJACENT TO THE CREEK BACK TO THE WEST TO WHERE THE GREEN LINE IS AS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT WILL PROTECT ALL OF THE TREES THAT ARE IN THERE.

AND WE WILL ADJUST OUR DEEDED RESTRICTIONS TO REFLECT THAT AS WELL.

SO THERE ARE TWO, UH, THREE MAJOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS, A HUNDRED YEAR TREES, THIS CONSERVATION, CONSERVATION EASEMENT.

NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT WE HAVE A 27 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT WE'RE ALSO DEDICATING COINCIDENT WITH THIS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 20, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT RELEVANT TO THIS CASE.

AND THE, UH, INCREASING THE DEEDED RESTRICTION FOR A HOTEL.

'CAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD SAID THEY DIDN'T WANT ANY FLY BY NIGHT HOTELS, WHEN YOU GET TO A HUNDRED UH, UNITS IN A HOTEL, YOU'VE GONE BEYOND THAT 80 NUMBER.

AND I'LL TELL YOU THOSE BACKGROUND.

BACK WHEN I WORKED HERE, UH, 25 OR 30 YEARS AGO, WE DID A STUDY AND FOUND OUT THAT HOTELS WITH 80 ROOMS OR LESS TENDED TO BE THE ONES THAT HAD THE MOST PROBLEM WITH, WITH, UH, MR. COOKER.

THAT, THAT CONCLUDES YOUR THREE MINUTES.

I'M SURE THERE'S GONNA BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU, SIR.

AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR MR. COKER? YOU GONNA ASK HIM TO CONTINUE? YES.

Q QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER BLAIR.

MR. COKER, CAN YOU PLEASE COMPLETE YOUR THOUGHTS, SIR? YES, SIR.

SO, UM, WITH CITY MANAGER BACK SOME TIME AGO ASKED ME TO EVALUATE WHICH HOTELS AND MOTELS WERE THE MOST PROBLEMATIC FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT AND FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE CITY.

AND WE DID A FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL STUDY, IT WAS BACK IN 1989, AND WE DETERMINED THAT THE, THE HOTELS AND MOTELS THAT RECEIVED THE MOST CALLS FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE MOST CALLS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT WERE HOTELS THAT HAD ROOMS OF 80 OR LESS.

AND AS A RESULT OF THAT, THE COUNCIL AND THE COMMISSION, UH, AMENDED THE, OR THE ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE THAT AN SUP OR ANY, ANY HOTEL WITH 80 OR LESS UNITS.

UH, SOME OF THOSE HAVE PASSED AND SOME, BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE A A, A SMALL HOTEL ON OUR PROPERTY.

WE'VE GOT A REALLY GREAT PIECE OF PROPERTY, 20 CARRIES 250,000 CARS AND TRUCKS A DAY.

IT'S RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION.

IT'S A, IT'S A GREAT LOCATION.

AND WITH THAT, UH, WITH THE AMENDMENTS TO OUR APPROACH, WE'D LIKE TO DO CSS ON THE WEST SIDE, 15 ACRES.

THERE'S ALSO A 2.1 ACRE TRACK THAT WAS REZONED FOR, UH, LET ME SHOW IT UP, SHOW IT DOWN THE PLAN.

THIS PIECE RIGHT HERE WAS REZONED LAST YEAR FOR CSS WITH DEEDED RESTRICTIONS FOR A, UH, QT UH, QUICKTRIP FUELING STATION, NOT WITH TRUCKS, BUT FOR, UH, RESIDENTIAL VEHICLES AND A AND A 9,000 SQUARE FOOT CROLL.

SO, UH, THAT'S THE CHANGE THAT HAS HAPPENED THERE.

I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

THANK YOU MR. COKER FOR THAT.

UM, UPDATE.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO THIS BODY, THE, THE PRINCIPAL OR WHY IS THE APPLICANT SO HIT FAST ON CS WHEN ANOTHER ZONING CLASSIFICATION WILL GIVE HIM EXACTLY WHAT, WHAT WE'RE DOING WITHOUT THAT CSS ZONING? I THINK I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.

COMMISSIONER BLAIR, THE APPLICANT

[05:25:01]

IS, HAS MADE AN APPLICATION ORIGINALLY FOR IR AND WE CHANGED THAT TO CSS BECAUSE IT ROLLED BACK SOME OF THE HEIGHTS AND DENSITIES THAT OCCURRED.

BUT WE WERE REALLY LOOKING AT, AT USES THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE CSS, WHICH INCLUDES THE, THE WAREHOUSING AND, UH, INSIDE COMMERCIAL SOME, UH, INDUSTRIAL THAT'S ALLOWED IN CSS.

UH, AS A LOCATION FOR THIS.

AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, MY OFFICE IS IN DEEP EL AND THERE ARE A LOT OF, OF INSIDE COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE BEING DISLOCATED BECAUSE IT'S CHANGING.

UM, AND PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME OF THOSE TO RELOCATE HERE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS WOULD BE GOOD.

I I, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT Y'ALL UNDERSTAND THAT ON THE SOUTH OF OUR PROPERTY, WE HAVE THE FREEWAY ON THE WEST OF OUR PROPERTY.

WE HAVE A SIX LANE DIVIDED THOROUGHFARE ON THE NORTH OF OUR PROPERTY.

WE HAVE A 500 FOOT DEEP INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH AREA THAT, THAT IS BETWEEN US AND THE VERY FIRST RESIDENTIAL USES THAT ARE ANYWHERE CLOSE TO US AND THEN TO THE WEST OF US, UH, TO THE EAST OF US WE'VE GOT PANTHER CREEK AND THAT ENTIRE FLOODPLAIN.

SO THERE ARE REALLY NOT ANY RESIDENTIAL USES THAT ARE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO US.

AND, AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT WE PROVIDE AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY, NOT JUST THE, NOT JUST THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY THAT SURROUNDS US, BUT TO THE CITY OF DALLAS THAT PROVIDES AN ECONOMIC BASIS FOR, FOR NEW GROWTH IN THIS AREA.

SOME OF WHICH WE, WE WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HELP GUIDE TOWARD THE RESIDENCES THAT ARE IN THE PROPERTIES SOUTH, NORTHEAST, AND WEST OF US.

UM, MR. COKER, IS IT, IS IT NOT CORRECT THOUGH THAT IR DISTRICT THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF IS THE NON-ACTIVE IR DISTRICT? THAT IS CORRECT.

IT'S, IT'S, RIGHT NOW THERE'S, IT USED TO BE A, UH, CONCRETE BATCHING PLANT AND IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR, FOR YEARS NOW AND, BUT IT'S STILL ZONED IR.

UM, AND IS IT NOT TRUE THAT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT SIX LANE HIGHWAY IS THE PARK? YES, MA'AM.

THERE IS A AND A GREEN BELT ALL TRUE.

AND, AND A VERY NICE PARK I MIGHT ADD.

AND IT'S BY SITTING ON RIGHT ON THE TRINITY RIVER.

IT IS.

UM, IS IT NOT TRUE THAT WE HAD COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND THE COMMUNITY WAS ADAMANTLY IN OPPOSITION TO THE DEVELOPMENT UNDER CSS? YES, MA'AM.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? YES.

COMMISSIONER HALL.

MR. COKER, UH, THIS PROPERTY IS, IS VERY CLOSE TO THE GREAT TRINITY FOREST.

MR. COOK, COMMISSIONER HALL.

HA.

HAVE YOU OR OR YOUR CLIENT EVER BEEN APPROACHED BY ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH THE GREAT TRINITY FOREST, UH, TO ACQUIRE THE LAND? WELL, I, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION, COMMISSIONER.

UH, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE'VE HAD ANY IMPACT OR INQUIRIES FROM THE TRINITY FOREST PROPER GROUP.

UH, THE CITY OF DALLAS DID ACQUIRE THE IMMEDIATELY, UH, NORTH OF OUR PROPERTY AND EAST OF THE INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH THAT'S FLOOD.

HOLD MR. COOK.

ONE, ONE SECOND.

I THINK THAT THAT QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE NEIGHBOR IS INQUIRING ABOUT BUYING THIS IS BEYOND THE QUESTION FOR THE BODY.

THE BODY IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS CHANGE IN ZONING AT THIS PROPERTY IS A, IS A GOOD USE OF LAND.

JUST BY WAY OF EXPLANATION, MOST OF THE OPPOSITION SEEMS TO BE BASED ON THE FACT THAT THIS IS IN THE TRINITY FOREST REGION AND WE WANT TO PROTECT THE TREES, ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES.

MY CURIOSITY WAS JUST, HAS ANYBODY EVER OFFERED TO BUY IT TO PRESERVE THAT? UH, AND I I I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I THINK THAT THE, THE QUESTION IS ABOUT THE SPECIFIC AREA THAT WAS NOTIFIED.

THE, THE, THE AREA OF LAND THAT IS BEFORE THE BODY IS THAT AREA.

AND THE REQUEST THAT IS BEING MADE IS THE ONE THAT, UM, THE, THE, THE, WHAT IS IT? CF MU ONE IS THE SORT OF WHAT'S BEFORE THE BODY.

AND I THINK WE SHOULD KEEP OUR DISCUSSIONS TO THAT AND THAT THAT'S SORT OF THE GERMAN OF THE DISCUSSION.

AND NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.

COMMISSIONER TREADWAY.

THAT, UH, EAST SIDE OF THE PROP, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY GOING FROM THE NORTH END TO THE SOUTH END AND UH, MAKE THAT, MAKE THAT 14 ACRES, OH, NOT 22, 14 14 ON THE, UH, TO OUR PROPERTY LINE.

HOW LARGE IS THIS? UM, CONSERVATION EASEMENT.

IT'S ABOUT 22 ACRES ON

[05:30:01]

ULTIMATELY WE, WE ARE CONSIDERING DOING A CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THAT PAN PANTHER CREEK FLOODWAY, BUT IT'S NOT THE SAME PROPERTY, SO.

UM, IF THIS BODY GRANTS YOU THE MU REQUEST AND NOT THE CSS REQUEST, IS YOUR CLIENT STILL GONNA BE ABLE TO USE IT OR ARE YOU WANTING TO EITHER BE ACCEPTED AT CSS OR REJECTED? OUR PREFERENCE IS TO DIVIDE IT UP LIKE I'VE SUGGESTED, WHICH THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, 24 ACRES OF DEVELOPABLE PROPERTY AS U ONE WITH THE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS THAT I'VE ALREADY AG AGREED TO AND THE LEFT HAND 15 ACRES.

UM, LET ME KIND OF SHOW YOU THIS GRAPHIC GIVES A LITTLE CLEARER, SIR.

I I UNDERSTAND THE REQUEST.

MY, MY QUESTION IS, IF WE JUST DO AN MU AND DO NOT DO ANY SORT OF CS REQUEST, UH, WOULD YOU PREFER THAT OR WOULD YOU JUST PREFER AN OUTRIGHT REJECTION? I PREFER FOR YOU TO DO WHAT I'M ASKING YOU TO DO .

I I GOT THAT.

UM, I'M ASKING A DIFFERENT QUESTION.

UH, AND I UNDERSTAND THE, MY CLIENT ADVISED ME THAT HE WANTS TO HAVE A DECISION TODAY FROM THE COMMISSION AND HE DID NOT TELL ME TO SAY YES OR NO TO AN OPTION THAT DID ANY, ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT.

BUT, BUT I DID TALK TO COMMISSIONER BLAIR ABOUT IF THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS DENIAL THAT WE CAN AT LEAST HAVE DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF CITY STAFF OR DO I HAVE TO DO THAT LATER? YEAH, WE'RE GONNA GET TO THAT I THINK PROBABLY NEXT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF PLEASE.

UM, CAN YOU REMIND ME THIS WHOLE CONSERVATION EASEMENT, CAN YOU JUST REFRESH MY MEMORY ON HOW THAT WORKS AND HOW WE MAKE THAT A BINDING OBLIGATION IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE BINDING? COMMISSIONER TREADWAY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN DRAFTED AND EXECUTED AND RECORDED WITH THE COUNTY.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE AND SOMEONE CAN CORRECT ME, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT IS THE CASE.

SO ONCE, UM, IF, IF CPC WERE TO APPROVE THIS AND COUNSEL WERE TO APPROVE IT, THERE WOULD BE NO WAY TO BIND THAT CONSERVATION EASEMENT SO WE CAN'T APPROVE IT SUBJECT TO THE FILING OF A BINDING SOMETHING.

JUST WONDERING HOW THIS WORKS LEGALLY.

I, I DO NOT BELIEVE SO.

I CAN DOUBLE CHECK, BUT MY, I, I'LL, I'LL DOUBLE CHECK, BUT MY FIRST BITE AT THE APPLE WOULD BE NO, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE ALREADY RECORDED WITH THE COUNTY AND YEAH.

AND SO JUST PLAYING THIS OUT STRATEGICALLY AND APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO COME BEFORE THIS BODY AND SHOW THAT THEY REALLY MEAN BUSINESS BY HAVING HAD ALREADY RECORDED SOMETHING AND NOT JUST PROMISING TO RECORD IT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER BLA, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.

AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I HAVE COMMENTS, UM, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 12 2 98, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING NOT FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF A MU DISTRICT IN LIEU OF A CSPA TO DENY IT, AS WELL AS TO DENY THAT APPLICANT'S CHANGE TO 15 ACRES OF CSS AND THE BALANCE OF THE, UM, REQUEST TO A MU ONE WITH HOTELS.

UM, IS THAT WHAT THAT PREJUDICE IS? WITHOUT PREJUDICE? WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION, VICE CHAIR FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.

COMMISSIONER BLA, ANY COMMENTS? WE'VE SEEN THIS CASE OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND MR. COKER, I REALLY DO APPRECIATE YOUR DILIGENCE IN WORKING ON THIS CASE.

UM, IT'S NOT BEEN EASY FOR EITHER ONE OF US.

UM, I APPRECIATE, UH, MS. MUNOZ AND I'M, I HAVE TO SAY A BIG APPRECIATION TO MS. MUNOZ FOR TRYING TO MAKE SOMETHING WORK.

UM, HER DILIGENCE AND HER APPRECIATION TO WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTED, WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTED AND WHAT WAS BEST FOR THE CITY, UM, WAS I, I APPRECIATED AND I RESPECTED WHAT YOU TRIED TO ACCOMPLISH.

UNFORTUNATELY, CSS DOES NOT FIT HERE.

CS ALLOWS TOO MUCH THAT, THAT BY RIGHT, THAT IS, UM, NOT CONDUCIVE TO THE, TO NOT ONLY THE COMMUNITY, BUT THE GREEN BELT, THE FLOODPLAIN, THE PARK AT ALL.

[05:35:01]

SO WHAT I WOULD MR. COKER ASK THAT YOU, YOU GO BACK WITH THE APPLICANT AND, UM, RECOMMEND IS THAT WE HEAR WHAT HE WANTS, BUT I NEED HIM TO ALSO HEAR WHAT IS NEEDED.

UM, WE'RE WILLING TO WORK, WANT TO WORK, BUT IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT THIS BODY CAN ACCEPT AND THE COMMUNITY IN WHICH IT SITS IN NEEDS TO ACCEPT.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, WHEELER? UM, LOOK, I I I'M MORE AMPED TO APPROVE THIS AND THE REASON BEING IS THAT, UM, THERE'S NOT A DIRECT COMMUNITY NEXT TO IT.

UM, AND THAT IT, THAT THERE IS IF HO IF AT FIRST WE WERE DOING, POSSIBLY TALKING ABOUT DOING A WAREHOUSE, IF WE CAN GO FROM A WAREHOUSE TO A HOTEL IN AN AREA THAT THERE IS NO ONE ELSE LIVING CLOSE BY.

THIS APPLICANT TOLD US IN THE PAST, IN THE PAST MEETING, NO ONE HAS CAME TO HIM TO PURCHASE IT FOR A RESIDENTIAL OR ANY OF THOSE THINGS.

UM, AND THIS HAS BEEN A, THIS IS A GREAT COMPROMISE, UM, TO HAVE THIS MUCH LAND AND WILLING TO, TO MAKE IT CONSERVATION, UH, CONSERVE THE, THE TREES AND THE, AND TRINITY FOREST AND ALL THOSE GREAT THINGS.

BUT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY OWNER HAS COMPROMISED AND IS GIVING SO MUCH BACK, BUT THERE'S NOT A NECESSARILY A, IF THIS WAS RIGHT NEXT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD, I'LL BE MORE THAN THAT.

BUT THIS IS A HOTEL BEATS ANOTHER WAREHOUSE IN AN AREA THAT WE REALLY NEED WAREHOUSES.

I MEAN, NEED SOME HOTELS FOR, FOR, UM, THOSE WHO ARE COMING OFF OF 20.

IT'S A GREAT COMPROMISE.

SO I'M MORE THAT TO APPROVE THIS.

UM, AND MS. MUNI HAS DONE GREAT WORK, BUT WHEN IT DOESN'T SIT RIGHT NEXT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD, I, I, I'M, I'M MORE THAN ENOUGH TO, TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT'S CHAIR RUBEN.

UM, I, I MAY HAVE READ THE, THE DOCKET A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, BUT THE WAY THAT I SAW IT WAS THAT THE CSS, EVEN WITH THE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS THAT WERE OFFERED WOULD IN FACT ALLOW WAREHOUSES.

AND I THINK THAT, AND MR. COKER IS SHAKING HIS HEAD AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS GREAT, YOU KNOW, SORT OF TENSION BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, THE ECONOMICS OF SOME OF THIS LAND ALONG I 20 AND THEN THE FACT THAT WE DO HAVE A LOT OF UNDEVELOPED GREEN SPACE.

UM, ALSO A BUDDING I 20 THAT IS A REAL ASSET TO THE CITY.

UM, AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS SOMETIMES A CHALLENGING DECISION, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE MAKE ZONING CASES IN THESE AREAS ABOUT WHETHER WE UP ZONE IT IN A WAY THAT DOES ALLOW THESE MASSIVE WAREHOUSES TO COME IN.

BUT I THINK IN THIS INSTANCE WHERE WE'RE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE, YOU KNOW, THE PARK AND ALL OF THOSE OTHER FACILITIES THAT WAREHOUSE USES ARE SIMPLY TOO INTENSE HERE.

SO I, I AM FULLY ON BOARD WITH COMMISSIONER BLAIR'S, UM, MOTION TO DENY THIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AND SEE IF THERE'S ANOTHER PRODUCTIVE USE OF THE LAND THAT WOULD BE LESS INTENSE, BUT I JUST DON'T SEE THE WAREHOUSE AS REALLY BEING RESPECTFUL TO WHAT CAN ULTIMATELY BE ACHIEVED OUT OF THIS AREA.

UM, SO I AM HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.

LEMME TRY TO WRITE THANK YOU CHAIR.

I'LL ALSO SUPPORT THE MOTION AND I WILL JUST POINT OUT THAT THE STAFF REPORT IS GREAT.

THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE HERE AND IT SPECIFIES THAT THE CSS IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH FORWARD DALLAS OR WITH THE CURRENT PLAN IN PLACE FOR THIS AREA.

AND I THINK THOSE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT AND SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL THAT PREJUDICE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.

OPPOSED? ONE VOTE IN OPPOSITION.

COMMISSIONER REER.

MOTION PASSES.

STAY IN DISTRICT EIGHT.

NEXT CASE IS NUMBER 30.

I, I DID WANT TO GET THE, UH, THE POST DOCKET SITE PLAN PUT ON THE SCREEN FOR YOU FOLKS.

UH, I WILL READ THIS INTO THE RECORD, BUT

[05:40:01]

YOU'VE HAD THIS DISTRIBUTED TO YOU, BUT I DIDN'T WANNA PUT IT ON THE SCREEN ONCE REAL QUICK.

SO THIS IS Z 2 2 3 1 1 2 ITEM 30.

AND IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR ONE ESPECIALLY USED PERMIT FOR EMOTIVE VEHICLE FUELING STATION.

AND TWO, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE THROUGH 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR GREATER OR LESS, EXCUSE ME, ON PROPERTY ZONED SUB-DISTRICT FIVE WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 3 3 OF THE CF HAN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT NUMBER ONE WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER, ELAM ROAD AND CF HAN FREEWAY.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 30.

YES SIR.

PLEASE COME.

PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

MY NAME IS ARVIN SHARMA.

I'M, UH, HERE ON THIS CASE.

UH, THANK YOU SO MUCH, UH, FOR ALLOWING US TO WORK WITH MR. PEPE AND, UH, VAR.

SINCE OUR LAST CALL COUNCIL MEETING, WE DID MEET WITH THEM AND WE HAVE ALREADY, UH, COMPILED WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF SHRINKING THE BUILDING DOWN TO 3,200.

SO THAT MEETS THE NUMBER OF PARKING AND WE ALSO AGREED TO REDO THE SITE PLAN, TAKING OUT THE ELI ACCESS.

WE'VE DONE THAT AS WELL AND SENT IT OFF.

AND SO WE HAVE COMPLIED WITH WHAT WERE THE ISSUES IN THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING.

AND THEN THE ONLY ITEM I CAN THINK OF RIGHT NOW IS THE LANDSCAPING OF 10 FEET THAT WE ARE NOT ABLE TO DO THE WAY IT IS, UH, SET UP, BUT IN ALTERNATE WE HAVE, WE'RE WILLING WITH, YOU KNOW, THE CITY FOR SOMETHING ELSE THAT THEY CAN DO, HAVING A BETTER, YOU KNOW, UP-TO-DATE PAYMENTS AND WE ARE ADDING SOME BICYCLE PARKING AND SOME EV PARKING AND FEW OTHER THINGS WE CAN DO IN DUE OF THAT.

AND SO I THINK WE'RE VERY CLOSE TO MEETING ALL THE REQUIREMENTS.

UH, AND, UH, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE CASE, BUT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH, UH, ANYTHING PENDING TO FINISH IT.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMERS QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER.

COMMISSIONER BLAIR, IS THERE ANOTHER SPEAKER? IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD? NO.

COMMISSIONER BLAIR QUESTIONS? UM, YES, MR. SHARMAN? YES MA'AM.

UM, YOU SAID THAT YOU AND, AND, UM, MR. PEPE, CAN YOU PUT THE NEW, UM, SITE PLAN BACK? I HAVE A SITE, YES.

I HAVE A SITE PLANNING AND A AND A LANDSCAPE PLAN AND LANDSCAPE AND, AND LANDSCAPE.

AND CAN YOU MAKE IT A LITTLE BIGGER 'CAUSE I CAN'T SEE .

IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT GOING FOR ME.

UH, TWO SECONDS.

HERE WE GO.

OH, THANK YOU.

YOU JUST TELL ME WHAT TO SHOW WHEN I WILL.

I WANNA SEE, I WANT, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE EGRESS.

EGRESS.

SO HERE'S ELLUM, UH, FRONTAGE.

SO THERE IS NO, THERE IS NO, UM, SO MR. SHARMA, YOU TOOK THE, THE EGRESS AND INGRESS OFF OF YEAH.

OFF ELAM.

ELAM, YEAH.

AND YOU ALSO, AND SO YOU ONLY HAVE THE EGRESS AND INGRESS ON THE SERVICE ROAD.

SERVICE ROAD? YES, MA'AM.

AND YOU HAVE MOVED THE, THE EGRESS AND INGRESS DOWN SO THAT IT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE, THE CITY STANDARDS? WELL, YEAH.

WE, WE DID GET AN ORIGINAL APPROVAL WITH TDOT AS WELL AS THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.

AND GOT YOU, YOU HAVE SPOKEN WITH TDOT? YES, YES.

AND TDOT HAS APPROVED? YEAH, WE, THEY HAVE GIVEN US AN EXTENSION, UH, WHICH OKAY, SO THEY'VE GIVEN YOU AN EXTENSION.

THEY HAVE NOT APPROVED IT.

YEAH, IT'S, IT'S STILL IN EFFECT OF THE EXTENSION.

FROM, FROM PREVIOUS TIME.

OH, SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT STILL, SO TDOT IS GOING TO, IS SAYING THAT BECAUSE THAT THE EGRESS AND INGRESS IS ALREADY THERE.

THEY'RE, THERE ARE IN AGREEMENT THAT YOU GET TO CONTINUE TO USE IT.

AND THAT WOULD BE YOUR ONLY EGRESS AND INGRESS? CORRECT.

AND YOU ARE ALSO, UM, PUTTING IN EV PARKING? YES, MA'AM.

AND YOU SAID YOU SHRUNK THE BUILD THE BUILDING SO THAT IT'S 3,200 SQUARE SQUARE FEET AND YOU, IT NOW COMPLIES WITH THE PARKING? CORRECT, MA'AM.

SO YOU HAVE, YOU'VE GOT THAT EXTRA PARKING SPACE? YES, WE DID.

[05:45:01]

SO, UM, THE ONLY THING, OKAY, LET ME ASK YOU, LANDSCAPING, YOU, AT THIS POINT IN TIME, YOUR LANDSCAPING IS, YOU SAY, YOU'RE SAYING IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH, UM, THE PD PD FIVE, WAS IT PD 5 33? YEAH, THEY NEED 10 FEET IS WHAT I, WHAT I UNDERSTAND.

SO WE ARE MORE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE CITY ON WHAT WE CAN DO IN LIE OF, TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL, HOW MANY FEET OF, OF, OF LANDSCAPING DO YOU HAVE? WE HAVE, UH, EXCUSE ME, MA'AM, WE HAVE FIVE RIGHT NOW, MA'AM.

SO YOU'RE DEFICIENT OF FIVE FEET? YEAH, THAT'S ALL.

IT SAYS, YEAH, IT SAYS, IT SAYS FOUR ON THE FOUR ON THE CURRENT LAND.

UM, THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR YOU RIGHT NOW.

THANK YOU, MA'AM.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR, COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? WE'LL GO TO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER BLAIR.

UM, MR. PEPE, ONE OF THE OTHER, UH, UM, UH, BESIDES THE PARKING, THE SIZE, THE ENTRY, UM, HAVE YOU HEARD, WELL, I HAVE TO ASK THAT TO MR. NEVAREZ, BUT THE LANDSCAPE, OKAY, LET'S SEE.

UM, YOU'RE HEARING, YOU HAVE, YOU'RE HEARING THAT THEY ARE ONLY, THEY ONLY HAVE FOUR FEET OF, OF LANDSCAPING, CORRECT? YES.

THAT'S WHAT THE PLAN DEPICTS.

AND, UM, NOW ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUE, UH, OTHER CONCERNS THAT WAS, UH, UH, WAS SPOKEN OF AT THE BRIEFING WAS THE, UM, CLOSE PROXIMITY OF A GAS STATION TO THE RESIDENTIAL.

UM, IT, UH, SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE GAS STATION, THAT THE USE OF GAS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROXIMITY OF RESIDENTIAL IS TOO CLOSE FOR THIS TO BE CONSIDERED, UM, A SAFETY ISSUE? I MEASURE, I MEASURE THE DISTANCE AT 50 FEET AND, UM, IT'S NOT WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER TYPICALLY RESIDENTIALLY AJA, UH, EXCUSE ME, COMPATIBLE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL, UH, PROXIMITY.

THERE'S, THERE'S SOME INTERVENING PROPERTY, BUT IT'S, IT'S STILL 50 FEET.

UM, SO IT'S NOT A USE I WOULD CONSIDER COMPATIBLE WITH A CLOSED PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL.

SO ARE YOU, WHAT, WHAT WOULD YOU CONSIDER, UM, ACCEPTABLE PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL? ARE YOU, ARE YOU REFERRING TO A USE? NO, NO, NO.

OR NO? NO.

WHAT, HOW MANY FEET, HOW MANY FEET IS NEEDED FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED SAFE? I THINK IT DEPENDS ON THE, I THINK IT DEPENDS ON THE CONTEXT AND NO, I'M SAYING GAP FOR A FUELING STATION.

HOW MUCH SPACE DO YOU NEED FROM RESIDENTIAL FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED SAFE FOR A FUELING STATION WITH A RESIDENTIAL SITTING BEHIND IT? I WOULD, I WOULD NOT SAY THAT THERE'S A NUMBER.

AND I WOULD SAY THAT IT DEPENDS ON THE PARTICULAR CONTEXT, THE ORIENTATION OF LOTS AND THE ACCESS FROM ROADS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

BIG PICTURE THINGS.

BUT I, I, I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT.

EXCUSE ME.

I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT THERE'S A SPECIFIC NUMBER THAT I WOULD USE AS A RULE ACROSS THE BOARD IN THIS CASE THAT PROXIMITY WAS JUDGED AS INAPPROPRIATE IN, IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED AND THE, THE ENTRY.

SO I, I WASN'T I TO, TO GET TO YOUR QUESTION MORE IF YOU'RE ASKING IF, IF ONE OR IS IS APPROPRIATE OR NOT, UM, ONE IS POTENTIALLY APPROPRIATE.

SO CLOSING OFF, I'M NOT GONNA CHANGE TO PARKING, I MEAN TO EGRESS INGRESS CLOSING OFF THE ACCESS ON ELAM AND ONLY HAVING ONE ENTRY POINT.

IS THAT, UH, ACCESS, IS THAT ACCEPTABLE OR DOES IT NEED TO I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T SAY NECESSARILY THAT IT NEEDS TO, I THINK THAT FOR PURPOSES OF GOOD DESIGN, THEY SHOULD MEET THE GUIDELINES OF, UM, STREET DESIGN THAT WE HAVE ADOPTED.

UM, SO THAT WAS A REASON FOR ENCOURAGING THE MARKING OF A CLOSED ON THE NORTHERN ONE AS WELL AS THE MOVING, EXCUSE ME, THE MOVING, THE ONE ON THE EASTERN SIDE THAT WASN'T MOVED ULTIMATELY.

[05:50:02]

I, I WOULD SAY, UH, BUT WE DID RECOMMEND, WE DID RECOMMEND THAT ANY ACCESS MEET THE STREET DESIGN GUIDELINES IS MR. NAVARRE AROUND? YEAH, NO, I SENT, I SENT HIM A MESSAGE THAT WE WERE BACK ON DECK WITH THIS ONE.

I'VE SENT ANOTHER.

WE WILL CIRCLE BACK, UH, COMMISSIONERS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE? YES.

WAS THIS SITE PLAN SUBMITTED TO STAFF IN TIME FOR THE ZONING STAFF, THE ARBORIST TRANSPORTATION FOR ALL THE DIFFERENT ENGINEERING TO VET THIS PROPOSED REVISION? SO DAVID ENGINEERING HAS, HAS REVIEWED IT.

UM, I HAVEN'T HAD ABILITY TO REVIEW THIS DRAFT OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN WITH, WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE HAD THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IN THE PREVIOUS ONE.

SO THE, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IS CLOSE TO ARTICLE 10 COMPLIANCE.

IT LACKS THE PDS INCLUSION OF, SO WE, WE HAD THAT, THAT IT LACKS THE INCLUSION OF THE 10 FOOT WIDE STRIP, UM, IN THE FRONT AND THE SCREENING OF PARKING WITH THE THREE FOOT HIGH SOLID FENCE.

SO THOSE OCCURRED LANDSCAPING AND ENGINEERING REVIEW DID OCCUR.

WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? IT, IT, IT WAS A FAIRLY, YOU KNOW, EACH OF THESE CHANGES HAVE BEEN SMALL AND ITERATIVE.

SO WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO REVIEW ON THEM.

BUT THE REPORT THAT WE HAVE IN THE DOCKET SAYS THAT THE SITE PLAN DOES NOT MEET VARIOUS STANDARDS.

SO THIS PLAN, YES, I'M SORRY.

THIS PLAN IS AFTER THAT AND IT'S A, AN ITERATION FROM THAT.

DO WE HAVE CONFIRMATION THAT, THAT TDOT HAS SIGNED OFF ON THIS DRIVEWAY LOCATION LAST TIME DAVID CHECKED IN? HE DID HAVE CONFIRMATION OF THAT.

DID, DID NOT OR DID HE DID NOT HAVE CONFIRMATION OF THAT LAST TIME.

I HAVE, I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT, PLEASE.

AND, AND JUST, UH, FYI YEAH, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA BE HOLDING THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT, SO JUST YES, JUST LETTING YOU KNOW.

BEFORE WE GET INTO LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS OF QUESTIONS, WE'RE GONNA HOLD IT UNDER ADVISEMENT.

PLEASE.

SO I, I PULLED IT UP 'CAUSE I MAY, I THOUGHT MAYBE MY, MY MEMORY DIDN'T SERVE ME RIGHT.

WELL, LEMME GO AROUND THE CORNER OR SOMETHING.

UM, WHAT, WHAT RESIDENTIAL IS IN WITHIN 50 FEET OF THIS? 'CAUSE I, MAYBE I'M, 'CAUSE I SEE, I SEE A TRUCK PARKING LOT, WHICH IS, IS WAY MORE DETRIMENT, DETRIMENTAL.

I SEE A CAR LOT.

I SEE.

UM, BEHIND THE, THE TRUCK PARKING, THEY, THERE'S A CHURCH.

UM, AND, AND IT IS THIS, THIS LOT.

UM, WHERE'S THE RESIDENTIAL? 'CAUSE I CAN'T, EVERYTHING ON MEYER STREET IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND EITHER CAN BE DEVELOPED OR IS DEVELOPED WITH A, WITH A RESIDENTIAL HOME AT THAT POINT.

THE R FIVE, UM, YOU MAY ALSO SEE SOME TRUCK PARKING ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AS WELL.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT, IF YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT AERIALS, YOU MAY SEE, UH, TRUCK PARKING THAT'S ON RESIDENTIAL ZONE PROPERTY.

BUT THAT RESIDENTIAL IS ON THE MYERS STREET COURT.

MYERS COURT.

AND IT'S A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.

SO WOULDN'T IT BE MORE THAN 50 FEET? I'M TALKING ABOUT PRO I WAS TALKING PROPERTY LINE AND PROPERTY LINE.

I, I'M, I'M, I'M, SO PROPERTY LINE.

THE PROPERTY LINE.

SO IT'S 50 FEET.

I'M LOOKING AT THE, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, AND THEN MAYBE I'M CONFUSED.

I'M LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY LINE.

AND THEN BEHIND THAT PROPERTY IS A TRUCK PARKING LOT.

AND THEN BEHIND THAT TRUCK PARKING LOT IS MEYER STREET.

SO 50 FEET.

SO MAYBE I'M CONFUSED AS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 50 FEET.

MAYBE I DON'T HAVE IT.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FROM THE FIRST ENTRANCE THAT THEY'RE CLOSING OFF.

I'M CORRECT OR WE ARE, I DID PROPERTY LINE AND PROPERTY LINE IN THAT ESTIMATION.

THEY'RE CUT, WHERE THEY'RE GONNA CLOSE OFF THE, THE HAM EXIT.

SO NO, SO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE, WHERE, PRETTY MUCH WHERE

[05:55:01]

BUT WHERE THE TANKS ITSELF IS MORE THAN 50 FEET.

I JUST DID PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE IN THAT ESTIMATION.

AND THIS WAS PREVIOUS TO THE, UH, A GAS STATION.

AM I CORRECT? OWNED BY THE SAME OWNERS? THAT'S CORRECT.

COMMISSIONER BLAIR IN THE MATTER OF, UM, Z 2 2, 3 1, 1 2.

I MOVE THAT WE HOLD THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 1ST.

FEBRUARY THE FIRST.

I'LL SECOND THAT.

COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 1ST.

ANY DISCUSSION? UH, MR. SHARMER, LET'S GET THESE ITEMS IRONED OUT.

UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONER.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.

LET'S STAY IN DISTRICT EIGHT.

THAT'S IT.

AND GO.

TWO.

I ONLY HAVE, WE HAVE, UH, WELL, WE HAVE THE, UM, OH 5 7 8.

YEAH, THE ONE THAT WE HAVE TOGETHER.

[48. 24-224 An application to change the portion of Jim Miller Road between Great Trinity Forest Way and Highland Road to “Santos Rodriguez Road”]

IT'S YES.

NUMBER 48 MM-HMM.

LET'S GO TO THE STREET NAME CHANGE.

ITEM NUMBER 48 NC 2 34 0 0 1.

AND MR. IF YOU'RE DOING THE NAME CHANGE, WE'RE READY.

GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR.

ROAD ON OCTOBER 27TH, 2023.

ITEM NUMBER 48 NC 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 1.

IT IS AN APPLICATION TO CHANGE THE PORTION OF SIMILAR ROAD BETWEEN GREAT TRINITY FOREST WAY AND HIGHLAND ROAD TO SANTOS RODRIGUEZ ROAD.

THE APOP ITEM HAS BEEN ADVERTISED FOR A HEARING AT THIS TIME.

340 NOTICES WERE SENT TO, SENT TO ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS ON DECEMBER 15TH, 2023, AND WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR AND 19 REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.

NEWSPAPER NOTICE WAS PUBLISHED ON DECEMBER 17TH, 2023, AND NOTIFICATION SIGNS WERE POSTED ALONG THE SIMILAR

[06:00:01]

WAIVERS ARE NEEDED FOR 651 A DASH 9.304 A FIVE.

A STREET NAME MAY NOT CONTAIN MORE THAN 14 CHARACTERS PROVIDING, HOWEVER, THAT THE STREET TYPE DESIGNATION MAY BE ABBREVIATED TO COMPLY WITH THIS REQUIREMENT.

SIX AND 51 A DASH 9.304 B ONE A ROADWAY MUST HAVE ONLY ONE NAME AND SECTION 51 A DASH 9 3 0 4 C1.

A HISTORIC STREET NAME MAY NOT BE CHANGED.

STAFF HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST TO CHANGE THE PORTION OF JIM MILLER ROAD BETWEEN GRADE THREE, FOREST WAY AND HIGHLAND ROAD TO SANTOS RODRIGUEZ ROAD, PROVIDED THAT THE REQUIRED WAIVERS ARE GRANTED BY CITY COUNCIL SUBDIVISION REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 16TH, 2023 BY UNANIMOUS VOTE.

RECOMMENDED DENIAL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. ESTA.

UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER 48.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE NAME CHANGE SPEAKER'S IN OPPOSITION? I WE'RE, WE'RE KEEPING YOU ON YOUR TOES, YOLANDA.

WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON.

THANK Y'ALL FOR Y'ALL SERVICE.

I KNOW Y'ALL GET BEAT UP, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE THOSE ISSUES ON THE PARK BOARD.

BUT ANYWAY, EVERYONE COULDN'T COME DOWN BECAUSE IT WAS CONFLICTING.

THEY THOUGHT THAT AT THE COMMITTEE MEETING IT WAS DENIED.

SO IT WAS DONE AND WE WAS TOLD WE HAD TO COME.

SO I'M STANDING HERE REPRESENTING EVERYONE TO LET YOU ALL KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, WE SYMPATHIZE WITH WHAT TOOK PLACE.

BUT AS YOU ALL KNOW, UM, WE DO NOT WANT TO BE REMINDED OF THE HORRIFIC TRAGEDY OF MR. SANTOS RODRIGUEZ.

AND OUTTA RESPECT, MR. JIM MILLER WAS A COUNTY COMMISSIONER.

HE PAID HIS DUES TO THE COUNTY, TO THE CITY.

AND WE LIKE DRIVING DOWN.

JIM MILLER BEEN IN PLEASANT GROVE FOR 50 YEARS.

WE HAVE ENOUGH OF OUR OWN BAD NEGATIVE NEWS, WHEREAS WE DON'T WANT TO DO IT.

WHEN I SERVED ON THE PARK BOARD, I WAS ONE OF THE FIRST ONE WHO SIGNED OFF, WHICH IS NOW COUNCIL MEMBER MORENO.

HE WAS A PARK BOARD MEMBER.

THEY HAVE GIVEN HIM A PARK NAME AFTER HIM.

AND I HEAR OBLON HAVE GAVE HIM A STATUE.

YOU COULD NEVER DO ENOUGH TO REPLACE WHAT TOOK PLACE.

BUT HE HAVE NO TIES TO PLEASANT GROVE.

SO WE ASK THAT YOU ALL RESPECTFULLY AGREE WITH THE COMMITTEE AND DENY THIS REQUEST.

AND SO, UM, I'M HERE FROM THIS END OF JIM MILLER, WHERE I LIVE ALL THE WAY UP TO 30 BUCKNER TERRACE TO SAY THAT WE WILL LIKE TO KEEP JIM MILLER AS JIM MILLER.

THANK YOU ALL.

THANK YOU, MS. WILL, CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? 1 0 1 2 PANDORA AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 7.

RIGHT UP THE C ON FREEWAY WHERE I CANNOT TELL THE POLICE AND FIRE TO CONTROL THE NOISE.

SO I JUST THREW THAT IN ON THAT ISSUE.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US THERE.

ANYONE ELSE HERE BEFORE WE GO TO OUR SPEAKERS ONLINE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OKAY.

WE HAVE TWO REGISTERED SPEAKERS ONLINE.

BEGIN, UH, WITH MS. UH, PELLAND.

ARE YOU LINE, PLEASE? MAKE SURE YOUR CAMERA'S ON FOLLOWED BY MS. BRADBERRY.

HELLO.

IS YOUR, IS IS YOUR CAMERA ON MA'AM? UH, I GUESS NOT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT.

THERE SHOULD BE, IT'S A NEW COMPUTER AND I DON'T SEE WHERE I DO THAT, UH, ON THE ACTUAL WEBEX SYSTEM THERE, THERE SHOULD BE A LITTLE BUTTON SET THERE THAT LOOKS LIKE A CAMERA.

YOU MIGHT WANT TO TOGGLE THAT A COUPLE OF TIMES.

IT MIGHT SAY START VIDEO OR IT MIGHT JUST BE A CAMERA ICON.

I DON'T SEE IT.

OH WAIT, I DO SEE IT.

I CLICKED IT.

I THAT YOUR CAMERA.

[06:05:04]

OKAY, MS. POWELL, WE'LL WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU AS, UH, MS. BRADBURY, ARE YOU ONLINE? OH, WE SEE SOMEONE.

I DID IT.

IT'S A BRAND NEW COMPUTER FOR ME AND BUTTONS ARE IN DIFFERENT PLACES.

NO WORRIES.

UM, I WANT TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION, NOT BECAUSE I DON'T RESPECT, UH, MR. SAN OUR SANTOS, BUT BECAUSE IT'S NOT THE BEST THING FOR OUR AREA.

IF YOU LOOK ON OUR SITE, YOU'LL SEE THERE IS TREMENDOUS, UM, OPPOSITION AND CONCERN ABOUT THIS.

WE UNDERSTAND IT'LL COST MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO MAKE THE NAME CHANGE.

ALL THESE HOMEOWNERS AND BUSINESS OWNERS WILL HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR ADDRESSES.

UM, AND FOR ME, I LIVE JUST A BLOCK OFF JIM MILLER ROAD AND WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF THE PARKLAND OF THE GREAT TRINITY FOREST.

AND WE HAVE JUST NOMINATED THIS SECTION OF THE GREAT TRINITY FOREST TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER AS A HISTORIC SITE WITH TRADITIONAL PROPERTIES.

AND IT WOULD NOT BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF DEVELOPING ECO AND HISTORIC TOURISM, WHICH IS OUR PREFERRED ECONOMIC ENGINE OUT HERE, UH, TO HAVE THE STREET IN ANY WAY ASSOCIATED WITH ONE OF THE MOST HORRIBLE INCIDENTS OF POLICE VIOLENCE IN OUR HISTORY.

THANK YOU, MS. UH, PELLANT.

DID YOU STATE YOUR, UH, ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? YES.

IT'S 3 0 1 5 NUTTING DRIVE, DALLAS, 7 5 2 2 7.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MS. UH, BRADBERRY.

OKAY, LET ME GET OFF HERE.

, THAT'S A MAYBE A RED BUTTON WITH A X STOP VIDEO.

THERE WE GO.

BRADBURY, WE'RE READY FOR YOU.

I AM LAUREN BRADBURY OF 78 14 FORNEY ROAD.

UM, I'M A FIFTH GENERATION MEMBER OF THIS COMMUNITY WITH FAMILY, UH, MY FAMILY.

HAVING MOVED HERE IN THE 1860S, I'VE BECOME A DEVOTED RESEARCHER OF LOCAL HISTORY FOR PLEASANT MOUNDS, INE, PLEASANT GROVE, AND OTHER LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

OUR STREET NAMES ARE OUR KEY GUIDEPOSTS TO EXPLORE AND LEARN ABOUT OUR HISTORY AND OUR EVOLUTION IN THIS AREA.

AS A RESULT, RESULT OF THIS SPECIFIC PROPOSAL, I LEARNED THAT MY GRANDDAD, ARCH MCNEIL, WHO ALSO HAS A A STREET NAMED FOR HIM, WAS A PALLBEARER FOR THE ILLUSTRIOUS JIM MILLER.

JIM MILLER HAD A NOTABLE IMPACT ON THE BEAUTY AND ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF DALLAS THROUGH SEVERAL PROJECTS UNDERTAKEN DURING, DURING HIS SERVICE TO THE CITY, WHICH I DON'T HAVE TIME TO LIST, BUT I'M SURE YOU'RE AWARE.

UH, MY BOTTOM LINE IS TO SAY THAT STREETS NAMED TO HONOR PERSONS, UM, IN OUR CITY ARE MEANINGFUL NO MATTER HOW SHORT OUR SENSE OF, UM, HISTORY OR HOW SHORT OUR MEMORIES MIGHT BE.

IT'S FOR THAT REASON.

I'M SURE THAT IT'S ENSHRINED IN OUR CODE THAT SUCH STREETS SHOULD NOT BE RENAMED.

I'M ASKING TO CONTINUE TO HONOR JIM MILLER, UH, THE MAN AND OUR LOCAL HISTORY BY KEEPING OUR STREET NAME UNCHANGED.

THANK YOU, MRS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YES.

UM, THE SPEAKER THAT JUST SPOKE, MS. LAUREN, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT YEARS THAT JIM MILLER SERVED THE CITY? UM, THE COUNTY.

IT, I BELIEVE IT WAS IN THE TWENTIES, BUT I'M NOT, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE.

UM, I'VE BEEN, YEAH, DOING MOSTLY, UH, YEAH, GO AHEAD.

THAT'S OKAY.

THAT, THAT I, I BELIEVE YOU .

I'LL TAKE THAT.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE? COMMISSIONER WEER.

UM, HAS THERE ALSO BEEN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AMONGST THE, THOSE COMMUNITIES UP, UH, UP AND DOWN, JIM MILLER ALL THE WAY FROM DISTRICT, UM, FIVE ALL THE WAY TO DISTRICT EIGHT? OR HAVE YOU ALL BEEN COMMUNICATING ABOUT THIS, UH, ACROSS THE BOARD? YEAH, YOU MIGHT JUST WANT TO, WHO DO YOU WANT THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION? I MAYBE WILLIAMS IS HERE OR WE'RE GONNA MS. BRADBERRY, UM, MISS, UH, WILLIAMS. WILLIAMS , I WAS OUT ONE

[06:10:01]

FIVE TO THE LEFT.

FOR ME, IT'S EIGHT TO THE RIGHT OF ME IS SEVEN AND I'M THE PRESIDENT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION 'CAUSE THEY SPLIT US UP.

SO IT'S FIVE, SEVEN, AND EIGHT.

SO WHERE JIM MILLER IS AT, THEY'RE PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

SO THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF COMMUNICATION.

AND THE CHURCH, REVEREND WRIGHT WAS GONNA BE HERE BECAUSE HE ATTENDED THE CHURCH RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE FIRE STATION, BUT HE COULDN'T MAKE IT.

THEY, THE ONE WHO RECEIVED THE NOTIFICATION AND SOME OTHER HOMEOWNERS, THEY COULDN'T TAKE OFF.

SO THERE'S BEEN SOME COMMUNICATION AND LIKE WE SAID, WE ALL SYMPATHIZE IT, BUT WE JUST DON'T FEEL THAT THAT'S A GOOD FIT FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

QUESTIONS FOR STAFF PLEASE? COMMISSIONER TRI.

HOW ARE YOU? SO AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE THAT HEARD THIS, FIRST, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S SOME CLARIFICATIONS HERE.

'CAUSE I WAS VERY CONFUSED ABOUT THE PROCESS.

SO THE COMMISS SHEET, THE, THE SUB REVIEW COMMISSION, WE RECOMMENDED DENIAL, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

AND AT THAT MEETING THERE WAS QUITE A FEW PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP, UM, AND TALKED ABOUT THIS ISSUE.

SO I WAS UNDER THE, I DID NOT REALIZE THAT WE RECOMMENDED DENIAL, BUT THAT DIDN'T MEAN THAT THAT WAS THE END OF IT.

THAT IT DID COME FORWARD NOW TO CPC AND THAT IS CORRECT.

SO I THINK MS. WILLIAMS SPOKE TO THE FACT THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT PERHAPS THOUGHT THAT ACTION WAS TAKEN AT THE STEP BEHIND THE CPC, BUT THAT WASN'T CORRECT.

IT THIS KEEPS GOING YES.

UP TO CPC.

SO IF CPC RECOMMEND APPROVAL, IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL HEARING, BUT IF CPC RECOMMEND DENIAL UNTIL THEN, UNLESS IF WE RECEIVE ANY APPEAL FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBER, IT WON'T GO TO C CITY PLAN CITY, UH, CITY COUNCIL HEARING.

SO FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE FOLLOWING THIS CASE, IF WE DENY AT THE CBC, IT COULD STILL GET APPEALED AND GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL YES.

IF WE RECEIVE WITHIN 10 DAYS, YES.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP FOLLOWING THIS CASE.

SO, UM, I WILL ASK THE SAME QUESTION I ASKED AT THE LAST TIME.

I ALSO THINK THAT THIS IS OBVIOUSLY, UM, MY QUESTIONS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HAPPENED AND RESPECT FOR THE FAMILY.

IT REALLY HAS TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT IT APPEARS THAT THIS CHANGE WOULD REQUIRE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN ADDITIONAL COSTS.

AND IS THERE ANY FUNDING SOURCE FOR THOSE ADDITIONAL COSTS? WE HAVE NOT IDENTIFIED THE FUNDING SOURCE YET.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN ADDITIONAL COSTS BY THE CITY OF DALLAS WITHOUT A FUNDING SOURCE? THAT'S CORRECT.

AND I THINK MS. WILLIAMS MAY HAVE MENTIONED THIS, UM, EVERYONE THAT LIVES ALONG THE STRIP OF JIM MILLER WILL ALSO HAVE TO PAY OUT OF POCKET THEIR COST TO CHANGE ALL OF THEIR ADDRESSES.

WELL, NOT ALL.

I THINK MAYBE THE CITY WILL CHANGE FOR SOME CITY ADDRESSES, BUT FOR THE MOST PART, MOST OF THOSE COSTS WE BORNE INDIVIDUALLY BY THOSE BUSINESSES AND THOSE INDIVIDUALS.

REGARDING THE OFFICIAL CITY ADDRESSES, LIKE PROPERTY ADDRESSES, WE, SINCE IT WAS INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL, WE, THERE IS NO COST FOR THE ADDRESS CHAINS.

BUT REGARDING ALL OTHER COSTS, IT'S UP TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, THERE MAY BE LIKE A POLICE STATION OR A FIRE STATION ALONG THE STRIP OF JIM MILLER AND THEY WOULD ALSO HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR ADDRESS.

YEAH, WHATEVER FALLS ALL THOSE ADDRESSES, YEAH.

SO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WOULD CHANGE CHANGE AND PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO AN ADDRESS THAT IS NEW IF IT HAPPENS.

AND THEN FINALLY, TO MY RECOLLECTION FROM OUR LAST DISCUSSION, THERE'S NO CONNECTION BETWEEN SAN, BETWEEN SANTOS RODRIGUEZ AND THIS PARTICULAR STRETCH OF ROAD.

THE FAM FAMILY MEMBERS OR PEOPLE FROM OUTSIDE OF THE COMMUNITY RECOMMENDING JIM MILLER? I DO NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT WE RECEIVED THE, UH, MEMO FROM CITY COUNCIL, FROM OUR CITY MANAGER, UH, FROM THE THREE COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTING FOR THE NAME CHAINS.

DO YOU KNOW IF THERE'S BEEN ANY DISCUSSIONS TO RENAME WHERE HE DID LIVE IN HIS HONOR? NOT YET.

I'M LIKE, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY DISCUSSION.

NO DISCUSSION FROM, AND YES.

ANY, ANY OTHER FIRST ROUND IONS? COMMISSIONERS? WILL WE GO TO THE SECOND AND FINAL ROUND? OKAY.

SEEING NONE SECOND ROUND, PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER, WE LIVE YES.

MORE THAN THE MONEY SPENT IT.

WE ARE FOR SURE THERE WAS A MORE OF AN OUTCRY FROM THAT COMMUNITY.

UM, IS, IS ANYONE IN THAT COMMUNITY RECOMMENDING THE NAME CHANGE OR WERE WAS BEHIND JIM MILLER BEING NAMED THAT OR IT WAS PEOPLE,

[06:15:01]

BUT I, I DO NOT KNOW IF IT WAS INITIATED BY THE PROBLEM.

THE CITIZEN AND REQUEST WAS FORWARDED TO THE COUNCIL MEMBER.

THAT'S HOW IT GOT.

BUT, UH, OBVIOUSLY WE RECEIVED A MEMO FROM COUNCIL MEMBER AND THAT'S HOW WE PROCEED.

ARE YOU AWARE THAT, THAT, THAT THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT ON, UH, FOR HARRY HEIN AND THEY DID NOT RENAME HARRY HEIN? IT, IT IS BEEN YEARS, BUT IT WAS ATTEMPT FOR THE ACTUAL HARRY HEIN.

MAYBE I'LL GET OUTTA SCOPE.

I DON'T WANT DANIEL TO SAY NOTHING.

I'M GOOD.

YEAH, THAT, THAT, THAT THE AREA THAT HE WAS, THAT, THAT HE WAS FROM, THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT TO RENAME THAT AREA THAT THAT STREET, WHICH IS HARRY HIGH AND IT DID NOT GROW THROUGH, UH, YEARS AGO, MANY YEARS AGO.

SO FAR I DON'T, I I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION, SO I CANNOT TELL YES AND NO.

BUT, UH, YES, I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT THEY NAMED A PARK STATE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE? COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.

IN THE MATTER OF NC 2 3 4 1.

I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW SRC RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.

I'LL SECOND IT.

ANY COMMENTS PLEASE, ON THESE CASES? WE CAN'T DENY RE PREJUDICE.

OH, I KNOW.

THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION MR. MOORE.

NO.

SO THIS ARISES UNDER ARTICLE NINE AND THE DENIAL WITH OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE DISTINCTION? IT'S FOR THE ZONING ARTICLE FOUR STUFF.

SO IT'S JUST A DENIAL.

I I I FOLLOW A STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER HANEN? THANK YOU.

I THINK WE'VE HAD ROBUST DISCUSSION AND I THINK, UM, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY CAPTURED A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION THAT CAME OUT OF SRC.

THIS IS IN NO WAY, I THINK ANY INDICATION OF OUR CITY'S COMMITMENT TO HONORING SANTOS RODRIGUEZ AND THE IMPORTANCE OF US ALL REMEMBERING, UM, TRAGEDY THAT HAS HAPPENED IN OUR CITY.

BUT AS WAS ALSO OBSERVED, JIM MILLER IS PART OF A HISTORIC STREET NAME.

I THINK THE COMMUNITY'S BEEN VERY CLEAR ON THEIR DESIRE TO CONTINUE THAT NAME AND THEIR EFFORTS, UM, WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITY.

AND I DO HOPE THAT THE CONVERSATION AROUND REMAINING AND HONORING SOMETIMES RODRIGUEZ DOES CONTINUE.

AND, UH, I, UH, KUDOS TO SRC.

I ALSO WATCH THE PROCESS.

UH, I THINK IT'S A NOBLE REQUEST THAT WE HAVE HERE.

AND I'M, UH, FAIRLY CONFIDENT THAT, UH, THE, THE POWERS THAT BE THE BOSSES WILL FIND A, UH, A GREAT WAY TO HONOR THE VERY SHORT LAUGH OF MR. RODRIGUEZ.

UH, WITH THAT WE HAVE A MOTION.

A SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY, AYE.

YEAH, YOU'RE STILL MUTED.

LET'S GO TO CASE 51 BEFORE WE

[51. 24-266 Amendment to the City of Dallas Thoroughfare Plan to change the designation of Elam Road between Pemberton Hill Road and Jim Miller Road from a minor six-lane divided roadway in 100 feet of right-of-way [M-6-D(a)] to a special two-lane undivided roadway with a shared-use path on the north side of the roadway in 75 feet of right-of-way [SPCL 2U]. Staff Recommendation: Approval to amend the City of Dallas Thoroughfare Plan to change the designation of Elam Road between Pemberton Hill Road and Jim Miller Road from a minor six-lane divided roadway in 100 feet of right-of-way [M-6-D(a)] to a special two-lane undivided roadway with a shared-use path on the north side of the roadway in 75 feet of right-of-way [SPCL 2U]]

TAKE A BREAK.

LAST CASE D EIGHT COMMISSIONERS.

BEFORE I START, I JUST WANNA VERIFY YOU CAN, OH, DID I, LET ME SHARE MY SCREEN.

JUST A SECOND.

UH, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU MS. SMITH.

YOU MAY LOOK.

IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE MUTED.

MS. SMITH, WE WE CAN, UM,

[06:20:03]

MS. SMITH? NO, I, MS. SMITH, DO YOU HAVE, UH, DR.

RAS CELL NUMBER? WE CAN'T HEAR? YEAH, NOT SURE.

WE, SHE JUST, NO, WE JUST NEED TO HEAR HER.

YEAH, IF YOU DON'T NO, NO, NO.

I'LL PUT YOUR, PUT THAT ON THAT PHONE.

NO.

I THINK WE CAN HEAR YOU NOW.

YOU WANNA TRY IT AGAIN? NO, I THINK YOU MUTED YOURSELF ABOUT NOW.

YES, WE HEAR YOU NOW.

THROUGH THE PHONE OR THROUGH THE SPEAKER? THE SPEAKER.

OH, PERFECT.

OKAY, LET'S GO THERE.

LET'S TRY SHARING AGAIN.

SORRY.

I CAME DOWNSTAIRS.

I WASN'T SURE WHEN I'D BE UP.

OH, SORRY.

WRONG, WRONG BUTTON.

SO THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF DALLAS THOROUGHFARE PLAN FOR ELAM ROAD.

THIS REQUEST WAS, UM, FOR, FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO FACILITATE A SAFE ROUTE TO SCHOOL PROJECT.

THIS SECTION OF ELAM ROAD IS ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN AS A SIX LANE DIVIDED ROADWAY AND A HUNDRED FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.

THIS ROADWAY CURRENTLY EXISTS AS A TWO LANE UNDIVIDED ROADWAY IN 55 TO 106 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.

I APOLOGIZE.

UM, THE PROPOSAL IS TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION ON THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN TO A SPECIAL MR. ROADWAY.

MR. HATE TO INTERRUPT THE SHARED USE PATH ON THE NORTH SIDE ROADWAY IN 75 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY, MS. SMITH.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THIS SECTION OF EAM ROAD RESULTED FROM A 2020 NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT, MS. MS ROUTES TO SCHOOL CALL MS. SMITH THAT WAS AWARDED TO THE CITY OF DALLAS IN SEPTEMBER, 2020.

THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED WITH A SUPPORT LETTER.

I'M JUST GONNA BRIEF IT ON REQUEST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION STATING THAT THEY SUPPORTED THE APPLICATION AND SUPPORTED THE PRO PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS.

THIS PROJECT IS ALSO IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SEPTEMBER, 2017 PEMBERTON HILL STRATEGIC NEIGHBORHOOD ACTION PLAN.

THAT YES.

HOW ABOUT I COME UPSTAIRS? , DO YOU GUYS WANT ME TO COME BACK UPSTAIRS? YOU WANNA TAKE A LITTLE BREAK AND I'LL COME, I'LL BE RIGHT THERE.

WE WE'RE ACTUALLY JUST GONNA HAVE YOU HERE FOR QUESTIONS BECAUSE WE'RE JUST GONNA BRIEF ON REQUEST AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.

UH, BUT I IT'S HOT.

CAN YOU SHAKE YOUR HEAD IF YOU CAN HEAR ME? YOU CAN.

YES, WE CAN.

BUT YOU, YOU CAN'T HEAR US? OKAY THEN I'M GONNA KEEP ON GOING.

NO, NO, I CAN'T KEEP ON GOING.

NO.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? THEY WANNA, YES, WE CAN HEAR COMM WE CAN HEAR YOU BOTH APPARENTLY.

MS. SMITH CANNOT HEAR US.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? COMMISSIONER HAWK? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU JUST FINE AND I CAN HEAR HER.

THANK YOU SO MUCH MS. WILLIAMS, PLEASE.

I CAN'T HEAR, BUT WHO'S ON FIRST? ? I CAN'T COMMISSIONERS.

DOES ANYONE NEED TO SIGN A BRIEF? IT'S BEEN READ INTO THE RECORD.

DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? DO WE HAVE A SPEAKER? YES, PLEASE.

I, UH, SHE DID READ HIM THE RECORD.

YEAH, YOU DON'T NEED TO BE BRIEF.

SETH WAS OUR, AND THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF DALLAS, THOROUGH FAIR PLAN TO CHANGE THE DE DESIGNATION OF ELAM ROAD BETWEEN PEMBERTON HILL AND JIM MILLER.

I THINK SHE'S JUST READING IT INTO THE RECORD.

MINOR SIX LANE DIVIDED ROADWAY AND A HUNDRED FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY TO A SPECIAL TWO LANE UNDIVIDED ROADWAY WITH SHARED USE PATH ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROADWAY.

AND 75 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CITY PLAN COMMISSION THROUGH A FAIR COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.

[06:25:01]

OKAY, FIRST I WANNA THANK SETH BECAUSE IN 2017 THAT'S WHEN WE STARTED THE PEMBERTON TRINITY FOREST NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, RICKY CALLAHAN.

AND WE WERE LIKE THE FORGOTTEN CITY TO BE HONEST.

NO ONE WANTED TO TAKE US ON BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT WE WERE SO ROUGH, BUT SELF HUNG WITH US.

AND IF YOU ALL DRIVE DOWN PEMBERTON HILL AND ELAM, YOU WILL SEE HOW BEAUTIFUL IT IS OVER THERE.

SO I'M GLAD I WAS HERE AND I STAYED FOR THIS.

NOW I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW PLANNING DEGREE.

WHEN THEY SAY SIX LANE, ARE THEY SAYING IT'S SIX LANE ON PEMBERTON HILL? BECAUSE IT'S ONLY TWO LANES AND I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHAT WE VOTED AND AGREED ON.

'CAUSE I HAVE THE BOOK IN MY CAR 'CAUSE I TRAVEL WITH IT ALL THE TIME.

SO WHEN I JUST, 'CAUSE IT'S NOT SIX LANES.

ARE WE TRYING TO TAKE, SAY WE'RE GONNA TURN SIX LANES INTO TWO LANES BECAUSE IT'S ONLY TWO LANES GOING BOTH WAY DOWN ELAM AND PEMBERTON HILL.

UNFORTUNATELY THE INFORMATION, THE WAY IT WORKS IS WE'RE HERE TO TAKE, OKAY.

SO I'LL THE COMMENTS, COMMENTS YOU HAVE ON THIS AND WELL, Y'S NOT GONNA WITH YOU.

I'M ALMOST, I ALMOST GOT IT OUT.

STAFF IS HAPPY TO GET WITH YOU AFTER.

BUT NOW, BUT Y'ALL ARE NOT GONNA APPROVE THIS TODAY, RIGHT? WE ARE VOTING ON IT TODAY.

BECAUSE THIS IS NOT WHAT WE, THIS IS NOT IN THE PLAN AND WHAT WE AGREED ON, I KNOW IT CHANGED.

SO I WISH YOU ALL WOULD COME BACK AND LET SELF GET BACK WITH THE COMMUNITY.

'CAUSE THIS IS NOT, I REMEMBER EVERYTHING I WAS PART OF, THIS IS NOT WHAT WE AGREED ON AND I THINK IT'S GONNA BE SOME ANGRY NEIGHBORS LIKE, UH, FATHER HILL IF Y'ALL GONNA BE ENCROACHING ON SOME OF THEIR PROPERTIES.

SO THIS IS NOT WHAT WE AGREED ON.

SO I ASK THAT SINCE YOU REPRESENT DISTRICT FIVE, MR. TONY SHADI, THAT YOU TAKE THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT AND MS. BLAIR REPRESENT EIGHT TO THE LEFT OF ME.

AND THEN WE HAVE MS. WHEELER SEVEN, WHICH IS PART OF SEE HOW WE ALL TOGETHER ON PEMBERTON HILL, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THIS IS WHAT WE AGREED ON.

AND WE JUST WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK BEFORE Y'ALL START MAKING MAJOR CHANGES IN OUR COMMUNITY.

ELAM, LET'S SAY ELAM AND PEMBERTON HILL, PATIENT OF ELAM ROAD BETWEEN PEMBERTON HILL AND JIM MILLER ROAD FROM A MINOR SIX LANE DIVIDED ROADWAY AND 100 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY TO A SPECIAL TWO LANE UNDIVIDED ROAD WITH A SHARED USE PATH ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROADWAY.

IN 75 FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY.

THIS IS E PEMBERTON HILL.

IT'S IN BETWEEN TWO.

YEAH, IN BETWEEN THE TWO.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

SO IT'S GONNA AFFECT THE COMMUNITY WAY.

IT IS NOT A SIX LANE.

THEY TAKE IT IS A TWO LANE.

WE ALREADY HAVE A TWO LANE.

SO IT'S NOT ACCURATE.

IT'S NEVER BEEN A SIX LANE, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A TWO LANE.

THIS IS NOT ACCURATE.

I'M SORRY Y'ALL, I'VE ONLY BEEN LIVING THERE.

THANK YOU FOR 65 YEARS.

SO IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A TWO LANE.

SO WE DON'T HAVE A SIX LANE, SO I ASK YOU ALL TO NOT APPROVE.

THIS IS OKAY.

TELL ME.

OKAY? OKAY.

DO WHAT YOU WANNA DO.

THANK YOU'ALL.

I I HAVE A DEGREE IN, UH, MASTER'S DEGREE IN MARKETING.

I PLANNING THAT DESIGN.

I'M YOU SORRY.

OKAY, KEEP IT THERE.

THANK, THANK YOU MR. BOWEN.

COMMISSIONER, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? SEE NONE.

COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES IN THE MATTER OF, UM, WHAT IS THAT? UM, 2 4 2 6 6.

I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AND WHAT DID, WHO ELSE IS EXPECT TO APPROVE? THIS WAS, THAT'S IT.

THAT'S IT.

HAPPY TO SECOND THAT.

UH, COMMENTS.

THE, THE DOCKET BACK IN ORDER, THE ORDER WE LEFT, UH, WHICH TAKES US

AND THE OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES.

IT IS 4 0 2.

LET'S TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK.

COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET BACK ON ON THE RECORD.

2 3 4 5 6 7 8.

WE DO HAVE EIGHT COMMISSIONERS COM.

IT IS 4:15 PM COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE TAKE YOUR SEATS.

COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON THE RECORD.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE, UH, HEADING BACK INTO

[6. 24-228 An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 2415 for a motor vehicle fueling station on property zoned an NS(A) Neighborhood Service District, on the southeast corner of Cedar Crest Boulevard and East Kiest Boulevard. Staff Recommendation: Approval, for a five-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional five-year periods, subject to amended conditions.]

[06:30:01]

TO CASE NUMBER SIX Z 2 23 1 63 AND MS. MUNOZ OR SOMEONE CAN PLEASE READ THAT INTO THE RECORD.

ITEM SIX, CASE C 2 23 1 63.

AND APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 24 15 FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION ON PROPERTY ZONED AT NSA NEIGHBORHOOD SURFACE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CEDAR CREST BOULEVARD IN EAST EAST BOULEVARD.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, ER, RUBIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YES, IN THE MATTER OF 2 2 2 C 2 3 1 6 3, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH.

WE GO TO CASE NUMBER EIGHT.

THANK YOU VICE CHAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.

AND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND.

AND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AND OPPOSED AYE HAVE IT.

COMMISSIONER,

[8. 23-240 An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 2325 for analcoholic beverage establishment limited to a microbrewery,microdistillery, or winery on property zoned Subarea A within PlannedDevelopment District No. 741, on the northeast corner of OlympusBoulevard and Wharf Road.Staff Recommendation: Approval, for a five-year period with eligibility forautomatic renewal for additional five-year periods, subject to amendedconditions. (Part 2 of 2)]

YES SIR, WE CAN.

EXCELLENT.

THANK YOU COMMISSION.

UH, BEAR WITH ME AS I READ THIS IN, UH, ITEM EIGHT, CASE Z 2 23 DASH TWO 15.

UH, AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2325, UH, FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO MICROBREWERY, MICRO DISTILLERY OR WINERY ON PROPERTY ZONE SUB AREA A WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 7 4 1 ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLYMPUS BOULEVARD AND WAR ROAD STAFF'S.

RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS, SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED SITE PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.

THANK YOU MR. ROBERTS.

I SEE THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

ROB BALDWIN.

3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B.

UM, IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN UP TO CYPRESS WATERS AND INTO THE THE SOUND, YOU SHOULD REALLY SHOULD GO DO IT.

THIS, THIS WINERY IS GREAT.

IT'S, IT HAS A DECK OVERLOOKING THE WATER.

UH, WE'RE EXPANDING IT.

WE'RE RENEWING THE, THE SUP.

EVERYBODY LOVES THIS, UH, OUT THERE.

IT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL.

I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS.

I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMERS, QUESTIONS FOR MR. BALDWIN.

QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF CASES Z 2 2 3 DASH TWO 15, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS, SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED SITE PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.

RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.

COMMISSIONER COMP FOR YOUR MOTION.

COMMISSIONER FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES NUMBER

[9. 24-231 An application for an MF-2(A) Multifamily District on property zoned an R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the southeast corner of West Kiest Boulevard and Guadalupe Avenue]

NINE I.

ITEM NINE IS Z 2 2 3 207.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED AT R SEVEN FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF WEST KEYS BOULEVARD AND WALLO BAY AVENUE SET.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. PEP.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS ITEM NUMBER NINE Z 2 2 3 2 17.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YES, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3, 2 1.

I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL, UH, THE SECOND MEETING OF FEBRUARY, WHICH IS FEBRUARY 15TH.

15TH.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR MOTION AND COMMISSIONER HOUSE RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY COMMENTS? AND NONE.

THAT WHAT YOU MIGHT HAVE .

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES NUMBER

10.

ITEM NUMBER 10 IS Z 2 2 3 2 4 8.

AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 14 64 4.

REFUSE TRANSFER STATION AND PROPERTY ZONED.

IM IN DISTRICT MANUFACTURING DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF CALIFORNIA CROSSING ROAD EAST OF WILDWOOD DRIVE.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR AN ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO AN AMENDMENT, SITE PLAN, AND AMENDMENTS, LANDSCAPING PLAN, AND AMENDED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. GARZA.

I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

GOOD AFTERNOON SIR.

[06:35:19]

I YOU'RE FINE.

I NEED TO DO THAT AGAIN.

NO YOU DON'T.

MAYBE JUST, JUST YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

THAT'S ALL.

KEVIN YARD, UH, SCS ENGINEERS REPRESENTING COMMUNITY WASTE DISPOSAL 1901 CENTRAL DRIVE, SUITE FIVE 50, BEDFORD, TEXAS 7 6 0 2 1.

ITEM NUMBER 12, ITEM 12 KC 2 23 DASH 2 82.

UH, WE DID GET RECEIVE YOUR COMMENTS.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. YARD? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF CASE Z 2 23 DASH 2 48 I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL TENURE PERIODS SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED SITE PLAN AND AMENDED LANDSCAPE PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION.

COMMISSIONER HOUSE DRIVE FOR YOUR SECOND.

UH, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

[12. 24-234 An application for an MU-1 Mixed Use District on property zoned a CRCommunity Retail District, on the west corner of South Lancaster Roadand Marfa Avenue]

AN APPLICATION FOR AN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES OWNED A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON THE WEST CORNER OF SOUTH LANCASTER ROAD AND MARFA AVENUE SAS RECOMMENDATION AS APPROVAL.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 12 Z 2 2 3 2 82.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER RUBEN, DO YOU HAVE MOTIONS, SIR? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 2 8 2, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP A PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH.

COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RUBIN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER THAT HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT TO FEBRUARY 15TH.

ITEM NUMBER 24 DASH 2 35.

THE OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES.

NUMBER 13,

[13. 24-235 An application for a Specific Use Permit for a bank or savings and loan office with a drive-through on property zoned a GR General Retail Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 193, the Oak Lawn Special Purpose District, on the southwest corner of Oak Lawn Avenue and Avondale Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Approval, for a ten-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional ten-year periods, subject to a site plan and conditions. (Part 2 of 2)]

AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A BANK OR SAVINGS AND LOAN OFFICE WITH A DRIVE THROUGH ON PROPERTY ZONE GR, GENERAL RETAIL SUB-DISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 1 93, THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OAK OAKLAND AVENUE.

THEY HAVE RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. BRIDGES.

UM, WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER 13 Z 2 2 3 2 97 THE APPLICANT.

GOOD AFTERNOON SIR.

I'M NOT SURE THAT'S ON IS IT? SORRY.

AND WHAT, WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO REPEAT PLEASE? JUST YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, SIR.

JIM GALL.

UH, MY ADDRESS IS 3 8 7 5 REGENT DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 2 9.

THIS IS AN EXISTING BUILDING.

IT WAS BUILT ORIGINALLY FOR A BANK.

IT IS COMPLETE WITH TYPICAL BANK FACILITY WITH DRIVE-THROUGHS IN THE BACK.

UH, AT, AT THE TIME THEY WENT FOR AN SUP FOR ONLY FOR USING A DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW SERVICE.

TO OUR UNDERSTANDING DRIVE-THROUGHS WERE ACCEPTABLE FOR REMOTE UNITS OR ATM UNITS.

AND SO THAT EXPIRED 10 YEARS AFTER IT WAS ORIGINALLY GIVEN AND I THINK THE CURRENT TENANT HAD NO IDEA THEY HAD TO RENEW IT SO THEY DIDN'T.

SO OUR TENANT HAS TAKEN OVER THE BUILDING, UH, IN A LEASE ARRANGEMENT.

THEY HAVE REMODELED THE INTERIOR.

THE CURRENT WINDOW IS SEALED WITH FILM SO IT CANNOT BE USED.

AND SO WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR THAT OPTION TO GET BACK TO A USE THROUGH THIS SUP TO ALLOW US TO USE THE DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW.

AND IF APPROVED, ALL WE WILL BE DOING IS REMOVING THE FILM OFF THE GLASS.

THIS WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE, THE TIME PERIOD WILL BE FOR SEVEN YEARS INSTEAD OF 10 AND IT WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR MR. GAAL.

QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO THANK YOU.

IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH 2 97, UM, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE

[06:40:01]

AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I HAVE COMMENTS.

DO YOU HAVE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? OH, WITH SITE PLAN AND CONDITION? MM-HMM.

YEAH, I'M NOT SURE THAT ANYBODY, PERHAPS OTHER THAN COMMISSIONER HAMPTON IS AWARE OF THIS, BUT THE OAK LAWN COMMITTEE, WHICH IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, SORT OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE OVER PD 1 93 HAS FORMED A SUBCOMMITTEE TO STUDY LEMON AVENUE AND MAKE, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HOW THE COMMITTEE, THE COMMUNITY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF OAKLAWN AVENUE.

AND SO WHILE I THINK THAT TODAY THIS IS A DRIVE-THROUGH BANK THAT ALREADY EXISTS, UM, AND HAVING THAT BANK CONTINUE TO EXIST IS NOT A MATERIAL CHANGE FROM THE CONDITION TODAY.

I HAVE A LOT OF, UM, SUSPICION THAT THE COMMUNITY'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OAK, I MEAN SORRY, LEMON AVENUE ARE GONNA CHANGE WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS.

AND SO I WANNA GIVE THE CITY THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVISIT THIS IN LIGHT OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS DOWN THE ROAD.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.

COMMISSIONER RUBEN? YEAH, I'M NOT GONNA SUPPORT THE, THE MOTIONS TODAY.

I SHARE SOME OF, UM, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S SENTIMENTS ABOUT THIS DRIVE-THROUGH, BUT I THINK THAT THIS AREA IS, YOU KNOW, SUFFICIENTLY WALKABLE AT THE MOMENT THAT I DON'T SEE A DRIVE-THROUGH HERE MEETING THE SUP REQUIREMENT.

SO I WILL BE, UM, NOT SUPPORTING THE MOTION COMMISSIONER.

THAT'S RIGHT.

I COULD ASK COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR A CLARIFICATION.

YOU REFERRED TO LEMON AVENUE AND OAKLAWN AND I'M NOT SURE WHICH.

SO THE PROPERTY OR THE, THE APPLICANT HERE IS THE PROPERTY IS ON OAKLAWN, NOT LEMON.

IT IS, BUT IT'S VERY CLOSE TO LEMON.

AND SO I THINK THAT IT'S THE SCOPE OF WHAT THIS OAK LAWN COMMITTEE REVIEW DOES, I THINK IS GOING TO TAKE IN KEY INTERSECTIONS NEAR LEMON AS WELL.

SO, AND THIS WOULD BE ONE OF THOSE INTERSECTIONS.

I APOLOGIZE IF I DIDN'T MAKE THAT CLEAR.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION LETTER.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON SECOND, NOT COMMISSIONER TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FILE TO HAVE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BEFORE A SEVEN YEAR PERIOD.

NO AUTOMATIC RENEWAL SUBJECT TO SIDE PLANNING CONDITIONS.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? YES.

NO AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.

UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? NO.

MOTION PASSES.

ONE IN OPPOSITION CASE NUMBER

[14. 24-236 An application for an MU-2 Mixed Use District on property zoned an RR Regional Retail District, on the west line of Upton Street, between East Clarendon Drive and Viola Street.]

14.

THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 14 Z 2 2 3 2 9 9.

AN APPLICATION FOR AN MU TWO MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN RR REGIONAL RAIL DISTRICT ON THE WEST LINE OF UPTON STREET BETWEEN EAST CLAREDON DRIVE AND VIOLA STREET.

UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. CLINTON.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? STAND NONE.

COMMISSIONER DO HAVE MOTION? YES, THE MATTER 2 2 3 DASH 2 99 I MOVE TO BE KEEPING PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND, UH, HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY THE 15TH.

UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT MADE BY VICE CHAIR REIN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE.

APPROVE OPPOSED.

MOTION CARRIES NUMBER 15, ITEM 15

[15. 24-237 An application for a TH-3(A) Townhouse District on property zoned an R-5(A) Single Family District, on the north line of Hendricks Avenue, east of South Denley Drive.]

IS CASE Z 2 23 DASH 300.

AN APPLICATION FOR A TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE AT R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF HENDRICKS AVENUE EAST OF SOUTH BENLEY DRIVE.

COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE ONE COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? IT SAYS NUMBER 15,

[06:45:03]

YES, MR. BATE, I WAS OUT AT THIS LOCATION YESTERDAY.

ARE YOU AWARE THAT IT'S NOT, THERE'S NOT A ZONING PLACARD CURRENTLY PAY POSTED? I WASN'T AWARE OF IT AT THE MOST RECENT TIME, BUT THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE RATHER, HAS INDICATED THAT THEY HAVE HAD SEVERAL ISSUES WITH KEEPING THE SIGN POSTED.

I THEY HAVE SENT A PHOTO OF IT IN THE PAST, BUT THAT THEY HAVE HAD ISSUES WITH IT EITHER DISAPPEARING OR OTHERWISE BEING ABSCONDED WITH.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

COMMISSIONER HALL.

UM, THIS IS TO BUILD TWO TOWN HOMES ON, ON THE 5,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT.

SO THE POINT OF CLARIFICATION, I BELIEVE THE LOT IS ABOUT 7,200 SQUARE FEET, UM, IN SIZE, UH, WHAT THEY INTEND TO BUILD.

I BELIEVE IT, IT SHOULD HAVE SAID, I THINK A DUPLEX WOULD BE MORE ACCURATE IN TERMS OF UH, UH, THE USE REGULATIONS THAT WE HAVE.

UH, THAT'S REALLY ALL, IT COULD BE ALLOWED EITHER THAT OR A SINGLE FAMILY ON THAT LOT.

UM, A DUPLEX RATHER THAN WHY DIDN'T THEY REQUEST DUPLEX ZONING? THE DUPLEX ZONING.

WE ACTUALLY, I DID LOOK AT THAT DURING MY ANALYSIS AS WE WERE ALSO LOOKING INTO A QUESTION ABOUT THE LOT SIZE.

UH, THE REASON I THINK THAT THEY WENT WITH THE TOWNHOUSE ZONING IS THAT IT WOULD BE, I THINK, LESS ONEROUS ON THE OTHER SURROUNDING LOTS ON THAT BLOCK.

SO WITH THE DUPLEX ZONING, THE MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK, I BELIEVE IS 25 FEET, WHEREAS THE R FIVE A IS 20 FEET.

SO BECAUSE OF BLOCK BASED CONTINUITY REQUIREMENTS, THAT WOULD IN EFFECT REQUIRE ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ON THAT BLOCK BASE TO PUSH BACK MORE WITH THE TH THREE DISTRICT.

WHILE IT DOES ON ITS FACE LOOK LIKE IT HAS A LOT MORE PERMISSION IN TERMS OF YARD LOT SIZE REGULATIONS, IT ENDS UP BEING TAILORED IN QUITE A BIT WITH THE BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY REQUIREMENTS ON THE FRONT YARD SETBACK.

AND THEN THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS ON SIDE YARDS IF YOU HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, IF IT'S ADJACENT TO SINGLE FAMILY.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, HAVE THERE BEEN ANY TYPE OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS SURROUNDING, UM, THIS PARTICULAR, UM, ZONING? BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THAT AREA IS HAVING SOME ISSUES WITH THE TYPE OF HOUSING THAT'S GOING IN TO THAT AREA AND IF I'M MISTAKEN, THE TYPE OF DUPLEXES BEING BUILT IS ONE OF THOSE ISSUES? CERTAINLY I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY COMMUNITY MEETINGS THAT HAVE BEEN HELD.

THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE RATHER, HAS MADE AN EFFORT TO REACH OUT, BUT UNDERSTANDING UNDERSTANDABLY WOULD THE ABSENCE OF THE DISTRICT FOUR COMMISSIONER, IT'S BEEN A BIT TOUGH TO COORDINATE THAT, BUT THEY HAVE REACHED OUT AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE OPEN TO CERTAINLY WORKING WITH WHOEVER ENDS UP IN THE SEAT.

COMMISSIONER RUBEN.

MR. MR. BADER, ARE YOU AWARE WHETHER THIS CASE WILL BE HELD UNTIL WE GET A, HOPEFULLY GET A D FOR COMMISSIONER SOON? I AM AWARE, YES.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER? SEEING NONE.

WE HAVE A MOTION.

COMMISSIONER RUBIN? YES, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 300.

I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL THE 15TH OF FEBRUARY? YES SIR.

THANK, THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER RUBIN FOR YOUR MOTION.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND.

[16. 24-238 An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 2278 for an extended hours historic house museum and meeting space and fundraising on property zoned Area G within Planned Development District No. 63, the Swiss Avenue Historic District, with H/1 Swiss Avenue Historic District Overlay, on the east corner of Swiss Avenue and Parkmont Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval, for a three-year period, subject to amended conditions.]

THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 16.

2 2 3 3 0 3.

AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2 2 7 8 FOR AN EXTENDED HOURS HISTORIC HOUSE, MUSEUM AND MEETING SPACE AND FUNDRAISING ON PROPERTY ZONE AREA G WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 63, THE SWISS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT WITH H ONE SWISS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY ON THE EAST CORNER OF SWISS AVENUE AND PARK MO STREET STAFF.

RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS.

I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

ROB BALDWIN 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B.

UH, I WAS HERE AT THE BRIEFING AND UNDERSTAND AND SPOKE WITH COMMISSIONER, UH, KINGSTON AND UNDERSTAND IT'S GONNA BE HELD.

SO I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH MY WHOLE PRESENTATION.

I'M GONNA HEAR BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, BUT WE DO HAVE OTHER PEOPLE, UH, WHO MAY WANNA SPEAK AND SUPPORT.

SO, UM, I'M GONNA SEAT THE FLOOR.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES, SIR.

GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.

LARRY.

OFFICE 6 0 3 8, EXCUSE ME, BRIAN PARKWAY, DALLAS, 7 5 2 0 6.

UM, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE ALDRIDGE HOUSE MUSEUM, UM, IT IS ONE OF ANY OF YOU WHO LIVE IN NEIGHBORHOODS AND HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

UH, THE ALDRIDGE HOUSE

[06:50:01]

AUTHORED THE VERY FIRST PART OF DALLAS NEIGHBORHOODS AND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS TO BEGIN TO FORM AND HAVE CONTINUED TO SUPPORT THE CITY AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ONGOING.

UM, WE HAVE OUR, WE HAVE A HISTORIC DISTRICT ASSOCIATION, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

UH, WE HAVE OUR ANNUAL, UH, WELCOME NEW NEIGHBOR AND RESIDENCE, UM, BARBECUE PICNIC DINNER LUNCHEON THERE.

UM, THE HOME TOUR, WHICH, UM, I THINK WE JUST CELEBRATED OUR 40TH OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

ALDER J HAS ALWAYS BEEN OPEN AND SUPPORTED, UH, OUR HOME TOUR.

UM, THIS YEAR WE ALSO PARTICIPATED IN THE JUNIOR HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT HOME TOUR.

UM, AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T REALIZE THAT SWISS AVENUE MEDIAN IS ACTUALLY A CITY PARK.

SO FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES, SWISS AVENUE IS A CITY PARK AND ALDRIDGE HOUSE CONTRIBUTES TO, UH, ALL OF THE CITIZENS OF DALLAS.

AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR LONG SERVICE.

HOPEFULLY NOT TOO LONG TONIGHT.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MELANIE VANLANDINGHAM, 63 11 LAKE SHORE DRIVE, UH, DISTRICT 14 7 5 2 1 4.

I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRIENDS OF ALDRICH HOUSE.

WE ARE A COMMUNITY NONPROFIT, PARTNERING VERY CLOSELY WITH THE ALDRICH HOUSE MUSEUM.

THE SUP FUNDRAISING IS ESSENTIAL TO FUND OUR TOURS AWARD-WINNING MUSEUM PROGRAMS, BENEFITS AND EXHIBITS FOR THE PUBLIC, AND TO FUND PRESERVATION OF THIS HISTORIC LANDMARK AND MUSEUM.

THE SOP ALLOWED HOURS AFTER 5:00 PM ALLOW US TO OFFER ALL OF THESE PROGRAMS TO WORKING MOMS, DADS, STUDENTS, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND ALL OTHER NON-PROFITS LIKE THE SWISS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT, MANY WHO ARE VERY STRONG SUPPORTERS AND MEMBERS OF THE MUSEUM.

FUNDRAISING AND AFTER 5:00 PM HOURS PROVIDED BY THIS SUP ARE BASIC, BENIGN AND ESSENTIAL TO EVERYONE WE SERVE IN THE COMMUNITY.

AND YOU THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

NEXT SPEAKER.

YES SIR.

COMMENTS? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU, SIR.

UH, NEXT SPEAKER.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.

COMMISSIONER ? I DO IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 DASH 3 0 3, I MOVE THAT WE, UM, KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT TO, I WOULD DO FEBRUARY 15TH, BUT IF THAT'S FULL, YOU CAN MOVE IT TO THE NEXT ONE.

THANK YOU YOUR HONOR.

I'M SORRY, MR. CHAIR.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, WHAT'S THE DATE THAT WE'RE HOLDING IT TO? FEBRUARY 15.

SECOND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.

SECOND ON THE MOTION COMMENTS.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON?

[06:55:01]

I DO, I RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY THE SAME AMOUNT OF POSITIVE FEEDBACK AS I DID NEGATIVE FEEDBACK IN THIS CASE.

AND FRANKLY, THE NEGATIVE FEEDBACK IS ENTIRELY COMING FROM THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE NEXT DOOR OR TWO DOORS DOWN OR THREE DOORS DOWN FROM THIS FACILITY.

I HAVE 90% OF THE BALLOTS IN OPPOSITION AND ONLY TWO BALLOTS WERE RETURNED IN FAVOR.

AND ONE OF 'EM IS THE APPLICANT FOR THE ENTIRE NOTIFICATION PERIOD, UM, AREA THAT MEANS I'VE GOT 56% OPPOSITION, WHICH WOULD TRIGGER SUPER MAJORITY VOTE AT THIS BODY.

AND SO I HAD HOPED, AND I KNOW THE HISTORY OF THIS PROPERTY WELL, I KNOW ALL ABOUT THE APPLICANT'S AGENTS USING FORGED SIGNATURES OF THE NEIGHBORS AND ASKING THAT'S OKAY.

ASKING THE COUNCIL PERSON AT THE TIME TO, UM, HAVE THE POLICE STOP INVESTIGATING THAT.

I KNOW THAT THE NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE AROUND THERE ARE DISTRUSTFUL OF THE ORGANIZATION AND I SUPPOSE I WOULD BE TOO IF THEY USE MY NAME ON LEGAL DOCUMENTS WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT.

SO THERE'S CLEARLY SOMETHING THAT'S STILL VERY WRONG IN THIS COMMUNITY ABOUT THIS PROPERTY AND I'M ASKING TO HOLD IT BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO TAKE A TRY AT SEEING IF WE CAN'T COME TO SOME BETTER ACCORD BETWEEN THE SIDES.

UM, OTHERWISE ORDINARILY 90% OPPOSITION IN THE NOTIFICATION AREA IS VERY CLEAR, VERY CLEAR MESSAGE.

SO I HOPE THAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WILL SUPPORT ME IN GIVING ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE IF I CAN'T MAKE SOME INROADS ON THAT.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER KINGSON.

JUST, JUST ONE QUICK POINT CLARIFICATION.

WE, WE DON'T HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY HERE.

IT'S TRIGGERED AT COUNCIL, BUT NOT HERE, HERE.

WE'RE JUST STRICT MAJORITY ON THAT ONE.

YEAH, I, YEAH.

POINT TAKEN, BUT JUST HERE AND REGULAR, UH, MAJORITY.

I DID SUPPORT THE EXTENSION.

I DO HOPE THAT THERE CAN BE A CONVERSATION AND BETTER RESOLUTION FOR THIS.

IT IS SOMETHING THAT, UM, HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE A GREAT ASSET FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I THINK WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE STAFF THAT THERE HAVE BEEN NO VIOLATIONS THAT I'M AWARE OF.

I AM IN CLOSE PROXIMITY, SO I'M VERY WELL AWARE OF THE OPERATIONS THAT GO ON THERE AND, YOU KNOW, I JUST, I I APPLAUD THE EFFORT TO TRY TO BRING CONSENSUS FOR THAT.

SO THANK YOU AND I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING THIS ON THE 15TH.

SURE, THAT'S RIGHT.

UM, I CAN'T SUPPORT A MOTION TO HOLD THIS WHEN I DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON THE OPPOSITION.

I HAVE SOME XS ON A MAP, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANYONE COMING DOWN TELLING ME WHY THEY OPPOSE IT.

I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING WRITTEN IN WRITING ABOUT WHY IT'S OPPOSED, UH, I THINK THIS IS A FINE ORGANIZATION DOING FINE WORK AS FAR AS I KNOW, I'M, I'M WILLING.

UH, I GENERALLY, UH, ASSUME THE BEST OF PEOPLE, UM, AND UNTIL TOLD OTHERWISE.

UM, WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS CASE IN PREPARATION FOR TODAY, AND I SAW A, YOU KNOW, PROPOSAL FOR A THREE YEAR RENEWAL WITH NO AUTOMATICS, AND I COMPARE IT TO SOME CASES THAT, UM, HAVE FIVE YEAR RENEWALS WITH AUTOMATICS THAT HAVE CRIME REPORTS AS LONG AS YOU'RE ARMED.

AND, UH, UH, WE JUST GAVE 10 YEARS TO A WASTE DISPOSAL CASE AND WE ARE THEN, UH, WE ARE NOW TELLING THE ALDRIDGE HOUSE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T GIVE THEM THREE YEARS AND, AND NO AUTOMATIC.

SO I, I JUST THINK IT'S, UM, SO IT'S A LITTLE, UH, LITTLE LITTLE HEAVY HANDED.

TO BE CLEAR, I ASKED TO HOLD IT.

OKAY, I UNDERSTAND.

BUT WE ALSO HAVE THE OPTION TO APPROVE IT TODAY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

BUT WE HAVE A MOTION TO HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH, KEEPING THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

CASE 17, THIS IS ITEM 17 Z 2 2 3 3 0 8.

OPPOSED TO AN OPPOSITION, UH, HOUSE, WRIGHT, AND HALL, IS THAT JUST TWO? MOTION CARRIES

[17. 24-239 An application for a Specific Use Permit for a child-care facility on property zoned Tract 2H within Planned Development District No. 388, the Tenth Street Neighborhood Historic District, with H/60 Tenth Street Neighborhood Historic District Overlay, on the northeast corner of South Fleming Avenue and East Clarendon Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval, for a five-year period with eligibility for automatic renewal for additional five-year periods, subject to a site plan and conditions.]

AND APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A CHILDCARE FACILITY ON PROPERTY ZONE TRACK TWO H WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 3 8 8.

THE 10TH STREET NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT WITH H

[07:00:01]

60 10TH STREET NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTH FLEMING AVENUE AND EAST CLARATON DRIVE.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? ITEM NUMBER 17 Z 2 2 3 3 8.

COMMISSIONER, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER RUBIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YEAH, I DO.

IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 3 0 8, I MOVE THE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL, UM, FEBRUARY 15TH.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ROOM FOR YOUR MOTION.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND, ALTHOUGH IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY, COMMENT.

UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE A PRACTICE SOMETIMES OF UPHOLDING CASES WHEN THERE'S A VACANCY IN A DISTRICT.

IT REALLY DOESN'T BRING ME MUCH JOY TO DO IT HERE WHEN IT'S A CHILDCARE USE.

AND CHILDCARE IS SO SORELY NEEDED IN THE CITY, BUT I'M DOING IT HERE AND HOPEFULLY WE HAVE A D FOUR COMMISSIONER SOON.

UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE WILL HAVE A A D FOUR COMMISSIONER SOON, UM, AND IF NOT THEN, UM, THE, THE PLAN IS TO DISPERSE THE CASES AND, AND GET 'EM DISPOSED OF ON THE 15TH.

SO HOPEFULLY THERE'LL BE A NEW COMMISSIONER, UH, THIS MONTH.

ITEM 18 IS CASE Z 2 23 DASH 3 0 9.

NUMBER 18,

[18. 24-240 An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 1495 for an alcoholic beverage establishment limited to a bar, lounge, or tavern and a commercial amusement (inside) limited to a Class A dance hall on property zoned a CC Community Commercial Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 595, the South Dallas/Fair Park Special Purpose District, on the east corner of Al Lipscomb Way and Meadow Street.]

AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1 4 9 5 FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, LIMITED TO A BAR, LOUNGE OR TAVERN AND A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE LIMITED TO A CLASS A DANCE HALL ON PROPERTY ZONE OF CC, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 9 5.

THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE EAST CORNER OF ALCOMBE WAY AND MEADOW STREET.

RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS, UH, 18 Z 2 2 3 3 9.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMM WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I HAVE A MOTION AND COMMENTS.

I, I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

OH, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 DASH 3 0 9, I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

UM, UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH.

FEBRUARY 15TH.

15TH OR FIRST? YOU SAID FEBRUARY 1ST.

FIRST.

OKAY, I'LL SECOND THAT COMMENTS.

COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

UM, THIS IS AN A A THIS ESTABLISHMENT IS A LONG TIME, UH, COMMUNITY THAT ME, UH, PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT THEY, AT THE LAST MINUTE LAST WEEK, I START GETTING SOME CALLS FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING.

AND THE APPLICANT WAS HERE EARLIER AND WE SPOKE, UM, ON SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT, UM, CAN HELP, UM, RAMIFY THIS.

AND SO, UM, THERE'S GONNA BE A COMMUNITY MEETING ON JANUARY 29TH AND THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, UM, UM, THIS PARTICULAR CASE, BUT IT WAS AT THE LAST MINUTE ME NOT FOLLOWING MY OWN GUIDES OF ALWAYS MAKING SURE APPLICANTS TALK WITH THE COMMUNITY NO MATTER WHAT AND HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN.

UM, SO YEAH, WE HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING ALREADY SCHEDULED AND WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK IN JANUARY.

IN FAVOR REFERENCE VERY MUCH COMMISSIONERS.

HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND.

ITEM 19, CASE C 2 23 DASH THREE 10.

ANY IMPOSED MOTION CARRIES.

UH, NUMBER 19,

[19. 24-241 An application for a Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise of food store greater than 3,500 square feet on property zoned Planned Development District No. 605 with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the southwest corner of South Buckner Boulevard and Samuell Boulevard.]

AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE.

GREATER 3,500 SQUARE FEET ON PROPERTIES ON PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 6 0 5 WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD AND SAMUEL BOULEVARD.

STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.

SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

IS THAT BETTER? OKAY, THERE WE GO.

JOE LACROIX BAIRD, HAMPTON BROWN ENGINEERING OUR ADDRESS.

OUR OFFICE IS LOCATED AT 6 3 0 0 RIDGELEY PLACE, FORT WORTH, TEXAS HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, UH, THE DEVELOPER THIS EVENING.

WE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM?

[07:05:02]

QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SEEN ON COMMISSIONER WHEELER? DO YOU HAVE MOTION? YES, WE DO.

WITH THE COMMENTS.

UM, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 23 DASH THREE I UM, MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING WITH APPROVAL WITH CHANGES THE FIVE YEAR PERIOD, UM, WITH AN WITHOUT OVER, UH, AUTOMATIC RENEWAL WITHOUT, WITHOUT AUTOMATIC RENEWAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS SITE SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER WHEELER AND FOR YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER HERBERT COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

UM, THE COMMENTS IS THAT, UH, JUST UH, UM, WE'VE DONE PRACTICES OF ON THE FIRST GO ROUND GIVEN APPLICANT'S AUTOMATIC RENEWAL AND THAT THE, THAT TAKES AWAY FROM THE COMMUNITY ABLE TO ASSIST THEM OVER THE PERIOD OF TIME OF IN DOING OUR INITIAL SUP PROCESS.

SO, UM, I THINK NO MATTER HOW BIG OR HOW SMALL THAT WE SHOULD ALWAYS ON THAT IN MY RECOMMENDATION, GIVE THE COMMUNITY CHANCE TO, TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO BECOME GOOD NEIGHBORS AND TO SEE IF AND GIVE THEM ALSO THE OPTION IF THEY'RE NOT A GOOD NEIGHBOR TO BE ABLE TO COME IN AND SPEAK AGAINST IT.

SO THAT WAS THE REASON FOR NOT APPROVING THE FIRST, THE, UH, AUTO RENEWAL.

ON THIS FIRST GO ROUND COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING FALLS TO RECOMME RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD WITH NO AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.

SUBJECT TO A SITE YES.

WITH NO AUTOMATIC RENEWALS, YES.

NO AUTO RENEWALS.

YES, I THINK THAT'S, WHAT DID I SAY THAT? OKAY.

UH, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

NUMBER 22.

[22. 24-244 An application for a TH-3(A) Townhouse District on property zoned a CR Community Retail District, on the southwest corner of Genstar Lane and Davenport Road. (Part 2 of 2)]

ITEM 22 Z 2 23 3 21.

AN APPLICATION FOR A TH THREE TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE.

A COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT CR ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF GENSTAR LANE AND DAVENPORT ROAD.

I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

UM, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS, LUKE FRANZ AT 2323 ROSS AVENUE, UM, HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE.

UM, THIS IS A SIMPLE REQUEST TO ADD MUCH NEEDED HOUSING, UM, TO THE CITY AND IN THIS DISTRICT, UM, BUT DONE SO IN A THOUGHTFUL WAY, UM, FOR SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED.

WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS A NATURAL, UH, TRANSITION AND PROGRESSION FROM THE S UH, THE, THE R SEVEN FIVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO THE, UH, RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL USES, UM, THAT ABUT THIS PROPERTY.

AND GO ALL THE WAY TO PRESTON FRANKFORT.

UM, WE'RE PROUD TO HAVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.

I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? WE DON'T KNOW WHO YOU ARE.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COME COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR MR. FRANCE? YES.

COMMISSIONER HALL.

SO YOU DEFINITELY PLAN TO BUILD TOWN HOMES ON THIS? YES.

JUST, UH, FOI OR A REGISTERED SPEAKER IS NOT ONLINE.

UH, I ONE REGISTER SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION.

UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.

STAND ON.

COMMISSIONER HAWK, YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2, 3, 3, 2, 1.

I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAWK FOR YOUR MOTION AND VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEE YOU.

NONE.

A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, UH, FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE.

UH, CHAIR SHEAD IS STEPPING OUT OF THE ROOM MOMENTARILY BECAUSE HE HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM.

UM, MR. KERR, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.

ON ITEM

23.

YES, THIS IS CASE Z 2 2 3 3 22.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR

[07:10:01]

3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS ON A PROPERTY ZONE SUB AREA.

TWO WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 360 6.

IT'S THE BUCKNER, UH, THE BUCKNER BOULEVARD SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD IN LAKE JUNE ROAD.

UM, THANK YOU.

AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.

THANK YOU MR. KERR.

UM, IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YOU JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS, MS. BUCKLEY? OKAY, GREAT.

UM, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT.

SEEING NONE AND I WILL MAKE THE MOTION IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 3 22.

I MOVE TO BE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.

UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? NAYYY, THE MOTION CARRIES.

AND CHAIR, SHE IS STEPPING BACK IN THE ROOM.

THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z 2 2 3 3 3 5.

THIS AN APPLICATION FOR A MU 3D MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTY ZONE LO 1D LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT WITH A D LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF ABRAMS ROAD BETWEEN FISHER ROAD AND EAST LOVER LANE.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL? YEAH, WE ARE, WE ALREADY PASSED THIS ONE.

YEAH, WE'RE

[25. 24-247 An application for an MU-1 Mixed Use District on property zoned an R-16(A) Single Family District, on the north line of LBJ Freeway, between Preston Road and Copenhill Road. (Part 2 of 2)]

ON NUMBER 25.

WE WE'RE MOVING ABOUT THIS.

NO, YOU'RE FINE.

THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z 2 2 3 DASH 3 4 2.

AND THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A MU MIX, ONE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE AND R 16, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF LBJ FREEWAY BETWEEN PRESTON ROAD AND COPEN HILL ROAD AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES MA'AM.

PLEASE BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

UH, MY NAME IS WANDA SUMMERS.

I'M THE APPLICANT FOR THIS.

MY ADDRESS IS 2 1 2 GROVE DRIVE, DESOTO, TEXAS 7 5 1 1.

UM, I WAS REACHED OUT, UH, MS. UH, TWAY REACHED OUT TO ME CONCERNING A CONCERN OF A PROPERTY THAT IS ADJACENT TO THIS ONE, UH, THAT HAD BEEN TURNED DOWN.

AND WHEN I WENT AND VISITED THE PROPERTIES, I'M LIKE, I ABSOLUTELY WOULD'VE TURNED IT DOWN ALSO BECAUSE TO GET TO THAT PROPERTY YOU LITERALLY HAVE TO WIND YOUR WAY THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

BUT THAT IS NOT THE CASE WITH THIS PROPERTY.

THIS PROPERTY HAS A CIRCLE DRIVE.

THE ONLY WAY ONTO THAT PROPERTY IS FROM THE LBJ FREEWAY ACCESS ROAD.

UH, RIGHT ADJACENT TO IT.

ON THE OTHER SIDE IS A HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS HOTEL AND ALL EVERYTHING ELSE, ALL THE WAY TO PRESTON, WHICH IS TWO MORE BUSINESSES.

THEY ARE ALSO COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES.

DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS? YES.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, WE DO HAVE SOME REGISTERED SPEAKERS.

NO, THEY'RE NOT ONLINE COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. SUMMERS? YES, COMMISSIONER TREADWAY, PLEASE.

HI, MS. SUMMERS, NICE TO MEET YOU IN PERSON.

NICE TO MEET YOU IN PERSON.

UM, JUST A COUPLE QUESTIONS.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE ABLE TO LISTEN IN EARLIER DURING THE BRIEFING OF THIS ITEM.

MM-HMM, ? YES.

ARE YOU AWARE OF THE 6 35 CORRIDOR PLAN? NO MA'AM.

ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO THE BUFFER THAT IS DIRECTLY TO THE WEST OF THIS PROPERTY BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY AND THE HOLIDAY INN? HOLIDAY INN HAS STARTED, UH, SETTING THEIR PROPERTIES BACK SO THAT THEY'RE NOT LITERALLY ON THE PROP FRONT PROPERTY LINES.

THEY SET THEIR PROPERTIES, THE BUILDINGS AND PROPERTY TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, UH, OR WHATEVER THE REASONS.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REASONS ARE EXACTLY.

I JUST KNOW THE LAST THREE OR FOUR I'VE SEEN, UH, THAT'S THE WAY THEY BUILD 'EM NOW TO GIVE SOME GREEN SPACE TO THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

ARE YOU AWARE, SO THIS IS, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE PROPERTY, THE LAND BETWEEN THIS SITE AND THE HOLIDAY

[07:15:01]

IT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF HOLIDAY INN.

IT'S A GREEN SPACE.

I'M TALKING ABOUT BETWEEN, BUT THAT'S OKAY.

SO WE'RE GONNA, I'M GONNA RECOMMEND THAT WE HOLD THIS CASE BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE ALL NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT SOME OF THE 6 35 CORRIDOR PLAN, THIS BUFFER.

AND SO WITH THE INTEREST OF MAKING SURE EVERYONE HAS ALL THE SAME INFORMATION, UM, MY RECOMMENDATION IS GONNA BE THAT WE HOLD IT SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE DISCUSSIONS INCLUDING WITH THE NEIGHBORS.

AND HOW WILL I GET A COPY OF THE 6 35 UH, PLAN? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

WE WILL FIGURE THAT OUT BECAUSE I HAD NO IDEA THERE WAS EVEN SUCH A THING.

YES, I, AGAIN, I WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S GOT THE SAME INFORMATION.

SO APPRECIATE YOU COMING DOWN TODAY.

AND JUST TO CONFIRM ON THE RECORD, YOU ARE THE REPRESENTATIVE OR THE APPLICANT? THE APPLICANT.

SO YOU OWN THE PROPERTY? NO, JUST LIKE THE PEOPLE FROM, UH, HEB DOESN'T OWN THE PROPERTY.

YOU KNOW, I, I JUST REPRESENT THE, UH, DESIGN COMPANY AND A PROPERTY OWNER.

SO TO CONFIRM, YOU'RE THE REPRESENTATIVE, NOT THE APPLICANT.

MA'AM, WERE YOU HERE FOR THE HEB CASE? MY NAME IS DOWN AS THE APPLICANT SO I CAN TELL YOU THAT I COME AND REPRESENT THEM.

SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROBLEM IS.

WE WILL GET IT FIGURED OUT.

THANK YOU, MA'AM.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE.

MS. SUMMERS.

MS. SUMMERS MAY I, I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION.

I KNOW IT IS GONNA BE HELD, BUT AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I HAD UNDERSTOOD.

THE APPLICATION IS FOR TWO OFFICES, MAINTAINING THE RESIDENCE IS WHAT IS STATED.

WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION, UM, HOME OCCUPANCY IS AN ALLOWED ACCESSORY USE.

IS THAT NOT CONSISTENT WITH HOW THE OWNERS ARE INTENDING TO UTILIZE THE PROPERTY? UH, I CAN SPEAK TO HER, UH, BUT UH, SHE WAS NOT AWARE THAT SHE COULD NOT ALSO, UH, LIVING THE HOME AS WELL AS, 'CAUSE SHE JUST BOUGHT THE HOME THE FIRST OF THE YEAR, SO.

AND, AND THERE'S SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS, BUT THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO ASK THE QUESTION IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD BEEN EVALUATED.

UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, WE THERE YOU THERE? IS THE APPLICANT PLANNING TO LIVE IN THE HOUSE ALSO? YES.

WERE, WAS, WAS IT NOT RECOMMENDED? POSSIBLY NOT A LO AND A POSSIBLY A LIVE WORK, UM, UH, ZONING CHANGE MAYBE? OH, OH, I'M SORRY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER FOR THE APPLICANT? YES, COMMISSIONER HERBERT.

JUST A, A CLARIFICATION TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.

YOU ASKED COULD SHE OPERATE A LIMITED HOME BUSINESS IN THE LOCATION? I MIGHT DEFER TO MS. BRIDGES WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US THAT THERE IS WITHIN OUR CODE ALLOWED ACCESSORY USES.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.

AND, AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS JUST ASKING IF THAT YEP, YEP.

IF THE APPLICANT.

COMMISSIONER TREADWAY IS READING THAT PART OF THE HOOK A CODE TODAY.

WE SENT IT TO HER SO SHE WILL HAVE IT MEMORIZED BY OUR NEXT HEARING.

KNOWING HER.

WELL, WE GOT LOTS OF LEARNING TO DO WITH NEXT .

UM, MAY I MAKE A MOTION? YES, I THINK WE'RE, UNLESS THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF WE'RE READY FOR.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE.

YES, I HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF OR MS. BRIDGES.

'CAUSE I MEAN, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE APPLICANT IS SAYING, THEIR INTENTION HERE, UM, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A STRAIGHT ZONING CHANGE TO MU, WHICH WOULD MEAN THAT, YOU KNOW, DOWN THE ROAD SOMEONE COULD PUT A GAS STATION HERE BY RIDE OR A BANK OR AN AMBULATORY SURGICAL CENTER.

DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT ANY OF THOSE USES GIVEN THE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY? NO MA'AM.

WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION.

I MOVE THAT THIS ITEM BE HELD UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, UH, CHAIR, WAIT FOR YOUR MOTION AND THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.

KEEPING THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN, HELD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH.

ANY COMMENTS? SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

NUMBER

26.

ITEM 26, WHAT CAN YOU SAY ABOUT IT? UM,

[07:20:01]

ZZ 2 2 2 1 2 2 81.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN AUTO SERVICE CENTER ON PROPERTY ZONED A CC COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 9 5.

THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SOCIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS NUMBER 26 Z 222 81 FOR ANY SPEAKERS? NUMBER 26.

UM, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF WHAT TO SAY.

I, THEY MAY NEED INTERPRETATION SERVICES.

NOBODY'S IN THERE FOR THIS CASE.

BUT I, I GAVE THEM THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR INTERPRETATION, BUT THEY MAY BE MISSING IT.

I, OR, OR, OR IN THE, UH, OTHER ROOM.

I'M NOT SURE.

DO YOU KNOW WHO THE, DO YOU KNOW WHO THE APPLICANTS ARE? THE OWNER IS FELIX CRUZ, THE APPLICANT.

ANDREAS GAN, UM, THE REPRESENTATIVE.

BLANCA CARDENAS.

YOU, YOU, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE.

YOU DIDN'T SEE 'EM TODAY? NO.

FORGOT.

NO, I DIDN'T SEE THEM TODAY, BUT I JUST WANT, OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE IN THE FLAG ROOM? DO WE KNOW? THERE'S PLENTY OF PEOPLE IN THE FLAG ROOM RIGHT NOW.

OH, JORGE, MAYBE JORGE CAN GO OVER THERE AND TELL HIM IN SPANISH.

I, WE HAD SOME OF THIS DIFFICULTY LAST TIME, SO I'M, MAYBE THAT'S A NO, NOT, AND I HAVEN'T, I HAVEN'T MET THEM, BUT I DID SEND THEM THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR INTERPRETATION.

[07:25:39]

THEY CAN HEAR JUST FINE IN THERE IT SOUNDS LIKE, BUT, OKAY.

WELL THEN, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, OUR APPLICANT IS NOT HERE.

WE'LL JUST, UH, PLAY BY YOU HERE.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.

COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO WITH COMMENTS, UM, IN THE MATTER OF, OF Z TWO 12 DASH 2 81, I MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, AND NOT FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OR DENIAL, BUT TO APPROVE THIS SUP FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD.

AND I HAVE COMMENTS.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS AND IT'S SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.

THANK YOU, MS. NO, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU .

COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION.

COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.

COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

UM, THIS PROPERTY IS ADJACENT TO A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT THAT HAS BEEN THERE SINCE MY 47 YEARS AS A ADULTS.

I'VE BEEN ADULT MY WHOLE LIFE FOR 47 YEARS.

UH, I TALKED WITH, UM, AFTER MAKING SOME CHANGES TO THEIR SITE PLAN.

UM, I TALKED WITH BOTH BERT TRAIN AND MILL CITY, UM, AND THEY WERE WILLING TO GIVE THEM A, A, A TRY, BUT THEY DIDN'T WANT MORE THAN TWO YEARS.

UM, AND IT'S A, IT'S A SMALL SITE.

NOTHING ELSE HAS BEEN BUILT THERE, BUT WE DO.

UM, THE, THE, THE RESTAURANT THAT HAS BEEN THERE, CHURCH'S CHICKEN HAS BEEN GREAT NEIGHBORS.

AND EVEN SPEAKING WITH THE ACTUAL OWNER, THE FRANCHISEE, HE HAD NO OBJECTIONS TO IT, BACKING UP TO THEM.

SO I MOVED WITH THE, UM, WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL BASED OFF OF THAT.

I DO KNOW, I AM AWARE OF THE TOP AND THE HATCHER STATION PLAN.

UM, BUT THIS IS BOTH OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS ALSO THAT, THAT ACTUALLY HELPED WRITE THAT AND WAS VERY MUCH IMPLEMENT IN THAT PLAN.

HAD NO OBJECTIONS.

COMMISSIONER HERBERT, COULD I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION REALLY QUICK? YES.

YOU, I, UH, RECOGNIZE WHAT YOU SAID AND YOU SAID THAT THEY MADE CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN.

DID THEY SEND THOSE? 'CAUSE I HAVEN'T GOTTEN CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN.

I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE CHANGES YOU'RE LOOKING FOR ARE REGULATORY RATHER THAN ON THE SURFACE.

UM, MAYBE I NEED TO, THE SCREENING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO, THE SCREENING AS FAR AS HOW THE FENCE, UH, THE FENCE IS GOING AROUND IT, THEY WERE GONNA MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS SCREENED IN AND THAT WAS BASED OFF, SO THOSE THINGS THAT THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE GONNA DO.

AND, UM, WE DID HAVE SOMEONE THERE TO LET THEM SPEAK WITH BIRTH TRAINS AND, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.

SO THE THINGS THAT THEY, THAT THEY RECOMMENDED, THEY SAID THEY WOULD DO.

IS, IS SCREENING A SCREENING REQUIREMENT? SOMETHING YOU WANT IT TO BE IN THE CONDITIONS YES.

TO BE REQUIRED, YES, BUT IT'S NOT AND IT'S GONNA BE ON, IT'S THERE.

THE SCREENING WAS ON THE, OKAY.

THE SCREENING WAS ON THE, AS FAR AS THE GATE, THE SCREENING WAS GONNA BE ON THE, UH, NORTHEAST, I WOULD ASSUME SIDE SIDE.

OH, ON THE SOUTH SIDE, ON THE SIGN SIDE.

BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE WHERE MOST OF THE CARS WE COULD BE CING FROM THE ROAD AND 'CAUSE THE FRONT SIDE, I BELIEVE THE PARKING WHERE THE PARKING WAS FOR THE VEHICLES, THAT'S WHERE THE SCREENING WA THEY WANTED TO BE FROM THE SIGN SIDE.

WELL JUST IF THAT'S NOT CODIFIED OR REQUIRED BY THE CONDITIONS OR CYCLING AT THIS TIME, AND IF YOU THOUGHT THOSE WERE IMPORTANT CHANGES, THEY SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION SOMEHOW.

TO SITE PLAN AND SCREENING OF OFF STREET PARKING MUST BE PROVIDED AS SHOWN ON THE TEST.

CAN MR. UH, ATTORNEY THEN, CAN YOU GIMME THAT MOTION RIGHT, THAT I CAN MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION ON THE SAMUEL, I MEAN ON THE SIGN STREET SIDE WHERE THE VEHICLES ARE TO BE PARKED, HE IS SUCH A ROUGH RESIGNATION.

UM, SUBJECT

[07:30:01]

NOT WITH THE SIX FOOT HIGH.

WITH THE SIX FOOT HIGH, UH, SOLID SCREENING FENCE MUST BE RETAINED ALONG THE SITE E BOUNDARIES, WHICH IS THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AS SHOWN, UM, TO BE PLACED ON THE ATTACHED SIDE PLAN.

I I LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING EXCEPT ON THE SITE PLAN.

I, YOU KNOW, IT MAY, IT MAY HAVE BE SOME DIFFICULTY TO, UM, TO GET THEM, 'CAUSE THEY HAVEN'T PRODUCED A SITE PLAN THAT HAS THE SCREENING SHOWN ON IT YET.

SO IT MAY HAVE SOME COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, THAT THEY MAY NOT BE PREPARED FOR.

SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS IF YOU PUT IT IN CODE INTO THE SUP CONDITIONS, IT'LL APPLY NOT NECESSARILY AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN, BUT ALONG THE FRONTAGE.

NONETHELESS, I, I WOULD RATHER GET MORE SPECIFIC WITH THE LANGUAGE THAN JUST SAY I SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T PRODUCED ONE YET.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

UM, THAT THEY MUST, UH, MAINTAIN A SIX FOOT HIGH SOLID SCREENING FENCE BETWEEN THE PARKING AREA AND THE SIDEWALK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY ADJACENT, UH, ON SI ROAD.

YOU OKAY WITH ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE? COMMISSIONER HERBERT? EXCELLENT COMMISSIONERS.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO, UH, CLOSE UP OF A HEARING, NOT FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD, UH, WITH ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS.

IS READ INTO THE RECORD BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEE NONE.

ANY OPPOSED? NO.

THREE IN OPPOSITION, HAMPTON CARPENTER AND REUBEN.

ANYONE ELSE? MOTION CARRIES.

OKAY,

GO TO CASE NUMBER 28 .

ITEM NUMBER 28, AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TWO AND RENEWAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1898 FOR A LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS.

AND A MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION ON PROPERTIES ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 8 42, THE LOWER GREENVILLE AVENUE SPECIAL PROVISION DISTRICT WITH AN MD ONE MODIFIED DELTA OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GREENVILLE AVENUE, RICHMOND AVENUE.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED SITE PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.

I'LL SEE THE APPLICANT HERE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, GOOD EVENING.

PASS THAT THRESHOLD.

TREE THAT HAS ACTUALLY, UM, DIED.

UH, ANDREW RUE 2201 MAIN STREET, UH, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 1.

UH, I'M HERE REPRESENTING, UH, THE APPLICANT, UM, SEVEN 11 FOR A LATE HOURS SEP ON GREENVILLE AVENUE.

UM, I'D LIKE TO THANK COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR WORKING WITH US TO COME UP WITH SOME, UM, ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR THIS PARTICULAR SUP RENEWAL.

UH, FIRST ITEM AS WAS BRIEFED IN THE HEARING TODAY, IS WE ARE WILLING TO MAINTAIN AND, UH, REPLACE ONE

[07:35:01]

UH, THAT'S ON THE STREET FRONTAGE.

THESE TREES WERE ORIGINALLY PLANTED AS PART OF A, I BELIEVE IT WAS 2017 BOND PROGRAM.

UM, SO THE CITY TECHNICALLY HAS THE MAINTENANCE OBLIGATION, BUT WE'RE WILLING TO, UH, TAKE THAT OVER AS PART OF, UH, THIS SUP REQUEST AND THAT'S WHAT WAS REFLECTED ON THE SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.

ADDITIONALLY TO THAT, UM, WE'VE ALSO AGREED TO PROVIDE A, UH, CORPORATE CONTACT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD JUST TO HELP HEAD OFF ANY ISSUES SHOULD THERE BE ANY ISSUES.

SO THERE'S ALWAYS THAT POINT OF CONTACT, UH, WITH THIS PARTICULAR STORE FROM THE CORPORATE LEVEL OF SEVEN 11.

UM, AND LASTLY, WE'VE ALSO, UM, PROVIDED, UH, DOCUMENTATION OF KEEPING THE EXTERIOR OF THE STORE CLEAN OVER TIME.

SO WE HAVE, UH, PICTURES THAT REFLECT THAT THEY'RE GOING THROUGH AND DOING THEIR, UM, DAILY, YOU KNOW, SWEEPS AND TRASH, UH, OPERATIONS AT THE STORE.

SO THAT WILL CONTINUE, UM, OVER TIME AS WE, UH, CONTINUE TO BE A GOOD OPERATOR AND A GOOD NEIGHBOR, UH, AT THIS LOCATION.

UH, AND WITH THAT I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MATTER.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. RUIT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 1 2 DASH 3 52, MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S APPROVED, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AS BRIEFED, UH, WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE ON THE SITE PLAN.

I'D LIKE THE TREES TO BE DESCRIBED AS MEDIUM OR LARGE CANOPY.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CAN AND SORRY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH 51 A FOUR 2.19 SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.

UM, INCLUDING THE TREES AS PART OF THIS, I THINK MAKES THE SUP STANDARD, UM, BECAUSE IT ALLOWS US TO BRING THE SUP THAT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO ENHANCE OR PROMOTE THE WELFARE OF THE AREA.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEE YOU.

NONE.

ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT.

29TH.

JENNIFER? I CAN READ IT.

NUMBER 29

[29. 24-276 An application for a new subdistrict on property zoned Subdistrict 1 within Planned Development District No. 621, the Old Trinity and Design District, on the northeast line of Irving Boulevard and the southwest line of Market Center Boulevard, northwest of Oak Lawn Avenue.]

IS Z 2 12 3 5 3.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT ONE WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 6 2 1.

THE OLD TRINITY AND DESIGN DISTRICT ON NORTHEAST LINE OF IRVING BOULEVARD IN 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 SARA.

SEAT THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS, UH, CITY PLAN COMMISSION.

SUZANNE KEDRON, 23.

23 ROSS AVENUE.

AT PRESENT, WE'RE ASKING THAT THIS CASE BE WITHDRAWN.

SO I WOULD SEEK, UM, YOUR RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR MS. KEDRICK.

QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? CNN.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF CASE Z 2 1 12 DASH 3 53.

I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND NOT FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, BUT, UH, I MOVE FOR A DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION AND, UH, VICE CHAIR ROOM FOR YOUR SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE DISCUSSION.

CNN.

GOING TO CASE NUMBER 31 AND, UH, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT VICE CHAIR RUBIN HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM AND HAS STEPPED OUT OF THE CHAMBER.

COMMISSIONERS, IT IS 5 24.

LET'S TAKE A 30 MINUTE DINNER BREAK.

GO AHEAD AND GET BACK ON THE RECORD.

5 6, 7 8 9.

WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.

UH, COMMISSIONERS? NO, YOU'RE FINE.

UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE

AND, UH, JUST FYI, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THAT BEHOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 15TH, UH, TO GET HIS MUTUAL ACCESS AGREEMENT IN ORDER.

COMMISSIONER SHANA I ITEM NUMBER 31, AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN AUTO SERVICE CENTER AND VEHICLE, UH, DISPLAY SALES AND SERVICE ON PROPERTIES ZONE SUB AREA TWO WITH PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 360 6, THE BUCKNER BOULEVARD SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT WITH A D ONE

[07:40:01]

LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE WEST LINE OF CONNER DRIVE BETWEEN BRUTON ROAD AND STONE HURST STREET STAFF.

RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL AND ZONING.

CASE NUMBER Z 2 2 3 1 16.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH DR.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY, SEEING NONE, UH, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 15.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTIONS FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY, AYE.

WAS THAT FEBRUARY 15TH OR FEBRUARY 1ST? 15TH.

LET THE RECORD REFLECTED BY SIR RUBIN.

SECOND BACK IN MR. CLINTON.

THIS

IS ITEM 32 Z 2 2 3 2 5 6.

AND APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE-IN OR DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE ON PROPERTY ROAD, OR, I'M SORRY, PROPERTY ZONED SUB AREA.

ONE WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 3 6 6, THE BUCKNER BOULEVARD SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE WEST LINE OF SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD BETWEEN NORTH SCE ROAD AND BLOSSOM LANE.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND STAFF'S, UH, RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.

THANK YOU MR. CLINTON.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON CASE NUMBER 32? OH, YOU'RE JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS? OKAY, COOL.

THANK YOU MR. TALLON.

ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANYONE ONLINE.

ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. TALLON? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, MR. CHAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, SIR, I DO.

IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 2 5 6, MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FOR TWO YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.

THANK YOU MR. CHAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

I ITEM 33

AN APPLICATION FOR AN OH ONE OFFICE SUBDISTRICT WITH DE RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON PROPERTY ZONE AND MF TWO.

MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1 93, THE OAK LONG SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT, HISTORIC ONE 15 TT POLK HOUSE HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY ON THE WEST CORNER OF REAGAN STREET AND DICKINSON AVENUE SITE RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.

THANK YOU MS. GARZA.

SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

THANK YOU MR. KAVANAUGH.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE THERE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR MR. KAVANAUGH? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, PLEASE? COMMISSIONER KING.

SO DURING THE BRIEFING, DID I UNDERSTAND THAT STAFF'S POSITION WAS APPROVAL WITHOUT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS? CORRECT.

PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOUR MOTION? YES.

IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 2 3 DASH 2 98, I MOVE THAT WE WILL CLOSE THE

[07:45:01]

UH, INCLUDE THE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT AND I CAN READ THEM IN THE RECORD IF THAT'S NECESSARY.

ARE THEY AS PUBLISHED IN THE DOCKET? YES.

OKAY, THEN YOU DON'T NEED TO.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER STER FOR YOUR MOTION.

I'LL SECOND IT MYSELF.

COMMENTS? YES.

PLEASE.

UH, THIS, THE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS ARE, UM, LARGELY JUST TO ACCOMMODATE WHAT THE COMMUNITY IS SEEING IN THIS AREA.

THIS AREA IS GETTING DEVELOPED VERY QUICKLY, REDEVELOPED VERY QUICKLY.

THIS PROPERTY IS IN A HISTORIC OVERLAY AND IN ORDER TO GARNER THE SUPPORT OF THE OAKLAWN COMMITTEE AND TO ASSUAGE SOME OF THE CONCERNS OF PEOPLE, NOT ONLY PD 1 93, BUT ALSO PD NINE, UM, AND THE STATE ALLEN HISTORIC DISTRICT, THE DEEDED RESTRICTIONS WERE OFFERED AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THIS PROPERTY AND THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE TO INCLUDE THEM.

DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AND YOU OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES CONCLUDES OUR ZONING CASES.

WE NOW MOVE TO OUR

I SINGLETON OF THE EVENING SINGLETON.

I THINK YOUR, YOUR MICROPHONE MAY NOT BE ON.

SORRY, I APOLOGIZE.

DCA 180 9 DASH 0 0 1 KSS NUMBER ONE, SUSPENSION OF CPC RULES OF PROCEDURE SECTION 13 F SEVEN TO NOT REQUIRE OAC TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSION REGARDING REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE.

UM, ARTICLE FOUR, UH, ZONING REGULATIONS IF NUMBER ONE IS APPROVED, THEN CONSIDERATION OF NUMBER TWO.

NUMBER TWO, CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING CHAPTER 51 A OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SUBSECTION I.

CERTIFICATES OF DEMOLITION FOR RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE WITH NO MORE THAN 3000 SQUARE FEET, A FLOOR AREA PURSUANT TO A COURT ORDER WITHIN SECTION 51 A DASH 4.501.

HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT AND RELATED SUB-SECTIONS WITH CONSIDERATION TO BE GIVEN TO REMOVE THIS SUBSECTION AND OTHER APPROPRIATE STANDARDS.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.

IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? MR. CHAIR? YES, SIR.

FIRST WE HAVE TO SUSPEND THE RULE AND I WOULD JUST NOTE FOR THE BODY THAT A SUSPENSION OF THE RULES OF TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY VOTE.

THERE.

SO WE NEED A MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, I WILL LOOK TO MR. MOORE IF MY LANGUAGE IS NOT CORRECT IN THE MATTER OF DCA 180 9 DASH 0 0 1.

I NEED TO SUSPEND THE CPC RULES OF PROCEDURE TO NOT REQUIRE ELECT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSION REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO ARTICLE FIVE ZONING REGULATIONS ON THIS MATTER.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION AND VICE CHAIR ROOM FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY COMMENTS PLEASE? I'LL COMMENT VERY BRIEFLY.

UM, I'M DEFINITELY FINE WITH SUSPENDING THE RULES HERE.

I SECOND THE MOTION.

UM, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE AS A SIT SEEN, AS A SIGNAL TO, YOU KNOW, LANDMARK THAT WE WILL SUSPEND THE RULES AND NOT GO THROUGH.

SO OAC AND OTHER, YOU KNOW, UM, CODE AMENDMENTS RELATED TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

HAPPY TO CONSIDER THEIR QUEST.

AND ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE TIMES WHEN THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE FIRMLY WITHIN ZAC, YOU KNOW, JURISDICTION, THAT IT ALSO MAY HELP TO SUSPEND THE RULES DEPENDING ON THEIR, THEIR URGENCY AND THEIR COMPLEXITY.

SO HAPPY TO DO IT HERE, AND WE'LL PICK UP FUTURE REQUESTS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

COMMISSIONER RUBIN.

UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE MOTION TO SECOND TO SUSPEND THE RULES.

WE'RE, HOW ABOUT THAT? PERFECT.

NOW WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARING.

SIR.

GOOD EVENING, MR. OFFIT.

I THINK YOUR THE MICROPHONE IS OFF.

MY APOLOGIES.

I'D HAVE TO PUNCH A LITTLE BUTTON.

THERE'S OH, IS IT? NO, YOU MAY, WELL, YOU MAY HAVE TO GET, THESE ARE NOT VERY SENSITIVE.

YOU HAVE TO GET IN THERE REALLY CLOSE.

I THINK

[07:50:01]

LARRY, OFFICE 6 0 3 8, BRIAN PARKWAY, DALLAS 7 5 2 0 6.

UH, ONE, I WANT TO THANK OUR STAFF FOR LOOKING AT THESE ISSUES THAT THIS, THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THIS ORIGINAL, UH, RULE OR WRITING, UH, CREATED AND PARTICULARLY IN THE, UM, 10TH STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT AND HOW MANY HOMES THAT WE HAVE LOST THERE PERMANENTLY, UH, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THIS WAS WRITTEN.

SO I WOULD URGE THE, UH, COMMISSION TO SUPPORT STAFF ON THIS NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

UH, LARRY JOHNSON, 10 26 BETTERTON CIRCLE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 3.

UM, UH, TO ECHO THE WORDS OF, UH, MR. UH, COMMISSIONER LARRY OFFIT, UM, I TOO AND STANDING, UM, IN OPPOSITION, OR I'M STANDING, UH, FOR THE OVERTURNING OF THE 3000 SQUARE FOOT RULE.

UM, THERE ARE OTHER COMMUNITY, UM, RESIDENTS WHO WANTED TO BE HERE.

UH, THERE'S MS. PATRICIA COX, WHO IS 80 YEARS OLD, WHO IS, UH, TAKING CARE OF A SICK FAMILY MEMBER.

THERE'S, UH, SEAN MONTGOMERY, UM, AND MS. COX IS A LIFETIME RESIDENT.

THERE IS SEAN MONTGOMERY, A 50-YEAR-OLD LIFETIME RESIDENT.

UM, UH, THERE IS, UH, BETTY HARRIS.

I'M AN 80-YEAR-OLD VETERAN WHO'S TAKING CARE OF HIS HEALTH.

AND ALL OF US FROM 2018 TO 2023 HAVE COME TO LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETINGS AS WELL AS CPC MEETINGS.

AND, UM, WE'VE HAD TO STAND BY, UM, HELPLESSLY AS THE 3000 SQUARE FOOT RULE WAS USED TO TEAR APART, UM, THE FABRIC OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT.

AND WE'VE HAD TO STAND BY HELPLESSLY, UH, WITH OUR HANDS TIED AS THE 3000 SQUARE FOOT RULE WAS USED TO, UM, TO SEND OUR HISTORY TO THE LANDFILL.

AND BY THE WAY, UM, EVERY HOUSE THAT WAS TORN DOWN WAS, UH, REPAIRABLE.

IT WAS REDEEMABLE.

AND SO, BUT THAT DIDN'T MATTER BECAUSE THE 3000 SQUARE FOOT RULE MADE IT POSSIBLE FOR, FOR PEOPLE TO JUST TEAR A HOUSE DOWN WITH NO ISSUE.

AND SO, UM, WE'LL BE VERY APPRECIATIVE IF THIS RULE WERE OVERTURNED.

UM, AND IT WOULD DO THE CITY OF DALLAS A LOT OF GOOD.

UH, 10TH STREET IS A, IS A FREEMAN'S TOWN, AND IT'S ONE OF THE LAST REMAINING INTACT FREEMAN'S TOWNS IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, IF NOT THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

SO THERE IS A HUGE ADVANTAGE, UM, WITH, WITH REGARD TO HERITAGE TOURISM, UM, THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF.

AND, UM, OUR CONCERN IS THAT IF THE CITY OF DALLAS, IF WE DON'T DO BETTER WITH OUR HERITAGE TOURISM, IF WE DON'T DO BETTER TO PROTECT PLACES LIKE 10TH STREET, WELL THEN THE ONLY THING THE CITY OF DALLAS IS GONNA REALLY HAVE IS, UM, A PLACE WHERE WE CAN SEE, UM, A BELOVED PRESIDENT THAT WAS SHOT AND KILLED AND, UM, AND HANGING MUSEUMS. SO, UH, WE WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU GUYS WOULD WORK WITH US AND FOR US TO, UH, REPEAL THIS DECISION.

AND, UM, UM, THANK YOU FOR CASE SINGLETON FOR BRINGING THIS TO THE CPC.

THANK YOU ALL.

ROBERT SWAN, 1121 EAST 10TH STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS 75 2 0 3.

UH, I AM COMING IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST TO RESCIND 51 A DASH, UH, 4.501 SUBSTATION, I OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE 3000 SQUARE FOOT RULE.

UM, BECAUSE THIS ORDINANCE CREATED A MINISTERIAL OBLIGATION FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION THAT STANDS IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION TO THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMISSION, THE GREATER PURPOSE TO WHICH, UH, FOR TO WHICH WE ARE CHARGED AND, AND TO WHICH WE SWEAR A OATH TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.

UM, GENERALLY OUR ORDINANCES SHOULD BE THE TOOLS THAT WE USE TO REALIZE OUR VISIONS AND OUR MISSION STATEMENTS AND THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, ARE OUR HIGHEST IDEALS.

IT THEY SHOULD NOT WAG OUR HIGHEST IDEALS.

THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE.

UH, CONSIDER THE FACT THAT AN APPLICANT COULD COME TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, ASK FOR A COLORED SPECIFIC SHADE OF BLUE, UH, FOR THE WINDOW TRIM ON THE HOUSE.

WE COULD DENY IT, WE COULD DENY IT WITH PREJUDICE IF WE WANTED TO PREVENT IT FROM HAPPENING THAT I SAID WE, I'M NOT ON THE COMMISSION.

I WAS ON THE COMMISSION ONCE.

OLD, OLD TABITHA.

IT'S DIE HARD.

THE LANDMARK COMMISSION COULD, UH, DENY THAT, UH, THE SAME APPLICANT, UH, DISSATISFIED WITH, UH, THE RESULT TO COME BACK THE NEXT MONTH WITH A COURT ORDER FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE HOUSE AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WOULD BE POWERLESS TO STOP IT.

THOSE, THAT'S THE KIND OF FARCICAL SITUATION CREATED BY THIS ORDINANCE.

THIS ORDINANCE HAS BEEN AROUND DOING DAMAGE FOR QUITE A WHILE.

[07:55:02]

UH, I DON'T, I CAN'T EXPLAIN ALL THE REASONS FOR THAT.

I KNOW SOME OF THEM.

UM, UP UNTIL ABOUT 2018, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAD NOT QUESTIONED, UM, UH, IT HAS JUST TAKEN MINISTERIAL OBLIGATION.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, THAT WAS INCONTROVERTIBLE.

UM, IT WAS NOT UNTIL 2018 THAT A COMMISSIONER DECIDED TO VOTE HER CONSCIENCE AND, UM, UH, VOTE AGAINST A DEMOLITION WHEN IT CAME AROUND FOR THE FINAL VOTE AT WHICH IT WAS DECLARED.

LANDMARK COMMISSION SHALL GRANT THE CERTIFICATE OF DEMOLITION.

AND THAT WAS, I THINK, EXPECTED TO BE A SOLE PROTEST VOTE, UM, UH, FOR A MOTION THAT WOULD TO DEMOLISH THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY SUCCEED.

WHAT HAPPENED THAT DAY WAS A MAJORITY OF COMMISSIONERS VOTED WITH THAT ONE COMMISSIONER WHO FINALLY STOOD UP AND, UM, AND VOTED IN DEFIANCE OF MINISTERIAL OBLIGATION.

UH, THE NEXT TIME A DEMOLITION LIKE THAT CAME UP IN, IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION, THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS AND THE VOTES CONTINUED IN THAT WAY.

OF COURSE, EACH ONE OF THOSE UNANIMOUS, UH, VOTES, INANCE OF MATERIAL OBLIGATION, GENERATED AN APPEAL TO THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION BY THE CITY ATTORNEYS.

WHAT HAPPENED WHEN IT CAME TO THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION WAS, UH, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION GOT, AND THE, AND THE RESIDENTS GOT A LOT OF THANK SIR SYMPATHY.

ALRIGHT, SIR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR.

NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

I'M SO HAPPY I'M HERE.

AND YOU'RE HERE, MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS CAROLYN HOWARD.

I AM AT 29 22 SWISS AVENUE IN DALLAS, AND I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PRESERVATION DALLAS.

THANK YOU FOR LETTING US SPEAK TONIGHT.

THIS COURT ORDER DEMOLITION 3000 SQUARE FOOT RULE, I THINK WAS MEANT TO ELIMINATE BLIGHT, WHICH CAN BE A VERY GOOD THING.

HOWEVER, IT HAS DISAPPROVED DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTED LOW INCOME HISTORIC DISTRICTS, INCLUDING 10TH STREET AND WHEATLEY PLACE PRESERVATION DALLAS SUPPORTS THE REMOVAL, THE REMOVAL OF THIS SECTION FROM THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THIS IS NECESSARY TO REDUCE THE LOSS OF SIMILAR HISTORIC STRUCTURES AND CERTAINLY RESIDENTIAL, ESPECIALLY IN MINORITY AND LOW-INCOME, HISTORIC DISTRICTS.

WE WANT TO PRESERVE OPPORTUNITIES TO REHABILITATE THESE PROPERTIES.

WE WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT, AND SO DOES THE CITY PLEASE ALLOW US TO DO THAT AND APPROVE THIS CHANGE TO THE ORDINANCE.

ANY OTHER SPEAKERS HERE ON THIS ITEM BEFORE WE GO? OUR SPEAKERS ONLINE.

GOOD EVENING, MS. MONTGOMERY.

UH, SMITH MAY ONLINE.

I OKAY.

UM, MS. MONTGOMERY, YOU DON'T MIND? OKAY.

UH, YOU'RE MUTED.

MS. MONTGOMERY, YOU MIGHT WANT TO TOGGLE YOUR MIC ON AND OFF.

DID YOU TRY TO, UH, TOGGLE YOUR MIC, MS. MONTGOMERY? I THINK I GOT IT.

THAT BETTER? YES.

EVELYN MONTGOMERY, 46 0 3 SWISS AVENUE, DALLAS.

I DO NOT SEE A SINGLE BENEFIT IN THE 3000 SQUARE FOOT RULE.

IT, UM, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS GETTING RID OF BLIGHT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA, BUT IT DOESN'T GET RID OF BLIGHT.

IT GETS RID OF ADORABLE LITTLE HISTORIC HOUSES THAT ARE SERVING THE EXCELLENT PURPOSE OF HOUSING FAMILIES.

UH, IT SEEMS TO HAVE SOMETIMES PROMOTED PEOPLE TO LET THOSE HOUSES RUN DOWN

[08:00:01]

SO THEY CAN REPLACE WITH SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE WORTH MORE MONEY AND THEREFORE NOT BE AS AFFORDABLE.

A NICE ROW OF INTACT HISTORICAL HOMES.

TELL US MORE ABOUT THE HISTORY OF DALLAS THAN ONE MANSION.

AND YET MANSIONS CAN BE ALLOWED TO FALL APART FOR QUITE SOME TIME, AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION COULD STOP THEM.

IT HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT A POOR EXPERIMENT TO HAVE THAT 3000 SQUARE FOOT RULE AND THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AE TO IT WITHOUT EVEN TRYING TO COME UP WITH ANOTHER SOLUTION OR SHARE THEIR KNOWLEDGE AS, UM, ARCHITECTS, AS CONTRACTORS OF HOW TO FIX THOSE SMALL HOUSES, WHICH ARE OFTEN VERY EASY TO SAVE EVEN WHEN THEY LOOK QUIET, RUN DOWN.

IT HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT A CATASTROPHE.

AND I SINCERELY HOPE THAT YOU WILL FOLLOW ALL OF OUR WISHES AND GET RID OF IT.

AND I THANK THE STAFF OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR HELP IN THIS.

UH, MR. MCGILL.

JAMES ? NO.

COMMISSIONERS, THAT CONCLUDES OUR SPEAKERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE.

I'M GONNA HAVE A MOTION.

COMMISSIONER HANEN, PLEASE.

ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE.

IN THE MATTER OF DCA 180 9 DASH ZERO ONE, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.

AND COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR SECOND.

I JUST WANNA ECHO MANY OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY THE SPEAKERS HERE, BUT ALSO ALL OF THE DISCUSSION THAT TOOK PLACE, BOTH AT LANDMARK COMMISSION AND IN THIS BODY OVER THE YEARS.

UM, I THINK AS A RESIDENT OF HISTORIC DISTRICT, I HAVE SEEN THE INEQUITY OF HOW THIS RULE HAS BEEN APPLIED.

I SPECIFICALLY RECALL A HOUSE IN JUNIOR'S HEIGHTS THAT NEVER MADE IT TO LANDMARK COMMISSION AGENDA BECAUSE THERE WAS SUCH AN OUTCRY ABOUT THE CONSIDERATION OF DOING THAT.

THAT HOUSE APPEARED ON THE JUNIOR HEIGHTS HOME TOUR THIS FALL.

SO IT IS AN EXAMPLE THAT EVEN WHEN, YOU KNOW, WE THINK WE'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING, WE DON'T ALWAYS GET IT RIGHT.

I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO RECONSIDER THAT AND I'M PLEASED TO BE ABLE TO, UM, SUPPORT THIS TODAY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SEE NONE.

TO CASE NUMBER 35, THE AUTHORIZATION OF A HEARING.

ANY OPPOSED? AYE.

HAVE IT.

THANK YOU ALL FOR JOINING US.

UH, COMMISSIONERS WILL MOVE

THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 35, CASE NUMBER Z 1 78 DASH 1 42.

A CITY PLAN COMMISSION AUTHORIZED HEARING TO DETERMINE PROPER ZONING FOR THE AREA TO INCLUDE, BUT NOT LIMITED TO USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND OTHER APPROPRIATE REGULATIONS IN AN AREA GENERALLY ALONG BOTH SIDES OF EDGEFIELD AVENUE.

FROM TENNESSEE AVENUE TO THE EARLY SOUTH OF NEWPORT AVENUE, BOTH SIDE OF BALBO DRIVE, BETWEEN PIONEER DRIVE AND BERKELEY AVENUE, BOTH SIDES OF DALE AVENUE FROM THE ALLEY EAST OF TENNESSEE AVENUE TO THE ALLEY EAST OF BALBO.

DRIVE.

BOTH SIDES, BOTH SIDES OF RUNNER AVENUE, BETWEEN BALBO DRIVE AND EDGEFIELD AFIELD DRIVE, AND BOTH SIDES OF NEWPORT AVENUE BETWEEN BALBO DRIVE AND EDGEFIELD DRIVE AND CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 14 ACRES.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL OF A WM U THREE WORKABLE URBAN MIX USE DISTRICT AND, UH, SHOPFRONT OVERLAY ON A PORTION.

UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BEGIN WITH OUR SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT.

I, ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD? I THINK WE HAVE TWO REGISTERED SPEAKERS ONLINE.

IS MR. GLENN ONLINE? MATTHEW GLENN ONLINE ABOUT, UH, ANDREW WALLACE.

MR. WALLACE? MR. WALLACE, IF YOU CAN HEAR ME, WE'RE READY FOR YOU, SIR.

PLEASE TURN ON YOUR CAMERA THERE.

UH, OKAY.

I LIVE AT, AT OWN PORTION SEVEN.

NOW CAN YOU SEE ME? OKAY? PERFECT.

UH, GOOD EVENING.

THIS IS ANDREW WALLACE.

[08:05:01]

WE CAN, WE CAN HEAR YOU, BUT WE CAN'T SEE YOU YET, YOUR HONOR.

YOUR CAMERA'S ON.

OKAY, THERE WE GO.

IS THAT WORKING NOW? YES, SIR.

ALRIGHT, PERFECT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

UH, GOOD EVENING.

THIS IS ANDREW WALLACE.

I LIVE AT AND OWN 1407 MELBOURNE AVENUE, ABOUT A BLOCK AWAY FROM THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE.

UH, I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE ZONING CHANGE FROM CR TO WMU THREE.

UH, THIS ZONING CHANGE IS A GREAT FIRST START, UH, STEP TOWARDS WHAT ELMWOOD COULD BE.

JUST IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS, WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE BUSINESSES OPEN IN ELMWOOD BY LOCAL RESIDENTS.

AND THAT IS IN SPITE OF THE STATE OF OUR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS IN AND NOT BECAUSE OF IT.

THE DEMAND IS THERE AND THE CITY OWES IT TO THOSE BUSINESSES AND THE ELMWOOD RESIDENTS TO REMOVE ANY ROADBLOCKS FROM THEIR SUCCESS AND OUR ACCESS TO THE AMENITIES THEY PROVIDE.

THIS MEANS ALLOWING MORE PEOPLE TO LIVE CLOSE TO THESE NEW SHOPS AND RESTAURANTS AND PROVIDE A SAFE AND WALKABLE URBAN FABRIC FOR ALL OF US TO LIVE IN.

UH, FOR THOSE WITH CONCERNS ABOUT GENTRIFICATION AND THE STABILITY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS A STAGNANT AND A DECLINING NEIGHBORHOOD.

IF A NEIGHBORHOOD ISN'T GROWING, IT'S ON THE PATH OF DYING.

TO ANSWER, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER'S CONCERNS EARLIER ABOUT THE AREA NOT BEING LARGE ENOUGH FOR WM THREE ZONING.

KEEP IN MIND THAT THE CANCER OF SINGLE FAMILY ZONING INFECTS OVER 66% OF THIS CITY.

AND THIS ZONING CHANGE NEEDS TO HAPPEN HERE TO HELP CURE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO BEAT BACK OUR BROKEN LAND USE.

ALSO, WALKABILITY SHOULD EXIST FIRST TO JUSTIFY TRANSIT, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN SUPPORT BEFORE WE GO TO OUR FOLKS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, WE'RE READY FOR OUR FOLKS IN OPPOSITION.

I NEED TO LOWER THIS.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? GOOD AFTERNOON.

MY NAME IS VIOLETA GADO MONTEJANO.

I'M FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE ALBU NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN 2021, AND I'M A RESIDENT OF ELWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD.

UM, WHEN THE GU KEPT HAPPENED, I WAS STILL OVER AND OVER BY THE, UH, AT THAT TIME, UH, UM, COMMISSIONER THAT I SHOULDN'T BE WORRIED ABOUT, UH, SUDDEN CHANGES BECAUSE THAT'S WAY AHEAD.

UH, NOW WE ARE IN 2023 AND NOW CAME THE REAL ZONING CHANGES FOR DOWNTOWN ELWOOD.

I HAVEN'T SPOKEN, UH, WITH A GOOD NUMBER OF, UH, BUSINESS OWNERS AND PROPERTY PROPERTY OWNERS IN DOWNTOWN ELMWOOD.

AND OUR MAIN PROBLEM, IT WAS NOT ENOUGH INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY.

WE ONLY HAVE TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS IN A SECOND COMMUNITY WAS A BOAT THAT WE WERE NOT EXPECTING TO HAPPEN AT THAT MEETING.

AND, UM, THE, THE MANY OF THESE, UH, OWNERS ARE, UH, LATIN WHERE THE FIRST LANGUAGE IS SPANISH, AND NOW THEY ARE WORRIED WHAT CAN HAPPEN.

MANY OF THESE BUSINESSES ARE AUTOMOTIVE BUSINESS AND WE HAVE STILL MANY QUESTIONS.

UH, WHAT WE ARE ASKING IS DELAY THIS BEFORE A BOAT TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS FOR ALL THESE, UH, UH, BUSINESS OWNER AND PROPERTY OWNERS IN DOWNTOWN ELWOOD.

ON A PERSONAL NOTE, I BELIEVE THAT IMPROVING DOWNTOWN ELMWOOD IS IMPORTANT, BUT IT'S EQUALLY IMPORTANT, UH, OR EVEN MORE IMPORTANT TO PROTECT SOME OF THE BUSINESSES THAT HAVE BEEN IN DOWNTOWN ELWOOD FOR MANY YEARS.

SOME OVER 30 YEARS, MANY 26, 15 YEAR BUSINESSES.

AND WE NEED MORE INPUT ON, UH, UH, COMMUNITY INVOLVED IN BALTIMORE FOR, UH, FOR THE PART OF THOSE BUSINESSES.

SO WE ARE ASKING TO NOT APPROVE, UH, THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING OR THIS ZONING CHANGES TODAY, AND, UH, ALLOW, UH, THE CITY AND COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS TO GET MORE INVOLVED.

UH, WITH THAT.

OTHERS MEETINGS HAVE HAPPENED BETWEEN THE, UH, THE LAST YEAR ELMO PRESIDENT, UH, ASSOCIATION, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, MANY OF THE THESE, UH, THINGS THAT WERE DISCUSSED IN THE MEETING WERE NOT TRANSMITTED ESPECIALLY TO MANY OF THE OWNERS OF BUSINESS OWNERS IN DOWNTOWN .

SO THAT'S WHY WE ARE ASKING FOR MORE, UH, MEETINGS BEFORE APPROVING.

SO EVERYBODY, UH, HAVE ALL THE CONCERNS.

ADDRESS.

AUTOCENTRIC BUSINESSES AND IN NO WAY WANTED THEM TO BECOME NONCONFORMING.

HEY, GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS GERALDO FIGUEROA, 2220 WEST CLARE AND DRIVE DALLAS, TEXAS.

UH, TWO YEARS AGO WHEN THE WOKE CAP WAS GOING ON AND THE PLAN WAS TAKING SHAPE FOR THE PUBLIC, SPOKE UP AND CAME UP WITH A PLAN FOR ITS VISION OF THIS AREA OF OAK CLIFF.

PROMOTE WALKABILITY PRESERVE ITS UNIQUE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS, CELEBRATE ITS HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND CULTURE SUPPORT LOCAL MINORITY WOMEN AND IMMIGRANT OWNED LOCAL BUSINESSES.

AND AFTER A LOT OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS, CPC AND COUNCIL MEETINGS AND PLAN WAS PASSED IN THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN, IT WAS MADE CLEAR THAT RESIDENTS OF OAK CLIFF WANTED TO KEEP THEIR

[08:10:01]

ON PAGE 35 SLASH 17, THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE CONCERNING AUTO SHOPS AND STOREFRONT OVERLAY, WHICH I THINK SHOULD BE ADDRESSED AND CLARIFIED BEFORE GOING FORWARD.

UH, NOT JUST HERE, BUT IN THE COMMUNITY AND SURROUNDING BUSINESSES.

I BELIEVE TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS IS NOT ENOUGH TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE ZONING CHANGES.

AND IN THE PAST WEEKS WE'VE SPOKEN WITH A LOT OF NEIGHBORS, BUSINESS OWNERS, PROPERTY OWNERS, AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THESE CHANGES.

I HAVE A SLIDE THAT I PROVIDED TO GEORGE.

JUST GIVE US ONE LITTLE MOMENT.

I PERFECT.

IN THESE AREAS AND WE CAN'T GET OUR PROTECTIONS MAYBE THAT WE OTHERWISE COULD.

GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.

MY NAME IS CHRISTINE HOPKINS.

I LIVE AT 1 1 1 8 ELMWOOD BOULEVARD.

I BOTH LIVE IN ELMWOOD WHERE THIS, UM, AUTHORIZED HEARING IS TAKING PLACE.

AND I WAS, UM, A MEMBER OF THE WEST OAK CLIFF COALITION DURING THE WCAP PROCESS.

MANY OF YOU'RE FAMILIAR TO ME BECAUSE OF THAT.

UM, AND WE FOUGHT HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR MINORITY OWNED, UH, AUTOMOTIVE BUSINESSES IN OAK CLIFF WERE NOT GOING TO BECOME NON-CONFORMING USES EITHER IN THE AREA PLAN ITSELF, WHICH WE WON THAT HARD FOUGHT BATTLE, OR IN ANY OF THE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS THAT TOOK PLACE.

UM, IT, WE HAD TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS ABOUT THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING, BUT PUD DID NOT PRESENT ON THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY AT EITHER OF THOSE COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

EVEN THOUGH A SHOPFRONT OVERLAY YOU WOULD THINK IS SOMETHING THAT'S PRETTY IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT IN AN AREA WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO ACTIVATE A SMALL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND MAKE IT INTO A LITTLE MINI MAIN STREET, UM, WE AS A COMMUNITY HAVE HAD TO DECIPHER THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY CODE OURSELVES.

THERE ARE SOME GOOD THINGS ABOUT A SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

NO, MANY OF US DO NOT WANT SOMEONE TO BE ABLE TO COME IN AND BUILD A THREE STORY APARTMENT WHERE THE GROUND FLOOR IS JUST RESIDENTIAL ACCESS WITH NO RETAIL ACTIVATION.

SO A SHOPFRONT OVERLAY CAN BE GOOD FOR THAT.

BUT THEN WE GO INTO THE FORM-BASED CODE, AND IF YOU LOOK AT 51 A DASH 13.304, THERE'S A USE CHART.

AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY IN A WMU AREA, GENERAL COMMERCIAL IS NOT PERMITTED.

AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL IS WHERE THE VEHICLE SERVICE USE IS ALLOWED.

O THE ONLY YOU SEE THAT MIXED USE SHOPFRONT AND SINGLE STORY SHOPFRONT ARE ALLOWED.

BUT AGAIN, THERE'S A USE CHART IN, UH, FIF, UH, 1551 A DASH 13.306, WHERE IF YOU FOLLOW THE COLUMNS IN THE ROWS, YOU SEE THAT IN THOSE TWO MIXED USE SHOPFRONT AND SINGLE STORY SHOPFRONT AREA FABRICATION USES ARE NOT ALLOWED, WHICH IS THE VEHICLE SERVICES USE.

SO IN ESSENCE, FROM THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING, I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS 30 FEET RULE.

THERE ARE SIX AUTOMOTIVE SHOPS IN THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY AREA.

THERE'S AN OWNER OF ONE OF THEM HERE WHO'S BEEN OPERATING FOR 26 YEARS.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE FIRST 30 FEET OF ALL OF THESE AUTO MECHANIC AND CAR WASH BUSINESSES ARE GONNA BECOME NON-CONFORMING IF THIS SHOPFRONT OVERLAY PASSES FOR THOSE BUSINESSES.

I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED WHETHER WE CAN EXEMPT THE LOTS THAT THE CURRENT, UM, AUTOMOTIVE SHOP BUSINESSES ARE ON FROM THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

UM, I DO HAVE THE ADDRESSES OF THOSE BUSINESSES IF CPC NEEDS THEM AND IS GONNA MOVE FORWARD TODAY, BUT I I DO THINK THAT WE AS A COMMUNITY SHOULD NOT HAVE TO BE TRYING TO FIGURE THIS OUT AND DECIPHERING IT ON THE DAY OF A HEARING OR EVEN A WEEK BEFORE A HEARING, THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED IN A COMMUNITY MEETING.

UM, ALONG WITH THINGS LIKE A HEIGHT OVERLAY, WHICH WAS AN OPTION THAT WAS NEVER PREVENT PRESENTED TO US OR DISCUSSED IN A COMMUNITY MEETING.

AND I KNOW, UM, PUDS STAFF'S OPINION IS THAT WE DON'T REALLY NEED TO TALK ABOUT A HEIGHT OVERLAY BECAUSE WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPES, BUT THERE ARE GONNA BE AREAS OF DOWNTOWN ELMWOOD THAT CAN GET UP TO THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT.

AND THERE ARE HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS BUILT IN THE FORM-BASED CODE FOR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ROOMS AND PARAPETS.

AND WE'VE SEEN THAT IN WEST DALLAS.

LAVATA NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPERS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET HEIGHT WITH THOSE EXCEPTIONS THAT WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS NOT EXPECTING.

SO I THINK THAT THERE ARE STILL SOME TECHNICALITIES HERE THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED.

AND I DID APPRECIATE COMMISSIONERS CARPENTER'S COMMISSIONS THAT COMMENTS THIS MORNING THAT WERE NOT GETTING ANY PROTECTIONS FOR LEGACY BUILDINGS.

UM, AND THAT'S JUST BECAUSE WE'RE NOT BEING OFFERED A PD.

AND I THINK WE'RE SORT OF IN A NEW ERA WHERE IT'S STAFF'S POSITION MAYBE FOR A LOT OF GOOD REASONS CITYWIDE IS THAT WE DON'T DO PDS ANYMORE.

BUT IT ALSO MEANS THAT WE'RE REALLY RESTRICTED IN WHAT WE CAN TRY TO DO IN,

[08:15:01]

NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

MR. PEREZ.

10.

THIS IS, UH, ADDRESS.

UM, HE'S HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE TIME THAT THEY DID THE MEETINGS.

UM, HE UNDERSTOOD THAT WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS, UH, MODIFY THE AREA.

HE UNDERSTANDS, BUT HE DOES NOT AGREE CAR WASH BECAUSE IN THE, UH, CAR WASH BUSINESS, IT IS AN, UH, AN ACTIVE, UH, LOCATION WHERE PEOPLE WORK AND NOT ABANDONED.

IT'S BEEN AN ACTIVE WORK ZONE FOR 26 YEARS, COMPLIANT WITH ALL THE RULES OF THE CITY OF DALLAS AND TAXES HAVE EMPLOYEES AND THEY'RE WORKING FOR THE COMMUNITY.

THEY WOULD LIKE TO GET PERMISSION TO REMODEL AND TO PUT CONCRETE OUTSIDE.

I'M GOING TO, UH, SO THE, UH, CAR WASH WILL HAVE A BETTER VIEW AND THE WHAT BETTER IMPROVE THE CURB, CURB VIEW.

YES, HE IS, UH, ESSENTIALLY NOT IN FAVOR OF LOSING HIS BUSINESS.

NEXT SPEAKER.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, IS THAT I THINK WE'RE READY AND I DON'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR, OUR SPEAKERS.

ANYBODY ONLINE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? NO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, THEN, COMMISSIONER? SURE.

NOT PLEASE.

MR. OGA, UH, CAN YOU TELL US WHEN THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY WAS ADDED TO THE PLAN? SO THE FRONT OVERLAY, UH, DISCUSSION CAME AFTER THE MEETING, THE PUBLIC MEETING WHERE THE COMMUNITY VOTED TO ADVANCE THIS TO THE CPC.

AND I THINK THE SPEAKER TONIGHT IS A PERSON THAT CAME AND DISCUSSED THE, THE, A FEAR OF THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS BEING DOMINATED WITH THE RESIDENTIAL USES, TOWN HOMES AND MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS.

AND THEN I DID HAVE A FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION WITH A COUPLE OF ATTENDEES THAT CAME TO ME AFTER THE MEETING.

AND THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT EITHER HAVING HIGHRISE APARTMENT BUILDING OR RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS DOMINATING THE PRIMARY SHOPPING STREETS.

AND, UH, IT WAS A SUGGESTION THAT CAME FROM THE SPEAKER THAT MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD CONSIDER.

AND STAFF CAME AFTERWARD AND STARTED THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE OPTIONS THAT WERE AVAILABLE.

UH, SO JUST SO I'M CLEAR, WH WHEN YOU SAY THE SPEAKER, WHICH SPEAKER IT WAS THE IDEA OF A SPEAKER THAT WAS HERE TONIGHT, THE SPEAKER THAT MENTIONED THE SHOPFRONT OVERLO BEING A CONTRACT.

MS. HOPKINS.

THAT WOULD'VE BEEN WHAT MONTH? THAT WAS JULY 18TH WHEN WE HAD THE INITIAL MEETING THAT WE PRESENTED THE VOTING PROPOSAL, UH, THE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ZONING DISTRICT.

SHE DID MENTION SOMETHING ABOUT RESIDENTIAL USE, DOMINATING AND THE HIGHRISE BUILDING, MAKING SURE THAT, AND THEN THEY DON'T DOMINATE THE, OH, MY ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS JUST WHEN, UH, CAN YOU GIVE THE, THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS AN IDEA?

[08:20:01]

AND THAT IS THE MEETING WHERE THE COMMUNITY THEMSELF DECIDED TO VOTE ON WHETHER TO ADVANCE THIS.

IT WASN'T STAFF SUGGESTION NOT TO HAVE ADDITIONAL MEETING, BUT ONCE THE COMMUNITY VOTED ON ADVANCING THIS TO THE CPC, IT BECAME A CHALLENGE BECAUSE A FEW INDIVIDUALS THAT WERERE HAPPY WITH THAT OUTCOME WANTED THAT TO HAVE ADDITIONAL MEETING.

BUT THAT WOULD'VE MEANT THAT IT WOULD'VE GONE AGAINST THE COMMUNITY VOTE THAT WANTED THIS TO ADVANCE.

ARE LEGALLY NON-CONFORMING AND THEY'RE OPERATING.

AND, AND, UM, SO JUST SO I'M CLEAR, SO SINCE THE LAST AUGUST OR SINCE LAST JULY, THAT'S WHEN THE IDEA OF THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY WAS PROPOSED BY MS. HOPKINS TO BE ADDED.

AND THEN WHAT QUESTIONS DID SHE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THEREAFTER? OR DID THE, I I KNOW THERE'S BEEN SOME RECENT CORRESPONDENCE ABOUT SHOPFRONT OVERLAY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS WITH REGARDING THE EXISTING BUILDINGS.

I READ SOME EMAILS THAT WERE FROM THIS PAST WEEK, WERE QUESTIONS ASKED OVER THE LAST SIX MONTHS REGARDING THAT ISSUE? YES, WE'VE ASKED, WE, WE'VE HAD, UH, TO RESPOND TO A NUMBER OF INQUIRIES AND QUESTIONS FROM DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS.

AND I THINK MS. HOSKINS IS ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE REACHED OUT TO STAFF A NUMBER OF TIMES AND WE'VE MET WITH HER, UH, I THINK WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION WITH HER SEVERAL TIMES TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT SHE HAD.

ONE OF THEM WAS THE PARKING MANAGEMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT WE SPENT, UH, COUPLE OF MONTHS JUST TRYING TO ADDRESS THAT.

AND THEN, UH, IT CAME TO THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY WHERE SHE SENDS THOSE QUESTIONS AND WE MET WITH HER, DISCUSSED THAT, AND ALSO RESPONDED TO THOSE EMAILS.

AND I THINK YOU WERE COPIED ON SOME OF THOSE EMAILS, CORRECT? UH, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.

CAN YOU, UH, SPEAK AGAIN? I KNOW, AND I I, I, I APOLOGIZE.

I FORGET THE LAST PERSON WHO SPOKES NAME, WHO WE WERE TRANSLATING FOR, WHAT WAS HIS NAME? DOES ANYBODY RECALL MR. PEREZ? CAN YOU, UM, HE HAS SOME CONCERNS ABOUT HIS BUSINESS.

I KNOW THAT, UM, YOU'VE FIELDED QUESTIONS THROUGH EMAILS THAT I WAS COPIED ON THIS PAST WEEK AND HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN TO THIS.

I ASK, UH, THE QUESTION REFERENCING THE, UM, DOCUMENTS THAT MS. HOPKINS HAD SHARED ALSO, CAN YOU JUST SPEAK ONE LAST TIME SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND? 'CAUSE ONE OF MY CONCERNS FOR THE CASE WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EXISTING BUILD BUSINESSES WERE NOT IN JEOPARDY OF LOSING THEIR ABILITY TO OPERATE.

SO ONE OF THE ANALYSIS THAT WE'VE DONE IS TO ENSURE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATION OF WORKUP.

AND AS SHE CORRECTLY SAID, THAT WORKUP, UH, RECOMMENDATION WAS TO ENSURE THAT WE PROTECT EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD-BASED BUSINESSES THAT IN A DISTRICT.

SO WE'VE DONE AN ANALYSIS JUST TO SEE THE USES THAT ARE THERE AND THE BUSINESSES AND WHETHER THEY WILL BE, HOW THEY'RE GONNA BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE.

UH, THERE'VE BEEN A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE AUTOMOTIVE RELATED USES, CAR WASH, UH, VEHICLE SERVICE, AND UH, UH, BODY SHOPS THAT ARE THERE.

AND LIKE I SAID, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DEFINITION OF, OF THE SERVICE IN, UH, ARTICLE 13, UH, CAR WASH IS INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION OF VEHICLE SERVICE.

AND THE BASE ZONING FOR A FORM DISTRICT ALLOWS PERMITS VEHICLE SERVICE IN GENERAL COMMERCIAL BUILDING TYPE.

SO IT IS, I THINK, A MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT.

IT'LL BE ALLOWED.

NOW, I HAVE TO, TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE CONFORMITY.

A LOT OF BUSINESSES THAT ARE CURRENTLY EXIST IN THE DISTRICT ARE NOT CONFORMING.

THEY ARE NONCONFORMING EVEN BY THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT STANDARDS.

AND IN FACT, THERE, THERE WAS A, A CODE SWEEP THAT HAPPENED THAT WAS EDUCATIONAL THAT CAN JUST WALK THROUGH TO EXPLAIN TO THEM SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY COULD DO TO BECOME CONFORMING.

AND I KNOW A NUMBER OF THOSE BUSINESSES, UH, GOT INFORMATION ON SOME OF THE AREAS WHERE THEY'RE NOT MEETING THE CODE.

SO THE ZONING CHAIN THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS NOT GONNA BE THE ONE FIRST ONE TO MAKE THEM NON-CONFORMING.

THEY STILL BE LEGALLY NON-CONFORMING AND ABLE TO OPERATE.

JUST LIKE RIGHT NOW, THEY

[08:25:01]

ALL OF THEM, WILL BE NON-CONFORMING AS TO DEVELOPMENT TYPE.

I, I JUST HAVE ONE, ONE LAST QUESTION.

UH, WAS THIS, WAS, THIS CASE WAS HELD OVER, CORRECT? YES.

SO THERE'S BEEN AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF TIME FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO GET THEIR QUESTIONS ANSWERED? YES.

SO THIS CASE WAS SUPPOSED TO COME TO THIS BODY ON, UM, NOVEMBER THE 16TH, 2023 LAST YEAR.

AND, UH, I THINK THE SPEAKER, MS. HOPKINS, YES, CAME, UH, AT THE, UH, ON BEHALF OF TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, LEAST THAT'S WHAT SHE TOLD US, AND REQUESTED THE CASE TO BE POSTPONED FOR AT LEAST FOUR WEEKS TO ALLOW THEM TO DO CONSULTATION.

AND AT THAT TIME, THE MAIN ISSUE WAS PARKING MANAGEMENT OVERLAY.

AND WE'VE HAD MEETINGS WITH THEM AND OTHER INTEREST GROUPS.

WE FIELDED SEVERAL QUESTIONS FROM, UH, STAKEHOLDERS TO ADDRESS THAT.

AND IT'S NO LONGER AN ISSUE NOW BECAUSE WE EXPLAINED EVERYTHING TO THEM AND THEY UNDERSTOOD WHY THAT WAS NOT AN OPTION THAT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS DISTRICT.

SO WE'VE HAD MEETINGS, SEVERAL MEETINGS AND CORRESPONDENCE WITH MOSTLY MOST THE, I THINK WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ONE SPEAKER TODAY, MOST OF THEM HAVE BEEN IN THOSE CALLS AND IN THOSE MEETINGS.

AND WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION WITH THEM, SAT DOWN WITH THEM AND ADDRESSED SEVERAL OF THEIR CONCERNS BEFORE.

THANK YOU, MR. RUBIN.

I'M GONNA NEED SOME HELP PARSING, UM, ARTICLE 13.

UM, IN LIGHT OF SOME OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE, SO I AM IN 13.306, I GUESS IT'S B THAT THE USE CHART THAT I THINK MS. HOPKINS WAS REFERRING TO.

AND I SEE THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CATEGORIES, MIXED USE SHOPFRONT, SINGLE STORY SHOPFRONT, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ET CETERA.

AND I SEE THAT FOR MIXED USE SHOPFRONT AND SINGLE STORY SHOPFRONT VEHICLE SERVICE IS NOT AN ALLOWED USE.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, BUT YOU GOTTA GOTTA UNDERSTAND THAT THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY IS A DESIGNATION OF A STREET, NOT THE PARCELS.

SO WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE THAT USE WITHIN 30 FEET OF A PROPERTY THAT IS FRONTING A STREET THAT IS DESIGNATED, UH, WITH SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

THAT'S THE PRIMARY STREET.

LET ME, LET ME, LET ME STEP BACK HERE.

SO I THINK THERE MAY BE TWO DIFFERENT CONCEPTS.

THERE'S A SHOPFRONT DISTRICT, AND THEN IS THERE A SEPARATE CONCEPT OF A SHOPFRONT OVERLAY? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? IT'S A SHOPFRONT OVERLAY THAT IS APPLIED ON A STREET AND IT IS PARKED, IT IMPACTS ABIDING PROPERTIES.

AND THAT IS 30 FEET FROM THE FRONTAGE, THE, THE, THE FRONT FACADE OF THE TRACTOR ON THE PROPERTY.

SO IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE ENTIRE PARCEL, IT DOESN'T FOLLOW THE PARCEL BOUNDARIES, IT DOESN'T FOLLOW THE ENTIRE BUILDING FOOTPRINTS.

IT ONLY AFFECTS 30 FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE OF THE BUILDING.

AND THE PRIMARY GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE END UP WITH ACTIVE USES THAT GIVE US THE URBAN FORM THAT PROMOTE A SHOPPING DISTRICT.

AND WE DON'T END UP WITH USES THAT ARE EITHER INACTIVE OR DO NOT CONFORM TO THE URBAN FARM FOR THE SHOPPING OR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

SO JUST BECAUSE THE, THE, THE PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED WITH THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU CAN'T DO ANY OTHER ACTIVITY BEYOND THE 30 FEET IN INWARD MEASUREMENT.

WELL, WELL HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHERE IN THE CODE THIS 30 FEET CONCEPT IS.

I'M JUST IN 13.306 B, WHERE WE HAVE THE USE CHART.

WHERE, WHERE IS THE 30 FOOT OVERLAY CONCEPT IN THE CODE? WELL, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.

IS THIS ON? HI, I'M MEGAN WITH PLANNING AN URBAN DESIGN .

I, UM, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT I, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE, THAT USES AND DEVELOPMENT TYPE ARE SEPARATE THINGS.

AND SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY, IT'S NOT AFFECTING EXISTING, I MEAN, ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS.

SO BASICALLY WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY USES NON-CONFORMING MOST OF THE BUILDINGS THERE, IF NOT

[08:30:01]

BUT AGAIN, THEY'RE, THEY CAN CONTINUE THE USES THAT ARE THERE TODAY.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S KIND OF ANSWERING THE QUESTION.

I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THERE WASN'T CONFUSION ABOUT, OKAY, SO YOU, YOU MENTIONED A DISTINCTION BETWEEN USES AND DEVELOPMENT TYPE.

WHAT, WHAT IS THAT? CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE MORE? RIGHT.

SO IN THE FORM-BASED CODE, THERE IS, UM, WE'LL GO TO THAT SLIDE AND IF YOU CAN CITE TO SPECIFIC PROVISIONS THAT WILL HELP ME WRAP MY HEAD AROUND.

SO I GUESS I'LL JUST KIND OF, WHILE I, I DON'T HAVE THE CODE SECTIONS MEMORIZED, SO I WILL ASK FOR SOME HELP WITH THAT.

CAN I WORRY ABOUT YOU IF YOU DID ? UM, SO WITHIN THE, THE WMU THREE DISTRICT, UM, AS IN WITH ALL THE FORM-BASED DISTRICTS, WE ARE REGULATING FORM PRIMARILY.

SO WE FIRST START WITH THE ALLOWABLE DEVELOPMENT TYPES.

AND SO THAT IS SECTION 51, A 13.304 DEVELOPMENT TYPES.

SO WE WOULD LOOK AT THE, UH, WALKABLE MIXED USE THREE DISTRICT.

THAT'S THE LOWEST INTENSITY FORM DISTRICT AS, UM, SETH MENTIONED EARLIER.

SO IT'S THE TOP LINE.

AND WITHIN THAT, AND THIS IS WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NEW DEVELOPMENT, NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE DISTRICT, MUST COMPLY WITH ONE OF THOSE DEVELOPMENT TYPES.

AND SO IF THEY WERE DOING A GENERAL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TYPE, THEN YOU WOULD GO TO THE USE CHART TO SEE WHAT USES ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THAT DEVELOPMENT TYPE.

AND SO WHAT IT HAS BEEN BUILDING INSPECTIONS PRACTICE TO WHEN MAKING, WHEN CREATING A FORM DISTRICT ON EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, WE RECOGNIZE THAT ALL THE STRUCTURES ARE GOING TO BE NON-CONFORMING AS TO THE FORM-BASED DISTRICT STANDARDS.

BUT THEN WE LOOK AT THE USES THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT TYPES THAT ARE ALLOWED.

AND THOSE USES, IF THEY COMPLY, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE OPERATING.

WE'RE NOT GONNA SAY JUST BECAUSE YOUR STRUCTURE DOESN'T COMPLY, YOU CAN'T OPERATE THE USE.

SO I I GET THAT THERE'S A DISTINCTION BETWEEN A, A USE AND A STRUCTURE, YOU KNOW, THE SETBACK ON RIGHT.

AN AUTO SERVICE USE, IT MAY NOT BE, YOU KNOW, UP AS CLOSE TO THE STREET AS EXACTLY AS THE, THE STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS OF, OF ARTICLE 13 REQUIRE, I, I'M FOLLOWING THERE.

I I ASSUME A, A CHANGING TO A FORM BASED DISTRICT CAN ALSO CREATE NON-CONFORMING USES, RIGHT? IT'S POSSIBLE, YES.

AND I JUST NEED, MAYBE THIS HAS BEEN EXPLAINED BEFORE, BUT IT'S JUST NOT LOOKING FOR ME YET.

WITH THIS SHOPFRONT OVERLAY ALONG, I THINK IT'S EDGEFIELD AND THE, THE ONE THAT BROUGHT OUT FERNDALE, FERNDALE, IT'S, IT, THOSE ARE THE TWO STREETS WITH THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAYS OVER THEM, RIGHT? YES.

AND THEN DO THE MIXED USE SHOPFRONT OR SINGLE STORY SHOPFRONT USE RESTRICTIONS APPLY TO THE, UH, USE REGULATIONS APPLY TO THOSE TWO STREETS.

SO IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE USE REGULATIONS AS IT IS THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

AND WE, IF SOMEONE COULD, WOULD BE SO KIND, MAYBE DANIEL HAS THE FORM BASE CODE.

IF WE COULD LOOK AT THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY DISTRICT STANDARD.

I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT.

I, I THINK I'M THERE IN THE CODE, BUT I DON'T WANNA GET OUTTA YOU.

IT'S UNDER 13.301 DISTRICT'S ESTABLISHED.

SORRY, I'M, THIS IS NOT MY VERSION OF THE CODE, SO I'M COMPLETELY LOST.

IT LOOKS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT IT, WHERE I'M USED TO JUST FLIPPING THE THINGS.

SO IF YOU, IF YOU HAVE IT THERE, DID YOU, MS. SLIMER? YES, MA'AM.

ARE YOU MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE PDF VERSION OF IT? PROBABLY, YEAH.

THAT'S OKAY.

[08:35:28]

SORRY, I APOLOGIZE.

ARE YOU LOOKING FOR THE SPECIFIC I FOUND IT, I FOUND IT IN THE, IN THE PAPER PRINTED P THE OLD, OLD SCHOOL WAY.

UM, ALL RIGHT.

SO THE, UM, IT'S, SORRY.

WOULD YOU LIKE A SECTION? I THINK IT'S, IT'S D FOUR SOMETHING D FOUR, RIGHT? A DC, YES.

DD THAT'S CORRECT.

AND THEN THAT IT IS D SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

SO, UM, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT USES, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, AND I'M SORRY, WAS THE QUESTION SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHERE THE 30 FEET MEASURED INWARD CAME FROM? I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY.

I MEAN, I HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME, SO LET ME MAKE, IS IT OKAY IF I ASK A NEW QUESTION? SURE.

I THINK I'M THERE, BUT LET ME, LET ME, IF I FAIL SOON, THEN I WILL.

D FOUR PROVIDES WHERE A SHOP SH OVERLAY DESIGNATION BEEN APPLIED TO A WMU OR WR DISTRICT, WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE HERE, RIGHT? THE STANDARDS FOR A MIXED USER, SINGLE STORY SHOP FRONT DEVELOPMENT HAVE APPLIED TO AT LEAST THE FIRST 30 FEET OF THE BUILDING.

MEASURED INWARDS FROM THE STREET FACING FACADE.

AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE SHOP FRONT DISTRICT USE REGULATIONS JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO AND 13.306.

RIGHT? RIGHT.

DO THOSE SHOPFRONT USE REGULATIONS APPLY TO THE FIRST 30 FEET OF THE BUILDING? RIGHT.

JUST THE FIRST 30 FEET.

AND THE INTENT IS TO HAVE ACTIVE USES ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE.

SO, SO IF YOU'RE OPERATING A VEHICLE SERVICE STATION RIGHT NOW, AND LET'S JUST SAY, I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN, YOU CAN OPERATE WHAT YOU HAVE TODAY, BUT LET'S JUST SAY YOUR BUSINESS IS GOING GREAT AND YOU DECIDE TO, YOU KNOW, BUILD A NEW FACILITY THERE.

IN THAT CASE, CAN A AUTOBODY SHOP OR A VEHICLE REPAIR SHOP OPERATE ON THAT PARCEL JUST OUTSIDE OF THE 30 FEET? YES.

YOU CAN HAVE MULTIPLE USES WITHIN A PROPERTY.

AND YOU COULD HAVE, UH, OFFICE USE IN FRONT WITHIN THE PAST 30 FEET AND THEN BEHIND IT, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER OPERATION YOU DO, AS LONG AS IT IS AN ALLOWED USE IN WMU THREE DISTRICT, YOU'D BE ABLE TO OFFER IT.

AND LET'S, YOU KNOW, I, I KNOW WHEN I TAKE MY CAR TO THE SHOP, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LITTLE OFFICE WAITING AREA THAT YOU SIT IN, UH, WHILE YOU'RE WAITING TO GET YOUR OIL CHANGED, YOUR CAR WORKED ON.

IS THAT THE SORT OF OFFICE THAT'S PERMITTED IN THE FIRST 30 FEET, OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE A COMPLETELY SEPARATE OFFICE? I MEAN, IT'S JUST WHERE THE OVERLAY IS APPLICABLE.

IT IS ONLY APPLICABLE WITHIN THE FIRST 30 FEET.

BEYOND THAT, YOU DEFAULT TO THE BASIS ONLY.

I, AND SO IF YOU HAD GENERAL COMMERCIAL BUILDING, YOU CANNOT HAVE, UH, THE ECHO SERVICE WITHIN THE FIRST 30 FEET.

THE OPERATION CAN'T HAPPEN WITHIN THE FIRST 30 FEET.

BUT BEHIND THAT, IF YOU HAVE A GENERAL COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT ALLOWS FOR AUTO REPAIR, YOU CAN STILL DO THAT.

SO TO MEET THE USE STANDARDS, THEY WOULD MOST LIKELY REQUIRE A SEPARATE CO.

I, I, I GET THAT PAST 30 FEET.

YOU'RE ABLE TO FIX YOUR CARS, REPAIR YOUR CARS, GREAT.

BUT THAT FIRST 30 FEET, DOES THAT OFFICE HAVE TO BE, CAN IT BE AN OFFICE OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE AUTO BODY SHOP? OR DOES THAT YOU HAVE TO RENT IT OUT TO A DENTIST OR A, YOU KNOW, CPA? I'M, I, SO I CURRENTLY DO NOT SPEAK ON BEHALF OF BUILDING INSPECTION, BUT I CAN TELL YOU WHAT I BELIEVE THE PRACTICE HAS BEEN IN THE PAST.

[08:40:01]

NOW THAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE IT FROM BEING OPERATED BY THE, BY THE AUTO SHOP, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THEY WOULD PROBABLY WANT A SEPARATE SUITE CREATED TO FULLY MEET THE, YOU KNOW, MAIN USE REQUIREMENTS BY IDENTIFYING OFFICE AS A MAIN USE.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS MY SPECULATION BASED ON WHAT I'VE SEEN FROM BUILDING INSPECTION IN THE PAST.

SO IT, IT MIGHT NEED TO BE A SEPARATE SUITE WITH A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR AN OFFICE.

BUT I'M GONNA, IT SOUNDS LIKE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND I FEEL LIKE I'VE MONOPOLIZED IT FOR NOW.

I MAY COME BACK AROUND ON A SECOND ROUND, NOT IZING IT ALL.

IT'S UH, IT'S GETTING CLEAR THE ARTICLE 13 FOG IS, IS IS THICK.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON IS GONNA CLEAR IT UP FOR ALL OF US.

I KNOW, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT, BUT I DID WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, BECAUSE WITHIN THE DEFINITIONS THERE IS A DEFINITION OF ACTIVE USE.

AND I THINK THE WAY I, AND I'M GOING TO USE IT IN REGARD TO FOR INSTANCE, AND UM, I HOPE STAFF WILL JUMP IN AS WELL.

I HAVE A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT.

'CAUSE THAT IS THE OTHER THING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY AUTOBODY.

BUT IT APPLIES TO WHATEVER USE, WHATEVER ALLOWED USE WITHIN THE DISTRICT.

SO YOU START WITH WNU THAT TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR DISTRICT TYPE IS, DON'T WANT USE TYPE, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF OVERLAP OF TERMINOLOGY, WHICH I THINK IS CONFUSING.

BUT FROM THE WM U THREE, THEN YOU GO TO THE DEVELOPMENT TYPE THAT IS CALLED OUT WITHIN SECTION, UM, 13.304.

THE DEVELOPMENT TYPE TELLS YOU WHAT YOUR ALLOWED USES ARE.

AND THEN WITHIN THAT YOU GO TO SECTION 13 3 0 6.

AND THEN THAT DRILLS DOWN INTO, I CAN DO MY AUTO BODY SHOP, WHICH FALLS WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL ZONING.

ON TOP OF THAT, ON ELMWOOD AND FERNDALE, WE HAVE A SHOP FRONT OVERLAY, THE MAIN FUNCTION OF, AND AGAIN, STAFF PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

WE'RE LIKE, YEAH, YOU CAN GET THERE.

, THAT SHOP FRONT OVERLAY SIMPLY SAYS, HERE'S WHERE YOUR BUILDING GOES.

YOU GOT YOUR MEN MAX IN THE FIRST 30 FEET.

YOU HAVE A DEFINED ACTIVE USE.

I'M GOING TO USE MY RESIDENTIAL EXAMPLE.

I HAVE A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING.

I'M DOING A TWO STORY TOWN HOME, WHATEVER I'M DOING, I CAN'T PUT A PARKING, I CAN'T PUT MY PARKING GARAGE IN THAT FIRST 30 FEET.

I COULD PUT MY LIVING ROOM THERE, I COULD PUT MY KITCHEN THERE, I COULD PUT, I COULD DO AN ACTUAL RETAIL WITH TWO STORIES OF RESIDENTIAL ABOVE IT.

IT'S, IT'S ONLY SAYING THAT WHATEVER IS IN THAT FIRST 30 FEET IS ACTIVE.

SO IF I WAS A AUTOBODY SHOP AND I HAD A SMALL OFFICE, IF I HAD A WAITING ROOM, I, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T THINK STORAGE IS NECESSARILY ALLOWED, BUT IT'S SIMPLY SAYING THAT FIRST 30 FEET, BUT YOU CAN ALSO SET BACK, I BELIEVE IT'S FIVE MINIMUM 15 MAXIMUM.

SO YOU WOULD ALSO POTENTIALLY SET BACK MORE.

MAYBE I HAVE A PAUSE OUT FRONT.

AGAIN, I THINK THAT GOES THROUGH THE INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT TYPE.

I WILL SAY, I ASKED MANY OF THE SAME QUESTIONS AFTER OUR BRIEFING TRYING TO GET MY MIND AROUND IT WAS STABBED.

OKAY, I'M AN EXISTING BUSINESS.

MY BUILDING IS SET BACK 120 FEET.

I'VE GOT TWO ROWS OF SURFACE PARKING IN FRONT OF ME.

I WANNA EXPAND MY BUSINESS.

I'M NOT GONNA BE COMPLIANT WITH SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

I MEAN, PRESUMING I'M ON ONE OF THE TWO STREETS.

SO WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT FIRST 30 FEET? DOES IT GET DESIGNATED AS OPEN SPACE? IT CAN'T BE PARKING.

I DON'T, AS I READ IT, THAT'S NOT ALLOWED.

BUT WHAT HAPPENS AND HOW MUCH COULD YOU EXPAND THAT EITHER EXISTING BUSINESS OR, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M DOING GREAT.

I DON'T WANNA DO THIS ANYMORE.

THERE'S A COFFEE SHOP THAT'S GONNA OPEN IN THIS BUILDING, BUT THE, EVERYBODY LOVES THIS BUILDING AND I WANNA REUSE THIS BUILDING.

BUT AGAIN, I'M TOO FAR BACK FOR THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

SO CAN STAFF KIND OF WALK THROUGH? WHAT WOULD THOSE TWO SCENARIOS LOOK LIKE? CAN, CAN I, SO I, I THINK SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO REITERATE THAT THIS WOULD ONLY BE APPLICABLE IN A CASE WHERE YOU ARE EITHER RECONSTRUCTING OR MAKING MAJOR INNOVATION.

AND DICTATE WHAT HAPPENS WITHIN THE SPACE.

SO CURRENTLY AS IS, RIGHT, MOST OF THOSE AUTO RELATED USES THAT YOU HAVE THERE ARE NONCONFORMING ANYWAY.

SO THEY'RE GONNA BE NONCONFORMING EVEN WHEN WE ADOPT THE NEW ZONING CHANGE.

BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU TEAR DOWN THE BUILDING AND YOU WANT TO BUILD A NEW ONE, YOU CAN DECIDE TO BE CREATIVE AND SAY, I'M NOT GONNA HAVE THIS TYPE OF USE WITHIN THE FIRST 50 FEET.

BECAUSE YOU ARE CREATING A NEW STRUCTURE.

YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO REDESIGN

[08:45:01]

SO YOU CAN SAY, I'M GONNA HAVE A WAITING ROOM IN THE AREA.

I'M GONNA DISPLAY MY, MY MERCHANDISE SOMETIMES REFLECTORS AND YOU KNOW, WASHERS.

I, I, I GO TO AUTO TO AUTO REPAIR SHOPS THAT HAVE THIS KIND OF SETTING ALL THE TIME.

YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY HAVE SOMETHING LIKE A LITTLE SHOP WHERE THEY'RE SELLING LIKE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND THAT WOULD BE DESIGNATED AS RETAIL AND IT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE SHOP ROLLED OVER.

SO YOU JUST HAVE TO BE CREATIVE.

SO IS IT CORRECT, 'CAUSE I THINK YOU MAY HAVE UNLOCKED THE OTHER PIECE OF THIS IS THAT THERE LEGALLY NON-CONFORMING TODAY, IT SOUNDS LIKE IN MANY CASES, SO THEY COULDN'T EXPAND TODAY BEYOND WHAT IS ALREADY ALLOWED IN THE CODE.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES.

AND SO THIS IS NOT CHANGING THE CURRENT CONDITION IN REGARD TO LE I, AND I THINK YOU MAY HAVE SAID THIS IN THE EARLIER BRIEFING, ARE THERE EXISTING USES THAT WILL BECOME NON-CONFORMING? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT STAFF HAS EVALUATED? SO NOT ONES THAT ARE ALREADY LEGALLY NON-CONFORMING.

ARE THERE EXISTING LEGAL USES THAT WILL BECOME NON-CONFORMING IF THIS CHANGE IS OCCURRED, THAT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED, CORRECT? NOT THAT I KNOW OF.

UH, THE ONLY USE THAT I THINK WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT WAS ONE SINGLE, UH, RE THE RES SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES.

I SAW THAT.

THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS IN THE AREA THAT WILL NOT BE ALLOWED.

BUT SINGLE FAMILY LIVING IS ALLOWED.

SO YOU CAN HAVE SINGLE FAMILY AS A USE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT.

AND SO THEN I'M JUST, JUST, AND THEN THE CARWASH WAS ANOTHER ONE THAT WE WERE CONCERNED, BUT THAT IS TAKEN CARE OF ON THE DEFINITION FOR VEHICLE SERVICE.

SO THE OTHER USES ARE STILL GONNA BE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT.

PERMITTED IN THE DISTRICT.

AND I, IF I CAN JUST ONE FOLLOW UP TO MAKE SURE I'VE GOT THIS REALLY CLEAR.

SO EXISTING BUILDING, I CHANGE MY USE, MY BUILDING DOESN'T CONFORM TO SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

I WOULD HAVE TO WORK WITH BUILDING INSPECTION TO FIGURE OUT HOW I MODIFIED WHATEVER WAS ON THE SITE OR DESIGNATED AS OPEN SPACE OR SOMETHING ELSE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.

ACTUALLY, OPEN SPACE IS NOT ALLOWED.

IS THAT A CHANGE OF USE? DOESN'T TRIGGER HAVING TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARD CHANGES TO THE STRUCTURE.

IT'S, IT'S CHANGES TO THE STRUCTURE.

AND IF, AND ONLY IF IT IS A MAJOR CHANGE OF STRUCTURE THAT AFFECTS UP TO, UH, AT LEAST 35% YES.

OF THE FLOOR AREA.

SO IF YOU'RE JUST MAKING MINOR INNOVATION OR MAYBE JUST FIXING A FEW THINGS HERE AND THERE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE.

YOU STILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR AND MR. CHAIR, MAY I ADD SOMETHING TO THAT REGARDING ABSOLUTELY.

THE NEW BUILDING, NEW STRUCTURES THAT ARE GOING TO COME UP.

SO I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR THAT STAFF WOULD BE IN FULL SUPPORT OF NOT GOING FORWARD WITH THE SHOP SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

IT WAS NOT PART OF OUR ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION.

IT WAS NOT PART OF EARLY DISCUSSIONS.

IT CAME UP VERY LATE IN THE PROCESS BY SOME OF THE SPEAKERS WHO ARE HERE TODAY, AS SETH MENTIONED.

AND SO WE WERE, UM, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO BE ACCOMMODATING.

HOWEVER, I DON'T THINK WE'RE SURE THAT IT REALLY ADDS MUCH VALUE.

IT REALLY SEEMS TO BE CAUSING MORE CONFUSION THAN NECESSARY.

UM, YOU KNOW, THE FORM DISTRICT ITSELF ADDRESSES THE STREET FRONTAGE AND WALKABILITY AND ACTIVE USES.

AND SO REALLY I THINK MOST OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

SO IF THAT HELPS, IF THAT MAKES ANYONE FEEL BETTER, YOU WOULD HAVE OUR SUPPORT.

AND , YOU KNOW, I I JUST WANNA MENTION THAT THE, THE, THE DISTRICT, MOST OF THE STREETS THAT ARE THERE ARE DOMINATED BY AUTO-RELATED USES, RIGHT? SO I THINK THE IMPETUS, THE, THE REASON WHY EVEN THE SHOW FRAUD OVERLAY CAME WAS BECAUSE THEY REALIZED THAT THEY WANT THE DESIRABLE, LIKE THE MORE ACTIVE, MORE KIND OF USES THAT DEFINE THE URBAN FORM THAT THEY WANT.

SO IF WE TAKE THIS OUT AND WE SAY YOU'RE GONNA CONTINUE WITH THE USES THAT YOU HAVE, WELL, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THE ZONING IN THE BOOKS, BUT REALIZING THE URBAN FORM, WHICH IS WHAT IS ENVISIONED IN THE PLAN, IS GONNA BE A CHALLENGE.

SO I THINK IT'S KIND OF A BALANCING ACT.

DO YOU WANT TO GET WHAT WAS DESCRIBED, THE VISION THAT WAS DESCRIBED IN THE PLAN, OR YOU WANNA KEEP CONTINUING AS YOU'VE BEEN BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO MAKE CHANGES, RIGHT? THEY CAN STILL CONTINUE DOING WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

THEY JUST HAVE TO BE CREATIVE AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO MAKE ANY CHANGES UNLESS THERE'S SIGNIFICANT RENOVATION OR IMPROVEMENT THAT HAS TO BE DONE TO THE STRUCTURE THAT AFFECTS MORE THAN 35% OF THE FLOOR AREA.

OR IT'S A TOTAL RECONSTRUCTION WHERE YOU TEAR DOWN THE BUILDING AND YOU'RE BUILDING A NEW ONE.

SO FOR THE MOST CASES, THIS IS GONNA COME INTO PLAY WITH

[08:50:01]

THEY CAN STILL CONTINUE OPERATING THE WAY THEY ARE.

IN FACT, THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING WITHOUT NECESSARILY BEING IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE EXISTING ZONING.

COMMISSIONER WILL, UH, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AND BECAUSE IF WE ARE CONFUSED, I'M FOR SURE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS CONFUSED EVEN ON THE AMOUNT OF MEETINGS.

AND, AND I'M HEARING YOU SAY THAT THEY HAVE TO GET CREATIVE.

MY SPECIALTY IS GETTING PERMITS, AND I COULD TELL YOU EVEN IN THAT I HAVE TO YELL, SCREAM, AND FIGHT AT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.

UH, SO ARE YOU AWARE, LIKE ARE YOU AWARE THAT THAT, SO IS EVERYONE THAT'S CAME TO SPEAK THAT ARE BUSINESS, THE BUSINESS OWNERS AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, ARE THEY ALL NON-PERFORMING? BECAUSE THESE, WE'VE HAD NO ONE THAT CAME TO THE MIC THAT WAS NOT IN OPPOSITION ISSUE.

LET ME SAY, THERE WAS A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT CAME TO SUPPORT THIS TODAY.

A LOT OF PEOPLE I SPOKE TO ABOUT SEVEN PEOPLE AND THEY WERE GIVEN THE WRONG INFORMATION.

BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT, SO SOME OF THEM CAME AT NINE O'CLOCK, SOME OF THEM CAME AT NOON, AND YOU KNOW, THEY WERE COMING TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS.

SO IT MIGHT LOOK LIKE THERE'S NOBODY THAT SUPPORTS THIS.

BUT YOU KNOW, FROM SOMEBODY THAT HAS BEEN ENGAGING WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE FOR AND AGAINST, I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE, MAJORITY OF THE STAKEHOLDERS, PEOPLE WHO HAVE CALLED ME, THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE OUT OF TOWN THAT HAVE CALLED ME AND SAID THAT THEY NEED SOME CHANGE IN THE AREA, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT NECESSARILY DEFINING WHAT THAT CHANGE IS.

A LOT OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THE CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THIS AREA.

SO IS IT, IS IT MOSTLY THE NEWER PROPERTY OWNERS? THE BLACK, NOT NECESSARILY THE NEW ONE.

A LOT OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR A LONG TIME.

SO I AM, I, I'M, I'M LIKE, I'M TOTALLY CONCERNED BECAUSE WHEN WE LEAVE IT UP TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO, TO, TO, ARE YOU AWARE THAT WHEN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, UM, WHEN IT'S A NON-PERFORMING USE, THAT WHEN IT GETS TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, THE HURDLES THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH TO SHOW THAT THEY ARE, THAT THEY HAVE NOT, UM, THE SIX MONTHS HAS NOT EXPIRED.

IF THEY DID SELL THE BUSINESS OR SOMETHING LIKE TO THAT EFFECT THAT THE HURDLES THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH.

SO IF WE JUST LEAVE THE, IF WE JUST LEAVE IT, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THEY NEED TO GET CREATIVE, WE SHOULDN'T BE CREATIVE.

THERE'S SHOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S ROUND SOMETHING THAT'S WRITTEN RIGHT.

AND, AND I DON'T THINK, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT BEING CREATIVE IN TERMS OF NON-CONFORMING USES.

WE HAVE CONFIRMED THAT OF THE EXISTING CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY.

WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY OF THE USES NON-CONFORMING.

SO WHEN IT GETS INTO STRUCTURES, THAT'S WHERE THE NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES COME INTO PLAY.

BUT REGARDING USES, WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY OF THE BUSINESSES THE USES OF THE FOLKS WHO WERE HERE SPEAKING TODAY, WE'RE NOT MAKING THEM NON-CONFORMING.

SO MAYBE, LET ME ASK THIS.

IF THE, IF, IF ANY ONE OF THESE BUSINESS OWNERS WERE WANTING TO TEAR THEIR BUILDING DOWN AND REBUILDING NEW BUILDING THAT IS BETTER AND LOOKS, MAYBE THEY WANNA BUILD A BODY SHOP OR A AUTO SHOP THAT LOOKS PROBABLY LIKE IN NORTH DALLAS WHERE IT'S REAL COOL AND CLEAN.

I, I TAKE MY, MY BEANS THERE.

THAT'S HOW NICE IT IS IN THE BUILDING.

THEY WOULD NOT KNOW, ONCE THEY TEAR THE BUILDING DOWN, THE STRUCTURE DOWN, THEY WILL BE NOT, THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD A NEW BUILDING WITH THE SAME USE.

AM I CORRECT? NOT THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO WITH THE SAME USE.

THEY'LL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE YARD LOT AND SPACE STANDARD.

SO THEY'LL HAVE TO MEET THE NEW SETBACK.

THEY'LL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE NEW HEIGHT.

SO WE'RE STILL JUST TALKING ABOUT THE ARE AND, AND WILL THE FIRST 30 FEET OF THEIR BUILDING ALSO HAVE TO BE SOME OTHER USE? SO IT DEPENDS.

THAT'S IF WE KEEP THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY, THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY DOES DICTATE THE ACTIVE USE IN THE FIRST 30 FEET, BUT YES, 30 FEET, AGAIN, SHOPPER OVERLAY.

SO CAN, CAN YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THE REASON THAT YES, THE OPPOSITION MAKES SENSE BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY SAYING THE SAME THING, BUT NOT THE, THE SAYING IS IF THAT THE MOMENT THE STRUCTURE IS DESTROYED, DESTROYED, THE CONFORMITY, THE NON-CONFORMING USE KICKS IN.

AND SO THEY COULDN'T EVEN MAKE IMPROVEMENTS IF THEY WANTED TO BECAUSE THE MOMENT THE BUILDING IS TORE DOWN, THE GRANDFATHER CLAUSE LEAVES.

SO WE'RE, WE'RE MIXING USE AND STRUCTURE AGAIN, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY USES NON-CONFORMING THE BUILDING ITSELF WILL BECOME NON-CONFORMING BUT NOT, WILL NOT BECOME NON-CON.

[08:55:01]

WELL, YEAH.

COMMUNITIES DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.

AND SO IF IT IS DESTROYED BY, IF IT IS DESTROYED INTENTIONALLY, LIKE YOU SAID, DEMOLISHED TO BUILD A NEW ONE, THE NEW BUILDING WILL NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT.

AND IF THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH ROOM ON THE PROPERTY FOR A SETBACK IS NON, IT CAN'T BE REBUILT.

WELL LUCK.

LUCKILY THE SETBACKS ARE LESS WITH THIS, SO THEY'RE, THEY'LL BE NEED TO BUILD CLOSER TO THE STREET.

I JUST, I DON'T KNOW.

I I'LL HAVE A COMMENT WHEN IT'S TIME TO COME IN.

SO IT'S, I I JUST, UH, I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW THESE BUSINESS OWNERS ARE FEELING.

I I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT, UH, THERE WAS A COUPLE OF THINGS, A REASON WHY IT CAME UP TO, BUT ONE OF THEM GOING OFF OF THIS, THIS WASN'T STAFF'S ORIGINAL PROPOSAL.

IT WAS, IT CAME FROM COMMUNITY.

SO THIS WAS OUR RESPONSE TO THOSE CONCERNS.

SO IF WE NEED TO ADJUST THAT, WE CAN DO THAT.

AND SO IT SEEMED THAT THAT WAS THE INTENT FROM THOSE WHO ASKED FOR IT TO GO IN THAT DIRECTION.

IF THAT'S NOT THE INTENT AND WE'RE FINDING THAT, THAT THERE ARE ISSUES WITH THAT, THEN WE CAN GO WITH A DIFFERENT APPROACH.

I DID ALSO WANT TO PLACE IT IN, I WANNA BE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS AWARE.

'CAUSE I KNOW WE'RE, THERE HAVE BEEN QUESTIONS ABOUT ENGAGEMENT AND ADDITIONAL ENGAGEMENT AND MORE TIME ON THINGS.

THIS IS A DIRECT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN THAT WENT ON FOR OVER TWO YEARS.

SO THERE WAS A VAST AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION THAT WENT INTO THAT LEADING UP TO THIS AND WHAT THE INTENT OF THE ZONING WAS GOING TO BE.

SO THERE WAS A PLAYBOOK IN PLACE.

SO I, AGAIN, I I, I DON'T WANT US TO LOSE THAT, THAT THIS DISCUSSION HAS NOW BEEN GOING ON FOR PROBABLY THREE AND A HALF YEARS.

SO I JUST DON'T WANNA LOSE THAT.

NOT TO SAY THAT THERE CAN'T BE ADJUSTMENTS AND THERE CAN'T BE MOVEMENT HERE, BUT I DON'T WANT US TO LOSE SIGHT OF THAT.

I, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE, 'CAUSE I KNOW HOW WE FEEL ABOUT PDS.

I'M, I'M, WAS NOT A PD EVER OFFERED TO THEM OR IS IS IT PART, WAS THIS A PART OF THE, ONE OF THE AREA PA AREA PLAN PACKAGES FOR DIFFERENT DISTRICT? THIS WAS PART OF, THIS WAS PART OF THE AREA PLAN? YES.

A PD A NON PD ACCOMPLISHED WHAT WAS LAID OUT IN THE PLAN.

TH THIS ZONING OPTION LAYS OUT AND ACCOMPLISHES WHAT WAS LAID OUT IN THE PLAN.

A PD WAS NOT NECESSARY.

I JUST ASKED BECAUSE IT WAS, IT WAS MENTIONED BY ONE OF THE, THAT THEY, THAT A PD, I MEAN WE WAS NOT GIVEN, I'M JUST SAYING, AND WE'RE, LET'S BE CLEAR, WE HAD, THIS IS NOT A CITY, THIS IS NOT A STAFF POLICY NOT TO DO PDS.

IF THERE IS A BASE ZONING OPTION TO KEEP US FROM DOING A PD, THAT IS WHAT WE TRY TO PURSUE.

AND A FORM DISTRICT, THAT WAS ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF LOW CAP.

YEAH, IT WAS.

AND I THINK THAT THE, THOSE, THE WMU THREES ARE BECOMING SUCH A, A, IT IS BECOMING AN THAT ISSUE.

I KNOW WE DON'T UNDERSTAND IT IN SOUTH DALLAS, SO I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND IT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS OF STAFF OR YOU GO TO A MOTION? THANK YOU.

YES, PLEASE.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF Z 1 78 DASH 1 42.

I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ITEM SUBJECT TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

I HAVE SOME COMMENTS.

UM, OKAY.

I I FEEL LIKE A LOT OF THE QUESTION, I'M SECOND IT.

THERE WAS OVER 7,790 TOUCH, UH, TOUCHPOINTS, PERSONAL TOUCHPOINTS.

YES, I DID.

I FEEL LIKE A LOT OF THE, UH, QUESTIONS TURN INTO DISCUSSION.

I THINK WE CAN, THIS IS PROBABLY A BETTER TIME TO GET INTO THIS.

UM, SO THE FIRST THING I WANT TO DRIVE HOME IS ACTUALLY THE COMMENTS THAT WERE JUST MADE.

UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SUMMARY AND THE STAFF'S REPORT, THE PURPOSE OF THE AUTHORIZED HEARING IS TO IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN.

THAT SHOULD BE THE GUIDING PRINCIPLE OF HOW WE'RE APPROACHING THIS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WAS O SOME OPPOSITION TODAY.

UM, THERE WAS ALSO SOME, UH, PEOPLE HERE IN SUPPORT THAT HAD TO LEAVE.

AND I'VE ALSO HAD PERSONAL CONTACT WITH PEOPLE THAT WERE SUPPORTING IT, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE CLOSEST TO THIS, THIS, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE BUSINESS OWNERS THAT ARE THERE.

I THINK WE SHOULD BE WAITING THEIR COMMENTS APPROPRIATELY AND HEAVILY.

BUT I ALSO WANNA BRING MORE CONTEXT TO THE FACT THAT THIS WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN, WHEN YOU LOOK BACK AT THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, I JUST WANNA QUICKLY GO OVER A COUPLE OF OF FACTS HERE.

THERE WERE 14 AREA PLAN TASK FORCE MEETINGS.

THERE WERE SEVERAL SEVEN VIRTUAL COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

THERE WERE SEV SEVEN IN-PERSON COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

THERE WERE FOUR IN-PERSON NEIGHBORHOOD EDUCATION WORKSHOPS.

THERE WAS OVER 17,000 VISITS TO A WEBSITE.

THERE WAS OVER 952 SURVEYS COMPLETED.

[09:00:01]

THOSE ALSO CAME THROUGH IN OVER 2,956 COMMENTS.

WHAT CAME OUT OF THAT ENGAGEMENT WAS THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORTED BY THIS BODY AND AT THE, UM, CITY COUNCIL WE'RE HERE TO APPLY THE OBJECTIVES OF THAT PLAN IN THIS CASE.

NOW, OBVIOUSLY THIS, UH, CASE WE GO A LITTLE BIT MORE GRANULAR.

THE WAY I PERSONALLY APPROACHED THIS WAS TO SEE IF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FORWARDED THOSE OBJECTIVES.

AND ALSO TO JUST CONFIRM THAT THERE HAVE NOT BEEN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES THAT HAVE CHANGED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE THAT PLAN WAS APPROVED SUCH THAT WE WOULD MAYBE WANNA REVISIT THE PLAN.

BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

I'VE NOT HEARD ANY, ANYBODY REACH OUT PRIOR TO THIS MEETING TODAY.

UM, OR MAKE COMMENT TODAY THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME EXTERNAL CIRCUMSTANCE THAT SHOULD BE TELLING US WHY WE SHOULD BE DEVIATING FROM THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN.

SO IF WE'RE GONNA APPLY THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN TO, TO SOME OF THE GOALS, UM, I'D LIKE TO QUICKLY JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT, WHAT THOSE WEST OAK CLIFF, UM, GOALS ARE.

AND I'M READING THIS FROM THE ACTUAL PLAN, PROTECT THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.

I FEEL LIKE THE RTN THAT IS IN OUR PLAN DOES THAT, AND I FEEL LIKE THE 300 FOOT ALCOHOL SEPARATION DOES THAT PRESERVE NATURAL AREAS AND EXPAND PUBLIC PARKS AND TRAILS IN CONJUNCTION WITH CREATING WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS THAT PROVIDE A VARIETY OF WORK, CULTURAL SHOPPING AND LIVING OPPORTUNITIES.

I FEEL LIKE THE, THE PLAN THAT WE WERE, UH, SHOWN THIS MORNING BY MR. RAINS REALLY FORWARDS THOSE OBJECTIVES IN AN INCREDIBLE WAY.

THAT'S GONNA BE A HUGE BENEFIT TO THIS AREA.

THERE'S, UH, IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION AND ACCESS THROUGH BETTER STREET DESIGN WAS A CORE IDEA OF WCAP.

THAT PLAN ALSO DOES FORWARD THOSE OBJECTIVES, ENCOURAGE BUSINESSES THAT ARE COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.

I FEEL LIKE THE, UH, EXAMPLES, UH, WITH ENCOURAGING THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY, WHICH I DO BELIEVE IS A NET BENEFIT.

I KNOW IT'S CREATING SOME CONFUSION FOR EVERYBODY HERE.

BUT I JUST WANNA ALSO, UM, FURTHER SHARE THAT THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS HAS HAD HAD TO DO THIS IN, IN MY DISTRICT.

IN FACT, THE OAK CLIFF GATEWAY, WHICH IS A PREDOMINANTLY OLDER AREA, TRANSITIONED TO A FORM-BASED CODE.

AND THAT WAS 850 ACRES.

AND SO IF YOU WANNA UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITY OF ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS, THIS IS, WE WOULD LOVE TO WA WA WAVE OUR MAGIC WAND AND TRANSITION FROM WHAT WAS TO WHAT WE'VE ENVISIONED IN OUR AREA PLAN.

IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY.

IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE, IT'S GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT MESSY.

AND I KNOW THAT THE INTENT IN BUILDING INSPECTION, THAT THEY, THIS IS NOT ABOUT DRIVING OUT EXISTING BUSINESSES.

I FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE THAT THE EXISTING BUSINESSES THAT ARE, THAT HAVE BEEN OPERATING IN THE AREA WILL CONTINUE TO BE ABLE TO DO SO.

I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT ONE THING IN THAT WOKE CAP COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.

I READ THROUGH A LOT OF THAT.

IT IS NOT THE OBJECTIVE OF WOKE CAP TO HAVE STREET ACTIVATING BUSINESS, BUSINESS-CENTRIC USES.

THAT DOES NOT MEAN I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD REMAIN FOR A LONG TIME.

I'M DEEPLY APPRECIATIVE THAT THOSE BUSINESSES ARE THERE NOW AND HAVE BEEN THERE AND PROVIDE A GREAT SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY.

THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE DRIVEN OUT.

BUT THAT'S ALSO OVER TIME, 10 YEARS, 20 YEARS FROM NOW, THAT'S NOT THE ULTIMATE VISION THAT WE ARE HOPING TO SEE FOR THIS COMMUNITY.

WE ARE HOPING TO SEE STREET ACTIVATING USES, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE DRIVING PRINCIPLES.

AND I BELIEVE EVENTUALLY WE'LL GET THERE AND WE WILL TRANSITION IN, IN A, IN A, IN A WAY THAT HONORS THE HISTORY OF THE, OF THE BUSINESSES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE.

AND AGAIN, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE A PLAN WHERE IT IS, UM, EXISTING CONDITIONS MOVING TO A, A GRAND VISION OF A VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, I, THERE, I CALL IT THE RUBIK'S CUBE EFFECTS.

AND YOU FIX THREE SIDES AND YOU'RE GOING FOR THAT FOURTH SIDE AND THEN YOU SCREW UP THE OTHER THREE SIDES AND EVERY TIME YOU THINK YOU GET IT RIGHT AND YOU TRY TO IMPROVE IT, WE'RE NOW COMPROMISING ANOTHER AREA.

AND THE SHOPFRONT

[09:05:01]

OVERLAYS A PERFECT EXAMPLE ON PAR, ON ON NET.

THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY, I BELIEVE SHOULD STAY BECAUSE I THINK THAT MS. HOPKINS' INTENT WAS SPOT ON IN THE SENSE THAT SHE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THIS AREA BEING OVERRUN WITH RESIDENTIAL.

AND I THINK THAT SHOPFRONT OVERLAY FURTHERS THE INTENT OF WOKE CAP.

UM, I'LL, I'LL BACK MY COMMENT.

MR. RUBIN.

UM, I, I AGREE WITH THE VAST MAJORITY OF WHAT COMMISSIONER CHERLOCK JUST SAID.

UM, AND, AND I WILL HONE IN ON HIS COMMENTS, HONE IN ON HIS COMMENTS THAT THAT WCAP WAS VERY THOUGHTFUL, SORT OF BROAD-BASED PLANNING.

AND NOW THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING IS THE GRANULAR PIECE.

UM, I THINK I, AFTER ALL OF OUR DISCUSSION WITH STAFF, UM, TONIGHT ABOUT THE, THE SHOP PARK OVERLAY DON'T NECESSARILY SEE THE INITIAL CONCERNS WITH IT.

WERE RAISED IN ABOUT THAT.

THEY WERE RAISED WITH IT ABOUT IT POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, DISPLACING EXISTING AUTO ORIENTED BUSINESSES.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, IF THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY WORKS AS INTENDED, I THINK IT CAN SORT OF EXIST IN CONCERT WITH THOSE, THOSE AUTO, YOU KNOW, SERVICE ORIENTED USES.

BUT I JUST WONDERED NOW, AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, NOW THAT I'VE HEARD MORE ABOUT THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY AND THAT CITY STAFF WAS INITIALLY CONCERNED ABOUT ADDING IT, THAT IT MAYBE IT JUST ADDS A ADDITIONAL LAYER OF COMPLEXITY TO THE ZONING IN THIS AREA THAT THAT WILL NOT ULTIMATELY BENEFIT, YOU KNOW, THE BUSINESS OWNERS OR THE AREA, THE EXISTING BUSINESS OWNERS, FUTURE BUSINESS AREA OWNERS OR THE AREAS WHOLE, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WE TRY TO GET VERY SMART AND CLEVER WITH OUR ZONING AND I THINK THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY IS A CLEAR EXAMPLE OF THAT WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO IMPOSE SOME DESIGN STANDARDS THAT, THAT ARE SOUND GREAT IN THEORY, BUT I JUST WORRY THAT IT, THAT IN PRACTICE IT'S GOING TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, GETTING THINGS DONE IN A DOWNTOWN ELMWOOD AREA MUCH MORE DIFFICULT.

SO I AM TEMPTED TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND, TO STRIP THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY.

I'M NOT GONNA DO IT JUST YET.

I WANNA HEAR FROM OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BODY, BUT THAT IS WHAT'S ON MY MIND AT THE MOMENT.

COMMISSIONER RE ALL BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

IN THE STAFF REPORT RIGHT NOW AFTER DOING RESEARCH, WE THINK THAT IF THEY WANT THE URBAN FORM THAT THE COMMUNITY IS ENVISIONING MAKING THIS MORE VIBRANT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT THAT IS MORE ACTIVE ON THE GROUND LEVEL, I THINK THE CHEVRON OVERLAY KIND OF CRISIS US TOWARDS THAT GOAL.

SO THAT, THAT'S ACTUALLY MY QUESTION.

ALSO, CAN, CAN I GO BACK TO STAFF FOR A CLARIFICATION? SURE.

UM, MS. WELLNER, I THINK YOU SAID THAT THE SHOP OVERLAY WAS NOT ORIGINALLY STAFF'S POSITION, BUT IT IS CLEARLY STAFF'S POSITION IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT WE RECEIVED.

SO CAN YOU, CAN YOU JUST AGAIN, JUST WANT SOME CLARIFICATION ABOUT THAT POINT, WHICH DOES SEEM TO BE A BIT OF A STICKING POINT.

SO WHEN WE STARTED, WHEN WE MADE THE INITIAL RECOMMENDATION, WE WERE GOING PURELY WITH WHAT WAS IN WORKUP.

AND WORKUP CALLED FOR A WALKABLE MIXED USE DISTRICT.

AND AS WE CONTINUE TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, UH, I THINK THE ISSUE OF WHAT DO WE WANT TO SEE IN THESE SHOPPING STREET, THE MAIN PRIMARY COMMERCIAL STREETS.

AND THERE WERE CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED, LIKE, UH, COMMISSIONER HAS POINTED OUT THAT THERE'S A POSSIBILITY BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY DESIRABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THE COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL IS NOT DOING VERY WELL CURRENTLY IN THE DISTRICT THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER WITH THE NEW ZONING THAT ALLOWS THEM TO DO RESIDENTIAL TOWN HOMES AND MIXED USE MIGHT BE TEMPTED TO GO FOR THAT WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BECAUSE IT'S ALLOWED.

SO TO PROTECT THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS CHANGING TO RESIDENTIAL USE, THEY WANTED TO SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO ENSURE ACTIVE USES, AT LEAST ON THE GROUND FLOOR.

THEY'RE NOT OPPOSED TO HAVING RESIDENTIAL.

SO THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY GETS US TOWARDS THAT.

IT KINDA PUSHES US TOWARDS ENSURING THAT WE STILL CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND NOT NECESSARILY A PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL USE ON THE GROUND FLOOR.

SO, BUT WHEN WE STARTED, IT WAS PRIMARILY GOING BY WHAT WORKUP SAID AND IT DID CALL FOR WORKABLE MIX USE DISTRICT.

OKAY, THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.

SO IF I'M HEARING YOU CORRECTLY, YOU STARTED WITH JUST A PURE MWMU BUT THEN BASED ON FEEDBACK YES.

YOU ADDED THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY AND STAFF DOES FIRMLY SUPPORT WHAT'S

[09:10:01]

WITHOUT IT, WE ARE GONNA END UP WITH SOME USES THAT MIGHT WORK AGAINST THAT VISION.

OKAY, THANK YOU THEN I, I FULLY SUPPORT THE MOTION.

THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.

COMMISSIONER RETT, MAYBE, PARDON ME ONE SECOND.

MAYBE THE CHRONOLOGY WILL BE HELPFUL TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IT.

AND YOU CORRECT ME IF, IF I HAVE IT WRONG.

UH, COUPLE OF COMING, UH, COMMUNITY MEETINGS AT THE LAST ONE OF WHICH THE COMMUNITY VOTED TO SEND THE ITEM TO THE PLAN COMMISSION.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES.

AFTER THAT VOTE, THERE WERE STILL SOME FOLKS IN OPPOSITION.

THEY STILL HAD SOME ISSUES AND THEY PROPOSED TO YOU THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY OF MS. HOPKINS.

THEY WERE NOT OPPOSED, AT LEAST THE SPECIFIC, SO THAT CAME AND PROPOSED WAS NOT OPPOSED.

HAD ALL THESE MEETINGS, WE'VE HAD ALL THIS CONVERSATION, AND THEN WE GET TO THIS LAST LINE AND THEY'RE, AND THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY WAS NOT EXPLAINED TO THEM.

WAS CONCERNED THAT EVEN THOUGH WE ARE GOING TO RECOMMEND THE FORM DISTRICT, THERE'S A POSSIBILITY AND LIKELIHOOD THAT WE MIGHT NOT GET TO THE URBAN FORM THAT PROMOTES COMMERCIAL USAGE ON THESE PRIMARY CORRIDORS, YOU KNOW, THE TWO STREETS.

SO THEY DIDN'T RECOMMEND IT FOR ALL THE STREETS IN THE DISTRICT, JUST THOSE TWO PRIMARY STREETS THAT THEY WANTED TO ENSURE THAT THEY BECOME MORE VIBRANT COMMERCIAL SHOPPING DISTRICT.

UNDERSTOOD.

SO THAT RECOMMENDATION WAS BROUGHT IN BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY? MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.

WE CAME AND KIND OF DID RECITE, WENT TO GATEWAY FARM DISTRICT.

WE FOUND OUT, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT THEY HAD BEEN DISCUSSED AND WHAT WAS WORKING AND WHAT WASN'T WORKING.

AND WE FELT IT WAS THE APPROPRIATE RECOMMENDATION FOR STAFF TO MAKE FOR THOSE STREETS THAT AT LEAST THEY WANTED TO KIND OF ENSURE THAT THEY BECOME VIBRANT AS COMMERCIAL STREET.

NOW FOR THE OTHER STREET, YOU KNOW, THE, WE, WE COULD GO WITH WHAT IS ALREADY THERE, YOU KNOW, ALL THE USES THAT ARE ALLOWED IN THE WME DISTRICT.

BUT TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE ACTIVE USES ON THE GROUND FLOOR, AT LEAST WITHIN THOSE PRIMARY COMMERCIAL STREET, I THINK, UH, A SHORT FRONT OVERLAY WOULD BE USEFUL.

PERFECT.

COMMISSIONER WEAVER, I'M, I'M CONFUSED BECAUSE ONE, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS IN NOT TWO OF THE SPEAKERS SAID THAT THE OVERLAY WAS NEVER DISCUSSED DIRECTLY WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE RUNNING INTO THE ISSUE.

IT WASN'T DISCUSSED AT THE TWO MEETINGS.

AND SO THEY, UH, OR WASN'T DISCUSSED.

THE OVERLAY WASN'T THE, NOT THE WMU THREE, BUT THAT OVERLAY WAS NOT DISCUSSED AT THOSE MEETINGS.

SO DID THAT AFTER THE MEETING STAFF WENT AND BACK IN AND, AND AND SUGGESTED A OVERLAY? OR WAS THAT SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED AT THE MEETINGS? THE OVERLAY? SO WHEN WE DID OUR PRESENTATION, WE WERE PRESENTING THE VISION THAT WORKUP HAD FOR THIS AREA AND IT DID RECOMMEND WORKABLE MIX USE DISTRICT.

IT DID RECOMMEND A HEIGHT.

SO WE WENT BACK AND STARTED DOING RESEARCH BASED ON THIS VISION, WHAT DISTRICT AND WHAT TOOLS WOULD GET US TOWARDS THIS.

AND THERE WERE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WERE PROPOSED THAT CAME UP.

YOU KNOW, THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS OR WE SHORT FRONT OVERLAY WAS ONE OF THEM.

SO WE DID NOT STEP ENGAGING PEOPLE AT THE MEETING.

WE'VE CONTINUED TO HAVE DISCUSSION.

WE, WE'VE LOOKED AT, EVEN WHEN WE WERE DOING THE INFRASTRUCTURE, I TOLD YOU WE WENT THROUGH SEVERAL ITERATIONS.

WE START CONSIDERING EACH CONCEPT, MAKE SURE THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT.

SO IF SOMETHING IS PROPOSED BY THE COMMUNITY, WE GO AND DO RECITE TO FIND OUT HOW IT WOULD PLAY AND WHETHER IT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT.

IF WE FIND THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA, STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND IT.

IF WE FIND THAT IT'S NOT, THEN WE WOULD NOT INCLUDE IT AS A RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO WHEN, WHEN IT, WHEN, SO I'M ASKING, IT'S VERY SPECIFIC LIKE THIS, KIND MORE OF A YES OR NO.

AND THE REASON I'M ASKING THAT IS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THE COMMUNITY IS HELD UP ON THE WMU.

THEY ARE SAYING THAT THE SECOND PART NEVER WAS PROPOSED DIRECTLY TO THEM.

SO A REAL SHORT WHAT DID THEY, DID YOU EVER, DID THE STAFF EVER GO BACK TO THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE SHOP FROM OVERLAY? NOT, NOT FORMALLY.

NOT FORMALLY LIKE MEETING.

SO THEY NEVER, SO THE COMMUNITY WE, WE'VE HAD, WE'VE HAD COMMUNITY MEETINGS WHERE STAFF HAVE BEEN INVITED TO COME AND TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.

AND IN THOSE MEETING WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE SHOP FUND OVERLAY.

SO, BUT AT THE MEETING WHERE THE VOTING HAPPENED, THE ISSUE OF STOREFRONT OVERLAY CAME AFTER THE MEETING.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT, SO CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMUNITY ISSUE IS NOT THE WMU AND AND AND AND IN GOOD FAITH, AND I CAN UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THE UN WE AS A BODY AND STAFF AS A BODY MIGHT EVEN UNDERSTAND, I DON'T UNDERSTAND, BUT UNDERSTAND THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY, THE COMMUNITY IS SAYING, YES, YOU ALL CAME TO US, WE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS, WE'VE

[09:15:01]

SO THERE'S A DIFFERENCE WHEN THE COMMUNITY HAS HEARD SOMETHING AND THEN WHEN THE COMMUNITY HAS NOT HEARD SOMETHING, THEY LITERALLY HAVE NOT HEARD ABOUT THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY, WHICH WOULD ADD SOMETHING TO THAT.

AND I CAN GET HOW MANY RESPONSES.

I TECHNICALLY I WAS ON A, A AREA PLAN TASK FORCE AND VERY HIGHLY INVOLVED.

SO I UNDERSTAND HOW THAT THE, THE ENGAGEMENT LEVEL, UM, WAS.

SO I'M ASKED, SO IF THAT WAS NOT PROPOSED TO THE COMMUNITY, IT IS A VERY MUCH, UM, CONCERN WITH THEM.

SO IT WAS NOT NE THIS WAS NEVER TOLD TO THE COMMUNITY IN A MEETING.

WAS IT WAS, I DON'T KNOW IF, UM, YOU ARE MISSING, UH, MY POINT BUT LET, LET, LET ME GO INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL IN DOING THIS.

WE'VE PARTNERS WITH DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS AND ONE OF THE, SO-CALLED GROUP THAT WE PARTNERED WITH WAS THE A I A GROUP.

THEY HAVE THE YOUNG PROFESSIONAL URBAN DEVELOPMENT OF WHICH THE LEADER OF THAT GROUP LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY AND WORKS VERY CLOSELY WITH THE GROUP THAT YOU SAW.

UH, SPEAKING HERE TODAY, ANTHONY, ANTHONY IS WITH BC WORKSHOP AND HE'S BEEN ON US AT EVERY POINT.

HE'S AN ARCHITECT AND A PLANNER BY TRAINING.

AND SO WHAT WE DID TO HIM WAS ASK HIM TO GO THROUGH THE FORM-BASED CODE.

'CAUSE WE KNEW IT'S A VERY COMPLEX CODE AND KIND OF KIND OF, WHAT CAN I SAY, EXPLAIN THE TERMINOLOGIES AND THE CONCEPTS THAT ARE THERE THAT ARE GONNA BE APPLICABLE HERE.

AND DID CREATE A BROCHURE THAT WAS TRANSLATED IN SPANISH AND THIS WAS PRESENTED AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING.

IT IS NOT THAT IT WASN'T MENTIONED, IT WAS JUST NOT PART OF THE PROPOSAL THAT WE ARE MAKING AT THAT POINT.

MR. SELF.

MR SELF, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IN IN SO MANY WORDS AND I'M KIND OF JUST, IT'S, I DON'T NEED TO, I I DON'T NECESSARILY NEED THE LONG VERSION.

I'M ASKING YOU AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING WAS A SHOP FRONT OVERLAY MENTIONED NOT THE GATHERING OF THE INFORMATION BECAUSE THE HANGUP IS REALLY JUST THE SHOP FRONT OVERLAY.

WAS THAT MENTIONED AT THE COMMUNITY MEETING? IT IS KINDA YES.

NOT THE ROUNDABOUT.

THE YES OR THE NO OF IT.

SO IT, I ACTUALLY REMEMBER THERE BEING A QUESTION ABOUT THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY AT THE MEETING.

IT WAS DEC IT WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE MEETING.

BUT HERE'S THE ISSUE.

THE COMMUNITY ASKED FOR THOSE WHO ARE HERE TODAY.

THEY ASKED FOR THE, THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

THIS WASN'T STAFF DECIDING AFTER WE HAD THE COMMUNITY MEETING TO CHANGE OUR RECOMMENDATION, OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS CHANGED BASED ON THE REQUEST FROM CERTAIN COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO ADD THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

THE SAME PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME AND MADE COMMENTS TODAY QUESTIONING THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

SO ONE WOULD ASSUME, AND AGAIN I KNOW WE SHOULDN'T ASSUME, BUT IT'S NOT THAT STAFF DIDN'T EXPLAIN THE SHOT FRONT OVERLAY OR DIDN'T PRESENT THE SHOT FRONT OVERLAY.

IT WASN'T PART OF THAT INITIAL RECOMMENDATION.

IT CAME OUT OF A REQUEST FROM COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO ADD THAT IN.

SO IT'S A, I'M I'M ACTUALLY CONFUSED ON WILD NOW, HOW THERE IS OPPOSITION TO THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY THAT WAS REQUESTED SPECIFICALLY THAT WE INCORPORATE INTO THE RECOMMENDATION.

AND SO THE SHOPFRONT RECOMMENDATION WAS BASED OFF, WAS BASED OFF OF MAKING SURE THAT THINGS THAT HAD HAPPENED IN WEST DALLAS DOESN'T HAPPEN IN YOUR AREA.

SO I MEAN THEIR AREA TO MAKE WAS IT, WAS IT RECOMMENDED BE TO, TO HAVE THAT SHOPFRONT OVERLAY TO PROTECT THEM AGAINST HEIGHT? NO, IT WAS SPECIFICALLY TO NOT TO AVOID HAVING AN ENTIRELY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

IT WAS TO BASICALLY FORCE A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AND NOT HAVE THE FEAR OVER THERE BEING POTENTIALLY A FOUR STORY MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON THAT CORRIDOR.

AND, AND, AND BECAUSE THEY WENT AND BECAUSE OF THAT ROUTE, UM, IN A FORM BASE, WE CAN'T ADD, WE CAN'T LOOK AT, UM, THOSE VEHICLE CELLS OR RE OR VEHICLE REPAIRS THAT CAN'T BE ADDED IN BECAUSE THEY WENT WITH THE FORM BASE, THE WALKABLE MIXED USE.

THEY CANNOT REMAIN.

THEY CAN REMAIN, BUT THEY WILL NOT BE PERFORMING IF SOMETHING'S THE STRUCTURE WILL NOT BE PERFORM.

HEARD SAYING SOMETHING DIFFERENT, THEN WE, I I WILL, I FOR I WILL SUPPORT, UM, I WILL SUPPORT THE COMMISSIONER AL THAT IS TRUE WITH THAT, WITH THE RECOMMENDATION.

SO THAT'S REALLY THE, THE, THE GIST OF IT IS WHETHER THEY WERE AWARE AT THE TIME BEFORE IT MADE THE PUBLIC HEARING ABOUT THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY.

AND IF THEY WERE THEN WE, THEN WE, THEY WERE MADE AWARE AND THEIR MINDS CHANGING TODAY IS DIFFERENT FROM THEM.

THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE MY OBJECTION.

AND IF THAT'S TRUE THAT THEY KNEW AND THEY'RE

[09:20:01]

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.

WELL I WAS JUST GONNA BRING IT BACK TO SAY I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION BECAUSE I THINK THAT IF WE SPEND THIS KIND OF TIME AND PARSE AND PARSING OUT EVERY ISSUE THAT WAS DONE IN WCAP HOT MINUTE AGO, WE'RE JUST GONNA DO THIS EVERY SINGLE TIME.

LOW CAP EXISTS FOR A REASON AND THERE MAY BE PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIKE EVERYTHING IN IT, BUT THAT'S FOLKS.

AND NOW THAT WE HAVE IT, YOU KNOW, ABSENT SOME COMPELLING REASON, WE SHOULD BE TRYING TO FIND IT.

UH, FOLLOW IT.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, FIRST ROUND.

I APPRECIATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO DIG INTO SOME OF THIS.

UM, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

AND I DO THINK THAT THE CONSIDERATION OF THE SHOPFRONT OVERLAY, I ACTUALLY APPRECIATED THE REMINDER TO GO BACK.

I STILL, ALSO STILL HAVE THE PDF OF WILL CAP ON MY, AND WENT BACK INTO DOWNTOWN IN, YOU KNOW, ELMWOOD.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S A HISTORIC RETAIL DISTRICT.

WE HAVE MANY OF THOSE, UM, THROUGHOUT MY DISTRICT AS WELL.

PRESERVING.

THOSE ARE PARTLY HOW WE MAINTAIN VIBRANT COMMUNITIES.

HAVING THAT MIX OF USES, MAKING SURE THAT WE MAINTAIN ACCESS TO RETAIL IS PART OF HOW IN MY EVALUATION WE HELP SUPPORT THRIVING COMMUNITIES AS THEY GROW AND CHANGE, AS WE ALL RECOGNIZE COMMUNITIES NEED TO.

UM, YOU KNOW, I, I DO AGREE THAT IT'S, IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES YOU GOTTA TAKE THE LONG PATH AROUND IT, GET BACK THERE.

AND SO I APPRECIATE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS LETTING ME TAKE THAT PATH AS I WAS WORKING THROUGH IT.

BUT I DO THINK THAT THAT SHOP FRONT, IT ADDS A LEVEL OF DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WILL HOPEFULLY FURTHER THE COMMUNITY GOALS.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE MINMAX THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE BASE FORM-BASED CODE WILL ALSO IMPACT BUILDINGS, EXISTING STRUCTURES.

AGAIN, I THINK WE'VE TALKED THROUGH THE EXISTING USES, BUT, UM, I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER CHER'S, UM, WORK ON THIS AND, UM, LOOK FORWARD TO SUPPORTING MOTION.

ANY OTHER, UH, DISCUSSION FOR FIRST ROUND? WE GO TO SECOND ROUND.

COMMISSIONER TR CAN I CALL THE QUESTION? SURE CAN.

WE'LL HAVE A, A VOTE NOW.

UH, COMMISSIONERS.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHOCK, SECONDED BY MYSELF TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF A WME THREE WALKABLE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT AND SHOPLIFT OVERLAY.

UH, EXCUSE ME.

WHAT, WHAT DID I SAY THAT, WHAT YOU SAYING? YEAH.

OH, SHOP FRONT OVERLAY ON APPORTION AND STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS, I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY, IS THAT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION SHE CARRIES.

OR IN OPPOSITION CARPENTER.

MOTION PASSES.

[SUBDIVISION DOCKET]

UH, WE'LL GO TO CASE.

UM, OUR SUBDIVISION DOCKET CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, UH, LADIES AND JOINT CONSISTS OF CASES 36 THROUGH 43.

UM, THEY WILL BE DISPOSED OF IN ONE MOTION UNLESS THERE IS SOMEONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE ITEMS. 36 THROUGH 43.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE ITEMS? 36 THROUGH 43 5 6 7 8 WE HAVE, WE DO OUR QUORUM MSA PLEASE.

LET'S GET THOSE RIGHT IN CONSENT ITEMS. UH, ITEM NUMBER 36 S 2 2 3 DASH 1 64 R.

ITEM NUMBER 37 S 2 34 DASH 0 2 9.

ITEM NUMBER 38 S 2 34 DASH 0 3 1.

ITEM NUMBER 39 S 2 3 4 DASH 0 3 2.

ITEM NUMBER 40 S 2 3 4 DASH 0 3 3.

ITEM NUMBER 41 S 2 3 4 DASH 0 3 5.

ITEM NUMBER 42 S 2 3 4 DASH 0 3 7.

AND ITEM NUMBER 43 S 2 3 4 DASH 0 3 9.

ALL CASES HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR

[09:25:01]

A HEARING AT THIS TIME.

AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, UH, COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS? COMMISSIONER HANEN PLEASE.

UM, MS. RUSH, THE TWO QUESTIONS ON TWO DIFFERENT CASES.

ITEM 36, UM, SS 2 2 3 1 4 6 ARE I WAS NOT ABLE TO DETERMINE WHAT WAS REVISED FROM THE PRIOR PLATT.

WERE YOU ABLE TO QUICKLY KNOW WHAT THAT WAS? UH, THE PREVIOUS PLATT, UH, S 2 3 4 DASHS 1 64 WAS TO CREATE ONE LOT AND NOW THEY'RE REVISING TO CREATE TWO LOTS.

I COULDN'T QUITE FIND THE LINE THERE.

THE SECOND ITEM IS ON NUMBER 41 S 2 34 DASH 0 3 5.

IT'S PART OF TWO ZONING DISTRICTS WHICH INCLUDE, UM, INGRESS AND EGRESS AND SPECIFIC INTERNAL STREETS.

ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE TWO PLAN DEVELOPMENTS STILL APPLY EVEN IF THEY'RE NOT INDICATED ON THE PLATT, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

IT'S STILL ZONING, SO THEY HAVE TO MEET.

UH, COULD YOU PLEASE CLARIFY? I'M SURE S THE NUMBER 36 ABOUT THE NUMBER LOTS.

36.

ITEM NUMBER 36 S 2 2 3 DASH 1 64.

R 1 1 1.

WAS THAT IT? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

PARDON ME? WE NEED A MOTION.

WE WILL GO TO CASE NUMBER 44, ITEM NUMBER 44 S 2 34 DASH 27.

ON THE SUBDIVISION DOCKET CONSENT ITEMS 36 THROUGH 43.

I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PAR PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR READ TO THE RECORD.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HENTER FOR YOUR MOTION.

AND I'LL SECOND IT.

ANY COMMENTS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? AYE HAVE IT MR. MOORE, IF IT'S OKAY WITH YOU, WE CAN DO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AT THE VERY END THAT WAY.

UH, HOPEFULLY MOST OF THESE FOLKS HAVE ALREADY ESCAPED.

UH, IS THAT OKAY? OKAY.

[44. 24-220 An application to replat a 5.508-acre tract of land containing all of Lots 5B, 5C, and part of Lot 7 in City Block1/5520 to create one lot on property located on Manson Court at Strait Lane, northeast corner.]

IT IS AN APPLICATION TO PLE A 5 5 0 8 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOTS FIVE B FIVE C, AND PART OF LOT SEVEN IN CITY BLOCK ONE OVER 5 5 2 0 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON MANSON COURT AT AT STRAIGHT LANE NORTHEAST CONNOR.

11 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON DECEMBER 29TH, 2023.

WE HAVE RECEIVED TWO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.

THANK YOU VERY MR. MRS. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS NUMBER 44 S 2 3 4 0 2 7 COMMISSIONER'S.

QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.

COMMISSIONER HALL, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO CHAIR, UH, IN THE CASE NUMBER S 2 34 DASH 0 2 7 I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THIS ITEM SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR MOTION.

I SECOND IT.

UH, ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

OKAY, UH, MR. ALVAREZ IS HERE, UH, WISHING TO BE APPROVED AND HE IS HERE FOR QUESTIONS.

NEXT CASE.

ITEM NUMBER 45

[45. 24-221 An application to replat a 0.688-acre tract of land containing all of Lot 23 in City Block 1/8016 to create two 7,500-square foot lots and one 15,000-square foot lot on property located between La Rue Street and Wyoming Street, west of Knoxville Street.]

S 2 3 4 DASH 0 2 8.

IT IS AN APPLICATION TO A 0.688 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOG 23 IN CITY BLOCK ONE OVER 80 16 TO CREATE TWO 7,500 SQUARE FOOT LOTS AND ONE 15,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN LARO STREET AND WYOMING STREET WEST, WEST OF KNOXVILLE STREET 19.

NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON DECEMBER 29TH, 2023.

WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. ESTE.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM?

[09:30:17]

UH, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. ALVAREZ? OKAY, SAME.

NONE.

QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO QUESTIONS.

COMMISSIONER TURNER, DO YOU HAVE I HAVE A QUESTION.

OH, SORRY.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.

MY APOLOGIES.

THAT'S ALL RIGHT.

MR. VETA.

UM, FROM THE STAFF REPORT, I DIDN'T SEE ANY RESIDENTIAL LOTS EITHER WEST, SOUTH OR EAST THAT WERE AS SMALL AS 7,500 SQUARE FEET, IS THAT CORRECT? IT LOOKED LIKE THE NEXT SMALLEST LOT WAS 88 20 AND THEN THEY OTHERWISE WENT UP TO, I MEAN THEY STARTED AT 14,000, 15,000, 30,000, 60,000.

SO EVEN THOUGH THE ZONING IS R SEVEN FIVE, THERE AREN'T ANY RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA THAT ARE THAT SMALL.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

THE SMALLEST LOT, UH, WITHIN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS 8,820 SQUARE FEET.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NONE.

COMMISSIONER OCK, YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? UH, YES.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION IN THE CASE NUMBER, UH, S 2 3 4 DASH ZERO TWO A.

I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THIS ITEM SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SHERLOCK AND VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE.

NUMBER 46 S 2 3 4 DASH 0 3 0.

YE I'M SORRY.

DID YOU REGISTER MY OPPOSITION CHAIR? SHEIN? UH, MY APOLOGIES.

I I'M NOT LOOKING AT THE SCREEN.

WE HAVE ONE IN OPPOSITION.

UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER WILL LET THE RECORD REFLECT.

MOTION PASSES 40, UH, SIX, PLEASE.

ITEM

[46. 24-222 An application to replat a 0.777-acre tract of land containing all of Lot 4A and part of Lot 4 in City Block A/2024 to create one lot on property located between Turtle Creek Drive and Katy Trail, northeast of Blackburn Street. Applicant/Owner: Robert Hallam Jr]

IT IS AN APPLICATION TO RELET A 0.777 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT FOUR A AND PART OF LOT FOUR IN CITY BLOCK E OVER 20 T 24 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN TOR CREEK DRIVE AND KG TRAIL NORTHEAST OF BLACKBURN STREET.

SIX, UH, 67 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON DECEMBER 29TH, 2023.

WE HAVE RECEIVED, UH, ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR, ZERO REPLY AND OPPOSITION.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM OF MS? GOOD EVENING.

GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN.

UM, I'VE SENT OVER SOME SLIDES, BUT I DON'T THINK WE NEED ANY.

I'M AMY MATTHEWS.

UM, 2 2 0 1 MAIN STREET, UH, 7 5 2 0 1.

I, AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.

THANK YOU FOR STAYING WITH US COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE, MS. MATTHEW, JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION.

AS I LOOK AT THE, UM, PLAT THAT'S IN OUR, UM, ZONING PACKET, THE TWO PARCELS, THERE APPEARS TO BE A STRUCTURE ON BOTH FOR COMBINING 'EM INTO ONE, THE ONE THAT, AND I'M, I'M APOLOGIZE, I CAN'T TELL WHICH ONE IS FOUR A AND WHICH ONE IS FOUR, BUT THE ONE THAT IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE NEW LOT, IT'S THE ONE THAT'S SHOWN IN THE DOCKET, BUT IT APPEARS IT DOESN'T MEET THE CURRENT SETBACKS.

BUT IS IS THAT ANYTHING THAT IS A CONCERN TO YOU AS YOU'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH YOUR PROJECT ON THIS? NO.

UM, THEY, NO, THEY PLAN ON BUILDING A NEW HOME THERE.

BUT ALSO ONLY, THERE'S ONLY A STRUCTURE ON ONE LOT.

ONE OF THE OTHER, I THINK THE OTHER LOT HAD THE STRUCTURED TORN DOWN A FEW YEARS AGO.

AND AGAIN, I WAS JUST, I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WE'RE CREATING ANY POTENTIAL ISSUES WITH THIS, SO THANK YOU.

NO, NO.

THANK YOU FOR, TO UNDERSTAND.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.

SEE NONE.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN CASE NUMBER TWO S 2 34 DASH ZERO THREE I MAY WE CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REPL, UM, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET? SURE.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, SECOND I COMMISSIONER RUBIN.

YOU OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

NUMBER 47, MR. CHAIR.

THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS RELATED TO ITEM THIS ONE.

NUMBER 47? YES.

LET'S GO TO THE THOROUGHFARES OR, YES, LET'S SEE, LET'S, LET'S SKIP THIS ONE.

[09:35:01]

LET'S TABLE NUMBER 47 FOR THE MOMENT AND WE'LL COME BACK TO IT.

LET'S GO TO, UH, 49.

[49. 24-264 Amendments to the City of Dallas Thoroughfare Plan to remove (1) Harwood Street between Pennsylvania Avenue and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard; and (2) Harwood Street between Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Al Lipscomb Way.]

HI.

DID YOU WANT ME TO BRIEF THIS? UH, I THINK JUST, UH, JUST READING INTO THE RECORD AND IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, WE'LL, WE'LL IMPROVISE.

PERFECT.

UM, GREAT.

THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF ELLI THIRD FAIR PLAN TO REMOVE ONE HARWOOD STREET BETWEEN PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BOULEVARD AND TWO HARTWOOD STREET BETWEEN MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BOULEVARD AND AL LIPSCOMB WAY STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CITY PLAN, COMMISSION DIRECTOR COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.

EXCELLENT.

UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, I'M SURE WE'RE ARE ON THE, ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE.

I DID ASK THE REPRESENTATIVE, UM, BECAUSE WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING, BUT THIS WASN'T BROUGHT UP.

SO WHEN THEY'RE SAYING TO REMOVE HARWOOD STREET BETWEEN PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND BETWEEN MARTIN LUTHER KING AND HARWOOD STREET, BETWEEN PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND MARTIN KING BOULEVARD AND ALSO BETWEEN HARWOOD AND STREET AND MARTIN LUTHER KING, IS THAT ONLY A PORTION OF IT THAT'S NOT THE FULL, UM, THAT'S NOT FULLY HARWOOD AM AM I CORRECT? BECAUSE THERE ARE BUSINESSES ON HARWOOD AND OTHER PROPERTY TAKING THE, THE ROADWAY OFF OF THE CITY OF ELLI CIRCUIT.

CAN YOU TURN TO YOUR MAP IN YOUR BRIEFING PACKET? I, I SAW, I SAW IT.

OKAY, PERFECT.

SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT MAP, YOU'RE GONNA SEE THAT.

UM, AND THEN IN THE, THE, THE NEXT PAGE SHOULD HAVE SLIDE, LIKE CROSS SECTION AND THERE'LL BE A TEXT DOT DRAWING SHOWING THAT WHEN TXDOT DID AND APPROVED THEIR PROJECT FOR 1 75 OR FOR 45 AND FOR THE SMM RIGHT PROJECT, THEY ACTUALLY DISCONNECTED HARWOOD.

SO HARWOOD NO LONGER GOES UNDERNEATH THE HIGHWAY.

IT, THERE IS NO PLAN ON RECONNECTING IT UNDERNEATH THE HIGHWAY.

'CAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT ANY LONGER.

THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE IN THEORY WHEN THOSE PLAN SETS WERE APPROVED THROUGH THE SCHEMATIC PHASE AND ALL OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MEETINGS THAT T DOT HELD WITH THOSE PRO WITH THAT PROJECT BACK MANY YEARS AGO.

UNFORTUNATELY IT WAS NOT AND WE LEFT IT ON THE PLAN.

THIS IS JUST A REMEDY OF THAT.

IT'S, IT'S AN APPLICATION AND IT'S A REMEDY TO CORRECT THAT SITUATION.

IT DOES NOT TAKE THE ROADWAY OR ABANDON A ROADWAY OFF OF THE LOCAL STREET NETWORK ONLY OFF OF THE PLAN.

SO THE THEATER, WHO IS THE APPLICANT FOR ONE OF THIS, ONE OF THESE ITEMS, WE, WE JUST STAFF INCREASED THE ITEM LENGTH.

AND SO THE THEATER WOULD LIKE TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH THEIR PORTION SOUTH OF MLK, WHICH IS NO LONGER EVEN CONNECTED TO MLK.

IT HAS BEEN BARRIERED OFF BY TECHSTAR.

SO IT'S ALL SO, 'CAUSE I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, SO THIS IS PART OF, PART OF THE REASON FOR THIS AND THE REASON WHY THE CITY OF DALLAS IS ALL SO IS APPLICATION.

'CAUSE IT'S ALSO, UM, THE CITY OF DALLAS AND 4, 4 4 IS IN PLANS IN HOPE TO BUILD A PARKING LOTS.

I WE ARE NOT DISCUSSING THOUGH, SO WE'RE NOT SO O ONLY THE ROADWAY AND THE PLAN.

SO THE ROADWAY IS ONLY BEING ABANDONED UP UNDER THE, UH, NOT ABANDONED, NOT ABANDONED, NOT ABANDONED, WHATEVER UNDER REMOVED FROM THE THIRD FAIR PLAN, REMOVED FAIR PLAN.

SO THEN A DEVELOPER WOULD BE ALLOWED TO LOOK AT THE ROADWAY AS A LOCAL STREET.

THOSE NEXT PROCESS AND PROCEDURES WOULD THEN BE ROUTED.

HOWEVER, THOSE PROCESS AND PROCEDURES WOULD NEED TO BE ROUTED THROUGH THE CITY AND ACCOMPLISHED.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

SEEING ON COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I MOVE TO VOTE.

I MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO AMEND THE CITY OF DALLAS, PLANNING TO REMOVE HARWOOD STREET BETWEEN THAT, UM, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.

BOULEVARD AND, AND HARWOOD STREET BETWEEN MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

BOULEVARD AND ALEX.

AND, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, LECH CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY COMMENTS? MOTION TO APPROVE.

STAND NONE.

AND OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

[09:40:03]

ITEM

[50. 24-265 Amendment to the City of Dallas Thoroughfare Plan to remove Crown Road from Newkirk Street to Farmers Branch City Limits Staff Recommendation: Approval to amend the City of Dallas Thoroughfare Plan to remove Crown Road from Newkirk Street to Farmers Branch City Limits.]

50.

THIRD FAIR COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF DALLAS THOROUGHFARE.

PLAN TO REMOVE CROWN GROUND ROAD FROM NEW KIRK STREET TO FARMER'S BRANCH CITY LIMITS FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS THOROUGHFARE PLAN STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND CITY PLAN COMMISSION.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ALL SPEAKERS, COMMISSIONERS, UH, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.

IN THE, UM, MATTER OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF DALLAS THOROUGHFARE.

PLAN TO REMOVE CROWN ROAD FROM NEW KIRK STREET TO FARMERS BRANCH CITY LIMITS.

I MOVE TO FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR A MOTION.

VICE CHAIR ROOM FOR YOUR SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALTHOUGH IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

WE OPPOSED AYES HAVE IT.

WE NEED TO DO, UH,

[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

THE MINUTES.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SMITH.

UH, CAN I HAVE A MOTION? MR. CHAIR? UM, CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR MINUTES FROM OUR DECEMBER EIGHT SEVENTH MEETING, UM, AS REVISED.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, EVERYONE FOR YOUR MOTION.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.

OPPOSED? I HAVE IT.

UH, WHAT ARE YOU GENTLEMEN HERE FOR? OH, THE PLATT.

SO WE'RE GONNA GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION NOW.

[EXECUTIVE SESSION]

UH, OUR COMMISSIONERS, I, I SAW A LINK FLYING AROUND MR. MOORE, SO THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO LOG OFF AND THEN LOG BACK ON ON THE LINK THERE.

THAT, THAT'S CORRECT.

FOR THE, THE COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE ONLINE, THERE WAS A SEPARATE LINK THAT WAS SENT OUT FOR THE EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT THE PUBLIC DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO.

COMMISSIONER HAWK, UH, BLAIR AND CARPENTER.

UH, PLEASE CHECK YOUR EMAIL.

YOU SHOULD HAVE AN, UH, A LINK FOR THE EXECUTIVE SESSION.

I SEE COMMISSIONER HAWK IS, HAS FOUND IT.

SO COMMISSIONER BLAIR, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER WILL, WE'LL GIVE A COUPLE OF MINUTES FOR YOU TO, SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO LOG OFF HERE, I'M ASSUMING, AND THEN LOG BACK THROUGH ON THAT ONE.

YEAH, I'LL HAVE TO GO TO MY OTHER COMPUTER TO FIND THE LINK.

AND FORWARD IT TO THIS MACHINE.

WE'LL WAIT FOR YOU.

OF COURSE.

UH, LET'S TAKE FIVE MINUTES.

THE ONE OUTSTANDING ITEM NUMBER 47, MR. ESTE, ITEM NUMBER 47 S 2 34 DASH 0 3 8.

LET'S, LET'S COME BACK AT 8 0 5.

SON.

GOING BACK TO

[47. 24-223 An application to replat a 0.603-acre tract of land containing all of Lots 8, 9, and 10 in City Block 17/8342 to create one lot on property located on Bagley Street, north of Darwin Street.]

IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT A 0.603 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOTS EIGHT, NINE, AND 10 IN CITY BLOCK 17 83 42 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON BAGLEY STREET NORTH OF NORTH OF, UH, DARWIN STREET.

18.

NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON DECEMBER 29TH, 2023.

WE HAVE RECEIVED TWO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND GENERAL REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. ESTA.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES, SIR.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

WARREN ELLIS, 8,700 STONE BROOK PARKWAY, NUMBER SIX, UH, 360 4, FRISCO, TEXAS 7 5 0 3 4.

I'M JUST HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

COMMISSIONER AND CHAIR.

MY NAME IS STEPHEN DARLING.

I'M AN ATTORNEY FOR MR. ESTRADA, BUT I'M ALSO A LONG FRIEND OF HIS.

UH, ALSO MY ADDRESS FILE FOR THE RECORD IS 2,500 DALLAS PARKWAY, PLANO, TEXAS 7 5 0 9 3.

ALSO HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL.

UH, COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR TWO SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER BLAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR EITHER MR. WARREN OR THE, UM, PREFERABLY MR. WARREN, BACK TO THE HOT SEAT .

NOW YOU JUST KNEW YOU WEREN'T GONNA GET AWAY THAT EASY, RIGHT? YES.

COMMISSIONER, HOW ARE YOU DOING THIS EVENING? I'M OKAY.

QUESTION.

UM, IS THIS RELA FOR RESIDENTIAL OR SOMETHING OTHER THAN RESIDENTIAL USE? FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, IT'S FOR RESIDENTIAL USE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? I, WE LOST COMMISSIONER HERBERT, MAYBE.

[09:45:01]

YEAH, WE GOT 'EM BACK.

ANY QUESTIONS, UH, COMMISSIONERS ONLINE FOR OUR TWO SPEAKERS.

QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION COMMISSIONER IS NOT ON.

SHE WAS, PARDON ME.

COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? I DO.

UM, IN THE, IN THE CASE OF, DO YOU HAVE THE CASE NUMBER IN FRONT OF YOU? I'M SORRY.

I DO.

IT'S S 2 3 4 0 3 8.

IN THE CASE OF, UH, 2 0 4 0 3 8 2 2, I'M SORRY, 2 3 4 0 3 8 2 3 4 0 3 8.

I, UM, THIS IS A TOUGH ONE.

UM, UH, MAKE A COMMENT AFTER, BUT I HAVE MOVED TO, UM, ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR MOTION AND VICE CHAIR FOR YOUR SECOND TO CLOSE UP ON MCCUNE FALLS STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SO THAT THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET DISCUSSION.

DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YEAH, I THINK THE QUESTIONS AND CONVERSATIONS WERE HAD, UM, IN, IN, IN, IN, IN DETAIL THE VERY GOOD QUESTION BY, UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR WAS RESIDENTIAL VERSUS COMMERCIAL, HOW WILL IT BE USED? UM, AND THAT'S ALL I CAN ASK FOR FROM THE, THE APPLICANT.

SO THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.

I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.

I THINK THAT SECTION 51 A DASH FIVE POINT, I'M SORRY, 8.503 SUBSECTION A ENTITLED RESIDENTIAL LOT SIZE SETS OUT A VERY CLEAR STANDARD FOR US.

I, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO WHATEVER JUDGE IS HEARING THIS CASE, I DO NOT AGREE, UM, THAT WE MADE A MISTAKE.

I THINK THAT, UM, WHEN I LOOK AT THE ADJACENT LOTS, UM, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEM ARE RESIDENTIAL AND THEY ARE WITHIN THE, UH, ESTABLISHED PATTERN.

THESE THREE LOTS ARE LIKEWISE, UH, RESIDENTIAL IN AND ALSO, UM, FOLLOW THE ESTABLISHED PATTERN IN TERMS OF WIDTH, DEPTH, UM, AND OTHER CHARACTERISTICS.

AND WHEN I, EVEN IF I WERE TO APPLY SOME OTHER STANDARD AND TAKE A BROADER VIEW AND LOOK AT THE COMMERCIAL LOTS NEARBY, I STILL THINK THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE AJA, THE MAJORITY OF THE LOTS, INCLUDING THE ADJACENT LOTS TO THE SUBJECT LOTS, UM, DICTATE THAT UNDER 8.503 A, THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE DENIED.

AND IF THE LANGUAGE IN THIS SUBSECTION OF THE CODE IS TO MEAN ANYTHING, THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE DENIED.

AND I THINK WE GOT IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME AND I'M STICKING WITH MY VOTE.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SURE, I HAVE THAT.

I ALSO WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.

UM, AS NOTED BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, UM, 8.503 IS SPECIFIC TO RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

UM, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT AND LOOK AT THE SURROUNDING CHARACTER OF THE AREA, THE COMMERCIAL ZONING THAT IS NEARBY HAS DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DIFFERENT LOT SIZE THAT GOVERNS ITS DEVELOPMENT AND, UM, IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER, WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE CHARGED WITH WITH THIS, UM, SUBMITTAL BEFORE US TODAY.

MADE AND STICK WITH THAT DECISION.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER BLAIR? I TOO AGREE WITH THE LADIES.

I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT.

UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, HERBERT'S, UH, MOTION, I THINK WE GOT IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

8.503 DOES APPLY.

UM, THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY IN WHICH IT SITS, THE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY, UM, DOES NOT BE BY NATURE OF THE FACT THAT IT'S COMMERCIAL.

IT DOES NOT HAVE LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS.

AND SINCE IT DOES NOT HAVE LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS, IT TO COMPARE RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIALS ASKING US TO LIKE TO COMPARE APPLES TO ORANGES, THEY'RE NOT THE SAME.

SO I CAN'T, I THINK WE GOT IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME AND I AM GOING TO FOLLOW THE, OUR, OUR DECISION, THE FIRST DECISION WE

[09:50:01]

LAST CHAIR, RUBEN 8.503 A IS CERTAINLY NOT THE MOST WELL DRAFTED PROVISION IN OUR CITY CODE.

UM, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THOSE WHO HAVE WORKED, UM, INTERACTING IN THE, AND AMENDING IT IN THE PAST.

AND I, I CERTAINLY KIND OF SEE ARGUMENTS ON BOTH SIDES ABOUT HOW THIS PROVISION SHOULD BE INTERPRETED.

AND I WOULD HOPE THAT IN THE FUTURE WE CAN TAKE A GOOD LONG, HARD LOOK AT IT.

UM, BUT I THINK I AM COMFORTABLE WITH THE MOTION THAT COMMISSIONER HERBERT MADE UNDER THE, UH, ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN.

SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING IT.

CAN YOU THE COMMENTS WHERE WE VOTE, TAKE A RECORD VOTE.

MS. SINA, RANDOM ORDER PLEASE.

WE HAVE A MOTION FOR, UH, APPROVAL MADE BY COMMISSIONER HERBERT.

SECOND I VICE CHAIR RUBIN.

SO WE'LL TAKE A RECORD VOTE.

UH, DISTRICT FIVE? YES.

DISTRICT 13, NO PLACE.

15? YES.

AND DISTRICT THREE? YOU MADE THE MOTION.

UH, MOTION FAILS.

SIX SIX IS WHAT I HAVE FAILS.

6, 6, 4, 6 AGAINST.

WE'RE UNFORTUNATELY HAVE AN EVEN NUMBER.

SO MR. MOORE MOTION FAILS.

WHAT DO WE DO? WE'RE EXACTLY SPLIT.

THE MOTION FAILS.

THE BODY IS, THERE'S A NEW MOTION THAT CAN BE MADE.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, ANYONE ON THE OTHER SIDE? COMMISSIONER.

MOTION.

I THINK COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S MAKING ONE OR I'LL SECOND IT.

UH, WITH REGARD TO S 2 34 DASH 0 0 3 8, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISREGARD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND DENY THE APPLICATION.

COMMISSIONER BLAIR SECOND PLEASE.

TAKE A RECORD VOTE.

MR. I I HAVE A QUESTION.

CAN I OR, OR MR. MOORE? OKAY, SO I CAN'T PREDICT THE FUTURE, BUT WE DIVIDED SIX SIX LAST TIME AND YOU NEEDED MAJORITY TO APPROVE A MOTION.

CORRECT? SO IF WE DON'T APPROVE OR DENY, IF WE'RE ESSENTIALLY DEADLOCKED AND WE DON'T REACH A DECISION TONIGHT, AND WE ARE NOT GONNA HAVE A MEETING IN THE NEXT THREE DAYS, IT'S GOING TO BE APPROVED BY OPERATION OF LAW, CORRECT? YES.

AND IN THAT INSTANCE, IF IT'S A OPERATION OF LAW, WE DON'T GET TO INCLUDE ALL THE CONDITIONS THAT STAFF REQUESTED ON THE PLATT.

THAT'S RIGHT.

IT'S JUST APPROVED.

BUT YOU HAVE TO MAKE, UH, YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE CONDITION IN THE DOCKET.

ALTHOUGH OCCASIONALLY, MR. MOORE, IS IT TRUE OR MAYBE MR. BAUGH, THAT, UH, IN THE PAST WHEN, WHEN THESE KINDS OF SITUATIONS HAVE HAPPENED BECAUSE OF MAYBE A WEATHER OCCURRENCE, YOU HAVE SPOKEN, SPOKEN TO THE APPLICANT AND MORE OR LESS SAID, HEY, IF YOU MIGHT HAVE A PLATT IN THE FUTURE, COME BACK TO THE CITY OF DALLAS, MAYBE YOU WANNA COMPLY WITH THESE CONDITIONS TODAY.

HAVE YOU, HAS THAT HAPPENED? I NEVER HAD THIS SITUATION.

EIGHT, NINE YEARS WITH SUBDIVISION.

NEVER HAD TO DEAL, DEAL WITH SITUATION LIKE THIS.

WHERE, WHERE PLATT HAS, UH, HAS NOT HAD REACHED THE 90 DAYS.

NEVER, NEVER.

THE ONLY CASE THAT I REMEMBER, WE HAD EINSTEIN AND, UH, CITY ATTORNEY OFFICE DRAFTED A LETTER OF NO ACTION.

UH, HOWEVER, IN THAT, UH, LETTER, UH, AND I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T REMEMBER IT WORD BY WORD, BUT IT SAID SOMETHING IN THE FACT THAT YOU STILL MUST COMPLY WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS, UH, IN, IN THE DOCKET.

INTERESTING.

ALTHOUGH CITY, ALTHOUGH CITY PLAN COMMISSION DIDN'T MAKE NO ACTION, YOUR PLAT IS APPROVED,

[09:55:01]

THAT'S THE ONLY, AND THAT WAS MAYBE YEAR OR TWO YEARS AGO.

AND IF I'M REMEMBERING IT WAS RELATED TO LIKE STORM, UH, DRAINAGE ONLY LIKE UNDER THE SAFETY.

I REMEMBER.

OKAY, WE'RE READY FOR RECORD VOTE.

O OTHER DISCUSSION PLEASE.

PARDON ME? COMMISSIONER HAT, I JUST WANTED TO STATE ON THE RECORD THAT UM, I DO, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION FOR ALL THE REASONS PREVIOUSLY STATED.

LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR OTHER MATTERS.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE'RE READY FOR A VOTE NOW.

DISTRICT FIVE? NO.

DISTRICT SEVEN.

THE MOTION IS TO DENY? YES.

DISTRICT THREE? IF WE GO DOWN, WE GO DOWN TOGETHER.

[52. 24-284 Consideration of FY2022-23 City Plan Commission Annual Report]

THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN.

UM, YOU WANNA MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT A PA MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT BEFORE YOU LEAVE .

I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT YESTERDAY THE, UM, REGISTRATION FOR THE NATIONAL AND AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE OPEN IS GONNA HAPPEN APRIL 13TH TO APRIL 16.

IT'S GONNA BE IN MINNEAPOLIS.

UH, UH, CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE BUDGET, ESPECIALLY JUST FOR YOU.

I THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO SEND ALL OF YOU IF YOU WANT TO JUST LET YO YOLANDA KNOW AND WE WILL START MAKING THE ARRANGEMENTS TO GET YOU REGISTERED AND TRAVEL ON ALL OF THAT.

PLEASE LET ME KNOW AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

I ALSO HAVE A FEW OTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS.

UH, ONE YOUR NEW EMAIL ADDRESSES.

UM, ITS WAS CALLING, UH, CITY PLAN COMMISSIONERS.

I'M NOT QUITE SURE IF EVERYBODY GOT TO, UH, SPEAK TO SOMEBODY FROM ITS, BUT AT THIS TIME, WE'RE GOING TO NEED YOU TO GO AHEAD AND CALL OUR HELP DESK AT (214) 670-1234 AND GET YOUR EMAIL CO COMPLETED COMPLETELY SET UP ALREADY FOR YOUR NEW EMAIL ADDRESSES.

ALSO, WE'RE ASKING THAT Y'ALL REFRAIN FROM USING YOUR OLD EMAIL ADDRESSES.

UM, COME FEBRUARY 9TH, WE WILL NO LONGER BE USING OR FORWARDING ANY EMAILS TO YOUR OLD EMAIL ADDRESSES.

2 1 4 6 7 0 1 2 3 4.

AND, AND JUST TO LET YOU KNOW ALSO, IF WE RECEIVE ANY EMAILS AFTER, UH, FEBRUARY, IS IT FEBRUARY 9TH? FEBRUARY 9TH, UH, WE WILL NOT BE, UH, SAVING THOSE EMAIL EMAILS WITH THOSE E OLD EMAIL ADDRESS.

YEAH, IT'S FEBRUARY 9TH BECAUSE WE WANT BASICALLY STARTING FEBRUARY 15TH TO LIKE STOP USING THE OLD EMAIL ADDRESSES AND USE THE OFFICIAL ONES, UH, BOARD AND COMMISSION APPRECIATION.

SAVE THE DATE FOR SATURDAY APRIL 20TH.

I HAVEN'T HEARD EXACTLY WHERE IT IT'S GOING TO BE, BUT IT WILL BE SATURDAY, APRIL 20TH.

UH, FOURTH QUARTER GIFT DISCLOSURE REMINDERS ARE DUE, UH, BY 5:00 PM JANUARY 30TH.

AND THE FILING DATE FOR THAT PERIOD IS OCTOBER 1ST, 2023 THROUGH DECEMBER 30TH, 2023.

ANNUAL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REPORTS, UM, RELATED TO THE PRIOR CALENDAR YEAR.

UH, CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE MUST RECEIVE THEM BY 5:00 PM TUESDAY, APRIL 30TH.

UH, THAT A, UH, PERIOD COVERED IS JANUARY 1ST, 2023 THROUGH DECEMBER 31ST, 2023.

IF ANYBODY NEEDS A FORM FOR GIFT OR FDR FORM, SHORT OR LONG, I HAVE THOSE HERE.

PLEASE DOCUMENT, TAKE THOSE WITH YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. MESSINA.

UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THAT? CHECK YOUR CALENDARS.

UM, ALL FINE.

I AM SIGNING OFF A PA .

AWESOME.

[10:00:01]

CAN I GET PLEASE? OH, YES.

OH, ALSO FOR THE ANNUAL REPORT.

I KNOW IT'S ON THE AGENDA.

UH, CHURCHILL IS WORKING ON THE CHAIRS, UH, MEMO AND, UH, CREATE A LITTLE MISSION STATEMENT.

UH, WE GONNA SEND THOSE TO YOU PROBABLY IN A WEEK SO WE HAVE IT READY.

IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE VOTED ON FEBRUARY 1ST BECAUSE FEBRUARY 1ST IS THE DEADLINE THAT WE NEED TO SUBMIT IT FOR CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

SO, UM, BUT WE WANTED TO ALLOW YOU A LITTLE BIT TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT.

MR. CHAIR, PLEASE.

MAY I MOVE CONSIDERATION OF OUR ANNUAL REPORT ADMISSION UNTIL OUR NEXT, UH, MEETING FEBRUARY 1ST? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND COMMISSIONER FOR YOUR SECOND.

I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION.