Apr 04, 2024 City Planning Commission

SHE'S HERE.

DISTRICT NINE, DISTRICT 10.

PRESENT.

DISTRICT 11, EXCUSE ME.

DISTRICT 11.

VACANT.

DISTRICT 12, DISTRICT 13 HERE.

DISTRICT 14 AND PLACE 15.

GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS.

YOU HAVE QUORUM, SIR? WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.

UH, TODAY IS THURSDAY, APRIL 4TH, 2024 AT 9:02 AM GOOD MORNING.

UH, WELCOME BACK COMMISSIONERS.

UH, HAVE A, A GOOD DOCKET TODAY.

WE'RE GONNA JUMP RIGHT IN, UH, FOR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, AND WE'LL BEGIN WITH CASE NUMBER TWO.

THAT ONE IS AS BRIEF AS NEEDED.

UH, LET'S TABLE THAT ONE JUST FOR JUST A SECOND.

UH, GIVE COMMISSIONER KINGSTON SOME TIME TO COME IN.

WE'LL COME BACK TO THAT ONE.

UH, AND WE'LL JUMP INTO THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH CONSISTS OF CASES THREE THROUGH SIX.

SIX HAS COME OFF CONSENT BECAUSE THERE, THERE'S SOME BOXES IN THERE.

SO WE'LL, UH, TAKE THAT ONE OFF.

CONSENT AND DISPOSE OF IT INDIVIDUALLY.

TAKES US TO CASE NUMBER THREE IN DISTRICT EIGHT, MICHAEL AND MR. PPI.

GOOD MORNING, SIR.

THEY HAVE A, A SMALL OFFICE BUILDING ON THE SITE AS WELL.

LET'S START WITH ITEM THREE.

ITEM THREE IS Z 2 2, 3 1, 9, 8.

AND THIS, THIS ONE IS LOCATED, UM, SOUTH OF I 20 ON BONVIEW ROAD APPLICATION, AND IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.

AND TWO, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ON A PROPERTY ZONE IN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE WEST LINE OF BONVIEW ROAD NORTH OF LOGISTICS DRIVE.

IT'S ABOUT THREE ACRES.

PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST BEING TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ON THE SITE.

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

SO CURRENT ZONING IS AG.

UM, THERE'S LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PD TO THE EAST AND THE SOUTH.

UH, THERE'S CS GENERAL DISTRICTS WITH SUVS FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING INTO THE WEST.

UH, THERE'S ONE AG PARCEL TO THE NORTH AND SOME LI TO THE NORTH THAT PROXIMITY TO A COUPLE REMAINING AG PARCELS, UM, NECESSITATES THE SUP AND IT IS ONLY ACCESSED FROM BON VIEW ROAD, BUT GENERALLY IT'S INDUSTRIAL IN CHARACTER OR ENTITLED AS SUCH.

BUT THEY DO NEED THE SUP, UH, DUE TO SOME AG THAT EXISTS IN THE AREA RIGHT NOW.

HERE IS THE PROPERTY LOOKING WEST, NOT BONNEY VIEW, LOOKING SOUTHWEST, LOOKING SOUTH.

IT JUST STARTED RAINING IN THIS PHOTO, IT LOOKS LIKE.

THAT'S GREAT.

UM, SOUTHEAST THE, UH, WAREHOUSE IN THE INDUSTRIAL PD CROSS THE WAY, AND LOOKING UP BONNIE VIEW, LOOKING BACK.

SO AS FORWARD AS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WE'VE GOT AG, UM, AT THIS TIME, AND THEY'RE PROPOSING LI THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME RESTRICTIONS ON THE LI UH, DUE TO THE PROXIMITY TO THE A AND SHARING A BLOCK FACE WITH, WITH A, HERE'S A SITE PLAN AS IT'S PROPOSED.

AND, UM, SO I AM TALKING ABOUT YOURS, .

UM, SO BASICALLY IT SHOWS THEIR, UH, COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING.

[00:05:01]

AND, UH, THEY DO HAVE TO PUT IN A 50 FOOT SETBACK DUE TO THE, UH, BLOCK BASED CONTINUITY WITH A DISTRICT ON THE BLOCK.

AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS FOR APPROVAL OF ONE, THE, UH, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.

AND TWO, THE APPROVAL OF THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? MM-HMM, NO QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, MR. PEPPY.

THIS IS THE 2 2 3 DASH 2 3 6, AND THIS IS THE APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2 3 3 7 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE FOOD STORE, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS ON PROPERTY ZONE, A REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO ALLOW THE CONTINUED SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL MERCHANDISE FOOD STORE.

3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS IS LOCATED THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF GREAT TRINITY FOREST WAY AND MURDOCK ROAD.

THIS IS THE ZONING MAP YOU WILL SEE IT'S SURROUNDED BY RETAIL USES AND ALSO A MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION.

OUTLINED IN BLUE IS THE AREA REQUEST ON THE AREA MAP.

UM, THEY RENEW THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.

WELL, IT WAS APPROVED ON JUNE 12TH, 2019 FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR AN ADDITIONAL TWO YEAR PERIODS, AND FOR THE USE OF SALE OF ALCOHOL AND BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE FOOD STORE, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS.

AND THE APPLICANT FILED FOR A RENEWAL OF THE SUP ON MARCH THE 21ST, 2023.

THE APPLICANT REQUEST A RENEWAL OF SUP 2 3 3 7 FOR A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS WITH THE ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR AN ADDITIONAL TWO YEAR PERIOD.

UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE TIME LIMIT, THE APPLICANT DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY CHANGES TO THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OR SITE PLAN OF SUP NUMBER 2, 3 3 7.

THE NEXT FEW SLIDES WILL BE PICTURES OF THE SITE AND THE SURROUNDING SITES.

ON THE SCREEN, YOU WILL SEE THE SUP CONDITIONS AND THE CONDITIONS ARE THE SAME.

THE ONLY THING DIFFERENCE IS THE, UH, TIME.

THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR AN ADDITIONAL TWO YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, PLEASE.

HOME AND A CEMETERY NOT HALF A MILE DOWN THE STREET, ABOUT HALF A MILE, MILE DOWN THE STREET, AND THIS IS THE SPOT THAT PEOPLE WOULD GET OFF AND GO DOWN IN ORDER TO GET TO THAT LOCATION? NO, MA'AM.

WERE YOU AWARE THAT THERE IS A LOT OF HOMELESS ACTIVITY AT THIS LOCATION? WHEN I DID MY SITE VISIT, I DID SEE A FEW HOMELESS PEOPLE.

WERE YOU AWARE THAT THIS APPLICANT NO.

YOU WEREN'T.

BE AWARE OF IT BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T HERE WHEN THEY OR THE LAST TIME.

SO WERE YOU, LET ME POSE IT IN A QUESTION FORM.

UM, WERE YOU AWARE THAT WHEN THEIR LAST SUP WAS RENEWAL, IT WAS, UH, ONLY FOR A TWO YEAR CONTINGENT ON THE FACT THAT EVERYBODY ON THAT STREET CLEANED UP THEIR HOMELESS, UM, AND, AND THE VAGRANCY AND PEOPLE HANGING OUT AND DOING A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER STUFF, DRINKING AND WHATEVER ON THE PROPERTY? NO, MA'AM.

ON PROPERTY, I WASN'T AWARE OF THAT.

UM, OKAY.

SO I LOOKED AT, AND I KNOW WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT YOUR STATS, BUT I LOOKED AT YOUR STATS AND IT'S, AND THE STAT, UH, WELL THE STATS KIND OF, KIND OF CONCERN ME.

SO WERE YOU, WERE YOU AWARE THAT, THAT THERE IS A, UM, FUNERAL

[00:10:01]

I WASN'T AWARE THAT THEY WOULD GO DOWN AT THAT LOCATION, BUT I DID NOTICE THAT THERE WAS A FUNERAL HOME DONE.

SO, BUT THERE WAS, YOU DID, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU DID YOUR SITE VISIT, THERE WAS HOMELESS THAT WERE THERE? YES, MA'AM.

AND THERE WERE, IT WAS A CHALLENGING LOCATION TO VIEW IT IF IF TO SAY THE LEAST, IF, IF NOT CORRECT.

I WOULDN'T SAY IT WAS CHALLENGING, BUT I DID NOTICE THAT THERE WERE A FEW HOMELESS PEOPLE OUT FRONT.

YOU ARE WELCOME.

UM, CAN YOU TAKE THIS OFF OF CONSENT? ABSOLUTELY, YOU CAN.

DO, YOU KNOW, UM, THEY DID NOT CONFIRM, BUT I DID SEND THEM SEVERAL EMAILS LETTING THEM KNOW THAT THE CASE WAS ON THE AGENDA TODAY.

I SENT THEM THE STAFF REPORT AND I TOLD THEM WHAT TIME TO BE HERE AND THEY DID NOT CONFIRM.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, IF THE APPLICANT IS, UH, IS LISTENING, HIGHLY RECOMMEND, UH, YOU MAKE IT DOWN HERE AT 1230.

UH, QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, CAN YOU CALL COMMISSIONER BLACK PLEASE? CAN YOU CALL THEM AGAIN AND ASK THEM TO GET TO COME DOWN AT 1230? YES.

I'LL RUN TO MY OFFICE AND GIVE THEM A CALL.

YOU ARE WELCOME.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.

IT'S APPROXIMATELY 3.035 ACRES.

ITEM NUMBER FIVE IS KZ 2 23 2 50.

THE REQUEST IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SUBDISTRICT FOR AN MF TWO MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT USES AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY USE ON PROPERTY ZONED AND FM MF TWO MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1 93, THE OG OAKLAND SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT.

IT IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF INWOOD ROAD, NORTHEAST OF LEMON AVENUE.

SO THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP OF THE, WHERE THE SITE IS AT.

THEN AERIAL MAP, THE AREA IN BLUE IS THE AREA OF REQUEST.

SO, UH, THIS IS A ZONING MAP SURROUNDING, UH, USES AROUND THE SITE.

MULTI, UH, MULTIFAMILY TOWARDS, TOWARDS THE NORTH AND NORTH EAST, INDUSTRIAL INSIDE TOWARDS THE, TOWARDS THE WEST, AS WELL AS MORTAR VEHICLE REPAIR.

AND THEN THERE IS A RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE TO THE SOUTHWEST.

AND THEN THERE'S SINGLE FAMILY TOWARDS THE SOUTH.

UM, EAST.

THE AREA OF REQUEST IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH SEVERAL TWO STORY MULTIPLE, UH, MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGS AND ZONE MF TWO DISTRICT.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY WITH AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY AND A REDUCTION IN PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT.

THE EXISTING ZONING DOES NOT ALLOW THIS USE, THEREFORE THEY ARE REQUESTING USE OF DISTRICT TO PERMIT THIS USE AND DEFINE TERMS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR IT.

UH, THE, THE PD CONDITION DOES DEFINE THE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY USE AS A PERMANENT RESIDENTIAL FACILITY REQUIRING EXISTING LIVING FACILITY LICENSE FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR ALL UNITS, WHICH, UH, FURNISHES IN SINGLE OR MULTIPLE FACILITIES, FOOD, SHELTER, LAUNDRY, AND OTHER ASSISTANCE WHICH MAY INCLUDE MEMORY CARE AND ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING TO FIVE OR MORE PRESENTS WHO ARE NOT RELATED BY BLOOD MAR OR ADOPTION OF THE OWNER OR ITY OF THE AS ESTABLISHMENT.

THE PEDESTRIAN REALM WILL BE ENHANCED BY DESIGN STANDARDS THAT ENSURES THEY AN ACTIV ACTIVATED SIDEWALK AND REQUIRE BELOW GRADE PARKING.

THESE ARE SOME OF THE SITE PHOTOS OF THE SITE ON SITE LOOKING SOUTHEAST, AGAIN, LOOKING SOUTHEAST TOWARDS THE MORE TOWARDS THE NORTH.

UM, LOOKING SOUTHEAST, LOOKING SOUTHEAST, LOOKING SOUTHEAST, LOOKING SOUTHEAST, LOOKING

[00:15:01]

NORTHWEST, LOOKING NORTHWEST, LOOKING SOUTHWEST, LOOKING WEST, LOOKING NORTHWEST, LOOKING NORTHEAST, LOOKING NORTHEAST, LOOKING NORTHEAST, LOOKING NORTHWEST.

LOOKING NORTHWEST.

THEN SURROUNDING USES AROUND THE SITE ON SIDE ON ONSITE LOOKING SOUTHWEST, LOOKING EAST, LOOKING EAST, LOOKING NORTH AND LOOKING E WEST, LOOKING EAST, LOOKING EAST, LOOKING EAST TOWARDS THE SOUTH.

SOUTHEAST, SOUTHWEST, SOUTHEAST, SOUTHWEST LOOKING WEST, LOOKING SOUTHEAST AND LOOKING SOUTHWEST.

AND THESE ARE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE BEING, UM, PROPOSED FOR THE PD 180 3.

UM, THE NEW PDS FOR THE FRONT, THEY'RE ALL PROPOSING 15 FOOT FRONT SETBACK FOR THE SITE AND REAR A 10 SETBACK.

HOWEVER, FOR BELOW GRAY PARKING STRUCTURE, THEY ARE REQUIRING A ZERO MINIMUM.

AND THEN FOR DENSITY, NO MINIMUM LOT AREA PER DWELLING UNIT, UM, THEY'RE PROPOSING A 1 1 70 UNITS MAX.

THE HEIGHT, THEY'RE NOT, UM, DOING ANY UH, VARIANCES.

AND THEN FOR THE LOT COVERAGE, THEY ARE PROPOSING A 70%.

AND THEN THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.

AND THEN I DID A MORE, UH, ZOOMED IN AND THEN, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED, SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT, PLANT AND CONDITIONS.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER HALL.

THANK YOU MS. GARON.

UH, JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS, UH, MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.

UH, THE, UH, THE APARTMENTS THAT ARE ON THIS LOCATION WERE BUILT IN 1948, CORRECT? I'M NOT AWARE OF WHEN THEY WERE BUILT.

YEAH, AT 1948, THAT MAKES 'EM JUST A LITTLE BIT OLDER THAN ME.

UM, THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS RETIREMENT HOUSING AT 55 UNITS PER ACRE, I BELIEVE.

AND SO THEY'RE ASKING TO DO 170 UNITS IN TOTAL IN, IS IT TWO OR THREE STORIES? I THINK IT'S THREE LEVELS.

THEY'RE PROPOSING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOES SAY THREE STORIES.

YES, CORRECT.

BUT, BUT NOT, UH, NOT ANY HIGHER THAN THE EXISTING BUILDINGS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THEY'RE KEEPING THE, THE SAME HEIGHT.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

UH, CURRENT ZONING DOES NOT ALLOW ASSISTED LIVING, NOR DOES IT ALLOW KITCHENS.

AND SO THE APPLICANT WANTS TO PROVIDE ASSISTED LIVING ALONG WITH KITCHENS? YES.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

AND, UH, LET'S SEE, WHAT ELSE WAS IT? UM, I BELIEVE THEY'RE GONNA DO SOME IMPROVEMENTS ON LA FOY DRIVE THE, WHERE THE DUMPSTER AREA IS.

UH, BELIEVE THEY DID MENTION.

YEAH, I THINK, I THINK THEY'RE GONNA DO, UH, MAYBE WIDEN THE STREET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT JUST TO, UH, MAKE IT EASIER TO GET, UH, UH, THE DUMPSTER TRUCKS IN AND OUT.

UM, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR RUBEN, JUST A, A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS.

ONE, UM, I HAVEN'T LOOKED IN ANY DETAIL AT THE NEW MAPS AFTER REDISTRICTING, BUT WHEN I THINK OF PD 1 93, I, I THINK DISTRICT 14 AND DISTRICT 12, BUT I GUESS D 13, DD TWO, THANK YOU.

I HAVEN'T HAD MY COFFEE YET.

UH, I GUESS DISTRICT 13 WAS REDRAWN TO GET INTO PART OF PD 1 93, IS THAT RIGHT? SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? OKAY.

HAVE TWO CUPS OF COFFEE.

TWO CUPS OF COFFEE.

ALRIGHT.

LITTLE PIECE.

AND THEN ONE OTHER, UM, QUICK QUESTION ON THESE ACCESSORY USES.

UM, IT SAYS THAT THEY'RE FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE RESIDENTS.

I CAN THINK BACK TO VISITING, YOU KNOW, A GRANDPARENT OF MINE AT A FACILITY LIKE THIS, AND I MIGHT GO WITH THAT GRANDPARENT TOO, THE MOVIE THEATER OR THE SALON OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

DOES, DOES THIS PROHIBIT, YOU KNOW, GUESTS AND FAMILY OF THE RESIDENTS FROM USING THAT, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY? I AM NOT AWARE.

AND NOW THAT I'M LOOKING AT THE LANGUAGE AGAIN, I THINK WE CAN CLEAN IT UP TO MAKE THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEAR THAT IT WAS FOR THE RESIDENTS AND THEIR GUESTS.

BUT I WOULD DEFER TO THE APPLICANT IF THAT'S WHAT THEY, UM,

[00:20:01]

ACTUALLY INTEND.

BUT I KNOW IN DRAFTING IT, THAT WAS WHAT I SORT OF ENVISIONED.

THANK YOU, MR. MOORE.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.

THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.

MS. GARZA, TWO QUESTIONS ON THE TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS.

I SEE THAT IT'S 15% ALONG INWOOD ROAD.

COULD YOU SPEAK TO HOW THAT RELATES TO OTHER STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE? IT'S ON FIVE 12 OF OUR CASE REPORT.

I KNOW FOR THIS ONE, UM, THEY DID MENTION THAT THEY STILL WANTED, UM, A BUFFER FOR THE RESIDENTS THERE, LIKE, UH, A TRANSPARENCY FOR, NOT FOR, FOR THE, THE RESIDENTS THERE TO HAVE A PRIVACY.

SO THEY DID, UM, SAY 15%.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER FORSIGHT, PLEASE.

WELL, I HAD GONE BACK AND LOOKED AT, UM, JUST FORM-BASED CODE AS A REFERENCE.

'CAUSE I KNOW IT TYPICALLY HAS, UM, TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS AND EVEN ALONG PRIMARY STREETS, UM, IT WAS A HIGHER PERCENTAGE THAN THAT.

SO THAT JUST CAUGHT MY EYE.

THAT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS A LOW, BUT CERTAINLY RECOGNIZED INWOOD A A BUSIER STREET.

UM, SECOND QUESTION IS, I NOTICED THAT THE LANDSCAPING IS CALLED OUT TO BE COMPLIANT WITH, UM, PART ONE, WHICH WOULD BE PART ONE OF PD 1 93.

COULD YOU SPEAK TO WHAT PERCENTAGE OF OPEN SPACE WILL BE PROVIDED? WAS THAT INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT? YES, THEY DID PROVIDE, AND I APOLOGIZE IF I LOOKED PAST IT.

SO THEY DID, UM, PROVIDE, THEY'RE PROVIDING, UM, MINIMUM OF 3,500 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE MR. OR ROUGHLY 27% OF THE LOT.

AND IS THAT FUNCTIONAL OPEN SPACE OR DOES THAT INCLUDE ALL OF THE SETBACKS IN OTHER AREAS? I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS WHAT, WHAT ARE THE, UM, AMENITIES PROVIDED TO THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE, ARE USABLE OPEN SPACE? I BELIEVE THEY MENTIONED THE WHOLE ENTIRE SET.

I WANTED TO ASK, ARE THEY TEARING DOWN THE EXISTING, UH, BUILDINGS THAT ARE ON THIS SITE TO BUILD A NEW, ARE THEY JUST RENOVATING EXISTING BUILDINGS TO, TO, UH, TO MAKE IT INTO A, AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY? THEY WILL BE, UH, DEMOLISHING THE, THE EXISTING BUILDINGS AND BUILDING A NEW, UH, BUILDING.

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

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. GARZA.

COMMISSIONERS AGAIN, CASE NUMBER SIX HAS BEEN TAKEN OF CONSENT.

HELLO AGAIN.

ITEM SIX, THIS IS Z 2 2 3 2 60, AND THIS IS LOCATED OFF OF LEMON IN OAK LAWN.

AND IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED AT GR GENERAL RETAIL SUBDISTRICT AND AN AN MF TWO MULTIFAMILY, UH, MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 1 93.

THE OAK LAWN SOCIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT, BOUNDED BY LEMON ROCK B AND BOWSER AVENUE AND REAGAN STREET, AND IT IS 3.07 ACRES.

PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST BEING TO ALLOW MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PRIMARILY RELATED TO USES, UH, SETBACKS, DENSITY LOCK COVERAGE, FLOOR AREA RATIO, HEIGHT, DENSITY STANDARDS, OR EXCUSE ME, DESIGN STANDARDS, PARKING, LANDSCAPING, AND MIXED INCOME HOUSING.

DEVELOPED A SITE WITH RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL USES.

AND HERE'S THE AERIAL MAP OF THE SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY.

TRIED TO HIGHLIGHT THE SPLIT ZONING NATURE OF THE PARCEL AS IT IS OR THE, THE, UH, BLOCK.

IT'S, UH, SPLIT BETWEEN MF TWO AND GR UH, RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE.

THERE'S A ALLEY THERE AT THIS TIME.

THERE IS MULTIFAMILY, MULTIPLE FAMILY USES TO THE NORTHEAST EAST.

UH, SOME SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED SUBDIVISIONS TO THE EAST, UH, MULTIPLE FAMILY TO THE SOUTHEAST RESTAURANT WITHOUT A DRIVE THROUGH SOUTHEAST ACROSS, UH, REAGAN.

AND THEN A COUPLE RESTAURANTS WITH DRIVE THROUGH ACROSS LEMON WITH AN OFFICE BUILDING, RETAIL

[00:25:01]

BUILDING, AUTO SERVICE CENTER, THE NORTHWEST.

AND THEN FINALLY A SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED SUBDIVISION TO THE NORTHWEST.

AND IT IS SPLIT BETWEEN THOSE TWO ZONING DISTRICTS, UH, WHICH SEPARATE THE USES.

UH, BUT THE CHANGE WOULD, UM, SORT OF BLEND THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THOSE TWO IN TERMS OF THE HEIGHT AND MASSING ALLOW THEM TO SPREAD OUT THEIR HEIGHT AND RATHER THAN FOCUSING AT ALL A HUNDRED PERCENT ON LEMON, UH, WHERE THE GR ENTITLES QUITE A BIT, WHEREAS THE MF TWO ENTITLES A LOT LESS.

UH, SO THEY BE ABLE TO SPREAD IT OUT A LITTLE BIT BETTER WITH THEIR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

UM, THEY DO HAVE A MIXED INCOME COMPONENT AND THEY HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS AND THEY'RE PROPOSING A CONCEPTUAL PLAN, DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND A LANDSCAPE PLAN.

AND HERE'S THE SITE, UM, ON THE ROCK MORTON LOOKING SOUTH, THE ALLEYS, EXCUSE ME, THE ALLEY ALLEY'S RIGHT THERE IN THE FRONT.

AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GO AROUND THE BLOCK SLOWLY.

THERE ARE SOME TOWN HOMES THERE ON THE SITE RIGHT NOW.

SERVICE PARKING, YOU CAN GO AROUND THE SITE, DOWN, DOWN BOWSER SERVICE PARKING, SURFACE PARKING, SERVICE PARKING, OLD ABANDONED RETAIL STRUCTURE, SURFACE PARKING THAT WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT SURFACE PARKING, SOME UNDEVELOPED SPACE.

THERE WAS A TACO BUENO HERE AT ONE POINT WHERE THAT TILE IS.

UM, THERE'S, UH, SURFACE PARKING AT THE CORNER OF LEMON AND, UH, LEMON AND THROCKMORTON.

I'M GONNA TURN TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE SURROUNDING USES.

SO THERE'S A RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE THROUGH CATTYCORNER.

THERE'S A, A TAKE FIVE AUTO SERVICE CENTER ACROSS THROCKMORTON, AND THERE'S A SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED, SOME MULTIPLE FAMILY MIX OF MULTI-FAMILY PLEXES ACROSS BOWER, LOOKING AT SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED, CIRCLING THE CORNER FROM BASON TO REAGAN.

IT'S A MULTIFAMILY AND, UH, THE, UH, RESTAURANT ACROSS REAGAN.

AND THEN FINALLY BACK AT LEMON, MORE MORE RESTAURANT GOING IN, UH, OFFICE BUILDING ACROSS THE STREET AND ANOTHER TACO DRIVE THROUGH ACROSS THE WAY.

UM, HERE'S THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND CONCEPTUAL PLAN.

THERE ARE SOME, UH, CLARIFICATIONS OFFERED IN THE LAST MINUTE CHANGES FROM THE DOCKET.

THEY ARE KIND OF ADMINISTRATIVE IN NATURE.

UH, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS CONCEPTUAL PLAN STANDS TO, UH, LIMIT USES, UH, SOUTHWEST OF THE HALF LINE, UH, TO THE RE TO THE, UH, COMMERCIAL ONES.

GR ALLOWS MULTIFAMILY IN, IN THERE, UH, ALREADY, AND THEN MULTIFAMILY, UH, USES STRICTLY MULTIPLE FAMILIES STRICTLY TO THE NORTHEAST AS WHAT SORT OF KEEPS IN THE USE REGIMEN.

WHILE THE REST OF THE SECTION, UH, ALLOWS DEVIATIONS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UH, OF THOSE TWO DISTRICTS.

SO WE END UP WITH, UM, KIND OF STRICTLY MULTIFAMILY ON THE NORTHEAST, SHOWN HERE ON PLAN NORTH, AND THEN A PODIUM, PODIUM, PARKING AND RETAIL IN THE SOUTHWEST TAKING UP THE WHOLE BLOCK.

ANOTHER, ANOTHER LOOK AT THAT AND MY AMATEUR CROSS SECTION.

BUT I DID FEEL THAT WAS IMPORTANT.

IT STEPS UP AS IT GETS AWAY FROM THE VASSER STREET, VASSER AVENUE RESIDENTIAL PARK.

UM, IT HAS TO JUMP UP FOR THAT PARKING PODIUM.

I HAVE PARTIAL ABOVE GROUND, PARTIAL BELOW GROUND, UH, AND THAT ALSO JUMPS UP TO ALLOW A LITTLE RETAIL BLOCK ON LEMON.

AND AS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE HIGHLY QUALIFIED, BUT UM, THEY HAVE REDUCED SETBACK ON LEMON, GET THAT BUILDING CLOSER TO THE STREET, UH, WHEREAS IT, IT KIND OF MAINTAINS, UH, HIGHER SETBACK A LOCK.

REAGAN ALSO HAS HIGHER SETBACKS TO STEP BACK THE MASSING AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL HALF OF THE BLOCK.

UM, AS FOR MINIMUM LOCK AREA, THEY ACROSS THE WHOLE SITE IN TERMS OF PURE UNIT COUNT, THEY'D REDUCE IT, UH, A LITTLE BIT.

UM, PL AREA RATIO IS OTHER, AS WELL AS OTHER DEVELOPMENT STANDARD MAY MAKE THE, UH, EXISTING, UH, CAP OF FIVE 20 A LITTLE HARD TO HIT.

UM, BUT WE DO INCLUDE THE, UH, TOTAL DENSITY THAT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE ON THE BASE REGIMEN, UH, THERE NONETHELESS.

AND MENTION THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING PERCENTAGES IN THERE.

UH, THOSE ARE SUBJECT

[00:30:01]

TO CHANGE IN THE, UH, CHANGES OF THE DOCKET.

UM, THEIR MIH ALSO IS TIED TO THE BASE, UH, INCREASING FROM A 2.0 FAR TO A 3.4, UM, 2.0 KIND OF HAD TO BE A SPECIFICALLY SET BASE BECAUSE MULTIFAMILY TWO DIDN'T HAVE A FAR TO START WITH.

UH, BUT YEAH, WE SEE THAT HEIGHT DECREASED FROM 85 ON LEMON DOWN TO 36 ON BOWSER.

THERE'S THE INTERMEDIATE STEPS AND THEN 90% L COVERAGE.

THE WHOLE STRUCTURE ALLOWS THEM TO, UH, ENCLOSED THEIR GARAGE.

AND AS FOR A LANDSCAPE PLAN, THEY HAVE A LANDSCAPE PLAN, WHICH GENERALLY MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF PART ONE.

THEY HAVE SOME REDUCED STREET TREES ALONG ROCK MORTON, UH, PROVIDED THAT THEY PRESERVE THE EXISTING LARGE TREES THAT YOU SEE THERE, UH, ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER, OR IT'S ACTUALLY THE NORTH CORNER, UH, PLAN NORTHWEST, BUT THAT'S THE PRIMARY VARIATION.

OTHERWISE, THE STREET TREES AND OTHER PLANTING GROUPS ARE THE SAME AS YOU WOULD SEE IN THE PART ONE I TO MODIFY THE GARAGE SCREENING.

SO IT DOESN'T OVERLAP WITH FOUR POINT 1107, BUT IN THIS CASE, FOUR POINT 1107 CONTROL AND ALLOW FOR PRESERVATION OF SPECIFIC LIVE OAKS ON THROCKMORTON MIXED INCOME PROVISIONS, UH, HAVE UPDATED IN THE CHANGE OF THE DOCKET.

UM, THE OLD ONE WAS 3.5 AT 61 TO 80 AM FI UH, WHEN, WHEN USING A 1.4 INCREASED FAR, UH, THE MAX HEIGHT IS TIED TO THE, THE FAR, BUT THE, UH, THE MAX HEIGHT ACTUALLY DECREASED ACROSS THE WHOLE PARCEL.

UH, IT'S A SLIGHT REDUCTION IN THE AVERAGE HEIGHT ACROSS THE PARCEL, STILL TIED TO THAT.

UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF FIVE, AT 5% AT 61 80 AM F FIVE IS BASED ON THE EXISTING M-I-H-D-B ORDINANCE THAT WE USE ACROSS THE BOARD, WHICH IS 5% AT 61 TO 80 FOR A ONE FAR RATIO INCREASE AND OTHER VARIATIONS FROM FOUR POINT 1107.

THEY MEET FOUR POINT 1107 MIXED INCOME DESIGN STANDARDS.

UM, FOR THE MOST PART, UH, THEY VARY THEIR ACTIVE BUILDING WITH, UM, THE HOPE IS THAT WILL LET THEM, UH, USE THAT ACTIVE BUILDING A LITTLE MORE FREQUENTLY THAN THEY WOULD MAYBE SCREENING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

UM, AND ALLOW THAT RETAIL IN FRONT OF YOUR GARAGE ON LEMON.

UH, TRANSPARENCY PACING DOES NOT APPLY TO GARAGE PARKING WALLS.

MOST OF THAT IS, IS WRAPPED AS IT IS.

UM, EVERYTHING ELSE IN 4.107 REMAINS A MODIFIED FENCING.

INDIVIDUAL ENTRIES ARE PEDESTRIAN SCALE, LIGHTING, GROUND LEVEL, OPEN SPACE, UH, GARAGE SCREENING, ALL STANDARD AND ADDITIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS.

THEY HAVE TWO PIECES OF STREET FURNITURE FROM THE REGULAR MIX OF THREE FOR EACH FRONTAGE.

THEY HAVE DRIVEWAY WIDTH AND NUMBER MAXIMUMS. SO 25, UH, MAXIMUM WIDTH ANYWHERE, UH, ONE PER FRONTAGE ON BROCK, MARTIN, REAGAN, AND LEMON, AND THEN NONE ON BOWSER.

UM, ADDITIONAL 40% TRANSPARENCY ABOVE WHAT'S CALLED FOUR AND FOUR POINT 1107, THAT'S 40% ON LEMON.

UH, ELSEWHERE.

THEY'RE REQUIRED TO MEET THE FOUR POINT 1107 TRANSPARENCY, UH, WHICH IS EVENLY SPACED AND THREE FOOT VERTICAL BUFFERS BETWEEN SIDEWALK AND PARKING OR DRIVING SURFACES.

THEY DON'T HAVE A, UH, AT THE, ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, PRIMARY EXPOSED PARKING OR DRIVING SPACES.

BUT THE, UH, THREE FOOT VERTICAL BUFFERS IS, SHOULD THEY CHANGE THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN IN ANY WAY TO INCLUDE THOSE, UH, THAT'LL APPLY, UH, PROTECT THE SIDEWALK FROM, UM, CAR ENCROACHMENT AND SAFE CROSSING LANGUAGE YOU'RE LIKELY FAMILIAR WITH.

UH, ONE DIFFERENCE IN THE RECOMMENDATION IN THE, UH, REQUEST IS IN REGARDS TO SIDEWALKS.

SO STAFF, RE STAFF AND THE APPLICANT ARE IN AGREEMENT ON EIGHT FOOT SIDEWALK WITH A SIX FOOT PARKWAY, SORRY, FIVE FOOT PARK, SORRY, IT'S A FIVE FOOT PARKWAY ON LEMON.

AND THEN ON THE OTHER STREETS, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS ACROSS THE BOARD AND A, UM, PARKWAY MINIMUM OF FIVE FOOT.

UH, THEY RECOMMEND OR THEY REQUEST TO, UH, YOU KNOW, SHRINK THEIR DRIVEWAYS WHEN THEY REACH, EXCUSE ME, SHRINK THEIR SIDEWALKS WHEN THEY REACH THE DRIVEWAY AS YOU GO NORTHEAST ON THE SITE TO A FOUR FOOT MINIMUM.

SIDEWALKS, UH, HAVE A LARGER PARKWAY.

SO RECOMMENDATION IS TO KEEP THE SIX ACROSS THE BOARD.

AND I'M GONNA LOOK AT THE PLAN.

YOU CAN KIND OF SEE WHERE THEY'VE MARKED THEIR DRIVEWAYS ON HERE.

IT'S NOT EXACTLY MIDWAY THROUGH THE SITE, BUT APPROXIMATELY IN THE NORTH OF THOSE DRIVEWAYS, THEY SHRINK THE SIDEWALKS DOWN FOUR FEET.

[00:35:02]

THAT'S A REFRESHER ON THAT.

WE DID HAVE CHANGES FROM THE DOCKET AND THEY'RE, UH, MOSTLY ADMINISTRATIVE.

SOME CLARIFICATION ON CONCEPTUAL PLAN, JUST TO BEEF UP THAT LANGUAGE, MAKE SURE THAT IT APPLIES ONLY TO USE, UH, USES NOT TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

'CAUSE THE WHOLE POINT OF THE REZONING IS TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO VARY ACROSS THOSE TWO TRACKS.

UH, BUT TO KEEP THAT RE RESIDENTIAL, OR EXCUSE ME, RETAIL COMPONENTS OF THE SOUTHWEST.

UM, AND SO THAT'S ACHIEVED ON PAGE 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, AND THREE.

UH, PARKING.

PAGE FOUR HAS DETAILED, DETAILED AS SMALL LOADING SPACES NEED TO BE ON THE GROUND FLOOR.

THERE WERE ALREADY REQUIRED SMALL LOADING SPACES, BUT IT GIVES DETAIL AS TO WHERE THOSE SHOULD BE.

UH, REMOVES TURRET FROM THE LIST OF PUBLIC ENTRANCE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS.

LONG STORY SHORT, THEIR PRI THEIR PRIMARY ENTRANCES NEED TO HAVE ARCHITECTURE ELEMENTS.

AND THAT WAS ONE IN THE LIST.

THEY REMOVED THAT.

AND, UH, PAGE SIX ADDED SOME SUSTAINABILITY FEATURES LIKE ALBIDO, ROOF STRUCTURES, RECYCLING, UH, IRRIGATION FOR LANDSCAPING AND, UH, BIKE RACKS.

I THINK, I BELIEVE IT WAS THREE BIKE RACKS NEED TO BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC OF THE, OF THE OVERALL BIKE PARKING THAT THEY HAVE.

AND THE APPLICANT ACCEPTED, INCORPORATED STAFF RECOMMENDED MIXED INCOME HOUSING UNITS AT 5% AT 61 TO 80 A FI.

IT WAS PREVIOUSLY 3.5 AS STATED A MINUTE AGO.

SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND A LANDSCAPE, A LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.

AND IM HERE FOR QUESTIONS.

QUESTIONS.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, PLEASE.

YEAH, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION, AND THIS IS PROBABLY FOR PHIL IRWIN.

UM, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION SORT OF LATE ABOUT THE TREES ON LEMON.

THERE WAS DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THEM BEING SIX INCH CALIBER.

AND I THINK MAYBE THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION BY PHIL THAT THEY BE FIVE INCH, AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION ABOUT THAT.

I DON'T THINK THE DEVELOPER CARES AND I DON'T CARE.

SO I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HE WOULD PREFER, UM, FOR THE HEALTH OF THE SITE.

WHAT, UH, WHAT PHIL WOULD PREFER.

UHHUH .

LET ME SEE.

SO THE ONE THING WE TOUCHED ON LEMON WAS, UH, NOT USING LIVE OAKS AS THE PRIMARY PLANTING GROUP THERE.

BE A LITTLE TOO, UH, IN THERE IN HIS SOME, UH, ESTIMATION TO, UM, DENSE TO SEE THERE.

'CAUSE IT'S A DENSE TREE COVER, UH, THE LIVE OAK.

UH, WHEREAS WE'D BE ABLE TO USE LIVE OAKS ELSEWHERE.

UH, THE CONDITIONS DON'T TOUCH ON THE CALIPER WIDTH ON LEMON YET.

I CAN, LET ME, I, I CAN SEE IF, UH, PHIL IS AVAILABLE, BUT BEYOND THAT, AT THE, THE TIME THE PROPOSAL LEAVES IT AS, UH, AS THE BASE STANDARD, WHICH I CAN'T REMEMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO ASK HIM SOMETHING SPECIFIC? YEAH, IF, IF HE HAS, I GUESS THERE WAS A REPRESENTATION OR AN AGREEMENT MADE WITH THE COMMUNITY.

AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, AND I THINK THE AGREEMENT MADE WITH THE COMMUNITY WAS THAT THEY WOULD DO SIX INCH AND THEN MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION THAT FIVE INCH MIGHT BE A BETTER CHOICE, UM, FOR THOSE TREES ON LEMON, UH, TO, I DON'T KNOW, GROW HEALTHIER OR GROW FASTER OR WHATEVER.

AND SO I'M JUST LOOKING FOR HIS PROFESSIONAL OPINION ABOUT WHICH SIZE TREE WOULD BE BEST TO PLANT FROM THE START.

I'LL SEE IF HE'S HANDY.

IF NOT, I WILL GET YOU THAT INFO, UH, BEFORE PUBLIC.

UM, BUT JUST TO CLARIFY, THERE'S NOT ANY TEXT AT THIS TIME, UH, REFLECTING THAT DISCUSSION.

I UNDERSTAND, BUT IT COULD BE ADDED.

COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.

OH, STIR.

WELCOME.

PARDON MY INTERRUPTION.

UH, I THOUGHT I COULD STEP IN HERE REAL QUICK IF YOU COULD HEAR ME OKAY.

ADAPTING TO THE LOCATION, A THREE AND A HALF INCH TREE, FOUR INCH TREE MAYBE WOULD BE MORE SUITABLE.

OKAY, VERY GOOD.

UH, THE, THE, THE DIFFERENCE THAT WE HAD ON THIS WAS THE CODE AND REFERENCES A, A MINIMUM OF THREE AND A HALF INCHES.

WHEN WE START ESCALATING UP TO A SIX INCH TREE, WE START LOOKING AT, UH, DIFFICULTY OF PLANTING.

UH, ALSO THE DIFFICULTY FOR THE TREE TO ADAPT TO THE CONDITION.

THAT'S A MORE MATURE TREE BEING PLANTED IN A, IN THAT, UH, LIMITED URBAN CONDITION.

SO WE LOOK FOR PLANTING THREE AND A HALF INCH TREE IS JUST AS SUBSTANTIAL AS PLANTING A SIX INCH TREE FROM MY POINT OF VIEW.

SO WHAT'S YOUR RECOMMENDATION? LEAVE IT AS IS.

I WOULD TYPICALLY LEAVE IT AS IS OR CODE MINIMUM AND ALLOW IT TO GROW TO THE SIX INCH.

UH, IF IT'S, THE IDEA IS TO PROVIDE THE LARGEST SIZE POSSIBLE AT TIME OF INSTALLATION, THAT'S SOMETHING YOU CAN TRY TO APPLY FOR.

BUT FOR THE LONGEVITY OF THE TREE AND THEN

[00:40:01]

I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT LAST PART.

UH, THE THREE AND A HALF INCH TREE MINIMUM IS A GOOD STANDARD IF YOU WANT TO GO TO FOUR INCH.

I MEAN, IT IS JUST A MATTER OF THE AGE OF THE TREE THAT YOU'RE INSTALLING INTO THE SITE.

THE YOUNGER THE TREE, THE FASTER IT CAN PROBABLY GROW AS IT'S MATURING INTO THE LOCATION.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.

ALL RIGHT.

I'M GLAD HE ANSWERED THAT.

UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.

UH, THERE'S A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

UM, MR. PEPE, I BELIEVE I READ THAT THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR 13,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROUND FLOOR OPEN SPACE.

IS THAT, DID I READ THAT RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.

IT'S THE GROUND FLOOR AND YOU'RE SATISFIED IT'S THERE BECAUSE WITH MY MATH SKILLS, I COULDN'T GET TO 13,000 FEET, BUT I'M SURE YOU'RE FINE.

YOU'VE GOT IT FIGURED OUT.

NOW THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CON THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CONDITIONS.

UH, WHAT IS, UH, LEADING YOU TO, UH, WELL, I JUST DIDN'T SEE ENOUGH INFORMATION FOR ME TO CONFIRM THAT.

SO YOU, YOU CAN THINK ABOUT THAT FOR THIS AFTERNOON.

AND THEN THERE WAS SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT SOME, EVIDENTLY SOME RELIEF TO THE GARAGE SCREENING BECAUSE OF LANDSCAPE.

I DIDN'T QUITE FOLLOW HOW THAT WORKED.

DID, DID I READ THAT Y YES.

WELL, IT'S A, CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT? IT'S AN INTERACTION BETWEEN THE L LANDSCAPING IN PD 1 93 DOES SOME THINGS THAT WE WOULD CALL DESIGN STANDARDS ELSEWHERE, INCLUDING GARAGE SCREENING.

THEY ARE GOING TO MEET THE FULL GARAGE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS OF FOUR POINT 1107, BUT THEY, UM, THEY WERE GETTING RELIEF FROM THE SCREENING REQUIREMENT OF PART ONE, PD 1 93, WHERE THEY MAY CONFLICT.

UM, AND IT WOULD ALLOW AN OPEN SPACE, UH, IN ENSURE THEY, THEY WANT, THEY WANNA IN AND THAT THAT RELATES TO THE OPEN SPACE.

THEY WANNA PUT AN OPEN SPACE OUTSIDE OF A GARAGE, BUT IF YOU HAVE A GARAGE IN PD 1 93, YOU NEED TO PUT, UH, I THINK PLANTING GROUPS IN FRONT OF IT.

AND SO THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT.

HAVE A KIND OF AN URBAN OPEN SPACE ON, UM, ON LEMON AVENUE.

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT ON THE PLAN.

SO WE'RE COVERED IN, IN STAFF'S ESTIMATION, IN, IN TERMS OF GARAGE SCREENING, BUT IT'S SORT OF A INTERACTION BETWEEN TWO SCREENING STANDARDS AND IN THE MIXED INCOME DESIGN STANDARDS AND, AND PD 1 93.

AND THEN AS FOR THE OPEN SPACE, OPEN SPACE IS REQUIRED IN THE URBAN DESIGN STANDARD SECTION.

SO FOR DEVELOPMENT, THEY, THEY HAVE TO HAVE 34,000 SQUARE FEET OF TOTAL OPEN SPACE AND THEN 13,000 OF TOTAL OPEN SPACE ON THE GROUND FLOOR.

AND THAT'S REQUIRED BY CONDITION.

COMMISSIONER HOFF, I, THAT COMMISSIONER HARBERT, UH, MR. PEPE, ARE THERE, THERE'S, ARE THERE EXISTING BUILDINGS ON THIS SITE THAT ARE GONNA BE DEMOLISHED? THERE'S ONE LEFT.

I THINK IT WAS A LA MADELINE, UH, THERE'S ONE LEFT THEN, OH, YOU KNOW WHAT, THERE'S ACTUALLY, THERE'S THREE, UH, ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY IN THE NORTH CORNER, UH, THAT I UNDERSTAND ARE OWNED BY THE, UH, THE DEVELOPER.

AND THOSE WOULD BE, UH, DEMOLISHED TO, TO BUILD THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

HERE'S THE OTHER, UH, COMMERCIAL BUILDING.

AND THEN THERE ARE THREE ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY BETWEEN THE ALLEY AND BOWSER AVENUE.

UH, THAT WOULD BE DEMOLISHED IN THIS CASE.

BUT EVERYTHING ELSE ON LEMON, UH, IS ALREADY DEMOLISHED A WHILE BACK.

AND I NOTICED LOOKING THROUGH THE BRIEF, THAT HHEB, IS THIS GONNA BE AN HEB STORE OR WHAT? I'LL, I'LL BE STRAIGHT.

IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A NO.

UM, I THINK THEY DID OWN THIS SITE AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE MOVING IT, THEY'RE MOVING ON FROM IT .

THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT THE, THE APPLICANT DEVELOPER, THEY'RE THE LANDOWNER.

MM-HMM.

, IT WAS, UH, COMMISSIONER HARBOR, PLEASE.

UM, DRIP IRRIGATION FROM, UH, FROM AIR CONDITIONER AND, AND, UM, RAINWATER COLLECTION.

UM, A POINT OF CLARIFICATION YOU MENTIONED, UM, AND THIS IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, BUT YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT IRRIGATION AND YOU, YOU, YOU SPOKE REALLY FAST, WHICH YOU NORMALLY DON'T DO.

MIKE, CAN YOU, UM, TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR PRESENTATION ABOUT IRRIGATION? YEAH.

THOSE ARE IN THE SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS FOR THAT, THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT.

UH, THIS DRAFT DOESN'T HAVE IT HERE.

UH, SO I DON'T HAVE THE FULL LANGUAGE, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S PART OF THE SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS.

IT RELATES TO, UH,

[00:45:02]

SO IT, IT'S, IT'S, I UNDERSTAND IT'S RELATED TO, RELATED TO THAT.

I DON'T HAVE THE NEW ADDED LANGUAGE IN, IN FRONT OF ME, UH, AT THIS TIME, BUT IT'S, I CAN ANSWER THAT.

IT'S A REQUIREMENT FOR LANDSCAPING.

THEY'RE REQUIRED TO COLLECT ANY CONDENSATION FROM HVAC SYSTEMS THAT ARE FIVE TONS OR MORE AND DO RAINWATER COLLECTION AND REUSE IT AS PART OF THEIR LANDSCAPING.

UM, THEY ALSO INTEND TO MEET, IT'S NOT LEAD, IT'S ONE OF THE OTHER STANDARDS, BUT THE CITY ATTORNEY WON'T ALLOW US TO PUT THAT IN.

AND SO WE HAVE TRIED TO CAPTURE SOME OTHER SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS WITHIN THE ORDINANCE THAT, UM, SORT OF DOVETAILS INTO WHAT THEY'RE INTENDING TO DO ON THE SITE.

AND IN THOSE SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS, THEY'RE PUT INTO THE PD OR IS IT A CASE BY CASE? WELL, THE, THERE'S SOME SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS IN THE PD, BUT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WON'T LET US REFERENCE STANDARDS LIKE LEAD IN THE PD.

SO EVEN THOUGH A DEVELOPER MAY CHOOSE TO COMPLY WITH THE LEAD STANDARD, WE CAN'T REQUIRE IT IN THE PD.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.

I SEE WE STILL HAVE MR. IRWIN, SO I WAS WONDERING IF I COULD ASK A FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON THE TREE DISCUSSION.

COULD YOU SPEAK TO THE RELATIVE, UM, SIZE VARIANCE? I THINK I UNDERSTAND, UM, THE PLANTING CONSTRAINTS AND THAT A YOUNGER TREE WILL ADAPT MORE QUICKLY, THEREFORE GROW MORE QUICKLY ON THE SMALLER VERSUS THE LARGER CALIPER.

AND I'M JUST GONNA SAY FOUR TO SIX, KEEP IT SIMPLER IN MY MIND.

WHAT WOULD BE THE RELATIVE, UM, IMPACT OF THAT IN TERMS OF PLANTING, IN TERMS OF SCALE OF THAT TREE WHEN THEY WERE PLANTED? IS THAT A SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT DIFFERENCE? UM, AND AGAIN, IS THERE ANY SORT OF RULE OF THUMB ON ON HOW THOSE, UM, INFILLS THE YOUNGER VERSUS AN OLDER, MORE MATURE TREE? WELL, THE, THE MORE MATURE TREE, OBVIOUSLY THE TALLER, UH, DEPENDS ON THE SPECIES OF COURSE.

UH, AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE SPREAD OF THE CANOPY ALSO DEPEND ON THE SPECIES.

UH, THE LARGER TREE WILL BE TALLER IMMEDIATELY.

IT WILL TAKE TIME FOR IT TO BEGIN TO GROW IN HEIGHT.

UH, AND THAT MEANWHILE, THE YOUNGER TREE WOULD, WOULD TYPICALLY BE GROWING FASTER AND CATCH UP TO THE HEIGHT OF THE TREE OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS THAT BY, BY THE TIME WE GET 10 TO 15 YEARS, THEY'RE PROBABLY GONNA BE CAUGHT UP WITH EACH OTHER, YOU KNOW, IN IF IN COMPARISON.

UH, AND ALSO DEPENDS ON THE SOIL CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE PLANTING IN.

UM, SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE A, YOU KNOW, OPTIMAL PLANTING CONDITIONS, THE YOUNGER TREE WILL TYPICALLY BE MORE RAPIDLY GROWING, BUT, BUT YOUR MATURE TREE, IF IT'S BEING WELL MAINTAINED, WILL DO WELL.

AND IT, IT'S GONNA FILL IN THE SPACE, UH, IMMEDIATELY AND IT, IT'LL LOOK LIKE IT'S BEEN A, A MORE MATURE TREE'S BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE.

THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

ONE FOLLOW UP.

I NOTICED IN THE CASE REPORT THAT IT MENTIONS THE PRESERVATION OF EXISTING TREES ALONG LEMON AVENUE.

I DIDN'T SEE THOSE LOCATED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

UH, DON'T THINK THEY'RE ON LEMON.

I THINK THEY'RE ON THROCKMORTON.

OH, THROCKMORTON.

MY, MY APOLOGIES.

YOU YOU GOT IT.

YEAH, I, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE PLAN BACKWARDS, SO MY APOLOGIES.

UM, AND SO IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL, I GUESS, LANGUAGE THAT SHOULD BE CONCERNED? THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR MR. PEPE, BUT IF THE INTENT IS TO, UM, MAINTAIN THOSE TREES AS A PART OF THE OVERALL LANDSCAPING, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDED TO BE CONSIDERED? AND I'M CONFIDENT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS THIS WELL IN HAND.

I JUST DIDN'T SEE IT IMMEDIATELY.

YEAH, WELL THIS, THIS, THE LANGUAGE THAT'S PROPOSED IS THE NUMBER OF TREES REQUIRED IN THE TREE PLANTING ZONE ALONG THE ROCK MORTON IS EIGHT, WHICH WOULD BE ABOUT THE STANDARD IN THE NORMAL.

UH, SO PROVIDED THE, FOR LIVE LI LARGE LIVE OAKS EXISTING PRIOR TO 2020 WERE SHOWN IN THE LANDSCAPE PLANT PRESERVED.

UM, SO OTHERWISE THEY HAVE TO MEET THE BASE STANDARD.

UM, SO THEIR INCENTIVE TO DO IT IS THEY CAN PLANT LESS, THEY CAN PRESERVE IT.

BUT THAT LANGUAGE, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF, MAYBE I WON'T LET PHIL FOLLOW UP IF NECESSARY, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IT CAN BE TRICKY TO SAY YOU, IT'S ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED THAT THIS IS PRESERVED BECAUSE OF, UH, THE HEALTH OF THINGS OVER TIME.

WE HAVE TO HAVE A, AN ALTERNATIVE, BUT THE INCENTIVE THERE IS THEY DON'T HAVE TO PLANT AS MANY ON THAT FRONTAGE.

[00:50:01]

UNDERSTOOD.

SO THAT'S, AND, AND AGAIN, I, I WAS READING THAT AND DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THE FULL CONTEXT OF IT, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

PAGE 26 MM-HMM, .

SO THEN A SECONDARY QUESTION REGARDING, UM, THE EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE ALLOWED RELATED, WELL, TWO FOLLOW UPS.

ONE THE EXCEPTIONS ON THE SCREENING, AND I WAS NOTICING SPECIFICALLY IN TERMS OF THE LOADING THAT IS REQUIRED, IS THAT BASE REQUIREMENT OF PD 1 93.

I SEE IT REFLECTED ON THE PLAN, BUT THERE'S NO STANDARD.

SO IS THAT DEFERRING BACK TO PD 1 93? THE, THE LOADING, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE LOADING STANDARD CORRECT, ON PAGE 23 OF THE REPORT WITH THE CONDITIONS? YES.

SO THE LOADING STANDARDS WERE VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT SPECIFICALLY AND AS I ASSUME AS FOLLOW UP TO CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY.

I, I KNOW WE'LL HEAR THIS INDIVIDUALLY, SO I CAN ASK THEM TO CONFIRM THAT.

AND THEN FINAL QUESTION ON THE, UM, TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS.

I, I NOTICED IT'S MUCH HIGHER WHERE WE'VE GOT THE GR ZONES.

IS THERE TRANSPARENCY THAT IS ANTICIPATED FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE SITE? YES.

SO WE HAVE TWO LAYERS OF, UM, TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS HERE.

SO THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE TO MEET 40%, UH, MINIMUM ON LEMON.

AND THEN IT'S THE FOUR POINT 1107 TRANSPARENCY STANDARDS ON THE EVERYWHERE OUT, ON EVERY OTHER FRONTAGE.

AND THAT IS, THAT ONE WORKS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.

IT'S NOT A PERCENTAGE, BUT IT DOES, I I THINK IT'S ROBUST LANGUAGE.

IT TALKS ABOUT AT LEAST ONE WINDOW AND ONE PRIMARY ENTRANCE, UM, AT THE STREET LEVEL.

AND THEN IT SAYS A TRANSPARENT SURFACE IS REQUIRED FOR EVERY 25 LINEAR FEET OF STREET FRONTING AND OPEN SPACE FRONTING FACADE.

SO IT'S EVERY 25 FEET, THEY REQUIRE A TRANSPARENT SURFACE.

SO IT'S A DIFFERENT MECHANISM FOR TRANSPARENCY THAN IS THE 40% ON LEMON.

THE, SO THEY'RE GONNA OVERLAP ON LEMON.

AND I PRESUME THAT IF YOU'RE MEETING 40%, IT'S EASY TO MEET YOUR 25%, UM, OR EVERY 25 FEET YOU HAVE MUST HAVE AN OPENING.

BUT THAT'S THE STANDARD THAT WE USE FOR MIXED INCOME PROJECTS.

TRANSPARENCY OF THE ONE IN 4.107.

WELL, WE HAVE THOSE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION IN THE BACK.

YEAH, UNDERSTOOD.

AND THEN THAT IS WHAT ALSO TRIGGERS, UM, ANY GROUND LEVEL UNITS CONNECT TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND ALL THE OTHER PROVISIONS THAT ARE INCLUDED.

UH, THE, THE PARK, THE PARKING SCREENING, UH, PEDESTRIAN SCALE LIGHTING, YEAH.

THANK YOU MR. PEPE.

THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, MR. PEPPER.

MY QUESTION IS ABOUT SIDEWALKS.

'CAUSE I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT AND STAFF ARE IN AGREEMENT ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE WIDTH OF THE SIDEWALK AND THE WIDTH OF THE PARKWAY ON LEMON AND FROCK, MORTON AND REAGAN, SOUTH OF THE DRIVEWAY.

BUT CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE DIFFERENCES IN THE RECOMMENDATION, UM, STAFF AND WHAT THE APPLICANT IS OFFERING ON BOWSER AND THRO MORTON? BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE JUST WIDTH BECAUSE THE APPLICANT'S SUGGESTING FOUR IN 10, WHICH IS 14 FEET, AND THE STAFF IS SIX AND FIVE, SO IT'S 11 FEET.

SO IS IT TREES OR, OR COMMUNITY PREFERENCE, OR DO YOU HAVE AN EXPLANATION? I UNDERSTAND IT'S COMMUNITY PREFERENCE, WHY THEY'VE VOLUNTEERED FOR, UM, STAFF IN, YOU KNOW, ACKNOWLEDGES THAT, BUT STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS SIX.

THE, UH, A DA PASSING DISTANCE FOR TWO WHEELCHAIRS IS FIVE.

SO THAT'S A FLOOR YOU WOULD SEE FROM ME IN TERMS OF RECOMMENDATION.

UM, THEY ALSO HAVE A FRONT, THEY HAVE A 15 FOOT FRONT SETBACK ON BOWSER, FOR EXAMPLE.

UH, I SEE NO ISSUE IN ACCOMMODATING A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PARKWAY AND A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SIDEWALK, NONETHELESS.

MIX USE FORM SUBDISTRICT WITH A SHOPFRONT OVERLAY WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 5 95, WHICH IS THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK.

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

SEVEN AND EIGHT.

WE'LL GO TO SEVEN AND EIGHT.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT VICE CHILDREN HAS A CONFLICT ON ITEM ITEM NUMBER SEVEN AND A STEPPED OUTTA THE CHAMBER.

THIS IS Z 2 34 DASH 1 0 1 AND THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, LIMITED TO A BAR, LOUNGE, A TAVERN, AND A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE, LIMITED TO A DANCE HALL ON PROPERTIES ZONE F WM U THREE DASH SH WALKABLE URBAN

[00:55:01]

SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT OUTLINE IN BLUE IS THE AREA REQUEST ON THE AREA MAP.

THIS IS THE ZONING MAP YOU WILL SEE IS SURROUNDED BY UNDERDEVELOPED FOR ITS PARK AUTO SERVICE CENTER, VEHICLE SALE AND MANUFACTURING.

THE AREA OF REQUEST IS LOCATED AT 29 10 BJO BOULEVARD.

THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT IN 1939.

IT'S APPROXIMATELY 2,688 SQUARE FEET.

THE ONLY USED AUTHORIZED BY THIS SPECIFIC PERMIT WOULD BE A BAR LOUNGE OF TAVERN, AND THE PROPOSED BAR LOUNGER TAVERN WILL OPERATE MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY FROM 8:00 AM TO 1:00 AM AND THE NEXT DAY AND SUNDAY 11:00 AM TO 11:00 PM THE NEXT FEW SLIDES WILL BE PICTURES OF THE SITE AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS.

THIS IS THE SITE PLAN.

ON THE SCREEN NOW WILL BE THE CONDITIONS AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR AN ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIOD.

AND IT'LL BE SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE.

ALSO I DID IT BASED ON THE USE.

UM, IS THERE ANY REASON THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR A FIVE YEAR AUTOMATIC WITH THE AUTOMATIC RENEWAL WHEN THIS IS A NEW SUP AND THE COMMUNITY NEEDS TIME TO ADAPT TO IT? CAN YOU REPEAT THAT FOR ME? I DIDN'T QUITE HEAR YOU.

ALL I HEARD WAS THE SUP RENEWAL.

THE THERE REASON WHY.

THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH A AUTOMATIC RENEWAL WHEN THIS IS A NEW ALCOHOLIC ESTABLISHMENT IN THE COMMUNITY AND THE COMMUNITY NEEDS TIME TO ADAPT AND SEE, UM, WHAT WOULD THIS BUSINESS BE AN ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY? WELL, I SPOKE WITH RYAN ABOUT THAT AND HE SAID, RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE A POLICY STATED THAT ALL NEW SUVS SHOULDN'T HAVE AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.

SO THAT'S WHY I LEFT IT AS THE FIVE YEAR WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.

LET ME, LET ME REPHRASE THAT.

LEMME STOP.

SO I KNOW THERE IS NOT A POLICY, BUT PUTTING A NEW SUP ON A, UH, IS PUTTING A NEW SUP ON A AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, HOW DOES THAT DEAL THE COMMUNITY, UH, IF, IF SOMETHING GO SOMETHING, IF THEY DO SOMETHING AND IT'S AUTOMATIC RENEWAL AND, AND THEN, UM, IT DOESN'T GIVE A COMMUNITY ROOM, IT DOESN'T GIVE A COMMUNITY ROOM TO HAVE A CHOICE ON WHETHER THEY WANT TO KEEP THEM IN A LATER DATE.

UM, IF THEY, IF THEY REDO THEIR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL AND AT THAT TIME EVERYTHING IS OKAY, UM, THEN THE COMMUNITY IS KIND OF LEFT WITH SOMETHING THAT, THAT THEY MIGHT NOT WANT.

UH, GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

I'LL, I'LL JUMP IN ON THAT.

UM, YEAH, SO, SO THIS IS JUST STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

UH, AS GIANNA SAID, YOU KNOW, WE ARE RECOMMENDING INITIAL FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH THAT ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTO RENEWAL, UH, FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS.

UM, ALSO AS GIANNA SAID, UM, ALTHOUGH, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS COMMISSIONERS, VARIOUS COMMUNITIES MAY HAVE, UM, SORT OF ESTABLISHED INTERNAL POLICIES ON, ON WHEN THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE APPROVING SOMETHING WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWAL OR NOT.

UH, CITY STAFF DOES NOT HAVE A HARD AND FAST RULE OR POLICY, UM, ON, ON WHEN WE RECOMMEND AUTO RENEWAL OR NOT.

IT'S REALLY JUST A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

UM, IN THIS CASE, UH, WE ARE RECOMMENDING ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTO RENEWAL.

UM, HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, YOU AS THE COMMISSIONER AND YOUR FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, YOU'RE, YOU'RE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UM, IF YOU WEREN'T COMFORTABLE, UH, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AUTO RENEWAL TO CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

COMMISSIONER HERBERT, UM, FOR FURTHER CLARIFICATION, THEREFORE, MYSELF AND, UM, NEWER COMMISSIONERS, WHAT GOES IN THE DECISION FROM STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON, UM, YEARS OF, OF ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS? WHAT GOES IN THAT DECISION MAKING? YEAH, I MEAN, LIKE I SAID, IT'S REALLY JUST A, A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

UM, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY LIKE FORMAL GUIDANCE, UM, IN THIS CASE.

DO YOU KNOW WHY WE CHOSE THIS OR IS IT I'LL PASS THAT TO THE CASE PLANNER.

UM, I CHOSE TO GO WITH THE FIVE YEAR WITH AUTOMATIC RENEWAL BECAUSE I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY OPPOSITION FROM THE COMMUNITY.

I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANYTHING FROM THE COMMUNITY.

UM, AND THEN

[01:00:01]

UM, SO IF HAD I HEARD ANYTHING NEGATIVE FROM THE COMMUNITY, THEN MAYBE I WOULD NOT HAVE SELECTED TO DO THE AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING FROM THE COMMUNITY.

PERFECT.

THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR.

YES, SIR.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.

HELLO.

WE ADDRESSED THIS A LITTLE BIT IN AN EMAIL, BUT TO, TO GET IT ON THE RECORD AT THE BRIEFING.

UM, THIS IS A BRAND NEW OPERATOR AND A BRAND NEW SUP.

THIS OPERATOR HAS NOT HAD AN SUP AT THIS LOCATION BEFORE YOU ARE CORRECT.

SO EVEN THOUGH AN SUP WAS REQUIRED FOR THIS USE, UH, A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WAS SOMEHOW ISSUED AN ERROR FOR THIS USE? THAT'S CORRECT.

YES, MA'AM.

THE CO WAS ISSUED AN ERROR FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE.

AND SO THESE SU UH, SUP CONDITIONS, THESE ARE BRAND NEW CONDITIONS THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM.

UH, CAN, I MEAN, THERE ARE SEVERAL, UM, CONDITIONS HERE THAT DON'T SEEM TO BE APPLYING TO, UH, THIS SORT OF USE.

I MEAN, IT SAYS IT REFERENCES A, A PRIVATE RECREATIONAL FACILITY.

IT SAYS FIELD LIGHTING IS NOT PERMITTED.

UM, AND THEN THE HOURS OF OPERATION, WHICH ARE, WHICH INCLUDE NO SATURDAY HOURS ARE VERY UNUSUAL FOR A, FOR A BAR.

WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THESE CONDITIONS WITH THE APPLICANT? YES.

AND SOME OF THESE CONDITIONS, UM, I STRIKED OUT BECAUSE THEY DID NOT PERTAIN TO THIS PARTICULAR USE, BUT I DID DISCUSS THAT WITH THE APPLICANT AND HE SAID THAT THESE ARE THE HOURS THAT HE WANTED TO, UM, OPERATE AT.

AND SO DID HE, WAS IT HE, DID HE ALSO HAVE AN EXPLANATION FOR THE REFERENCES TO FIELD LIGHTING AND PRIVATE RECREATIONAL FACILITY? IT ALMOST LOOKS AS IF THIS SET OF CONDITIONS WAS ADAPTED FROM ANOTHER USE AND DIDN'T QUITE GET TO WHERE IT NEEDED TO BE.

NO, MA'AM.

HE COULD HAVE USED AN EXAMPLE AND MAYBE FORGOT TO SWAP OUT SOME WORDING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT HE WILL BE HERE THIS AFTERNOON.

THAT WAY YOU CAN ASK HIM THOSE QUESTIONS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

I APPRECIATE IT.

YES, MA'AM.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, FORESIGHT IS THE EXISTING, UH, THE, THE, YOU, YOU SAY THIS IS A NEW OPERATOR.

UH, THE, THE BUILDING THAT'S THERE, IS IT CURRENTLY BEING OPERATED AS A NIGHTCLUB OR AS A LOUNGE? I BELIEVE SO BECAUSE THEY WERE ISSUED A CO AND ERROR.

SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE HERE TO GET THE SUP SO THAT THEY CAN LEGALLY OPERATE.

RATE.

EXPLAIN TO ME THAT AS THE CO WAS ISSUED AN ERROR, HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS.

UH, WHAT HAPPENED HERE? SO WHENEVER THEY WENT TO THE PERMIT CENTER TO GET A CO FOR THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS, THEY ACTUALLY GOT THE CO FOR THE, THAT'S LOCATED NEXT DOOR INSTEAD OF THIS PARTICULAR ADDRESS.

SO THEY WAS OPERATING OFF OF A CO THAT DID NOT BELONG TO THIS PARTICULAR ADDRESS.

HOW LONG HAVE THEY BEEN OPERATING? UM, I'LL HAVE TO CHECK THE SYSTEM AND SEE HOW LONG THEY HAVE BEEN OPERATING.

WE CAN HAVE THAT THIS AFTERNOON.

SOME INSIGHT TO THAT.

I CAN GET SOME INSIGHT TO THAT.

UH, WITH THAT QUESTION, THEY ACTUALLY WAS ISSUED A TO ON JULY 11TH, UH, THE, THE NEIGHBORING BUSINESS CALLED I AND CONTACTED ME THEIR SUP FOR THE NEIGHBORING BUSINESS, SOME KIND OF WAY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, UM, ATTACHED TO THAT BUSINESS.

BUT THEY HADN'T SAID THAT THEY NEEDED A SUP ALSO.

UM, THEY HAD WENT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND, AND STATED THAT, THAT THE BUILDING WAS NOT NON-CONFORMING AND THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ALLOWED FOR THEM TO GO BACK UP UNDER THE PREVIOUS USE OF PD 5 9 5, UM, FOR THE AREA.

AND THEN IT TRIGGERED A SUP.

THEY, UH, THEY WERE, UM, WE WENT TO, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PUT THEIR CO ON HOLD, BUT SAID THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO CLOSE, BUT THEY DID HAVE TO APPLY FOR A SUP.

THEY STARTED THIS PROCESS IN JULY AND THEY JUST GAVE THE PLANS TO THE PLANNER.

UM, THE COMPLETED PLANS LAST WEEK.

ALSO, THE C THE, THE, THAT PARTICULAR, UH, OPERATOR'S NOT TELLING THE TRUTH, THEY ARE OPEN MONDAY THROUGH, UH, SUNDAY THROUGH SATURDAY.

SATURDAY IS THE DAY THAT THEY'RE REALLY OPEN.

UM, SO THEY'RE OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.

ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS KZ 2 23 2 68.

THE RECORD WILL REFLECT THAT, UH, VICE CHAIR RUBIN WILL BE STEPPING BACK IN SHORTLY, TEXAS TO CASE NUMBER EIGHT.

[01:05:42]

THE REQUEST IS AN APPLICATION FOR ONE A U SUBDISTRICT FOR FWMU FIVE WALKABLE URBAN MIXED USE FORM DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ZONED A DA DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT, A CC COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND A PA PARKING SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT.

UM, NUMBER TWO IS A SPECIFIC USE FIC COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE AND PROPERTY ZONED A CC SUBDISTRICT AND A DA SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD NUMBER 5 95 AND THREE, A SPECIFIC USE PERIMETER COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE ON PROPERTY ZONED A CC SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD NUMBER 5 95 IS GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTHWEST LINE OF SOUTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY, NORTHWEST OF PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AND EAST OF JULIUS SHOPS.

UH, FREEWAY, APPROXIMATELY 7.88 ACRES.

THIS LOCATION MAP, THIS IS THE AERIAL MAP, THE AREA OF REQUEST IS THE HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE, THE ZONING, UH, MAP, UH, SO TOWARDS THE NORTH IS AN R 7.5, A SUBDISTRICT AND A CC SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95 TO THE NORTH IS AN, IS AN R FIVE A SUBDISTRICT AND A CCC SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95.

TOWARDS THE SOUTHEAST IS A DA SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95.

TOWARDS THE NORTHWEST IS AN FWMU THREE SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95.

AND THEN TOWARDS THE SOUTHWEST IS PD 5 97 SURROUNDED USES, UM, TOWARDS THE NORTH, UH, WEST IS A PERSONAL SERVICE, SINGLE FAMILY UNDEVELOPED GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE GREATER THAN 3000, UH, SQUARE 3,500 SQUARE FEET USE.

THERE'S ALSO A FIRE STATION AND THEN TOWARDS THE SOUTH, UM, WEST, I MEAN TOWARDS THE SOUTHEAST IS SINGLE FAMILY.

AND THEN TOWARDS THE SOUTH, UH, WEST IS SCHOOL TOWARDS THE SOUTH.

UH, WEST IS ALSO AN OFFICE BUILDING.

GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE LAWS IN 3000 SQUARE FEET AND THEN ALSO UNDEVELOPED LAND.

AND THEN IT'S TOWARDS THE NORTH, UM, WEST.

THERE'S A CHURCH UNDEVELOPED LAND, SINGLE FAMILY, MULTIFAMILY AND CHILDCARE FACILITY.

AND THIS IS, UH, UH, ZOOMED IN OF THE ACTUAL, UH, AREA OF REQUEST.

SO THE AREA REQUEST CONSISTS OF, UH, CC, UH, TOWARDS A, ACROSS MARTIN LUTHER KING.

AND THEN, UM, BETWEEN MARTIN LUTHER KING AND, UM, UH, SHARE, UH, HARDWOOD.

IT'S, UH, THAT SIDE ITSELF IS, UH, TO, UH, SONYS, WHICH IS, UH, A CC AND A PA DISTRICT.

AND THEN ACROSS, UM, IS, UH, ALSO A CC AND A DA, UM, DISTRICT.

SO, UH, THE AREA OF REQUEST, WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER ONE, IS THE WHOLE ENTIRE SIDE, UM, THAT IS IN RED.

SO THE WHOLE ENTIRE SQUARE, WHICH IS SUB AREA A AND SUB AREA B, A NEW SUBDISTRICT FOR AN FWMU FIVE WALKABLE URBAN MIXED USE.

SO THEY ARE PROPOSING TO REDEVELOP THE SITE WITH A PERFORMING ARTS CENTER AS DEFINED IN THE PROPOSED PD CONDITIONS.

AND THEN ITEM NUMBER TWO IS THE AREA CIRCLED IN GREEN.

IT'S AN SUP FOR COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE, UM, TO FACILITATE THE RENOVATIONS OF THE FOREST THEATER.

UH, SO THAT SIDE, UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO IS ON THE SOUTHWEST LINE OF SOUTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY BETWEEN PENNSYLVANIA AND UH, PEABODY AVENUE.

AND THEN ITEM NUMBER THREE IS THE AREA, UM, HISTORICAL IN BLUE, WHICH IS AN SUP FOR COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE ON THE NORTH AND WEST OF THE CONVENIENCE STORE, UH, TO FACILITATE THE RENOVATION OF THE FOREST THEATER.

SO THAT SIDE IS BETWEEN, UH, IT'S ON THE WEST CORNER OF SOUTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY AND MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR BOULEVARD.

SO ITEM NUMBER TWO, UM, BOTH ITEM NUMBER TWO AND ITEM NUMBER THREE ARE IN SUB AREA B, BUT ITEM NUMBER TWO IS TRACK TWO AND TRACK THREE.

AND ITEM NUMBER THREE IS TRACK ONE.

AND THEN, UM, SO THE SUB AREA A IS THE SIDE WITH THE PERFORMING ARTS AS DEFINED IN THE PROPOSED PD CONDITION.

UH, PERFORMING ARTS CENTER IS A USE THAT OPERATES AS A THEATER, COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOL, COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT

[01:10:01]

INSIDE RESTAURANT WITHOUT A DRIVE-IN OR DRIVE-THROUGH SERVICE IN AN OFFICE, AS THOSE USES ARE DEFINED IN ARTICLE FOUR OF CHAPTER 51 A OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT, UH, CODE.

AND THEN, UM, THIS IS THE SIDE PLAN FOR THE SUP NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS ALONG, UM, PEABODY AND PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, WHICH IS THE, AS MENTIONED, THE AREA IN GREEN.

AND THEN ITEM NUMBER TWO IS THE SUP FOR THE, UH, THE STIPEND FOR THE SUP NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS THE AREA IN BLUE.

THAT AREA, UM, DOES HAVE ON THAT CORNER OF SOUTH, UH, RIGHT, UM, FREEWAY AND MARTIN LUTHER KING, THERE IS A CONVENIENCE STORE.

UH, CURRENTLY THEY ARE NOT PROPOSING TO DEMOLISH THAT BUILDING IN THERE.

SO THAT IS GONNA BE OUT.

UM, SO THE OTHER TWO AREAS TOWARDS THE NORTH AND THE WEST, THAT IS THE AREA THEY'RE PROPOSING TO DO THE, THE PARKING.

AND THEN, UM, SO FORM DISTRICT, UM, FORM BASED ZONING DIFFERS FROM A TRADITIONAL ZONING.

UM, SO IN THAT THE GENERAL STANDARDS, UH, FOR TRADITIONAL FOCUS PRIMARILY ON THE, SO THE FORM DISTRICT FOCUSES PRIMARILY ON THE FORM OF THE BUILDING.

AND THE TRADITIONAL ZONING, UM, FOCUSES MORE ON THE ATTENDANT LAND USE.

SO THE DESIRED FORM OF BUILDING SPECIFICALLY MORE URBAN AND STYLE CHARACTERIZED BY MULTIPLE, UH, STORIES OUT FRONT OF SIDE, CLOSER TO THE STREET, AND THEN IT COMBINES THEAND OR STREET FRANCHISE TRANSPARENCY, BUILDING ARTICULATION AND PROJECTION AMENITIES.

AND THEN IT ALSO IS INTENDED TO INTERACTIVITY, STREAK SCAPE THAT ENCOURAGES PROJECTION ACTIVITY AND SCREEN PARKING.

IT BENEFITS THE PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, INCLUDE ADDITIONAL BUILDING AREA, INCREASED TIDE DENSITY AND FLOOR AREA, AND REDUCE PARKING REQUIREMENTS THAT ENCOURAGE YOU ON MULTIPLE MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION.

INFORMED DISTRICTS ARE INTENDED FOR NEIGHBORHOODS WITH DENT AND CHARACTER AND, UH, HIGH WALKABILITY.

SO THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF A TRADITIONAL, UH, ZONING, UH, DISTRICT.

IT HAS ITS STREETS, UH, THE, IF IT'S A CORNER LOT OR INTERIOR LOT, IT HAS ITS, UH, FRONT YARD SETBACK, CORNER SETBACK, RARE SETBACK AND SIDE, UM, YARD SETBACKS.

AND THEN SOMETIMES IT DOES HAVE, UM, ALLEYS ARE THERE FOR AN URBAN PLAN.

AND THIS IS MOSTLY BASICALLY ON THE DEVELOPMENT TYPE THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING, WHICH IS MU MIXED USED.

SO THE USES THAT TENDS TO BE FOR AN MU FOR THE FIRST FLOOR IS USUALLY A CIVIC PLACE OF WORSHIP, OFFICE, RETAIL AND SERVICE AND ENTERTAINMENT.

AND THEN, UM, FROM THE SECOND FLOOR TO THE UPPER FLOORS, IT TENDS TO BE FOR RESIDENTIAL, CIVIC, PLACE OF WORSHIP, OFFICE SERVICE, AND ENTERTAINMENT AND COMMERCE.

AND THEN, UH, FOR THE PLA UH, FOR THE PLACEMENT FOR A FORM DISTRICT, IT DOES, UH, BASE IT ON THE PRIMARY STREETS AND SIDE STREETS.

SO FOR THE SIDE STREET, IT TENDS TO HAVE A STREET FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT OF MINIMUM 40% FROM SETBACK AREA, MINIMUM OF FIVE FEET, AND THEN MAXED, UH, 15 FEET.

AND THEN SIDE SETBACK DOES VARY FOR THE PRIMARY STREETS.

UM, IT DOES REQUIRE STREET FINDERS TO BE MINIMUM 90%.

AND THEN FRONT SETBACK AREA, MINIMUM FIVE, MAXIMUM 15.

AND THEN, UM, IT DOES ALSO HAVE A PARKING SETBACK FOR THE PRIMARY IS 30 FEET, AND THEN FOR THE SIDE STREET IS FIVE FEET.

AND THEN, UM, THOSE CAN GO MORE IN DETAIL.

UM, AS I MENTIONED, SORRY, HOLD ON.

SO, UM, LIKE THE, TO SEE THE, THE VARIANCE, UM, BETWEEN THE BASE MU AND WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, IT COULD BE IN PAGE EIGHT, UH, 26 OF THE REPORT.

AND THEN, UH, FOR THE HIDE, UM, THE BUILDING HIDE DOES VARY.

UM, IT DOES HAVE, UH, FOR GROUND STORY HIDE A MINIMUM OF 1530, UH, FOOT MAX.

AND THEN UPPER STORIES, UM, HEIGHT ARE BETWEEN A, UH, THE PRIME IS 10 MINIMUM AND 15 FEET MAX.

AND THEN, UM, FOR THE ELEMENTS, UM, ENTRANCE SPACING BETWEEN, UM, THE DOORS, UM, PRIMARY STREET IS A HUNDRED FOOT MAX.

THEN THERE'S ALSO A BLANK WALL REQUIREMENT, UH, FOUR PRIMARY STREET, THE MAX IS 20 FEET.

AND THEN FOR GROUND STORAGE TRANSPARENCY FOR PRIMARY IS 50%, SIDE STREET IS 25%.

AND THEN FOR THE UPPER TRANSPARENCY, PRIMARY STREETS ARE 20%, AND SIDE STREETS ARE 20% AS LONG.

AND THEN THESE ARE SOME CHARACTER EXAMPLES OF AN MU DEVELOPMENT TYPE.

AND THEN THESE ARE THE DEVELOPMENT TYPES THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING WITHIN, UM, THE DISTRICT.

SO A MIXED USE SHOP FROM, AS I MENTIONED, UM, MADE AND

[01:15:01]

TYPE INTENDED PROMPTLY FOR GROUND STORY, RETO AND UPPER STORE RESIDENTIAL OR OFFICE USE.

AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING AN OPEN SPACE LAW DEVELOPMENT TYPE FOR A PORTION OF SUB AREA A, THIS DEVELOPMENT TYPE IS LOCATED AND DIS DESIGNATED TO ACCOMMODATE CIVIC OPEN SPACE OR NATURAL AREA WORTHY OF PRESERVATION.

AND THEN, UM, SO THIS IS SUB AREA A, SO THE AREA IN PING IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO BE THE DEVELOPMENT MIX USE SHOPFRONT DEVELOPMENT TYPE.

AND THEN THE AREA IN GRADE, WHICH IS A LONG PEABODY.

UM, THEY'RE PROPOSING TO, UH, OPEN SPACE LOT, UH, DEVELOPMENT TYPE AS SUPPOSE.

THESE ARE SOME OF THE SIDE PHOTOS OF THE SITE ON SITE LOOKING NORTH ACROSS, UH, MARTHA AND LUTHER KING.

AND THEN ON SITE LOOKING NORTHEAST ON SIDE, LOOKING NORTHEAST ON PEABODY, LOOKING NORTHWEST ON PEABODY, I MEAN LOOKING NORTHWEST ON HARDWOOD AVENUE, LOOKING NORTHEAST.

AND THEN ON, ON THIS ONE I DID GO, UH, IT WAS A FEW MONTHS AGO.

UM, HOWEVER, NOW, UM, HARDWOOD AVENUE, THEY ACTUALLY TEXTED ACTUALLY, UM, MADE IT INTO A DEAD END SO IT DOESN'T, UH, GO TOWARDS THE MARTIN LUTHER KING ANYMORE.

AND THEN ON PEABODY AVENUE, LOOKING SOUTHEAST ON PEABODY, UH, LOOKING SOUTHWEST.

AND I BELIEVE, UH, THIS BUILDING, UM, HAS BEEN, UH, DEMOLISHED OR IS NO LONGER THERE ON HARDWOOD AVENUE AS WELL.

THAT'S THE BUILDING, UH, LOOKING SOUTHEAST ON HARDWOOD LOOKING NORTHEAST.

LOOKING NORTHEAST LOOKING, SO LOOKING SOUTHWEST, LOOKING SOUTHWEST ON HARWOOD, ON HARWOOD LOOKING NORTHWEST, LOOKING NORTH SURROUNDING USES ON SIDE LOOKING NORTHWEST, LOOKING SOUTHWEST, LOOKING SOUTHWEST, LOOKING SOUTH, LOOKING NORTHWEST, LOOKING NORTHEAST, LOOKING EAST.

AND THEN, UM, CRITICAL ANALYSIS, THE AREA REQUEST IS WITHIN THE PROXIMITY OF AN EXISTING FORM DISTRICT TO THE IMMEDIATE NORTHWEST AND WEST OF JULIUS SHEP'S FREEWAY.

AND OVER 130 ACRE TRACT OF WMU THREE ZONING EXISTS ADJACENT TO SUBJECT SIDE DIRECTLY TO THE WEST.

AND SO THE WHOLE ENTIRE, UM, AREA IN YELLOW IS THE EXISTING, UM, DISTRICT.

UM, AND THEN WITHIN THAT AREA THERE'S AN AREA IN BLUE, WHICH IS ALONG MARTIN LUTHER KING, WHICH IS A SHOPFRONT, UM, DEVELOPMENT TYPE.

SO THE ASSUMPTION OF A WM DISTRICT ON THE EAST SIDE OF JULIA, SHE'S FREEWAY WILL CREATE A NEIGHBORHOOD LINKAGE WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE FREEWAY AND THE REST OF MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR QUARTER TO THE NORTHEAST.

AS, UH, WE ARE AWARE THOSE FREEWAYS THAT WERE DEVELOPED, UH, DID, UM, BREAK THAT LINKAGE A FEW, UH, COUPLE YEARS AGO.

UH, SO CREATING THIS NEW W UH, WMU UH, DISTRICT, UM, WHICH IS THE SITE OF THE FOREST THEATER, WE WILL CONNECT, UM, THE DISTRICTS TO, TO THE EAST AND TO FOREST TO WEST.

AND THEN, UM, SO THE SITE IS WITHIN THE, THE 360 PLAN.

SO THE SITE IS WITHIN THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK, UM, WHICH ON THE EAST OF DOWNTOWN, THE PROPOSAL DOES MEET THE PLAN STRATEGY TO BUILD COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS, PROMOTE GRADE PLACEMAKING, ADVANCED URBAN MOBILITY.

AND THEN IT IS ALSO WITHIN THE TRINITY RIVER CORRIDOR COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN.

THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE NORTH TRINITY FOREST DISTRICT, AND IN THE PROPOSAL MEANS THE PLAN OBJECTIVES TO CREATE A VIBRANT CENTRAL CITY AND HAS CITY'S URBAN FORM TO INCREASE THE APPEAL OF URBAN LIFE.

AND THEN IT IS ALSO WITHIN THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR PLAN.

THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL AREA CORRIDOR, AND THE DEVELOPMENT MEETS THE PLAN.

OBJECTIVES OF HOLISTIC STRATEGY IMPROVE BASIC ATTRIBUTES, WHICH ARE THE URBAN DESIGN WILL MAINTAIN BUILDINGS AND ACCESS TO GOODS AND SERVICES, AND IT ENCOURAGES CORRIDOR REINVESTMENT AND THEN STAFF CONSIDERATION.

UM, WE DO A STAFF DOES RECOMMEND, UH, THE REQUEST TO HAVE RESIDENTIAL USES.

UH, IT IS A MIXED USE FORM AND, UH, THE MIX USE FORM ARE INTENDED TO ACCOMMODATE A MIX OF COMPATIBLE USES, WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL AND, UM, COMMERCIAL.

AND THEN STAFF IS RECOMMENDING NO PARKING REQUIREMENT AS IT TO GENERATING PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC AND ACHIEVING URBAN DESIGN GOALS IN A WALKABLE AND TRANSIT REACH AREAS.

AND IT ALSO CREATES A WALKABLE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD FOR HIGHER DENSITY.

UM, HOUSING WILL PROMOTE LESS DEPENDENCY ON AUTOMOBILE

[01:20:07]

AND STA STATS.

RECOMMENDATION IS, UH, ONE APPROVAL OF A NEW DISTRICT FOR F WM U FIVE DISTRICT USES SUBJECT TO SUB AREA MAP EXHIBIT AND STATUTES, RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.

NUMBER TWO, APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE, PRIMARY FAIR COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD.

SUBJECT TWO, A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS, AND THREE APPROVAL, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER WHEELER? GOOD MORNING.

UM, WAS THE UPDATED WITH THE, WITH, UM, WHAT WE'RE INCLUDING IN THIS, UM, STAFF REPORT, THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE APPLICANT WAS WANTING? UM, UH, ESPECIALLY PERTAINING TO THE RESIDENTIAL USE, THEY UPDATED THAT, YES.

UM, MAYBE MONDAY OR TUESDAY THAT THEY, UM, I HAVE, IT WAS THE QUESTION, IF THE STAFF REPORT INCLUDES THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL USES, YES.

THEY ACTUALLY STRUCK TWO DIFFERENT THINGS OFF.

UM, THEY SENT IT TO ME MONDAY, UM, AFTER CONVERSATION WITH YOU ALL.

LEMME MAKE SURE, UM, I KNOW STAFF REC, THERE WAS TWO, WERE THE TWO TWO RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY WERE AGAINST ORIGINALLY WAS THE PARKING, UM, NO, UM, MINIMUM USE OF PARKING FROM PARKING AND FOR THE RESIDENTIAL, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THEY THERE, THE PARKING, THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WAS, IT WAS ALONG WITH WHAT THE, WHAT THE SOUTH DALLAS PD 5 9 5 IS MOVING TOWARD.

AND I THINK THEY WERE OKAY WITH THAT, BUT THEY WERE NOT OKAY WITH THE RESIDENTIAL, UM, USE AND THEY, THEY ACTUALLY SENT IT TO STRIKE IT OUT.

SO, UH, COMMISSIONER WILLER, THESE SOUND LIKE THEY MIGHT BE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT AT THE HEARING THIS AFTERNOON.

UM, BUT THE CASE REPORT THAT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE DOCKET LAST FRIDAY, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS TO NOT ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES, UM, AND THEN ALSO TO REQUIRE PARKING, UM, FOR, FOR THESE USES.

UM, IF THAT HAS CHANGED BETWEEN, UH, WHEN THE DOCKET WAS PUBLISHED AND NOW, UH, THAT COULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION, UH, IF A MOTION IS MADE TODAY.

SO I THINK THAT WHAT THEY, I THINK THE PARKING THAT THEY CAME, THAT THE PARKING, THEY WERE OKAY ONCE WITH THE EXPLANATION WAS HAD, UM, ON WHY THAT YOU ALL WERE MOVING BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANNA OFFEND THE COMMUNITY ON THE PARKING.

BUT ONCE WE TALKED TO THEM ABOUT THE REASONING FOR THE PARKING AT PD 5, 9 5 AREA PLAN IS ASKING FOR NO MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN, IN THAT AREA.

BUT THE RESIDENTIAL THEY DID, UM, WE SENT THAT OVER, WE TALKED BEFORE WE TALKED, AND THEY SENT OVER THAT TO BE STRIKED OUT.

I, THEY, THEY SENT IT TO ME, SO I, I DIDN'T KNOW WHY THEY DIDN'T SEND IT TO STAFF ALSO, BUT YEAH, YEAH, WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANYTHING.

I'M NOT AWARE IF THE APPLICANT DID OR NOT.

UM, THE, THE, THE CURRENT PROPOSAL AS PUBLISHED IN THE DOCKET IS AS LILIANA JUST PRESENTED, IS, UH, STILL TO PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL USES.

UM, AND IT'S ALSO TO REQUIRE PARKING FOR THE USE.

UM, IF, UH, THE COMMISSION WANTED TO TODAY, UM, NOT FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE RESIDENTIAL USES, BUT FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE NO PARKING REQUIREMENTS, UM, WE CAN GET DANIEL TO HELP YOU OUT WITH A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT.

I'M GONNA FORWARD IT TO YOLANDA SO SHE CAN FORWARD IT TO THAT WOULD BE GOOD AS WELL.

REASON THAT THEY DO THE PD IS SO THAT THEY CAN, UM, BECAUSE OF THE, THE DIFFICULTIES WITH PD 5 95 AND THE LIMITATIONS, AND BECAUSE WE, THE COMMUNITY KNEW THAT THEY WERE ACQUIRING MORE LAND, AND THIS WOULD ALLOW FOR THEM, FOR US NOT TO HAVE TO RESTRICT RESIDENTIAL AT THIS TIME, THAT THEY COULD OPEN UP THEIR, OPEN UP THAT PD BACK FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AND IT INCLUDE THE OTHER USES THAT THEY WANT AND TO MAKE IT EASIER, UM, FOR THEM TO WORK WITH US IN THE COMMUNITY.

UM, ALSO, UM, AND CAN YOU GIMME THE REASON THAT STAFF DID NOT, UM, UH, ADVISED IN THIS DIRECTION FOR A SUBDISTRICT IN PD 5 9 5 INSTEAD OF A SEPARATE PD? YES, BECAUSE, UM, SO THE SUVS, UM, THEY ARE PROPOSING TO JUST, UM, HAVE THE COMMERCIAL PARKING WHILE THE THEATER IS IN RENOVATION, AND THEN JUST LATER ON THEY ARE PROPOSING TO DO NEW USES.

RIGHT NOW THEY DON'T KNOW THE, THE LAND USE, THEREFORE WE DID RECOMMEND FOR THEM TO, ALL INCLUDED WITHIN THE PD, UM, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE FIRST SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95.

UM, SO IT'LL BE THE FIRST SUBDISTRICT.

UM, BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE INCLUDING THAT AND THEY DID MENTION THAT THEY ARE ACQUIRING ADDITIONAL LAND, UM, THAT THEY WILL BE INCLUDING IN, WITHIN THIS SUBDISTRICT, UM, THAT THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE RECOMMENDED FOR THE SUVS TO BE WITHIN, UH, THIS SUBDISTRICT, NO, OH, IT'S NOT THE SUBDISTRICT.

SO YOU, AT THE, I THINK YOUR RECOMMENDATION STAFF WAS TO CREATE A SUBDISTRICT INSTEAD OF A NEW PD, AND WHAT WAS THAT AND THE REASONING FOR THAT? YES.

UM, BECAUSE THE THEATER IS A BIG LANDMARK, UH, FOR THAT COMMUNITY, AND BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY PD 5, 9 5, WE DIDN'T WANNA TAKE THAT LANDMARK AWAY FROM THE PD 5 95.

WERE YOU AWARE THAT THE RECOMMENDATION, UM, FOR TO DO THEM WAS TO DO A PD? AND THE

[01:25:01]

JUST AS A, AS A FUNCTIONAL CLARIFICATION, I, I FEEL STRONGLY THAT YOU'LL HAVE A VERY SIMILAR EFFECT OF HAVING IT AS A SUBDISTRICT VERSUS HAVING IT AS A FULL PD.

UM, YOU'LL HAVE A FUNCTIONALLY SIMILAR EFFECT IF IT COMES TO WHETHER THAT'S AMENDING TO PUT RESIDENTIAL USES LATER.

UM, WHETHER IT'S PROVIDING RELIEF FROM THE USE OR THE, UM, ANY DIFFICULTIES OF PD 5 9 5.

I, I DO THINK THAT WE'VE OVERCOME ANY DEVELOPMENT DIFFICULTIES OF 5 9 5 WITH THE WAY THE TEXT IS WRITTEN.

AND I FEEL STRONGLY IT'LL BE, IT'S I PD A DIFFERENT PD OR AN INDIVIDUAL PD IS A DIFFERENT APPROACH, BUT I, I THINK WE'VE OVERCOME THOSE DIFFICULTIES AND YOU'LL HAVE A SIMILAR EFFECT IF YOU DO COME BACK TO MODIFY IT OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

SO WHEN THIS APPLICANT COMES BACK TO MODIFY, WILL THEY HAVE, UM, WILL THEY HAVE TO APPLY FOR DIFFERENT ZONING PER U PER PER PER UM, PARCEL, OR WILL THEY BE ABLE, OR AND THEN THAT WOULD MAKE THEM HAVE TO MODIFY, CONTINUE TO MODIFY THEIR SUBDISTRICT? AND, AND, AND THE REASON I'M ASKING THAT IS PD IS PD 5 9 5 IS ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT PDS IN AND, AND KNOWING THE AREA, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS FOR A NEW PD, WHICH IS NOT HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

I DEFINITELY DON'T HIGHLY RECOMMEND THEM ALL THE TIME, BUT IT WAS BECAUSE WE KNEW AND THEIR PROPERTIES ARE CONTINUING AND THEY'RE KIND OF ENCLOSED BETWEEN TWO FREEWAYS AND IT WAS THEM, THEY KIND OF SIT ALONE IN A WAY.

I GOTCHA.

YEAH, I, WELL, TO YOUR FIRST QUESTION, UM, PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD IF THEY STILL OWN OR HAVE SOME SORT OF SIGNATURE AUTHORITY FOR THE OTHER PARCELS, IT'S REALLY AS SIMPLE AS ANOTHER REZONING KEPT OPEN IT UP TO AMEND THE SUBDISTRICT, KEPT, DO WHATEVER YOU NEED TO IF NECESSARY.

UM, WHICH WOULD BE BASICALLY THE SAME CASE IF IT WERE AN INDIVIDUAL PD.

UH, BECAUSE IT, BECAUSE IT'S SINGLED OUT AS A SUBDISTRICT, THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO PARCEL BY PARCEL FOR ANY FUTURE REZONING.

UM, BUT I, I THINK THAT IT'S, SO IT IS A BALANCE OF, UM, MAINTAINING SOME OF THE ESTABLISHED NORMS OF, OF NOT JUST THE PD 5 95, BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, BUT ALSO OBVIOUSLY OVERCOMING SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT DIFFICULTIES OF PD 5 95.

AND I THINK THAT WE HOPEFULLY NEGATED AS MANY OF THOSE AS WE COULD IN A THOROUGH REVIEW OF 5 9 5.

UM, SO IT, IT REMAINS THERE, UM, WITHOUT CREATING A, A PD DONUT HOLE, BUT I, I THINK IT RESOLVES THE DIFFICULTIES THEY WOULD FACE.

UM, AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT KIND OF BUILDS ON A CONSISTENT CONNECTION TO ZONING SOUTH OF 45, NORTH OF 45.

I HOPE IT CAN BRIDGE THAT, UM, AS BEST AS IT CAN IN A REGULATORY SENSE.

AND ONE MORE THING.

WILL THIS SUBDISTRICT ALLOW FOR ALCOHOL, UH, UM, ANY A KINDA ALCOHOL USE? YES.

IT WOULD NOT PROHIBIT, IT WOULD NOT PROHIBIT THAT.

SO IT COULD BE IN A RESTAURANT OR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT IS ANOTHER USE IN THE, YEAH.

SO WITHIN THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER CUSTOM USE THAT'S BEING ADDED TO THE SUBDISTRICT ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT IS, UH, PROPOSED TO BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT, UM, WITHIN SUB AREA A ELSEWHERE IN THIS PROPOSED SUBDISTRICT.

GIMME ONE SECOND.

IS THAT NOT BUT CAN WE BY RIGHT.

AND AND THE REASON I'M ASKING THAT IS THAT THE COMMUNITY BY RIGHT, WITH THE RESTAURANTS ARE OKAY, BUT SEPARATE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE, LIKE BREW AND WINE STORES, LIQUOR STORES, IS THAT THEY DON'T WANT THAT.

BUT WITH THE, WITH THE ACCESSORY USE, IN A SENSE, THEY'RE OKAY WITH THAT? YEAH.

THE, THE ONLY PLACE WHERE THE USE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT WOULD BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT, IS WITHIN SUB AREA A.

SO THE, THE, UM, PARCEL WHERE THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER USE IS.

UM, AND THEN AS FAR AS THE REMAINDER OF THE SUBDISTRICT, UM, IT WOULD BE, AND THERE'S A TYPO IN THE CASE REPORT.

I APOLOGIZE ABOUT THAT.

UM, IT WOULD BE PERMITTED, BUT ONLY BY SUP AND ONLY ON THE GROUND STORY OF ANY, UM, MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS.

I DID HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT, UM, SUB AREA B WHERE IT SAYS THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL MAIN USES ARE PRINTED IN THE SUBDISTRICT COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE BY SUP.

AND LIQUOR STORE IS NOT A, A SUBSET OF THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER USE

[01:30:03]

QUESTIONS.

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

UM, I THINK WE HEARD SOME OF THE CONVERSATION THAT THIS IS A, UM, ICONIC LANDMARK FOR THIS COMMUNITY, UM, PREVIOUSLY WAS CONSIDERED FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.

CAN YOU SPEAK TO ANY DISCUSSION? I I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE CONDITIONS THAT RESPONDS TO THAT.

AND, AND THE ROLE THAT THE, THAT THE STRUCTURE THAT ITS TOWER HAVE PLAYED, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WAS CONSIDERED IN THESE, UM, CRAFTING THIS NEW SUBDISTRICT? UM, WE TALKED MR. BALDWIN IS ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE THE APPLICANT'S GONNA HAVE SOMEONE COME TO SPEAK TO THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING FOR A CITY LANDMARK BECAUSE IT WILL LIMIT THEM TO A MUSEUM, BUT THEY ARE GOING FOR A FEDERAL LANDMARK.

SO, SO THEY DON'T, SO FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMEONE HERE THAT'S GONNA SPEAK TO THE REASONING THAT IS THE WAY IT IS.

AND I WILL, UM, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER.

I DON'T THINK THAT MR. BALDWIN WILL, WILL BE SURPRISED BY MY QUESTION EITHER.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, .

I'M THINKING THAT THAT'S THE REASON THAT YEAH, THERE ARE NO SURPRISES LEFT.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE DEFINITION OF PERFORMING ARTS CENTER.

IT SAYS IT MEANS A USE THAT OPERATES AS A THEATER, COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER, ALCOHOL, BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOL, COMMERCIAL, AMUSEMENT INSIDE RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE THROUGH AND OFFICE AS THOSE USES ARE DEFINED, ET CETERA.

DOES THAT MEAN THAT THIS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER HAS TO HAVE ALL OF THOSE USES, UM, TO BE CONSIDERED A PERFORMING ARTS CENTER OR CAN IT INCLUDE THOSE USES, THE, UM, CONJUNCTION THERE AT THE END OF ALL THOSE USES IS AND RATHER THAN, OR SO, UM, SO AS IT'S PUBLISHED IN THE DOCKET THAT IS CORRECT, IT WOULD NEED TO HAVE ALL OF THOSE USES IN COMBINATION TO MEET THAT DEFINITION, BUT IS THAT THE INTENTION OF THE COMMUNITY, THAT IT NEEDS TO BE ALL OF THOSE THINGS OR, UH, I THINK, UM, THE INTENTION, I DON'T KNOW IF IT HAS TO BE ALL THAT, UM, AND MAYBE IT SHOULD BE OR, UM, BUT IT IS IN A AREA THAT IS NOW KIND OF OUR SUB IS OUR PERFORMING ARTS DISTRICT.

UM, THE SCHOOL, THE DISD SCHOOL IS, WE KINDA CONSIDER IT THE BABY BISHOP ARTS, UH, BISHOP, UH, ARTS THEATER? NO.

WHAT'S THE SCHOOL YOU TALKING ABOUT? UH, I'M SORRY.

UM, I KNOW THE PERFORMANCE ARE SCHOOL DOWNTOWN BOOKER T WASHINGTON.

SO IT'S, IT'S CONSIDERED THE BABY BOOKER T WASHINGTON.

UM, ALSO WITH, UM, ST.

PHILIP'S IS ALSO, UM, THERE'S A BLACK BOX.

WE APPROVED A BLACK BOX EARLIER FOR THE, FOR MARTIN LUTHER KING, UM, DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.

UM, I BELIEVE IT'S A, IT'S A MAGNET OF SORT, UM, IT'S A PERFORMANCE ART.

SO THAT WHOLE DISTRICT IS KIND OF THE PERFORMANCE ART DISTRICT OF SOUTH DALLAS.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT NEEDS TO BE IN WITH THE OR BECAUSE IT MIGHT NOT MEET SOME OF THOSE, UM, TO GIVE THEM A WAY OUT.

SO MAYBE THE OR NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED.

YEAH, THAT MAY BE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL.

'CAUSE YOU, MY, MY QUESTION WAS, I MEAN, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE INTENTION BEHIND WHAT THE, THE THEATER IS SUPPOSED TO BE REDEVELOPED AS.

I JUST DIDN'T WANT IT TO GET HUNG UP ON, YOU KNOW, IF, IF ALL OF THOSE USES DIDN'T HAPPEN TO OCCUR WITHIN THAT THEATER, YOU KNOW, WOULD THEY NOT QUALIFY AS A CONFORMING ARTS CENTER? DEFINITELY WE, WE, WE SHOULD VISIT THAT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THE COMMUNITY LOOKED AT THE, AND THEY JUST KNEW THAT THEY WAS BRINGING THAT.

SO MAYBE THAT AND OR MIGHT, WE DEFINITELY DON'T WANT THEM TO GET HOOKED UP IN THE FUTURE OR DEVELOPMENT SERVICE TO INTERPRET SOMETHING .

YEAH, AND, UM, SPEAKING FROM THE STAFF SIDE, I MEAN, I, WE, WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF, OF THE USE.

HOWEVER IT IS, I MEAN, THIS IS AN AWESOME PROJECT.

UM, IT'S JUST SO MUCH OF THIS CASE HAS BEEN LOGISTICS, UM, WITH THIS PARTICULAR DEFINITION, UM, WE ACTUALLY LOOKED TO THE REPRESENTATIVE AND, UH, THEY'RE EXPERIENCING GETTING, UH, CFOS WITH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO SORT OF HELP US CRAFT, UH, THE LANGUAGE OF THAT USE.

UM, SO THAT, THAT'S WHY IT IS WHAT IT IS.

UM, BUT UM, YEAH, IF, IF IT NEEDS TO BE EDITED OR THE CONJUNCTION CHANGED OR WHATEVER, THAT'S, YEAH, THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF.

SO WE DON'T RUN ISSUES.

AND IF I PIGGYBACK ON THAT, MY CONCERN WITH ADDING, CHANGING THAT CONJUNCTION TO AN OR, IS THAT I THINK IT WOULD ALLOW AN ALCOHOL BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT BY ITSELF BY, RIGHT.

AND SO I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION, IT NEEDS TO CLARIFY THAT IT'S A COMBINATION OF THESE USES.

WELL, I LEAVE THAT TO LEGAL.

I'M SO SORT OUT.

I JUST HAD THE QUESTION.

UM, UH,

[01:35:01]

BUT MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE FWMU FIVE FORM SUBDISTRICT IS THAT COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT OR GARAGE IS ALREADY JUST, THAT IS PART OF IT.

UH, IT IT'S ALLOWED BY SUP.

WAS THERE SOME REASON FOR SPELLING THAT OUT? YEAH, SO, UM, , UH, COMMISSIONER WILLER KIND OF TOUCHED ON THIS WITH ONE OF HER EARLIER QUESTIONS.

THERE'S UH, DEFINITELY A POINT TO BE MADE HERE ABOUT, UM, HOW THE, UH, SEVERAL MANY, UM, OVERLAPPING LAYERS OF ZONING REGULATIONS IN DALLAS CAN CONTRIBUTE TO, UM, LOGISTICAL, UH, PROBLEMS LIKE THIS.

UM, TRYING TO CHOOSE MY WORDS CAREFULLY.

SO ARE WE LOOKING FOR ABSOLUTE CLARITY? YES.

SO, SO YOU KNOW, WE SPENT I I, I THINK 10 PAGES OF THE 60 PAGE CASE REPORT EXPLAINING JUST WHAT USES WOULD BE PERMITTED IN A SUBDISTRICT LIKE THIS IN 5 95.

UM, SO WE DID ALL THAT 'CAUSE WE WANTED TO LAY IT ALL OUT THERE, BUT THEN BEYOND THAT WE WANTED TO HARD CODE IN, UM, THE VERY SPECIFIC USES SPECIFIC TO THIS PROJECT, HOW THOSE WOULD BE PERMITTED.

UH, AS COMMISSIONER WHEELER SAID, JUST IN CASE THERE IS, UM, VARYING INTERPRETATIONS AT AT PERMITTING.

ALRIGHT, WELL A FOLLOW UP QUESTION IS IN THE CHART.

UM, WHEN IT WAS SPELLING OUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, FWMU FIVE AND THE DIFFERENT SUBDISTRICTS, UM, UNDER OFFICE IN THEATER, IT SAID BY RIGHT IN SUBDISTRICT A ONLY, BUT IN BASE CODE F WMU FIVE, OFFICE AND THEATER ARE ALLOWED BY, RIGHT? SO IF YOU'RE NOT WANTING TO ALLOW OFFICE IN THEATER BY RIGHT IN SUBDISTRICT TWO, THEN I THINK THAT PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE ADDED THERE.

YEAH, THAT IS, UM, THE TYPO I MENTIONED EARLIER, I NOTICED THAT YESTERDAY, UH, AT FOUR 30 REVIEWING THIS CASE REPORT.

UM, I GOT A LITTLE FIXATED, UH, IN MY EDITING ON THE TWO DIFFERENT SUB AREAS, UM, FOR OFFICE, UM, BECAUSE IT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN A STRAIGHT F WM, U FIVE MM-HMM, , UM, IT WOULD ALSO BE PERMITTED BY W, RIGHT IN BOTH SUB AREAS, A AND B.

UM, IT'S ONLY IN SUB AREA A WHERE WE ARE HARD CODING IT AS BEING PERMITTED BY WRIGHT, UM, BECAUSE IT IS PART OF THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER CUSTOM DEFINITION.

AND THE SAME FOR, UM, ANY OF THOSE OTHER USES IN THAT FINAL, UH, USE COMPARISON CHART, UM, WHERE THERE ARE STRIKETHROUGHS IN THE SECOND AND THIRD COLUMN.

THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE'LL BE CORRECTING WHEN, UH, WHEN AND IF THIS CASE GOES TO COUNSEL.

THAT'S, THAT'S IT FOR ME.

QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS.

OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AWESOME JOB.

WE'LL, WE'LL GET SOME, UH, CLARITY ON THE WORDING FOR THAT MR. MOORE FOR THE HEARING.

WE'LL GET SOME CLARITY ON THE WORDING FROM YOU, SIR.

YES, I WILL WORK WITH THE COMMISSIONER AND WE'LL COME UP WITH SOMETHING.

THANK YOU SIR.

IS DAVID HERE? DAVID, ARE YOU WITH US? HE WAS, WE'LL KEEP GOING.

WE'LL FIND HIM.

WE'LL GET A CASE NUMBER NINE.

COMMISSIONERS.

MR. MR. BATE? GOOD MORNING, SIR.

OH, THERE HE IS.

WHAT WAS THE QUESTION FOR DAVID? IS IT, I BELIEVE THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE FOR HIM, SO WE WERE JUST KIND OF ADJUSTING FOR HIM.

GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS CASE Z 2 2 3 3 0 5.

I'M MARTIN BATE AND SHARE THE SCREEN REAL QUICK.

EXCELLENT.

ALRIGHT, THIS IS, UH, PLEASE STOP.

THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR ONE, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MU TWO MIXED USE DISTRICT USES, AND TWO, THE TERMINATION OF DEED RESTRICTIONS AS AMENDED Z SEVEN TWO DASH 2 69 ON PROPERTY ZONE TO GOA GENERAL OFFICE DISTRICT IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LBJ FREEWAY BETWEEN NOELL ROAD AND MONTFORD DRIVE AND THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 8.6 ACRES IN SIZE HERE.

WE SEE IT IN THE NORTHERN PART OF DALLAS.

IT'S RIGHT THERE, UH, ALONG 6 35 IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE GALLERIA

[01:40:01]

AREA, OR AS THEY NOW CALL IT THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT.

UH, HERE'S THE AERIAL MAP SHOWING THE SUBJECT SITE.

YOU SEE LBJ TO THE NORTH AND HERE'S A ZONING MAP SHOWING SOME OF THE SURROUNDING USES.

UH, TO THE NORTH IS PD 8 87, THAT'S PART OF THAT GALLERIA INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT, UH, AREA.

THE SUBJECT SITE CURRENTLY ZONED GOA, IT'S DEVELOPED WITH OFFICE BUILDINGS.

THEY ARE VACANT.

UH, WHEN I WENT ON MY SITE VISIT, THERE WERE A SMATTERING OF CARS THERE, PRESUMABLY PEOPLE TAKING PHONE CALLS OF SORTS TO THIS IMMEDIATE SOUTH IS AN MF ONE, A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT THAT IS DEVELOPED WITH MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND TO THE WEST IS AN MU THREE MIXED USE DISTRICT THAT HAS A VARIETY OF USES.

I BELIEVE THE MAIN THING IS A HOTEL, BUT THERE WAS ALSO SORT OF A, KINDA LIKE A DISTRIBUTION CENTER LOOKING THING FOR SOME SORT OF COURIER SERVICE.

AND THEN TO THE EAST ARE BOTH IN U2 MIXED USE DISTRICT AND AN MC ONE, UH, MIXED COMMERCIAL I BELIEVE IT IS, UH, THAT HAD A VARIETY OF RETAIL PERSONAL SERVICE TYPE USES.

AS MENTIONED, IT'S CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS AND A PARKING GARAGE.

THE OFFICES ARE VACANT AND THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PRIMARILY RELATED TO SETBACKS, DENSITY, FLOOR AREA RATIO, HEIGHT DESIGN STANDARDS, AND MIXED INCOME HOUSING TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY, THE DEVELOPERS PROPOSING RETROFITTING THE EXISTING 10 STORY OFFICE BUILDING IS MULTIFAMILY AND THEN DEMOLISHING THE TWO OTHER BUILDINGS AND REPLACING WITH ADDITIONAL MULTIFAMILY HOUSING.

UH, IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THIS, THEY'RE REQUESTING A PD WITH MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND THE PD INCLUDES CONDITIONS TO TRIGGER THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS WITH THE SITE PHOTOS WE'LL START TO THE WESTERN PART OF THE SITE.

THIS IS ON LBJ AND NOELLE LOOKING NORTHWEST AWAY FROM THE SITE AND LOOKING WEST FROM THE SITE TOWARDS, AGAIN, I MENTIONED THAT SORT OF DISTRIBUTION CENTER LOOKING THING.

IT'S NOT AN ACTUAL DC BUT IT LOOKS LIKE A LARGE WAREHOUSE.

AGAIN, SOME SORT OF COURIER SERVICE.

THEN LOOKING SOUTHEAST TOWARDS THE SITE, YOU CAN SEE THE SHORTER OF THE THREE BUILDINGS IN THE FOREGROUND, WELL IN THE FOUR OF THE BACKGROUND.

AND THEN AGAIN A LITTLE CLOSER, THEN GOING DOWN NOELLE ROAD LOOKING EAST TOWARDS THE SITE.

AND HERE'S AT THE TAIL END OR THE BOTTOM END OF THE SITE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE GARAGE IS THERE IN THE CENTER OF THE PHOTO.

UH, THEN THERE'S THIS SORT OF ACCESS DRIVEWAY THAT GOES INTO THE GARAGE AND THEN THE MULTIFAMILY TO THE SOUTH OR TO THE, IT'S TO THE SOUTH, BUT IT'S ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTO.

HERE WE ARE ON LBJ FREEWAY LOOKING NORTH TOWARDS THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT AND LOOKING NORTHEAST AGAIN, IN THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTO YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING SHORTER BUILDING IN THE EXISTING 10 STORY BUILDING, LOOKING SOUTHEAST TOWARDS TWO OF THE BUILDINGS, LOOKING EAST, LOOKING WEST, THEN LOOKING SOUTHEAST DIRECTLY AT THAT 10 STORY BUILDING THAT WOULD BE RETROFITTED.

AND THEN GOING OVER TO THE OTHER SIDE, LOOKING AT IT FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE, LOOKING WEST, LOOKING SOUTH AT THE, THIS IS THE OTHER SHORTER BUILDING THAT WOULD ALSO BE DEMOLISHED LOOKING TOWARDS THE EAST ON LBJ FREEWAY AND MONTFORD DRIVE.

LOOKING SOUTHWEST ON LBJ AND MONTFORT LOOKING NORTH AT THE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT, THEN TO THE NORTHEAST AND THERE TO THE RIGHT, YOU SEE SOME OF THOSE RETAIL USES I MENTIONED LOOKING TO THE SOUTH, THE SITES TO OUR RIGHT IN THE PHOTO LOOKING SOUTHWEST TOWARDS THE SITE, THEN GOING DOWN MONTFORT, LOOKING WEST DIRECTLY AT THE SITE, LOOKING TO THE NORTH ON MONTFORT.

LOOKING TO THE EAST AGAIN, THERE'S A VARIETY OF RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICES AND TO THE SOUTHEAST.

THEN ON ONSITE LOOKING EAST, THERE'S ONE APPEARS TO BE MULTI-FAMILY AS WELL.

AND THEN LOOKING WEST THERE YOU SEE THIS PARKING GARAGE AND THE EXISTING SHORT BUILDING AND TO THE NORTH WEST.

UH, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

NOW WHAT'S IN HERE IS SLIGHTLY OUT OF DATE.

WE RECEIVED A REVISION OVERNIGHT, UH, THAT ADDRESSES SOME CONCERNS THAT ENGINEERING AND STAFF HAD REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

I WILL SHARE THAT WITH YOU NOW.

ALL RIGHT, SO IT'S A LARGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

WE CAN JUST SEE IT FROM A FULL ONE OR FULL ZOOMED OUT VIEW HERE, BUT AS WE ATTEMPT TO ZOOM IN, UH, CANNOT PINCH TO ZOOM.

IT DOESN'T QUITE HAVE THE MAC OS MAGIC I GUESS.

SO HERE WE SEE THE PROPOSED BUILDING, NUMBER ONE, THAT WOULD BE IN PLACE OF THE EXISTING SHORT BUILDING TO THE WEST OF THE SITE.

THEN IN THE CENTER OF THE EXISTING 10 STORY

[01:45:01]

BUILDING THAT WOULD BE RETROFIT AND TO THE RIGHT PROPOSED BUILDING.

NUMBER TWO, AGAIN, REPLACING THE EXISTING TALL BUILDING TO THE SOUTH, THEY WOULD LIKE TO RETAIN THE EXISTING FOUR STORY PARKING GARAGE.

UH, YOU SEE A LARGE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE THAT HAS BEEN DESIGNATED.

THEY'RE PROPOSING 65,000 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS ABOUT 17% OF THE LOT WOULD BE OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS ABOVE THE 10% MINIMUM THAT'S REQUIRED IN A BASE.

MU TWO DISTRICT ACCESS TO THE GARAGE WOULD BE VIA MONTFORT DRIVE AND NOEL WITH THESE TWO SIDE DRIVEWAYS, AND PARDON ME, THE POINT OF CONTENTION THAT, UH, RESULTED IN THIS LAST MINUTE CHANGE WAS ORIGINALLY THEY HAD ENVISIONED HAVING ACCESS FROM MON OR FROM LBJ DIRECTLY TO THE GARAGE AS WELL.

ENGINEERING RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PRIMARILY RELATED TO, UH, SAFETY AND ENGINEERING STANDARDS.

UH, WITH THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT WOULD BE PROJECTED TO FLOW OUT FROM THE GARAGE ONTO LBJ, IT WOULD CREATE ISSUES REGARDING EITHER BLOCKING THIS RIGHT TURN LANE AS WELL AS SAFETY FROM EMERGING TRAFFIC THAT IS ATTEMPTING TO ENTER THAT RIGHT LANE.

THEY WOULDN'T HAVE ENOUGH OF A SLOW DOWN, UH, BEFORE THAT SPLIT, AS WELL AS CARS EXITING FROM HERE TO REACH, UH, THE U-TURN LANE TO GET ONTO WESTBOUND LBJ.

WHAT THE DEVELOPER, UH, HAS PROPOSED IS TO WITH US CUT OFF THE CONNECTION OF THAT DRIVE VILE SO IT WOULD NOT CONNECT TO THE PARKING GARAGE.

UH, THEY RERAN THEIR NUMBERS FOR THEIR TRAFFIC TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OVERNIGHT AND FOUND THAT IT WOULD NOT HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL IMPACT ON THE OUTFLOWS ON LBJ OR ON MONTFORD AND NOEL.

UH, AS SUCH, UH, WE ARE, UH, COMFORTABLE WITH THIS PROPOSED PLAN HERE.

AGAIN, THE BIG CONCERN WAS THAT WITH HAVING ACCESS TO THE GARAGE, YOU'D HAVE A LOT MORE VEHICLES COMING OUT AT ANY GIVEN TIME OR ENTERING.

AND SO THIS ALLEVIATES THAT CONCERN.

LEMME JUST GO BACK TO THIS ONE NOW.

SHARE THIS SCREEN AGAIN WITH THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS.

SO WE ARE USING AN MU TWO MIXED USE DISTRICT AS THE BASE ZONING.

WE WANTED TO RETAIN THE GOA OR GENERAL OFFICE DISTRICT FAR OF 4.0.

THE REASON FOR THAT WAS TO PROTECT SOME OF THE EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS THAT ARE ALLOWED ON THAT LAND.

UH, AS WE KNOW, DEVELOPMENT ISN'T ALWAYS A SURE THING, AND SO IF THERE WERE TO BACK OUT, WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE EXISTING USES WOULD STILL BE COMPLIANT.

UH, A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 182 FEET, WHICH WAS ACTUALLY IMPOSED BY THE EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS, UH, WOULDN, THUS IS THE REASON FOR THE PROPOSAL TO TERMINATE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, AS WE CALL IT.

WE DON'T WANT THE BELTS AND SUSPENDERS HERE.

UH, IF WE CAN REMOVE A DEED RESTRICTION BUT RETAIN THE SPIRIT, AND WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT THROUGH PD CONDITIONS.

UH, MODIFICATION OF SETBACKS IS 20 FOOT SETBACK ON LVJ AND A 10 FOOT SETBACK ON NOEL AND MONTFORD.

THE MAXIMUM DWELLING UNIT DENSITY THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED, THIS IS A DEVIATION FROM MU TWO, IS 50 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

UH, THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS WOULD ALLOW 90 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, WHICH IS AROUND WHAT MU TWO CAN PERMIT WITH CERTAIN MIXES OF USES.

UH, THE INTENT HERE IS THAT FROM THE OUTSET, THE DEVELOPER WAS INTERESTED IN PROVIDING MIXED INCOME HOUSING AND PROVIDING ABOUT 725 DWELLING UNITS AS I RECALL.

SO THE 90 DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE DENSITY WOULD ALLOW FOR THAT.

UH, IF THEY PROVIDE MIXED INCOME HOUSING AND THE TARGET PROPOSED IS A MINIMUM OF 5% UNITS AT 81 TO A HUNDRED PERCENT OF AREA MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME.

UH, THIS IS BECAUSE OF, UH, GUIDANCE THAT WE HAVE FROM THE, UH, HOUSING FOLKS WHERE, UH, GIVEN THE MVA AREA, THE MARKET VALUE ANALYSIS AREA, THE AREA THAT IT'S IN IS CLASSIFIED AS AN IMVA AREA.

AND SO OUR POLICY IS TO ENCOURAGE IN THESE LOWER MARKET VALUE AREAS, TO HAVE THE, THE, THE, THE TRANCHE AS IT WERE OF THE, OF THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING TARGET, BE AT THE HIGHER END TO ALLOW FOR THAT.

AGAIN, THAT MIXING OF INCOMES AS IT WERE, WE DON'T WANT TO CONCENTRATE LOWER INCOMES AND LOWER INCOMES.

THAT HAS NOT WORKED IN THE PAST.

IT'S, YOU KNOW, CREATED ISSUES.

AND SO WE WANT TO HAVE THAT MIXING OF INCOMES.

IF THERE WERE HIGHER INCOME MVA, WE WOULD PROPOSE A LOWER, UH, TRANCHE.

HERE'S A COMPARISON OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE HARD TO READ, BUT WILL ZOOM IN HERE.

UH, SO WITH THE EXISTING GOA, THERE'S A 15 FOOT FRONT SETBACK AND AN ADDITIONAL 20 FEET FOR THE PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE OVER 45 FEET IN HEIGHT, AND THEN 20 FOOT SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS WHEN ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL, AND NO MINIMUM IN ALL OF THE CASES.

AND THEN A TOWER SPACING REQUIREMENT, NO MINIMUM LOT SIZE OR MAX DWELLING UNIT DENSITY, UH, WHICH MAKES SENSE.

IT'S INTENDED FOR OFFICES PRIMARILY.

UH, THE FAR IS 4.0 AND THE HEIGHT IS ACTUALLY 270 FEET, BUT THE EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS DO LIMIT THAT WITH 80% MAX LOT COVERAGE.

WHOA, DID NOT WANT YOU TO DO THAT.

LET'S ATTEMPT THIS AGAIN,

[01:50:03]

HERE WE GO.

WITH THE BASE MU TWO DISTRICT, THE FRONT SETBACK IS 15 FEET, AN ADDITIONAL 20 FEET PER PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE OVER 45 FEET AND HEIGHT.

SO WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE IS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE 20 FEET ALONG LBJ AND 10 FEET ALONG NOEL AND MONTFORT, UH, WHICH WOULD BE IN LINE WITH A 10 FOOT SETBACK, OR SORRY, IT'D BE A 20 FOOT, UH, SETBACK ON NORMALLY ON LBJ OR ON NOEL AND MONTFORT, BUT IN THIS CASE IT WOULD BE 10 FEET.

UH, WE WOULD NOT REQUIRE THE TOWER SPACING FOR THE EXISTING PARKING STRUCTURE AND NO URBAN FORM SETBACK REQUIRED FOR THE, UH, FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS.

UH, THERE'S NO MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN MU TWO.

THERE'S A 50 DWELLING UNIT, ACRE PER ACRE MINIMUM, UH, WITH NO MIXED USE PROJECT.

UM, 75 DWELLING UNITS WITH A MIX OF TWO CATEGORIES AND A HUNDRED WITH A MIX OF THREE OR MORE.

IN THIS CASE, GIVEN THE INTENTIONS OF THE DEVELOPER AND WHAT WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH HERE, WE'RE PROPOSING A 50 DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE BASE, WHICH WOULD BE IN LINE WITH MU TWO AND THEN THE 90 DWELLING PER UNIT DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE BONUS WITH MIXED INCOME HOUSING, UH, THE FAR WOULD CHANGE AS WELL TO 4.0.

UH, MU TWO NORMALLY HAS A LOWER FAR, UH, BUT IN TERMS OF THE IMPACT OF WHAT COULD ACTUALLY BE DEVELOPED HERE, YOU WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE YOU, YOU WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE THIS HEIGHT LIMIT HERE OF 182 FEET.

SO IT WOULD SORT OF MINIMIZE SOME OF WHAT COULD COME OUT OF NORMALLY A LARGER FAR AND THEN RETAINING THE SAME MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE.

ZOOM BACK OUT TO NORMAL DIMENSIONS.

AND SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED.

AND TWO, THE APPROVAL OF THE TERMINATION OF DEED RESTRICTIONS AS AMENDED Z SEVEN TWO DASH 2 69 AS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT.

COMMISSIONER HARA? UH, YES, MR. BATE.

SO I WAS TRYING TO LISTEN ON THE DEED RESTRICTION AND THE HEIGHT SITUATION.

I NEED YOU TO WALK ME BACK THROUGH THAT.

WHY, WHY THE BASE ZONING CURRENTLY IS AT TWO 40.

WE'VE GOT A FREEWAY SITE AND WE'RE REMOVING HEIGHT.

HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT.

SURE.

UH, THE 20, SO THE EXISTING ZONING DOES ALLOW FOR 270 FEET OF MAXIMUM HEIGHT.

HOWEVER, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHENEVER THIS WAS FIRST DEVELOPED, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS WERE VOLUNTEERED.

UH, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE INTENT BEHIND THAT, BUT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE, UH, SOMEWHAT LABYRINTHINE BECAUSE AS THEY WERE ORIGINALLY WRITTEN, IT ONLY ACCOUNTED FOR THE 180 OR IT ONLY ACCOUNTED FOR A SHORTER BUILDING WHEN IT WAS AMENDED.

IT ALLOWED FOR A TALLER BUILDING UP TO, I BELIEVE IT WAS 186 AND A HALF FEET, AND IT WOULD ALLOW FOR, I THINK IT WAS 186 AND A HALF FEET AND 14 STORIES, AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL SHORTER BUILDING.

UH, THOSE REMAINED IN PLACE FOR SEVERAL DECADES AND THEY SEEM A LITTLE SUPERFLUOUS.

NOW, GIVEN THAT WE DO HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO WRITE A PD, UH, THE DEVELOPERS INTENDED MAX HEIGHT FOR, UH, THE BUILDINGS WOULD JUST BE THIS 10 STORY BUILDING.

AND SO WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE GIVEN THE, THAT THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS DID, GIVEN THAT THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS DID EXIST PREVIOUSLY, THAT WE COULD RETAIN THAT MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 182 FEET, UH, BY PUTTING IT INTO THE PD CONDITIONS.

UH, SO THEREFORE, BY HAVING THAT MAXIMUM HEIGHT, YOU RETAIN SOME OF THOSE PROTECTIONS OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, BUT YOU GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO REMOVE THEM.

AGAIN, WE TRY TO AVOID HAVING THESE, NOT NECESSARILY CONFLICTING, BUT JUST ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS THAT, FOR INSTANCE, AT THE TIME OF PERMITTING, IT WOULD MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF TO LOOK AT WHAT EXACTLY CONTROLS HERE.

UH, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? UH, I SUPPOSE SO, BUT , YOU KNOW, UM, I THINK, I THINK MAYBE THE QUESTION IS MORE WHY ARE WE RESTRICTING HEIGHT TO WHAT THE DE DESCRIPTION I'VE RESTRICT HERE, I'VE SITE HERE WE'RE GONNA PICK UP HOUSING UNITS AND WE'VE GOT A VERY LOW BASE DENSITY AND WE'VE TAKEN HEIGHT AWAY FROM THE SITE.

NOW I DON'T UNDERSTAND NOW MAYBE THE APPLICANT'S PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH THAT, BUT SURE.

UM, I MEAN I WOULD, THIS IS A CASE WHERE I WOULD ENTITLE IT BEYOND WHAT THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW QUICKLY THE APPLICANT WOULD, WOULD BUILD THIS PROJECT OR, OR YOU KNOW, I MEAN THIS IS A, A PERFECT OPPORTUNITY.

THERE'S A LOT TO LIKE ABOUT THIS CASE, BUT, YOU KNOW, EVEN THE 180 2 IS, IS BY MY ESTIMATION NOT BEING USED BY THIS PROJECT, I DON'T THINK THAT EXISTING BUILDINGS, I THINK IT'S MORE LIKE ONE 50.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT GOT TO 180 2.

UM, SO ANYWAY, I I CAN SAVE THIS FOR THE APPLICANT IN THE AFTERNOON, I SUPPOSE.

CERTAINLY.

UM, AND I GUESS I, I, I LOVE THE OPEN SPACE AROUND THE BUILDINGS ON THE GROUND FLOOR.

I GUESS WE'RE, THIS BODY'S NOT GONNA BE, IS NOT WORRIED ABOUT FIRE LANES AND WHETHER OR NOT, 'CAUSE I DON'T SEE HOW IT WORKS, BUT I'M JUST NOT GONNA WORRY ABOUT THAT.

I GUESS WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY OBJECTIONS FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT FROM THEIR REVIEW AT ZRT, UH, THE ZONING REVIEW TEAM.

UM, I CAN'T SPEAK ANYMORE ON THAT IN TERMS OF, UH, IN TERMS OF THAT, BUT, UH, WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY OBJECTIONS FROM FIRE, NO.

ALRIGHT, WELL I GUESS THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS FOR THIS MORNING ON IT,

[01:55:01]

BUT THANKS.

OKAY, COMMISSIONER SLEEPER, I HAVE A SORT OF A FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO, UH, UH, ONE THAT WAS JUST ASKED.

THE, UM, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A UNIQUE PERSPECTIVE ON THIS BECAUSE I DEVELOPED THIS BUILDING BACK IN, UH, THE, UH, 1980S.

ALRIGHT.

AND, UM, I'M QUITE SURE THAT THE, UH, THAT THE DEED RESTRICTION ON THE, THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE VOLUNTEERED.

IT WAS SOMETHING THAT FOR SOME REASON AT THAT TIME THE CITY THOUGHT THEY WANTED TO LIMIT THE HEIGHT.

AND IF YOU, IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT AND YOU LOOK AT THAT AREA, IT, IT'S RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO LINCOLN CENTER, WHICH HAS BUILDINGS THAT ARE QUITE A BIT TALLER THAN THIS.

I CAN'T SEE HOW THAT HEIGHT LIMITATION TODAY, I DON'T KNOW IF IT MADE SENSE BACK THEN, BUT I CAN'T SEE HOW THAT HEIGHT LIMITATION TODAY MAKES ANY SENSE.

AND I CAN PRETTY MUCH ASSURE YOU THAT THERE'S NO, UH, SENTIMENTALITY AMONG THE PREVIOUS OWNERS TO MAINTAIN THAT, UH, THAT THAT HEIGHT RESTRICTION.

SO, UM, IF IT'S, IF, IF IT'S NOT INAPPROPRIATE TO DO SO AND THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T WISH TO MAINTAIN THAT HEIGHT RESTRICTION, I, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER HA HOUSE RIGHT.

THAT IT WOULD MAKE A LOT OF SENSE TO, UH, TO LIFT THAT DEED RESTRICTION.

AND, AND I JUST IS IS, DO I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THAT, UH, THE, THE OWNER INTENDS TO DEMOLISH THE TWO, I THINK THEY'RE SIX STORY BUILDINGS AND, AND AND REDEVELOP THEM AS MULTIFAMILY, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

THEY WOULD DEMOLISH AND THEN THE CENTER BUILDING WOULD BE CONVERTED TO MULTIFAMILY.

UH, THE, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE MORE DETAILS ON THAT FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE.

BUT AS I UNDERSTOOD IT IN OUR INITIAL CONVERSATION, IT HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE FLOOR PLATES OF THE 10 STORY BUILDING BEING MORE APPROPRIATE.

I CERTAINLY CAN ELABORATE ON IT.

I'M NOT QUITE AS WELL VERSED IN ENGINEERING MYSELF, BUT AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, THE BONES OF THE 10 STORY BUILDING WORK WELL FOR MULTIFAMILY, THE BONES OF THE SIX STORY, NOT SO MUCH.

WELL IT'S AN, IT'S AN INTERESTING, UM, STATEMENT ON, ON THE STATE OF THE, UH, THE MARKET AND DALLAS, TEXAS RIGHT NOW TO THINK THAT SOMEBODY WOULD BE MAKING THAT KIND OF CONVERSION.

TIMES ARE GOOD.

COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, MY QUESTION IS ABOUT TRAFFIC, AND I KNOW YOU RAN THROUGH IT, BUT I DIDN'T CATCH THE IMPLICATIONS OF WHAT YOU SAID, THE CHANGE THAT HAD BEEN MADE TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BECAUSE THERE WAS A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS DONE RIGHT, BUT WE DIDN'T RECEIVE IT.

IS THAT, UH, THE TIA, UM, I'M NOT SURE IF YOU RECEIVED IT, IT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE, UH, IN THE DOCKET.

YEAH, I DIDN'T SEE IT IN THE DOCKET, BUT IT DIDN'T LOOK TO ME THAT THERE WAS A SOLUTION ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT WE GOT.

AND I KNOW YOU THE, SO FROM WHAT YOU WERE SAYING THIS, UH, JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO, THE DRIVEWAY IS GOING TO STAY THE SAME, THE LOCATION, BUT WHAT, WHAT CHANGED THAT MADE IT MORE ACCEPTABLE? OH, IT CHANGED.

SO THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE BRIEFING, OR NOT IN THE BRIEFING, BUT IN THE DOCKET AND THE REPORT, UH, IT SHOWED THE DRIVEWAY ACCESSING THE GARAGE, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE TODAY.

RIGHT NOW.

THE DRIVEWAY TERMINATES AT THE PARKING LOT AND THE REALLY, I THINK THE, ONE OF THE BUILDINGS IS IN THE WAY.

UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS TO NOT ALLOW ACCESS TO THE DR, UH, GARAGE OR EVEN TO ELIMINATE THE DRIVEWAY.

UH, WITH THE REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT I BRIEFED AND PRESENTED ON THE SCREEN JUST NOW, UH, THE DEVELOPER HAS DECIDED TO GO WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF NOT HAVING ACCESS TO THE DRIVEWAY, OR SORRY, NOT HAVING ACCESS TO THE GARAGE FROM LBJ AS SUCH, IT WOULD ONLY ACCESS A SMALL PARKING AREA WITH I BELIEVE 18 PARKING SPACES, WHICH COULD THEORETICALLY BE USED FOR DELIVERIES, UH, DROP OFFS, THAT SORT OF NATURE.

AND SO THAT MODIFICATION WOULD SATISFY TEXT DOTS PROBLEMS WITH THE, WITH THE DRIVE AND ALSO THE PROBLEM OF PEOPLE TRYING TO DO THE FIVE LANE CHANGEOVER TO GET TO THE U-TURN AT MONTFORT.

IT WOULD, YOU, YOU TECHNICALLY YOU COULD STILL DO THAT, BUT THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ATTEMPTING AT AT ANY GIVEN TIME OF DAY WOULD BE SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN IF IT HAD ACCESS TO THE GARAGE.

SQUARE FEET, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS ALL GROUND LEVEL.

MY OTHER QUESTION IS ABOUT OPEN SPACE.

'CAUSE THE, UH, STAFF REPORT SAYS THAT A MINIMUM OF 65,000 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE DEFINED IN PD CONDITIONS IS REQUIRED.

BUT WHEN I GET DOWN TO PD CONDITIONS, IT JUST SAYS 65,000 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE IS REQUIRED.

AND I KNOW 11, UH, WHATEVER IT IS, THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DESIGN STANDARDS SAY THAT OPEN SPACE, YOU KNOW, CAN BE UP IN THE SKY ON ROOFTOPS, WHEREVER.

I MEAN, IS THE INTENTION FOR IT TO BE, AND IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT CONTIGUOUS OPEN SPACE EITHER.

IS THE INTENTION HERE TO BE 65,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROUND LEVEL OPEN SPACE WITH, UH, SOME BIG PORTION OF IT BEING CONTIGUOUS? 'CAUSE IT SEEMS PRETTY UNDEFINED IN THE, IN THE STANDARDS IN THE PD.

SO REGARDING THAT, UH, THE 65,000

[02:00:01]

UH, COULD YOU REMIND ME, UH, WHICH THE FIRST SECTION WHERE OPEN SPACE WAS IN YOUR REPORT? YES.

IT'S ON PAGE, UM, NINE DASH 12 NINE DASH 12.

YEAH, THE FIR YEAH.

UNDER DESIGN STANDARDS, IT SAYS IT FOLLOWS THE PROVISIONS OF FOUR POINT 1107 FOLLOWING CHANGES.

DEFINE AND BEAUTY CONDITIONS.

SO IN THE, THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN WHAT THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN AS A, UM, THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A TYPO OR A MISTY.

UH, ORIGINALLY THEY HAD TO FIND OPEN SPACE DIFFERENTLY IN, UNDER THE PD CONDITIONS IN SECTION 1 0 3, UH, WITH, WHEN WE'VE REVIEWED THAT, WE MADE A UPDATE TO IT THAT REMOVED THAT DEFINITION TO INSTEAD USE THE NORMAL DEFINITION THAT'S USED IN THE CITY CODE, UH, FOR 1107.

SO, UH, WHATEVER CONTROL IS THERE IS ALL CONTROL HERE.

I CAN PULL THAT UP IF YOU'D LIKE TO GET THE EXACT LANGUAGE.

THAT'S OKAY.

BUT THE, THE WAY THE PD IS WRITTEN NOW, THE SIX, I MEAN THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE 65,000 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE, BUT IT WOULD NOT HAVE TO BE, NONE OF IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AT GROUND LEVEL.

IS THAT CORRECT? BECAUSE FOUR POINT 1107 ALLOWS IT TO BE IN THE SKY OR WHEREVER, OR IF THERE'S AN INTENTION FOR THERE TO BE CONTIGUOUS AMOUNT OF, AN AMOUNT OF CONTIGUOUS OPEN SPACE AT GROUND LEVEL, THEN THE PD NEEDS TO SAY SO BECAUSE ANY DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT COMES FORWARD IN THE FUTURE ONLY HAS TO COMPLY WITH THE PD, IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, SO, UM, IF YOU LOOK AT ONE 14 C, THE TOP OF THAT SECTION DOES SAY ACCEPT AS PROVIDED BELOW.

UH, EVERYTHING NEEDS TO MEET CODIFIED, UH, MIXED INCOME HOUSING DESIGN STANDARDS.

UM, SO ALL THE ONLY MODIFICATION AS FAR AS OPEN SPACE IS THAT, UH, IT'S ABOUT 17% OF THE SITE NOW RATHER THAN 10%, WHICH IS WHAT, UH, 4 11 0 7 WOULD REQUIRE.

UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, AS THIS READS, AND DANIEL CAN CHECK ME IF HE NEEDS TO, BUT OTHER THAN REQUIRING MORE OPEN SPACE, ALL OF THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS FOR OPEN SPACE AS FAR AS WHERE IT CAN BE LOCATED AND EVERYTHING WOULD, WOULD JUST COMPLY WITH 4 11 0 7.

BUT MY, MY POINT WAS THAT IF THE INTENTION FOR THIS PROJECT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME GROUND LEVEL OPEN SPACE IS REQUIRED OR CONTIGUOUS OPEN SPACE IS REQUIRED, THEN THE PD WOULD NEED TO BE MODIFIED TO SAY THAT, RIGHT? YEAH, I DON'T, UM, IN MY MIND, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT OPEN SPACE STANDARDS, UH, FROM 4 11 0 7.

BUT YEAH, IF THOSE ARE NOT CODIFIED, THEN IF THAT'S DESIRE, THEY WOULD NEED TO BE ADDED AS CONDITIONS TO THE PD.

AND I AM ATTEMPTING TO PULL UP THOSE CONDITIONS, BUT THE INTERNET IS BEING RATHER UNCOOPERATIVE THIS MORNING, BUT I CAN GET THAT DEFINITION TO YOU AFTER.

ALRIGHT, WELL I READ THEM LAST NIGHT AND I DIDN'T OKAY.

I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT WOULD REQUIRE GROUND LEVEL CONTIGUOUS, BUT, GOT IT.

COMMISSIONER HALL? YEAH, JUST A BIT OF, UH, CLARIFICATION.

UH, THE 10, THE 10 STORY BUILDING THAT'S BEING KEPT IS 145 FEET TALL AT PRESENT.

AND THE, UH, OTHER TWO BUILDINGS THAT ARE BEING DEMOLISHED ARE GONNA BE REPLACED, UH, WITH SHORT, UH, ONLY SIX, SIX LEVEL, UH, SIX STORY, UH, WOOD WOOD FRAME BUILDINGS.

SO THEY REALLY AREN'T PLANNING ON BUILDING UP TO 182 FEET OR ANY HIGHER.

AND IT SHOULD BE WORTH NOTING AS WELL WITH THE BASE MU TWO, UM, DISTRICT, THE MAX HEIGHT IS ONLY 135 FEET, AND SO IT WOULD MAKE THE 10 STORY BUILDING NON COMPLYING.

UH, IT DOES PROVIDE A 180 FOOT BONUS IF YOU HAVE WHAT'S CONSIDERED A MIXED USE PROJECT IN THE CODE WITH RETAIL.

HOWEVER, GIVEN THAT THE PLAN DOES NOT CURRENTLY CALL FOR RETAIL, THAT WOULD STILL BE TOO RESTRICTIVE.

UH, SO THAT WAS ANOTHER REASON FOR MODIFYING FROM THE BASE HEIGHT, UM, BUT CERTAINLY WOULDN'T, NO OBJECTION TO INCREASING THAT MAX HEIGHT.

COMMISSIONER FORSYTH, IN YOUR PICTURES, I NOTICED THAT THERE WERE SOME MATURE TREES ON THE PROPERTY ON THE SITE.

UH, ARE THEY BEING MAINTAINED OR ARE THEY GONNA BE DEMOLISHED? UH, IS THERE A LANDSCAPE PLAN? I DIDN'T SEE THAT.

UH, A LANDSCAPE PLAN WAS NOT SUBMITTED WITH THIS.

THEY WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS OF ARTICLE 10, UH, WHICH IS THE CITY'S GENERAL LANDSCAPING, UH, REQUIREMENTS.

UH, AS I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT DOES REQUIRE EITHER PRESERVATION OR REPLACEMENT OF TREES THAT WOULD BE DEMOLISHED.

UH, BUT I DON'T HAVE DETAILS ON HOW, HOW THAT WOULD LOOK WITH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT SECOND ROUND COMMISSIONER HOUSE.

ARE, HAVE AN FAR GREATER THAN THE, UH, 1.9 THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED BY AN MU TWO DISTRICT, BUT WE WANTED TO KEEP THAT IN THERE AS A, AS A METHOD OF SORT OF RETAINING THOSE ENTITLEMENTS THERE.

UM, MR. BATE, THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A 4.0 FAR.

SORRY, ONE MORE.

THE, THE, THE PROPOSAL HERE IS THE RECOMMENDATION IS A 4.0 FAR.

UH, YES, I, WE PUT IN THE 4.0 FAR JUST AS A WAY TO SORT OF RETAIN SOME OF THE EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS FROM THE GOA ZONING.

UH, AGAIN, GIVEN THAT, UH, THE SITE, IF FOR WHATEVER REASON IT WE'RE NOT REDEVELOPED, WE WOULD LIKE TO STILL RETAIN THAT.

UM, I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD WHETHER THE EXISTING BUILDINGS

[02:05:01]

WELL, I'M JUST TRYING TO ALIGN FAR AND HEIGHT AND UNIT COUNT AND ALL THIS, AND BY MY ESTIMATION, THE, THE PROJECT AS PROPOSED IS GONNA BE AROUND A TWO FAR, AND SO WE'VE GOT FOUR, BUT WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE TO LIMIT THE UNITS IF WE, IF WE SAY, IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE A, A, A HEIGHT LIMIT AND AN FAR, WHY DO WE EVEN HAVE TO TALK ABOUT UNITS? SO WITH THE UNITS, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS WOULD BE THAT IT WAS A WAY TO ENSURE THIS MIXED INCOME HOUSING, UH, BONUS COULD BE TRIGGERED, UH, BY ALLOWING IT TO BE IN EXCESS OF A BASELINE OF 50.

UH, THAT GIVES, ESSENTIALLY GIVES AN INCENTIVE FOR THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING TO BE USED.

UH, AS A BIT OF BACKGROUND, UH, WHEN THE PROPOSAL FIRST CAME IN, THE CONDITIONS WERE SUCH THAT THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS WOULD ALLOW, UH, MULTIFAMILY USE ON THE SITE.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN REALLY DO WITH MIXED INCOME HOUSING BONUSES.

WE CAN'T PROVIDE EXTRA USES.

UM, AND IT'S SORT OF PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE IN A WAY OF SAYING, OH, WELL, IF YOU SAY YOU'LL DO THIS MUCH MIXED INCOME HOUSING, THEN YOU CAN BUILD MIXED, YOU CAN BUILD MULTIFAMILY.

UH, SO INSTEAD THE, WHAT WE LOOKED AT WAS AN APPROACH OF USING THE DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE AS THE INCENTIVE AS IT WERE.

SO IF THEY DID NOT PROVIDE MIXED INCOME HOUSING, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BUILD WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.

UM, CERTAINLY THERE'S, I THINK TO USE A TERM OR PHRASE, THERE'S MANY WAYS TO SKIN ACCOUNT WITH IT.

UM, WE JUST THOUGHT THAT DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, UH, GIVEN WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO US WELL, BUT WE COULD GET TO MIXED INCOME HOUSING WITH FAR BONUSES OR HEIGHT BONUSES.

YES, THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER WAY OF PROVIDING THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING BONUS THROUGH FAR, UH, ADDITIONAL FAR ENTITLEMENT OR HEIGHT ENTITLEMENT.

MR. SLEEPER, YOU, YOU MAY HAVE JUST ANSWERED THIS, BUT I I DON'T THINK I HEARD IT RIGHT IF YOU DID.

SO THE DEVELOPER IS BASICALLY VOLUNTARILY DOWN ZONING THE PROPERTY AND CONVERTING THE USE FROM OFFICE TO MULTIFAMILY.

AND WHY DOES THAT TRIGGER A, UH, A LOW INCOME HOUSING REQUIREMENT? SO IN TERMS OF, UH, WHETHER IT'S DOWN ZONING OR NOT, UH, IT REALLY IS, IT'S MORE OF A, I WOULD CALL ALMOST LIKE A LATERAL CHANGE IN THE ZONING, UH, AS IT IS TODAY WITH THE GOA, IF YOU TOOK AWAY THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, ALL THAT YOU WOULD REALLY BE ABLE TO DO IS JUST BUILD A TALLER OFFICE BUILDING.

UM, BY SWITCHING IT OVER TO MU TWO, YOU'RE ALLOWING, UH, DIFFERENT USES THAT, UH, IN THIS CASE, ONE OF THE, THE MAIN ONE IS MULTIFAMILY.

UH, WE FOUND THAT THAT WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE FOR WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

IT WOULD ALSO STILL ALLOW OFFICE USES, AGAIN, IF THIS WERE TO, UH, IF, IF FOR WHATEVER REASON THE DEVELOPMENT DID NOT COME TO FRUITION, IT WOULD STILL ALLOW THIS USE TO EXIST, WHEREAS THE STRAIGHT MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT WOULD NOT ALLOW THAT.

UM, THE, SORRY, AND THE SECOND PART OF THE QUESTION.

OH, WITH THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING, IN TERMS OF TRIGGERING IT, UH, REALLY WHAT IT IS, IS THAT THE DEVELOPER WAS, I THINK THEY, THEIR INTENTION IS TO, THEY WANT TO PROVIDE MIXED INCOME HOUSING AND THEY WANT TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO, I GUESS, HAVE THAT CODIFIED IN HERE.

AND SO, UH, BY HAVING THE DEVELOPMENT, THE DEVELOPMENT AS PRESENTED WITH 725 DWELLING UNITS, YOU NEED ABOUT A 90 DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE DENSITY IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THAT.

SO IF THEY DON'T PROVIDE THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING, THEN THE DEVELOPMENT AS PROPOSED, SIMPLY IT, IT WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BE AS DENSE.

THEY COULD HAVE MUCH LARGER DWELLING UNITS.

THEY COULD MAYBE NOT BUILD ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE NEW TOWERS, OR MAYBE NOT BUILD BOTH OF THEM, BUT IT WOULD NEED TO HAVE THAT, IT WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH THAT 50 DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE MINIMUM.

UH, SO IN TERMS OF USING THAT AS THE, AS THE SWEETENER, AGAIN, THE IDEA IS IF YOU PROVIDE MIXED INCOME HOUSING THAT 5% AT 81 TO 100% A MFI, THEN THEY'LL BE ABLE TO BUILD AS ENVISIONED.

OTHERWISE THEY'D HAVE TO GO DRIVE BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD.

SO I, MAYBE I JUST MISSED THIS.

WHAT, WHAT IS THE HEIGHT ON THE TWO BUILDINGS THAT THEY'RE TEARING DOWN AND REPLACING? WHERE THEY'RE BUILDING NEW BUILDINGS? THE NEW BUILDINGS WOULD BE 95 FEET MAX.

UH, AND THAT'S INTERESTING.

THE 145 FEET THAT COMMISSIONER HALL MENTIONED HERE ON THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN, IT SAYS 102 MAX BUILDING HEIGHT FOR THE EXISTING BUILDING.

UM, BUT THAT'S THE, THE HIGHEST THAT IT COULD GO WOULD BE 187.

BUT THE NEW BUILDINGS ARE NOT TALLER.

NO, THEY WOULD BE SHORTER.

THEY WOULD BE SHORTER THAN THE 10 STORY BUILDING.

UH, I BELIEVE THEY WOULD BE.

BUT THAT'S ALREADY THERE.

GOA TO AN MU TWO, THAT ALLOWS THE RESIDENTIAL USES OF COURSE.

SO THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT UPZONING AT ALL.

AND THEY'RE, AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE ONLY BEING REQUIRED TO DO, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING BECAUSE THEY WANT TO, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE DOING IT VOLUNTARILY, NOT BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE ANY ZONING ORDINANCE THAT WERE REQUIRED.

IS THAT CORRECT? SO IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE MOVING TO, UH, FROM A

[02:10:01]

UM, AND THEN AN MU TWO, UM, WITHOUT ANY SORT OF MIXED USE PROJECT, WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE PROPOSING A NON MIXED USE PROJECT.

IT'S REALLY JUST, UM, RESIDENTIAL AT THIS POINT.

THE MAX DWELLING UNIT DENSITY, THEY COULD HAVE AN MU TWO, IT'S 50 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

UM, WITH THE PD, THEY'RE PROPOSING THAT 50 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE AS THEIR BASE.

UM, AND THEN INCENTIVIZING THE AFFORDABLE UNITS BY SAYING THAT THEY CAN GO UP TO 85 DWELLING UNITS, UNITS PER ACRE IF THEY PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

UM, SO THAT WOULD BE MORE THAN THE BASE DISTRICT, UH, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING A MIXED USE PROJECT.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? COULD THEY NOT HAVE JUST PROPOSED AT ALL AS A MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT AS OPPOSED TO A MIXED USE PROJECT? THEY COULD DO THAT AS WELL, UM, TO GET THAT DWELLING UNIT DENSITY.

UM, THEY'D PROBABLY BE LOOKING LIKE AN MF THREE OR AN MU THREE.

UM, THOSE ARE THE, OF COURSE, THE DENSER MF AND MU DISTRICTS WE HAVE IN THE CITY.

UM, RATHER THAN THAT THEY WENT WITH AN MU TWO.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS, UH, MORE OF A COMFORTABILITY FACTOR WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY OR NOT.

BUT, UH, UNDER A STRAIGHT MU TWO, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY COULDN'T GET THAT DENSITY, UH, WITHOUT A BONUS.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY'RE BUILDING LOWER DENSITY THAN WHAT THEY HAVE NOW.

AND YET IT RE, IT, IT TRIGGERS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENT.

WELL, WHEN YOU SAY RIGHT NOW, DO YOU MEAN THE EXISTING GEO A NO.

WHAT'S THERE RIGHT NOW? RIGHT.

SO THE EXISTING ZONING DOESN'T ALLOW DWELLING UNIT DENSITY AT ALL.

IT DOESN'T ALLOW DWELLING UNITS.

I UNDERSTAND.

AND I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE, THE BUILDING DENSITY THAT'S THERE NOW VERSUS THE BUILDING DENSITY THAT'S GONNA BE THERE.

GOTCHA.

THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT INCREASING THE DENSITY.

THE, WHEN YOU SAY DENSITY, DO YOU MEAN MORE THE HEIGHT? THE FAR, THE, THE VOLUME OF THE VOLUME OF THE BUILDING.

SO, SO THAT IS, AS, AS MARTIN SAID, KIND OF A DOWN ZONING FROM WHAT'S PERMITTED TODAY.

UM, BUT UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING, ASIDE FROM THE MASSING OF STRUCTURES AND STUFF LIKE THAT, THE EXISTING ZONING DOESN'T ALLOW RESIDENTIAL UNITS.

UM, SO BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO ALLOW WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, SUDDENLY WE HAVE TO CONSIDER DWELLING UNIT DENSITY IN THE MIX AS WELL, NOT JUST THE MASSING AND THE HEIGHT, UH, OF, OF BUILDINGS.

WE'RE LOOKING AT UNITS FOR PEOPLE NOW, RATHER THAN OFFICES.

UM, MAYBE I'M JUST MISSING THE CONCEPT HERE, BUT GENERALLY, I THOUGHT AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS WERE TRIGGERED WHEN YOU WERE ASKING FOR AN INCREASE IN ZONING RIGHTS.

THIS IS NOT REALLY AN INCREASE IN ZONING RIGHTS.

IT'S A CHANGE FROM OFFICE TO MIXED USE.

AND YET IN THE EYES OF, AND, AND UNLESS FOR SOME REASON THIS, THIS DEVELOPER JUST WANTED TO DO, I DON'T KNOW WHY, WHY IT WOULD TRIGGER A REQUIREMENT, BUT YOU'RE SAYING IT TRIGGERS A REQUIREMENT TO ADD AFFORDABLE UNITS, EVEN THOUGH, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT INCREASED THE DENSITY? YEAH.

SO THE THING THAT INCENTIVIZES THE AFFORDABLE UNITS IS NOT JUST, UM, DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS IN GENERAL.

THIS IS KIND OF WHERE I WANT TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN, BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PERMITTED USES.

SO WHAT YOU ARE FOCUSED ON IS THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, THE HEIGHT, THE FAR, ET CETERA.

UM, BUT THE WAY FOR THIS MULTIFAMILY PROJECT TO WORK IS WE DON'T JUST HAVE TO LOOK AT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, THE ZONING RIGHTS.

WE ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT THE USE THE PERMITTED USES.

UM, SO ALTHOUGH THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD SAY THEY'RE LOSING OUT IN TERMS OF WHAT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THEY'LL NOW BE ENTITLED TO, THEY ARE GAINING, UH, THE USES THAT ARE PERMITTED NOW, THE RESIDENTIAL USES, WHICH THEY DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE TODAY.

SO I THINK THAT'S THE TRADE OFF, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

WELL, THANK YOU.

I, I, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I DON'T REALLY GET IT, BUT I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, .

, I'M SURE RUBIN COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, UH, I'M JUST GONNA JOIN IN THE BAND THAT QUESTIONS WHY WE'RE LIMITING HEIGHT AT THIS LOCATION.

DOING THAT BE? WELL, MY ONLY CONCERN WITH STRIKING THAT OUT AND USING THE BASE IS THAT THE BASE MU TWO ONLY ALLOWS A 135 FOOT HEIGHT AS A BASE.

THAT, THAT, THAT KIND OF GOES TO THE SAME, TO THE SAME POINT.

IT'S A, IT'S A, A DECREASE IN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, BUT THEY'RE GAINING THAT PERMITTED USE THAT THEY DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE TODAY, COMM.

SO THEORETICALLY, IF SOMEONE WANTED TO ALTER THE, THE PD ORDINANCE TO, UM, MODIFY OR ELIMINATE THAT HEIGHT LIMITATION AND GO TO JUST WHATEVER THE BASE MU TWO DISTRICT FOR THE PD ALLOWS, IS THAT JUST STRIKING A SINGLE LINE IN THE ORDINANCE? OR, OR WHAT WOULD THE MECHANISM FOR

[02:15:01]

NOW, THERE'S A, THERE'S A SWEETENER IN THERE IF YOU PROVIDE, AGAIN, WHAT'S CALLED THE MIXED USE PROJECT WITH RETAIL.

SO IF THEY BUILT A BUILDING THAT HAD MULTIFAMILY AND THEN PUT RETAIL AT THE BOTTOM, IT COULD GO UP TO 180 FEET.

UH, WHICH THAT WOULD, THAT COULD BE DONE WITH THE EXISTING, THE 10 STORY BUILDING, FOR INSTANCE.

UH, BUT IF YOU WERE TO JUST HAVE THAT BASE HEIGHT, SO IF THEY DEVELOPED IT AS ENVISIONED, THAT 10 STORY TOWER WOULD NO LONGER BE IN COMPLIANCE BECAUSE IT'S TALLER THAN 135.

SO YOU NEED TO HAVE, AT LEAST, YOU NEED TO MODIFY FROM BASE MU TWO REGARDLESS.

IN ORDER TO ALLOW THAT EXISTING 10 STORY BUILDING.

UM, BUT IT COULD CERTAINLY GO HIGHER.

YEAH, AND I, UH, WE'RE GETTING SOME, I REALLY LIKE THE QUESTIONS WE'RE GETTING TODAY.

I THINK IT'S GOOD DISCUSSION.

THEY'RE SORT OF, UH, DISRUPTIVE.

I MEAN THAT IN A GOOD WAY.

UM, UH, ONE THING THE COMMISSION COULD DO, UM, RATHER THAN THIS PD FOR MU TWO, UM, IS UH, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF A STRAIGHT U THREE DISTRICT WOULD WORK.

I THINK WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AND RUN THE NUMBERS AND MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NOTHING WE'RE MISSING.

UH, PLEASE.

YEAH, YOU'D LOSE OPEN SPACE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

SO IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING IS SORT OF, WE'D HAVE TO, WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT THAT MIX IS.

UM, BUT YOU KNOW, THERE IS THE CONCERN ABOUT THE HEIGHT, UH, MAX HEIGHT AND, UM, MU THREE IS THE SAME AS THE CURRENT GOA, UM, FAR GETS YOU TO A 4.0 MAX, UM, JUST LIKE GOA DOES.

UM, SO YEAH, MAYBE, MAYBE A STRAIGHT MU THREE OR A PD WITH AN MU THREE BASE THAT WE MODIFY OFF OF TO GET BETTER OPEN STATE STANDARDS OR WHATEVER ELSE IS DESIRED.

UM, MAYBE THAT'S A GOOD WAY TO GO.

AND I APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS.

I REALLY DO .

LET'S GO BACK TO CASE NUMBER TWO.

UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, WE'RE, WE'RE BRIEFING THESE AS NEEDED.

THE THE MINOR AMENDMENT WE HELD OFF ON THAT ONE.

WOULD YOU LIKE A BRIEF? I BRIEFED.

UH, EITHER WORKSHOPS OR TIMES TO CONTINUE OUR CONVERSATION ON THE PLACE TYPE, I MEAN ON THE, FOR DALLAS PLAN DOCUMENT.

UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE A, A BREAK BEFORE WE GET TO OUR FORWARD DALLAS PIECE.

IT'S 1118.

UH, LET'S BE BACK AT, UH, 1130.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONERS.

IT IS 1141, UH, AM AND WE'RE BACK ON THE RECORD.

GOOD MORNING, GENTLEMEN.

WE'RE READY.

ALRIGHT, THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH.

ONE SECOND.

ALRIGHT, TODAY'S GONNA BE AN, UH, CONTINUING DISCUSSION FROM OUR, UH, LAST WORKSHOP ITEM WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, THE PLACE TYPE MAP AND SUGGESTED CHANGES.

SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION ON THAT, UH, JUST TO KIND OF BRING EVERYBODY UP TO SPEED IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR.

UH, WE'VE HAD OUR WORKSHOP MARCH 28TH, AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE PLACE TYPE DESCRIPTIONS AND A FEW PLACE TYPE MAP, UH, SUGGESTED CHANGES.

WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE THE MAP COMPONENT OF OUR DISCUSSION TODAY.

WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS PUBLISH AN UPDATED MAP FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE, BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT YOU ALL HAVE PROVIDED US.

SO THEY HAVE, UH, ENOUGH TIME TO PROVIDE SOME COMMENTS WHEN WE GET INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, IN A FEW WEEKS.

SO WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS TALK THROUGH THE, SOME OF THE, FROM THE PLACE TYPE MAP, CHANGE SUGGESTIONS, SOME, UM, SOME ISSUE ERRORS THAT WE'D LIKE TO CONFIRM AND CLARIFY WITH YOU ALL.

AND THEN MOVING FORWARD, AS WE LOOK TO THE NEXT WORKSHOP THAT WE ARE GONNA HAVE WITH YOU ALL, WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND OTHER PLAN DOCUMENT SECTIONS, WE'RE ALSO GONNA CONTINUE THE PLACE TYPE DESCRIPTION, UH, REVIEW WITH THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL IN THAT WORKSHOP.

SO THIS PARTICULAR SLIDE SHOWS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT SO FAR.

UH, SO WITHIN THE PLACE TYPE DESCRIPTION SECTION, WHEREVER YOU SEE A GREEN CHECK, THAT'S WHERE WE'VE RECEIVED INPUT FROM YOU ALL.

UH, WHEREVER THERE IS AN ORANGE CHECK, THERE'S ONGOING DISCUSSION JUST TO CLARIFY DIRECTION ON THAT.

AND THEN WHEN, WHEREVER THERE'S JUST A BLANK BOX WHERE YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH YOU ALL.

SO TODAY, UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A DISCUSSION SOLELY ON THE PLACE TYPE MAP, UM, SUGGESTED CHANGES, UM, WHEN WE MEET AGAIN FOR THE NEXT WORKSHOP ON THE 11TH, WE'LL CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION ON THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL IN ADDITION TO THE OTHER COMPONENTS OF THE PLAN.

AND THEN BASED ON THAT MEETING, UH, IF NEEDED, WE CAN TALK ABOUT ADDITIONAL,

[02:20:02]

SO JUST TO OVERVIEW WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SO FAR, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST MEETING, UH, WE ACTUALLY HAD THAT CONVERSATION ABOUT THE BACHMAN LAKE AREA JUST NORTH OF THERE, UH, CHANGING THAT OR, OR, UH, TWEAKING THAT, UM, SUGGESTED CHANGE TO COMMUNITY MIXED USE.

SO WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE WITH THAT, UH, DIRECTION.

UH, BUT WE HAVE A FEW OTHER AREAS THAT WE'D LIKE TO DISCUSS, UH, SPECIFICALLY IN D EIGHT AND D SIX.

SO WE'RE GLAD COMMISSIONER BLAIR, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UH, ARE HERE TODAY.

ALL RIGHT.

SO FOR TODAY, WHAT WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS THE, CALLING IT THE RED BIRD DISTRIBUTION CENTER.

UH, SO AS WE ANALYZE THAT SUGGESTED CHANGE, WE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING, UH, IN THE REGION IN THAT AREA, PROVIDE KIND OF STAFF'S INPUT REGARDING THAT AND GET SOME MORE DIRECTION IN TERMS OF WHICH PLACE TYPE THAT SHOULD GO TO.

SO FOR CONTEXT, UH, THE REDBIRD DISTRIBUTION AREA THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN RED ON THE MAP, UH, THAT IS JUST NORTH OF DESOTO.

UM, AND ALSO TOO, AS WE LOOK KIND OF MORE REGIONAL, TAKE A STEP BACK, UH, DESOTO LANCASTER, THAT'S BASICALLY, UH, A LARGER INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE AREA.

UM, ALSO TOO IN BLUE THAT SHOWS THE INLAND PORT, THE DALLAS PORTION, EXCUSE ME, THE DALLAS PORTION OF THE INLAND PORT.

UH, SO JUST FOR CONTEXT IN THAT AREA, THE INLAND PORT IS A LARGER, UH, PORTION OF, OF THE REGION.

DALLAS IS ONLY 25%.

UH, DALLAS ONLY HAS 25% OF THAT LARGER INLAND PORT AREA.

SO AS WE LOOK AT THE REDBIRD DISTRIBUTION AREA, AS WE LOOK AT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN DESOTO, LANCASTER, AS WE LOOK AT THE PORTIONS THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS CONTAINS OR IS WITHIN THE INLAND PORT, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT HOW THAT PORTION JUST SOUTH OF 20, KIND OF BEHAVES AS THAT DISTRIBUTION CENTER.

UM, SO AS WE'RE LOOKING TO, TO APPLY THE SUGGESTION OR THINK THROUGH THE SUGGESTION OF MOVING AWAY FROM THE FLEX INDUSTRY OR FLEX COMMERCIAL TO A COMMUNITY MIXED USE, UH, SOME THOUGHTS THAT STAFF HAD IS, UH, EITHER KEEPING IT FLEX COMMERCIAL OR LOOKING AT A, UM, LOGISTIC PLACE TYPE COULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE.

UH, JUST BECAUSE ONE, IT'S AWAY FROM RESIDENTIAL.

TWO, IT'S ADJACENT TO OTHER, UH, SIMILAR USES IN OTHER PARTS OF THE REGION.

AND THEN THREE, BECAUSE THE INLAND PORT, THE COM COM, THE PORTION THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS, UH, KIND OF WITH WITHHOLDS WITHIN THE INLAND PORT, UH, IS VERY MINIMAL.

IF WE WERE TO CONCEPTUALLY MOVE THE REDBIRD DISTRIBUTION TO THE INLAND PORT, THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY ROOM FOR THAT TO, TO FIT.

SO WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT AS, UH, AS A CITY, AS WE GROW, AS THAT INDUSTRY GROWS REGIONALLY, UH, DO WE WANT TO KEEP THAT REDBIRD DISTRIBUTION AS A LOGISTICS FLEX COMMERCIAL AREA, OR DO WE WANT TO MOVE DIRECTLY, UH, TO THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE.

SO WITH THAT, I'M NOT SURE, COMMISSIONER BLA, IF YOU WANTED TO PROVIDE A BIT MORE EXPLANATION IN TERMS OF KINDA YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT.

THIS IS YOUR DISTRICT.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE, UM, KIND OF INPUT FOR THE REST OF THE BODY, UH, JUST BASED ON THE INPUT THAT, UH, STAFF HAS, UH, IN THE AREA.

YES, PLEASE.

WELL, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE, IT WAS SOUTH OF 20, NORTH OF, UH, UH, UM, DE NORTH OF DESOTO LANCASTER.

UM, THERE'S A HYBRID OF USES, BUT WHEN YOU ARE CLOSER TO THE RED BIRD AREA, THERE'S MORE RESIDENTIAL USES.

IN FACT, JUST, WELL, THERE'S A LOT OF, OF RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, UM, THAT'S ON POLK AND BECKLEY MEET ALL THE WAY TO 35, THAT, THAT IS NOTHING BUT RE TOTAL RESIDENTIAL.

AND TO ALLOW INTENSIVE, UM, IR II USES WOULD BE TOTALLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH WHAT'S THERE ON THE GROUND ALREADY.

[02:25:01]

THERE'S A, THERE'S A SCHOOL, A PARK, UM, AND WHERE MOST OF DISD STUDENTS USE, THE FACILITY THEY USE FOR THEIR BASKETBALL GAMES, FOOTBALL GAMES, AND WHERE THEY GRADUATE FROM, SO TO, TO, TO, AND, AND, AND IT HAS WAREHOUSES THAT, THAT SURROUND IT, BUT IT'S CAUSED, IT, IT, IT, IT'S IN VIOLATION OF THE, THE, THE CITY'S VISION ZERO BECAUSE THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF ACCIDENTS THAT HAPPEN WHEN YOU HAVE RESIDENTS AND, AND RESIDENTIAL, UH, TRAFFIC AND TRUCK TRAFFIC.

SO TO MOVE IT TOWARDS SOMETHING THAT IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS ON THE GROUND WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BLEND RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL.

WE ALSO, THAT OVER THERE, WE ALSO HAVE OUR, IT'S TARGET AND FI AND 1, 2, 3, ACTUALLY 3, 4, 5 MEGACHURCHES, UM, THAT ARE ALL WITHIN A MILE FROM I 20 IN, IN THIS AREA.

SO TO SAY THAT IT'S A LOGISTICS IS INAPPROPRIATE TO, UM, SAY THAT IT'S, YOU CAN BLEND, IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE.

SO SOMETHING THAT WASN'T LESS INTENSE OF 50, 60 BAY WAREHOUSES THAT SHOULD GO IN THE INLAND PORT.

UM, THE OTHER OP, THE OTHER CHALLENGE WITH THAT IS THEY'RE, THE STREETS ARE NOT MA NOT DESIGNED, NOR ARE THEY BUILT TO HANDLE THE TRAFFIC OF, UH, OF TRUCKS AND WHAT THE, THE TRUCKS BRING.

UM, AND, AND, AND SO THE INLAND PORT IS MORE LOGISTICALLY APPROPRIATE, MORE LOGISTICALLY DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED.

SO THAT'S WHERE, WHERE IT SHOULD BE.

BUT, BUT TO MOVE IT FROM TOTAL INDUSTRIAL, YOU CAN'T TAKE WHAT IS ALSO ON THE GROUND AND, AND TELL THEM YOU'RE, YOU GOTTA GO.

SO YOU BLEND IT.

UM, AND THAT WOULD GO FROM SOME OF DISTRICT THREE, BECAUSE DISTRICT THREE IS, IS RIGHT THERE AS WELL.

WHEN YOU GO, UM, ON, JUST AS YOU GET TO REDBIRD, SO FROM REDBIRD YOU HAVE BRAND NEW, UM, MULTIFAMILY, YOU HAVE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY.

UM, WE'RE GETTING READY TO GET OUR, GET OUR GROCERY STORE.

UM, TOM THUMB IS MOVING INTO THAT AREA.

SO YOU DON'T WANNA, YOU DON'T WANNA KILL 'EM BEFORE THEY GET THERE AND, AND, AND ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO OPERATE.

SO, AND THE, THE CITY HAS, HAS ENGINEERED PROVIDED THE, THE APPROPRIATE PLACE AT THE INLAND PORT.

THE, THE STREETS ARE ENGINEERED TO HANDLE THE TRAFFIC WITHOUT BREAKING DOWN AND BREAKING UP.

UM, PD 7 61 SOUTH OF I 20 WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR ALL OF OUR WAREHOUSE, ALL OF OUR HEAVY USE WAREHOUSE.

SO THAT WAS THE THOUGHT.

AND THAT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE, WITH THE RESIDENTS, WITH THE MULTIPLE, UM, VI UM, VISITS THAT, UM, LAWRENCE AND HIS STAFF AND HIS TEAM HAD TO, TO VISIT WITH THIS AREA.

UM, THIS WOULD BE THE, THE, THE WAY TO HAVE THEM LIKE, UM, HIS TEAM.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR.

UH, I THINK TO ADD, UH, TO, TO WHAT YOU JUST MENTIONED, UH, SO AS WE, AND THE REASON WE WANNA CONFIRM THIS, UH, AS WE LOOK TO POTENTIALLY MOVE THIS TO A MIXED COMMUNITY, MIXED USE AREA, UH, AND HAVE POTENTIALLY THESE USES WERE TO GET MOVED TO THE, TO THE INLAND PORT, UH, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD HAPPEN, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE INSIDE CITY BOUNDS.

SO IT WOULD BE OTHER, WE'RE KINDA SAYING THAT THIS, THIS TAX BASE WOULD, COULD GO TO THE INLAND PORT AND, YOU KNOW, BE A TAX BASE FOR HUTCHINS OR WILMER OR LAN OR ANOTHER COMPONENT, ANOTHER CITY, UH, THAT'S WITHIN THE INLAND PORTS.

JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS, THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS OKAY WITH THIS BODY AS WE CONSIDER, UH, IF WE'RE TRANSITIONING THIS TO BE A MORE MIXED USE, UH, TYPE OF AREA.

WHERE WOULD THESE USES GO IF THEY DECIDED TO GO SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THIS CITY? SO I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT THAT WAS KIND OF WITH WHAT YOU WERE THINKING ABOUT.

SECONDLY, AS WE LOOK AT THE PINK AREA IN THIS MAP, UH, AS COMMISSIONER BLAIR MENTIONED, UH, THERE IS

[02:30:01]

A, UH, DISD STADIUM, WHICH IS WHERE MY MOUSE IS, UH, IN RED.

UH, SO AS WE HAD INITIAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMUNITY, I THINK BEFORE THIS IR, UM, KIND OF DESIGNATION BEFORE WE HAD IT BE FLEX COMMERCIAL WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE DISD DISTRICT, WHICH WAS ALSO ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY.

UH, SO WHAT, UH, THAT THE TWEAKS OF THE MAP, THE, THE REFLECTED THE COMMUNITY'S FEEDBACK WAS ONE, TO REDUCE, UH, THAT ADJACENCY TO, TO RESIDENTIAL AND WHAT WE COULD DO AS WELL TO KIND OF, TO CONTINUE THAT, UM, PROGRESSION.

UH, THIS AREA COULD SHRINK IF WE DECIDE TO KEEP COMPO COMPONENTS OF THAT.

OR IT COULD JUST GO ENTIRELY COMMUNITY MIXED USE.

FOR EXAMPLE, UH, THE FLEX COMMERCIAL AREA WHERE KIND OF SOUTH OF, I BELIEVE BECKLEY MEAD, UM, AND JUST KIND OF CUTTING OFF AT THE OPEN SPACE.

THAT COULD BE A FLEX COMMERCIAL AS WELL.

AND EVERYWHERE ELSE WOULD BE, UH, COMMUNITY MIXED USE.

THAT'S ANOTHER WAY OF KIND OF CONTINUING WHAT YOU JUST MENTIONED, COMMISSIONER BLAIR WITH ADDING MORE COMMUNITY MIXED USE AND REDUCING THE FOOTPRINT OF THE FLEX COMMERCIAL IN THE AREA.

UH, WHAT WHAT WE ALSO DIDN'T WANT TO DO IS APPLY A LOGISTICS HUB TO THIS.

I THINK THE FLEX COMMERCIAL, UH, SEEMS TO MAKE SENSE IN TERMS OF NOT GROWING THAT FOOTPRINT, STILL BEING COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING SOUTH, UH, OF THE CITY.

UM, AND ALSO TOUCHING WITH WHAT YOU JUST MENTIONED, BUT WE JUST WANT TO CONFIRM WITH THIS BODY THAT, UH, IF WE DO MOVE TO COMMUNITY MIXED USE EVERYWHERE IN THIS AREA, JUST THE IMPLICATIONS OF THAT WOULD MEAN IN THE FUTURE IN TERMS OF TAX BASE, IN TERMS OF WHERE ELSE THIS USE COULD GO IF THEY DECIDED TO, UH, I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT, THAT THAT DIRECTION WAS OKAY WITH THIS BODY, UH, AS WE CONTINUE MAKING THOSE TWEAKS TO THE PLACE TYPE MAP.

I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S ANY FURTHER INPUT OR FEEDBACK, UH, BASED ON THAT.

IT'S, IT'S MORE OF JUST A QUESTION.

SO I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE AERIAL MAP AND I SEE A NUMBER OF DISTRIBUTION CENTERS ALREADY BUILT THERE, AND SOME OF 'EM SEEM VERY CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH I THINK WE, YOU KNOW, IS THERE, THERE'S SOME DEFINITELY SOME ISSUES WITH THAT.

AND AS WE, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS THAT THAT LOGISTICS IS, IS NOT THE VISION FOR THE AREA, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT AT CLUB WHEN WE LOOKED AT VARIOUS AREAS, NOT THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY, IS WHEN WE'RE CHOOSING PLACE TYPES, WE WANT TO TRANSITION AWAY FROM SOMETHING.

IN THIS CASE, I THINK IT'S, WE DON'T WANT LOGISTICS TO EXPAND BAND.

WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO GET SOMETHING ELSE? AND I THINK THERE'S TWO SORTS OF COMPETING THINGS THAT WE OFTEN CONSIDERATIONS WE SAW AT CLUB.

ON ONE HAND, THERE'S SOMETIMES IN IDEAL PLACE TYPE WITH USES THAT WE THINK ARE IDEAL FOR THE AREA, BUT MAYBE A NUMBER OF FACTORS HAVE THE TRANSITION TO THOSE IDEAL USES RELATIVELY FAR OFF INTO THE FUTURE.

WHEREAS THERE MAY BE A PLACE TYPE THAT IS STILL ACCEPTABLE, BUT MAYBE NOT AS IDEAL, BUT THAT PLACE TYPE MAY GENERATE THE TRANSITION QUICKER.

SO I KNOW COMMISSIONER BLAIR MENTIONED SOME, YOU KNOW, TOM THUMB AND OTHER THINGS COMING INTO THE AREA.

I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHERE THAT GOES, BUT CAN YOU SPEAK TO SORT OF BALANCING THOSE TWO COMPETING TENSIONS OF MOVING AWAY FROM DISTRIBUTION USES AND WHETHER WE GET THERE FASTER WITH FLEX COMMERCIAL OR COMMUNITY MIXED USE NOW? GREAT QUESTION.

SO IN TERMS OF WHERE THE TO THUMB WOULD BE, THAT'S THE RED BIRD SHOPPING MALL, UH, WHICH IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF, UH, 67, UH, BASICALLY WHERE MY MOUSE IS KIND OF HOVERING AROUND.

SO IT'S NOT IN THIS PARTICULAR MAP.

I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S ON MY OTHER MAP.

OH YEAH.

SO, UH, WHERE MY CURSOR IS, IT WOULD BE IN THIS AREA.

UH, SO GOING TO WHAT COMMISSIONER BLAIR MENTIONED ALONG 20, THE COMMUNITY HAS SAID, YOU KNOW, THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT CORRIDOR IS MORE MIXED USE IN NATURE, UM, AS THEY GO, AS THAT AREA STARTS TO DEVELOP AND BECOME MORE MIXED USE IN NATURE, THEY WANNA ALSO HAVE A BUFFER FROM, YOU KNOW, THOSE USES THOSE, UH, MIXED USES, COMMERCIAL USES FROM THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND THEN ALSO TOO, LIKE COMMISSIONER BEAR MENTIONED HAVING A BUFFER, UM, FROM THOSE CURRENT LOGISTICS, UM, TYPES OF USES IN THE AREA.

SO I THINK AS, UH, 67 AND 20 TRANSFORMS MORE INTO A MIXED USE AREA.

UH, TWO WAYS TO LOOKING ABOUT IT.

SO IF WE WANTED TO HAVE THAT LARGER REGION IN MY MOUSE BE JUST MIXED USE IN NATURE, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD DEFINITELY LOOK INTO.

I THINK ALL WE WANT TO DO IS JUST THINK ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS FROM THE OTHER COMPONENT.

THE OTHER CITIES THAT ARE, ARE ADJACENT TO US.

SO, UM, DESOTO AND

[02:35:01]

LANCASTER, THEIR VISION IS TO KEEP THAT AS BEING, UM, LOGISTICS.

AS WE LOOK INTO THEIR, THEIR COMP PLAN AND THEIR LAND USES, THOSE USES AREN'T GONNA CHANGE.

SO WHAT WE WANNA DO IS JUST MAKE SURE THAT AS THE CITY'S COMPONENT, UH, IF IT, IF IT GOES, IF IT DOES TRANSITION TO COMMUNITY MIXED USE, UM, JUST THINKING ABOUT WHAT THAT AREA COULD HAVE TRANSFORMED TO IF DESOTO CONTINUES, WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

SO IF IT STAYS COMMUNITY, IF IT STAYS FLEX, UH, COMMERCIAL, AGAIN, IT INDICATES THERE THERE'S TRANSITION, UM, IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO AS A CITY.

BUT THERE'S STILL SOME, THERE'S STILL SOME COMPATIBILITY WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH DESOTO WITH WHAT YOU SAID IN TERMS OF WHAT'S THE QUICKEST WAY TO KIND OF GET THINGS STARTED.

UM, I COULDN'T TELL YOU DIRECTLY.

UM, BUT I THINK IF WE WANTED TO, UH, INDICATE KIND OF LOUD LOUDER THAT WE WANTED TO FOCUS ON THAT HARDER TRANSITION TO JUST MIXED USE IN GENERAL, I THINK APPLYING THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE COULD BE THAT INDICATOR ON THE MAP.

SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT, UM, I'LL SUGGEST OR SAY BASED ON YOUR QUESTION.

UM, IN, IN RESPONSE TO, UM, VICE P VICE CHAIR, THAT AREA IS ALSO HEAVILY, UM, MEDICAL, UM, THE ONLY HOSPITAL THAT SERVES THE WHOLE ENTIRE WELL.

THERE'S CHAR, THERE'S METHODIST, THAT IS THE NORTH SOUTHERN SECTOR, AND THEN THERE'S CHARLTON METHODIST, WHICH IS IN DISTRICT EIGHT.

AND WITHIN THIS, THIS PATHWAY, THE NEED TO TRANSITION FROM AWAY FROM HEAVY, UM, LOGISTICS TYPE OF USE IS EVIDENT WHEN YOU SEE, UM, EMERGENCY VEHICLES HAVING TO GO AROUND, FIND ALTERNATE ROUTES IN ORDER TO GET TO THE, THE MOST, TO THE, TO THE HOSPITAL.

WHEN YOU SEE HOSPI, UM, EMERGENCY VEHICLES FROM DESOTO, UM, CEDAR HILL, DUNCANVILLE, TRYING TO ACCESS THAT, THAT PATHWAY, AND THEY CAN'T GET THERE.

SO WHAT WE HAVE, WHAT HAS BEEN ALSO SEEN HAPPENING IS IF YOU'RE ASKING WHAT TYPE OF YOUTH TO TRANSITION FROM, IF YOU DON'T DO, UH, UH, MIXED USE WHERE YOU HAVE SOME TYPE OF, UM, UH, COMMERCIAL FIRST FLOOR AND RESIDENTIAL, UH, UP, YOU WOULD TRANS, THE, THE NATURAL TRANSITION WOULD BE TO, UM, ANYTHING THAT IS MEDICAL SUPPORTING, UM, MEDICAL OFFICES, MEDICAL SUPPORT SYSTEMS, UM, THAT WOULD BE AN EXCELLENT USE TO TRANSITION, UM, FROM WAREHOUSING AND TO, AND IT WOULD ALSO BE MORE SUPPORTIVE OF, UH, CHARLTON METHODIST.

I MEAN, IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER, UM, ABOUT THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO, UH, CHARLTON METHODIST HAD A, A ZONING CHANGE COME BEFORE US BECAUSE THEY COMPLETELY ENLARGED THEIR, MET THEIR, THEIR, UM, EMERGENCY ROOM AND THEY BROUGHT IN MORE SERVICES.

AND THOSE SERVICES WAS BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH THAT THEY NEEDED IN THEIR EMERGENCY SERVICES BECAUSE OF THE NEED FOR THAT WAS SUPPORTING THE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES AS WELL AS DALLAS.

UM, DESOTO ALSO IS KIND OF TRANSITIONING IN THAT CORRIDOR AWAY FROM, UM, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.

IF YOU GO JUST SOUTH NEAR BETWEEN DANIEL DILL AND WINTERGREEN, WHICH DANIEL DILL IS OUR BORDERLINE.

THE, THE NORTH SIDE OF DANIELDALE IS DISTRICT EIGHT, THE SOUTH SIDE OF DANIELDALE IS DESOTO.

AND WHEN YOU GET BET BETWEEN DESOTO AND, UM, I MEAN WHEN DESOTO STARTS IN WINTERGREEN, THERE IS A, A, A NICE NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT IS HAPPENING.

SO DESOTO IN THAT AREA IS ALSO, IT SEEMS TO BE TRANSITIONING AWAY FROM HEAVY INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING INTO SOMETHING LESS INTENSE.

SO THAT'S JUST ANOTHER THOUGHT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT.

I CAN ADD SOME CONTEXT TO THAT TOO AS WELL.

JUST SO ON, ON THE MAP, WHEN WE MENTIONED CHARLTON, THE MEDICAL CENTER, YOU MENTIONED WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE REDBIRD ACTUALLY, UM, UH, PARKLAND AND MORE MEDICAL FACILITIES ARE HAPPENING ALONG THERE AND ALSO ALONG WHEATLAND.

UM, THOSE ARE ALSO MEDICAL

[02:40:01]

SUPPORTING USES.

GOING BACK TO WHAT'S HAPPENING IN DESOTO AS THEY'RE DEVELOPING THEIR COMP PLAN.

UM, HAMPTON IS A KEY CORRIDOR, UH, FOR THEM IN TERMS OF MIXED USE.

UH, SO AS YOU GO FROM DESOTOS HAMPTON TO DALLAS, UM, IN TERMS OF BEING MAYBE BEING A CORRIDOR OR A GATEWAY INTO THE CITY, THAT COULD BE MAYBE MORE MIXED USE IN NATURE.

UH, SO RIGHT NOW IT IS PREDOMINANTLY DISTRIBUTION.

SO IN TERMS OF WHAT THAT CONNECTION LOOKS LIKE, UM, I THINK IF THE SUGGESTION FROM COMMISSIONER BLAIR, IT WAS TO BE MORE MIXED USE, THAT COULD TIE INTO SOME OF THE, UH, FUTURE IDEAS THAT DO SOTO HAS, ALTHOUGH A LOT OF THEIR MIXED USE IS FURTHER SOUTH, CLOSER TO THEIR CITY CENTER, UM, THERE ARE STILL LOOKING AT MIXES OF USES, BUT THE PREDOMINANT USE WOULD BE, UM, LOGISTICS ON THEIR SIDE, COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT, FOLLOW BY COMMISSIONER HOUSE.

WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPLICATIONS OF A CHANGE LIKE THIS ON THE EXISTING DISTRIBUTION CENTERS THAT ARE IN THIS AREA? CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? SORRY.

WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPLICATIONS OF, OF, OF CHANGING THIS ON THE EXISTING BUSINESSES? THE DI DISTRIBUTION CENTERS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE? SO THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY IMPLICATIONS.

THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY ZONING CHANGES IN THIS AREA.

SO IN TERMS OF JUST INDICATING KIND OF THE FUTURE, UM, VISION THAT THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO GO IN THIS AREA, IT WOULD BE MORE JUST INDICATING THAT IF THEY WERE TO REZONE OR REDEVELOP, UH, THAT THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF DEVELOP A MORE MIXED USE.

UM, AND THEN ANYTHING THAT'S, UH, INDUSTRIAL NATURE WOULD BE MORE SUPPORTING VERSUS PRIMARY.

SO LAWRENCE, YOU, YOU SPOKE VERY QUICKLY WHEN YOU ANSWERED THAT.

I'M SORRY, YOU SAID THERE WOULD BE NO ZONING CHANGES AS A RESULT OF THIS, CORRECT? CORRECT.

COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT, PLEASE IF YOU HAVE FOLLOW UP.

BUT IT DOES MEAN THAT IF THERE, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, A BUSINESS CLOSES OR WHATEVER, AND, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, AND THEY WANTED TO REOPEN AS A DISTRIBUTION CENTER, THAT BECAUSE IT WOULD, IF WE CHANGE THIS TO COMMUNITY MIXED USE, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN THAT WAY OR TO GET A, A APPROVAL FOR A ZONING CASE.

SO I, I CAN FOR SOME CLARITY.

SO THIS WOULDN'T CHANGE THE ZONING SO THEY COULD CONTINUE WITH THAT USE, UH, UNLESS THEY DECIDED TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO SOMETHING ELSE.

SO AS LONG AS THE ZONING REMAINED WHAT IT IS, IT'LL CONTINUE REMAINING THAT IN PERPETUATE PERPETUITY UNLESS THEY DECIDE TO DO A REZONING.

AND THAT REZONING WOULD REFERENCE WHAT THE CURRENT VISION IS IN TERMS OF WHAT SHOULD THAT CHANGE SHOULD BE.

AND COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT BRINGS UP A, A CRITICAL POINT AND ONE THAT WE HEAR FREQUENTLY ABOUT WHAT THIS PLAN IS AND WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO.

AND SO I'M, I'M HOPING YOU CAN DRILL DOWN A LITTLE BIT, AND YOU, AGAIN, YOU SAID THIS WOULD NOT CHANGE THE ZONING A HUNDRED PERCENT.

UH, AND IN FACT, UH, A BUSINESS WHERE THE, THE COLOR ON THIS CHART, ON THIS MAT MAY CHANGE UNDERNEATH THEM, RIGHT.

CAN CONTINUE IN PERPETUITY.

AND CAN RECEIVE A CO RIGHT.

CAN CLOSE DOWN AND CAN OPEN UP 10 YEARS LATER RIGHT.

AND STILL RECEIVE A CO RIGHT.

REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE COLOR IS HERE ON THIS MAP.

RIGHT? RIGHT.

AND ALSO TOO, TO ADD TO THAT, AS ZONING CHANGES COME INTO THE CITY, WE'LL BE REVIEWING THOSE ZONING CHANGES, WHAT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP INDICATES.

AND THAT MIGHT, UH, HAVE US MAYBE UPDATE OR AMEND THE FUTURE PLACE TYPE MAP TO BE MORE REFLECTIVE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING, UH, OR WHERE THE VISION IS FROM THE MARKET TOO.

SO IT'S STILL A LIVING DOCUMENT, BUT YES, A HUNDRED PERCENT THIS WOULDN'T CHANGE ZONING.

UH, THEY COULD CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN TERMS OF WHAT THE ZONING HAS ON THE GROUND UNLESS THEY DECIDED TO CHANGE THEIR ZONING.

AND THEN THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER PROCESS TO COME BEFORE YOU ALL TO REVIEW THIS MAP AND GO THROUGH THAT, UH, DISCUSSION WITH WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN ON THE GROUND.

SAY, I WANT TO BUILD AN APARTMENT BUILDING HERE.

SO IF WE CAN JUST DRILL DOWN A LITTLE BIT ON THAT.

UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK ANOTHER THING THAT I HEAR FREQUENTLY ABOUT THIS PROCESS AND WHAT THIS IS GONNA DO IS HOW IS THIS PLAN GONNA BE USED? WHAT IS IT GOING TO, HOW IS IT GONNA INFORM? AND I KNOW THAT WE, WE HEAR THE WORD FROM YOU GUYS, IT'S A SUGGESTION, UH, AND EXACTLY.

WALK ME THROUGH HOW THIS DOCUMENT IS GOING TO BE USED BY STAFF, BY FUTURE PLAN COMMISSION AND BY FUTURE CITY COUNCIL.

SO RIGHT NOW, UH, THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED IR.

UM, IT HAS SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS, BUT IT WOULD BASICALLY JUST THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS, JUST SAY IT SHOULD BE INDUSTRIAL LAND USES.

SO IF YOU HAVE A WAREHOUSE AND YOU'RE OPERATING YOUR WAREHOUSE, YOU CAN KEEP OPERATING YOUR WAREHOUSE.

IT CAN GO AWAY FOR, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN SHUT IT DOWN FOR 10 YEARS.

THE ZONING IS STILL THERE.

YOU CAN KEEP OPERATING THAT WAREHOUSE, YOU CAN SELL IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE.

THEY CAN OPERATE A WAREHOUSE AND THEY CAN OPERATE, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD APPLY TO OPERATE DIFFERENT TYPE OF, UM, LIGHTER INDUSTRIAL LAND USES.

THAT'S THEIR ENTITLEMENTS THEY HAVE RIGHT NOW.

THIS DOES NOT CHANGE ANY OF THAT.

NOW, LET'S SAY SOMEONE BUYS THAT PROPERTY AND THEY

[02:45:01]

IF WE HAVE THIS AS A LOGISTICAL PLACE TYPE, WE WOULD TAKE A LOOK AND SAY, NO, THIS IS NOT A PLACE FOR APARTMENTS.

THIS IS A PLACE FOR MORE WAREHOUSES IN A LOGISTICAL CENTER.

SO THAT'S THE VISION FOR THIS AREA.

STAFF WOULD NOT, WOULD USE IT AS A VISION TO SAY WE'RE TAKING THAT IN.

THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.

THAT'S NOT ALL OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, BUT THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, WHERE WE MIGHT RECOMMEND DENIAL FOR THAT.

THAT WOULD THEN ALSO BE WHAT PART OF WHAT CPC AND COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO SAY.

WHAT'S THE VISION? THE VISION IS A LOGISTICAL CENTER.

OKAY, AN APARTMENT DOESN'T MATCH THAT VISION.

AGAIN, IT COULD CHANGE BECAUSE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT FACTORS.

IT DOESN'T SAY IT HAS TO BE A LOGISTICS CENTER.

IT CAN SAY IT, IT SHOULD BE THAT THERE ARE OTHER FACTORS YOU CAN TAKE IN.

IF WE CALL THIS A MIXED USE AREA AND SOMEONE SAYS, I WANT TO BUILD AN APARTMENT BUILDING HERE, IT WOULD BE THAT VISION TO SAY THAT DOES ALIGN WITH WHAT THAT VISION IS.

THIS DOES, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ONE OF THE FACTORS THAT WE CAN TAKE A LOOK IN TO SAY WE ARE GONNA RECOMMEND APPROVAL BECAUSE THE VISION IS FOR A MIXED USE AREA, NOT A LOGISTICAL CENTER.

UM, AND AGAIN, BECAUSE WE WILL SAY THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN, IT DOES NOT CHANGE YOUR ENTITLEMENTS.

IT DOESN'T CHANGE WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO.

IT DOES NOT CHANGE YOUR ZONING, BUT IT INFORMS ANY FUTURE ZONING CHANGES.

IT DOESN'T SAY IT HAS TO BE CERTAIN ZONING.

IT JUST IS ONE THING THAT CAN HELP INFORM THOSE DECISIONS ABOUT FUTURE ZONING CHANGES.

IT IT, AS YOU SAID, IT WOULD BE AN INFORMED RECOMMENDATION FOR A ZONING CASE AS IT COMES IN.

AND THEN THIS BODY WOULD DO WHAT IT DOES, WHICH IS TO DIG DOWN AND GO INTO, YOU KNOW, THE DETAILS OF THE SITE, THE AREAS OF TRANSITIONING, ALL, ALL THE, YOU KNOW, THE 30 FACTORS THAT WE ALL CONSIDER IN EACH ZONING CASE.

AND ONE OF THEM WOULD BE THIS, THIS MAP WITH ITS QUOTE, YOU KNOW, ITS SUGGESTION.

AND AS WE SEE HERE EVERY TWO WEEKS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME ZONING CASES THAT ALIGN WITH THE VISION THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT A WORKING GROUP COME UP WITH.

SO TIME AGO, SOMETIMES THAT VISION IS A YEAR OLD, SOMETIMES IT'S 20 YEARS OLD.

AND SOMETIMES WE FOLLOW THAT RECOMMENDATION AND MANY, MANY, MANY TIMES WE DON'T BECAUSE THAT, THAT RECOMMENDATION DOESN'T ALIGN WITH, ALIGN WITH THE FACTS ON THE GROUND.

IS THAT FAIR? YES.

CHAIR.

UH, 100%.

UM, YOU MAY TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND SAY, WHILE WE, YOU KNOW, LET'S, LET'S SAY IT'S THE FLEX COMMERCIAL, AND YOU SAY, OKAY, WELL FLEX COMMERCIAL DOES ALLOW WAREHOUSE, BUT I'M PROPOSING A HALF A MILLION SQUARE FOOT WAREHOUSE.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THE FLEX COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AT VERSUS, OH, WELL IT'S A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT WAREHOUSE.

OKAY, THAT ALIGNS, I'M LOOKING AT THIS, I'M USING THE MAP AS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'M TAKING UNDER CONSIDERATION, BUT AS A CHAIR POINTED OUT, IT'S NOT THE ONLY THING YOU WOULD BE TAKING A LOOK AT.

YOU'D BE TAKING A LOOK AT FACTS ON THE GROUND, UM, YOU KNOW, YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE AREA, YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE MARKET, YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS, UM, YOU KNOW, THEIR INPUT AND WHAT THEY'RE TELLING YOU AS WELL.

THANK YOU SIR.

COMMISSIONER HOUSE.

THEN LET ME JUST ASK YOU MAYBE A LITTLE BIT HARDER QUESTION ABOUT OUR PROCESS.

BUT JUST TO HELP ME, PARDON ME, PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND THOUGH IF, UH, IT IS, UM, THE PLACE TYPE IS TO BE COMMUNITY MIXED FOR USE, AND WHAT'S THERE NOW IS DISTRIBUTION CENTERS AND WAREHOUSES, THEN TECHNICALLY THAT, THAT'S A NON-CONFORMING LAND USE FOR.

SO THAT GETS BACK TO ZONING.

THE NON-CONFORMITY IS THE ZONING.

AND, UH, THIS DOCUMENT DOESN'T CHANGE THE ZONING.

SO IT DOESN'T MAKE THOSE NON-CONFORMING LAND USES.

THEY'RE STILL, 'CAUSE THERE'S NO, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE LAW, THE ZONING FOR THOSE.

UM, YES, IF THIS DOES CHANGE TO A COMMUNITY, MAKES USE OF SAYING IT SHOULD PROGRESS TO SOMETHING THAT'S MORE THAN JUST THOSE WAREHOUSES.

THAT'S NOT, THOSE WAREHOUSES DOESN'T SAY THAT.

IT HAS TO, DOESN'T SAY THAT THEY'RE NON-CONFORMING.

JUST THAT THE FUTURE VISION IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S ON THE GROUND.

COMMISSIONER HOUSER, UM, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS OR A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.

UM, I COMPLETELY RESPECT THE VISION THAT COMMISSIONER BLAIR IS ARTICULATING.

I UNDERSTAND.

I THINK THE ISSUES THAT SHE'S ARTICULATING IN HER COMMUNITY, UM, I, I'LL I'LL JUST SAY THAT WE, WE CAN DO THAT ON THIS PLACE MAP AS, AS SHE SUGGESTS.

AND I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT WE WILL LIKELY STILL GET ZONING CASES FROM PEOPLE COMING IN, THE DISTRIBUTION CENTER, WAREHOUSE DEVELOPERS COMING IN BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA BID UP THE LAND VALUES BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY THINK THIS LAND IS BECAUSE OF THE MACRO ECONOMIC AND, AND TRANSPORTATION, UH, UH, FACTORS THAT IMPINGE UPON THIS AREA.

AND SO THIS KIND OF GOES TO A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT WE DID LAST TIME ON THE BACHMAN LAKE AREA.

IT'S FINE FOR US TO SAY OUR VISION IS IS SOMETHING SLIGHTLY LESS INTENSE THAN WHAT'S THERE TODAY.

WE JUST HAVE TO REALIZE THAT THAT IS A UPHILL BATTLE, UM, IN THAT THERE'S, THERE'S AN ECONOMIC UNDERPINNING TO SO MUCH OF WHAT WE DO HERE.

AND, AND I'M NOT CRITICIZING THOSE VISIONS.

I JUST WANT US TO BE VERY AWARE THAT, THAT THOSE, SOME OF THOSE VISIONS WILL NOT BE ACHIEVABLE.

AND THEN LET ME, YOU DON'T NEED TO COMMENT ON THAT.

I, AND

[02:50:01]

UM, IMPORTANT DISTRICT, IMPORTANT ISSUE.

I'M SURE EVERYONE ON THIS HORSESHOE COULD SPEND TWO HOURS ON OUR DISTRICT.

SO WHY THIS DISTRICT? WHY THIS CASE? WHY NOW? WHAT ARE, WHAT, HOW DOES THIS, WHY ARE WE DOING THIS RIGHT NOW? RIGHT.

SO I THINK GOOD QUESTION.

SO AS WE ARE GETTING FEEDBACK FROM EACH OF YOU ALL, ONE-ON-ONES, UH, ALSO THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND JUST OTHER FACTORS, UH, WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS JUST BRING UP CERTAIN AREAS THAT BASICALLY WHAT YOU SAID THERE IS, THERE'S CERTAIN AREAS THAT IF WE WERE TO CHANGE OR MOVE TOWARD A PARTICULAR DIRECTION FROM A PLACE TYPE CHANGE, TWO THINGS COULD OCCUR.

ONE, IF IT'S DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT'S ON THE GROUND, UM, THINKING THROUGH THE NEXT STEP OF THAT WOULD EITHER BE SOME KIND OF ZONING CHANGE, AUTHORIZED HEARING, UH, THAT THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.

IF NOT, WHAT WE WANNA DO IS MAKE SURE THAT THE PLACE TYPES THAT WE HAVE HERE JUST DON'T THEY MEAN SOMETHING.

TH COULDN CAN'T YOU BUNDLE THESE AND ORGANIZE THIS, THIS ONE-OFF KIND OF TH THIS IS NOT, NOT A GOOD USE OF THE COMMISSION'S TIME IN MY, IN MY OPINION.

I, I DON'T, I THINK OPENING UP A CASE LIKE THIS, THIS SMALL, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ENTIRE CITY, YOU'RE NOT USING OUR TIME WELL.

SO I THINK WE'RE ALL GETTING, WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE WEARY OF IT.

JUST TO CLARIFY TOO, SO WITHIN THIS ENTIRE CITY, THERE ARE ONLY, THERE ARE FEW AREAS THAT WE JUST NEED SOME CLARIFICATION FROM.

SO THAT'S, THAT'S ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR IS JUST THAT FEEDBACK.

UH, IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT APPROACH, THERE'S A LOT OF AREAS WE NEED, THERE'S A BUNCH OF AREAS WE NEED CLARIFICATION ON.

SO WHY THIS ONE, WHY NOW JUST MENTIONED STAFF HAD SOME THOUGHTS VERSUS WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY AND WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE CBC MEMBER.

JUST WANTED TO GET MORE FEEDBACK FROM THE BODY.

WELL, I THINK YOU NEED TO BE TALKING TO THE, TO THE CHAIR, THE COMMISSION AND OTHERS ABOUT OUR AGENDA ON THESE TIMES BECAUSE WE HAVE OUR TIME IS VALUABLE AND I DON'T THINK IT'S BEING RESPECTED IN THESE BRIEFINGS.

DEFINITELY.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER IRV.

SO WE, WE HOPPED INTO THESE, THESE KEY UPDATES.

I GUESS AT THE BEGINNING OF LAST MEETING, AT THE BEGINNING OF THAT WE, THERE WAS A LIST OF MAYBE 15 AREAS THAT ARE PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE THAT ARE WORTHY OF THAT, THAT CITY STAFF THINKS ARE WORTHY OF ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION, RIGHT? SO THEY'RE ARE HANDFUL OF MAYBE NOT AREAS THAT ARE, ARE WERE FOR DISCUSSION.

I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THEM THAT WE WANTED TO COME.

AND WE'RE NOT GOING THROUGH EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE HERE, ARE WE? NO, WE'RE NOT.

THERE'S JUST A FEW THAT WE WANTED TO TALK, TALK ABOUT THREE TON OF TOTAL.

THIS IS THE SECOND ONE.

UM, BUT JUST WANTED TO TALK THROUGH SOME OF THOSE ISSUES THAT WE HAD INTERNALLY WITH YOU.

AND THAT'S, THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE SORT OF ILLUSTRATIVE OF SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE AS, AS CITY STAFF.

AND PART OF THE REASON FOR HOPPING INTO THESE TWO TO THREE IS TO SORT OF HIGHLIGHT THE TRADE OFFS SO CITY STAFF CAN HAVE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COMMISSIONERS INDIVIDUALLY OUTSIDE THE HORSESHOE.

TO DEAL WITH THAT SORT OF FINE TUNING.

SO WE'RE NOT TRYING TO SPEND AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME ON THIS.

WE'RE TRYING TO SORT OF GO THROUGH THE EXERCISE SO EVERY MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION CAN UNDERSTAND SOME OF THESE TENSIONS THAT WE FEEL.

SO THESE CONVERSATIONS LATER ON CAN BE REALLY WELL INFORMED.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, FILE THAT.

COMMISSIONER SLEEPER.

YOU MAY NOT KNOW THAT MUCH ABOUT, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET VERY MEANINGFUL INSIGHT FROM ME ON THAT.

I, I THINK I RESPECTFULLY WANNA ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER HOUSER IS SAYING.

IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO POP INTO THESE DISCUSSIONS.

WE GET AN AGENDA THAT SAYS FORWARD DALLAS BRIEFING.

IT DOESN'T REALLY SAY ANYTHING ELSE.

IT DOESN'T SAY WITH REGARD TO THESE AREAS, WE DON'T GET THIS HANDOUT REALLY IN ENOUGH TIME TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT.

SO WE'RE JUST SITTING HERE EATING LUNCH AROUND THE HORSESHOE, TALKING ABOUT NO DISRESPECT, REDBIRD, WHICH I PERSONALLY DON'T KNOW ABOUT ENOUGH ABOUT TO GIVE YOU THAT MUCH INPUT.

AND I DIDN'T GET ENOUGH FAIR NOTICE TO EDUCATE MYSELF ABOUT IT AHEAD OF TIME.

SO I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE WASTING MY TIME IF YOU WANT MEANINGFUL IMPACT FROM THE ENTIRE COMMISSION.

I NEED AN AGENDA.

I NEED THE MATERIALS AND ENOUGH TIME TO LOOK AT IT.

I'VE BEEN TO PUBLIC MEETINGS OR, OR PRIVATE MEETINGS ON FORWARD DALLAS EVERY NIGHT THIS WEEK.

I'VE GOTTEN HOME AT 11 OR 12 EVERY NIGHT THIS WEEK.

AND NOW I'M HERE.

AND NOW WE'RE EXPECTED TO COME TO A NUMBER OF PUBLICLY CALLED MEETINGS ON THIS.

I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE AT THOSE SAME MEETINGS AND THAT YOU'RE WORKING HARD AS WELL.

BUT IF WE'RE GONNA GET THROUGH THIS AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE EDUCATED DISCUSSIONS, HEY, SURPRISE, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SOME PART OF THE CITY YOU MAY NOT BE ALL THAT FAMILIAR WITH AND SOME NUANCED DISCUSSION.

[02:55:01]

AND I'M PROBABLY NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT FEELS THAT WAY.

SO IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE ACTUAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT FORWARD DALLAS AN HOUR HERE OR AN HOUR, THERE IS NOT, I THINK A GOOD USE OF OUR TIME.

IF YOU WANNA SAY, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE DOING, HERE'S THE NEXT THING.

HERE'S WHAT WE WANNA TALK ABOUT ON THE 11TH.

HERE'S WHEN YOU CAN EXPECT AN UPDATED MAP.

HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT IN TERMS OF THE TOPICS WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS.

THAT'S HELPFUL.

BUT HERE'S A SPECIFIC THING WE WANNA TALK ABOUT TODAY.

AND YOU'RE HEARING ABOUT IT FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY.

I, I DON'T FIND THAT HELPFUL AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH HELP WE CAN PROVIDE YOU.

THAT'S, IF THAT FEEDBACK'S HELPFUL TO YOU, GREAT.

IF NOT, I'LL GO BACK TO WHAT I WAS DOING.

NO, THANK YOU.

I THINK IT'S A, IT'S A FAIR POINT, MS. GILLIS.

I, I THINK THE FEEDBACK, SO ANDREA GIL IS PLANNING AN URBAN DESIGN.

I THINK THE FEEDBACK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IS WHAT DOES THIS BODY NEED? WE ARE TRYING TO PIECE TOGETHER, WE HEAR DIFFERENT THINGS.

WE HEAR ONE INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER THAT'S CLEARLY FRUSTRATED.

UM, BUT THEN WE HAVE MEETINGS WHERE Y'ALL SAY, OKAY, COME BACK TO US DURING OUR LUNCH AND GIVE US A BRIEFING WHEN WE CAN FIT CERTAIN THINGS IN.

WHAT DO YOU ALL NEED? I THINK AT THE BODY, YOU ALL TELL US HOW YOU WANT THIS TO MOVE FORWARD, WHAT IS MOST EFFECTIVE FOR YOU.

AND WE WILL DO THAT.

SO AT THIS POINT, IT'S NOT HELPFUL FOR US TO HEAR THAT WE'RE WASTING YOUR TIME.

WE DON'T WANNA BE WASTING YOUR TIME.

SO I THINK THE BODY NEEDS TO DECIDE AND LET US KNOW HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO US TO PROCEED.

WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE US TO COME, WE CAN COME WITH A FULL PACKAGE OF THIS IS WHAT WE RECOMMEND MOVING FORWARD.

WE'VE TRIED TO DO THAT.

WE'VE GOTTEN SOME FEEDBACK THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT.

WE'RE HERE, WE FIT IN AN HOUR BECAUSE YOU SAID YOU NEEDED TO, YOU WANTED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME TIME TO, TO DEAL WITH SOME OF THE SMALLER THINGS.

SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS YOU HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT FROM US, WHAT THE TIMING IS AND HOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT AND DECIDE AS A BODY COLLECTIVELY MM-HMM, SO THAT WE CAN RESPOND ACCORDINGLY.

THANK YOU MS. GIL.

I, I THINK, UH, THE COMMISSION AND THE COMMISSIONERS BRING A FAIR POINT.

UH, WE, THIS IS A LOT TO CONSIDER.

IT'S COMPLICATED, IT'S BIG.

AND I THINK TO GET INPUT FROM US, WE MAYBE NEED A LITTLE BIT OF A HEADS UP AS TO THE DETAIL OF WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE DISCUSSING.

AND I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES IT'S DIFFICULT FOR YOU.

YOU DIDN'T KNOW TODAY IF YOU WERE GONNA HAVE 10 MINUTES OR AN HOUR.

IN FACT, WE JUST DECIDED RIGHT BEFORE LUNCH, WE, I HONESTLY THOUGHT YOU WERE PROBABLY GONNA GET 20 MINUTES.

IT ENDED UP THAT YOU GOT AN HOUR.

SO YOU DO HAVE TO IMPROVISE A LITTLE BIT.

BUT I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HOUSE RIGHT, ARE ARE ON POINT WHERE THE INPUT FROM US, YOU KNOW, WE, WE NEED A LITTLE BIT OF HEADS UP.

I, I KNOW I DO.

'CAUSE I I NEED TO DO MY HOMEWORK AND, AND READ AND THINK ABOUT IT.

UH, AND SO MAYBE ESPECIALLY FOR OUR MEETING NEXT THURSDAY, LET'S HAVE A DETAILED AGENDA.

EXACTLY WHAT WE HOPE TO, TO GET TO, WHAT WE WANT TO CONSIDER AND WHAT WE WANNA TALK ABOUT.

UM, WE'RE RUNNING A LITTLE BIT SHORT ON TIME COMMISSIONERS.

I THINK WE HAVE COMMISSIONER SLEEPER.

WELL, I KNOW WE'RE RUNNING SHORT ON TIME AND, AND I HOPE YOU'LL FORGIVE ME IF I'M REHASHING GROUND THAT I HASHED LAST WEEK.

BUT, UM, JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, WE, WE TALKED ABOUT LAST WEEK OR I, I TALKED TO YOU TWO INDIVIDUALLY ABOUT, ABOUT AN AREA THAT YOU SAW ON YOUR MAP TO BE COMMUNITY MIXED USE, WHICH IS A FAIRLY LOW DENSITY ZONING EVEN COMPARED TO WHAT'S ON THE GROUND TODAY.

AND IF YOU ADD ON WHAT'S BEEN APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION, IT, IT, IT'S A MUCH HIGHER ZONING CATEGORY, MUCH MORE DENSE ZONING CATEGORY THAN THIS CATEGORY.

SO I I, I GUESS THE THING THAT IT MADE ME REALIZE IS IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO INTERACT WITH YOU GUYS NOW SO THAT WE GET THAT, UH, COLORED THE RIGHT WAY ON THE MAP OR FUTURE LAND USE IS GONNA BE A REAL DIFFICULT PROBLEM IF WE ARE ABLE TO FOLLOW THROUGH ON THE MUCH MORE DENSE ZONING THAN WE HAD IN MIND.

SO I GUESS WHAT THAT'S SAYING IN A LONG WAY IS I, I I I, I HAVE A FEELING I, THE FEELING I HAD BEFORE WAS THIS MAP WAS A, WAS A GENERAL, UM, INDICATION OF WHERE THE PLAN MIGHT GO.

BUT I NEVER, I NEVER REALLY FELT LIKE IF, IF, IF THIS MAP WAS NOT COLORED THE WAY I THINK IT SHOULD BE OR THE, THE WAY

[03:00:01]

I, THAT ALIGNS WITH MY FUTURE PLANS, THAT I REALLY BETTER START THE BATTLE EARLIER AND TALK WITH YOU GUYS AND MAKE SURE THAT IT HAS THE RIGHT, UH, NOMENCLATURE ON THERE ARE OTHERWISE, BUT I GO TO DO WHAT I'M WAS ORIGINALLY PLANNING ON DOING.

I MAY HAVE A VERY TOUGH TIME DOING THAT.

SO IT, IT, I YOU'RE NODDING YOUR HEAD, WHICH I'M, WHICH I'M GATHERING IS AN AFFIRMATION IF, IF THAT'S CORRECT, I JUST THINK IT, IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE THAT ARE IN OUR DISTRICTS UNDERSTAND THAT AND UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT HOW THIS MAP GETS DRAWN OR YOU MAY FIND IT DIFFICULT TO DO WHAT YOU WANNA DO IN THE FUTURE.

COMMISSIONER HERBERT, COMMISSIONER, WERE THERE.

AND JUST TO KIND OF STEP BACK IN TERMS OF THE ASK FROM STAFF, UH, IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS, AND WE'VE REQUESTED, YOU KNOW, ONE-ON-ONES WITH EACH OF YOU ALL TO TALK THROUGH YOUR DISTRICT, THE PLACE TYPE MAP AND KIND OF WHAT YOU SEE THERE.

WHAT WE WANT TO DO TOO, AS WE HAVE THESE MEETINGS, IS CONNECT THE DOTS IN TERMS OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING WITH EACH OF YOU ALL.

INSTEAD OF HAVING ONE OFF CONVERSATIONS, CREATE A PLAY STOP MAP THAT HAS SOMETHING THAT Y'ALL HAVE NEVER SEEN, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE SEEING WHAT'S HAPPENING, UH, WITH THE ENTIRETY OF THE, THE FEEDBACK WITH EACH OF YOU ALL.

SO AS WE CONTINUE THOSE DISCUSSIONS TO TALK ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN YOUR DISTRICT, UH, IF SOME, IF THERE'S SOME ISSUE ERRORS THAT COME UP THAT COULD GET MORE FEEDBACK OR MORE, UH, INPUT FROM THE BODY, THAT'S WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE AND HAPPEN AND HAVE HAPPEN.

SO THAT, THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF KIND OF COMING HERE, COMING HERE.

BUT I THINK WHAT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, UM, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT MENTIONED, I THINK WE CAN DO A BETTER JOB OF KIND OF CRAFTING IT, UH, TO HELP YOU ALL GET THAT INPUT FOR US.

THE PREVIOUS BODY THAT WE WERE WITHIN, UH, THEY, THEY SUGGESTED DOING IT A PARTICULAR SIMILAR WAY.

I THINK THIS ONE NEEDS TO BE TWEAKED A BIT JUST TO PROVIDE YOU ALL WITH ENOUGH TIME, WITH ENOUGH AMMUNITION AND KNOWLEDGE, UH, TO GIVE UP THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.

I'LL BE QUICK.

UM, FIRST THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP THIS AREA FOR MY DISTRICT, DISTRICT EIGHT, DISTRICT ONE.

A LOT OF US TOUCH THIS ISSUE AND IT'S HUGE FOR OUR COMMUNITY, THE BLACK AND BROWN COMMUNITY.

UM, THE WHOLE FOCUS AROUND THIS PLAN WAS AROUND EQUITY, UM, AND, AND BEING EQUITABLE TO THE PEOPLE WHO WE'VE FORGOTTEN OVER THE YEARS.

THAT'S BEEN A HUGE PART OF OUR PLAN IS THE CITY AS EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYEES, CITIZENS FROM THE MAYOR'S OFFICE TO THE, UM, THE, UH, UM, UM, MANAGER, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

SO I DO THINK THAT THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE AND WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THE INPUT FROM OTHER PEOPLE BECAUSE EMOTIONS ARE REALLY HIGH IN OUR COMMUNITY ABOUT INDUSTRIAL NEXT TO HOUSING.

UM, THIS, THIS AREA STRETCHES ACROSS 20, WHICH IS 50% OF THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.

SO THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS CONVERSATION IS HIGH FOR ME AND THE PEOPLE THAT I DEAL WITH AT MY MEETINGS THAT ARE COMING UP, UM, AS OR OTHER CONVERSATIONS THAT ARE IMPORTANT FOR OTHER PARTS OF THE AREA.

UM, THAT BEING SAID, THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE HELPFUL TO ME TO GO BACK TO MY COMMUNITY IN REGARDS TO THE PLANS THEMSELVES.

I'VE SEEN FIVE LARGE WAREHOUSES GO UP IN MY AREA AND AT EACH CASE A CITIZEN CAME UP AND SAID, THIS IS AGAINST THE SOUTHWEST DALLAS PLAN.

THEY WERE APPROVED ANYWAY.

SO I JUST FIND IT INTERESTING THAT THESE CONVERSATIONS HAPPEN AND THERE'S SO MUCH STRENGTH PUT BEHIND THESE AREA PLANS.

AND THEN THE SOUTHERN SECTORS USES THEIR AREA PLAN AS A TOOL AND THEY'RE STILL REJECTED.

SO AS WE MOVE FORWARD, LET'S KEEP EQUITY IN MIND.

UNDERSTANDING THE AREAS.

YES, I GET IT ALL.

UM, BUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS CONVERSATION IS REALLY HIGH FOR ME AND MY COMMUNITY.

NOT NATIVE TO THEIR COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

COMMISSIONER.

UM, I HAD A PREVIOUS CONVERSATION IN, UM, WITH CITY STAFF, UM, THIS MORNING AND, AND I DID KEEP CITY STAFF PRAISE OF SOME THINGS THAT THAT HAPPENED THIS WEEK THAT I MET WITH THE COMMUNITY GROUP WHO WAS HAVING A HARD TIME WITH PLACE TYPES, UM, WHICH WAS THE CHOPPY COMMUNITY.

AND I TOOK THE TIME TO EXPLAIN SOME THINGS TO THEM AND I, AND I, AND I WORK REALLY WELL WITH CALLING ANDREA AND, AND, AND PATRICK AND TO GET THOSE INFORMATIONS OUT.

I THINK THAT WAS REALLY MISSING IT.

AND I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS TIME CONSUMING THAT WE ALWAYS DON'T HAVE UPDATES.

BUT I ALSO THINK THAT I FOUND OUT THIS MORNING THAT THIS BODY USED TO TAKE TOURS IN THE MORNING AND WE'RE, WE'RE, IF WE CAN TAKE SOME, WE MIGHT NEED TO TAKE SOME TOURS AS A BODY TO THESE DIFFERENT AREAS AND UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S IN, IN HIGH REGARD.

UM, PEOPLE IN, AGAIN, NORTH OF 30 REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT AND WHAT THEY'RE IN SOUTH OF 30.

WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND.

SO IT'S MISCONSTRUED ON WHAT IS BEING ASKED OR WHAT THE PLACE TYPES MIGHT BE.

WHAT, WHAT OUR COMMUNITY CAN AND WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE THEY'VE NEVER PLANNED, THEY'VE, EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE OR FOR THEM HAS BEEN PLANNED BY THE CITY OR FOR SOMEONE THAT IS

[03:05:01]

WHERE WE'RE JUST NOW, WE'RE BEHIND THE BOOK AGAIN, WE KNOW I'M 47 AND I'M IN COLLEGE FOR URBAN PLANNING BECAUSE I NEVER KNEW WHAT AN URBAN PLANNING WAS.

AND SO JUST IMAGINE THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE, ARE, THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS.

SO I UNDER GETTING US INFORMATION EARLIER WILL REALLY HELP.

UM, THE REASON THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE AREAS MAYBE CAN HELP OTHER COMMISSIONERS, UM, UNDERSTAND.

BECAUSE AGAIN, THE COMMUNITY DID NOT POP, DID NOT PLAN.

THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY DID NOT PAY PLAY IN THE DISTRIBUTION AREA, THE INLAND PORT.

THEY HAD NO SAY.

AND IF THEY DID, THEY WOULD'VE BEEN AROUND AND SAYING, THIS IS WHAT WE NEED, THIS IS WHAT WE DON'T WANT.

WE, IS THIS GONNA CAUSE AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE? ANY OF THOSE THINGS.

SO I AGREE HALF, I DO AGREE WITH SOME OF IT THAT YOU DEFINITELY, WE NEED TO GET THAT OUT ON WHAT THOSE BRIEFING IS GONNA LOOK LIKE AND, AND BE INCLUSIVE.

AND WE NEED TO CROSS, WE NEED TO CROSS BORDER LINES BECAUSE THIS BODY AS A WHOLE VOTES ON EVERYTHING, NOT JUST ONE COMMISSIONER.

AND WE NEED TO CROSS SOME BORDERLINES TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT IS ALWAYS IN AND, AND, AND KINDA IN AN UPROAR ABOUT WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE.

SO DO WE NEED TO KNOW, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE ARE VERY UNEDUCATED ON EVEN WHAT FORWARD, FORWARD DALLAS IS.

UM, I, I GET TO HAVE A SPECIAL PLACE BECAUSE FORWARD DALLAS IS WORKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH AREA PLANS.

SO I WAS A CHAIR ON THE AREA PLAN AND HAD GOT TO GET SOME LEARNING FIRSTHAND WITH CITY STAFF.

SO GET THE INFORMATION OUT A LITTLE EASIER.

BUT I DO UNDERSTAND WHY THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE INLAND PORT IS NOT JUST CONTROLLED, UM, BY THE CITY OF DALLAS.

IT'S CONTROLLED BY WILMER, UM, HUTCHINS, DESOTO, UM, DUNCANVILLE LANCASTER.

AND WHEN YOU GO TO CROSSING LINES, DALLAS HAS TO DO THEIR PART ON THAT 25% TO ENSURE THAT THE CITIZEN OF, OF DALLAS IS PROTECTED FIRST AND FOREMOST FROM ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES.

AND THEN WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE BECAUSE IT DO OFFER GREAT JOBS.

UM, BUT WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE AT A COST OF OUR COMMUNITY.

GO AHEAD AND BEGIN THE HEARING NOW.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GENTLEMEN.

UH, COMMISSIONERS THAT, IT'S 1231 AND THAT CONCLUDES THE BRIEFING OF DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.

WE'LL

[CALL TO ORDER ]

GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.

MS. PACINO, CAN YOU PLEASE START US OFF WITH THE ROLL CALL? THANK YOU.

DISTRICT ONE, PRESENT.

DISTRICT TWO PRESENT.

DISTRICT THREE PRESENT.

DISTRICT FOUR, DISTRICT FIVE, DISTRICT SIX PRESENT.

DISTRICT SEVEN PRESENT.

DISTRICT EIGHT.

DISTRICT NINE HERE.

DISTRICT 10, PRESENT DISTRICT 11, VACANT.

DISTRICT 12 PRESENT.

DISTRICT 13 HERE.

DISTRICT 14 HERE AND PLACE 15.

INTO THE DOCKET WITH ITEM NUMBER TWO, ITEM NUMBER TWO

YOU HAVE QUORUM CHAIR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. PINA.

GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

TODAY IS THURSDAY, APRIL 4TH, 2020 4, 12 30 2:00 PM WELCOME TO THE DALLAS CITY PLANE COMMISSION.

HAVE A COUPLE OF VERY QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS BEFORE WE GET STARTED.

UH, OUR SPEAKING GUIDELINES, EACH SPEAKER WILL RECEIVE THREE MINUTES.

UH, MS. PINA WILL KEEP TIME AND WE'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP.

UH, PER OUR RULES ON CASES WHERE THERE IS OPPOSITION, THE APPLICANT WILL GET A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.

UH, THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING.

WE WILL HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ONLINE.

I WILL ASK OUR FOLKS ONLINE TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR CAMERA IS ON AND WORKING.

UH, THE STATE LAW REQUIRES US TO BE ABLE TO SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU.

IF WE CAN'T SEE YOU, WE CAN'T HEAR FROM YOU.

UM, ALSO ASK ALL, UH, SPEAKERS TO PLEASE BEGIN THEIR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

THEN ALSO, JUST ONE QUICK LONG ANNOUNCEMENT.

UH, WE'RE GONNA VERY RESPECTFULLY ASK ALL FOLKS THAT HAVE POWERPOINTS AND PRESENTATIONS, UH, TO PRESENT TO THIS BODY TO SEND THEM, UH, TO MS. PINA AHEAD OF TIME.

UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE BEFORE THE DAY OF THE HEARING.

UM, AND I WILL LET, UH, ALL OF YOU THAT, UH, FREQUENT THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION, GET TOGETHER WITH STAFF TO FIND OUT THE, THE LOGISTICS ABOUT HOW WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN.

I THINK IT WOULD MAKE OUR, OUR WORK, UH, MORE EFFICIENT AND THE QUESTIONS COMING FROM THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE TO, UH, TO YOU, UH, MUCH MORE INFORMED IF WE HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE POWERPOINTS AHEAD OF TIME.

AND WITH THAT, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.

JUMP RIGHT

[2. 24-1168 application for a minor amendment to the existing development plan and landscape plan on property zoned Planned Development Subdistrict No. 148 within Planned Development District No. 193, on the northwest corner of Buena Vista Street and North Fitzhugh Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Luke Kvasnicka, Michael Hsu Office of Architecture Representative: Drew Martin Planner: Sheila Alcantara Segovia Council District: 14 ]

[03:10:01]

M 2 34 DASH 0 0 4, AN APPLICATION FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT.

SUBDISTRICT NUMBER 1 48 WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 1 93 ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BUENA VISTA AND NORTH FITZ HU AVENUE.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YOU HAVE TWO REGISTERED SPEAKERS ONLINE.

ARE THEY ONLINE? LUKE? YES, I'M ONLINE.

UH, MY NAME IS LUKE FKA.

I'M AN ARCHITECT WITH MICHAEL SHU, OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURE IN AUSTIN, TEXAS.

UM, THE ADDRESS, 8 2 6 AUSTIN STREET, AUSTIN, TEXAS.

UM, I, NOTHING FURTHER TO COMMENT, BUT I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS OR THE PUBLIC MIGHT HAVE.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.

COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF M 2 3 4 DASH FOUR I? WE CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR MOTION.

I SECOND IT.

ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE NOW MOVING ON TO OUR ZONING CASES AND CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH CONSISTS OF CASES THREE THROUGH SIX.

[Zoning Cases - Consent ]

UH, CASES FOUR AND SIX HAVE BEEN TAKEN OFF THE CONSENT SO THAT THERE WILL BE DISPOSED OF INDIVIDUALLY.

THAT LEAVES CASES THREE AND FIVE THAT WILL BE TAKEN IN ONE MOTION UNLESS THERE IS SOMEONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON CASE THREE OR CASE NUMBER FIVE, AND THEN WE WILL PULL IT OFF CONSENT AND HEAR IT INDIVIDUALLY.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON CASE THREE OR CASE NUMBER FIVE, BOTH ON PAGE TWO OF YOUR AGENDA? OKAY, LET'S GET THOSE RIGHT INTO THE RECORD PLEASE.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

ITEM THREE IS Z 2 2 3 1 9 8.

IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND TWO, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ON PROPERTY ZONED AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE WEST LINE OF BONNIE VIEW ROAD NORTH LOGISTICS DRIVE.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS ONE APPROVAL OF LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND TWO, APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.

AND ITEM SIX OR ITEM FIVE IS Z 2 23 2 50.

THAT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MF TWO MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT USES AND AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY USE ON PROPERTY ZONED IN MF TWO MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1 93, THE OAKLAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF OAKLAWN ROAD, NORTHEAST OF LEMON AVENUE.

STAFF.

RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONERS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON ITEMS ITEM THREE AND FIVE? CAN YOU MAKE THE MOTION COMMISSION PLEASE? I WOULD NEED A MOTION.

SURE.

IN THE MATTER THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTING OF ITEMS THREE AND FIVE.

I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPROVAL AS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.

UH, COMMISSIONER RUBEN FOR YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND FOR ITEMS THREE AND FIVE, QUICK COMMENT PLEASE.

COMMISSIONER RUBEN COMMENTS, I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS WORTH PULLING FIVE OFF OF CONSENT, BUT JUST WANTED TO MENTION NOW THAT THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS HERE, THAT THE LANGUAGE LIMITING THE ACCESSORIES IS TO RESIDENTS ONLY SHOULD PROBABLY BE TWEAKED TO RESIDENTS AND GUESTS BETWEEN NOW AND COUNCIL.

JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT NOTED ON THE RECORD.

THANKS.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER .

UM, YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT ON I ITEM FIVE AND, UH, MY SUPPORT FOR THAT ITEM.

YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE GETTING HERE IS A PROJECT THAT'S GOING FROM, UM, BY MY ESTIMATION, ABOUT 46 UNITS TO 170 UNITS.

WE'RE GETTING IT IN A LOW RISE FORMAT AND WE'RE GETTING A TYPE OF HOUSING THAT, UM, IS, UH, VERY MUCH NEEDED IN THE CITY.

I THINK IT'S JUST A HUGE WIN AND I HOPE THIS COMMISSION SEES MORE CASES LIKE THIS.

UH, THIS IS AN EASY YES.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? C NONE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

GO TO, UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSE.

SECONDED THAT, THAT WAS A MOTION BY OF VICE CHAIR RUBIN.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER, UH, HOUSE.