* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:03] WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. COMMISSIONERS, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. WE START OFF WITH A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SCHOCK. HERE. DISTRICT TWO. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. DISTRICT THREE. COMMISSIONER HERBERT. PRESENT ONLINE. HE'S ONLINE. OKAY. DISTRICT, DISTRICT FOUR. COMMISSIONER FORSYTH HERE. DISTRICT FIVE CHAIR. SHE DID PRESENT DISTRICT SIX. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. PRESENT? DISTRICT SEVEN. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, REAGAN. DISTRICT EIGHT. COMMISSIONER BLAIR? I'M HERE. DISTRICT NINE. COMMISSIONER SLEEPER. HERE. DISTRICT 10. COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. PRESENT. DISTRICT 11. COMMISSIONER HAWK. I'M SORRY. 11. COMMISSIONER LER. DISTRICT 12. COMMISSIONER HAWK DISTRICT 13. COMMISSIONER HALL HERE. DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBIN. YOU HAVE A QUORUM, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, COMMISSIONERS. GOOD MORNING. TODAY IS THURSDAY, UH, AUGUST 8TH, 2024, 9:06 AM WELCOME TO THE BRIEFING OF THE DALLAS CITY FINE COMMISSION. GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL AGAIN. UH, COMMISSIONERS. AS ALWAYS, UH, THIS IS A TIME FOR, UH, COMMISSIONERS TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF. WE'LL KEEP ALL OUR COMMENTS, UH, FOR THE HEARING THIS AFTERNOON, BEGINNING AT 1230. AND FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER RUBIN IS ONLINE AND NEEDS TO BE MOVED OVER AS A PANELIST, AND WE'LL DO THAT NOW. UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA JUMP RIGHT INTO THE DOCKET. UH, A COUPLE OF MOVING PARTS. UH, ITEM NUMBER 36, WE DO HAVE A REQUEST FOR AN INTERPRETER ON THAT ITEM. SO WE WILL BE MOVING THAT, UH, TO RIGHT AFTER THE, UH, ZONING CASE IS UNDER CONSENT. SO AFTER NUMBERS FIVE, WE WILL DISPOSE OF NUMBER 36 AND THEN WE'LL GET BACK INTO ORDER INTO THE ZONING CASES THIS AFTERNOON. UH, WE ALSO HAVE A, UH, AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, UH, WITH, UH, FOR ITEM DCA 2 0 1, 0 1 1, AND WE WILL HAVE THAT AT THE END OF THE BRIEFING THIS MORNING. AND WITH THAT, WE'RE GONNA JUMP RIGHT IN TO THE AGENDA, BEGINNING WITH THE MINOR AMENDMENT THAT WE WILL BRIEF, UH, PER REQUEST COMMISSIONERS, ANYONE NEED TO BRIEF ITEM NUMBER ONE OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON IT. OKAY. WELL THEN WE'LL BEGIN WITH CASE NUMBER, UH, TWO ON THE, UH, CONSENT AGENDA. COMMISSIONERS FOR ZONING. ITEM NUMBER TWO HAS COME OFF CONSENT AND WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, SO WE WILL NOT BRIEF THAT TODAY. TAKES US TO CASE NUMBER THREE AND MR. CLINTON. GOOD MORNING, SIR. GOOD MORNING. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE, CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 14 0, 1 SECOND, SORRY. THERE WE GO. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE WITH A CLASS A DANCE HALL ON PROPERTY ZONED A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF MCCREE ROAD, NORTH OF EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A NEW SUP TO, UH, FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EVENT CENTER AND NIGHTCLUB, APPROXIMATELY 3.2 ACRES IN TOTAL SIZE. HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP AND HERE IS OUR AERIAL ZOOM IN. THIS IS THE ZONING MAP. THE SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE, UH, COMMERCIAL SERVICES COM, COMMUNITY, RETAIL AND [00:05:01] UH, MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL AS WELL AS REGIONAL RETAIL. UH, BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THIS, UH, AGAIN, CURRENTLY ZONED CS FOR COMMERCIAL SERVICES. UM, THIS LOT HAS FRONTAGE ON BOTH MCCREE ROAD AND ACCESS ROAD. IT IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. THE, UH, APPLICANT PROPOSES THE PROPOSES THE HOURS OF OPERATION WILL BE THURSDAY THROUGH MONDAY, 6:00 PM TO 2:00 AM. UM, AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE WITH A CLASS A DANCE HALL ON PROPERTY. UM, APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A FIVE YEAR PERIOD. THERE HAVE BEEN FOUR ZONING CASES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, AND NOW WE'RE GONNA GO TO THE SITE VISIT IMAGES. UH, THIS IS ON MCCREE ROAD LOOKING WEST TOWARDS THE PROPERTY. THIS IS ON MCCREE ROAD LOOKING NORTH. THIS IS ON ACCESS ROAD LOOKING SOUTH. THIS IS ON ACCESS ROAD LOOKING SOUTH. UM, SAME LOCATION LOOKING WEST, SAME LOCATION LOOKING EAST. UH, THIS IS, UM, ON THE PROPERTY LOOKING NORTH. AND NOW WE HAVE IMAGES OF THE SURROUNDING USES. UH, THIS IS ON PROPERTY LOOKING SOUTH TOWARDS THE, UH, COMMERCIAL. THIS IS, UH, BACK ON MCCREE ROAD LOOKING SOUTH. UM, THERE'S SOME, UH, UH, RESTAURANTS AND OTHER RETAIL O THIS IS IN THE SAME LOCATION LOOKING EAST, THE SAME LOCATION LOOKING NORTH. UM, THERE'S A, I BELIEVE IT'S A SAM'S CLUB. UM, HERE IS THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND, UH, QUICK STAFF ANALYSIS. SO THERE ARE ALREADY EXISTING COMMERCIAL RETAIL SURROUNDING THE SITE. SO THE, UM, AREA REQUESTS WOULD MATCH AND FIT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, THE LAND USE COMPATIBILITY, UM, AGAIN MATCHES WITH THE IMMEDIATE AREA. UM, AND THERE WOULD BE, UM, REQUIRED BUFFERS IN LANDSCAPING TO MEET ARTICLE 10. AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, SLEEPER, UH, MR. CLINTON HAS, HAVE THERE BEEN ANY, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, OPPOSITION TO THIS USE? I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY. OKAY. NO. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, MR. CLINTON? UM, THE PLAN COMMISSION TURNED DOWN A REQUEST FOR AN SUP FROM THE SAME APPLICANT IN 2021 FOR A PRIVATE CLUB BAR? THAT'S CORRECT. I WOULD HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK ON THAT. OKAY. WELL, UH, FROM MY INVESTIGATION THAT SEEMS TO BE THE CASE, BUT, UM, HOW IS THIS, OKAY, WELL, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS HOW IS THIS, UM, COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE CLASS A DANCE HALL GOING TO BE DIFFERENT FROM THE PRIVATE CLUB BAR REQUEST THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY? I THINK THAT WOULD BE BEST, UM, ANSWERED BY THE APPLICANT. ALRIGHT. UM, CAN YOU ALSO EXPLAIN, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE APPLICANT ASKED FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, BUT WHY WOULD THE STAFF BE SUPPORTING A FIVE YEAR PERIOD FOR, UH, A NEW, UM, ESTABLISHMENT FOR, UM, SOMETHING AS POTENTIALLY, UH, THAT COULD POTENTIALLY CAUSE ISSUES LIKE A DANCE HALL IN A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE? UM, SO STAFF FOUND THAT FIVE YEARS WILL BE ADEQUATE FOR THE APPLICANT TO, UM, HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO GET THEIR OPERATIONS SET UP AND THEN ALSO PROVE THAT THEY ARE A COMPLIANT OPERATOR. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY, COMMISSIONER HOUSER COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE TAKEN THIS CASE OFF CONSENT. COMMISSIONER HOUSE WRIGHT. UM, WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THE CASE REPORT, I I COULDN'T QUITE TELL IF THERE IS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE ON THIS SITE OR IF IT'S A UNDEVELOPED SITE. IT IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. OKAY. AND COULD THAT PERHAPS BE A REASON FOR THE FIVE YEARS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO BUILD A BUILDING? YES. THAT, YES. I'LL LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER HAMPTON HAS JOINED US. GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONER HALL. MR. CLINTON, UH, CLASS A DANCEHALL JUST MEANS NIGHTCLUB CLUB? THAT'S CORRECT. AND WHAT, WHAT IS A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE REFERRING TO? I THINK THAT WOULD ALSO BE BEST A ANSWERED BY THE APPLICANT. BY THE APPLICANT. THEY COULD SPEAK TO THEIR INTENTIONS MORE. OKAY. AND THERE'S NO RESIDENTIAL ANYWHERE NEARBY THIS, THERE IS RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH, BUT NOT THE IMMEDIATE SOUTH OF THE SITE. ANY IDEA ROUGHLY HOW FAR AWAY? UM, [00:10:01] I WOULD'VE TO MEASURE THAT. I, I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, NO. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON TO CASE NUMBER FOUR, MR. BATE. GOOD MORNING, SIR. WE'RE SEATED TODAY USING THEIR POWERPOINT. I CAN. GOOD, GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. THIS IS ITEM OR CASE Z 2 34 DASH 216. IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN R 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES ZONE IN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. IT'S LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF OAKWOOD DRIVE, WEST OF HAYMARKET ROAD, ABOUT 9,000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE, UH, LOCATED HERE IN THE SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE CITY. UH, THIS IS THE AERIAL MAP. NOW, SOMETHING CAME UP BEFORE THE MEETING. UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR VERY EAGLE EYE. NOTICE THAT THE LINE HERE FOR THE AERIAL MAP BISECTS A STRUCTURE, UH, THAT WOULD BE RATHER ODD, UH, TO SAY THE LEAST. UH, WE DISCUSSED THIS OR I DISCUSSED THIS WITH THE GIS TEAM AND THEY CONFIRMED THAT, UH, THERE ARE CERTAIN ISSUES WITH THE AERIAL, UH, MAPS OR THE AERIAL BOUND, UH, THE PARCEL BOUNDARY LAYERS THAT THEY USE ON THEIR MAPS WHEN THEY'RE GENERATED. SOMETIMES THEY APPEAR TO BE SHIFTED BY, UH, ABOUT FIVE FEET IN THIS CASE, SOMETIMES A LARGER SHIFT, SOMETIMES A SMALLER SHIFT. UH, BUT WE DID CONFIRM THAT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT WAS USED BY GISS MATCHED THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT WAS PRODUCED BY THE APPLICANT'S SURVEYOR. UH, ALL THAT IS JUST TO SAY AND KIND OF, UH, ASSURE THAT THE, UH, LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING USED IN THIS REQUEST, IT DOES NOT BISECT THAT STRUCTURE. UM, IT IS ENTIRELY THE ACTUAL ON THE GROUND MEASUREMENTS ARE ENTIRELY THE EAST OF THAT STRUCTURE THERE. UH, SO HOPEFULLY THAT INTRODUCE MORE CONFUSION BY EXPLAINING THAT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO CLEAR THAT UP IF THERE WERE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT. UH, HERE'S THE ZONING MAP OF THE AREA. THERE'S A MIX OF AGRICULTURAL AA ZONING AND THEN AN R 7.5 A BLOCK TO THE NORTH. UH, THE MAJORITY OF THE AREA IS SINGLE FAMILY. UH, THERE IS A CR DISTRICT TO THE NORTHEAST OF THE SITE, UH, THAT PRIMARILY HAS A LARGE, UH, NURSERY, UH, AND PLANT SALES FACILITY THERE, UH, CURRENTLY ZONED AA AND THEY WANNA BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE. AND IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THIS, THEY REQUEST AN R 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT. UH, HERE'S SOME PHOTOS OF THE PROPERTY OR ON OAKWOOD DRIVE LOOKING SOUTH, THEN LOOKING SOUTHWEST, THEN LOOKING TO THE WEST, LOOKING TO THE EAST, AND THEN LOOKING NORTHWEST AWAY FROM THE SITE, LOOKING NORTH AWAY FROM THE SITE, LOOKING NORTHEAST AND THEN LOOKING EAST AND THEN LOOKING SOUTH. UH, THIS IS A COMPARISON OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BETWEEN AA AND R 7.5. UH, AA IS, IT'S LESS INTENSIVE FROM A RESIDENTIAL PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE THERE ARE MUCH GREATER RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT'S BUILT THERE. UH, BUT THE AA DISTRICT DOES HAVE, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL USES THAT ARE ALLOWED JUST BY VIRTUE OF GENERALLY BEING A MORE OF A RURAL AREA. UH, THE R 7.5 A DISTRICT, IT HAS LESS RESTRICTIVE SETBACKS AND SLIGHTLY MORE PERMISSIBLE HEIGHT AS WELL AS LOT COVERAGE. UM, BUT PRETTY MUCH ALL YOU CAN DO ON R 7.5 IS RESTING FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'LL GO TO NUMBER FIVE. WE'LL STAY WITH YOU MR. BAY. ALL RIGHT, THIS IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 21. IT IS AN A AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2118 FOR VEHICLE DISPLAY SALES AND [00:15:01] SERVICE ON PROPERTIES ZONE SUBDISTRICT TWO WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 3 4, THE CF HAN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT NUMBER TWO WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF CF HAN FREEWAY, SOUTHEAST OF SOUTH BUCKNER BOULEVARD, APPROXIMATELY 2178 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE. AGAIN, FAR SOUTHEASTERN PART OF THE CITY. AND HERE'S THE AERIAL MAP SHOWING THE SUBJECT SITE ALONG THE CF HAN SERVICE ROAD. UH, THE ZONING MAP. SO IT IS ALL WITHIN PD 5 34, SUBDISTRICT TWO, UH, TO THE NORTHEAST IS SUBDISTRICT ONE, UH, TO THE SOUTH SOUTHWEST IS R 7.5 A WITH A SINGLE FAMILY. AND THEN TO THE EAST NORTH OR THE WEST NORTHWEST IS RR AN RR DISTRICT, UH, WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISING FOOD STORE, AND I BELIEVE ALSO AN SEP FOR ALCOHOL SALES. IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT, IT IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED THE VEHICLE DISPLAYED SALES AND SERVICE BUSINESS. UH, IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED IN ON NOVEMBER 12TH, 2014 FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD AND WAS MOST RECENTLY RENEWED ON JUNE 9TH, 2021. THE SAP EXPIRED ON JUNE 9TH OF THIS YEAR, BUT THE APPLICANT DID FILE FOR RENEWAL ON APRIL 24TH, AND THEY'RE REQUESTING RENEWAL FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD AND DO NOT PROPOSE ANY CHANGES TO THE CONDITIONS OR THE SITE PLAN. UH, HERE'S SOME PHOTOS OF THE PROPERTY. WE'RE ON CF HAN LOOKING WEST AT THE SITE, THEN NORTHWEST WITH THE SITE ALONG TO THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE PHOTO LOOKING NORTH ON CF HAN, THEN LOOKING NORTHEAST AWAY FROM THE SITE, THEN MOVING UP CF HAN LOOKING SOUTHEAST AT THE SITE ITSELF, LOOKING SOUTH AT THE SITE, THEN LOOKING WEST TO THE NORTHERN PORTION OUTSIDE OF THE SITE. THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO IT. I THINK I HAVE A DETAILED SLIDE. YEAH, UH, NO CHANGES TO IT. UH, THE CONDITIONS, IT'S EXACT SAME CONDITIONS, JUST THE PERMIT WILL EXPIRE THREE YEARS IN THE PASSAGE OF THE ORDINANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER BLAIR, CAN YOU GO BACK TO, UM, SLIDE? I THINK IT'S EITHER EIGHT, THIS WOULD BE SLIDE EIGHT. NO, GO BACK. ONE MORE. THIS WOULD BE SLIDE SEVEN. YEAH, THAT ONE. WHAT'S THAT? WHAT'S, WHAT'S, WHAT'S ALL OF, I DIDN'T, I HAVE NOT SEEN THAT. IS THAT ON THEIR PROPERTY? UM, IF YOU COULD CLARIFY, UH, WHEN YOU SAY THAT, WHICH PART OF THE PHOTO? SO I'M LOOKING AT, I'M LOOKING AT THE, UM, SHED AND IS IT THIS LEFT HAND SIDE HERE? RIGHT THERE, YES. THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THEIR PROPERTY. THAT IS AN ADJOINING PROPERTY THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THEIR PROPERTY, CORRECT. SO THE, THE BUSHES AND ON THE RIGHT SIDE, LOOKING AT THIS SLIDE ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THAT SHED AND THOSE, AND THAT IS THEIRS? YES. I BELIEVE EVERYTHING ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, IF YOU SEE KIND OF THE BLACK FENCE POST HERE, EVERYTHING TO THE RIGHT, THAT IS THEIR PROPERTY. THE SHED, I BELIEVE IS THE OFFICE THAT IS DESIGNATED ON THE SITE PLAN. UH, EVERYTHING TO THE LEFT OF THAT FENCE POST IS OUTSIDE OF THEIR PROPERTY. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH, THANK YOU. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. BATE. UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE WILL COME BACK TO CASE NUMBER SIX. UH, VICE CHAIR RUBIN IS IN THE CHAMBER. UH, IT TAKES US TO CASE NUMBER SEVEN. UH, THAT WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, SO WE'LL NOT BRIEF THAT TODAY. CASE NUMBER EIGHT WILL ALSO BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO AUGUST 22ND. SO WE'LL GO TO CASE NUMBER NINE. BACK TO YOU, MR. CLINTON. MR. CHAIR? YES, SIR. I, I HAVE A CONFLICT ON THIS ONE, AND SO I WILL BE STEPPING OUT VIRTUALLY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT MY CHAIR EVEN HAS A CONFLICT ON ITEM NUMBER NINE AND HAS SIGNED OFF HAVING SOME ISSUES WITH THE POWERPOINT ONCE. ONE MOMENT. ALL RIGHT, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER NINE, CASE Z 2 2 3 DASH 3 38. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A GR GENERAL RETAIL SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE, AP PARKING SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT. [00:20:02] WHOA, WITHIN, UH, PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1 93, THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PER SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT, EXCUSE ME, WITH CONSIDERATION FOR AN MF TWO MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF LUCAS DRIVE BETWEEN MAPLE AVENUE AND BROWN STREET. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REMOVE THE P ON PD NUMBER 1 93 TO ALLOW MULTI, UH, MULTIPLE FAMILY USES ON THE PROPERTY. IT'S ABOUT, UH, 6,797 SQUARE FEET IN TOTAL SIZE. HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP. THIS IS THE AERIAL MAP AND OUR ZONING MAP WITH THE SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE, UH, COMMERCIAL RETAIL TO THE NORTH AND WEST AS AND SOUTH, UM, MULTIFAMILY TO THE EAST AND SINGLE FAMILY TO THE EAST. UH, QUICK BACKGROUND. UM, ACTUALLY THIS WAS HEARD BEFORE, BUT WE'RE BRINGING IT BACK. SO, UM, JULY 11TH, UH, CPC, IT WAS, UH, HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, UM, WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO BE READVERTISED, UH, FOR AN MF TWO SUBDISTRICT. UM, SO I'LL JUST GO BRIEFLY THROUGH THE SITE, UH, PHOTOS. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING, UH, SOUTHEAST. THIS IS ON LUCAS DRIVE LOOKING SOUTHEAST. UM, THIS IS ON LUCAS DRIVE LOOKING SOUTHWEST TOWARDS, UH, THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL RETAIL. THIS IS ON LUCAS DRIVE, UH, LOOKING NORTHEAST. UH, SAME LOCATION LOOKING NORTHWEST. ALSO LOOKING NORTHWEST. UM, THIS IS ON PROPERTY, UH, LOOKING NORTHEAST TOWARDS THE RESIDENTIAL USES. THIS IS ON PROPERTY LOOKING SOUTHEAST. UH, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED. QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. UM, MR. CLINTON, UM, THANK YOU FOR THE PHOTOS. I KNOW PREVIOUSLY THERE WAS SOME QUESTION ABOUT THE POSTED NOTICE. DID THE APPLICANT, UM, SEND YOU PHOTOS DOCUMENTING THAT THEY'D BEEN ABLE TO REPOST THOSE NOTICES? YES, THEY HAVE. THANK YOU. AND ARE YOU ALSO AWARE THAT THERE'S, UM, ONGOING, UM, CITY PROJECTS THROUGH OTHER DEPARTMENTS FOR THE MAPLE AVENUE SAFETY THAT'S REVIEWING THE LENGTH OF MAPLE AVENUE FROM MOCKINGBIRD TO OAK LAWN? YES, I'M AWARE. THANK YOU. AND ARE YOU AWARE THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE OAKLAWN COMMITTEE AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS REGARDING THEIR REQUEST? YES. THANK YOU. AND GENERALLY, I THINK THERE WAS CONSENSUS THAT THIS IS APPROPRIATE AND MATCHES THE SURROUNDING, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, UH, WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 10. MORNING CHAIR. CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME? GOOD MORNING. WE CAN. WONDERFUL. BEAR WITH ME AS I HAVE THIS UPLOADED HERE. APOLOGIES. TOO MANY SCREENS. YES, CHAIRMAN, IS THAT FULL SCREEN FOR EVERYBODY? YES, WE CAN SEE IT. THANK YOU. WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL. THANK YOU. UH, THANK YOU COMMISSION. UH, THIS IS CASE, UH, Z 2 34 DASH SEVEN. UM, IT'S A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SAP NUMBER 24 39. UH, WE ALLOW FOR A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING LOT TO CONTINUE ON SITE. UH, THIS MIGHT SEEM A LITTLE FAMILIAR. IT WAS HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, UM, FROM A COMMISSION MEETING BACK IN JUNE, UH, TO WORK THROUGH A COUPLE SITE DETAILS. WE DID RECEIVE, UH, AN UPDATED SITE PLAN, A LANDSCAPE PLAN, UH, YESTERDAY. STAFF HAS, HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO REVIEW THAT PLAN IN DETAIL ZONING CONDITIONS ON SITE. IT IS THE CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT. UH, THERE ARE SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT LIMIT THE ALLOWED USES ON SITE. UM, AND THE CURRENT SUP WAS ADOPTED IN JAN JANUARY OF, UH, 22. SEE ITS LOCATION THERE, FAR SOUTH SIDE. IT'S AERIAL SHOWING THE [00:25:01] ONSITE CONDITION. TAKING A LOOK AT SURROUNDING USES, UH, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND AGRICULTURAL SERVICES AROUND, UH, INCLUDING SOME VACANT PARCELS AS WELL AS SOME WAREHOUSING USES. UH, DURING THE SITE VISIT ON TELEPHONE LOOKING NORTHEAST SOUTH OFF TELEPHONE SOUTHEAST, AND THE SITE ENTRANCE THERE, LOOKING SOUTH, HERE'S THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN APPROVED. THE SUP, UH, AGAIN, WE'VE RECEIVED AN UPDATED SITE PLAN. WE HAVE NOT, UH, BEEN ABLE TO CONDUCT A THOROUGH REVIEW ON THAT. HOWEVER, UH, WITH THAT STAFF'S INITIAL RECOMMENDATION WAS APPROVAL FOR THAT FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS. AND WITH THAT CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? NO. ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU, SIR. WE'LL GO TO CASE NUMBER 11. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT VICE RUBIN HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM AND HAS LOGGED OFF. SAL GEIER. GOOD MORNING. UH, PARDON ME. WE, WE DO HAVE A, A QUESTION ON THE, ON THE PREVIOUS CASE. UM, AND I DON'T KNOW IF MR. CONNOR IS ABLE TO ANSWER THIS OR IF, UM, IF I NEED MR. MULKEY OR, OR SOMEBODY TO HELP, UM, BECAUSE THEY GOT, THIS IS ON CONSENT. NO, IT'S NOT. I, WHERE, WHERE DID CONSENT WHEN? OH, NEVERMIND. I CAN ASK AT THE, THE, AT THE HEARING. HEARING. PERFECT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. DR. . GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. UM, I'M GONNA STEP IN FOR THIS CASE. JUST A SECOND. UM, ITEM Z 2 3 4 1 22. UM, OKAY, LET'S SEE. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 10 17 FOR A PROPERTY THAT'S BOUNDED BY BICKER STREET, UH, NORTHWEST MORELAND ROAD, GALLAGHER STREET AND FURY STREET. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 5.2 22 ACRES. IT'S IN WEST DALLAS, UM, WEST OF, WELL, NORTH WESTMORELAND ROAD, AND NORTH OF SINGLETON BOULEVARD IS IN DISTRICT SIX, UM, SIDE BY SIDE, AERIAL AND ZONING MAP. IT IS, UH, DALLAS IS THE SCHOOL THAT IS BEING PROPOSED. MR. CHAIRMAN, THE, THE, THE PRESENTATION'S NOT BEING DISPLAYED. OH, THAT'S CORRECT. OH, THAT'S TRUE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. WHY? OKAY, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE PRESENT. [00:30:13] THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. ALL MY APOLOGIES. SO I'LL RESTART. Z 2 1 3 1 22. UM, IT IS, UH, AN APPLICATION, JUST A SECOND. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 10 17 FOR A PROPERTY THAT'S BOUNDED BY BAKER STREET, WESTMORELAND ROAD, GALLAGHER STREET AND FURY STREET. IT'S 5.2 ACRES. UH, IT'S, AS I SAID, WEST DALLAS, WEST OF WESTMORELAND AND NORTH OF SINGLETON BOULEVARD. UM, THE AERIAL AND THE ZONING MAP SIDE BY SIDE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SCHOOL, A DALLAS ISD SCHOOL THAT IS GONNA BE, UH, TURNED DOWN AND REBUILT INTO A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SCHOOL. UM, I WILL EXPLAIN ON THE NEXT SLIDE. THE PROPERTIES SURROUNDED BASICALLY BY SINGLE FAMILY, R SEVEN FIVE. AND TO THE EAST SIDE OF WESTMORELAND IS A PD THAT ALLOWS A MIXTURE TYPE OF HOUSING. ON THE CORNER IS A RETIREMENT HOUSING, AND IT'S A COMBINATION OF, AGAIN, SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING, A LITTLE BIT OF MULTI-FAMILY TO THE EAST, AND A LITTLE BIT OF VACANT LAND. UM, FOR THE BACKGROUND, THE PD WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2019. IT WAS AN R FIVE AND A COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT THAT WERE, UH, TRANSITIONED TO OR APPROVED TO BE REZONED TO A PD FOR A EXISTING SCHOOL. THAT'S TWO STORY AND HAS BEEN OPERATED THERE SINCE THE FIFTIES. UH, THE CURRENT REQUEST INCLUDES MODIFY STANDARDS, UH, FOR TYPICAL STUFF FOR SCHOOLS, FLOOR AREA HEIGHT, SETBACKS, REDUCED OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS, NEW DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SIDEWALKS, BUFFERS WITH WE'RE USED TO WHEN, UH, WE'RE SEEING SCHOOLS, SCHOOL CASES. UM, THE CASE WAS HELD ON JULY 25TH, UM, THE, IN BETWEEN THEN AND NOW, A REVISED LANDSCAPE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND A REVISED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN. UM, JENNIFER NOTED HERE THERE WAS, WAS A LITTLE ERROR ON THE STAFF REPORT ON THE MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE SCHOOL. JUST TO EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT, UM, THE REQUEST IS THE, IT'S AN EXISTING PUBLIC SCHOOL THAT'S CALLED DALLAS ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ACADEMY, THAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO, UH, BE REDEVELOPED INTO AN ACADEMY TYPE OF SCHOOL THAT'S GOING TO, UH, BASICALLY SERVE OTHER SCHOOLS IN DALLAS, A SD. AND IT'S A DIFFERENT TYPE OF CAMPUS. IT'S NOT, UM, IT'S FOR, UM, OTHER TYPE OF CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES. IT'S NOT A NECESSARILY A SCHOOL. UM, JUST A SECOND. LEMME GET THIS OUTTA MY WAY. UM, JUST PICTURES ON THE SIDE, AROUND THE SIDE. THIS IS THE SCHOOL FROM WESTMORELAND. THIS IS, UH, WHAT'S ACROSS FROM WESTMORELAND, UH, WHICH IS THE RETIREMENT HOUSING THAT I WAS MENTIONING ACROSS WESTMORELAND VACANT LOT AND SOME SINGLE FAMILY IN THE BACKGROUND ACROSS, UH, WESTMORELAND AND GALLAGHER. UH, VACANT AND SINGLE FAMILY. THE SCHOOL FROM GALLAGHER, UH, LOOKING EAST ON GALLAGHER, THE EXISTENCE SCHOOL THAT IS GONNA BE TORN DOWN, UM, ASIDE FROM GALLAGHER AS WELL. YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING CURB CUT AND HOW THE SCHOOL HAS ACCESS ONLY FROM GALLAGHER STREET, UM, ACROSS THE STREET, UH, SINGLE FAMILY AND UNDEVELOPED OR VACANT LAND, UH, ON FURY STREET. LOOKING TOWARDS THE SCHOOL ON FURY STREET, UM, ACROSS THE SCHOOL, MORE SINGLE FAMILY AND, UH, UNDEVELOPED MORE SINGLE FAMILY AND UNDEVELOPED. UM, THE EXISTING SERVICE YARD FOR THE SCHOOL THAT IS, UM, FACING BICKERS STREET, SAME, UH, SCHOOL FACING BICKERS, BICKERS AND WESTMORELAND IS BASICALLY, WE JUST WENT AROUND THE SCHOOL AND THE INTERSECTION. THE AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHOWS A BIGGER FOOTPRINT BUILDING WITH TWO, UM, PARKING LOTS EAST AND WEST. UM, 11 MORE CURB CUTS JUST FOR BETTER ACCESS. I THINK THEY HAVE CIRCULATION THAT IS, UM, SEPARATED. UM, AND YOU'LL SEE TWO NEW CURB CUTS ON BICKERS AND ONE ON GALLAGHER. A LITTLE CHANGE [00:35:01] SINCE THE LAST, UH, CBC DOCKET. THEY REPLACED THREE LARGE TREES WITH 2 MILLION ONES OR ORNAMENTAL ONES. THE CITY ARBORIST REVIEWED AND THEY'RE OKAY WITH IT. UH, IT, I THINK IT WAS, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS UTILITY CONFLICTS OR PAVING. UM, A BIG DISCUSSION THAT HAPPENED BETWEEN LAST TIME AND THIS TIME WAS THE CIRCULATION OF BUSES AROUND THE SCHOOL. AND THE APPLICANT AGREED TO ALLOW AND LEAVE THIS CURB CUT THAT'S AT THE CORNER AT BEAKERS. IF YOU SEE MY MOUSE SPEAKERS IN WESTMORELAND TO BE FOR EMERGENCY ONLY AND NOT FOR BUSES, AND ALL THE BUSES AND, UH, ROUTING IS GONNA BE FROM GALLAGHER STREET AND THEY'RE GONNA EXIT AND GONNA CIRCULATE CLOCKWISE AROUND THE SCHOOL. AND THEY'RE GONNA EXIT ON THE WEST SIDE OF BAKER STREET. AND I WILL EXPLAIN, AGAIN, THIS WAS THE CONVERSATION THAT HAPPENED BETWEEN STAFF AND THE APPLICANT, AND THOSE WERE THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS THAT WE USED TO HAVE. AND NOW THEY ARE ADDRESSED AND, UH, THE APPLICANT AGREED WITH STAFF. UM, THIS EXHIBIT IS SHOWING THE, UM, FEEDER SCHOOLS OR SCHOOLS THAT ARE GOING TO USE THIS ACADEMY. UM, MOLINA HIGH SCHOOL, PINKSTON HIGH SCHOOL, ADAMSON HIGH SCHOOL, AND SUNSET HIGH SCHOOL, AND HOW THE BUSES ARE GONNA CIRCULATE, UM, ON A LARGER AREA TO DROP OFF AND, UH, PICK UP STUDENTS FROM, UM, THIS ACADEMY SCHOOL. THIS EXHIBIT IS GONNA BE LABELED AND INCLUDED IN THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN. THE CONDITIONS AMENDED SINCE THE PD WAS CREATED IS JUST TO ACCOMMODATE THIS NEW, BIGGER, UH, ACADEMY. UM, AND TO ADD OUR NORMAL CONDITIONS FOR OPEN FENCING TO INCLUDE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, LANDSCAPE CONDITIONS WITH ALL THE STREET TREES THAT YOU JUST SAW. UM, SIDE YARDS, UH, ARE CALLED OUT FOR GALLAGHER STREET. THE FLOOR AREA IS INCREASED TO 160,000, UH, SQUARE FEET. THE OFF STREET PARKING IS EXPLAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. SINCE THIS IS NOT A HIGH SCHOOL PER SE, IT IS A SCHOOL WHERE THE, IS NOT A SCHOOL WHERE THE STUDENTS ARE GONNA DRIVE THEMSELVES. IT'S A SCHOOL THAT'S BASICALLY GONNA BE SERVED JUST FOR THE BUSES. UM, IT HAS A VERY, UH, A LOWER PARKING RATIO THAN A NORMAL O MISS SCHOOL WHERE THE STUDENT ARE DRIVING THEMSELVES. UM, AND THEN WE HAD ONE BOX, WHICH REFERRED TO THAT, UM, EMERGENCY ACCESS GATE ON B BAKKER STREET OR BIKER STREET. UM, THE APPLICANT, AFTER WE POSTED THE DOCKET, THE APPLICANT AGREED WITH THE CONDITION. SO THIS BOX IS GONNA BE REMOVED. UM, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN IS UPDATED TO REFLECT TODAY'S CONDITION AND STANDARDS DESIGN STANDARDS, TYPICALLY FOR SCHOOLS TO HAVE SIDEWALKS, TO HAVE AMENITIES CLOSE TO, UM, ENTRANCES TO THE SCHOOL AS INDICATED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. BUT THIS BEING SAID, STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AMENDED LANDSCAPE PLAN, REVISED AMENDED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. AND MY APOLOGIES FOR THE HICCUPS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER HARA. UM, DR. UREA? I LIKED, UH, WHAT I SAW ON THE PARKING, UH, AND THE RATIONALE FOR THAT FROM NINE AND A HALF DOWN TO THREE AND A HALF PER CLASS. UM, IS THAT BASED ON THE, THE TEACHER COUNT IN THE BUILDING OR IS IT JUST BASED ON THE SPACES YOU HAVE LEFT ON THE SITE PLAN? 'CAUSE IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S MUCH PARKING TO BEGIN WITH AND, AND IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S GOOD REASON TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED PARKING, BUT IF YOU COULD JUST GIVE US A LITTLE MORE COLOR ON THAT. UM, OKAY, LET ME, LET ME LOOK AND I DON'T KNOW, AND I WOULD SEE, I'M HOPING DAVID IS HERE TO EXPLAIN, UH, WHAT THEIR, UM, IF YOU'LL ALLOW ME, I CAN ASK, UH, ARE YOU AWARE THAT I THINK ANSWER PLEASE, QUESTION. OKAY. ARE YOU AWARE THAT, UH, NONE OF THE STUDENTS, UM, WILL ARRIVE HERE BY, BY VEHICLE AT ALL? YOU KNOW? OKAY, SO EVERYBODY CO THIS IS A CAREER INSTITUTE? YES. FOR DISD, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO THE ONE THAT WE AUTHORIZED TO REPLACE THE, WE, UM, THE, THE ONE THAT WAS DESTROYED BY THE, UM, TORNADO, UM, WHY CAN'T I THINK OF THE NAME OF THE SCHOOL? YEAH, RIGHT. BUT IT WAS AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL UP THERE. UM, SO THIS IS NOT THE HOME CAMPUS FOR ANY OF THE, THE KIDS. UM, UH, 900 KIDS WILL COME IN THE MORNING, 900 KIDS WILL COME IN THE AFTERNOON. THEY, THEY GET, UM, BROUGHT IN BY SCHOOL BUSES. SO THE REASON WHY THERE ARE FEWER PASSENGER, UM, PASSENGER VEHICLE PARKING SPACES IS THEY'RE JUST HAVING TO ALLOW PARKING FOR THEIR STAFF AND THEIR TEACHERS, AND THEN A CERTAIN NUMBER OF, UH, ANTICIPATED GUESTS. SO I GUESS I COULD HAVE ASKED THE QUESTION MORE CLEARLY. HOW MANY STAFF ARE ON CAMPUS? IS IT THREE [00:40:01] AND A HALF ENOUGH TO MEET THE NEED? YES, IT IS. YES. OKAY. RIGHT, IT'S, THANK YOU. SORRY, . COMMISSIONER ETT, THIS IS A DETAIL, UM, ON THE FIRST RESPONDER PROVISION, UM, REGARDING THE GATE AND THE ACCESS IT REFERENCES KNOX EQUIPMENT. SINCE THAT'S A SPECIFIC MANUFACTURER, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO SAY KNOX EQUIPMENT OR SIMILAR? YES, PROBABLY YES. OR EQUAL, WHATEVER THE EQUIVALENT LANGUAGE MIGHT BE. YES. AGAIN, I FEEL CONFIDENT THAT WOULD'VE COME UP LATER, SO JUST WANTED TO NOTE IT. THANK YOU DR. RE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. WELL, AND I HAVE AN ANSWER. YOU KNOW, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE ARE 70 STAFF MEMBERS AT THIS? TEACHERS AND STAFF MEMBERS, SO THEY ALLOWED FOR THOSE 70 PLUS AND ANTICIPATED 40 OR 50, UM, POSSIBLE VISITORS AT ANY PARTICULAR TIME? BUT I DO HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. UM, IN RESPONSE TO, UM, THE CORRECTION THAT YOU MADE, UH, MR. GRAHAM MADE ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE SCHOOL, THE SIZE OF THE SCHOOL HAS NOT GOTTEN BIGGER SINCE IT WAS ORIGINALLY BROUGHT TO THE COMMUNITY. IT'S JUST THAT THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING, UM, FROM THE APPLICANT OR THE ARCHITECT? NO, I'M NOT SURE WHERE, UM, THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE JUST, WERE HAVING TO REPORT THE, UM, GROUND FLOOR SQUARE FOOTAGE, AND SO IT DIDN'T INCLUDE ALL OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. SO, SO THE FOOTPRINT HASN'T CHANGED. IT'S, IT'S JUST A, A CORRECTION TO, TO BRING IT INTO HOW WE NORMALLY, UM, CORRECT, UH, REPORT SQUARE FOOTAGE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DR. RUDA. I WILL GO TO CASE NUMBER 12. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MS. BRIDGES. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. THIS IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH 1 47. IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR A MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE, AN R SEVEN FIVE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT. AND THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW TOWN HOMES AND COMMERCIAL RETAIL USES ON THE PROPERTY. THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP, THE AREA MAP, THE ZONING MAP YOU WILL SEE SURROUNDING THE AREA. REQUEST IS R SEVEN FIVE, SOME VACANT AREAS, NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE VACANT, AND ALSO R SEVEN FIVE. THE AREA REQUEST IS CURRENTLY ZONED R SEVEN FIVE, SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT. UM, THE PROPERTY IS UNDERDEVELOPED. THE LOT HAS FRONTAGE ON NORTH PERRY CREEK ROAD IN ELLUM ROAD. HOPEFULLY I'M PRONOUNCING THAT CORRECTLY. THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY WITH TOWN HOMES AND COMMERCIAL RETAIL USES TO ACCOMPLISH THIS, THAT REQUEST A MIXED USE ONE, UM, MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT. THE NEXT FEW PICTURES WOULD BE OF THE SITE AND THE AREAS. THESE ARE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. UM, THIS IS THE FLOOR AREA RATIO. I CAN GO INTO DETAIL IF NEED BE ABOUT THIS, AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER HALL, PLEASE. THANK YOU. MS. BRIDGES, WILL THE TOWN HOMES BE SEPARATE FROM THE RETAIL OR WILL IT BE TOWN HOMES ON TOP OF RETAIL? I THINK THAT'LL BE A QUESTION THAT NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED BY THE APPLICANT. HE DIDN'T GO INTO DETAIL WITH ME ABOUT THAT, BUT I BELIEVE MR. ROB IS HERE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. YOU ARE WELCOME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE'RE GONNA CASE NUMBER 13. [00:45:38] THIS IS CASE, THIS IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH 15. AN APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WITH TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT IN L OH ONE LIMITED OFFICE USES LOCATED ON THE NORTH LINE OF LAKE JUNE ROAD, EAST OF NORTH ST. AUGUSTINE DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 29 AND A HALF ACRES IN SIZE, UH, LOCATED HERE IN THE FAR EASTERN PORTION, UH, KIND OF PLEASANT GROVE AREA OF THE CITY. UH, HERE'S THE AERIAL MAP OF THE, UH, OF THE, OF THE SITE. UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, A VERY LARGE WOODED AREA ALONG LAKE JUNE. UH, HERE'S A ZONING MAP SHOWING THE, UH, EXISTING ZONING. UH, SO RIGHT NOW THE, THE AREA OF REQUEST IS PRIMARILY ZONED MF TWO A WITH A SMALL PORTION OF R 7.5 A TO THE NORTHEAST. UH, GENERAL SURROUNDING AREAS INCLUDE R 7.5 A WITH SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, UH, A CR DISTRICT TO THE SOUTHEAST, AND THEN A PD 8 0 7, WHICH IS FOR THE PRAIRIE CREEK BRANCH LIBRARY. UH, THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY AND AN OFFICE ON THE SITE IN ORDER TO ACCOMPLISH THIS. THEY'RE REQUESTING A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. UH, HERE'S SOME PHOTOS OF THE SITE. UH, OBVIOUSLY GIVEN THE, THE, THE SIZE OF THE SITE, IT'S HARD TO GET MUCH MORE THAN THE PHOTOS FROM LAKE JUNE AND A COUPLE OF THE SIDE STREETS. UH, BUT HERE WE ARE ON LAKE JUNE ROAD LOOKING NORTHEAST. THAT'S THE PRAIRIE CREEK BRANCH LIBRARY PARKING LOT ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, THEN LOOKING EAST, THEN MOVING DOWN ALONG LAKE JUNE. LOOKING AWAY FROM THE SITE, UH, LOOKING WEST, LOOKING NORTH AT THE SITE. SO THIS IS WHERE THE, UH, OFFICE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE. THEN LOOKING TO THE NORTHEAST AND MOVING UP A BIT ON THE NORTHEAST, THEN LOOKING SOUTHEAST AWAY FROM THE SITE. HERE'S ONE OF THE SIDE STREETS COA DRIVE LOOKING WEST. SO RIGHT NOW, THAT'S A, UH, STREET THAT DEAD ENDS. IT WOULD EXTEND INTO THE, INTO THE DEVELOPMENT, THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN, UH, NEO SHOW DRIVE IS THE OTHER ONE THAT WOULD EXTEND INTO THE DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN LOOKING EAST AWAY FROM, UH, THE SITE, UH, THIS IS THE PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN. SO IT IS BROKEN DOWN INTO THREE TRACTS. UH, THERE'S A TRACT ONE, WHICH IS FOR THE, UH, RESIDENTIAL AREA. THAT'S TH THREE, UH, STANDARDS. THEN THE LO ONE LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT IS TRACK TWO. TRACK THREE IS THIS OPEN SPACE AREA, AND WE HAD IT DESIGNATED AS TRACK THREE IN ORDER TO SPECIFY THAT DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT TAKE PLACE WITHIN TRACK THREE. UH, THAT'S IN ORDER TO PRESERVE SORT OF THE NATURAL, UH, THE NATURAL, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY, THE NATURAL BEAUTY, THE NATURAL RESOURCES, ET CETERA. UH, HERE'S A DETAILED VIEW OF THE RESIDENTIAL AND A DETAILED VIEW OF THE OFFICE. UH, SEVERAL PROPOSED CONDITIONS. WE'LL GO THROUGH THESE. UH, THE SIDE SETBACKS FOR RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE TWO FEET. UH, THERE WILL BE REAR YARD SETBACKS ALONG PRAIRIE CREEK FOR THE HOUSES ALONG PRAIRIE CREEK WILL BE AN 80 FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK. UH, REAR YARD SETBACKS BY THE OFFICE. PARKING LOT WOULD BE 25 FEET, UH, ALONG PRAIRIE CREEK. ALSO LIMITED TO TWO STORIES MAX, UH, THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF 75%. THEY, THEY WANT TO, UH, ALLOW AN ACCESSORY COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER PRIVATE BY RIGHT IN TRACK. ONE PARKING MINIMUMS WILL BE TWO OFF STREET SPACES PER LOT FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY. AND THEN ONE PER 333 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA FOR THE ACCESSORY COMMUNITY CENTER SERVICE CENTER, AND THE OFFICE. ADDITIONALLY, UH, DRIVEWAYS, THEY MUST BE 18 FEET AWAY FROM ADJACENT DRIVEWAYS. SO THE INTENT THERE IS TO SORT OF PREVENT, UH, LARGE BREAKS WITHIN THE SIDEWALKS THERE SO THAT YOU HAVE SOME, SOME SPACING THERE. IT MAKES IT SAFE FOR PEDESTRIANS. UH, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THAT RIBBON DRIVEWAYS BE PROVIDED FOR AT LEAST 10% OF THE DRIVEWAYS. THAT'S IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF PERVIOUS SURFACE AND REDUCE THE SORT OF RUNOFF AND EFFECTS THAT THAT HAS ON PRAIRIE CREEK. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS FOR 30%. UH, THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING THAT ENCLOSED PARKING SPACES MUST HAVE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS IF THEY'RE RECESSED LESS THAN SEVEN FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE, A MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT OF EIGHT FEET, A MINIMUM SIX FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK ALONG ALL ROADS, AND THEN PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS TO TRACK THREE AT EACH CUL-DE-SAC ADJACENT TO TRACK THREE, AS WELL AS A PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO THE ST. AUGUSTINE PARK AND THE PRAIRIE CREEK BRANCH LIBRARY. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF HAS SOME RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS THAT DEVIATE FROM THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTED CONDITIONS FOR GARAGE DOORS. WERE RECOMMENDING THAT THEY MUST BE RECESSED AT LEAST FIVE FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE OF THE STRUCTURE. SIDEWALKS WOULD BE A MINIMUM SI SIX FOOT, [00:50:01] WITH A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT WIDE BUFFER. WE'RE ALSO REQUESTING OR RECOMMENDING PEDESTRIAN ENHANCEMENTS SUCH AS PEDESTRIAN SCALE LIGHTING, ENHANCED CROSSWALKS AND PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE SEE FROM THE, UH, SECTION 1107 DESIGN STANDARDS. UH, AND RESERVING 10% OF TRACT ONE FOR OPEN SPACE. UH, AGAIN, USING THE 1107 DEFINITIONS THERE THAT WE OFTEN SEE FOR, UM, OTHER DEVELOPMENTS. UM, MAINLY MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS. SNAP'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER HALL? UH, THANK YOU. UM, THE STAFF RECOMMENDED AMEN, 30% FOR RIBBON DRIVEWAYS, BUT APPLICANT SAYS ONLY 10, UH, Y YES. CAN YOU, DO YOU KNOW A REASON FOR THAT? UH, 10% WAS, UH, SORT OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY, UH, BROUGHT UP, UH, DURING SOME DISCUSSIONS, BOTH WITH, UH, WITH OUR LONG RANGE AND URBAN DESIGN TEAM. UH, CERTAINLY 10% IS, IT'S BETTER THAN 0%, THAT'S FOR SURE. UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING 30% JUST TO HAVE THIS SORT OF AN ADDITIONAL, UH, INCREASE, INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF PURIA SURFACE TO REDUCE THE RUNOFF THAT GOES TOWARDS PRAIRIE CREEK. UM, IN DISCUSSING WITH LONG RANGE AND WITH URBAN DESIGN, UH, THE PRAIRIE CREEK CREEK IS RATHER, IT'S AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA. AND WHILE WE CERTAINLY WANT TO SEE, WE WANNA SEE HOUSING IN THE CITY, WE WANT TO HELP SEE DEVELOPMENT HAPPEN, BUT WE ALSO WANNA MAKE SURE THAT NATURAL AREAS ARE, UH, PROTECTED AND PRESERVED. AND SO 30% IT WOULD PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL, UH, ADDITIONAL PROTECTION FOR THAT NATURAL RESOURCE. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HOUSER. UM, MR. BATE, WHAT? I WENT THROUGH THE, UM, ZONING REPLY PACKET LAST NIGHT, BY THE WAY. THANKS AGAIN FOR AN EARLY PUBLISH OF THAT. UM, IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS SOME, UM, FOLKS THAT DIDN'T LIKE THIS CASE, BUT THEY WERE ON THE WEST SIDE OF PRAIRIE CREEK, WHICH IS REALLY A LITTLE SEPARATE FROM OUR AREA. UH, WERE THERE ANY COMMUNITY MEETINGS, AND ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY DIALOGUE WITH THE FOLKS ON THE EAST THAT WHOSE STREETS WILL BE USED TO CONNECT INTO THIS? YOU KNOW, THERE, UH, THERE'S A NUMBER OF STREETS THAT ARE GONNA BE THROUGH STREETS LEADING FROM, UM, FROM MASTERS THAT, UM, ARE GONNA LEAD TO THESE NEW RESIDENCES, WHICH ISN'T NECESSARILY BAD, BUT I'M JUST KIND OF CURIOUS WHAT KIND OF FEEDBACK YOU WERE GETTING. CERTAINLY. SO A COMMUNITY MEETING WAS HELD, UH, THIS, THIS TUESDAY, UH, TUESDAY EVENING. UH, CHAIR SHA WAS ALSO IN ATTENDANCE THERE. UH, THE GENERAL COMMUNITY FEEDBACK, I THINK I, I WOULD, I WOULD CLASSIFY AS A MIX OF, UH, SUPPORT AND CONCERN FOR, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT AS WE OFTEN SEE WITH PROPOSALS FOR LARGE, UH, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. UH, I DON'T RECALL SPECIFICALLY, UH, CONCERNS THAT CAME UP ABOUT TRAFFIC GOING THROUGH THERE. UM, PERHAPS EITHER, UH, JUDGE, DO, YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME INFORMATION ON THAT OR, UH, THE APPLICANT MIGHT HAVE HEARD. UH, BUT I DO NOT RECALL ANY SPECIFIC CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC GOING THROUGH THOSE TWO THROUGH STREETS. I ASSUME THAT IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR LESS DENSITY THAN IS CURRENTLY ON THE GROUND TODAY. DO THEY UNDERSTAND THAT? UH, YES. I BELIEVE THEY DO. YES, SIR. THAT WAS DISCUSSED. I, I'LL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, BUT WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER HAMILTON, PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR. BAY. I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION ON THE SIDE YARD SETBACK THAT'S SHOWN AT TWO FEET. IT APPEARS THAT SOME OF THE, UM, PROPOSED LOTS WILL BE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE R 75. COULD YOU JUST SPEAK TO HOW THE TWO FEET WAS ESTABLISHED IN STAFF'S REVIEW WITH THE APPLICANT? UH, YEAH, THE TWO FEET, UM, UH, IT WAS, IT WAS, IT WAS A, IT WAS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT AND, UH, WE DID NOT SEE THAT IT WOULD BE NECESSARILY BE A CON A CONFLICT WITH THE, UH, WITH THE ADJACENT AREAS. UM, IN TERMS OF THE SETBACK, ADDITIONALLY, THE MAJORITY OF THE SITES HERE THAT DO, UH, BUT THE R 7.5 A, UH, THESE RIGHT HERE ON THE EASTERN SIDE, THAT WOULD BE MORE DICTATE BY THE REAR YARD SETBACK AS WELL. THAT WOULD BE REAR YARD, IS THAT WHAT I BELIEVE SO, YES. YEAH, I WAS GONNA, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN MY EXPECTATION. AND AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME EXACTLY HOW THE TWO FEET IS MEANT TO BE, UM, IMPLEMENTED, UM, BOTH INTERNAL BUT THEN ADJACENT TO THE SITE. BUT TYPICALLY AT THAT, UM, SEPARATION, UH, YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO HAVE WINDOWS. AND SO THAT'S, AGAIN, JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WORKS IN THE LARGER CONTEXT. SO IT MAY BE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. UH, MR. BATE, UH, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT FOR THE, THE COMMUNITY MEETING. UH, THAT WAS, WOULD YOU SAY IT WAS VERY WELL ATTENDED? CERTAINLY. I THINK THERE WAS A LOT OF GREAT DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE, BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND SOME OF THEIR PARTNERS IN THERE AS WELL. I KNOW THAT THEY ARE WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AS PART OF, UH, HELPING TO SORT OF PROMOTE AFFORDABLE HOME OWNERSHIP. AND I THINK, YEAH, IT WAS, IT WAS VERY PRODUCTIVE DIALOGUE. I WOULD CHARACTERIZE IT. IS IT ALSO [00:55:01] FAIR TO SAY THAT, UH, AT LEAST MY IMPRESSION THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE FOLKS THAT ATTENDED THE MEETING WERE EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT, EXCEPT FOR MAYBE A COUPLE OF FOLKS OR MAYBE JUST TWO, THAT THEIR, THEIR CONCERNS KIND OF HOVERED MORE ON, ON A COMMUNITY CENTER, A RECREATION CENTER THAT SOMEHOW WOULD BE A, UH, A RESULT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT? AND IT WAS, IT WAS KIND OF A TANGENTIAL ITEM. I WOULD SAY THAT YES, THERE WERE, GENERALLY THE RECEPTION WAS RATHER WARM. AND I THINK A LOT OF THE CONCERNS THAT CAME UP, I WOULD SAY THAT I HAVEN'T BEEN TO TOO MANY COMMUNITY MEETINGS YET, BUT VERY CHARACTERISTIC OF BEING USED AS SORT OF AN AREA TO EXPRESS GENERAL CONCERNS IN THE COMMUNITY TO, UH, TO ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS. THANK YOU, SIR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. UM, COMMISSIONERS, WHY DON'T WE TAKE A BREAK NOW. IT'S EXACTLY 10:00 AM LET'S TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK. [01:07:27] COMMISSIONER, [01:07:28] WE'RE READY TO GET BACK ON THE RECORD. COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE READY TO GET BACK ON THE RECORD. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, I BELIEVE IS ONLINE. DID YOU FIND HER? MR. HELMS? YOU FOUND COMMISSIONER WHEELER. PERFECT. THANK YOU. 2, 3, 4, 5. WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM. YES, PLEASE. COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE TAKE YOUR SEATS. WE'RE READY TO GET BACK ON THE RECORD. IS COMMISSIONER HERBERT ON? HE WAS ON ON 2 3, 4, 5, 6 4 5, 6 7. [01:10:01] WE NEED ONE MORE. 21 MARK. OKAY, WE DO HILL QUORUM. NOW COMMISSIONERS WILL MOVE TO CASE NUMBER 14 Z 2 34, 180 6. BACK TO YOU MR. CLINTON. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 14 CA, CASE Z 2 34 DASH 180 6. AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS Z 9 78 DASH 15 AND Z 1 9 0 DASH 68 ON PROPERTY ZONE CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH CORNER OF SOUTH FITSU AVENUE AND HASKELL AVENUE. UH, THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO AMEND THE EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS AND ALLOW ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL USES APPROXIMATELY 34,000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE. HERE IS OUR LOCATION MAP. THIS IS THE AERIAL MAP. HERE'S THE ZONING MAP. WITH THE SURROUNDING USES. WE DO HAVE, UM, SINGLE FAMILY TO THE NORTH, UH, MULTIFAMILY TO THE SOUTH, AND THEN COMMERCIAL RETAIL ON EITHER SIDE, UH, WEST AND EAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. UH, THE, UH, QUICK BACKGROUND ON THIS. UH, SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO AMEND THE EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS TO, UM, ALLOW TWO ADDITIONAL USES, UM, VEHICLE OR ENGINE REPAIR OR MAINTENANCE AND VEHICLE DISPLAY SALES AND SERVICE USES. UM, THEY ALSO PROPOSED TO ADJUST THEIR HOURS OF OPERATION, UM, FOR THE EXISTING USE, UM, AS WELL AS THEIR, UH, PROPOSED USES TO OPERATE BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 9:00 AM AND 6:00 PM. UM, THERE HAVE BEEN TWO ZONING CASES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, AND HERE WE HAVE SITE VISIT IMAGES. UH, THIS IS ON SOUTH SHU AVENUE LOOKING SOUTHEAST. UH, THIS IS ALSO LOOKING SOUTHEAST TOWARDS THE INTERSECTION. UH, THIS IS LOOKING, UH, THIS IS ON PROPERTY LOOKING NORTHEAST. THIS IS ON PROPERTY LOOKING SOUTHWEST. THIS IS ON PROPERTY LOOKING NORTHWEST. UH, THESE ARE IMAGES PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT SHOWING THE INSIDE OF THE PROPERTY. UM, THIS, UH, THESE IMAGES ARE, UH, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE, UM, PART OF THEIR EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS. THEY HAD TO PROVIDE A SIX FOOT, UM, BUFFER, AND THEY WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND AND DID A SEVEN AND A HALF FOOT, UH, MASONRY WALL. UH, AGAIN, THIS IS INSIDE THE PROPERTY LOOKING NORTHWEST. THIS IS INSIDE THE PROPERTY LOOKING NORTHEAST. UH, THIS IS THAT BACKSIDE OF, UH, OF THE PROPERTY. UM, THIS WAS JUST A SNIPPET OF THE EXISTING D RESTRICTIONS AND, AND THE, UH, AMENDED D RESTRICTIONS WOULD READ AS FOLLOWS. UM, SO THOSE USES PERMITTED IN CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT AS AMENDED, AND THOSE USES PERMITTED IN THE CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE [01:15:01] DISTRICT, LIMITED TO A MACHINERY HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR TRUCK SALES AND SERVICE USE OPERATING BETWEEN. UM, AGAIN, THE UM, REVISED VERSION IS, UH, THEY WENT FROM 7:00 AM AND SET TO 7:00 PM TO THE NEW HOURS OF 9:00 AM TO 6:00 PM. UM, THE NEW USE WOULD BE A VEHICLE OR ENGINE REPAIR OR MAINTENANCE USE OPERATING BETWEEN 9:00 AM AND 6:00 PM. THE OTHER USE WOULD BE A VEHICLE DISPLAY SALES AND SERVICE USE OPERATING BETWEEN 9:00 AM AND 6:00 PM AND THEY'VE ALSO, UH, VOLUNTEERED ANOTHER DEED RESTRICTION, UM, TO THE EXHAUST AND VENTILATION EQUIPMENT THAT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH, UH, THE, UH, PROPOSED USES AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS, UM, AS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. CLINTON, CAN I ASK YOU TO GO BACK TO PAGE 13, YOUR SITE PHOTOS? ONE MORE. THERE WE GO. SO THIS IS LOOKING ESSENTIALLY STANDING ON THE PROPERTY, LOOKING ACROSS AT WHAT'S A VACANT LOT. IT'S, UM, RESTRICTED NOW FOR ACCESS. THERE WERE PREVIOUSLY CARS PARKING ON IT. THE TRUCK THAT'S THERE, IS THAT ACTUALLY PARKED ON THE, WHAT I'D CALL THE SIDEWALK AND THE PARKWAY? IT LOOKS TO BE, YES. AND ARE YOU AWARE, UM, I KNOW YOU'VE REACHED OUT TO COMPLIANCE STAFF, AS HAVE I, I KNOW THIS PROPERTY, UM, DOESN'T HAVE ANY CURRENT VIOLATIONS, BUT ARE YOU AWARE IF THERE'S OTHER ISSUES IN THE AREA RELATED TO SOME OF THE OTHER, UM, USES IN ITEMS SUCH AS PEOPLE PARKING ON OR, I'M AWARE PARKING ON UNAPPROVED SERVICES. I'LL JUST SAY IT THAT WAY. UM, AND HAVE YOU SEEN ANY RESPONSE BACK FROM CODE COMPLIANCE ON QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT? I HAVE NOT. OKAY. UM, IT, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED ARE, UM, SEEKING TO ADDRESS ESSENTIALLY THE ADJACENCY. WE'VE HAVE ADDITIONAL, UM, EXISTING RESIDENTIAL IMMEDIATELY APPROXIMATE TO THE SITE. THEY'RE ADDING A BIT MORE INTENSITY TO THE USE. UM, IS, COULD YOU SPEAK TO, AND THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR CODE COMPLIANCE MORE THAN YOU, BUT ARE YOU AWARE OF HOW, UM, PARKING AND LOADING, UM, IS REQUIRED AS BASE CODE? YOU, YOU CAN'T LOAD ON THE LOAD AND UNLOAD FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY? IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. YOU CAN'T PARK IN UNAPPROVED SURFACES? THAT'S CORRECT. AND THAT'S BEEN AN ONGOING ISSUE IN THE COMMUNITY. DID YOU SEE THAT ON YOUR SITE VISITS? YES. OKAY. UM, I THINK THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS FOR NOW. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU MR. CLARK. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS ON THIS, THIS CASE? OKAY. WE'LL GO TO, UH, CASE NUMBER 15, MR. CARR. GOOD MORNING. MORNING. GOOD MORNING. UH, THIS IS CASE NUMBER, EXCUSE ME. THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z 2 3 4 2 9. IT'S RENEWAL OF SEP NUMBER 1959 AT, UH, 1302 ELM STREET, RENEWAL OF, UH, SEP NUMBER 1959 FOR AN ATTACHED THE APPLICATION'S, THE, THE POWERPOINT'S NOT UP. LET ME MAKE SURE WE GET THAT UP. HEY WILSON. EXCUSE ME, I THINK WE BRIEFED THIS ONE LAST TIME. UH, SO IF YOU COULD, COULD YOU JUST BRIEF UPDATES, UM, SINCE THE LAST HEARING I KNOW, UM, WE'VE TAKEN CARE OF THE TRAFFIC STUDY ISSUE. DO YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT THAT? SURE, SURE. YEAH. UM, APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. CAN YOU SEE THE SCREEN NOW? YES, WE CAN. THANK YOU. GREAT. UM, SO WE DID GET A TRAFFIC STUDY FROM THE APPLICANT, UM, AND THAT WAS RE REVIEWED BY, UH, THE TRAFFIC, UM, TEAM. UM, THEY REVIEWED IT AND THEY HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE, UH, PROPOSED RENEWAL FOR A SIX YEAR RENEWAL PERIOD. UM, SO WITH THAT, UM, THE, UH, STEPS, UH, RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR THAT SIX YEAR PERIOD. THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? NUMBER 15. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, MR. KERR COMMISSIONERS, LET'S GO TO NUMBER 16 Z, 2 34, 1 91. [01:20:40] THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 16, CASE Z, 2 34 DASH 1 91. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A TRUCK STOP ON PROPERTY ZONE, A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1 8 5 1 FOR THE SALE OF, UH, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE. UM, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS, AND A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE WEST CORNER OF CF HA FREEWAY AND SILVERADO DRIVE. AGAIN, THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A NEW SUP, UH, FOR TRUCK STOP ON THE PROPERTY, AND IT'S APPROXIMATELY 3.69 ACRES IN SIZE. HERE IS THE LOCATION MAP, AND THIS IS OUR AERIAL MAP. HERE'S OUR ZONING MAP, UH, SHOWING THE SURROUNDING USES. SO COMMERCIAL SERVICE TO THE WEST AND NORTH OF THE SITE AND SINGLE FAMILY TO THE SOUTH OF THE SITE. UH, QUICK BACKGROUND. SO AGAIN, IT'S CURRENTLY ZONE CS. UM, IT'S DEVELOPED WITH COMMERCIAL RETAIL, GAS STATION, MERCHANDISE STORE AND TRUCK STOP. UM, THE LOT HAS FRONTAGE ON CF HA FREEWAY AND SILVERADO. UM, AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW A TRUCK STOP ON SITE. THERE IS AN EXISTING SUP AND APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A NEW SUP. HERE ARE THE SITE VISIT PHOTOS. THIS IS ON CF HA FREEWAY LOOKING SOUTH. UH, THIS IS ON SILVERADO LOOKING SOUTHWEST. THIS IS SAME LOCATION LOOKING NORTHWEST, SAME LOCATION, LOOKING IN THE SAME DIRECTION. THIS IS ON SILVERADO, LOOKING NORTHEAST ON SILVERADO. LOOKING, UH, WEST HERE. WE ARE ON SITE, LOOKING NORTH ON SITE LOOKING EAST. AND THIS IS ON, UH, CF HAN LOOKING. UH, FIRST IMAGE IS LOOKING WEST, SECOND IMAGE IS LOOKING EAST. UM, AND THEN, THEN WE HAVE SOME SURROUNDING USES, UH, PHOTOS. THIS IS ON THE SITE LOOKING SOUTH TO THE RESIDENTIAL. ACTUALLY, I THINK THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S COMMERCIAL. I'M SORRY. UH, THIS IS ON PROPERTY LOOKING, UH, SOUTHWEST. THIS IS LOOKING WEST, UH, NORTHWEST HERE. WE ARE ON PROPERTY LOOKING EAST. AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S A LARGE SITE. UM, SO THIS IS THE, UH, PROPOSED SITE PLAN, AND WE DID GET AN UPDATED SITE PLAN, UM, AND I THINK THAT WAS CIRCULATED TO THE COMMISSIONERS. SO THIS IS THE, UM, REVISED SITE PLAN. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE A SKETCH THAT WAS PROVIDED, UH, FOR IMPROVEMENT, I BELIEVE, ON SILVERADO. I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE, UM, WORKED, WORKED ON, UM, PRETTY, UH, SORRY, I'M LOSING THE WORD. UM, BUT THE TIME LIMIT. UM, SO THE, THEY'RE, UM, APPLYING FOR, UH, AN A PERMANENT TIME, UH, LIMIT FOR THE SUP, UM, NO OVERNIGHT PARKING ON THE SITE. AND THEN, UM, NO, UH, COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE EGRESS IS PERMITTED, UM, ON SILVERADO. UM, QUICK STAFF ANALYSIS. SO THERE ARE EXISTING COMMERCIAL, UH, USES IN THE AREA. UM, SO THE AREA OF REQUEST DOES MATCH AND IS COMPATIBLE, UH, WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. AND IT DOES ALIGN WITH, UH, FORD, DALLAS AND THE WEST KLEBERG, UH, LAND USE PLAN. AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR PERMANENT TIME PERIOD, SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS. [01:25:01] THANK YOU, SIR. UH, LAQUAN, BEFORE WE GO TO QUESTIONS, COULD YOU KIND OF BRIEFLY OUTLINE OUR REMAINING, UH, RECOMMENDED EDITS TO THE PLAN, UH, FROM THE UPDATES THAT OCCURRED THIS WEEK? YES. SO WE DID MEET, UM, WE HAD A FEW MEETINGS WITH, UH, THE ARBORISTS. UM, SO THERE WERE, THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP IN TERMS OF THE LANDSCAPING THAT, UM, WOULD NEED TO BE PROVIDED, UH, ON THE PLAN TO MEET ARTICLE 10. SO, UM, WE STILL HAVE TO WORK THROUGH GETTING THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, UM, TOGETHER AS WELL AS A SITE PLAN THAT, UM, IS COHESIVE WITH THE CONDITIONS. AND I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH, UM, THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS THE COMMISSIONER TO GET EVERYBODY ON ONE ACCORD FOR THOSE THINGS. THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER BLAIR? UM, YOU JUST, CAN YOU PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU SAY THAT THE ARBORISTS, THAT RIGHT NOW THE, THAT THEIR PLAN DOES NOT MEET ARTICLE 10, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? SO THERE ARE THINGS, UM, ON THEIR PLAN THAT TRIGGER CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR ARTICLE 10 THAT THE, THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO, UH, PROVIDE TO BE COMPLIANT. SO ARE YOU SEEING THAT BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND STAFF, THE APPLICANT IS NOT, UM, IN AGREEMENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS THAT STAFF IS SAYING IS RE REQUIRED TO MEET ARTICLE 10? NO, APPLICANT IS, UM, WILLING TO MEET THEM. I, I JUST DON'T THINK THEY'VE HAD TIME TO MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS. OKAY. AND THEN, UM, YOU, YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THE SITE PLAN. CAN YOU PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN? YES. SO THE SITE PLAN, BASED ON, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, UM, ONE OF THE CONDITIONS WAS TO PRO, UH, PROHIBIT ACCESS FROM SILVERADO. SO THE SITE PLAN IS STILL SHOWING THAT. UM, SO WE WANTED TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO GET THAT SITE PLAN UPDATED AND THEN ALSO HAVE THE SITE PLAN MATCH THE, UM, CONDITIONS. SO IF, IF THERE IS, OKAY, SO IF THERE, THE SITE PLAN HAS ACCESS ON SILVERADO, BUT THE CONDITIONS SAY NO ACCESS ON SILVERADO. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE SITE PLAN OR THE, OR THE CONDITIONS NEED TO CHANGE IN ORDER TO MEET WHAT THE APPLICANT IS ABLE TO DO. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE, THAT SKETCH? YES. WELL, YOU KNEW I WAS GOING THERE, DIDN'T YOU? UM, THIS PARTICULAR SKETCH ARE, ARE YOU AWARE OF IT, THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IT? UH, YOU COULD REFRESH MY MEMORY IF YOU'D LIKE. SO, BUT IT IS PROBABLY MORE OF A QUESTION THAT I NEED. UM, UH, MR. NAVAREZ, IS HE AROUND? I'M, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU GRACE. APPRECIATE THAT. . SO I THINK IT'S, IT'S AN IMPROVEMENT SKETCH, CORRECT? UH, YEAH, THERE, THERE ARE SOME IMPROVEMENT SIGNS, UM, THINGS THAT WERE THERE THAT ARE NO LONGER THERE THAT NEED TO BE REPAIRED, NEED TO BE REPLACED. SO, UM, YEAH. MR. NAVAREZ, CAN I ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS? PLEASE? YOU SEE YOU'RE HIDING. CAN YOU HELP, UM, THE COMMISSIONERS, UM, UNDERSTAND THE SITE PLAN WELL, THIS, THE, UM, SKETCH, THE, THE IMPROVED IMPROVEMENT SKETCH THAT WE'RE SHOWING NOW, CAN YOU HELP THE COMMISSIONERS UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS MEANS? GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS, DAVID VIRUS TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, UH, THERE'S AN ABSOLUTE NEED FOR IMPROVEMENTS, NOT JUST AT THIS SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION, BUT ALSO ON THE EAST SIDE. UM, SIRIUS, I WAS NOT AWARE OF IT. THE, OUR, OUR DISTRICT ENGINEER WAS AWARE OF IT, BUT WE HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY SERVICE REQUESTS OR COMPLAINTS HE HAD DRIVEN BY AND ESSENTIALLY PUT IT ON BACK OF HIS MIND TO FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION AT ONE POINT. WE TRULY APPRECIATE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER TO BRING THIS UP TO OUR ATTENTION. THIS CATCH I PREPARED ON TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION, UM, IT IS LIKELY WHAT WE'LL BE MOVING FORWARD WITH. WHAT WE NEED THOUGH IS TRAFFIC COUNTS TO MAKE SURE WE KNOW WHERE WE CAN PUT A STOP SIGN. I'M [01:30:01] OF THE OPINION THAT ONLY THE, THAT ONE SHOWING THE LEFT ON ARROW FROM SILVERADO TO SILVERADO, UH, WILL NEED A, UH, STOP SIGN AND A STOP BAR. I DIDN'T SKETCH THAT'S MISSING. UM, BUT OTHERWISE THERE'S A, CERTAINLY, THERE'S CERTAINLY A NEED FOR ANY IMPROVEMENT AT THIS INTERSECTION. IF YOU DRIVE THERE, YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO, THERE'S A STOP SIGN, THERE'S A YIELD SIGN. UM, I'M SURPRISED THAT THIS HADN'T COME UP TO OUR ATTENTION. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS INTERSECTION NECESSARILY AFFECTS THE CASE THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU, BUT WE TRULY APPRECIATE THAT THIS WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION AND, AND WE'RE GIVING A PRIORITY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S, UM, ADDRESSED. SO THERE IS A SERVICE REQUEST, CORRECT? THAT I INITIATE? YES, MA'AM. THERE, THERE IS A, AN A SERVICE REQUEST. SO AND YOU'RE SAYING YOU DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT IMPACTS THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT'S DESIRE FOR WHAT THEY WANT TO DO? UM, WELL, YES, THAT'S WHAT I SAID. I IT'S AN, IT'S AN IMMEDIATE NEED THAT, THAT, THAT THIS INTERSECTION HAS, UH, WITH OR WITHOUT THE, THE CASE MOVING FORWARD OR THE REQUEST, EXCUSE ME, THE REQUEST MOVING FORWARD. I, WELL, I APPRE THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE DONE, UM, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS WITH THIS PARTICULAR CASE. BUT WHEN, UH, WHEN SOMEONE GOES INTO THE SITE AND THEY EXIT THE SITE BASED, WHEN YOU OVERLAY THIS WITH THE APPLICANT'S SITE PLAN, UM, COULD YOU NOT SEE A BENEFIT OF THIS IMPROVEMENT, LETTING WHATEVER TYPE OF VEHICLE COMES IN AND OUT TO KNOW WHO HAS THE RIGHT OF WAY AND WHICH WAY YOU'RE GOING? IS THAT NOT CORRECT? I, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE STATEMENT, MA'AM. SO IF THAT IS NOT CORRECT, WELL, IF THAT IS CORRECT, WOULD THAT NOT THEN IM, UM, UM, IMPACT THE APPLICANT'S DESIRE TO DO ANYTHING AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE THAT'S CORRECT. I IT'S INDEPENDENT. OKAY. UM, THANK YOU. I, I, I APPRECIATE, UM, YOUR, YOUR DILIGENCE WITH THIS IN, IN THIS, THIS SKETCH. DO YOU, WELL, ONE MORE QUESTION, I BELIEVE, OR ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS DONE A, A SEMI TRAFFIC COUNT? I'M, I SPOKE WITH THE APPLICANT'S CONSULTANT AND THEY EXPLAINED THAT THEIR, THAT THEIR TRAFFIC COUNTS ARE SPECIFIC TO THEIR, THE, THE SITE DRIVEWAY, UH, ON SILVERADO. SO IT, IT COUNTS. WELL, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE, THERE, WELL, WE'LL, WHICH WE'LL SEE LATER, SO MAYBE I'LL JUST SAY THAT FOR LATER, BUT IT DOES HAVE SOME COUNTS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO THIS PARTICULAR SITE AND THIS ACCESS. YES. AND WE'LL CERTAINLY REQUEST A COPY AND I THINK WE HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED A COPY, MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN USE THOSE COUNTS AND VERIFYING THAT THE DESIGN, UM, WORKS. I DO HAVE TO APOLOGIZE AND I HOPE THAT AT LEAST ONE OF YOU NOTICED THAT THERE'S NO PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES IN THIS DESIGN. UH, THIS IS PROBABLY WHAT'S GONNA LOOK OUT THERE FOR NOW. THANK YOU. UM, MR. CLINTON, UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THIS PARTICULAR SITE, UM, THAT THE APPLICANT ENLARGED HIS FOOTPRINT AT THIS CORNER BY PURCHASING THE LOT, THE, WHERE THE ACCESS PORTIONS? I DON'T KNOW IF I'M, I'M DIRECTIONALLY CHALLENGED WHEN I GET TO THIS SITE BECAUSE I OF 1 75 IT SAYS I'M GOING EAST AND WEST AND I THINK I'M GOING SOUTH. SO I'M DIRECTIONALLY CHALLENGED LOOKING HERE. SO WHEN YOU GO BEHIND THE SITE THAT'S ALREADY THERE. YEAH. UH, YEAH. CAN YOU MAKE IT BIGGER? OKAY. SO WHEN YOU GO TO THE SITE THAT'S ALREADY THERE, YOU SEE THAT, THAT BUILDING IN THE VERY, VERY BACK YEAH. THAT, THAT'S ALREADY THERE. CORRECT. AND THEY ARE ALREADY OUT OF, UH, UTILIZING THAT PARTICULAR SERVICE FOR A REPAIR SHOP OF A COMMERCIAL VEHICLE REPAIR SHOP. IS THAT NOT CORRECT? UH, I BELIEVE SO, YES. AND THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY'RE, WELL, THE, THE, THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY'RE DOING ALSO WILL KIND OF HELP THAT, HELP THAT AREA AS WELL [01:35:01] TO DO WHAT THEY DO MORE EFFICIENTLY AND, UM, SO THAT IT LOOKS BETTER FOR THE COMMUNITY OPPOSED TO WHAT IT COMPUTE. SO THAT SITE RIGHT IN THE BACK, DO YOU, ARE YOU AWARE WILL NOT BE DIS IT MAY BE IMPROVED UPON, BUT IT WON'T GO AWAY, IS THAT CORRECT? I'M AWARE. MM-HMM. . THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. MR. CLINTON, ACCORDING TO YOUR, UM, STAFF REPORT, THE CASE REPORT, THIS SIDE IS ALREADY OPERATING AS A TRUCK STOP CORRECTLY, AND SO THEY'RE JUST NOW GETTING AROUND TO ASKING FOR AN SUP? YES. OKAY. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THE CURRENT USE IS OF SILVERADO AND WHAT THE INTENDED USE IS? BECAUSE THE SUP CONDITIONS SAY THAT EGRESS IS FORBIDDEN. SO DOES THAT MEAN TRUCKS ARE SUPPOSED TO ENTER VIA SILVERADO? WE GOT A, A, A COMMUNICATION YESTERDAY, I BELIEVE, FROM A, A CITIZEN WHO SEEMED TO BE, UM, UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT TRUCKS WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE USING SILVERADO AND SENT US SOME PICTURES. SO, SO THE CONDITIONS, UH, STATES INGRESS AND EGRESS, UM, AND WELL THAT'S THE SUBJECT HEADING. I'M SORRY, BUT IT SAYS IT THAT INGRESS EGRESS IS THE, IS THE, THE HEADING, BUT IT SAYS FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES EGRESS IS NOT PERMITTED ONTO SILVERADO. GOT YOU. I BELIEVE THAT WAS A TYPO. APOLOGIES, UM, ON MY END, HOWEVER, UM, YES, THE INTENTION IS TO HAVE THE TRUCKS ONLY ENTER FROM FRONTAGE FROM CF. HA. OKAY. UM, ENTER AND EXIT FROM CF. HA. OKAY. SO THIS SHOULD SAY NO AC EXIT. THERE SHOULD BE NO INGRESS OR EGRESS THAT'S CORRECT. ON SILVERADO? THAT'S CORRECT. AND SO THAT MEANS THE SITE PLAN IS SUPPOSED TO SHOW THAT THAT DRIVE HAS BEEN REMOVED ENTIRELY? YES. OKAY. AND ARE WE ALSO SUPPOSED TO BE GETTING A LANDSCAPE PLAN ON THIS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? YES. SO THE APPLICANT, UH, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THEY STILL HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO DO WITH THAT PORTION OF, UM, UH, BUT THAT IS NOT, THAT'S SEPARATE FROM THIS SUBMITTAL, IF YOU WILL. OKAY. WELL, IT, IT, IT'S CONNECTED IN A WAY BECAUSE IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE REPORT CORRECTLY, IT SEEMED THAT THEY WERE PROPOSING SOME LANDSCAPING THAT WAS AN ENHANCEMENT TO ARTICLE 10. AND IF IT WAS GOING TO BE A, AN ENHANCEMENT TO ARTICLE 10, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT THOSE ENHANCEMENTS BE INCORPORATED INTO THE SUP CONDITIONS? YES. SO WE DID HAVE A, UM, MEETING AND WE DISCUSSED THAT THIS WEEK. SO THEY ACTUALLY JUST HAVE TO DO WHAT IS REQUIRED BY ARTICLE 10. NOTHING. OKAY. SO THE ENHANCEMENTS ARE, ARE NOW BEING DROPPED? OH, I MEAN, YES. OKAY. AS FAR AS REQUIREMENTS? YES. OKAY. AND I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION IS, UM, I SEEM TO ASK THIS QUESTION A LOT. UH, THE RATIONALE FOR A PERMANENT TIME PERIOD FOR A TRUCK STOP, GIVEN THAT TRUCK STOPS ARE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY, UM, INTRUSIVE. AND THIS WOULD MEAN THAT NO MATTER HOW THE AREA CHANGES IN THE FUTURE, THERE WOULD ALWAYS BE THE RIGHT TO HAVE A TRUCK STOP HERE. THAT'S CORRECT. SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING, UM, THEY'VE HAD THE TRUCK STOP FOR AS LONG AS I GUESS THEY'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS. MM-HMM. . SO THEY JUST WANT TO GET THE SUP, SO IT'S ALLOWED BY. RIGHT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. STUCK AROUND COMMISSIONER BLAIR. UM, IN REGARDS TO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER'S QUESTIONED, UM, ABOUT THE TIMELINE OR THE TIME PERIOD FOR THE, THE SUP, UM, MR. CLINTON, ARE YOU AWARE THAT IT IS NOT MY, UM, I'M NOT ONE WHO BELIEVES IN PERMANENT SUVS. I IBEL, ESPECIALLY ON THE INITIAL SUP. ARE YOU AWARE THAT THAT'S MY WAY THAT I NORMALLY OPERATE? I AM AWARE. HEY, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, WE WILL GO TO THE NEXT CASE. THANK YOU MR. CLINTON. UH, COMMISSIONER'S CASE NUMBER 17 WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 5TH. WE WILL BRIEF IT THEN TAKES US TO NUMBER 18. I'M, I'M STILL HERE, . ALRIGHT, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 18, CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 23. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A MICRO BREW BREWERY, MICRO DISTILLERY OR WINERY ON PROPERTY ZONE TRACK A WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2 69, THE DEEP EL NEAR EAST SIDE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF MAIN STREET AND NORTH CRODA STREET. UH, THE PROPOSAL IS [01:40:01] FOR A NEW SUP AND IT'S APPROXIMATELY 4,000 SQUARE FEET IN TOTAL SIZE. HERE IS OUR LOCATION MAP AND THIS IS OUR AERIAL MAP. UM, HERE'S THE ZONING MAP WITH THE, UM, EXISTING SURROUNDING USES. SO COMMERCIAL RETAIL AS WELL AS, UH, PD 2 69, UM, TO THE NORTH, SOUTHEAST, AND WEST OF THE SITE. UM, TO THE EAST OF THE SITE, THERE IS, UH, EXISTING SUP NUMBER 2 3 1 9. UM, BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THIS. IT'S, UH, AGAIN, UH, ZONE PD, UH, 2 69 SUBDISTRICT TRACT A, UH, WITH, UH, CBD DOWNTOWN DEMOLITION DELAY OVERLAY. UM, THIS IS A CORNER LOT, SO IT HAS FRONTAGE ON BOTH MAIN AND, UH, NORTH CRO STREET. IT'S, UH, CURRENTLY, UH, A VACANT BUILDING AND THE PROPOSED HOURS OF OPERATION, UH, WOULD BE BETWEEN 11:00 AM AND 12:00 AM MIDNIGHT MONDAY THROUGH SUNDAY. UM, AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW A MICRO BREWERY, MICRO DISTILLERY OR WINERY ON THE PROPERTY. UM, THERE HAVE BEEN SEVEN ZONING CASES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, AND THIS IS A NEW SUV. SO HERE WE HAVE, UH, SITE VISIT PHOTOS. THIS IS ON MAIN STREET. LOOKING TOWARDS THE PROPERTY, THIS IS ON MAIN STREET, LOOKING WEST. THIS IS ON MAIN STREET LOOKING SOUTH. THIS IS ON MAIN STREET LOOKING EAST. UH, THIS IS ON NORTH. THERE ARE EXISTING COMMERCIAL USES IN THE AREA, UM, OF THE SUBJECT SITE. THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENCIES SEEM TO CLASH WITH THE PROPOSED USE. UM, THE PROPOSED USE, UH, STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENT USES. UM, AND THE REQUEST IS SEEN TO BE DE UH, POTENTIALLY DE DETRIMENTAL TO THE IMMEDIATE USES. UM, AS WELL, THE, UH, PROPOSAL DOES NOT ALIGN WITH, UH, THE GOALS OF FOR DALLAS. SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DID YOU WANT MR. CLINTON, SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY, THE REASON FOR STAFF'S DENIAL IS THE ADJACENCY OF THIS, UH, MICRO, UM, BREWERY, ERY, WHATEVER IT IS TO A SCHOOL. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. UM, I, I WAS, I MUST ADMIT, I WAS A LITTLE SHOCKED WHEN I SAW THIS, THIS RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THAT POLICY HAD ALWAYS BEEN THAT WE ARE TRYING TO SEPARATE CHILDREN, UNDERAGE CHILDREN FROM, FROM ALCOHOL. YOU KNOW, THIS IS A VERY, UM, UH, ENTERTAINMENT, ALCOHOL, HEAVY ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENT, HEAVY AREA. UM, AND AS A BARBER SCHOOL FOR ADULTS, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE AGES OR, UH, OKAY. THE, THE RANGE OF WHO'S ATTENDING THE SCHOOL. OKAY. 'CAUSE IT'S FOLLOWING THIS LINE OF THOUGHT. IF IT WERE A TRUCK DRIVING SCHOOL NEXT DOOR, WOULD THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION BE THE SAME OR A POLE DANCING SCHOOL? I THINK THAT WOULD IT MIGHT FIT IF IT WAS POLE DANCING . UM, NO, I THINK THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED, UH, OR DEPENDENT ON CASE BY CASE BASIS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO MANY JOKES THERE THAT I'M NOT EVEN GONNA GET NEAR COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. THANK YOU. UM, MR. CLINTON, UM, WITHIN PD 2 69, IS IT CORRECT THAT THERE IS A BUYRIGHT ALLOWANCE FOR TECHNICAL SCHOOL AND BUSINESS SCHOOLS? THAT'S CORRECT. AND THE BARBERSHOP LIKELY FALLS WITHIN THAT? YES. USE CLASSIFICATION. THERE'S A SEPARATE USE CLASSIFICATION FOR, UM, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, DENOMINATIONAL SCHOOLS, AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS THAT REQUIRE AN SUP? THAT'S CORRECT. SO THERE'S NO SUP RELATED TO THE BARBER SCHOOL. I HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK ON THAT. WELL, PER THE ZONING MAP IN OUR CASE REPORT, I CAN REPORT THAT THE SUP IS NOT VISIBLE. NOT VISIBLE, YES. SO, UM, RELATED TO THAT, UM, THE USE ON THE CORNER, ARE YOU AWARE THAT IT'S ACTUALLY AN EXISTING USE THAT IS RELOCATING TO THIS NEW LOCATION? WAS THAT ANYTHING THAT THE APPLICANT'S TEAM HAD SHARED WITH YOU? YES. SO ANY KNOWN ISSUES, UM, WITH THE OPERATOR, WITH THE EXISTING USE, UM, AS PART OF THE STAFF REVIEW? UM, NO, BECAUSE THIS WAS AGAIN, INDEPENDENTLY, UM, EVALUATED. EVALUATED. SO YOU DIDN'T LOOK AT IT IN TERMS OF WHERE THEY HAVE THEIR EXISTING USE. OKAY. WELL I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT THAT. MM-HMM, . SO THE USE ON THE CORNER, THEY HAVE TWO FRONTAGES. I THINK THERE WAS A REFERENCE ALSO TO, YOU KNOW, CIRCULATION AND LOADING. ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE'S A DEDICATED LOADING SPACE IN FRONT OF THIS SPACE? IT'S [01:45:01] ON STREET, BUT THAT IT'S DEDICATED WITHIN THE AREA? , WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU MEAN BY, UH, LOADING SPACE? LIKE DROP PICKUP, DROP OFF, OR? CORRECT. OKAY. UM, SO ON, ON STREET LOADING IS PROVIDED, I DID SEE FOR IN THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. YES MA'AM. I DID SEE THAT, YES. OKAY. AND THEN THE USE OF THE SPACE ITSELF, IT'S A INTENDED TO BE A MICROBREWERY, SO THEY'RE GONNA BE BREWING, UM, ON SITE. DO YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW LARGE THEIR RETAIL FACILITY WILL BE WITHIN THE SITE? ACCORDING TO THEIR SITE PLAN, IT'S LOOKING LIKE THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING IS 7,900 SQUARE FEET. AND THEN OUT OF THAT 7,900 SQUARE FEET, ABOUT 3000 SQUARE FEET WOULD, WOULD BE USED FOR THAT. UM, THE SUP, SO I THINK IT'S 2250 IS THE TOTAL SUP AREA, BUT IT'LL BE, UM, SPLIT BETWEEN WHERE THEY'RE DOING THE PRODUCTION VERSUS WHERE THEY'RE DOING THE RETAIL. YES. AND, AND I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT THIS, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S APPROXIMATELY 700 SQUARE FEET, SO A SMALL RETAIL, THE BULK OF IT WILL BE FOR THE BREWING THAT'S GOING TO OCCUR ON SITE? I BELIEVE SO. SO PRETTY LIMITED USE. MM-HMM, . OKAY. AND THEN IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA, I THINK YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR REPORT THERE'S A NUMBER OF BARS, A NUMBER OF OTHER, UM, YOU KNOW, RESTAURANT, SOME RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS. SO IT'S IT'S VERY MIXED IN THE, IN THE AREA? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. MM-HMM. . UM, AND I WILL ASK THIS. I WAS ABLE TO VISIT WITH SOME OF THE, UM, IMMEDIATE STAKEHOLDERS. ARE YOU AWARE IF THE, UM, BARBERSHOP, THE IMMEDIATE PROPERTY OWNER OR THE OPERATOR HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY AS A PART OF THE REVIEW OF THIS? I'M NOT AWARE. OKAY. I CAN ASK THE APPLICANT THAT AND THEN, UM, I WILL UNFORTUNATELY OBSERVE. ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE BARBERSHOP IS NO LONGER IN OPERATION AND TRAINING SCHOOL? EXCUSE ME. AS OF WHAT DATE? TWO WEEKS AGO. TWO. OH, WELL THEY WERE, WHEN I WENT OUT THERE, I HAD YOUR REPORT. UNDERSTOOD. YEAH. I'D LIKE A THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. MR. HALL, UH, MR. CLINTON, UH, THE STAFF REPORT, UH, SAYS THAT, UH, ONE OF THE REASONS THAT YOU RECOMMENDED DENIAL WAS THAT IT WAS, WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH FORWARD DALLAS. I, I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD, FORWARD DALLAS 2006, THE EXISTING LAND USE PLAN AND NOT FORWARD DALLAS 2.0 THAT WE ADDRESSED LAST, UH, TWO WEEKS AGO. YES. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. OKAY, THANK YOU. I'LL PLAY REFEREE THERE A LITTLE BIT. UH, FORWARD DALLAS 2.0 HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED BY COUNSEL YET, SO YOU WON'T SEE US, UM, EVALUATING ANY CASE, UH, IN REFERENCE TO THAT PLAN UNTIL IT IS ADOPTED, IF IT IS ADOPTED. THANKS. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, THANK YOU MR. CLINTON. COMMISSIONER'S CASE NUMBER 19 IS, UH, ALSO GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO SEPTEMBER. UH, WE WILL CLARIFY THAT DATE OF COMMISSIONER HERBERT ON IS, I DON'T THINK HE'S ON LINE AT THE MOMENT. WE'LL GET THAT AT THE HEARING. GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. WE ARE BACK ON THE RECORD IS 11:09 AM WE'LL CIRCLE BACK TO PEPPER SQUARE AND BRIEF THAT CASE NOW. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. LET ME GET THIS ONE UP JUST A SECOND. THE BIGGER THE POWERPOINT, THE LONGER IT TAKES THE LOAD GUYS. SO JUST GIMME ANOTHER MOMENT. TAKE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. [01:51:46] OKAY. THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR YOUR PATIENCE. WE HAVE IT ALL LOADED UP. MY NAME IS JENNIFER MUNOZ AND I'M THE CASE MANAGER FOR Z 212 3 58. THIS CASE WAS PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED FOR THREE DIFFERENT HEARINGS, BUT HAD BEEN POSTPONED AND HELD. SO THIS IS THE FIRST BRIEFING OF THIS CASE. THIS REQUEST IS FOR A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WITH A BASE OF MIXED USE TWO DISTRICT, AND THEY HAVE PROHIBITED CERTAIN USES WITHIN THIS PD AS WELL. THERE ARE CURRENTLY THE SITE IS ZONED TO SEE OUR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT AND THERE ARE SUVS ON THE PROPERTY FOR CELL TOWERS. THE PROPERTY CONTAINS 15 AND A HALF ACRES AND IS LOCATED IN FAR NORTH DALLAS AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH PRESTON ROAD AND ON THE EAST SIDE OF BELTLINE ROAD. HERE'S AN ARROW MAP IDENTIFYING THAT PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE THE LAYOUT OF THOSE EXISTING STRUCTURES, ALL RETAIL STRUCTURES THAT EXIST THAT WERE BUILT BETWEEN 1977 AND 2001. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL LEASE AREA IN 11 ONE AND TWO STORY BUILDINGS. SO THE SITE IS OBVIOUSLY AT THE INTERSECTION OF TWO LARGE THOROUGHFARES, WHICH IT IS CURRENTLY JUST USED SINCE IT'S A RETAIL CENTER. THERE'S NO, UM, WALKABILITY THAT'S BEEN BUILT IN AND IT'S REALLY JUST SURFACE PARKING WITH RETAIL STRUCTURES TO BE A CAR OR AUTO ORIENTED DESTINATION. HERE'S THE ZONING MAP THAT IDENTIFIES THE SUBJECT SITE. AGAIN, ZONED AS CR DISTRICT AND THE SURROUNDING LAND, UH, EXCUSE ME, ZONING DISTRICTS TO THE NORTHEAST. WE DO HAVE A LIMITED OFFICE RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION OF PRESTON AND BELTLINE. AND THEN BEHIND THAT WE DO HAVE MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT AS WELL AS TO THE EAST ALL ALONG BELTLINE ACROSS FROM THE SUBJECT SITE WHERE THERE ARE SOME SORT OF TOWNHOUSE UNITS THAT ARE BUILT TO THEIR REARS FACING BELTLINE. AND THEN THEY HAVE INTERIOR FRONTAGE ALONG BERRY TRAIL AND OTHER INTERIOR ROADWAYS. BEYOND THAT, THERE IS ADDITIONAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, BUT THAT'S, UM, SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET DOWN BERRY TRAIL TO THE SOUTH. WE DO HAVE ADDITIONAL CR DISTRICT, THAT AREA PART OF IT, UM, NORTH ON BY ALEXIS DRIVE WAS ORIGINALLY PART OF THIS AREA OF REQUEST, BUT THE APPLICATION, WHICH HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR OVER TWO YEARS NOW, DID, IT WAS AMENDED AT THE START OF THE PROCESS AND THEY DECIDED TO REDUCE THE OVERALL AREA BY ALMOST FIVE ACRES. SO THAT SECTION IS NO LONGER A PART OF IT. AND THAT'S WHERE THERE ARE, UH, FINANCIAL INSTITUTION, AUTO SERVICE CENTER, AND AN AMER, A MINI WAREHOUSE USE. THAT'S BY SUP TO THE WEST. WE HAVE PD 2 72 THAT IS SPECIFICALLY FOR SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT USES. THERE ARE MULTIPLE USES THAT ARE ALL RELATED TO RETAIL USES, INCLUDING RESTAURANT PERSONAL SERVICE AND A GENERAL MERCHANDISE AND, AND FOOD STORE INCLUDING FUEL. [01:55:01] UM, TO THE NORTHWEST THOUGH, WE DO HAVE GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE USES AND THEN MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S PART OF TWO NEW PDS THAT ARE IN THE WORKS FARTHER TO THE NORTHWEST. SO THIS AGAIN IS JUST THE OVERVIEW WHERE I DISCUSS, UM, ABOUT THE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND HOW THE SITE CURRENTLY IS. ZONE AS A CR DISTRICT DOES NOT ALLOW ANY RESIDENTIAL USES, SO IT'S STRICTLY FOR RETAIL USES AT THIS TIME. SO THIS REQUEST WOULD CHANGE THIS AUTO ORIENTED RETAIL ONLY SHOPPING DESTINATION AND COMBINE IT WITH, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES, POSSIBLY PROVIDE SOME AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS WELL. WELL, AND INCREASE THE PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES AND PROVIDE OPEN SPACES. SO INSTEAD OF SEEING JUST LARGE RETAIL STRUCTURES WITH SURFACE PARKING, WE WOULD SEE MORE GREEN AREAS AND CONNECTIONS TO THE EXTERIOR THAT CONNECT INTO THE INSIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND THOSE OPEN SPACE GREEN AREAS TO BRING IN PEOPLE FROM THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND CONNECT THEM TO A TRAIL TO THE SOUTH ACROSS LEXUS DRIVE. THERE'S A LOT OF AMENITIES THAT ARE PROPOSED WITH THIS REQUEST AND IN RETURN THEY'VE REQUESTED ADDITIONAL DENSITY, ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, AND THEY'RE NOT OUTSIDE OF THE REALM OF THE BASE MU TWO DISTRICT, BUT THEY ARE SPECIFIC TO THE DESIGN OF THIS SITE. THEY, THERE IS A STATED VISION WITH THIS PD, WHICH IS SOMETHING YOU DON'T TYPICALLY SEE, BUT UM, THEY DID REQUEST TO HAVE THIS INCLUDED. THEY, YOU CAN READ THIS IN THE CASE REPORT AND THE CONDITIONS AS WELL, BUT I JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT UP THERE TO NOTE THAT THEY HAVE THIS OVERARCHING VISION FOR THIS PD AREA AND IT'S SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS DONE WITH THE PDS TO THE NORTHWEST THAT WERE LAST APPROVED. UM, AND SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE WHOLE AREA IS KIND OF CHANGING AWAY FROM THAT SHOPPING RETAIL DESTINATION, AUTO ORIENTED, UM, IDEOLOGY OVER TO NOW TRYING TO LIVE, WORK, PLAY, ALLOW PEOPLE TO SHOP WHERE THEY LIVE AND USE THE OPEN GREEN SPACES AND BE ABLE TO ACCESS THINGS MORE EASILY. THERE WERE CHANGES RECEIVED IN THE TWO WEEK HOLD THAT WAS GRANTED TO THEM SINCE YOU LAST HAD THEM ON THE DOCKET ON JULY 25TH. AND THOSE CHANGES INCLUDED ADDING THE DEFINITION FOR A HABITAT GARDEN. THEY PROHIBITED INDUSTRIAL USES ENTIRELY. THEY REDUCED THE DENSITY ALMOST BY HALF, UM, TO A, FROM A MAXIMUM OF 1,550 UNITS WITH MIXED INCOME HOUSING TO A MAXIMUM OF 984 UNITS. AND THAT'S INCLUDING 116 RETIREMENT SPECIFIC HOUSING USES OR USE. THEY ADDED THAT AS A POTENTIAL BONUS. RATHER THAN PROVIDING MIXED INCOME HOUSING, THEY WOULD JUST PROVIDE RETIREMENT HOUSING INSTEAD. THEY DID ALLOW THE OPTION TO COMBINE THAT ALONG WITH MIXED INCOME HOUSING AND INCLUDE THE RETIREMENT HOUSING. SO THEY COULD DO ONE THE OTHER OR NEITHER DEPENDING ON HOW THEY CHOOSE TO PROCEED. THEY REMOVED THE HIGHER DENSITY SECOND BONUS THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY WORKED INTO THE PD TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL MIXED INCOME HOUSING AND DENSITY THAT WOULD'VE GOTTEN THEM UP TO THE 1,550 UNITS. THEY ADDED A MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 35,000 SQUARE FEET FOR RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICE USES, AND THEY REQUIRE 50% OF ALL GROUND FLOOR SPACE FRONTING OPEN SPACE TO BE RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICE USES. THEY AGAIN REMOVED THE SECOND TIER FOR THE FLOOR AREA RATIO BONUS, AND THEY ARE NOW REQUIRING URBAN FORMS SETBACK FOR PHASE ONE, WHICH IS ON THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THEY HAVE, UM, SOME APARTMENTS THAT ARE PROPOSED IN THAT AREA. SO THAT IS A PART OF, OF, IF YOU LOOK AT IT, IT'S PHASE P. ADDITIONALLY, UM, THEY ADDED A CLARIFYING STATEMENT ON THE ABILITY OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL TO RELOCATE TREES. SO THIS IS IN THE LANDSCAPING SECTION IN CASE THERE ARE CONFLICTS WITH UTILITIES, DRIVEWAYS, OR VISIBILITY TRIANGLES. THEY ARE NOW REQUIRING A FENCE ALONG OPEN SPACE A ON THE PERIMETER OF BELTLINE ROAD AND REMOVED SOME PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES. THEY DECREASED THE SPACING OF PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES FROM 500 FEET TO EVERY 300 FEET AND THEY ADDED A MINIMUM EIGHT FOOT WIDE TRAIL CONNECTION TO MATCH THE PRI PERIMETER SIDEWALK ALONG BELTLINE ROAD. BUT THERE ARE NO CHANGES MADE TO THE PLAN. HERE ARE PHOTOS OF MY SITE VISIT STARTING, UM, LOOKING SOUTH FROM BELTLINE ROAD ONTO THE PROPERTY AND WE ARE GOING SOUTHWEST FROM BELTLAND ROAD ONTO THE [02:00:01] PROPERTY. AND NOW WE'RE LOOKING OVER FROM PRESTON ROAD EAST ONTO THE SITE. AND NOW HERE ARE PHOTOS OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO THE NORTHWEST NORTHEAST THAT'S IN THE LIMITED OFFICE AREA. AND THEN THIS IS IN THE MULTIFAMILY AREA. THIS IS WHAT'S FACING ALONG BELTLINE ROAD AND THIS IS FURTHER TO THE SOUTH. AND NOW WE'RE LOOKING SOUTH FROM THE SITE ONTO THE ADJACENT, UH, RETAIL USES. THESE ARE ALL NORTH OF LEXUS DRIVE AND THIS IS LOOKING FROM PRESTON EAST ONTO THE SITE OR THE ADJACENT SITE NOW, UM, BECAUSE IT IS VERY CONNECTED TO ALEXIS AND IT WAS ORIGINALLY A PART OF THE AREA OF REQUEST. I DID INCLUDE SOME PHOTOS SOUTH OF ALEXIS DRIVE AND THAT'S TO THE SOUTHWEST ON PRESTON WHERE THERE'S A LARGER OFFICE TOWER AND ADDITIONAL RETAIL USE IS TO THE WEST. AGAIN, A CONTINUATION OF PD 2 72 FOR SHOPPING CENTER USES. YOU SEE THE FUELING CENTER AND THE OTHER RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICE USES THAT YOU SEE THROUGHOUT THAT AREA. SO THERE'S LOTS OF RETAIL AND SHOPPING OPPORTUNITIES THROUGHOUT HERE. NOW THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT CHART THAT'S BEEN REDUCED HERE AND I'M SHOWING YOU THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, UH, FOR THE CR DISTRICT AS THEY ARE ENTITLED CURRENTLY. AND THEN THE PROPOSED WITH THE PD WITH THE MU TWO BASE, I DO HAVE THE ORIGINAL M MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUSES, UM, ONE AND TWO. AND THEN AS A COMPARISON, WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IF THEY WERE A STRAIGHT MU TWO DISTRICT IN OUR CODE. SO AT THIS TIME THEY ARE ENTITLED TO HAVE UP TO 54 FEET IN HEIGHT OR FOUR STORIES AND 60% LOCK COVERAGE. AND AS I MENTIONED, THE CR DISTRICT DOES NOT ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES. SO THAT'S ALL FOR RETAIL PERSONAL SERVICE AND OTHER TYPES OF USES THAT ARE PERMITTED IN THAT DISTRICT, BUT PRIMARILY RETAIL. AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, THEIR SETBACKS ARE 15 FEET FRONT YARD AND THEN IF THERE IS DIRECT RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY, 20 FEET FOR SIDE AND REAR. HOWEVER, THERE ARE NO MINIMUMS IN ANY OTHER CASE. NOW THIS SITE DOES HAVE FRONT YARDS ON PRESTON AND BELTLINE ACROSS THE MAJORITY OF THE SITE. AND SO YOU WOULD SEE THAT 15 FOOT FRONT YARD IN THOSE AREAS. AN MU TWO DISTRICT HAS A SIMILAR FRONT YARD OF 15 FEET. AND THEN WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING PER THE PD IS A SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER YARD SPACE WITH 50 FEET ON PRESTON ROAD AND 25 FEET ALL ALONG BELTLINE, THEY HAVE ADDED THE CONDITION OR PROVISION THAT URBAN FORM APPLIES TO PHASE I, WHICH IS THE LOWEST SECTION, I'M SORRY, I DON'T THINK IT'S I I THINK IT'S ONE WHICH IS TO THE SOUTHWEST. IT'S THE TALLEST PORTION OF THE BUILDING. AND THEN THE CHANGES YOU CAN SEE HERE IS THAT THEY WOULD BE GRANTED SIGNIFICANTLY MORE HEIGHT IN THE MAJORITY OF THE PD. THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN OUTLINES THE DIFFERENT AREAS THAT ARE GOING TO BE PERMITTED TO GO UP TO 75 FEET IN HEIGHT EXCEPT FOR THE ONE AREA, PHASE ONE, WHICH IS TO THE SOUTHWEST, WHICH FRONTS DIRECTLY ON PRESTON AND WOULD GO UP TO 165 FEET IN HEIGHT. SO FOR OPEN SPACES THEY HAVE A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 36 FEET. AND YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT IN COMPARISON THE MU TWO BASE WOULD ALLOW THEM TO GO ANYWHERE BETWEEN 135 TO 180 FEET IN HEIGHT. NOW WITH THE MIXED USE DISTRICT, THE MORE USES THAT YOU MIX AND BY ADDING RESIDENTIAL USES TO YOUR MIX, YOU ARE GRANTED ADDITIONAL RIGHTS AND THAT INCLUDES HIGHER OF COURSE DENSITY OR IN THIS CASE ALSO HIGHER HEIGHT. WHEN WE MOVE ON TO THE DENSITY SECTION, AGAIN CR NO DENSITY BECAUSE NO RESIDENTIAL USES ARE PERMITTED AND THE FAR HAS A MAXIMUM IF YOU HAVE COMBINED USES OF 0.75 SO SIGNIFICANTLY A LOWER, LOWER STRUCTURES WITH A LOT LESS UM, BUILD OUT OR BULK OF THOSE STRUCTURES. AND THEN IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED AND THEN WHAT IS COMPARED TO THE BASE MU TWO [02:05:01] DISTRICT, THE DWELLING UNIT DENSITY THAT'S BEING PROPOSED CURRENTLY IS 48.5 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. AND WITH UM, ONE BONUS BEING AN OPTION, IF THEY PROVIDE 5%, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT AN 81 TO 100 A MFI, THEY'RE NOW PROPOSING TO RECEIVE A BONUS OF ONLY 7.5 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. SO THAT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL BUMP. AND THEN ADDITIONALLY THEY'VE INCLUDED THAT THE FAR WOULD GO UP TO 2.85 FROM 2.5. SO THE BASE MU TWO DISTRICT HAS A DWELLING UNIT DENSITY THAT STARTS AT 50 PER ACRE. AND SO BY GOING TO 48.5, THEY'RE BELOW THE BASE FOR THE LOWEST OF MU TWO DISTRICT. AND THEN THEIR FIRST BUMP, WHICH IS TO PROVIDE MIXED INCOME HOUSING, IS FOR 7.5, WHICH STILL KEEPS THEM BELOW 60 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. WITH AN MU TWO DISTRICT BASE, YOU COULD GO UP TO 75 IF YOU MIX WITH A SECOND USE AND ALL THE WAY UP TO A HUNDRED IF YOU MIX WITH TWO OR MORE USES. AND THEN THE FAR GOES CLIMBS ALL THE WAY TO 2.25. IN THIS CASE, THEIR BASE FAR IS LARGER IN THIS REQUEST, SO THEY ARE ASKING FOR SOME BULK ON THEIR STRUCTURES. THOSE ARE THE MAIN DIFFERENCES. AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY'RE CLOSE TO MU TWO WITH HAVING NOW WITH THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS, SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER DENSITY. HERE'S THE PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE TWO AREAS THAT ARE SHADED ARE THE OPEN SPACES AND HERE IT IS ENLARGED. UM, THOSE THAT SAY PARK ON THERE ARE ACTUALLY OPEN SPACE. I THINK I HAVE AN OLDER VERSION OF THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN HERE. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. BUT OVERALL IT IS THE SAME HERE. AS FAR AS THE LOCATION OF THOSE OPEN SPACES, IT'S THE NAME THAT HAS CHANGED. PHASE P IS SHOWN HERE AS HAVING THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT TO THE SOUTHWEST AS I MENTIONED ALONG PRESTON OF 165 FEET. AND THEN THE PHASE N AND PHASE ONE EACH HALF, THE 75 FOOT MAX THAT'S BEEN DESCRIBED IN THE CONDITIONS AS WELL. HERE IS THE PHASE ONE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT SHOWS THE STRUCTURE THAT'S UM, ACROSS FROM BERRY TRAIL FRONTING ALONG BELTLINE ROAD HAS THAT MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 75 FEET. AND THERE IS THIS DESCRIPTION OF WHAT'S RECOMMENDED FROM OUR TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE ON SIGNALIZATION, UM, AT THE INTERSECTION OF BERRY TRAIL AND BELT LANE ROAD TO CONSTRUCT THE WESTBOUND APPROACH OF THE BELTLINE VILLAGE DRIVEWAY TO PRESTON ROAD AS A TWO LANE APPROACH TO CONSTRUCT A RIGHT TURN DECELERATION LANE FOR THE NORTHBOUND RIGHT TURNING MOVEMENT FROM PRESTON TO BELTLINE VILLAGE DRIVEWAY AND TO CONSTRUCT A RIGHT TURN DECELERATION LANE FOR THE NORTHBOUND RIGHT TURNING MOVEMENT FROM PRESTON TO PEPPER SQUARE. SO TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DOES RECOMMEND THAT THE TIA INCLUDE A THRESHOLD OF OR MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT BASED ON ROAD CAPACITY AND ADDITIONALLY THEY REQUIRE A PARKING DEMAND STUDY BE PROVIDED FOR THIS PROJECT WHICH HAS NOT YET BEEN PROVIDED. THOSE WILL BE REQUIRED AT TIME OF PERMITTING OTHERWISE. SO THERE ARE STILL DIFFERENCES IN OPINION THAT YOU SAW BOXED OUT IN THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE PROVIDED IN THE DOCKET TODAY. AND ADDITIONALLY, I'VE MADE SOME DISCUSSION OF THEM AS TALKING POINTS THROUGHOUT MY REPORT, WHICH ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE MASSIVE DROP IN THE DENSITY THAT'S PROPOSED. STAFF IS STILL OF THE POSITION THAT WE HAVE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT IN TOTALITY FOR, YOU KNOW, ALMOST TWO YEARS NOW. AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'RE HEARING THAT THEY'RE CONSIDERING DROPPING THE DENSITY HALF WELL BELOW WHAT IS PERMITTED BY THE MU TWO BASE. WE WOULD RECOMMEND KEEPING WHAT THE ORIGINAL REQUEST ENTAILED, WHICH IS WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY VETTED AND DEEMED TO BE, UH, SUITABLE FOR THE SITE AS WELL AS INCORPORATED MIXED INCOME HOUSING AS AN ASPECT WHICH IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO OUR CITY AND TO THE RESIDENTS. SO AT THIS TIME, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT IS ALL BUT COMPLETELY CHANGED, UM, ALONG WITH THE DENSITY THAT'S BEING PROPOSED NOW THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO EITHER PROVIDE 5% OR PROVIDE 116 RETIREMENT HOUSING UNITS. WHILE RETIREMENT HOUSING UNITS ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, IT IS NOT A GUARANTEE OF ANY SORT OF AFFORDABILITY. AND SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A DEVELOPMENT BONUS BASED ON AFFORDABILITY, I DON'T THINK IT'S THE SUITABLE PLACE TO INCORPORATE [02:10:01] IT AS A BONUS. IT IS DEFINITELY A DESIRABLE USE. HOWEVER, WHICH IS PERMITTED IN THIS DISTRICT AS AN MU TWO BASE SURFACE PARKING ALONG PRESTON IS STILL SOMETHING THAT IS UNDESIRABLE AND SO STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THOSE TWO ROWS THAT ARE PROPOSED ALONG PRESTON. INTERIOR SURFACE PARKING IS PERMITTED THROUGHOUT AND SO FRONTING ALONG THE STREETS IN THIS 50 FOOT SETBACK THAT THEY HAVE PROPOSED, WE WOULD HOPE TO SEE A LOT OF GREEN AREA AND POSSIBLY CONNECTIONS GOING INTO THE SITE. SOMETHING THAT WOULD SHOW US MAYBE ACCESS TO RETAIL USES SOMETHING THAT PROVIDED BETTER DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURE ITSELF RATHER THAN SEEING JUST ADDITIONAL WHAT THEY CALL TEASER PARKING ALONG PRESTON TO GET PEOPLE IN. NOW ANOTHER SECTION IS THE SIGN SECTION STAFF DOES NOT AGREE WITH INCREASING THE NUMBER OF DETACHED SIGNS ALLOWED PER STREET FRONTAGE BECAUSE IT ALSO INCLUDES PER BUILD SITE. WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS TO COME AS FAR AS WHERE HOW THEY WILL, YOU KNOW, PARCEL OUT THE SITE, ESPECIALLY AFTER IT'S BEEN ENTITLED. WHAT WILL CHANGE IN THE FUTURE THAT COULD LEAD TO A WHOLE LOT OF DETACHED SIGNS FOR THIS PROPERTY, WHICH OBVIOUSLY WOULD DETRACT FROM THE IMPROVED APPEARANCE. OVERALL, THERE'S NO NEED TO HAVE NUMBER ONE, DOUBLE THE SIGNS. NUMBER TWO, WHO KNOWS HOW MANY SITES IN THE FUTURE THAT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE PROPERTY. AND THEN THEY HAVE PROPOSED THIS FENCE ALONG BELT BELTLINE ROAD. THIS IS NEW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE DID NOT DISCUSS PREVIOUSLY. UM, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHY THEY'VE DONE IT AND UM, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD LIMIT THEM IN SOME WAYS BECAUSE OUR DESIGN STANDARDS ALREADY INCLUDE FENCING AND THEN OF COURSE OUR CODE PERMITS THAT STYLE OF FENCE THAT THEY HAVE PROPOSED, WHICH IS A FOUR TO SIX FOOT OPEN FENCE THAT'S ALREADY ALLOWED BY RIGHT, I UNDERSTAND IF THEY'RE TRYING TO GUARANTEE IT FOR SOME REASON, BUT IT WOULD LIMIT THE ACCESS TO THE OPEN SPACE. AND SO WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENCES THAT ARE NEARBY BEING ON THE BELTLINE SIDE, PROBABLY HAVING THE BEST ACCESS TO OPEN SPACE. A IT JUST DIDN'T SEEM TO MAKE SENSE TO THEN CUT THAT OFF BY PUTTING A FENCE THERE. THEY COULD UTILIZE SHRUBS OR MANY OTHER SCREENING ELEMENTS IF IT IS AN ISSUE OF SAFETY OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE. BUT THERE SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF ACCESS POINT IF STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND, UM, SOME SORT OF ACCESS FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO GET TO THE OPEN SPACE. OTHERWISE, IF THEY DO MAINTAIN THE FENCE AS PROPOSED AND THEN PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES, WE'RE STILL NOT AT UM, AGREEMENT WITH THAT STAFF JUST FEELS THAT THERE SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF SIX FOR EACH OPEN SPACE, ESPECIALLY SINCE THEY'RE KIND OF DOUBLE DIPPING. MANY OF THE PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES, AT LEAST TWO OF THEM TRASH RECEPTACLES AND BENCHES ARE ALREADY REQUIRED IN A DIFFERENT SECTION ON SIDEWALKS. SO IT REALLY DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO INCLUDE THOSE AS TWO OUT OF FIVE OF WHAT'S GOING TO BE REQUIRED IN THESE OPEN SPACES. I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE GETTING EXTRA CREDIT FOR THAT AND THEY'RE ALREADY GONNA BE THERE. SO EITHER REMOVE THEM FROM THE PEDESTRIAN, UM, AMENITIES FROM THE LIST OF ALLOWABLE PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES OR YOU SHOULD UP IT AT LEAST ONE. I MEAN OBVIOUSLY WE DO WANT TRASH RECEPTACLES AND BENCHES IN THE OPEN SPACES, BUT IF THEY'RE ALREADY REQUIRED, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW AT LEAST 50% CREDIT. THAT'S WHY WE'RE AT A DIFFERENCE OF ONE HERE. AND THEN FINALLY THE CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC TRAIL SYSTEM. WE DO HAVE SOME CHANGES TO THE LANGUAGE WHICH ARE IN THE DOCKET. I'VE PRO, EXCUSE ME, I'VE PROVIDED THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE AND THEN THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. THERE MAY BE FURTHER CHANGES TO THAT SECTION. ULTIMATELY STAFF WOULD SAY THAT WE FULLY SUPPORT HAVING THE CONNECTION TO THE TRAIL SYSTEM TO THE SOUTH. HOW THAT COMES ABOUT IS THE QUESTION WHO'S PAYING FOR WHAT AND HOW WE MEMORIALIZE THAT IN THIS PD. THOSE ARE THE FINAL TERMS THAT ARE STILL UP IN THE AIR. SO OVERALL WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO HAVE THIS PROJECT. WE THINK IT WOULD BE WONDERFUL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL, BUT IT'S APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. THANK YOU HONOR. MUCH SOOZ QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, SLEEPER, MS. MUNOZ, UM, IN YOUR UH, PRESENTATION YOU DISCUSSED THE FACT THAT UH, I THINK THE, IT'S TO THE NORTHWEST, THE OLD PRESTON NE NORTE PROPERTY. THERE, THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT UP ZONING THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED, ALTHOUGH IT HADN'T BEEN BUILT YET. SO I'M, I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHEN YOU DO YOUR ANALYSIS OF A REQUEST LIKE THIS, DO YOU CONSIDER THE FACT THAT THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT UPZONING CATTYCORNER FROM THIS, DO YOU CONSIDER THAT TO BE [02:15:01] A FAVORABLE CONDITION FOR A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS BECAUSE YOU'VE ALREADY GRANT, WE'VE ALREADY GRANTED MORE ZONING, SO WHY NOT GRANT MORE ZONING HERE OR DO YOU CONSIDER IT A NEGATIVE FROM THE STANDPOINT THAT, UM, THERE'S BEEN QUITE A BIT OF DISCUSSION AND EMAILS AND SO FORTH ABOUT THE, UH, THE THE DENSITY AND THE TRAFFIC DENSITY AND THE LOAD ON THAT INTERSECTION, THE FACT THAT ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT CATTY CORNER'S GONNA CREATE A GREAT DEAL MORE DEMAND AND, AND THIS ONE WOULD TOO. SO HOW, HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU WEIGH THOSE WHEN YOU'RE MAKING YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OR NOT APPROVAL? WHEN WE, UM, ASSESS A REQUEST, WE DEFINITELY LOOK AT THE SURROUNDING DENSITY TO DETERMINE WHAT IS SUITABLE FOR THE REQUEST SITE. NOW, WHEN IT COMES TO REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO MANAGE THE INCREASED VOLUME OF TRAFFIC, THAT'S SOMETHING WHERE WE EXPECT THOSE, THOSE ITEMS TO BE REVIEWED BY OUR ENGINEER. YOU, YOU EXPECT WHAT? I'M SORRY. THEY ARE REVIEWED IN THE ANALYSIS PROVIDED TO OUR ENGINEER AND THEN WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THAT, WHICH IS WHY THOSE FOUR RECOMMENDATIONS I DESCRIBED FROM OUR ENGINEER INCLUDING SIGNALIZATION AND HOW TO MAINTAIN CERTAIN DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES AND TURN LANES ARE ALL INCORPORATED INTO THE REQUEST. OKAY. SO, SO IF, IF I'M READING BETWEEN THE LINES, WOULD IT BE CORRECT TO SAY THAT THE, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER DID NOT FEEL LIKE THE EXTRA BURDEN CAUSED, UH, THAT THAT WOULD BE GENERATED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS, UM, A FACTOR THAT WOULD WEIGH AGAINST IT? IS THAT, IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? I THINK THEY LOOK AT IT AS WHAT MEASURES ARE CAN BE TAKEN TO PROPERLY MANAGE THE TRAFFIC. I SEE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. RUBIN. ALRIGHT, I'VE GOT SEVERAL QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE. AND IS MR. NAVAREZ AVAILABLE? WE, I CAN SAVE MY QUESTIONS FOR HIM FOR A LITTLE LATER, BUT I DO HAVE A COUPLE FOR HIM. UM, FIRST OFF IS, I THINK WE GOT AN EMAIL WITHIN THE LAST DAY OR TWO ABOUT THE ZONING SIGNS ON THIS PROPERTY BEING ZONING NOTIFICATION SIGNS ON THIS PROPERTY BEING DOWN. UM, WHEN, WHEN WERE YOU ALERTED TO THAT ISSUE? WE WERE ALERTED LATE LAST WEEK AND THE APPLICANT REQUESTED SIGNS IMMEDIATELY AND REPOSTED THEM. OKAY, SO THEY WERE REPOSTED WITHIN HOW LONG AFTER YOU IT DID TAKE OUR STAFF, UM, AN ADDITIONAL DAY TO PRINT THE SIGNS. SO THEY WERE POSTED TWO DAYS LATER I BELIEVE. OKAY, GREAT. AND DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW LONG THE ZONING SIGNS HAD BEEN DOWN? NO, UM, THAT'S BASED ON REPORTING. SO AS SOON AS THEY'RE REPORTED THEN WE ADVISE THE APPLICANT SO THAT THEY CAN CHECK, VERIFY, AND REPOST AS NEEDED. OKAY, GREAT. I JUST WANNA GO THROUGH THE HISTORY OF THIS, THIS CASE. IS THERE SOMEONE ON ONLINE, UM, I GUESS NOT, UM, JUST GO THROUGH THE HISTORY OF THIS CASE. YOU TOUCHED ON HOW THE AREA OF REQUEST HAD SHRUNK BY ABOUT FIVE ACRES, RIGHT? CORRECT. OKAY. AND THAT FIVE ACRES WOULD CONTINUE TO BE ZONED COMMUNITY RETAIL IF, IF THIS ZONE, IF SOME SORT OF ZONING CHANGE OR PASSED TODAY, RIGHT? YES. OKAY. WHAT ABOUT THE HEIGHT? WHAT WAS THE INITIAL REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT ON HEIGHT INITIALLY THEY HAD REQUESTED, UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS ABOUT THE MAXIMUM OF WHAT THEY HAVE NOW AND THEN WITH ADDITIONAL MIXED INCOME HOUSING BONUSES THAT GOT THEM UP TO 290 FEET, TWO 90. SO NOW THEY'RE AT 1 65, 1 65. AND AS THE ORDINANCE IS DRAFTED RIGHT NOW, THAT 1 65 THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY MIXED INCOME HOUSING, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO WRITE THE ORDINANCE SO THE HEIGHT WOULD BE TIED TO MIXED INCOME HOUSING THROUGH A BONUS? YES. OKAY, GREAT. UM, CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE OPEN SPACE? I KNOW WE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE THE BELTLINE PIECE. WHERE'S THE OTHER OPEN SPACE ON THE SITE LOCATED? THE OTHER, YOU KNOW, SPECIFIC OPEN SPACE ON THE SITE LOCATED, IT'S LOCATED TO THE SOUTH TOWARDS THE ALEXIS DRIVE PROPERTY AND THAT SHOULD BE WHERE THE TRAIL CONNECTION WILL BE. OKAY. AND YOU KNOW, I KNOW YOU TOUCHED ON HOW IT HAD TO BE PROGRAMMED WITH A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PEDESTRIAN ELEMENTS. WHAT ABOUT THE PROGRAMMING SURROUNDING IT? WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF, OF USES SURROUNDING EACH OPEN SPACE? SO AS [02:20:01] RECENTLY SUBMITTED, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO A RETAIL OR OPEN, I'M SORRY, RETAIL OR PERSONAL SERVICE USES ON ANY STRUCTURES THAT ARE FRONTING THOSE OPEN SPACES FOR 50% OF THE GROUND FLOOR AREA. OKAY, GREAT. UM, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT, I KNOW THAT MIH SLASH SENIOR HOUSING PIECE, YOU KNOW, CAME IN LATER IN THE GAME HERE. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT THERE'S CLARITY ON, ON WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING HERE. SO RIGHT NOW THE BASE IN THE PD WOULD BE 48.5 UNITS PER ACRE, RIGHT? CORRECT. SO THAT WOULD EQUATE TO ROUGHLY 750 UNITS? YES. OKAY. AND THEN THEY COULD GET AN ADDITIONAL 7.5 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE BY DOING ONE OF TWO THINGS, RIGHT? YES. OKAY. AND ONE WOULD BE PROVIDING 116 SENIOR HOUSING UNITS, CORRECT? YES. AND THE OTHER WOULD BE PROVIDING SOME FORM OF MIXED INCOME HOUSING? THAT'S RIGHT. RIGHT. AND THEY COULD DO JUST SENIOR HOUSING TO GET A BONUS OR THEY COULD DO JUST MIXED INCOME HOUSING TO GET THAT 7.5 DRILLING UNITS PER ACRE BUMP OR THEY COULD DO BOTH TO GET A 15 DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE BUMP, RIGHT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND THAT'S ON DENSITY WHERE THEY COULD GET THE BUMP BY DOING ONE OF TWO THINGS. THERE ALSO IS A POSSIBILITY OF GETTING A BUMP ON ON FLOOR AREA RATIO, CORRECT? YES. AND THEY CAN'T GET THAT BUMP ON FAR BY PROVIDING SENIOR HOUSING, CAN THEY? NO, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE THROUGH PROVIDING MIXED INCOME HOUSING. THAT'S RIGHT. AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS 5% AT 51 THROUGH 80, I'M SORRY, 51 THROUGH 60 MFI. CAN YOU GIVE ME A ROUGH IDEA OF WHAT THAT, AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT NOW, WE CAN CERTAINLY SAVE THIS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. CAN YOU GIMME A ROUGH IDEA OF WHAT THAT INCOME BAND EQUATES TO AND AN ANNUAL INCOME FOR A FAMILY OF ONE OR A FAMILY OF FOUR? I WILL LOOK AT THAT. OKAY, GREAT. LET'S JUST, LET'S JUST BE PREPARED TO ADDRESS THAT AT THE HEARING. UM, I THINK THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT FOR YOU. YOU, BY THE WAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR VERY THOROUGH PRESENTATION ON THIS AND ALL OF YOUR, YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS CASE, MS. OZ. THANK YOU. UM, MR. NAVARRA IS JUST A, A FEW QUICK QUESTIONS FOR YOU. UM, WE'VE GOTTEN SEVERAL EMAILS SAYING THAT THE PRECEDENT BELT LINE INTERSECTION IS EITHER THE MOST DANGEROUS OR ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS. ARE YOU, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT ASSERTION BEING MADE? GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS? YES. I, THAT IS ON MY UNDERSTANDING THERE. I ATTENDED PUBLIC NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS, UM, AS WELL AND, AND I HEARD THE COMMENT, WE CAME BACK TO THE OFFICE, WE ASKED OUR OFFICE OF DATA ANALYTICS. WE ACTUALLY HAVE A DEPARTMENT CALLED DATA ANALYTICS AND THEY, UH, RAN NUMBERS AND HELPING US UNDERSTAND WHETHER OR NOT INDEED THIS INTERSECTION WAS AS DANGEROUS AS IT WAS PRESENTED TO BE. THE COMMENT OBVIOUSLY CAUGHT OUR ATTENTION, THE RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS, WHICH WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE COMMISSION. BELTLINE AND PRESTON REPORTED 117 CRASHES FROM 2016 THROUGH 2023. IT DID NOT, UM, WAS, IT WAS NOT LISTED UNDER THE 100 INTERSECTIONS BY VOLUME, UM, RANGING, UH, UP TO 517 CRASHES OVER THE SAME PERIOD. SO THIS INTERSECTION DID NOT MAKE THE CUT TO BE WITHIN THE TOP 100. OKAY. MOST DANGEROUS INTERSECTION. THAT'S NOT HOW WE DEFINE, UM, THE CONCLUSION THAT THEY PROVIDED TO US IS BELTLINE AND PRESTON IS NOT ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS IN DALLAS. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, ONE OTHER QUESTION, AND THIS IS PROBABLY FAIRLY OPEN-ENDED, BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT, AT ZONING CASES AND THE TRAFFIC THAT THEY GENERATE, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVES, NOT JUST WHAT'S PROPOSED UNDER THE ZONING CASE VERSUS NOTHING HAPPENING UNDER THE PROPERTY. IS THAT FAIR? YES, SIR. THAT'S, SO RIGHT NOW THIS IS ZONED COMMUNITY RETAIL. COMMUNITY RETAIL AND HAS SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS BEYOND WHAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE SITE IN TERMS OF, OF RETAIL DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? YES SIR. HAS THERE BEEN ANY ASSESSMENT OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT OF COMMUNITY RETAIL FULLY BUILT OUT VERSUS THE PROPOSED MIXED USE ON THE SITE? [02:25:01] SO WE, WE, WE REVIEWED A TRAFFIC STUDY OF A FEW PROVISIONS OF THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC OF THE TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN IT. UH, THE ANALYSIS DID INCLUDE, IT DIDN'T INCLUDE AN EVALUATION, BUT IT POINTED OUT THAT, UM, IF DEVELOPED BY THE AMOUNT, UH, ALLOWED BY WRIGHT, IT WOULD, IT WOULD GENERATE, OR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATES 76% LESS TRAFFIC THAN WHAT THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED BY WRIGHT BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT. UNDER THE EXISTING COMMUNITY RETAIL SUMMARY. CORRECT. OKAY. UH, LET ME REPHRASE THAT. SURE. THE ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATES OR WILL GENERATE 76% LESS TRAFFIC THAN WHAT IT WOULD BE ALLOWED BY RIDE THAN IT WOULD GENERATE IF ALLOWED BY, IF BUILT BY WHAT IS ALLOWED BY RIDE IT, IT. AND BY THE WAY, WHEN WAS THAT TRAFFIC STUDY PERFORMED? REPEAT YOUR QUESTION, SIR. WHEN? YEAH, ROUGHLY WHEN? OH, WELL, UM, I DON'T HAVE ALL THE DATES, BUT THEY HAVE, OH, ACTUALLY, NEVERMIND, I'LL GIVE THEM CREDIT FOR THIS. THEY DID SHOW THAT THE ANALYSIS WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED IN 2021 REVISED, UH, UPON UH, FIRST REVIEW IN SEPTEMBER OF 2022. A SECOND UPDATED SUBMISSION WAS SUBMITTED TO STAFF IN 2023. A THIRD SUBMISSION WAS LATER RECEIVED, UH, IN OUR OFFICE. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.