[00:00:02]
COMMISSIONERS, UH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.
WE START OFF WITH A ROLL CALL, PLEASE.
DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SCHOCK, DISTRICT TWO.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DISTRICT THREE.
COMMISSIONER HAWK DISTRICT 13.
DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBIN.
TODAY IS THURSDAY, UH, AUGUST 8TH, 2024, 9:06 AM WELCOME TO THE BRIEFING
[BRIEFINGS]
OF THE DALLAS CITY PINE COMMISSION.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, 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.
WELL THEN WE'LL BEGIN WITH CASE NUMBER, UH, TWO ON THE, UH, CONSENT AGENDA.
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.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE, CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 14 0, 1 SECOND, SORRY.
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.
THE SURROUNDING USES INCLUDE, UH, COMMERCIAL SERVICES COM, COMMUNITY, RETAIL AND UH, MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL
[00:05:01]
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.
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 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 IN OTHER RETAIL.
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 AND LANDSCAPING TO MEET ARTICLE 10 AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR FIVE-YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, SLEEPER.
NOW, MR. CLINTON HAS, HAVE THERE BEEN ANY, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, OPPOSITION TO THIS USE? I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY.
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.
WELL, UH, 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.
UM, CAN YOU ALSO EXPLAIN, I, 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, IT 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, UH, COMPLIANT OPERATOR.
COMMISSIONERS, WE, WE HAVE TAKEN THIS CASE OFF CONSENT COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT? 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.
AND COULD THAT PERHAPS BE A REASON FOR THE FIVE YEARS TO, BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO BUILD A BUILDING? YES.
UH, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER HAMPTON HAS JOINED US.
COMMISSIONER HALL, MR. CLINTON, UH, CLASS A DANCE HALL JUST MEANS NIGHTCLUB.
AND WHAT, WHAT IS A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE REFERRING TO? I THINK THAT WOULD ALSO BE BEST A ANSWERED BY THE APPLICANT.
THEY COULD SPEAK TO THEIR INTENTIONS MORE.
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, I WOULD'VE TO MEASURE THAT.
[00:10:01]
I, I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, NO.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON TO CASE NUMBER FOUR, MR. BATE.
SO WE'RE SEATED TODAY WHERE? NEAR POWERPOINT.
THIS IS ITEM OR CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2016.
IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN R 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY 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.
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 GIS 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 IN 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, 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 LOCK COVERAGE.
UM, BUT PRETTY MUCH ALL YOU CAN DO ON R 7.5 IS RESTING FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STAFF'S.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ALL RIGHT, THIS IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 21.
IT IS AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2118 FOR VEHICLE DISPLAY SALES AND SERVICE ON PROPERTIES ZONE
[00:15:01]
SUBDISTRICT TWO WITHIN PLANNED 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 HA SERVICE ROAD.
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 DISPLAY 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 SUP 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.
I THINK I HAVE A DETAILED SLIDE.
UH, THE CONDITIONS, IT'S EXACT SAME CONDITIONS, JUST THE PERMIT WILL EXPIRE THREE YEARS FROM THE PASSAGE OF THE ORDINANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, APPROVAL QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER BLAIR, CAN YOU GO BACK TO, UM, SLIDE? I THINK IT'S EITHER EIGHT AND THIS WOULD BE SLIDE EIGHT.
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, SO I'M LOOKING AT THE PHOTO, 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.
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.
I, I HAVE A CONFLICT ON THIS ONE, AND SO I WILL BE STEPPING OUT VIRTUALLY.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT VICE CHAIR.
EVERYONE HAS A CONFLICT ON ITEM NUMBER NINE AND HAS SIGNED OFF HAVING SOME ISSUES WITH THE POWERPOINT ONCE.
ALL RIGHT, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER NINE, CASE Z 2 2 3 DASH 3 3 8.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A GR GENERAL RETAIL SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE, AP PARKING SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
[00:20:01]
WHOA, WITHIN, UH, PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1 93, THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PERFECT 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.
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.
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 WEST, 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.
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.
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 OAKLAWN? YES, I'M AWARE.
AND ARE YOU AWARE THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE OAKLAWN COMMITTEE AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS REGARDING THEIR REQUEST? YES.
AND GENERALLY, I THINK THERE WAS CONSENSUS THAT THIS IS APPROPRIATE AND MATCHES THE SURROUNDING, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, UH, WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 10.
CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME? GOOD MORNING.
BEAR WITH ME AS I HAVE TO GET THIS UPLOADED HERE.
CHAIRMAN, IS THAT FULL SCREEN FOR EVERYBODY? YES, WE CAN SEE IT.
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'LL 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 L 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 IN JANUARY OF, UH, 22.
FAR SOUTH SIDE AERIAL SHOWING THE ONSITE CONDITION,
[00:25:01]
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 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, KAREN, THANK YOU, SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT VICE CHAIR RUBIN HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM AND HAS LOGGED OFF.
BUT 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.
I, WHERE, WHERE DID CONSENT WHEN? OH, THAT'S FINE.
I CAN ASK AT THE, THE, AT THE HEARING.
UM, I'M GONNA STEP IN FOR THIS CASE, JUST A SECOND.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 10 17 FOR A PROPERTY THAT'S BOUNDED BY BEAKER 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. THE, THE PRESENTATION'S NOT BEING DISPLAYED.
WHY? OKAY, BUT I DON'T HAVE PRESIDENT.
[00:30:12]
THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.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.
UH, IT'S, AS I SAID, WEST DALLAS, WEST OF WESTMORELAND AND NORTH OF SINGLETON BOULEVARD.
UM, THE AREA 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 MULTIFAMILY 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 MODIFIED STANDARDS, UH, FOR TYPICAL STUFF FOR SCHOOLS, FLOOR AREA HEIGHT, SETBACKS, REDUCED OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS, NEW DESIGN STANDARDS FOR SIDEWALKS, BUFFERS.
WE 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 THE REVISED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.
UM, JENNIFER NOTED HERE THERE WAS A LITTLE ERROR ON THE, 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 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.
THE SCHOOL FROM GALLAGHER, UH, LOOKING EAST ON GALLAGHER.
THE EXISTING 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, A LITTLE BIT MORE CURB CUTS JUST FOR BETTER ACCESS, I THINK THAT HAVE CIRCULATION THAT IS, UM, SEPARATED.
UM, AND YOU'LL SEE TWO NEW CURB CUTS ON BICKERS AND ONE ON GALLAGHER.
[00:35:01]
LAST, UH, CPC DOCKET.THEY REPLACED THREE LARGE TREES WITH TWO MEDIAN ONES OR ORNAMENTAL ONES THAT CITY ARBORISTS 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.
UM, THE APPLICANT AGREED TO ALLOW AND LEAVE THIS CURB CUT THAT'S AT THE CORNER AT BEAKERS.
IF YOU SEE MY MOUSE BEAKERS 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 GOING TO CIRCULATE CLOCKWISE AROUND THE SCHOOL, AND THEY'RE GONNA EXIT ON THE WEST SIDE OF BEAKER STREET.
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, KINGSTON 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, A, A LOWER PARKING RATIO THAT A NORMAL O MISS SCHOOL WHERE THE STUDENTS ARE DRIVING THEMSELVES.
UM, AND THEN WE HAD ONE BOX WHICH REFERRED TO THAT, UM, EMERGENCY ACCESS GATE ON BICKER 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.
WITH THIS BEING SAID, STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITION IS APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AN AMENDED LANDSCAPE PLAN, REVISED AMENDED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
AND MY APOLOGIES FOR THE HICCUPS.
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 A 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 ANSWERS PLEASE? QUESTIONS? OKAY.
ARE YOU AWARE THAT, UH, NONE OF THE STUDENTS, UM, WILL ARRIVE HERE BY, BY VEHICLE AT ALL? YOU KNOW? OKAY, SO EVERYBODY, 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, IT 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, I MEAN PASSENGER VEHICLE PARKING SPACES IS THEY'RE JUST HAVING TO ALLOW PARKING FOR THEIR STAFF AND THEIR TEACHERS AND 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 AND A HALF ENOUGH TO
[00:40:01]
MEET THE NEED? YES, IT IS.SORRY,
SINCE THAT'S A SPECIFIC MANUFACTURER, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO SAY NOX EQUIPMENT OR SIMILAR? YES, PROBABLY YES.
OR EQUAL, WHATEVER THE EQUIVALENT LANGUAGE MIGHT BE.
AGAIN, I FEEL CONFIDENT THAT WOULD'VE COME UP LATER, SO JUST WANTED TO NOTE IT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
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.
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.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE IN 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 ZONE R SEVEN FIVE, SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS UNDEVELOPED.
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, THEY REQUEST A MIXED USE ONE, UM, MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT.
THE NEXT FEW PICTURES WILL BE OF THE SITE AND THE SURROUNDING 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.
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.
OH, YEAH, HE DIDN'T GO INTO DETAIL WITH ME ABOUT THAT, BUT I BELIEVE MR. ROB IS HERE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE'RE GONNA TO CASE NUMBER 13.
[00:45:37]
THIS IS CASE, THIS IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH ONE 50.AN APPLICATION FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WITH TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT IN 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'RE 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, A STREET THAT DEAD ENDS.
IT WOULD EXTEND INTO THE, INTO THE DEVELOPMENT, THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
AND, 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 THE 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.
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 IS 75%.
THEY DO WANT TO, UH, ALLOW AN ACCESSORY COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER PRIVATE BY RIGHT AND TRACKED 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 SAFER 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 THE 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.
WE'RE 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, WITH A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT
[00:50:01]
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 TRACK ONE FOR OPEN SPACE.
UH, AGAIN USING THE 1107 DEFINITIONS THERE THAT WE OFTEN SEE FOR, UM, OTHER DEVELOPMENTS.
UM, BILLING, MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
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 AS SORT OF AN ADDITIONAL, UH, INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF PURIA SURFACE TO REDUCE THE RUNOFF THAT GOES TOWARDS PRAIRIE CREEK.
UM, AND 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.
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, UM, 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.
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, DRISHA DE 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.
DID THEY UNDERSTAND THAT? UH, YES, I BELIEVE THEY DO.
I, I'LL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, BUT WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER HAN PLEASE.
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 DICTATED 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, COMMISSIONER, UH, MR. BAY.
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 A 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.
[00:55:01]
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 AND MAYBE JUST TWO THAT THEIR, THEIR CONCERNS KIND OF HOVERED MORE ON, ON A COMMUNITY CENTER RECREATION CENTER THAT SOMEHOW WOULD BE A, UH, A RESULT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IN OTHER 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.UM, COMMISSIONERS, WHY DON'T WE TAKE A BREAK NOW.
IT'S EXACTLY 10:00 AM LET'S TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK.
AND THEY ARE ALREADY OUT OF, UH, UTILIZING THAT PARTICULAR SERVICE FOR A REPAIR SHOP, UH, UH, COMMERCIAL VEHICLE REPAIR SHOP, IS THAT NOT CORRECT? UH, I BELIEVE SO, YES.
AND THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY'RE, WELL, THE, THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY'RE DOING ALSO WILL KIND OF HELP THAT, HELP THAT AREA AS WELL 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.
MR. CLINTON, ACCORDING TO YOUR, UM, STAFF REPORT, THE CASE REPORT, THIS SITE IS ALREADY OPERATING AS A TRUCK STOP CORRECTLY, AND SO THEY'RE JUST NOW YES.
GETTING AROUND TO ASKING FOR AN SUP? YES.
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.
APOLOGIES, UM, ON MY END, HOWEVER, UM, YES, THE INTENTION IS TO HAVE THE TRUCKS ONLY ENTER FROM FRONTAGE FROM CF HA.
UM, ENTER AND EXIT FROM CF HA.
OKAY, SO THIS SHOULD SAY NO AC THERE SHOULD BE NO INGRESS OR EGRESS THAT CORRECT ON SILVERADO? CORRECT.
AND SO THAT MEANS THE SITE PLAN IS SUPPOSED TO SHOW THAT THAT DRIVE HAS BEEN REMOVED ENTIRELY? YES.
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.
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 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.
SO THE ENHANCEMENTS ARE, ARE NOW BEING DROPPED? I MEAN, YES.
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.
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, SO THEY JUST WANT TO GET THE SUP, SO IT'S ALLOWED BY.
SECOND AROUND COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
UM, IN REGARDS TO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER'S QUESTION, UM, ABOUT THE TIMELINE, THE TIME PERIOD FOR THE, THE SUP, UM,
[01:00:01]
MR. CLINTON, ARE YOU AWARE THAT IT IS NOT MY, UM, I'M NOT ONE WHO BELIEVES IN PERMANENT SUVS.I, I, ESPECIALLY ON THE INITIALS UP, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THAT'S MY WAY THAT I NORMALLY OPERATE? I AM AWARE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, WE WILL GO TO THE NEXT CASE.
UH, COMMISSIONER'S CASE NUMBER 17 WILL HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO SEPTEMBER 5TH.
WE WILL BRIEF IT THEN TAKES TO NUMBER 18.
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 NORTHCROSS STREET.
UH, THE PROPOSAL IS 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, SOUTH, EAST, AND WEST OF THE SITE.
UM, TO THE EAST OF THE SITE, THERE IS, UH, EXISTING SUP NUMBER 2, 3 1 9.
IT'S, UH, AGAIN, UH, ZONE PD, UH, 2 69 SUBDISTRICT TRACT A, UH, WITH, UH, CVD DOWNTOWN DEMOLITION DELAY OVERLAY.
UM, THIS IS A CORNER LOT, SO IT HAS FRONTAGE ON BOTH MAIN AND, UH, NORTH CRODA 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 MICROBREWERY MICRO DISTILLERY OR A 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.
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 CRODA STREET LOOKING NORTH.
UM, SAME LOCATION LOOKING SOUTH.
UM, HERE IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, UM, AND, UH, QUICK STAFF ANALYSIS.
SO ALTHOUGH, UH, THE EXISTING, 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 SEEM TO BE, UH, POTENTIALLY DE DETRIMENTAL TO THE IMMEDIATE USES.
UM, AS WELL, THE, UH, PROPOSAL DOES NOT ALIGN WITH, UH, THE GOALS, UH, 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, UM, ADJACENCY OF THIS, UH, MICRO, UM, BREWERY, CERY, 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 WERE 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,
[01:05:02]
I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE AGES OR, UH, THE RANGE OF WHO'S ATTENDING THE SCHOOL.'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
UH, OR DEPENDENT ON CASE BY CASE BASIS.
SO MANY JOKES THERE THAT I'M NOT EVEN GONNA GET NEAR COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
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.
THERE'S A SEPARATE USE CLASSIFICATION FOR, UM, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, DENOMINATIONAL SCHOOLS, AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS THAT REQUIRE AN SUP? MM, 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.
SO, UM, RELATED TO THAT, UM, THE USE ON THE CO, 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.
'CAUSE THIS WAS AGAIN, INDEPENDENTLY, UM, EVALUATED.
SO YOU DIDN'T LOOK AT IT IN TERMS OF WHERE THEY HAVE THEIR EXISTING USE.
WELL I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT THAT.
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 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.
UM, SO ON, ON STREET LOADING IS PROVIDED FOR IN THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE? YES MA'AM.
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 BUT 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.
AND I, 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, PRETTY LIMITED USE.
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 ESTABLISHMENT.
SO IT'S, IT'S VERY MIXED IN THE, IN THE AREA? THAT'S CORRECT.
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.
I CAN ASK THE APPLICANT THAT AND THEN, UM, I WILL UNFORTUNATELY OBSERVE.
ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE BARBERSHOP IS NO LONGER IN OPERATION IN TRAINING SCHOOL? EXCUSE ME.
AS OF WHAT DAY? TWO WEEKS AGO.
OH, WELL THEY WERE, WHEN I WENT OUT THERE, I HAD YOUR REPORT.
MR. HALL, UH, MR. CLINTON, UM, 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.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
I'LL PLAY REFEREE THERE A LITTLE BIT.
UH, FOR DALLAS, 2.0 HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED BY COUNCIL YET, SO YOU WON'T SEE US, UM, EVALUATING ANY CASE, UH, IN REFERENCE TO THAT PLAN UNTIL
[01:10:01]
IT IS ADOPTED.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
UH, COMMISSIONER'S CASE NUMBER 19 IS, UH, ALSO GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO SEPTEMBER.
UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT IS, I DON'T THINK HE'S ONLINE AT THE MOMENT.
WE'LL GET THAT AT THE HEARING.
UH, LET'S TAKE A BREAK AT THIS POINT HERE.
COMMISSIONER, UH, TAKE A 15 MINUTE BREAK.
IT IS 11:09 AM WE'LL CIRCLE BACK TO PEPPER SQUARE AND BRIEF THAT CASE NOW.
LET ME GET THIS ONE UP JUST A SECOND.
THE BIGGER THE POWERPOINT, THE LONGER IT TAKES THE LOAD GUYS.
THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
MY NAME IS JENNIFER MUNOZ AND I'M THE CASE MANAGER FOR Z 2 12 3 5 8.
THIS CASE WAS PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED FOR THREE DIFFERENT HEARINGS THAT HAD BEEN POSTPONED AND HELD.
SO THIS IS THE FIRST BRIEFING OF THIS CASE.
[01:15:08]
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, 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 MULTIFAMILY 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 AMER A MINI WAREHOUSE USE.
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 IN, IN FOOD STORE, INCLUDING FUEL.
UM, TO THE NORTHWEST THOUGH, WE DO HAVE GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR 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 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, 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 THE 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.
THERE, 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 IN 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
[01:20:01]
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 BELTLINE ROAD ONTO THE 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 ALEXIS 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, AN ADDITIONAL RETAIL USES 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.
[01:25:01]
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 FOR 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 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.
BUT OVERALL IT IS THE SAME HERE.
AS FAR AS THE LOCATION OF THOSE OPEN SPACES, IT'S THE NAME THAT HAS CHANGED.
[01:30:01]
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 HAVE 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 TIAA 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 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.
[01:35:01]
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 PRES 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 HAVE 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 VERY MUCH MS. MUNOZ.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, SLEEPER, UH, MS. MUNOZ, UM, AND 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 UPZONING 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 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.
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.
ALRIGHT, I'VE GOT SEVERAL QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE AND IS MR. NAVARRA IS AVAILABLE? WELL, I CAN SAVE MY
[01:40:01]
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 WERE, 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.
AND DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW LONG THE ZONING SIGNS HAD BEEN DOWN? NO, UM, IT'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.
I JUST WANNA GO THROUGH THE HISTORY OF 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.
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.
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.
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.
UM, CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE OPEN SPACE? I KNOW WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE, THE BELTLINE PIECE.
WHERE'S THE OTHER OPEN SPACE ON THE SITE? 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.
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 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.
UM, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, THAT, I KNOW THAT IH 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.
AND THEN THEY COULD GET AN ADDITIONAL 7.5 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE BY DOING ONE OF TWO THINGS, RIGHT? YES.
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.
AND THEY COULD DO JUST SENIOR HOUSING TO GET A BONUS OR THEY COULD DO JUST MIXED INCOME HOUSING TO GET THAT 7.5 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE BUMP, OR THEY COULD DO BOTH TO GET A 15 DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE BUMP, RIGHT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND THAT'S ON DENSITY WHERE THEY COULD GET THE BUMP BY DOING ONE OF TWO THINGS.
THEY'RE ALSO, 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.
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
[01:45:01]
HAVE THAT NOW, WE CAN CERTAINLY SAVE THIS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.CAN YOU GIVE 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.
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, 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. VOZ.
UM, MR. NAVARRA IS JUST A, A FEW QUICK QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
UM, WE'VE GOTTEN SEVERAL EMAILS SAYING THAT THE PRECEDENT BELTLINE 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.
THAT'S NOT HOW IT WOULD DEFINE, UM, THE CONCLUSION THAT THEY PROVIDED TO US IS BELTLINE AND PRESTON IS NOT ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS IN DALLAS.
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, UH, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT ALTERNATIVES, NOT JUST WHAT'S PROPOSED UNDER THE ZONING CASE VERSUS NOTHING HAPPENING UNDER THE PROPERTY.
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? SO WE, WE, WE REVIEWED A TRAFFIC STUDY OF A FEW REVISIONS 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 RIGHT, IT WOULD, IT WOULD GENERATE S OR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATES 76% LESS TRAFFIC THAN WHAT THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED BY RIDE BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT.
UNDER THE EXISTING COMMUNITY RETAIL.
THE ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT GENERATES OR WILL GENERATE 76% LESS TRAFFIC THAN WHAT IT WOULD BE ALLOWED BY.
THEN IT WOULD GENERATE IF ALLOWED BY, IF BUILT BY WHAT IS ALLOWED BY, RIGHT.
IT, IT, IT, 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 ON MARCH OF 2024.
SO THERE, THERE WERE FOUR FORMAL SUBMITTALS, EVEN THOUGH THERE WERE A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE SUBMITTALS MARCH OF OF 2024.
UM, DOES THAT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REFLECT THE FACT THAT THE DENSE MAX DENSITY'S BEEN DROPPED FROM 1550 TO A, A SHADE UNDER A THOUSAND? OKAY.
SO THEORETICALLY THE, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT COULD BE EVEN LESS THAN UNDER WHAT'S IN THERE.
[01:50:02]
OKAY.WE, WE, THEY OWE US ONE MORE, ONE MORE REVISION.
YOU, COMMISSIONER HALL, UH, MS. MUNOZ, YOU SAID, UM, YOU MADE A COMMENT ABOUT RETIREMENT HOUSING WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE AFFORDABLE.
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RETIREMENT, HOUSING AND MIXED INCOME? UH, HOUSING? SO RETIREMENT HOUSING DOESN'T HAVE ANY INCOME REQUIREMENTS.
IT'S NOT A, A FORM OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT'S JUST A VARIETY OF STANDARD HOUSING.
AND SO IT'S JUST AN AGE LIMIT THAT'S PLACED ON THE HOUSING, UM, PRODUCT.
SO AS FAR AS AFFORDABILITY GOES, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MIXED INCOME HOUSING, THERE ARE, UH, INCOME LIMITS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF UNITS ARE CARVED OUT AND ALLOWED FOR THOSE WHO MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
THIS IS NOT DONE FOR RETIREMENT HOUSING, SO THERE'S NO AFFORDABILITY BUILT INTO THE REQUIREMENT.
SO RETIREMENT HOUSING COULD BE, YOU COULD SPECIFY 55 PLUS OR 65 PLUS.
ACCORDING TO OUR CODE, I THINK IT SAYS 55 PLUS 55 PLUS.
THIS WOULD NOT BE ASSISTED LIVING OR NO, THIS, I I DON'T EVEN THINK YOU WOULD CALL IT INDEPENDENT LIVING.
I GUESS YOU WOULD JUST CALL IT RETIREMENT HOUSING.
OUR CODE DOESN'T REALLY SPECIFY THAT IT WOULD BE CALLED ASSISTED LIVING.
AND BECAUSE IT'S CALLED RETIREMENT HOUSING AND NOT ASSISTED OR, OR SKILLED NURSING, IT DOESN'T REQUIRE ANY EXTRA PERMITTING OR CHANGES.
UH, YOU CAN JUST SAY IT'S 55 PLUS AND IT'S BASICALLY MARKET RATES.
THERE'S NO CONTROL THAT'S BAKED INTO IT'S FOR AFFORDABILITY.
SO THAT'S WHY I MAKE THAT COMMENT.
CERTAINLY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON BACK TO TRAFFIC, BECAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE WHAT EVERYBODY IS, UM, HARPING ON IN LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT EVEN USING THE NUMBERS WITH A HIGHER DENSITY, THAT THE PROPOSED AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC IS ABOUT HALF OF WHAT IS BEING GENERATED UNDER ITS CURRENT USE.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM, MA'AM, I, I I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK, UH, NUMBERS TO, YOU'RE SAYING THAT, THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL GENERATE HALF OF WHAT IS CURRENTLY GENERATED? YEAH.
SO, OR, OR ENTITLED, UH, LET, I'M GONNA GET TO THAT.
LET ME, I'M GONNA ASK YOU THIS AT THE HEARING.
SO IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE PROPOSED AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC IS ROUGHLY HALF WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING GENERATED AND ABOUT A FOURTH OF WHAT COULD BE GENERATED IF THE CURRENT ZONING WAS BUILT OUT TO WHAT'S FULLY ENTITLED.
IF THAT'S THE ASSERTION FROM THE, FROM THE ANALYSIS.
UM, I'D LIKE TO DIG MORE INTO IT.
I, I BELIEVE YOU'RE COMING FROM AN EVALUATION OF THE STUDY OR, OR THE STUDY OF, OF THE, THE REPORT.
UM, I'D LIKE TO LOOK INTO IT, MA'AM.
AND, UM, THAT PERSPECTIVE MAKES ME WANNA LOOK INTO THEIR NUMBERS.
YEAH, BECAUSE I'M, THAT'S WHY I'M, I'M GIVING THIS TO YOU NOW.
I CAN, I, WE, WE CAN CERTAINLY TAKE INTO IT, TAKE, TAKE A LOOK INTO IT RIGHT AWAY AND COME BACK WITH AN ANSWER DURING THE, DURING THE HEARING AND, AND IF I'VE NOT LOOKED AT IT CORRECTLY, YOU CAN CORRECT ME.
I WON'T HOLD, I WON'T HOLD THAT AGAINST YOU.
NO, WE, I, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE, WE GIVE YOU AN ANSWER ON THAT.
SHE WITH, WITH THE REDUCTION AND MS. M MUNOZ WITH THE REDUCTION IN THE UNIT COUNTS, UH, IN THE DENSITY, WAS THERE REDUCTION IN PUBLIC SPACE, UH, ALLOCATION AND REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC SPACE AND PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES, UH, AND JUST AMENITIES SPACE IN GENERAL? NO, THERE WAS NOT.
SO WE'RE SEEING THE SAME BENEFITS.
THE ONLY BENEFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT THAT CHANGED WAS OF COURSE THE AVAILABILITY OF UNITS AND THE AFFORDABLE UNIT ASPECT.
COMMISSIONER FORESI, PLEASE, ON YOUR, UM, UH, PRESENTATION, THE UNDEVELOPED AREA THAT'S SOUTH OF ALEXIS, COULD YOU, UH, MENTION WHAT IS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED THERE? IF YOU GO BACK TO YOUR, YOU KNOW, THE SITE SLIDE WHERE YOU HAD, YOU KNOW, SOUTH OF ALEXIS, IT'S, IT IS RIGHT NOW A GREEN SPACE AREA AND THAT'S NOT A PART OF THE AREA OF REQUEST
[01:55:01]
AND IT JUST SEEMS TO BE UNDEVELOPED LAND THAT'S CURRENTLY ZONED ON MF TWO DISTRICT.SO IT'S FOR MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
IS IT NOT CORRECT THAT THERE IS A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT GOING IN THERE TOO? THAT ADDS TO THE, YOU KNOW, WHEN COMMISSIONER SLEEPER TALKED ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S NORTHWEST, UH, AT DEL NORTE.
UH, IN ADDITION TO THAT DEVELOPMENT, THERE'S ALSO A, A NEW MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF ALEXIS, IS THAT CORRECT? I I DO NOT KNOW.
UM, AT THIS TIME IT IS ENTITLED FOR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
SO THAT'S THE ZONING THAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED THERE.
SO THEN I, I, I GUESS THESE TRAFFIC STUDIES THAT WE WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVEN'T REALLY FACTORED IN THE ALL, ALL THE ADDITIONAL, UH, UH, DENSITY THAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN, IN ADDITION TO THE DENSITY WITH THE, WITH THE PEPPER SQUARE DEVELOPMENT.
THE TRAFFIC STUDY INCLUDED, UM, I HAD IT OPEN RIGHT THERE.
MM-HMM,
IF, IF YOU ALLOW ME A FEW SECONDS, UM, I HAD IT HIGHLIGHTED, I MOVED AWAY FROM IT, BUT I KNOW THAT IT INCLUDED, UH, UH, THE BOTH THE TERRA CAP INCLUDE IS INCLUDED THERE WITH 1,120 HIGH-RISE, MULTI-FAMILY UNITS, UH, PLUS SHOPPING AND RESTAURANTS, AND THEN ALSO THE ALEXIS TTI WITH 101,268 MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS.
WHAT'S THIS ONE TO THE SOUTH THAT IS FOR ANTE? LEXUS IS TO THE SOUTH WITH A MIX OF TOWN HOMES, APARTMENTS, AND THEN THE TERRA CAPITAL MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTHWEST, WHICH IS BOTH ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE, IN THEIR STUDY.
SO WHAT, WHAT ARE THOSE NUMBER, UH, UNIT NUMBERS AGAIN, FOR THOSE, UH, ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES? THE STUDY ASSUMED OR INCLUDED A BACKGROUND TRAFFIC CONDITION WITH TERRA CAP MULTIFAMILY WITH 900 MULTIFAMILY MID-RISE.
I'M APPROX, I'M, I'M ACTUALLY, I'LL GIVE YOU EXACT NUMBERS FROM THE REPORT.
912 MID-RISE DWELLING UNITS AND 1,120 HIGH-RISE DWELLING UNITS IN ADDITION TO 16,000 SQUARE FEET OF SHOPPING CENT OR GROCERY, UH, RETAIL STORES AND 16,000 SQUARE FEET OF RESTAURANT.
THOSE NUMBERS OBVIOUSLY ARE APPROXIMATED SINCE THEY'RE NOT BEING BUILT RIGHT NOW.
UM, IT ALSO TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THAT IT'S REPLACING 353 EXISTING DWELLING UNITS.
THERE'S A, AND THEN, UM, A MATH AND, AND THEN ALSO THE ALEXIS TTI IS INCLUDED WITH 1,268 DWELLING UNITS.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT BASICALLY THERE'S ABOUT 2000 ADDITIONAL, UH, UNITS IN THE AREA IN ADDITION TO THE 1000 THAT'S BEING YES, SIR.
THAT ARE ALREADY PERMITTED BY, OKAY.
UM, TO, UH, JENNIFER, UH, WITH THE REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF UNITS, UH, FROM 1,550 TO UH, 968, I THINK, UM, WHERE WILL THAT REDUCTION BE? WILL IT BE IN PHASE ONE OR PHASE P OR PHASE N? IT DOESN'T SPECIFY THE DENSITY PER PHASE, IT'S THE OVERALL PROJECT.
SO, UM, AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, THEN THERE'S NO REDUCTION IN THE, THE, THE HEIGHT OF ANY OF THE STRUCTURES, YOU KNOW, LIKE FOR INSTANCE IN PHASE B, THE 12 STORY STRUCTURE WILL STILL REMAIN 1212 STORIES.
AND, UM, IN YOUR PRESENTATION, YOU MENTIONED THAT, UH, WITH THE PD THERE ARE PROHIBITED USES.
W WOULD YOU, UH, HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE ARE? IT'S THE INDUSTRIAL USES THAT THEY'VE NOW PROHIBITED CLEARLY.
AND, UH, LET ME SEE, WHAT WERE THOSE INDUSTRIAL USES? I'M CURIOUS.
IT IS GAS DRILLING AND PRODUCTION.
TEMPORARY CONCRETE, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT BATCHING PLANT
ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP TO A COUPLE OF THE, THE QUESTIONS BEFORE, UH, MS. MUNOZ, IN TERMS OF THE, THE RETIREMENT HOUSING PIECE.
UH, JUST, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE HAVE SEEN SOME OF THOSE THAT ARE, THAT ARE AGE RESTRICTED AND INCOME RESTRICTED.
WE HAVE SEEN SOME THAT ARE JUST INCOME
[02:00:01]
RESTRICTED.WHAT, WHAT THIS, UH, APPLICATION THOUGH IS, IS PROPOSING IS JUST AN AGE RESTRICTION, WHICH IS A, THIS PERCENT WOULD BE SET ASIDE FOR FOLKS AT A CERTAIN AGE, UH, TO GUARANTEE THAT THOSE UNITS ARE SET ASIDE FOR FOLKS IN THAT AGE GROUP, CORRECT? THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT INCOME RESTRICTED AND AGE RESTRICTED.
UH, DAVID, JUST A QUICK FOLLOW UP TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND THE, THE CONVERSATION YOU JUST HAD WITH COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT, THE, THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS TOOK INTO ACCOUNT OR DID NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE POTENTIAL ENTITLEMENTS WITHIN THE, THE AREA OF STUDY.
IT DID TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, IT DID TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, IT DID TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, BUT, UH, BUT IT ALSO TOOK INTO ACCOUNT A, A PREVIOUS DENSITY NUMBER FOR THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION, NOT THE NEW REDUCED NUMBER, WHICH IS ROUGHLY 45, 50% LESS.
WE HAVE, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED A REVISED REPORT TO REFLECT THE LATEST PROPOSED, UH, DWELL, UM, DENSITY.
YES, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE.
JUST A COUPLE OF FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS TO MAKE SURE I'M FOLLOWING SOME OF THE PROVISIONS REALLY RELATED TO BUILDING FORM AND THE DIFFERENT PHASING.
SO I SEE THAT WE'VE GOT 75 FOOT FIVE STORIES.
UM, I'M GONNA SAY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE SITE, WE'VE GOT THE FACE P 165, UH, FEET BASE, 12 STORIES, ALL SUBJECT TO RPS.
IT SAYS THAT PHASE ONE DOES NOT HAVE URBAN FORM, IS IT CORRECT THAT URBAN FORM SETBACK APPLIES TO THE OTHER TWO PROJECT PHASES? SO IT WOULD BE N AND P? NO, IT ONLY APPLIES TO PHASE ONE.
IT ONLY, OKAY, I'VE READ THAT OPPOSITE.
SO THEN THE OTHER QUESTION IS ON TOWER SPACING.
TOWER SPACING APPLIES TO NONE OF THE AREAS, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO KIND OF UNDERSTANDING THE FIVE STORY, THE 12, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE A BUILDING LAYOUT, SO WE HAVE A CONCEPT PLAN.
IS THERE ANY EVALUATION BY STAFF ON HOW THE TOWER, TOWER SPACING TYPICALLY IS TRYING TO MAKE SURE THERE'S LIGHT, THERE'S AIR, THERE'S VIEW IN BETWEEN? IS THAT PROVISION CAPTURED ANYWHERE ELSE? I SAW BUILDING ARTICULATION, I SAW SOME OTHER LANGUAGE, BUT NOTHING THAT REALLY SPOKE TO MANAGING THE SIZE OF THE TALLER BUILDINGS THAT SEEM TO BE ANTICIPATED HERE.
YEAH, I THINK IT'S JUST SPECIFIC TO THE DESIGN FEATURES THAT WERE, UM, BUILT INTO THE STANDARDS FOR THE BUILDING ARTICULATION, LIKE YOU NOTED.
SO WE'VE REALLY JUST IN THE SETBACKS ARE DEFINED THE HEIGHT, THE FAR, BUT IT'S REALLY THE FAR IS IS THE CAP, HOW THEY THINK ABOUT ARRANGING IT ON THE SITE.
THERE'S NO REAL LANGUAGE THAT SPEAKS TO THAT.
UM, AND THEN THE DESIGN STANDARDS ON THE FACADE, I THINK I SAW BUILDING ARTICULATION.
IS THAT THE ONLY COMPONENT THAT'S CURRENTLY CONSIDERED? WELL, AND I SHOULD SAY I DID SEE THAT THERE'S, UM, INTERNAL SIDEWALKS I THINK TRYING TO, UM, INDICATE AN INTERNAL CIRCULATION PATTERN BOTH FOR INTERNAL STREETS, PERIMETER, PUBLIC STREETS, BUT THE BUILDING FORM OTHER THAN SPEAKING TO BUILDING ARTICULATION, AND THEN THERE'S LANGUAGE TALKING ABOUT ENTRIES AND REQUIRED FRONTAGE ON THE OPEN SPACE OF 50%.
THAT PRETTY, THOSE ARE REALLY THE, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.
AND THEN THE LANGUAGE ON DESIGN STANDARDS, SPEAKING ABOUT ENTRIES DOESN'T LIMIT IT SPECIFIC TO RESIDENTIAL, BUT WHEN YOU READ WITHIN THE PROVISIONS, IT REFERENCES UNITS, IT REFERENCES, I MEAN, IT SEEMS TO BE LEANING TOWARDS THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT.
COULD YOU SPEAK TO HOW THAT WOULD APPLY TO THE OTHER USES THAT WOULD FALL WITHIN AN MU TWO? IT DOES SPECIFY THAT IT'S FOR STREET LEVEL DWELLING UNITS ADJACENT TO STREET OR INTERNAL PRIMARY DRIVES IN EACH BUILDING.
SO UNDER A, IT SIMPLY SAYS NEW CONSTRUCTION, THE FOLLOWING DESIGN STANDARDS APPLY TO NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SO ARE THERE ANY DESIGN STANDARDS RELATED TO OTHER USES?
[02:05:01]
OTHER ALLOWED USES? AS FAR AS, YOU MEAN ENTRIES GO CORRECT OR STREET FACING FACADES AND HOW THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, ALL THE LANGUAGE, I'LL APOLOGIZE.WHEN I READ THIS, I, I THOUGHT IT WAS APPLYING TO EVERYTHING AND THEN I STARTED TO SEE THE REFERENCE TO UNITS.
AND SO THEN I WASN'T CLEAR WHAT THE INTENT WAS FOR OTHER USES.
SO IT ON A, FOR FRONTAGES, IT JUST HAS THAT THE, ALL THE FACADES THAT ARE FACING THOSE DRIVEWAYS AND OPEN SPACES MUST HAVE AT LEAST ONE COMMON PRIMARY ENTRANCE AND THEN THAT, THAT ENTRANCE MUST BE CONNECTED BY AN IMPROVED PATH CONNECTING TO THE SIDEWALK.
IT ALSO HAS A TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENT.
UM, A TRANSPARENT SURFACE IS REQUIRED FOR EVERY 25 LINEAR FEET OF CONTINUOUS STREET FRONTING FACADE, INCLUDING THE INTERNAL PRIMARY DRIVE AND OPEN SPACE FRONTING FACADES.
SO THE FRONTAGES PROVISIONS, SO A ONE A APPLIES TO ALL USES A ONE B INDIVIDUALLY? YES.
ENTRY E IS ONLY RELATIVE DWELLING RELATIVE TO DWELLING UNITS? CORRECT.
AND THEN WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT, UM, HOW THE OPEN SPACE IS ORGANIZED WITHIN THE SITE? UM, I SAW THE PROVISION ABOUT 50% OF THE, WELL, THERE'S, THERE'S A MINIMUM REQUIRED RETAIL AND PER PERSONAL SERVICE USES THE 35,000 AND THEN 50% OF THE FRONTAGE, I THINK IT WAS AT THE GROUND LEVEL ON OPEN SPACE.
MUST BE PERSONAL SERVICE USE? YES.
BUT NOT DISTRIBUTING ADDITIONAL, UM, EITHER OPEN SPACE OR POCKETS WITHIN THE AREA.
IT'S JUST THE TWO ZONES THAT ARE SHOWN ON THE CONCEPT PLAN.
IS THAT CORRECT? SO THOSE AGGREGATE AREAS WERE SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE A GREATER USABLE SPACE FOR NOT ONLY THE RESIDENTS ON SITE, BUT THE SURROUNDING AREAS AS WELL.
MS. MUNOZ, THE, UM, TRAIL SYSTEM LANGUAGE THAT'S HERE.
DOES THIS REFLECT A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE STAFF? OR IS THIS WHICH OF WHICH, OR I SAY IT SAYS IT'S PENDING FINAL LANGUAGE WITH OUR PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, WE HAVE AN EXISTING SECTION AND THEN A POSSIBLE LANGUAGE FOR CONSIDERATION ARE, IS THIS STILL IN FLUX OR? IT IS.
SO THE APPLICANT'S LANGUAGE IS THE EXISTING LANGUAGE.
AND ULTIMATELY YOU'LL SEE THERE'S A LOT OF RESPONSIBILITY LAID OUT ON THE CONNECTION BEING BASICALLY FUNDED BY THE CITY, AND THEN THE CITY WOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE AREAS EVEN THROUGHOUT THE SITE ITSELF, THE AREA OF REQUEST.
AND FOR THAT REASON, THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS THAT STAFF WOULD PREFER TO SEE THERE, ESPECIALLY OUR ATTORNEYS AND
SO AT THIS TIME, IT STILL IS IN FLUX AS YOU MENTIONED.
AND THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT I DID ASK THE REPRESENTATIVE TO LOOK AT AND THEN MAKE A DETERMINATION OF WHAT THEY COULD AGREE TO.
AND I THINK THAT HOPEFULLY WE COULD GET AN ANSWER FOR THEM TODAY.
SO AT, AT THIS POINT, THE POSSIBLE LANGUAGE FOR CONSIDERATION IS THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION SUBJECT TO FURTHER REVISION WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND THE CORRECT LEGAL DEPARTMENT.
UM, MOVING ON, UH, REFERENCING STAFF'S OBJECTION TO THE PROVISION THAT SAYS THERE COULD BE TWO DETACHED SIGNS PER STREET FRONTAGE.
UH, AM I UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY, THAT STAFF'S REASON FOR DISAGREEING WITH THAT IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT THIS SITE COULD BE SUBDIVIDED INTO A LOT OF OTHER SMALLER LOTS IN THE FUTURE AND THEREFORE THAT WOULD OPEN THAT UP TO A PLETHORA OF SIGNS OR, OR, OR STAFF OBJECTING TO AT THIS POINT? YOU KNOW, THE, THE BROAD SWATH OF PRESTON AND BELTLINE THAT THEY THINK TWO DETACHED SIGNS PER THOSE EXISTING STREET FRONTAGES IS EXCESSIVE.
IT'S PER STREET FRONTAGE, BUT IT'S ALSO PER, UM, BUILD SITE.
SO IT DEPENDS ON HOW IT'S APPLIED AND RATHER THAN LEAVE THAT UP IN THE AIR FOR HOW IT'S APPLIED OR FOR FUTURE SUBDIVISION, UM, TO REALIZE HOW THAT AFFECTS THEM BASED ON THIS PROVISION, I WOULD SAY STAFF IS INCLINED TO INSTEAD LEAVE THEM AT WHAT'S CURRENTLY PERMITTED.
I'M, I'M NOT QUITE FOLLOWING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT BUILDING SITE EQUALS STREET FRONTAGE.
IS THAT IT? IT DOESN'T SAY THAT, BUT IS THAT JUST SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED AT, AT PERMITTING? UM, RIGHT.
SO EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS PER STREET FRONTAGE MM-HMM.
WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THE TOTALITY OF THE PD.
[02:10:01]
GOING ON THE RETIREMENT, UM, UNIT PIECE, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE, I KNOW THIS IS AGE RESTRICTED, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE, UH, VIA THE PD TO WRITE A, UM, INCOME RESTRICTION INTO THE REQUIREMENT? I, I DO BELIEVE SO THAT, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I HAVE TO TALK TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT.AND THEN LASTLY, UM, WITH THE PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES, I UNDERSTAND YOUR, UM, POINT THAT FIVE REQUIRING FIVE ITEMS OFF OF THIS LIST IS, UM, IN STAFF'S OPINION TOO MINIMAL, UH, A REQUIREMENT BECAUSE I MEAN, AS I'M LOOKING AT IT, FOUR OF THE FIVE COULD BE MET WITH BENCH BIKE RACK, TRASH CAN AND A BINDING SIGN.
SO, SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THERE SHOULD BE ADDITIONAL AT LEAST? YES.
CAN I JUST CHIME IN THAT RETIREMENT HOUSING IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING PROGRAM IF IT'S WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT'S NOT HOW IT'S WRITTEN AT THIS TIME, BUT IT, IT IS ELIGIBLE, IT'S ONE OF THE TWO USES THAT CAN UTILIZE IT IF WRITTEN SUCH.
UM, A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES HAD GREAT QUESTIONS.
AND, AND FOR YOU, I JUST HAVE A COUPLE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS ON THE TOWER SPACING.
IN AN URBAN FORM SETBACK, JUST TO BE CLEAR, STAFF DOES NOT HAVE A BOX CONDITION IN THE DOCKET ON THOSE TWO ISSUES, RIGHT? THERE'S NO DISAGREEMENT? NO.
UM, ONE CLARIFICATION ON THE TRAIL CONNECTION LANGUAGE IS THE APPLICANT'S, ALTHOUGH WE GOT, YOU KNOW, REVISED CONDITIONS SUBMITTED A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, REVISING SEVERAL PIECES, THAT TRAIL CONNECTION LANGUAGE HAS BEEN IN THE APPLICANT'S SUBMITTAL FOR A WHILE NOW, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND THE STAFF ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE WAS JUST RECENTLY ADDED ON THAT PIECE, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND FINALLY, ONE MORE FOR, UM, MR. NAVAREZ.
THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. NAVAREZ.
I KNOW LIKE MS. MUNOZ, YOU'RE, YOU'RE A VERY BUSY GUY, SO I APPRECIATE YOU COMING DOWN HERE, UM, TO HELP OUT AND PROVIDE US SOME INFORMATION ON THIS ONE.
UH, ONE THING THAT SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE, UM, EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT IS THE SIGNALIZATION OF BURIED TRAIL, AND I THINK THE APPLICANT'S TIA ACKNOWLEDGES THAT, THAT THIS, YOU KNOW, PROJECT IF DEVELOPED WOULD REQUIRE BERRY TRAIL TO BE SIGNALED FROM A NEEDS BASIS, RIGHT? CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION, SIR? THE ANSWER? YES.
IT'S NOT VERY WELL, WELL ARTICULATED.
UM, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, YOU KNOW, RECOGNIZES THAT IF THIS THING GETS BUILT OUT, BARRY BERRY TRAIL WOULD LIKELY NEED TO BE SIGNALED, RIGHT? YES, SIR.
THE, THE TRAFFIC STUDY IN FACT RECOGNIZES THAT THERE'S A NEED FOR A TRAFFIC SIGNAL THERE TODAY, THE SIGNAL HAS BEEN ADDED TO OUR NEEDS INVENTORY, WHICH MEANS IT TAKES TIME TO GET AT IT INTO A LIST OF DOZENS.
AND I'M TALKING ABOUT I THINK 120 INTERSECTIONS THAT ARE NEEDING TO BE UPGRADED.
WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROJECT AND OR ANY WORK BEING DONE AT THIS DRIVEWAY, THE SIGNAL WOULD BE EXPEDITED.
THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE DEVELOPER WOULD ALSO BE NEEDED TO BE ASSESSED IN ORDER TO INCLUDE THE IMPROVEMENT WITH THEIR PROJECT.
AND IS THERE A WAY TO BAKE THE SIGNALIZATION OF THE BERRY TRAIL BELT LINE INTERSECTION AND THE DEVELOPER'S CONTRIBUTION TO THAT SIGNALIZATION INTO THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE? Y YES, SIR.
THE, THE, AS MANY OTHER PDS, THE AND, UH, CONDITION COULD BE ADDED INTO THE PD THAT THE INSTALLATION, THE ASSESSMENT AND THE INSTALLATION WAS WE COMPLETED BEFORE EITHER A BUILDING PERMIT OR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
PERSONALLY, FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, UM, CEO IS THE VERY LAST POINT OF OUR REVIEW, HAVING THIS BROUGHT UP TO THE VERY LAST MINUTE, IT'S ALWAYS PROBLEMATIC.
THERE HAVE BEEN CASES WHERE WE, YOU KNOW, WE BRING THIS UP TO THE DEVELOPER, THE DEVELOPER SAYS, WELL, IT SAYS UNTIL THE CEO AND HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AT THE VERY LAST MINUTE, IT CAUSES PROBLEM FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.
WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IF IMPOSED ON THE CONDITIONS, THAT IT WOULD BE A BUILDING PERMIT.
AND SO THAT IT ALLOWS US TIME TO, UM, CALCULATE THE ASSESSMENT AND ENTER, ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH A DEVELOPER AS TO WHAT THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES ARE AND THE DEVELOPER AS WELL.
COMMISSIONER HALL, SECOND ROUND.
[02:15:01]
A COUPLE THINGS.ONE, I THINK IT'S ALREADY BEEN CLARIFIED THERE.
THE SPECIFIES 35,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL.
THAT'S A REQUIREMENT AT MINIMUM, AND I BELIEVE IT ALSO SPECIFIES 90,000 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE IN TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
AND I THINK THE TRAFFIC STUDY ALSO SAYS THERE WOULD BE ACTUALLY TWO SIGNALS, UH, REQUIRED.
IS THERE ONE ON PRESTON AS WELL AS BELTLINE Y? YES, SIR.
UH, THERE'S ALSO A NEED THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE COORDINATED WITH THE ALEXIS TANTE.
THERE WOULD ALSO NEED TO BE UPGRADES, UH, FOR PEDESTRIAN DETECTION AT THE INTERSECTION OF BELTLINE AND PRESTON.
UM, THOSE WILL NEED TO BE DISCUSSED INTERNALLY WITH THE CO WITH THE, WITH THE, UM, NCT CALL AND SEEING WHAT UPGRADES ARE BEING PLANNED OUT FOR THIS QUARTER IN MAKING SURE THAT EITHER THERE IS A TEMPORARY UPGRADE OR, UM, A, A CONTRIBUTION INTO THAT PROJECT.
AND SO, THREE, IF I MAY CORRECT, AND MORE THAN JUST PUTTING UP A TRAFFIC SIGNAL, THIS WOULD BE IMPROVEMENT OF FOR PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WHEN WE, WHEN WE THINK OF ANY UPGRADES IN THE PUBLIC INFRA, UH, OF, AS A PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, PEDESTRIANS ARE THE FIRST, UH, FACTOR IN OUR EVALUATION OF THE DESIGN.
SO THE CONCEPT WOULD BE NOT ONLY TO CALM THE TRAFFIC FLOW ON THESE TWO MAJOR THOROUGHFARES, BUT TO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, AADA COMPLIANCE, ACCESS TO THE SITES BASED ON A DA COMPLIANCE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, I THINK THAT CONCLUDES OUR, OUR, UH, OUR BRIEFING TODAY.
UM, WE DO HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT WE WILL GO INTO.
PROBABLY WE'LL BEGIN THE HEARING WITH THAT.
UH, AND THEN ALSO JUST TO TAKE A QUICK STEP BACK ON THIS, ON THIS CASE, UH, WE WILL TAKE UP THE, THE QUESTION ON THE POSING THE POSTING OF THE SIGNS AND IF IT COMPLIES WITH SECTION 1.106 FIRST BEFORE WE GET INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE.
UH, AND WHEN THAT COMMISSIONER'S IT IS 1214.
UH, THAT CONCLUDES THE BRIEFING OF THAT PLAN COMMISSION.
MS. LOPEZ, CAN YOU PLEASE START US OFF WITH A ROLL CALL?
[CALL TO ORDER]
GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SCHOCK.
PRESENT, DISTRICT TWO, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
PRESENT DISTRICT, DISTRICT THREE.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT PRESENT, DISTRICT FOUR.
COMMISSIONER FORSYTH PRESENT, DISTRICT FIVE.
CHAIR SHADI PRESENT, DISTRICT SIX.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER PRI, DISTRICT SEVEN.
DISTRICT NINE COMMISSIONER SLEEPER.
COMMISSIONER HAWK DISTRICT 13.
COMMISSIONER HALL PRESENT DISTRICT 14.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HERE AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBIN, I'M HERE.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
WELCOME TO THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
TODAY IS THURSDAY, AUGUST 8TH AT 12:50 PM COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS BEFORE WE GET INTO THE HEARING.
UH, OUR SPEAKER GUIDELINES, EACH SPEAKER WILL RECEIVE THREE MINUTES, UH, TO SPEAK AND IN CASES WHERE WE HAVE OPPOSITION PER OUR RULES, THE APPLICANT WILL RECEIVE A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UH, ALL RULES ALSO ALLOW US TO ADJUST THE SPEAKING TIME PER CASE AND WE WILL BE DOING THAT TODAY.
UH, OBVIOUSLY WITH SO MANY PEOPLE HERE TODAY FOR THE PEPPER SCORE CASE.
WE'LL GO TO, TO ONE MINUTE ON THAT CASE.
ALSO, WE DO HAVE THESE, THESE LITTLE YELLOW SHEETS DOWN HERE AT THIS TABLE AT, AT SOME POINT TODAY AT, UH, YOUR CONVENIENCE.
PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO FILL ONE OF THESE OUT.
SO WE HAVE A RECORD OF YOUR VISIT WITH US HERE TODAY.
UH, AND WITH THAT COMMISSIONERS, UH, WE'RE GONNA START OUT ACTUALLY WITH THE LAST ITEM, UH, NOT TECHNICALLY THE LAST ITEM, BUT WITH ITEM NUMBER 20,
[20. 24-2386 Consideration of amending Chapters 51 and 51A of the Dallas Development Code, Section 51-4.208 “Recreation and Entertainment Uses”, Section 51A-4.208 “Recreation Uses”, and related sections with consideration to be given to defining a use, “private game club”, and establishing appropriate zoning districts and development standards associated with the use.]
UH,[02:20:03]
THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT.UH, WE WILL START OUT IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, FOR MS. GILLIS IN THE O OPEN SESSION BEFORE WE GO TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND, UH, SPEAK WITH THE ATTORNEYS ABOUT THIS ITEM AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND BEGIN AT THE TOP OF THE DOCKET.
LET'S THE FIRST, NEXT ONE, COMMISSIONERS, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM AND IS RECUSING STEPPING OUT OF THE CHAMBER, IN FACT HAS STEPPED OUT OF THE CHAMBER.
CAN WE READ THIS INTO THE RECORD FIRST AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY SPEAKERS PLEASE? SURE.
UM, CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING CHAPTERS 51 AND 51 A OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 51 DASH 4.208, RECREATION AND ENTERTAINMENT USES SECTION 51 A DASH 4.208 RECREATION USES AND RELATED SECTIONS WITH CONSIDERATION TO BE GIVEN TO DEFINING A USE PRIVATE GAME CLUB AND ESTABLISHING APPROPRIATE ZONING DISTRICTS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY REGISTERED SPEAKERS ON THIS ONE.
COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. GILLS BEFORE WE GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION? OKAY THEN, UH, IT IS NOW 12:53 PM THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION WILL NOW GO TO, INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEEKING ADVICE OF ITS ATTORNEY TO DISCUSS LEGAL ISSUES RELATED TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 20, DCA 2 0 1 0 1 AS AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 55 5 1 0.07.
ONE OF THE TEXANS OPENS MEETINGS ACT COMMISSIONERS WILL STEP BACK TO THE BRIEFING ROOM COMMISSIONERS.
IT IS 1 24, UH, AND THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION HAS RETURNED FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE MOVE ON FROM THIS ITEM? AND WE WILL, WE WILL TAKE IT BACK UP FOR A MOTION AT THE REGULAR ORDER OF THE, OF THE AGENDA.
SO WE WILL COME BACK TO THIS ITEM TO MAKE A, A MOTION AND ALSO HAVE A, A CHANCE TO ASK QUESTIONS FOR, FOR STAFF.
UH, BUT WITH THAT COMMISSIONERS, UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GONNA HEAD RIGHT BACK INTO THE AGENDA RIGHT IN ORDER BEGINNING
[1. 24-2366 An application for a minor amendment to an existing development and landscape plan on property zoned Planned Development District No. 501, on the south line of Stults Road, between Woodshore Drive and Clearwater Drive]
WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE M 2 3 4 0 0 2.LET'S GET THAT RIGHT INTO THE RECORD.
ITEM NUMBER ONE M 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 2 APPLICATION FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND LANDSCAPE PLAN ON A PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 0 1 ON THE SOUTH LINE OF STT ROAD BETWEEN WOOD SHORE DRIVE AND CLEARWATER DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. BLUE.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS ITEM NUMBER ONE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YOU NONE.
COMMISSIONER HOUSER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YES.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF M 2 34 DASH 0 0 2, I MOVE APPROVAL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION SEEING YOU? NONE.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE NOW MOVING ON TO OUR ZONING CASES.
[Zoning Cases - Consent]
BEGIN WITH THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WHICH CONSISTS OF CASES 3, 4, 5, AND SIX, PARDON ME.TWO AND THREE HAVE COME OFF CONSENT.
IT WILL BE VOTED ON AND DISPOSED OF INDIVIDUALLY.
THAT LEAVES CASE CASES FOUR AND FIVE THAT WILL BE DISPOSED OF IN ONE MOTION, UNLESS THERE IS SOMEONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON EITHER OF THOSE TWO CASES AND THEN IT WILL BE HEARD INDIVIDUALLY.
SO DOES ANYONE WANT TO BE HEARD ON ITEMS FOUR OR FIVE? THAT WOULD BE CASE Z 2 3 4, 2 16 AND Z 2 3 4 2 21.
THAT WOULD BE PAGE TWO AND THREE.
ANYONE WANT TO BE HEARD ON CASES FOUR OR FIVE? OKAY, WE'LL GET THOSE RIGHT IN PLEASE.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER FOUR, CASE Z 2 34 DASH 216 AND APPLICATION FOR AN R SEVEN 50.
A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF OAKWOOD DRIVE, WEST OF HAYMARKET ROAD.
[02:25:01]
STAFF.THIS IS ITEM NUMBER FIVE, CASE Z, 2 34 DASH 2 21.
AND APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2 1 1 8 FOR VEHICLE DISPLAY SALES AND SERVICE ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT TWO WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 34, THE CF HA SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT NUMBER TWO WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTH LINE OF CF HA FREEWAY, EAST OF MURDOCH ROAD.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
UH, AGAIN, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THOSE TWO ITEMS? COMMISSIONERS? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? CASE FOUR AND FIVE.
SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
UM, IN THE MATTERS OF CASE NUMBER Z 2 3 4 216 AND 2 3 4, NO.
TWO EXCUSE, YEAH, TWO, UH, 2, 3, 4, 2, 2, 1.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AS READ INTO THE RECORDS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION AND COMMISSIONER HOUSE FOR YOUR SECOND.
[2. 24-2367 An application for a TH-3(A) Townhouse District on property zoned an IR Industrial/Research District, on the south line of West Commerce Street, between Sylvan Avenue and North Edgefield Avenue.]
BACK TO CASE NUMBER TWO.ITEM TWO, CASE C 2 3 4 DASH 34.
AN APPLICATION FOR A TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED AND IR INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF WEST COMMERCE.
STREET BETWEEN SYLVAN AVENUE AND NORTH EDGEFIELD AVENUE.
STATUS RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS ITEM NUMBER TWO, TOP OF PAGE TWO.
MR. HELMS, THOUGH WE HAVE SOME REGISTERED SPEAKERS ONLINE ON THIS ITEM, DO YOU KNOW IF ANY OF 'EM ARE ONLINE? MR. MYERS, MS. BALL MERIDIAN, AND, UH, MR. KUSHNER MYERS IS ON.
OKAY, SPENCER MYERS, WE'RE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
I'M A RESIDENT OF CLIFF CLIFFTOP LANE, WHICH IS, UH, TO THE SOUTHWEST OF THE PROPOSED REZONING AREA, UH, WHICH YOU CAN'T SEE FROM THE AERIAL MAP, UH, PROVIDED IS THAT THERE IS A TREE FILLED AREA, UH, WHICH IS ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THIS PROPERTY ON COMMERCE STREET.
UH, THAT TREE FILLED AREA IS ACTUALLY A HILL.
UH, THAT HILL IS MORE THAN 50 VERTICAL FEET, UH, FROM THE SLAB, UH, ON THE COMMERCE STREET PROPERTY UP TO WHERE OUR HOMES ARE.
AND, UH, RECENTLY AN ACUTE EROSION, UH, EVENT OCCURRED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD JUST A HUNDRED YARDS TO THE WEST OF THIS IN THE ADJOINING PROPERTY ON COMMERCE STREET.
UH, AND THAT WAS BECAUSE OF DIGGING SOMEONE DID AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS HILLSIDE, UH, AT THAT PROPERTY, UH, THE BACKYARDS OF SEVERAL OF THE HOMES IN OUR, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ARE NOW GONE, UH, AND THE HOMES FOUNDATIONS ARE AT RISK, UH, FROM EXTREME DAMAGE, UH, DUE TO THIS EROSION.
SO WITH THE PRO PROPOSED REZONING PLAN, WE'RE CONCERNED THAT THIS DIGGING MAY OCCUR AGAIN, UH, WITHOUT PROPER, UH, SOIL STUDY, WITHOUT IMMEDIATE REMEDIATION OF ANY, UH, LEVELING, UH, OF THAT, UH, ZONE.
SO, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE JUST BRINGING THIS UP AS, AS A CONCERN GIVEN THE ONGOING EROSION ISSUES THAT WE HAVE, UH, THE UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY FOR DALLAS.
UH, GIVEN THAT THIS IS A HILL THAT IS, UH, MORE SUBSTANTIAL THAN MOST, UH, I, I THINK IS SOMETHING THAT IS, UH, PARTICULARLY NEEDED TO BE CALLED OUT HERE.
COULD YOU PLEASE, UH, STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, SIR? YES.
UH, ANY OF OUR OTHER SPEAKERS ONLINE.
TRACY BALL? UH, SHE IS ONLINE.
YOU PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR, YOUR CAMERA IS ON AND WORKING.
STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE SEE YOU IN ORDER.
SO I AM ALSO LIKE MR. MEYERS, ONE OF THE RESIDENTS AT THE TOP OF THE CLIFF.
AND WHILE WE ARE ALL EXCITED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN OUR AREA, THERE ARE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE ABILITY OF THE CITY TO MANAGE THIS PROJECT BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT
[02:30:01]
THAT OUR HOUSES ARE IN, WERE NOT MANAGED PROPERLY.UM, THE, AS HE MENTIONED, 17 HOMES HAVE EXPERIENCED FOUNDATION ISSUES ARE AND ARE AT RISK OF SLIDING OFF THIS CLIFF.
THEY ARE AT RISK OF FALLING OFF THE CLIFF.
AND WE AS RESIDENTS DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES OR THE KNOWLEDGE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AND HOW TO DO IT QUICKLY AND EFFECTIVELY TO MANAGE THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE FACING.
SO IT SEEMS AS THOUGH PERMITS WERE GIVEN THAT MAYBE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GIVEN FOR OUR DEVELOPMENT.
AND ALSO THERE WAS LACK OF OVERSIGHT ON, UM, THE BUSINESSES ON COMMERCE WHO DUG INTO THE CLIFF AND EXCAVATED INTO THE CLIFF AND CAUSED THE INSTABILITY THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW.
SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE, AND, AND THE FACT THAT THE PRESENTATION TO THE ZONING AND PLAN COMMITTEE DIDN'T MENTION ANY OF THIS AND DIDN'T MENTION THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, UM, THE CITY'S OFFICE OF COMMUNI COMMUNITY PROSECUTION LOOKING INTO THIS MATTER IS A HUGE DEAL.
AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE PROPER OVERSIGHT IS GIVEN TO ANYONE WHO PLANS TO DO ANY TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION THAT COULD POTENTIALLY FALL CAUSE MORE UNSTABILITY TO THIS CLIFF.
THERE ARE 17 HOMES AT IMMEDIATE RISK AND 53 HOMES IN THIS COMMUNITY.
AND LIKE I SAID, WE'RE JUST INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS.
WE, WE DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO RETAINING WALL AND THE COST OF THE RETAINING WALLS ARE IN THE MILLIONS AND ALL BECAUSE THE PROPER OVERSIGHT WASN'T GIVEN IN ADVANCE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
SO WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE NO FURTHER IMPACT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND ANY HOMES THAT ARE BUILT AT THE BOTTOM OF THE CLIFF ARE NOT IMPACTED BY WHAT'S GOING ON WITH US.
AND WE HAVE ONE OTHER, MERIDIAN FROM A COMMUNITY HOA.
COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR OUR TWO SPEAKERS.
SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF CASES Z 2 34 DASH 34, I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND PUT THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL SEPTEMBER THE 19TH, 2024.
AND I HAVE BRIEF COMMENTS IF I GET A SECOND.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSE FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
I AM VERY WELL AWARE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY THE ILLEGAL EXCAVATION EXCAVATION THAT WAS DONE WITHOUT PROPER PERMITS AT BOTH THE SUBJECT SITE HERE AND THE SITE IMMEDIATELY TO THE, TO THE WEST.
AND I'M ALSO AWARE THAT THERE ARE CODE AND COMMUNITY PROSECUTION INVESTIGATIONS GOING ON, AND IT IS DEFINITELY NOT THE TIME TO AUTHORIZE ANY SORT OF, UM, ADDITIONAL ACTIVITY UNTIL THIS SITUATION IS RECTIFIED.
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES GOOD? YES, SIR.
COMMISSIONER HOLT PLACED UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL WHAT DATE? SEPTEMBER 19TH.
[3. 24-2369 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]
TO CASE NUMBER THREE.THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE, CASE Z 2 34 DASH TWO 14.
AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE WITH A CLASS A DANCE HALL ON PROPERTY ZONED A A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON THE WEST SIDE OF MCCREE ROAD, NORTH OF EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE Z 2 34 2 14.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.
COMMISSIONER SLEEPER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? NO.
COMMISSIONER HOLT, MY APOLOGIES, PLEASE.
I GUESS THE QUESTION COMES UP AGAIN, WHAT IS THE COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE, BUT I DON'T
[02:35:01]
KNOW IF THERE'S ANYONE HERE THAT CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.I CAN GIVE THE CODE DEFINITION FOR THAT USE AND, UH, IT'S A LITTLE FUNKY, SO STRAP IN.
GIMME ONE SECOND TO PULL THAT UP.
UM, SO, UH, THE CODE DEFINITION FOR A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE HAS SEVERAL LAYERS.
UM, BUT THE MAIN DEFINITION IS, UH, A FACILITY WHOLLY ENCLOSED IN A BUILDING THAT OFFERS ENTERTAINMENT OR GAMES OF SKILL TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC FOR A FEE.
THIS USE INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, AND ADULT ARCADE, ADULT CABARET, ADULT THEATER, AMUSEMENT CENTER, BILLIARD HALL, BOWLING ALLEY, CHILDREN'S AMUSEMENT CENTER, DANCE HALL, MOTOR TRACK OR SKATING RINK.
SO IT'S BASICALLY ANYTHING OF AN ENTERTAINMENT NATURE THAT HAPPENS INSIDE.
UH, WE HAVE ANOTHER USE IN OUR CODE CALLED COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT OUTSIDE THAT WOULD BE KIND OF THE SAME THING, BUT OBVIOUSLY OUT OF DOORS.
UM, AND THEN FROM THERE, THERE ARE KIND OF SUB USES THAT CAN BE PERMITTED LIKE A BINGO PARLOR OR AMUSEMENT CENTER OR THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, BUT THIS APPLICANT IS JUST PROPOSING THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE USE.
UM, AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT, THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING THAT A PERCENTAGE OF THEIR FLOOR AREA BE USED FOR A DANCE HALL, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT KIND OF RUNS PART AND PARCEL WITH COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR STAFF? OKAY, NOW WE'RE READY FOR THE MOTION.
IN THE MATTER OF, UM, CASE, UH, Z 2 34 DASH TWO 14, UM, I, UH, RECOMMEND THAT WE, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF A FIVE YEAR UP.
WOULD THAT BE SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN CONDITIONS? YES.
COMMISSIONER SLEEPER FOR YOUR MOTION AND VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY OPPOSED? WE HAVE ONE IN OPPOSITION CARPENTER.
SO WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR ZONING CASES UNDER ADVISEMENT.
THE BEGINNING WITH CASE NUMBER, NO, PARDON ME? ACTUALLY, WE'RE GONNA GO
[36. 24-2403 An application to replat a 0.780-acre tract of land containing all of Lot 2A in City Block 3/5018 to create a 3-lot shared access development with 7,500 square feet lot each and one Common Area on property located on Easter Avenue, south of Fordham Road. (Part 1 of 2)]
TO ITEM NUMBER 36.WE HAVE, UH, AN INTERPRETER THAT WAS REQUESTED, SO WE HAD TO MOVE THAT ITEM UP.
UM, EL EDUARDO LINA MARTINEZ OR ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ IS THE APPLICANT ON, ON CASE NUMBER 36? EDUARDO MARTINEZ OR MR. ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ.
COMMISSIONERS THEN LET'S, LET'S TABLE THE ITEM FOR THE MOMENT.
I THINK THAT THEY REQUESTED THE, UH, THE INTERPRETER.
[02:40:02]
SO LET'S COME BACK TO THIS HERE, UH, AFTER A FEW CASES.THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
WE'LL NOW GO TO CASE NUMBER SIX, UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WHICH IS ON PAGE THREE Z 2 12 3 58.
FOR THIS ITEM, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'LL GO FOR, UH, WITH ONE MINUTE PER SPEAKER.
PLEASE BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, MS. LOPEZ WILL KEEP TIME.
[6. 24-2374 An application for a Planned Development District for MU-2 Mixed Use District uses on property zoned a CR Community Retail District, located on the southeast corner of Preston Road and Belt Line Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a conceptual plan, a development plan, and staff’s recommended conditions. ]
AN APPLICATION FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MU TWO MIXED USE DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTIES OWNED A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PRESTON ROAD AND BELTLINE ROAD STAFF.RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. MUNOZ.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
DO YOU NEED TO RAISE THAT TABLE OR DO YOU THERE'S A LITTLE MAGIC BUTTON BACK THERE SOMEWHERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONERS.
ANDREW REIG, 2201 MAIN STREET, UH, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 1.
UM, I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION IF WE CAN PULL THAT UP, UH, TO GIVE YOU A PREVIEW OF SOME OF THE MATERIALS THAT, UH, WE WILL BE DISCUSSING TODAY.
MY APOLOGIES MR. RIG, MY APOLOGIES.
WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A QUICK STEP BACK BECAUSE WE, THERE, THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT THE SIGNS.
SO THAT IS THE ITEM THAT WE'LL TAKE UP FIRST.
UH, IT'S NOT THE MERITS OF THE CASE JUST TO SEE IF, UH, UH, YOU COMPLY WITH SECTION 1.106, SO YOU HAVE YOUR, YOUR ONE MINUTE ON THAT ITEM, JUST MAKING SURE THAT YOU KNOW.
AND THEN ANY, ANYONE FROM THE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON JUST THE ITEM, JUST THE SIGN IF THE SIGNS WERE POSTED IN ACCORDANCE TO 1.106 AND THEN WOULD DISPOSE OF THAT.
AND DEPENDING WHAT HAPPENS THERE, WE'LL EITHER SWING BACK TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE OR WE HOLD OR DENY THE ITEM PER OUR RULES.
UM, ANDREW RIG 2201 MAIN STREET FOR THE RECORD.
UH, REGARDING THE ZONING SIGNS, WE HAVE POSTED THOSE FOUR TIMES OVER THE COURSE OF THE ZONING CASE BEING FILED.
UH, MOST RECENTLY WE WERE ALERTED THAT THE SIGNS WERE DOWN, UM, LATE, UH, LAST WEEK, WE IMMEDIATELY FILED TO GET REPLACEMENT ZONING SIGNS AND PLACE THOSE ON THE SITE, UH, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
UM, WE HAVE PUT GOOD FAITH EFFORTS INTO ENSURING THAT THE ZONING SIGNS ARE POSTED.
IN ADDITION, UM, WE'VE HELD MULTIPLE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, HAD, UH, A WEBPAGE WITH ALL THE UPDATES ON IT TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S OTHER METHODS OF INFORMING THE PUBLIC ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR CASE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE FROM THE APPLICANT'S SIDE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THE, THE SIGN ISSUE? OKAY.
OH, THE, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO, THERE'S A LITTLE BUTTON THERE TO THE MIC TURNED OFF.
NATALIE LEVE, 6 2 1 5 GEORGIAN COURT, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 5 4.
UH, I APPRECIATE WEBSITES, COMMUNITY MEETINGS, BUT THE CODE IS VERY CLEAR AND IT'S A VERY SIMPLE ISSUE.
SIGNS ARE REQUIRED TO BE 14 DAYS UNTIL THIS HEARING IN TWO INSTANCES, RESIDENTS WHO ARE HERE TODAY HAD TO EMAIL THE CITY IN ORDER TO HAVE COMPLIANCE BECAUSE THEY WERE SO CONCERNED BECAUSE THESE MEETINGS WERE SET TO APPEAR SEVEN IN 14 DAYS AND HEY, WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY SIGNS THE CODE WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS TO BE DISMISSED.
I DO NOT VIEW GOOD FAITH EFFORTS AS WAITING FOR RESIDENTS TO SEND EMAILS AND THEN PUTTING SIGNS UP.
UH, I CAN ATTEST THAT THE, THERE WAS NOT A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO KEEP THE SIGNS UP.
[02:45:01]
WHERE THE SIGNS, UH, WERE ABSENT WAS MAY 28TH DURING THAT HIGH WINDSTORM AND I, I LIVE CLOSE BY, I DRIVE BY THAT STREET DAILY ON MY WAY TO THE OFFICE.THE SIGNS WERE DOWN FOR 60 DAYS, SO I THINK THAT CLEARLY IS NOT A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO KEEP THE NOTIFICATION SIGNS UP.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON, UH, ON THE SIGN ISSUE FIRST? MR. RU? TECHNICALLY PEREZ, YOU DO GET, OH, SORRY.
I'M GWEN MOORE AT 7 2 3 1 TANGLE GLEN DRIVE.
AND I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK THAT WE NEED MORE RULES BECAUSE THESE SIGNS HAVE BEEN FLOPPED OVER.
THEY WERE NOTHING BETTER THAN A SIXTH GRADE SCIENCE PROJECT FACING A 40 MILE AN HOUR SPEED LIMIT.
IF YOU'RE TRYING TO COMMUNICATE IT'S A 15 ACRE PROPERTY, WE NEED MORE RULES.
IF IT'S 15 ACRES, THEY SHOULD HAVE 15 SIGNS SO WE CAN READ THEM.
SO WE NEED A GOOD FAITH EFFORT FROM YOU THE NEXT TIME.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, FOLKS.
I, I WOULD'VE REALLY APPRECIATE IT IF WE DON'T GET INTO THAT RIGHT.
OR IT'S GONNA BE A LONG DAY IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE THAT.
WE FREQUENTLY POST ZONING SIGNS FOR OTHER CASES THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
UH, TYPICALLY THE BEST WAY TO POST THEM IS TO AFFIX THEM TO, UM, A, A FENCE.
THERE'S NOT MANY OPPORTUNITIES FOR FENCES OUT HERE.
I DID, UH, AS MYSELF BEING THE ONE POSTING THE SIGNS ON SITE, I DID FIND A SUITABLE LOCATION TO AFF FIX A SIGN THAT WOULD BE LESS LIKELY TO, UH, BE IMPACTED BY A STORM, BE STOLEN, UM, OR, UM, OTHERWISE TAKEN AWAY.
WE'VE ALSO ALERTED THE SECURITY ON SITE TO ENSURE THAT, UM, THE SIGNS REMAIN UP AND IF THEY SEE ANYBODY TAMPERING WITH THE SIGNS TO, UM, ALERT THE OWNERSHIP GROUP.
UM, I WILL ADMIT THAT THERE'S NOT THE BEST LOCATIONS FOR THESE SIGNS ON THE SITE.
IT'S REQUIRED TO HAVE FIVE ZONING SIGNS FOR A SITE THIS SIZE.
THOSE FIVE ZONING SIGNS WERE, UH, REPOSTED IN OUR OPINION, A GOOD FAITH EFFORT WHEN WE WERE NOTIFIED THAT THEY WERE DOWN OR WE HAD OBSERVED THAT THEY WERE DOWN.
QUESTIONS FOR MR. ROIG? FIRST ON THE ITEM ON THE, THE SIGNS COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, MR. RUHR, IN ADDITION TO THE SIGNS, UM, REQUIRED BY THE CITY, ARE THERE NOT ALSO BANNERS ALL UP AND DOWN BELTLINE AND PRESTON NOTIFYING RESIDENTS THAT THERE'S PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE? I HAVE SEEN BANNERS ON PRESTON ROAD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR MR. RIG? QUESTIONS FOR OUR, UH, SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? I HAD ONE QUESTION, PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER FORSET FOR THE GENTLEMAN THAT JUST SPOKE, HOW MANY DAYS DID YOU SAY THAT THE SIGNS WERE DOWN? TWO DAYS.
YEAH, ACTUALLY I HAVE TO COME TO THE MICROPHONE.
AND WHEN WERE THEY NOTIFIED THEY WERE GOING? THERE'S A LITTLE BUTTON THERE THAT, YES.
UH, MAY 28TH TO JULY 28TH, THE SIGNS WERE NOT PRESENT.
SO 60 DAYS IS THE WAY I CALCULATE IT.
AND, AND, UH, WHAT ARE YOU SAYING? ALL THE SIGNS WERE DOWN? YES.
I, IN FACT, I HAVE A YOUTUBE VIDEO THAT SHOWS THE FOUR SIGNS THAT WERE UP ORIGINALLY.
AND I ALSO HAVE TIME DATED PHOTOGRAPHS THAT THE SIGNS WERE DOWN ON THE DATE THAT I INDICATED.
UM, SO I'VE BEEN TO 12 MEETINGS REGARDING PEPPER SQUARE, SO I'M VERY INVOLVED IN THIS WHOLE DEVELOPMENT.
I DRIVE BY THERE DAILY TO GO TO MY OFFICE, SO IT'S A VERY EASY THING FOR ME TO OBSERVE.
AND I ALSO WAS INVOLVED IN MAY WHEN THE SIGNS WERE NOT PRESENT AND THE MEETING WAS NOT DELAYED AS WE REQUESTED.
SO I'VE BEEN KEEPING MY EYE ON THE SIGN, SIGN ISSUE.
THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I'M SO AWARE.
AND YOU, YOU INDICATE THAT THE SIGNS WENT DOWN ON MAY 28TH.
DID YOU REPORT THAT IMMEDIATELY? I DON'T THINK I HAD AN OBLIGATION TO REPORT IT.
SO, UH, I GUESS WHEN, WHEN, WHEN DID THE COMMUNITY NOTIFY THE, THE, THE DEVELOPER THAT THE SIGNS WERE NOT THERE? WHEN, WHEN WAS THAT? THAT WAS DONE ON JULY 28TH.
[02:50:01]
UH, AN INDIVIDUAL THAT'S IN THIS ROOM, UH, EMAILED, UH, THE, THE PLANNING STAFF ABOUT IT, AND THEN CONSEQUENTLY THE SIGNS WERE PUT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT.THANKS, CHAIR RUBEN, I THINK COMMISSIONER FORSYTH ASKED MY QUESTION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT.
WE, WE ALREADY PASSED THAT, SIR, I CAN'T SPEAK.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'LL SAY THAT.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THE, ON THE SIGN ISSUE? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE.
UM, MS. MUNOZ, IF THIS BODY WERE TO FIND THAT THERE WAS A POSTING NOTICE IS THE TYPICAL REQUEST FROM THE BODY TO SIMPLY REPOST THE SIGNS, CPC WOULD HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO EITHER HOLD THE CASE TO ALLOW FOR REPOSTING OR COULD MAKE A DECISION TODAY IF THEY CHOSE TO? NO.
JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLARIFICATION ON THE RECORD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION? YES, I DO.
UM, I MOVE TO FIND THE APPLICANT COMPLIED WITH THE SIGN NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS ON 51 A 1.106 BY MAKING GOOD FAITH EFFORTS TO KEEP NOTIFICATION SIGNS POSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CODE.
VICE CHAIR RUBIN, AND SO MANY SECONDS THAT I, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON WAS VERY QUICK AND, AND FAST, SO WE WILL HAVE HER AS SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION MR. RUBIN, PLEASE? I'LL JUST SAY IT SOUNDS LIKE AS SOON AS THIS APPLICANT WAS NOTIFIED OF THESE SIGNS BEING DOWN, THEY, THEY PROMPTLY REPOSTED THEM AND I THINK THAT CONSTITUTES, UH, GOOD FAITH EFFORTS IN MY VIEW.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS.
IS THERE A NO ON THAT ONE? OPPOSITION.
NOW WE'LL GO TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE.
WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE APPLICANT IN ONE MINUTE.
I DO HAVE A QUICK PRESENTATION IF I COULD PULL THAT UP OR CAN I DO IT ON THE SCREEN HERE? OKAY.
DID YOU FIND THE BACK? YEAH, I THINK IT SHOULD BE, UH, SHOULD BE PULLING UP.
IS IT TRYING TO TOGGLE IT OR? YEAH, LET ME, LEMME CHECK THAT REAL QUICK.
SORRY, WHAT? YOU DIDN'T HAVE ABOUT CLOSE ANYTHING, DID YOU? I DON'T THINK SO.
I NEED TO RECONNECT THE COMPUTER TO WEBEX WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE.
[02:55:41]
ARE YOU READY MR. RUE? SURE THING.I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WERE WAITING ON, UH, MR. CHAIR.
I THINK WE CAN, WE'LL GO AHEAD GET THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD.
UM, JUST WANT TO PREVIEW, UH, SOME OF THE MATERIALS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR DOCKET, UH, OR I GUESS IN OUR PRESENTATION THAT WE HAPPY TO DISCUSS FURTHER.
UM, GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW OF THE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PD, UH, WE'RE PROPOSING, OBVIOUSLY NO CR IS THE EXISTING, UM, ZONING DISTRICT.
UH, AND THE IMPETUS FOR THIS REQUEST IS TO REVITALIZE AN AGING SHOPPING CENTER TO PROVIDE FOR A WALKABLE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH AMPLE OPEN SPACES, GREEN SPACES, RESTAURANT, RETAIL, AND SOME, UH, TRAIL CONNECTION LANGUAGE, SIDE PERIMETER SIDEWALKS AND INTERIOR CONNECTIVITY ITEMS. UM, HERE'S AN AERIAL OF THE SITE.
UM, WE'VE HAD EXTENSIVE COMMUNITY OUTREACH, WHICH WE'LL TALK TALK TOUCH ON LATER.
UM, A COUPLE THINGS THAT WE DID TALK ABOUT BRIEFLY IN THE BRIEFING.
UH, WE DID REDUCE THE AREA OF THE REQUEST, UH, FROM 23 ACRES DOWN TO 15, AND WE'VE SUBSEQUENTLY DECREASED OUR DENSITY FROM OUR ORIGINAL REQUEST OF 2300 DOWN TO 984.
UM, I THINK I MIGHT HAVE HEARD A, A BEEP, BUT I'LL JUST QUICKLY SHOW YOU SOME OTHER SLIDES THAT WE HAVE IN OUR DECK AND WE'D BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS THEM, UM, SHOULD THERE BE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
CHAIRMAN SHADAY, VICE CHAIRMAN RUBEN AND PLANT COMMISSIONERS.
UH, MY NAME IS LEE KLEINMAN OF MASTER PLAN 2201 MAIN STREET DALLAS.
THANK YOU FOR SERVING THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS AND THINKING OF THE FUTURE OF OUR CITY.
SPECIAL THANKS TO VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR THE, UH, TIRELESS WORK HE DID ON THE PD CONDITIONS WORKING WITH HENRY S. MILLER IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSIONERS THAT TOOK THE TIME TO, UH, PROVIDE SOME SUGGESTIONS AND, UH, SO THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE SOME CHANGES TO MAKE THIS A BETTER PD.
UM, I APPRECIATE THE ROLE THAT THE PLANT COMMISSION HAS, WHICH IS TO LOOK TO THE FUTURE GROWTH AND IMPROVE LAND USE FOR THE CITY.
THE STATUS QUO AT BELT LINE IN PRESTON REINFORCES A SEA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AGING, RETAIL, INCREASING TRAFFIC AND AGING.
70 STYLE SHOPPING CENTER EXPERIENCE THAT NO LONGER SERVES THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
MILLER WANTS TO PREVENT THIS SLOW DEGRADATION INTO BLIGHT.
THEY OFFER THE CITY A NEW PEPPER SQUARE WITH A VIBRANT MIXED USE COMMUNITY OFFERING MUCH NEEDED RESIDENTIAL AND A CURATED MIX OF QUALITY RESTAURANTS AND RETAILERS THAT SERVE THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY AS WELL AS THE NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR.
WE'RE NOT MINUTE GOES BY QUICK.
LET'S, LET'S TRY TO HAVE A RESPECTFUL HEARING HERE, SIR.
RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU FOLKS TO, TO TRY TO KEEP THIS AT A, AT AN EVEN KEEL AND A RESPECTFUL TONE.
HELLO, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
MY NAME'S GREG MILLER AND I AM THE PRESIDENT OF HENRY MILLER COMPANY.
AND, UM, APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION.
WE'RE HOPING TO BUILD SOMETHING REALLY, UH, SPECIAL FOR THIS AREA THAT WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF AND THAT WILL HELP SERVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND, UH, HELP THE CITY GROW IN, UH, PROPER WAY.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ONLINE AND SUPPORT? LET'S CHECK.
IS MS. SPRING ONLINE? WENDY SPRING.
[03:00:01]
SPRING? YES.WE'RE READY FOR YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS.
DO YOU HAVE YOUR CAMERA ON MA'AM? I'M SORRY.
OOPS, I CAN'T SEE HER ON MY SCREEN, CAN YOU? NO, BUT THE, CAN WE SWITCH VIEWS HERE? TAKE THE POWERPOINT DOWN.
SHOULD BE STAND BY MS. SPRING.
MS. SPRING, I THINK, I THINK I SAW YOU THERE FOR A MOMENT.
6 5 1 5 WESTGATE DRIVE, DALLAS 7 5 2 5 4.
I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THE PEPPER SQUARE REZONING PROPOSAL BECAUSE MANY STRIP SHOPPING CENTERS ACROSS DALLAS ARE DETERIORATING WITH HIGH PERCENTAGES OF EMPTY STOREFRONTS AND ARE INCREASINGLY BECOMING ATTRACTIVE TO CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.
PEPPER SQUARE IS NO EXCEPTION.
STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT BY INCLUDING A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT TO THE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY IN AN AREA WILL REDUCE CRIME.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVITALIZE AND STABILIZE THIS PROPERTY AND PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL HOUSING OF BOTH A LEASE AND OWNERSHIP NATURE THAT IS SO BADLY NEEDED IN THIS CITY.
I'D RATHER SEE DENSITY OCCUR IN PEPPER SQUARE AND IN OTHER UNDERUTILIZED SHOPPING LOCATIONS ACROSS DALLAS THAN COME DURING OUR SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.
ALRIGHT FOLKS, WE'RE READY FOR OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.
IF YOU COULD MAYBE JUST COME ON DOWN, UH, 10 AT A TIME OR SO AND BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
UM, I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOME SPEAKERS HERE IN FAVOR AND, UH, YEAH, NO, I, I THOUGHT I ASKED IF THERE WAS OTHER SPEAKERS AND, AND NOBODY.
SO THERE ARE OTHER SPEAKERS, MY APOLOGIES FOLKS.
I, I ASKED FOR FOLKS IN, IN SUPPORT, DIDN'T SEE ANYBODY ELSE STAND UP.
SO IS IF THERE IS ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE ITEM, LET'S TAKE THOSE FOLKS FIRST.
UH, SEAN JENSEN, 1 5 5 3 6 BAY POINT DRIVE.
UM, I LEAD THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DIRECTLY ACROSS BELTLINE FROM PRESTON FROM PEPPER SQUARE.
OUR ORGANIZATION IS NOT TAKING A COLLECTIVE POSITION.
THERE'S JUST TOO MANY DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
WE WANT THEM ALL TO BE HEARD REGARDLESS OF THEIR VIEWS.
WE WANT OUR MEMBERS TO SPEAK THEIR OWN MINDS.
I'D LIKE TO VOICE MY OWN PERSONAL SUPPORT FOR REZONING.
OVER THE PAST YEAR I'VE SEEN MILLER MAKE MANY CHANGES BASED ON OUR INPUT, BUT WHEN THEY DIDN'T, THEY EXPLAINED WHY AND I COULD UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE, I CAN SEE THE VISION.
I'M EXCITED AT THE CHANCE TO REVITALIZE THAT DYING SPACE AND BUILD SOMETHING NEW THERE THAT WE CAN ALL EMBRACE AS A DYNAMIC POSITIVE RESOURCE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
I ASK YOU TO SUPPORT THE APPLICATION.
[03:05:01]
YOU.ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM? LAST CALL.
OKAY, NOW WE'RE READY FOR YOU FOLKS.
WHAT SIR, WE JUST WANTED, WE HAVE A PRESENTATION IF THAT'S ALRIGHT.
DID WE DONE SIXTY SEVEN TWENTY EIGHT PRIOR THE, SORRY, THE MICROPHONE.
MARK LOMBARDI SIXTY SEVEN TWENTY EIGHT PRIOR COVE COMMISSIONERS.
WE ARE PART OF THE PEPPER SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION, A GROUP OF 20 PLUS COMMUNITIES AND HOAS AND ARE HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR REVITALIZED PEPPER SQUARE, A DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD SERVE LOCAL RESIDENTS, NEWCOMERS, THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT TOO.
HOWEVER, WE FEEL THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT MEET THAT STANDARD.
OUR GROUP HAS RECEIVED FEEDBACK THROUGH COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC MEETINGS, LOCAL SURVEYS, AND COUNTLESS PERSONAL INTERACTIONS.
THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY DO NOT SUPPORT THIS PROPOSAL.
THEY DO SUPPORT OR RE-ENVISION PEPPER SQUARE, BUT FEEL THIS PLAN LACKS JUST THAT VISION AND CREATIVITY.
A SMART REDEVELOPMENT CAN SET THE STANDARD FOR THRIVING COMMUNITY CENTERS THROUGHOUT DALLAS.
A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN SHOP, DINE, VISIT SERVICE PROVIDERS, GATHER A PLACE THAT PROMOTES A TOWN SQUARE TYPE ATMOSPHERE.
IF A RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT IS INCLUDED, IT SHOULD SEAMLESSLY FIT WITHIN THE OVERALL VISION.
ENHANCING THE COMMUNITY FEEL RATHER THAN DETRACTING FROM IT.
THIS IS A GENERATIONAL OPPORTUNITY.
THE COMMUNITY HAS MADE ITS VOICE HEARD AND IS WILLING TO BE PATIENT.
THE CITY DESERVES BETTER AND WE'LL EXPLAIN WHY, BUT WE NEED YOUR HELP.
HI, JANET MARKHAM, 7 7 1 4 MAPLE CREST DRIVE.
PEPPER SQUARE IS DESIGNATED WITH THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE PLACE TYPE IN FOR DALLAS 2.0.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? TO QUOTE THE LITERATURE FOR COMMUNITY MIXED USE WITHIN MORE SUBURBAN AREAS OF DALLAS.
THESE AREAS ARE COMPRISED OF LARGER COMPLEXES, OFTEN
[03:10:01]
WITH FEWER STORIES WHILE OFFERING A LARGE AMOUNT OF RETAIL RESTAURANT AND PERSONAL SERVICES THAT ARE GENERALLY SEPARATED BY LARGE PARKING AREAS OR OPEN SPACES ALONG THE PERIMETER.TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM FORWARD DALLAS WHEN CLOSER TO DOWNTOWN DALLAS, BUILDINGS IN THESE URBAN AREAS ARE GENERALLY DEVELOPED VERTICALLY AND OFFER MORE HOUSING OPTIONS.
FOR AN EXAMPLE OF THAT, JUST LOOK AT THE MASTER PLAN RENDERINGS.
IN OTHER WORDS, TALLER BUILDINGS WITH DENSER HOUSING ARE BETTER SUITED FOR DOWNTOWN.
WHILE SHORTER BUILDINGS WITH LESS FOCUS ON RESIDENTIAL AND MORE FOCUS ON COMMUNITY RETAIL OPTIONS ARE BETTER SUITED FOR SUBURBAN AREAS.
WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT PEPPER SQUARE IS NOT DOWNTOWN, IT'S IN A SUBURBAN AREA.
THE PROPOSAL FOR MILLER AS IT STANDS TODAY DOESN'T BELONG AT PEPPER SQUARE.
I LIVE AT 60 15 HIGH COURT PLACE.
THE PEPPER SQUARE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 23 ACRES.
EIGHT ACRES ARE REMOVED FROM THE REZONING REQUEST AND WON'T BE UPDATED OR INCORPORATED INTO THIS REDEVELOPMENT.
THAT IS NOT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WHEN ONE THIRD OF THE SITE IS BEING IGNORED, LEAVING DECADES OLD STRUCTURES IN PLACE, LET'S APPROVE A PLAN THAT THAT TURNS ALL OF PEPPER SQUARE INTO A VIBRANT COMMUNITY.
WITH PROPERLY SCALED STRUCTURES THAT APPEAL TO THE GREATER NORTH A COMMUNITY, THIS PLAN IS MISSING KEY.
UH, DEFINE DEF DEFINING FACTORS TO THE, FOR A COMMUNITY MIXED USE PROJECT IN A SUBURBAN AREA, THERE SHOULD BE FEWER STORIES WHILE OFFERING A LARGE AMOUNT OF RETAIL RE RESTAURANTS AND PERSONAL SERVICES.
WE ARE SEEING, WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE IS A FOCUS ON DENSE RESIDENTIAL AND THE RETAIL BEING IGNORED OR LOOKING LIKE AN AFTERTHOUGHT.
THE PROPOSED LIMITED AMOUNT OF RETAIL IN, IN RELATION TO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE DEDICATED TO RESIDENTIAL IS LARGELY BENEFITING THE RESIDENTS ON SITE, THEREFORE LIMITING THE NEW SHOPPING OPTIONS THAT WILL THANK SIR, YOUR TIME IS UP.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, SIR.
MATT BACH 1 5 7 4 6 COVID CIRCLE.
FAR NORTH DALLAS RESIDENTS DO NOT FEAR APARTMENTS OR OTHER FORMS OF RENTAL DEVELOPMENTS.
IT'S JUST THAT WE ALREADY HAVE THOUSANDS OF GARDEN STYLE MULTIFAMILY RENTAL UNITS.
WHAT WE LACK IS MISSING MIDDLE HOME OWNERSHIP OPTIONS.
THE PREVAILING HEIGHTS OF THE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY COMPLEXES IN OUR AREA ARE TWO TO THREE STORIES WITH A DENSITY OF 20 TO 30 UNITS PER ACRE.
THIS PLAN THAT'S BEING PRESENTED TODAY SEEKS TO ADD APPROXIMATELY A THOUSAND NEW APARTMENTS HOUSED IN HIGH-RISE STRUCTURES.
SOME 12 STORIES TALL AT A DENSITY OF 63 UNITS PER ACRE.
THIS IS A DRASTIC DEPARTURE FROM THE CHARACTER OF OUR COMMUNITY AND NOT AT ALL COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
THERE ARE NO CREATIVE HOUSING OPTIONS BEING OFFERED, NO SIGNIFICANT COMMITMENT TO OWNER OCCUPANCY OR SENIOR LIVING OPTIONS.
THE A THOUSAND MORE APARTMENTS DO NOT FULFILL ANYONE'S GOALS EXCEPT THE DEVELOPERS.
IF WE'RE GOING TO REPURPOSE RETAIL INTO MIXED USE, IT SHOULD BE TO GET THE PROPERTY TO ITS HIGHEST.
THANK YOU FOR GOING, LET'S GET SORRY.
1 4 3 3 2 REGENCY PLACE DISPLAYED ON THIS GRAPHIC IN RED AND YELLOW SHADING ARE MORE THAN 13,000 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO PEPPER SQUARE.
GENERALLY WEST OF PRESTON IN GREEN SHADING EAST OF PRESTON ARE THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES CLOSE TO PEPPER SQUARE, ORANGE SHADING DEPICTS RETAIL ONLY SITES TO REZONE A LARGE RETAIL ONLY SITE AND CHANGE IT INTO DENSE MULTIFAMILY DOES A DISSERVICE TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTS NEARBY.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE LANDOWNER AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THIS INTERSECTION IS ALREADY ENTITLED TO ADD 1700 RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO THEIR SITE AND THE OWNER SOUTH OF THE SITE IS ENTITLED TO ADD THREE TO 500 RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO THEIR SITE.
IF YOU GRANT THE LANDOWNER AT PEPPER SQUARE THE RIGHT TO ADD 984 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, YOU ARE OVERLOADING AN ALREADY STRAINED INTERSECTION.
LET'S GET THIS RIGHT, WE CAN DO BETTER.
FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER GRAYSON.
SANDY GRAYSON, 72 38 HEATHER MOORE DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 4 8.
A VERY SMART ZONING CONSULTANT RECENTLY SAID THAT WHEN HE SEES A ZONING CASE WITH A LOT OF OPPOSITION, HE KNOWS THAT CASE IS A LOSER.
PEPPER SQUARE HAS HUGE OPPOSITION, IT'S A LOSER.
BUT IN THE LAST TWO OR THREE WEEKS, AN EFFORT WAS MADE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS, BUT WE'RE STILL NOT THERE.
[03:15:01]
DO BETTER.PLEASE DEFER YOUR VOTE ON THIS CASE SO THAT THE PEPPER SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION AND THE APPLICANT CAN NEGOTIATE AND HOPEFULLY REACH A COMPROMISE THAT BOTH SIDES CAN LIVE WITH.
WILL EVERYONE WHO IS HERE TODAY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PEPPER SQUARE CASE, PLEASE STAND UP.
WHAT'S THAT FOLKS? I'M GONNA RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO REFRAIN FROM CLAPPING.
THANK MARC YOU SO MUCH APPRECIATE YOUR UNDERSTANDING.
UM, ANYONE IN THE CITY WHO HAS DRIVEN DOWN PRESTON ROAD REGULARLY KNOWS THAT FROM DAVENPORT ALL THE WAY TO 6 35 IS A HUGELY CONGESTED AREA.
THERE ARE MULTIPLE APARTMENTS, THERE ARE THREE MAJOR HIGHWAYS THAT ARE, THAT IS LEADING INTO, AND THE TRAFFIC IS HORRENDOUS.
I DON'T SEE THE SENSE OF ADDING OVER A THOUSAND MORE BODIES AND CARS TO THIS AREA.
IT'S ALREADY A NIGHTMARE FOR THOSE OF US WHO LIVE THERE AND HAVE TO WORK THERE AND COMMUTE THROUGH THERE TO DRIVE THROUGH.
SO WE'RE ALL FOR REVITALIZING PEPPER SQUARE WITH RESTAURANTS AND BUSINESSES, BUT ADDING ALL THESE BODIES AND ALL THIS TRAFFIC TO THIS AREA IS, DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME.
1 5 6 3 6 GOLDEN CREEK ROAD DALLAS.
MY FAMILY'S IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO THE HENRY S. MILLER ZONING CASE, THE PEPPER SQUARE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL.
WE'VE LIVED IN PRESTONWOOD AREA SINCE 1985 WITH PROXIMITY TO SCHOOLS, CHURCH SHOPPING OPTIONS, NOT AN AREA WITH CONGESTED TRAFFIC AND CRAMPED MULTI-LEVEL APARTMENT COMPLEXES WITH HIGH DENSITY.
THERE'S NOTHING REMOTELY LIKE THE PROPOSED 12 STORY BUILDING, WHICH IS OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE LONG ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITIES REPRESENTED BY 19 OR MORE, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PROPOSAL.
WHILE THIS PROPERTY COULD USE SOME REVITALIZATION, MORE DENSITY HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED FOR THE EXISTING APARTMENT COMPLEXES BETWEEN BELTLINE AND ARAPAHOE ROADS ALONG PRESTON ROAD.
THEREFORE, THIS ZONING AND REQUEST IS UNNECESSARY AND UNJUSTIFIED.
THE GREEN SPACE IS SMALL UNINVITING AND DOES NOT ENHANCE THE SURROUNDING AREA OR LIFESTYLE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, SUSAN AND GARRETT SHERMAN.
WE LIVE JUST SOUTH OF PEPPER SQUARE AND OUR CUSTOMERS OF PEPPER SQUARE RETAILERS.
OUR GRANDCHILDREN TAKE LESSONS AT OLYMPIC MEDALIST JIM MONTGOMERY SWIM SCHOOL AT PEPPER SQUARE.
THE ZONING MUST REMAIN NEIGHBORHOOD RETAIL SALES.
WE WANT NO APARTMENTS AT PEPPER SQUARE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION IS FIERCE.
THE NORTHWOOD HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE NORTH DALLAS NEIGHBORHOOD ALLIANCE REPRESENT OUR VIEWS.
WE HAVE NO REPRESENTATION ON THIS COMMISSION.
DISTRICT 11 SCHULTZ DOES NOT REPRESENT OUR CONCERNS.
MR. RUBIN DOES NOT KNOW US AND DOES NOT REPRESENT US.
MA'AM, I WOULD PLEASE ASK YOU TO JUST KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO THE CASE AND, AND LET'S KEEP THE COMMISSIONERS OUT OF OUR COMMENTS NOW.
YOU MUST VOTE NO, DO NOT SEND THIS TO CITY COUNCIL.
WE CAN DO BETTER NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.
I'M DIANE BENJAMIN, 65 30 WAGNER DRIVE.
I'M A FULL-TIME VETERAN REALTOR.
HAVING SERVED OVER 45 YEARS AS A REALTOR AND AS A TOP PRODUCER FOR HENRIETTA MILLER REAL ESTATE, WHERE I TOOK AN OATH TO PROTECT THE VALUE OF THE HOMEOWNER'S PROPERTY.
MANY TIMES, MANY OF THESE HOMEOWNERS, THIS IS THE FIRST INVESTMENT, IF NOT THE ONLY INVESTMENT OF THEIR LIFETIME.
I HAVE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THIS CONTINUATION IN MY OPINION, OF OBAMA'S PLAN FOR THE 21ST C CENTURY, WHICH IS DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH.
AND ALSO A, UH, DISCOURAGE IS THE ENTREPRENEURIAL SPIRIT OF MEN, THE URBANIZATION OF THE SUBURBS, WHICH IS DESTROYING OUR HOME VALUES WHEREIN HIGH DENSITY WHICH THIS PLAN WILL INCUR, UH, ON THE LOW INCOME HOUSING THAT IS DESTRUCTIVE TO OUR HARDWORKING CITIZENS WHO EARNED THEIR HOMES IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND, AND THIS, THIS HIGH DENSITY IS GOING TO ABSOLUTELY DESTROY THE VALUE OF THEIR HOMES.
I WISH TO EXPRESS MY STRONG OPPOSITION TO THE FORWARD 22.0.
[03:20:01]
YES MA'AM.I LIVE AT 69 0 9 LEE MEADOW DRIVE.
I'D LIKE TO BRING GOOD NEWS AND THE THING ABOUT IT IS I LOVE THIS.
I FEEL LIKE WE'RE JUST ASKING, WE ALL WANT THE SAME THING.
I THINK IT'S JUST THE WAY THAT WE GET THERE, SO I APPRECIATE YOU LISTENING TO US.
MY MAIN CONCERN AS A RESIDENT IS THE TRAFFIC, WHICH IS ALREADY GRADED AT A, UH, AN F LEVEL.
AND I THINK JUST ADDING, UH, RESIDENTIAL THERE IS JUST NOT, IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY COMMON SENSE.
SO I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO JUST THINK ABOUT THAT.
I DRIVE BY THAT INTERSECTION MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY AND IT'S ALREADY BAD.
SOMETIMES I'M AT, YOU KNOW, ANY NON-TRAFFIC TIMES IS BAD.
I LIVE AT 8 8600 THACKERY AVENUE.
I RISE IN OPPOSITION TO THE PEREZ APPLICANT WITH THIS COMMUNITY NEEDS IS MORE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING.
I DON'T THINK PEOPLE ARE AWARE, OR THE CITY COUNCIL AWARE IS THAT 43% OF ALL HOMES ARE BEING PURCHASED BY INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS WHO THEN CONVERT THEM INTO RENTALS.
THAT'S ITS 60% I'M QUOTING FROM A NATIONAL REALTORS ASSOCIATION.
THE BEST THING THAT COULD HAPPEN HERE IS YOU BUILD MORE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT WHERE PEOPLE HAVE EQUITY STAKE IN THEIR PROPERTY.
WE DO NOT NEED MORE PAR APARTMENTS AT THIS SITE.
MY NAME IS CHRISTINE CASEY AND I LIVE AT 7 0 2 5 REGAL VIEW CIRCLE.
AND, UH, I'M OPPOSED, UH, TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I BELIEVE IN, UH, DENSITY, UM, AND I BELIEVE IN DENSITY CLOSE TO WHERE PEOPLE WORK SUCH AS DOWNTOWN.
UH, THERE IS NOT A CONCENTRATION OF EMPLOYERS WHERE THIS DEVELOPMENT IS PLANNED TO TAKE PLACE.
UM, I WOULD SUPPORT TWO STORY OR THREE STORY TOWNHOUSES OWNER THAT COULD BE PURCHASED BY PEOPLE WHO COULD GET EQUITY.
UM, THE 12 STORY HIGH RISE WOULD NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND ON OCTOBER, UH, SORRY, AUGUST 7TH AND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR, A REFERENCE WAS MADE TO THE SURVEY THAT WAS SENT OUT TO THE PEOPLE WHO LIVED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THERE WERE 1100 RESPONSES, 91% WERE OPPOSED.
THERE IS NO BASIS FOR YOU TO BELIEVE THERE IS WIDESPREAD SUPPORT OR ANY SUPPORT, ANY MEANINGFUL SUPPORT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.
MY NAME IS BARLOW URBAN NATIVE DALLAS SITE.
UH, I LIVE AT 5 9 3 4 WARREN MIST LANE IN DALLAS IN PRESTONWOOD.
UM, HENRY S. MILLER CAN MAKE A SIZABLE PROFIT FOR THEMSELVES AND THEIR INVESTORS WITH RETAIL, BUT INSTEAD THEY DECIDE TO CHANGE THE LAND USE TO MAXIMIZE THEIR PROFIT.
ADDITIONALLY, THERE ARE TOO MANY MULTI-FAMILY UNITS ALREADY AROUND THAT AREA.
EACH MULTI-FAMILY UNIT THAT IS BUILT GENERATES FIVE TO SEVEN VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY.
THAT MEANS A THOUSAND UNITS WILL ADD BETWEEN FIVE TO 7,000 ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY LEADING TO CONGESTION, NOISE LEVELS AND DECREASE QUALITY OF LIFE.
IN ADDITION, WE GOT TTI DEVELOPMENT NEXT TO IT, DEVELOPING 300 UNITS PROPOSED AND WE HAVE VALLEY VIEW COMING UP.
HOW MUCH DENSITY DO YOU WANT FOR US? WE HAVE A SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOUR TIME IS UP AND PLEASE DO NOT SELL US OUT.
I LIVE 66 0 2 1 MOCK ROAD, THE LAST 7 5 2 4 8 HENRY MILLER'S ASSERTION THAT PAPER SQUARE CANNOT BE SUSTAINED WITH ONLY 40% OF THE CENTER LIST IS QUESTIONABLE.
WE KNOW THAT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO ENTER NEW LONG-TERM LEASES DUE TO THESE REZONING APPLICATION OR FOCUS ON FILLING CURRENTLY EMPTY SPACES DUE TO THE POTENTIAL NEED TO HAVE TO BUY OUT THE TENANT IF THE APPLICATION IS APPROVED.
YET THE WEBSITE SHOWS ONLY FOUR AVAILABLE SPACES.
THIS DISCREPANCY RAISES DOUBTS ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF MILLER'S CLAIM REGARDING THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE CURRENT LEASING SITUATION.
THE LIMITED EFFORT AND INVESTMENT BY MILLER IN RENOVATING PAPER SQUARE OVER THE PAST DECADE COMPARED TO OTHER NEARBY CENTERS FURTHER UNDERMINES THE ARGUMENT.
THANK THE TIME IS UP SIGNIFICANT.
[03:25:01]
YOU FOR JOINING US.CELESTE MELEY 59 27 PRESTON VALLEY DRIVE.
THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF PEPPER SQUARE INCLUDES AN UNREASONABLY HIGH DENSITY OF APARTMENTS.
THE AREA ON THE EAST SIDE OF PRESTON ROAD IS PREDOMINANTLY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WHILE THE WEST SIDE ALREADY HAS OVER 6,000 APARTMENT AND CONDO UNITS WITH HUNDREDS OF IMMEDIATE VACANCIES.
ADDITIONALLY, FURTHER DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS PRESTON DEL NORTE IN THE AREA SOUTH OF ALEXIS ALREADY ZONED FOR MULTIFAMILIES WILL ADD THOUSANDS MORE UNITS.
A ZONING CHANGE TO ADD EVEN MORE APARTMENTS IS NOT ONLY UNNECESSARY BUT ALSO INAPPROPRIATE IN A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA.
THIS LEVEL OF DENSITY IS TOTALLY AND ABSOLUTELY OUT OF CHARACTER WITH BOTH EXISTING SAN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND EVEN THE MULTI-FAMILY AREAS.
YES, TO A REVITALIZED RETAIL AREA, SERVING THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.
HI, MY NAME IS CRYSTAL ROBERTS.
I LIVE AT 1 4 0 1 2 HUGHES LANE IN WILLIAMSBURG.
I OPPOSE REZONING OF THE PEPPER SQUARE AND I BOUGHT MY HOUSE OVER 20 YEARS AGO WHEN IT WAS A THRIVING INTERSECTION.
HENRY S. MILLER HAS NOT MAINTAINED OR ENCOURAGES ENCOURAGED BUSINESSES TO STAY AND STAY THERE.
AND IF YOU LISTEN TO ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS THAT ARE HERE TODAY, YOU HEAR ALL THEIR THOUGHTS AND ALL THEIR ISSUES AND EVERYTHING ABOUT THIS.
AND WE NEED TO ASK YOU GUYS A QUESTION.
YOU KNOW, IF YOU ARE LIVING NEXT TO THIS, WOULD YOU GUYS LIKE WHAT THEY'RE DOING? WOULD YOU LIKE THE TRAFFIC INCREASE? WOULD YOU LIKE ALL, EVERYTHING THAT COMES ALONG WITH IT, OUR CITY SERVICES ARE NOT GONNA BE MAINTAINED.
IT'S GONNA BE SLOWER RESPONSE TIMES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
YOU GUYS ARE APPOINTED OFFICIALS REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE YOU SHOULD BE LISTENING TO THE CONSTITUENTS AND NOT THE DEVELOPERS.
THIS IS THE PEPPER SQUARE IS THE WORST POSSIBLE LOCATION TO TRY TO FIT IN THIS REQUESTED DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S LIKE TRYING TO SHOEHORN A BATTLESHIP INTO A SMALL POND.
AND I THINK ABOUT THIS VERY VISUALLY.
OKAY, THE INTERSECTION THERE, THE CLOSEST INTERSECTION, PRESTON AND BELT LINE.
CURRENTLY THE MORNING COMMUTE AT AM THE LINE OF CARS STRETCHES DOWN PAST PEPPER SQUARE DEVELOPMENT.
THREE TO FOUR LIGHT CYCLES TO GET THROUGH.
TO ADD THIS MANY UNITS AND TO NOT MAKE IT, UM, UH, UH, BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT INSTEAD OF SOME KIND, UH, IS ABSURD.
IT'S GONNA LEAD TO WHAT'S ALREADY A REALLY, REALLY DIFFICULT SITUATION AND MAKE IT MUCH WORSE.
THE ONLY WAY TO ALLEVIATE THAT WOULD BE FOR THE CITY TO BUILD AN OVERPASS OVER PRECEDENT BALLOT LINE.
UM, I OPPOSE OBVIOUSLY THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, PROPOSAL FOR PEPPER SQUARE.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE CITY HAS APPROVED MULTIPLE, UM, MIXED USE, UM, AR UH, MIXED USE AREAS, UM, AROUND US, INCLUDING VALUE MALL.
UM, AND I KNOW THERE'S SOME OTHER ONES THAT ARE IN THE AREA AND I I I HOPE THAT YOU GUYS TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS PROPOSAL BECAUSE AS THOSE DEVELOP AND MORE RESIDENTS MOVE INTO THOSE AREAS, IT'S GONNA MAKE THE DENSITY EVEN MORE.
AND I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THESE APARTMENTS, YOU KNOW, I, I HEAR PEOPLE AND I UNDERSTAND PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE HOMES AND PLACES TO LIVE THAT AREN'T MAYBE SINGLE FAMILY UNITS, BUT WITH ALL OF THIS OTHER AREA ALREADY APPROVED, IT'S JUST HELPING.
YOU KNOW, THOSE PEOPLE ARE GONNA MOVE INTO THAT AREA AND THEY'RE NOT GONNA NEED MORE APARTMENTS, UM, IN THE AREA.
SO JUST THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
HELLO, MY NAME IS JANE MAXVILLE.
I LIVE AT 6 9 4 8 CLEAR HAVEN DRIVE, DALLAS.
AND I FEEL THIS IS SO SAD THAT WE HAVE TO BE HERE TODAY BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT LISTENING.
YOU'RE NOT LISTENING TO THE CITIZENS THAT LIVE HERE.
YOU ARE FOLLOWING THE MONEY AND LISTENING TO A DEVELOPER THAT I HAVE BEEN USING PEPPER SQUARE FOR OVER 40 YEARS AND I PERSONALLY BELIEVE HE HAS ALLOWED IT TO BE RUN DOWN SO THAT HE CAN MAKE THIS DEVELOPMENT.
[03:30:01]
TO US.I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE HAVE TO DO TO TELL YOU.
PLEASE LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO LIVED THERE, AND I BELIEVE HE CAN MAKE THIS INTO A REVITALIZED AREA.
MY KIDS, WE ATE AT FIRST NEVER FILLED THAT SPACE.
STEINMART NEVER FILLED THAT SPACE.
I LOOKED AT GOING INTO A SPACE THERE 15 YEARS AGO AND TURNED IT DOWN BECAUSE THEY WERE SO ARROGANT TALKING TO ME.
HI, TRAVIS RUDOLPH, 73 48 ELM RIDGE DRIVE.
SO I LIVE JUST EAST SOUTHEAST OF PEPPER SQUARE.
UM, MY COMPANY IS AT ALPHA AND PRESTON, WHICH IS JUST SOUTH OF PEPPER SQUARE.
SO I, I LIVE AND I WORK WITHIN A HALF A MILE OF PEPPER SQUARE AND I DRIVE THAT CORRIDOR EVERY DAY.
I DRIVE FROM ALPHA AND PRESTON TO BELTLINE AND PRESTON EVERY SINGLE DAY.
SO I CAN ATTEST TO ONE, THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA.
NUMBER TWO, THE FACT THAT ALL OF THOSE APARTMENTS ON THE WEST SIDE OF, OF PRESTON ARE NOT AT FULL CAPACITY.
UM, SO I, I OPPOSE THE MULTIFAMILY JUST FOR THE RECORD.
UH, I AM IN SUPPORT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT FOR, UH, UH, MIXED USE.
UM, SO I JUST WANNA SAY THAT NUMBER.
NUMBER TWO, UM, MY FAMILY AND I, WE JUST MOVED INTO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD A YEAR AGO.
WE MOVED TO GET AWAY FROM MULTIFAMILY DENSITY FROM A, FROM A DIFFERENT PART OF TOWN.
UM, IF YOU DO THIS, I JUST DON'T KNOW WHY I WOULD KEEP MY FAMILY OR MY COMPANY IN THIS AREA.
I'M 69 32 HUNTERS RIDGE DRIVE, DALLAS, 7 5 2 4 8.
I'M RELATED TO THE TRAVIS AT THE ALAMO AND I'M A RETIRED EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT WHO MANAGED A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS IN MEDIA A YEAR.
SO HOPEFULLY I CAN COMMUNICATE CHEER UP.
YOU GUYS, YOU MAY BE SURPRISED AND EVEN PLEASED TO KNOW THAT HOMEOWNERS SYMPATHIZE WITH YOUR EFFORTS TO STEM THE LOSS OF POPULATION FROM DALLAS TO THE SUBURBS.
BUT PLEASE RECONSIDER APPROVAL OF A 12 STORY BUILDING AT BELTLINE AT PRESTON, THE SECOND MOST CONGESTED INTERSECTION IN DALLAS.
PLEASE HAVE HENRY S. MILLER AND MASTER PLAN, WHICH WAS SOLD TO A FIRM IN NEW YORK TWO YEARS AGO TO MAKE REVISIONS TO THE PROPOSED PEPPER SQUARE REDEVELOPMENT.
JUST SEND THEM BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD.
I'M A 50 YEAR RESIDENT OF 67 18 ROLLING VISTA.
I'VE STUDIED THE, THE, UH, MILLER PLAN FAIRLY EXTENSIVELY FOR QUITE A FEW MONTHS AND CONSIDERED THEIR SELLING POINTS IN DETAIL AND CANNOT SEE ANY BENEFITS TO ME AS A NEARBY PROPERTY OWNER.
IT WILL INCREASE MORE DENSITY.
THAT'S A DETRIMENT THAT IS NOT A BENEFIT TO HOMEOWNERS LIKE ME.
WE LIVE IN AN AREA SATURATED WITH SHOPS OF ALL KINDS.
IT'LL PROVIDE MORE RESTAURANTS.
WE'RE ONE MILE FROM MADISON WITH SEVERAL HUNDRED RESTAURANTS.
IT'LL PROVIDE A TWO ACRE PARK.
BUT I'M NOT GOING TO WALK MY DOG ACROSS BELTLINE OR PRESTON TO GET TO A TWO ACRE PARK.
IT'LL ENHANCE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT WILL DESTROY THE LONG EX, THE LONG EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE STRONGEST BENEFIT TO ME WOULD BE TO ELIMINATE THE EYESORE CURRENTLY AT PEPPER SQUARE WITH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES AND A LIMITED NUMBER OF RESIDENCES, MAYBE 400.
YOUR TIME, JOSE AND EASY ACCESS.
I FEEL LIKE WE WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY AT ALL.
IF MILLER, WHEN HE ANNOUNCED IN 2015 THAT HE WAS GOING TO, UH, REVAMP PEPPER SQUARE, THAT STOPPED ALL AT ONCE.
NEVER HEARD ANOTHER WORD ABOUT IT.
AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN MASTER PLAN CAME ABOUT AFTER A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER WAS LEFT AND A NEW CITY COUNCIL MEMBER CAME ON.
AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE ALL THESE APARTMENTS.
NOW, PEPPER SQUARE HAS BEEN A SHOPPING CENTER THAT I HAVE SHOPPED AT SINCE I HAVE LIVED HERE FOR 25 YEARS.
IF YOU TAKE AWAY AND YOU SEE ALL THE RENDERINGS THAT MASTER PLAN HAS COME UP WITH, WITH PEPPER SQUARE, I WON'T SHOP THERE.
ALL THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE GONNA BE LIVING THERE ARE GONNA BE SHOPPING THERE.
IF YOU LOOK BACK AT PRESTON, ROYAL PRESTON AND FOREST PRESTON AND 6 35 ALL THE WAY UP TO CAMPBELL, THERE ARE SHOPPING CENTERS.
IF YOU STOP AT BELTLINE, WHERE ARE THE PEOPLE IN THAT AREA GONNA SHOP? THANK YOU.
[03:35:01]
WITH ITS TOWERING BUILDINGS DOESN'T FIT.IT'S OUT OF SYNC WITH EVERYTHING AROUND IT.
IF YOU DRIVE UP PRESTON ROAD FROM UPTOWN ALL THE WAY THROUGH PLANO, YOU'LL SEE LOTS OF SUCCESSFUL TWO STORY APARTMENTS OR SHOPPING, SORRY.
UH, SUCCESSFUL TWO STORY SHOPPING CENTERS.
THE MILLER REPRESENTATIVE TOLD US AT A COMMUNITY MEETING THAT THEY CANNOT MAKE MONEY UNLESS THIS PLAN IS IMPLEMENTED.
BUT ALL THOSE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS UP AND DOWN PRESTON, SEEM TO BE DOING FINE.
SO MAYBE SOMETHING IS MISSING IN THE MILLER COMPANY.
THIS PLAN IS OUT OF CHARACTER.
THE EMPTY VALLEY VIEW MALL AREA IS HUGE.
RESOLVE THE ISSUES AROUND IT AND BUILD A LOT OF HOUSES THERE.
LEON FINKELSTEIN, 66 46 ORANGEWOOD DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 4 8.
MY WIFE WENDY AND I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE REZONING OF PEPPER SQUARE.
UH, AS OF NOW, WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN A RISE IN CRIME.
UH, AS SOMEONE MENTIONED EARLIER, MORNING TRAFFIC CAN GO BACK THREE OR FOUR LIGHTS BEFORE YOU CAN GET TO WHERE YOU WANT TO GO.
UH, WE BELIEVE THAT, UH, REVITALIZING THE AREA WITH MORE RESTAURANTS, CHILDREN, FRIENDLY AREAS, AND EVEN A BIGGER PLAYGROUND THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW AT, UH, THE HILLCREST PLAZA.
UH, PLEASE VOTE NO FOR THE REZONING OF PEPPER SQUARE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
BEFORE I BEGIN, I HAVE A LETTER.
I WOULD LIKE TO DISTRIBUTE THAT ELABORATES IN GREATER DETAIL WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SPEAK.
THERE'S THERE'S A LITTLE BUTTON THERE IF YOU WANT TO RAISE THAT UP.
14 3 20 HUGHES LANE AND I RESIDE DIRECTLY OFF OF PRESTON ROAD.
THE KIMLEY HORNED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IS FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED.
IT RELIES ON MANIPULATED DATA AND METHODOLOGIES THAT UNDERMINE ITS CONCLUSIONS.
SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS ARE UNFEASIBLE DUE TO EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ON PRESTON ROAD.
AS CONFIRMED BY MICHAEL MORRIS.
THE LACK OF A FORMAL TIA FOR THE ALEXIS TANTE DEVELOPMENT RAISES MORE CONCERNS ABOUT THE STUDY'S DATA ACCURACY.
FURTHER, THE FLAWED DATA STUDY USES VEHICULAR COUNTS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH STANDARD URBAN PRACTICES THAT RELY ON AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC COUNTS.
THE STUDY EMITS FIVE YEARS OF TECH STOP DATA ENDING IN 2019 AND 2023 DATA IN ITS ENTIRETY.
THE DESIGN DOES NOT ELABORATE HOW EFFECTIVE TRANSIT ARCHITECTURE WILL SERVE TRIP GENERATIONS.
GIVEN THE FLAWED DATA AND METHODOLOGY AND INFEASIBLE INFRASTRUCTURE AND SAFETY REQUIREMENT RECOMMENDATIONS, I ENCOURAGE THIS COUNCIL TO RECONSIDER THE VALIDITY OF KIMLEY'S TIA STUDY THAT UNDERPINS THE CURRENT ZONING CASE AND THE SAFETY OF ALL COMMUNITY RESIDENTS.
I LIVE AT 1 5 7 4 6 COVE WOOD CIRCLE.
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT PEPPER SQUARE COMES AT A TIME WHEN CITY SERVICES ARE ALREADY STRETCHED THIN WITH EXISTING BROAD PROJECTS LIKE PRESTON DEL NORTE ADDING OVER 1,700 UNITS.
AND THE AREA SOUTH OF ALEXIS ALSO CONTRIBUTING HUNDREDS MORE.
ADDING A THOUSAND NEW UNITS OF PEPPER SQUARE WOULD STRAIN UTILITIES, EMERGENCY SERVICES AND SCHOOLS EVEN FURTHER.
FIRE AND POLICE SERVICES ARE ALREADY UNDER PRESSURE WITH RESPONSE TIMES EXPECTED TO INCREASE BEFORE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES CAN BE ALLOCATED.
ADDING MORE RESIDENTS WILL ONLY EXACERBATE THESE ISSUES AFFECTING THE QUALITY OF ESSENTIAL SERVICES.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE.
LEN 5 9 5 8 PRESTON VALLEY DRIVE, DALLAS, 7 5 2 4 0.
AS CITY OF DALLAS HOMEOWNERS AND PROPERTY TAXPAYERS, WE BOUGHT OUR HOMES WITH THE TRUST AND EXPECTATION THAT OUR DALLAS ZONING WAS A MEANS OF PROTECTING OUR HOMES AND OUR QUALITY OF LIFE.
FROM FUTURE ENCROACHMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE
[03:40:01]
LAND USES THE FUTURE IS NOW.AND ALTHOUGH WE HAVE HELD UP OUR SIDE OF THIS BARGAIN BY CARING FOR OUR HOMES AND PROPERTY, PAYING OUR TAXES, OBEYING CITY ORDINANCES AND COMPLYING WITH THAT ZONING.
NOW THE ONUS IS UPON US TO FIGHT FOR OUR PROTECTION.
WE PAY THE CITY TO PROTECT US, NOT TO ENABLE OUR OPPONENTS.
UM, ERICA CHRISTENSEN, 73 10 CLIFF BROOK DRIVE.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'RE AWARE, BUT SEVERAL MONTHS AGO I ACTUALLY HAD TO CALL THE POLICE 'CAUSE THERE WAS A STRANGER LOOKING AT ME THROUGH MY WINDOW IN MY YARD.
AND THE TOOK THE POLICE 30 MINUTES TO GET HERE.
NOW YOU, UH, LAST WEEKEND I WAS AGAIN IN A SITUATION WHERE I WAS GOING TO HAVE TO CALL THE POLICE BECAUSE I THOUGHT SOMEBODY WAS ROBBING MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE AND I DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER CALLING THEM BECAUSE THEIR RESPONSE TIME IS SO BAD THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO GET HERE.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW ADDING OVER 1500 DEPARTMENTS IS GOING TO HELP THE POLICE RESPONSE TIME, BUT I IMAGINE IT PROBABLY WON'T REALLY HELP.
I'M JOSH SPALDING, 67 63 HILLWOOD LANE.
I'M JUST GONNA CUT THROUGH SOME OF THE STUFF THAT I WAS ALREADY GONNA TALK ABOUT 'CAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE DENSITY AT THIS LOCATION.
AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, THERE'S GONNA BE 2000 APARTMENTS ON ONE SIDE, MAYBE 500 ON ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT REALLY, THAT'S JUST GOING TO INCREASE THE NEED FOR RETAIL IN THAT AREA.
AND THE POLICE AT THE LAST MEETING WE HAD ON THIS WOULD NOT GUARANTEE THAT THEY COULD, THEY COULD ADEQUATELY PROTECT US IF THIS, IF THIS, UH, IF THIS ACTUALLY DID INCREASE.
BUT I THINK THE WORST THING THAT CAME OUT OF THE MEETING WAS WHEN THE DEVELOPER CLAIMED THAT MORE DENSITY AND MORE TRAFFIC MEANT LESS TRAFFIC, WHICH IS ABOUT AS BELIEVABLE AS THE COWBOYS GO INTO THE SUPER BOWL
NOW, THAT WAS A LOW BLOW, SIR.
MY NAME IS STAN POMERANTZ, UH, 58 40 ENCORE DRIVE.
I WANNA SPEAK TO SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN ENOUGH EMPHASIS.
I'VE LIVED IN THE AREA OVER 20 YEARS, ONCE ON HUGHES LANE AND NOW IN THE ENCORE DEVELOPMENT, UH, PRESTON ROAD IN THE TRAFFIC IS A CONCERN.
BUT I NEED TO ATTEST TO YOU THAT IT'S ONLY BEEN IN THE PAST YEAR THAT WE'RE BEGINNING TO SEE GRIDLOCK ON PRESTON ROAD.
AND WHEN I SAY GRIDLOCK, YOU SEE SOLID CARS FOR FOUR BLOCKS BETWEEN SPRING VALLEY AND ALPHA.
WE DON'T KNOW THE IMPACT OF PRESTON DEL NORTE.
WE DON'T KNOW THE IMPACT OF TANTE.
BELIEVE ME, THE TRAFFIC WILL BE SO DIFFICULT TO GET THROUGH.
IT WILL MAKE LIVING IN DALLAS NOT THE PLACE TO BE.
COOKIE PEDEN 71 11 DEBBIE DRIVE, DALLAS 7 5 2 5 2.
I ALSO SERVE AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE NORTH DALLAS NEIGHBORHOOD ALLIANCE.
SINCE HENRY MILLER FIRST ANNOUNCED HIS INTENT TO REZONE PEPPER SQUARE.
RESIDENTS HAVE LISTENED AND THEY'VE RAISED THEIR CONCERNS.
IN ADDITION, SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS ARE IN ADDITION TO APPROXIMATELY 1500 UNITS, THERE'S ALREADY 2300 THAT ARE PLANNED FOR THAT AREA AND APPROVED.
TWO, THEY DESIRE TO RETAIN THE, THE INTEGRITY OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE RETAIL SHOPPING.
THAT'S AVAILABLE THERE AND ADD TO IT WITH BETTER QUALITY.
THEY ALSO WANT TO THE HEIGHT OF PROPOSED BUILDINGS TO BE LIMITED SO THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING TOWERED AND INCONGRUENT WITH THE REMAINDER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PLAN THAT I'VE READ TODAY DOES NOT INTEGRATE ANY OF THOSE CONCERNS THAT THE RESIDENTS HAVE RAISED OVER AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME.
I URGE YOU TO LISTEN TO THEIR CONCERNS AND NOT GIVE CARTE BLANCHE TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE PD CONDITIONS THAT THEY WERE TOLD.
MY NAME IS BOB ANO AND I'M A 30 YEAR RESIDENT OF 62 22 LIBERTY HILL AND THE PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY APARTMENT COMPLEX AT PEPPER SQUARE, INCLUDING HIGH RISE BUILDINGS ARE FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THIS COMMUNITY.
THIS DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT ALIGN WITH OUR NEIGHBORS NEIGHBORHOOD'S NEEDS OR VALUES.
WE SUPPORT REVITALIZATION, BUT BELIEVE IT SHOULD ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE RESIDENTS AND PRESERVE OUR
[03:45:01]
COMMUNITY'S UNIQUE CHARACTER.THIS PROPOSAL FAILS TO DO SO AND SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED IN ITS CURRENT FORM.
YOU CAN PULL THAT DOWN IF YOU NEED TO.
I HAVE LIVED IN THE ONLY HOUSE MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE EVER OWNED.
DURING THAT TIME, I HAVE SEEN PRESTONWOOD SHOPPING CENTER CHANGE FROM AN UPSCALE RETAIL SPACE TO A DOWNSCALE RETAIL SPACE.
I HAVE SEEN HILLCREST VILLAGE PROJECT CHANGE HANDS TO DEVELOPERS WHO ACTUALLY LIVE IN THE AREA BUILDING A POPULAR AND SUCCESSFUL RETAIL SPACE THAT FITS WELL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
NOW, 91% OF THE 23 HOAS HAVE MADE THEIR DECISION FOR PEPPER SQUARE DEVELOPMENT.
THEIR FEEDBACK IS THAT PEPPER SQUARE SHOULD BE AN UPSCALE SPACE WHERE NEIGHBORS COULD DINE AND SHOP.
WE ANTICIPATED THAT PRESTON AND BELTLINE WOULD MIRROR PRESTON AND ROYAL AND PRESTON AND FOREST.
WE FEEL THAT IT IS YOUR ROLE TO LISTEN AND TO JOIN FORCES WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS.
ISN'T THAT YOUR JOB? THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.
I LIVE AT 1 5 6 11 OVER MEAD CIRCLE, AND I'VE LIVED IN MY HOUSE FOR 50 YEARS.
I'VE SEEN THREE BIG SHOPPING MALLS BUILT AND TWO OF 'EM TORN DOWN.
I'VE SEEN PRESTON ROAD GO FROM A LITTLE SMALL LITTLE ROAD THAT WENT OUT TO THE COUNTRY TO WHAT IT IS TODAY, WHICH IS AWFUL.
I DON'T DRIVE ON PRESTON ROAD NOW.
I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE IF ALL OF THIS IS BUILT IN ADDITION TO EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED AND THERE'S SO MANY RAMIFICATIONS.
THIS COULD BE A, A JEWEL FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, ONLY IF HENRY S. MILLER COULD BE REQUIRED TO WORK WITH THE AREA AND BUILD SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY COULD BENEFIT FROM.
AND THERE'S SO MANY RAMIFICATIONS.
THE SCHOOL IN THAT AREA CURRENTLY HAS 1100 STUDENTS AND 20 PORTABLE BUILDINGS.
AS A FORMER PRINCIPAL, THAT'S ABHORRENT.
I LIVE AT 74 38 LINWORTH DRIVE.
TRANSPARENCY IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS IS VITAL FOR GAINING COMMUNITY TRUST AND SUPPORT.
THE LACK OF REFERENCE TO AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN THE PROVIDED MATERIALS IS TROUBLING.
WE REQUEST THAT ANY SUCH ASSESSMENTS BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND THAT SUFFICIENT TIME IS GIVEN FOR REVIEW AND OUT INPUT.
OUR COMMUNITY'S WELLBEING DEPENDS ON INFORMED AND TRANSPARENT DECISIONS.
WE HOPE TO WORK TOGETHER WITH OUR REPRESENTATIVES TO ACHIEVE THE BEST OUTCOMES FOR PEPPER SQUARE.
I LIVE AT 73 36 HEATHER MOORE DRIVE.
MY WIFE AND I HAVE LIVED THERE FOR THE LAST 43 YEARS, AND WE ARE ADAMANTLY AGAINST THE REZONING REQUEST.
WHEN WE MOVED INTO OUR HOUSE, WE EXPECTED THERE WAS GONNA BE CHANGES IN THE RETAIL BUSINESSES AND GROWTH AND A LITTLE BIT, UH, HEAVIER TRAFFIC.
BUT TO US, THIS RECOMMENDATION BY HENRY S. MILLER IS COMPLETELY OVER THE TOP AND DEFIES COMMON SENSE.
WE'VE BENEFITED IN RECENT YEARS FROM WHAT YOU GUYS, I THINK REFER TO AS HILLCREST VILLAGE GREEN.
THERE'S SOME THRIVING, UH, RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AROUND IT.
THERE IS ONE RESTAURANT THAT HAS LEFT, BUT, UH, WE WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING MORE LIKE THAT WITHOUT THE 984 UNITS AND TO THE HENRY S. MILLER PEOPLE.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO OUR GRIEVANCES AND, UH, WE COUNT ON YOUR REPUTATION AS INVOLVED FOR 100 YEARS IN DALLAS TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND WORK WITH OUR HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION.
PETER LARSON, 1 5 6 3 1 KINGS CREST CIRCLE, DALLAS, TEXAS.
I'VE BEEN IN COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE FOR 25 YEARS.
[03:50:01]
THAT YOU ALL ARE A BUNCH OF PROFESSIONALS AND KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND UNDERSTAND DEVELOPMENT.AS SOME OF YOU ARE ARCHITECTS, YOU KNOW, AS WELL AS I DO.
THIS DEAL DOESN'T HUNT THE THE, IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.
I MEAN, THE THE PERSON WHO'S GONNA LIVE IN UNIT 8 0 5 IN THE TOP OF THIS THING, DO YOU THINK THAT PERSON REALLY CARES ABOUT DALLAS? THEY DON'T CARE.
LASTLY, YOU AS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS BETTER UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO TAKE DALLAS.
WHAT DO YOU ALL WANT, SIR? WHAT DO YOU WANT FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS? AND YOU KNOW, THIS DEAL DOES NOT HUNT.
GWEN MOORE, 7 2 3 1 TANGLE GLEN DRIVE.
I HAVE LIVED NEAR PEPPER SQUARE FOR 40 YEARS AND KNOW IT WELL.
THE HENRY S. MILLER PROPOSAL IS OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THIS COMMUNITY THAT MANY OF US CALL HOME.
DURING THE LAST FEW MONTHS, GREG MILLER HAS BEEN PRETENDING TO COMPROMISE ALL WHILE GIVING US THE SAME TALL RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT BUILDING OVER AND OVER AND OVER WITH A LITTLE BIT OF LIPSTICK APPLIED THIS TIME.
THE REALITY IS THE DEVELOPER GREW UP IN HIGHLAND PARK.
HE'S CLUELESS ABOUT BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR IN FAR NORTH DALLAS.
HE'S PROVEN THAT BY WILLFULLY NEGLECTING PEPPER SQUARE FOR MANY YEARS.
UM, HIS GRANDDADDY, THE LATE HENRY S. MILLER WAS WONDERFUL AND HE WAS CREDITED WITH PIONEERING THE MODERN DAY SHOPPING CENTER.
HE WAS REASONABLE AND BELIEVED IN NEIGHBORHOODS.
NOW, HIS GRANDSON, AFTER FAILING TO EFFECTIVELY RUN PEPPER SQUARE, EXPECT YOU TO GIVE HIM THE KEYS TO A BIG SHINY NEW APARTMENT BUILDING ONE THAT WILL CHANGE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOREVER.
AND HE'S NOT GONNA STOP THERE.
HE INHERITED LOTS OF PROPERTY IN NORTH DALLAS.
YOU CAN ONLY IMAGINE WHAT HE THANK YOU.
UH, IT'S STEVEN NORD, SETH 14 2 20 HUGHES LANE.
ALONG WITH THE PREVIOUSLY STATED CONCERNS, MY OPPOSITION ALSO INVOLVES INVASION OF PRIVACY FROM MY BACKYARD.
I CAN SEE THE CELL PHONE TOWER IN THE PEPPER SQUARE PARKING LOT ACCORDING TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN THAT LEE CLIMAN PRESENTED.
THAT CELL PHONE TOWER IS AT THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE PROPOSED FIVE STORY APARTMENT BUILDING.
AND THE HEIGHT OF THE TOWER EQUALS THE HEIGHT OF THE FIVE STORY BUILDING.