* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:03] START US OFF THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE. GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SCHOCK. PRESENT, DISTRICT TWO. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. PRESENT. THANK YOU. DISTRICT THREE. COMMISSIONER HERBERT, PRESENT, DISTRICT FOUR. COMMISSIONER FORSYTH. PRESENT. DISTRICT FIVE. CHAIR SHA DEAD PRESENT. DISTRICT SIX. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. PRESENT. DISTRICT SEVEN. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, REAGAN. DISTRICT EIGHT. COMMISSIONER BLAIR PRESENT. DISTRICT NINE. COMMISSIONER SLEEPER. OKAY. DISTRICT 10. COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. DISTRICT 11. COMMISSIONER EBLER. DISTRICT 12 VACANT. DISTRICT 13. COMMISSIONER HALL HERE. DISTRICT 14. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HERE AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBIN. I'M HERE. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE QUORUM, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, GOOD MORNING LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. TODAY IS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2024, 9:10 AM WELCOME TO THE BRIEFING [BRIEFINGS] OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION. UH, THIS IS JUST A TIME FOR COMMISSIONERS TO ASK QUESTIONS, UH, OF STAFF. AND, UH, WE WILL KEEP ALL OUR, UH, ALL OUR COMMENTS TO THE HEARING THIS AFTERNOON, BEGINNING AT 1230. UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND JUMP RIGHT INTO THE DOCKET. JUST AN FYI. WE'RE GONNA, UH, BRIEF ALL THE D SEVEN CASES AT THE END, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, SOME TIME TO, TO GET IN THIS MORNING. AND, UH, WITH THAT WE'LL BEGIN WITH CASE NUMBER ONE Z 2 2 3 2 20. AND I BELIEVE THAT CASE IS GONNA COME OFF. CONSENT. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, MR. PEPPI. HI. OKAY, TIME TO GO. SO THIS IS Z 2 2 3 2 2. AND IT'S LOCATED IN SOUTHWEST DALLAS, SOUTH I 20. SO IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED AND NSA NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE DISTRICT WITH THE RESTRICTIONS AND, AND AN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF WEST CAMPUS AND ROAD BETWEEN CLARK ROAD AND ROYAL CEDAR. WAY ABOUT 4.83 ACRES. AND THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO PERMIT RESIDENTIAL USES ON THIS SITE. HERE'S THE SITE. HAS IT EXISTS TODAY? HERE IS THE EXISTING AND SURROUNDING ZONINGS TH TO THE EAST. UM, P PD MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTHWEST, UH, OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS TO THE SOUTH, AND THAT SINGLE FAMILY IN THE T ZONING TO THE EAST. AND SO IT IS THAT NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE DISTRICT CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. UH, PROPOSING RESIDENTIAL USES. EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS, UH, WILL REMAIN IN PLACE. THEY SHOULDN'T INTERFERE WITH WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO, UM, SINCE THEY DON'T AFFECT RESIDENTIAL USES. ADDITIONALLY ALONG A MAJOR ROAD, MF TWO IS MORE APPROPRIATE, UH, WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE TO EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, TRANSIT, RETAIL, MOVE RIGHT ALONG. HERE'S THE SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY AND MOVE EAST A LITTLE BIT. ALSO LOOKING AT THE SITE ALL FROM CAMP WISDOM LOOKING EAST OUTSIDE, CITY LIMIT TO THE SOUTH. AND THERE'S, UH, MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTHWEST AND THEN EAST THERE'S RE THERE'S RETAIL FURTHER DOWN. CAMP WISDOM, YOUR SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY. UH, AS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UM, THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT ACT ON THIS SITE, UM, THAT AFFECTED IN A, UH, WAY DIFFERENT THAN TYPICAL MULTIFAMILY. THEY'VE GOT A SIGNIFICANT FRONT STEP BACK BECAUSE OF THEIR BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY FROM THE AG DISTRICT ON THE BLOCK. UH, THERE'S RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE PROJECTED ONTO THIS, UH, LIMIT LIMITS HEIGHT THEY'LL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH, UH, UNDER THE MF TWO OR ANY OTHER DISTRICT AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER HALL, PLEASE. MR. PEPE? UH, THEY WANT MULTIFAMILY. WHAT, WHAT TYPE OF MULTIFAMILY IT WOULD BE? UH, A APART, I THINK IT'S A SINGLE BUILDING APARTMENT IS WHAT THEY'RE APPROVING OR, UH, PROPOSING? JUST APARTMENTS? NO, NO TOWN HOMES OR I SUPPOSE I THINK THEY HAVE A, UM, WHERE, WHERE THEIR HEIGHT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE LIMITED. UH, THEY PROPOSE LIKE WHAT MAYBE LOOK LIKE TOWN HOMES, BUT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ALL TOGETHER ON ONE LOT. THEY'RE MULTIFAMILY FROM A, A CODE PERSPECTIVE, BUT, UH, I THINK THAT THERE IS A SMALLER [00:05:01] PORTION THAT'S PROPOSED OUTSIDE OF THE MAIN THING. WITH THAT SAID, THEY'RE NOT TIED TO A SINGLE CONCEPT UNDER A GENERAL ZONING DISTRICT. OKAY. ARE, ARE, ARE YOU AWARE THAT WE'RE GETTING QUITE A FEW LETTERS IN OPPOSITION AND THEY'RE BRINGING UP THINGS LIKE, UH, A CREEK AND DRAINAGE ISSUES AND I AM. OKAY. UH, IS, IS, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN SAY ABOUT THAT AT THIS POINT? OR THOSE HAVE TO BE HANDLED DURING THE, THE PLATTING AND ENGINEERING PHASES THAT COME AFTER THIS UHHUH THEY ANSWER, COMPLY WITH ALL THE REGULATIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED. UH, CAN'T GET INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL, BUT ALL OF THAT IS REQUIRED TO BE HANDLED AFTER THAT POINT. UM, BASED ON THE ZONING MAP, A PORTION OF IT IS CONSIDERED UNDER THE GEOLOGICALLY SIMILAR AREA, UH, WHICH WHICHEVER THE, UM, ESCARPMENT IS ASSOCIATED WITH, BUT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH ADDITIONAL, UH, REVIEW. SO THEY, THEY DO HAVE SIGNIFICANT DRAINAGE REVIEW THAT HAS TO OCCUR AFTER THIS POINT. OKAY. BUT WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T DETERMINE WHAT THAT IS AT THIS SPACE. AND JUST ONE FINAL THING, UM, I I WAS JUST CURIOUS THAT WHY THIS WAS ON CONSENT BECAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE A BIG CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES TO, TO MULTIFAMILY AND THEN THERE WAS, THERE WAS QUITE A FEW ISSUES WITH IT CA IT CONSENT, I MEAN, IT CAN COME OFF CONSENT IF, IF ANYONE IS IN OPPOSITION OR IF THE COMMISSION CHOOSES. SO I MEAN, IT'S JUST MAINLY STAFF AS AN APPROVAL OF THE CASE AND THERE'S NO DISALIGNMENT BETWEEN THE, UH, APPLICANT AND STAFF IN THE REQUEST. SO IT CAN STAY ON CONSENT BY OUR PRACTICE. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YES. UM, FIRST CAN WE TAKE THIS OFF OF CONSENT AND, UM, THE NEXT QUESTION IS, UM, IN THE, IN THE PLAN THERE WAS TALKS ABOUT PRESERVING A LOT OF THE ACREAGES OF LAND AT, ARE YOU AWARE THAT, IS THAT A PART OF YOUR EVALUATION? NO, IT'S NOT A PART OF OUR EVALUATION. WE KNOW THEY INTEND, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE STATED THEIR INTENT TO, UH, HAVE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS AND OTHER THINGS, UH, TO THE NORTH, NOT PART OF OUR ASSESSMENT BECAUSE IT'S NOT TIED TO THE ZONING CASE IN ANY WAY. UH, THERE'S CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR DRAINAGE AND TREE PRESERVATION THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET. THAT'S ONE THING THEY COULD DO TO MEET THOSE. UH, BUT THAT DOESN'T PLAY INTO THE EVALUATION BECAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT LINKED. IT'S A GENERAL ZONE CHANGE. OKAY. THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO HAVE THOSE TOOLS. THANK YOU. AND THE, UH, FIVE FLOORS WERE MENTIONED, UM, ON THIS SITE, ONE BUILDING FIVE FLOORS. UM, WHERE THIS BUILDING IS, WILL RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY ARE THE OTHER THINGS YOU MENTIONED? UM, REDUCE THAT HEIGHT, RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE IS GOING TO ACT ON THE SITE FROM THE EAST. THERE'S TH ZONING TO THE EAST AND THAT'S GONNA PROJECT RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE. UH, THE APPLICANT MAY BE ABLE TO DESCRIBE BETTER, UH, WITH THEIR DIAGRAMS WHERE THEIR BUILDING MEETS IT, BUT THAT WAS OBVIOUSLY A, UM, A CONCERN IN TERMS OF, HEY, CAN YOU MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF CODE? UH, AS A RESULT THEY CAN SO THAT AT A RATE OF, UH, ONE TO THREE, IT'S PROJECTING FROM THE EAST TO THE WEST ACROSS THIS PROPERTY AND LIMITING THEIR, THEIR HEIGHT, MAX HEIGHT OF, OF MULTIFAMILY TWO IS JUST 36 FEET. UM, WHEN THEY USE A MIXED INCOME BONUS, OR IF THEY INCLUDE MIXED INCOME HOUSING, THEY CAN INCREASE THEIR HEIGHT, UH, DEPENDING UPON HOW MUCH HOUSING IS PUT IN. IF THAT'S FIVE, 10, 15%, THEY CAN INCREASE IT FROM 51 66 85. THAT INCREASE DOES NOT INCLUDE R-P-S-R-P-S ACTS ON, ON TOP OF THAT BONUS, IT NEGATES, UH, WHERE IT DOES STRIKE THE, UH, PROXIMITY SLOPE. SO POINT BEING IS THEY ARE LIMITED BY PROXIMITY SLOPE. I KNOW THEY, AS THEIR BUILDING'S IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SITE, UH, THEY'D ONLY BE ABLE TO GET TO 75 FEET, FOR EXAMPLE. OKAY. IF THEY WERE 225 FEET. I TRIED TO DO IT IN MY HEAD THERE FOR A SECOND, BUT I DETERMINED THAT IT WAS NOT FOR THE BEST. SO , THEY, THEY COULD ONLY GET TO FOR 75 FEET IN HEIGHT, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THEY YES. OR TWENTY TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY FIVE FEET FROM THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE. OKAY. AND UNDERGROUND PARKING WAS MENTIONED. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY FLOORS OF UNDERGROUND PARKING? IS IT JUST ONE? NO, I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? AND THAT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE FIVE FLOORS, RIGHT? IT'S FIVE FLOORS OF ACTUAL IT WOULDN'T BE, NO, IT WOULDN'T BE INCLUDED IN STORIES. UM, IT WOULD ONLY, YOU KNOW, THE HEIGHT IS REALLY WHAT'S AT PLAY HERE OR HEIGHT IS REALLY WHAT'S LIMITED HERE. SO IF THERE PARKING WAS PARTIALLY ABOVE GROUND AND BUMPS UP THEIR HEIGHT, THEN IT ONLY, IT'S THE ONLY TIME IT PLAYS INTO, INTO ACCOUNT WITH THAT. BUT THEY'RE NOT HELD TO ABOVE OR BELOW IN THE ZONING. OKAY. UM, LAST, UH, MAYBE LAST, UM, THE, THE AREA, UM, THAT'S BEING CONSERVED IS BEHIND THIS PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. YES. RIGHT. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, TRAFFIC PLANS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED. I REVIEWED THEM. WHETHER I AGREE WITH 'EM IS ANOTHER STORY. BUT, UM, [00:10:01] WILL FIRE AND ENGINEERING, I MEAN, FIRE AND POLICE BE ABLE TO GET TO THAT AREA IN CASE THERE'S EVER A FIRE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? IT, IT, WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED, UM, IN PERMITTING OR IN ENGINEERING AT SOME POINT? YEAH, THE, THE BUILDING ITSELF, THE FACILITY IS BEING DEVELOPED IS GONNA HAVE TO HAVE, UH, FIRE LANES DEPENDING ON THE HEIGHT, UM, THAT RUN WITHIN THE SITE, UH, TO A CERTAIN DISTANCE TO ACHIEVE, UH, THEIR, THEIR HOSE REACH. AS FOR THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, I DON'T THINK THAT TYPICALLY, UH, AND I'M SPECULATING, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT TYPICALLY CONSERVATION AREAS OR, OR NATURAL AREAS OR OPEN SPACE, UH, HAVE REQUIREMENTS FOR THINGS LIKE FIRE LANES AND ACCESS. UH, I CAN CHECK WITH ENGINEERING TO SEE IF THERE'S A, A CONCRETE ANSWER ON THAT, BUT I WOULD, N LIKE ANY OPEN SPACE, UH, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE A FIRE LANE REQUIREMENT. 'CAUSE FIRST OF ALL, THEY'RE NOT DEVELOPING IT. GOTCHA. UM, SO THE, THE HELMET ITSELF WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT FIRE LANE REQUIREMENTS ON ITS INSIDE. OKAY. SO THEY HAVE MENTIONED GOING IN AND CLEARING THE BRUSH AND MAKING THAT CREEK WALKABLE AND LIVABLE. UM, WILL THEY EVER HAVE TO COME FOR ZONING FOR THAT OR WILL THE CONSERVATION ZONING, UM, COVER THEM FOR THAT, THAT SECTION OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT? YEAH, I WOULD, AGAIN, SPECULATE, I HADN'T HEARD ABOUT THAT, BUT I WOULD, WITHOUT A STRUCTURE OR A DEFINED USE, THEY WOULD LIKELY NOT NEED TO CHANGE ZONING UNDER AG ZONING. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HANEN, PLEASE. THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSIONER HERBERT COVERED A COUPLE OF MY QUESTIONS. TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UM, HOW THE SITE WAS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED. ANY PROTECTIONS, UM, RELATIVE TO THE ADJACENT CREEK? IS THERE A DIFFERENCE, UH, BETWEEN IN ARTICLE 10 BETWEEN THE TWO ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED THERE SHOULD FOR THE EXISTING N MS VERSUS THE PROPOSED? NO, THERE SHOULD NOT BE. THERE SHOULD NOT BE BECAUSE GENERALLY YOUR, YOUR MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 10, SAY SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX USES AND THEN ALL OTHER USES. SO YOUR ARTICLE 10 REQUIREMENTS ARE THE SAME AND TREE RESERVATION VERSUS, UH, ONSITE LANDSCAPING. SAME. AND SO IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT OR CONSIDERATION? IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'VE TALKED ABOUT IMPROVEMENTS ACTIVATING THE CREEK, USING IT AS AN AMENITY FOR THE SITE. IS, UH, THAT'S CLEARLY NOTHING THAT'S BEFORE US AS A STRAIGHT ZONING CHANGE. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN REVIEWED AND IS BEING DISCUSSED IN OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS OR THROUGH OTHER CHANNELS? I THINK THEY'D HAVE TO ANSWER THAT. UH, WE DON'T HAVE A TOOL IN ZONING TO DO THAT, UH, EITHER OUTSIDE OF AREA REQUEST OR WITHIN A GENERAL ZONING DISTRICT. THEY COULD SPEAK TO THAT IF THEY'VE, UM, PURSUED THAT WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS OR, UM, HAVE OTHER WAYS THEY'D LIKE TO, TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD. UH, BUT IT'S NOT GONNA BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE ZONING CASE. ALRIGHT. AND THEN FINAL QUESTION. I NOTICED THAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS SAID THAT THERE'S NO CHANGE, BUT THE USES THAT ARE DEFINED IN THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED IN MF TWO OR THEY PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED OR THEY'RE JUST CARRYING FORWARD WITH THE PROPOSED REQUEST? YEAH, YOU, SO THE RESTRICTIONS THAT EXIST ON THE SITE ARE JUST GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE, UH, LESS THAN 3,500 IS PROHIBITED AND MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION AT PROHIBITED. PRESUMABLY THOSE WERE PUT IN PLACE WITH THE, UH, NS DISTRICT. I MEAN, THEY WERE PUT IN PLACE WHEN THEY, WHEN A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WENT IN HERE AND NO, THEY, THEY WOULD NOT AFFECT THE MULTIFAMILY. UH, THEY CHOSE NOT TO TERMINATE THEM FOR WHATEVER REASON. UH, BUT THEY'LL, THEY'LL REMAIN, UH, SO IF IT EVER WERE, UH, IF IT, SO EITHER IF IT REMAINS IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OR IF IT EVER WERE TO BE A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IN THE FUTURE OR A MIXED USE DISTRICT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THOSE USES WOULD STILL BE PROHIBITED. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT PLEASE. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. SHOULD HE, UM, IS, IS, UH, THIS, UH, CREEK AREA FOR THIS PROPERTY IN A FLOOD ZONE? SORRY. UM, YES. THERE'S A PORTION OF THE, OF THE CREEK IS DESIGNATED AS FLOODPLAIN AT THIS TIME. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE DESIGNATION IS? IS IT A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN? COULD YOU, WHAT WHAT IS THE DESIGNATION? OH, WHICH, UH, TYPE OF FLOODPLAIN? I'M, I'M SORRY. I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD IF IT'S A 100 OR, UH, LESS. I THINK THE BLUE, I, I, I DO THINK THE BLUE IS, UM, 100 YEAR ON THIS MAP AS SHOWN. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. UM, IS THERE, UH, A RETAINING WALL THAT'S GOING TO, UH, HAVE TO BE BUILT IN ORDER TO LEVEL THE PROPERTY ALONG THE CREEK SIDE? SO, UH, SO THERE'S VARIOUS THINGS ONE CAN DO TO, UH, ACCOMMODATE, UH, DRAINAGE ISSUES. UM, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY YOU CAN'T BUILD TYPICAL STRUCTURES IN THE FLOODPLAIN, UH, WITHOUT IMPROVE IMPROVING [00:15:01] IT, UH, MODIFYING IT, UH, SO THAT THE FLOODPLAIN IS EITHER NO LONGER THERE OR IT ACCOMMODATES THE, THE STRUCTURES. RETAINING WALL IS ONE, IS ONE APPROACH, UH, THAT'S POSSIBLE THAT HAVE TO BE ASSESSED DURING PLATTING AND PERMITTING AS THEY, UH, MOVE THROUGH THE PROCESS, WHAT TYPE OF, UM, WHAT TYPE OF IMPROVEMENT OR STRUCTURE THEY NEED TO, TO ACCOMMODATE THAT FLOOD AREA. UH, BUT THEY DO HAVE TO DO IT, THEY HAVE TO IMPROVE DRAINAGE THROUGH THE SITE, NOT WORSEN IT. THEY HAVE TO, UH, BUILD OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN OR BUILD WITH THE FLOODPLAIN WHENEVER, UH, IT APPLIES. SO THEY'LL HAVE TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A DRAINAGE, DRAINAGE, UH, A RETAINING WALL IN ORDER TO, YOU KNOW, ACCOMMODATE THE DRAINAGE ISSUES ON THIS PROPERTY. IF, IF THEY'RE BUILDING NEAR THE FLOOD PLAIN, IF THEY'RE BUILDING FARTHER FROM IT, THEN THAT WOULDN'T APPLY OR BE NECESSARY, AND THAT'S OPEN TO THEM IN A GENERAL ZONING CASE. OKAY. AND UM, EARLIER YOU SAID THE, UM, THE RPS WOULD ALLOW THE SITE, UH, THE PROJECT TO BE 75 FEET TALL. IS THAT RIGHT? YEAH, SO I WAS JUST THROWING OUT AN EXAMPLE OF DOING TH 30 THREES AND SO THEY CAN ACTUALLY ONLY GET TO THAT HEIGHT. SO RPS IS A, IS A NEGATIVE FORCE, NOT A, A POSITIVE FORCE IN TERMS OF HEIGHTS. UM, MEANING IT'S A DETRA IT DETRACTS, UH, RIGHTS THAT ARE POTENTIALLY THERE. UH, IT DOESN'T ADD THEM OBVIOUSLY. UH, SO THE BASE HEIGHT FOR MULTIFAMILY TWO IS 36 FEET. THEY CAN ONLY INCREASE THE HEIGHT AS THEY INTRODUCE MIXED INCOME HOUSING AS PART OF THE BASE. UH, MF TWO, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S 5%, 10%, UM, 15%. SO, SO, SO LET ME CLARIFY. YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE ZONING ACTUALLY THEN, THAT THEY'RE, THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING WOULD ONLY ALLOW FOR 36 FEET HIGH, UH, BUILDING THAT'S THE BASE HEIGHT. IF THEY INCLUDE 5% MIXED INCOME HOUSING, IT'S 51, THEY INCLUDE 10, IT'S 66. IF THEY INCLUDE 15%, THAT'S 85 FEET. HOWEVER, RPS DETRACTS FROM THAT, THAT'S LISTED IN THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CHART IN THE REPORT. BUT, UH, RPS COUNTERACTS THAT, SO IF, IF EVEN IF THEY DID 10, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, 10% AT, UM, THE MIDDLE INCOME BAND OF MULTI MIXED INCOME HOUSING, THEY GET 66 FEET IN HEIGHT. BUT THE HASTRICK THERE IS THAT RPS STILL DETRACTS HEIGHT OFF OF THAT. SO IF THEY'RE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, THEY'RE GONNA LOSE HEIGHT REGARDLESS OF HOUSING, UH, INCLUSION. DO YOU, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE TOTAL HEIGHT IS FOR THE, UH, THE BUILDING THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING AT THIS SITE? I DON'T, I KNOW THAT, I KNOW THE MAXIMUM HEIGHTS THAT ARE, UM, ALLOWED BY THE ZONING DISTRICT. SO 36 51, 66 85 MINUS RPS. COMMISSIONER BLAIR, I'M GOING TO, UM, FOLLOW SOME OF THE QUESTIONS FROM, FROM COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT. WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THIS BEING A, A A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN, UM, WOULDN'T IT BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THEM TO BE RA FOR THIS BLOCK TO BE RAISED OUTSIDE OF THE FLOOD PLAIN IN ORDER TO BUILD ON IT? CORRECT. PRESUMABLY NOT ALL OF IT. IT'S A SMALL PORTION OF THE SITE THAT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN. IT'S THE EASTERN SIDE IS LOCATED IN THE FLOODPLAIN ONLY. I WISH THIS WERE, UH, A MORE READABLE MAP, UM, BUT IT'S ONLY THE EASTERN PART OF THE FLOODPLAIN, SO NOT THE ENTIRE LOT WOULD HAVE TO BE LIFTED FROM IT. UM, IT'S JUST THE EASTERN SIDE. IT'S JUST THE EASTERN SIDE. BUT WOULDN'T THAT STILL BE REQUIRED TO BE BROUGHT OUT OF THE FLOOD PLAIN IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE DEVELOPED? YES, BUT, BUT YOU, YOU MAY NOT WANT TO DEVELOP IN THAT PORTION. YOU MAY LEAVE IT LOW AND LET WATER FLOW WHERE IT IS THROUGH THERE, WHAT HAVE YOU. SO THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD IN THE FLOODPLAIN PORTION IF THEY REALLY WANTED TO, WHICH USUALLY COST IS THE, UH, IS THE, UH, PROHIBITOR THERE. UH, THEY'D HAVE TO BUILD UP OUT OF IT OR IMPROVE THE FLOODPLAIN SO THAT IT IS NOT AN ISSUE. UM, SO IT'S A SMALL, SMALL PORTION OF THE SITE IN THE EAST IS THE FLOODPLAIN. UH, SO THEY MAY WANT TO DEVELOP OTHER PORTIONS OF THE SITE BECAUSE OF, UH, THAT'S EASIER. UH, BUT IF THEY DID WANT TO DO ANYTHING IN THE EAST, THEY'D HAVE TO WORK AROUND THE FLOODPLAIN OR IMPROVE IT, IMPROVE FLOW, OR BUILD, UM, OUT OF IT. ANY OF THOSE THINGS ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM. SO YOU, YOU, IT WAS, DID I NOT HEAR AND UNDERSTAND THAT THEY WOULD BE DOING A CONSERVATION AREA WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE CREEK? IS THAT THE AREA THEY'RE DOING THE CONSERVATION [00:20:01] AREA IN? YEAH, NOTHING IS, UM, BOUND TO THIS CASE, SO I DON'T WANT TO GUARANTEE ANYTHING. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT'S ACTUALLY MAINLY, UH, IF, IF NOT THAT THE APPLICANT CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION, BUT ALSO THE PARCEL. SO THE NORTH POTENTIALLY, UH, BUT THE APPLICANT MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT MORE. SO THIS PROPERTY IS ALSO RIGHT ON TOP OF A EXISTING CREEK, IS THAT NOT CORRECT? EX ON TOP OF A WHAT? I'M SORRY, . I SAID NEITHER OF US HEARD EACH OTHER, UM, ON TOP OF AN EXISTING, WHAT YOU SAID CREEK. YES. SO THERE'S THE FLOODPLAIN ON THE EAST, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON THE EAST SIDE AND THE, AND, AND THE WEST SIDE. UM, THEY WOULD HAVE TO WORK WITH THOSE WHEN THEY GET TO PLATTING AND PERMITTING. SO THEY'D EITHER HAVE TO BUILD AROUND THEM, UM, ADDRESS THOSE THROUGH THE PROPER MEANS THAT GO WITH PLATTING AND PERMITTING. UM, OR LIKE I SAID, AVOID THEM. WILL, DO YOU KNOW IF ANYONE FROM ENGINEERING WILL BE AVAILABLE THIS AFTERNOON IN ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS TO BE ASKED? YES. I'LL, I'LL LET HIM KNOW FOR SURE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. PEPPY, THE CASE NUMBER TWO, PLEASE ES GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. THIS IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH TWO 12 AND IT'S THE APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. NUMBER 2, 2 2 1 FOR A STUDIO TATTOO STUDIO USED ON PROPERTY ZONE SUB-DISTRICT ONE A WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 6 21, THE OLD TRINITY AND DESIGN DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LEVY STREET BETWEEN MANUFACTURING STREET AND EXPRESS STREET. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO CONTINUE THE USE TO CONTINUE A USE OF A TATTOO STUDIO ON THE PROPERTY. THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP, THE AREA MAP AND THE ZONING MAP. YOU WILL SEE THAT IT IS SURROUNDED BY OTHER OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE USES AND THEN ALSO THE LEVY IN THE TRINITY RIVER GREENBELT. ON JANUARY 11TH, 2017, THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2221 FOR TATTOO STUDIO AND THE APPLICANT APPLIED TO RENEW THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2221 ON APRIL THE 18TH, 2024. THE NEXT FEW SLIDES WILL BE OF THE SITE AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. SO THIS IS ON ONSITE. THIS IS LOOKING SOUTH, LOOKING SOUTH, LOOKING DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET LOOKING NORTH. AND AS YOU WILL SEE HERE IS THE SITE PLAN. NOTHING ABOUT THE SITE PLAN HAS CHANGED. AND INSTEAD RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'LL COME BACK TO ITEM NUMBER THREE. WE'LL GO TO NUMBER FOUR. MS. BRIDGES, THIS IS CASE NUMBER ZZ 2 34 DASH 2 27. IT'S APPLICATION FOR REMOVAL OF THE D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTY ZONE AND MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY WITH THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT NUMBER 1933. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW ALCOHOL CELLS ON THE PROPERTY. THE LOCATION MAP, THE AREA MAP THE ZONING MAP, YOU WILL SEE THAT THE SITE IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY UNDEVELOPED LAND, MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL AS WELL. OKAY, THE AREA REQUEST [00:25:01] IS ZONED BY MU ONE AND IS DEVELOPED WITH A MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING, UH, STATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE FUEL STORE, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS. THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR ALCOHOL SALES, WHICH IT HAS HAD SINCE 2012. UM, THE MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 2011 IS APPROXIMATELY 1,854 SQUARE FEET. AND THE LOT HAS ACCESS ON BOTH SOUTH ZANG AND WEST SOFA. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS TO REMOVE THE D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY AND NAD ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY. A PERSON SHALL NOT SELL OR SERVE ALCOHOL CELLS, BEVERAGES OR SETUPS FOR ALCOHOL BEVERAGES FOR CONSUMPTION OFF THE PREMISES UNLESS THE SALE OF SERVICE IS PART OF THE OPERATION OF A USE, WHICH IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT HAS BEEN GRANTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. THIS IS ON ONSITE. ON ONSITE AS WELL. I'M JUST STANDING ACROSS THE STREET ONSITE ON SITE AS WELL. THESE ARE SURROUNDING USES AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, I, I'M NOT FOLLOWING THE RATIONALE FOR THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BECAUSE ALL I SEE HERE TO JUSTIFY IT IS JUST THE APPLICANT'S DESIRE NOT TO HAVE TO HAVE AN SUP. AND I MEAN, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT EVERYONE IN THE CITY WHO IS REQUIRED TO HAVE AN SUP WOULD PREFER NOT TO. SO, UM, CAN, CAN YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON THIS AND DO YOU HAVE ANY, UH, INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER THE SUP THEY HAVE IS CURRENTLY CURRENT? ARE THEY CURRENT ON THEIR 12 B CONVENIENCE STORE INSPECTIONS OR THE CRIME STATISTICS? I'M JUST, I'M, I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIND A REASON TO JUSTIFY REMOVING THIS. WELL, I DO NOT HAVE THE, UH, CRIME STATISTICS FOR THAT. HOWEVER, UM, THEY ARE CURRENT ON THEIR SUP AND THEN THEY'RE WANTING TO REMOVE THE D ONE LIFT CONTROL OVERLAY BECAUSE THE USE OF MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION IS ALLOWED. THEY JUST WANTED TO BE ABLE TO, UH, SELL THE ALCOHOL. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT YOU KNOW, I, I GUESS I'M TRYING TO FIGURE WHY WE WOULD, UH, DETERMINE WHY WE WOULD REMOVE THE, UM, D ONE OVERLAY HERE. JUST BECAUSE THE APPLICANT DESIRES TO AND NOT DO SOMETHING SIMILAR FOR EVERY OTHER, YOU KNOW, GAS STATION CONVENIENCE STORE THAT SELLS ALCOHOL. THERE IS A, UH, GAS STATION FURTHER DOWN THE STREET, A QT AND THEY ARE ABLE TO SELL ALCOHOL. IS THAT BECAUSE THE BOUNDARY OF THE OVERLAY IS IN BETWEEN THOSE PROPERTIES? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. ALRIGHT. I, ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. YOU ARE WELCOME. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, JUST ONE FOLLOW UP ON THAT. YOU MENTIONED THE ADJACENT, UM, PROPERTY THAT, UM, HAS THIS BY, RIGHT? ARE THEY PART OF A, UM, REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT? UM, AND DO THEY ALSO HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY THAT APPEARS TO EXIST HERE? I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK THAT TO SEE WHAT THAT PARTICULAR ZONING IS. OKAY. THANK I CAN GET BACK WITH YOU ON THAT. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER TURNER. BUT SO I WASN'T CLEAR, DID THE, DID THE APPLICANT GIVE ANY REASON FOR THE, FOR GIVE A REASON WHY THEY FILED THIS? YES, THEY WANNA BE ABLE TO, THEY WANNA BE ABLE TO SELL ALCOHOL RIGHT NOW THEY CAN'T, UM, BECAUSE OF THE D ONE OVERLAY, SO THEY JUST WANNA REMOVE THEIR OVERLAY TO ENSURE THAT THEY CAN SELL ALCOHOL. EVERYTHING ELSE WILL REMAIN THE SAME. CAN, CAN I CLARIFY SOMETHING? IF THEY HAVE THE D ONE LIQUOR OVERLAY, THEY CAN SELL ALCOHOL WITH AN SUP. RIGHT? BUT THEY ALREADY HAVE THE SUP, SO NOW THEY'RE BACK TO REMOVE THAT D ONE OVERLAY. SO THEY ALREADY ARE SELLING ALCOHOL UNDER AN SUP. I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SUP TO SEE, BUT WHEN I DID MY SITE VISIT, I DIDN'T SEE ANY ALCOHOL THERE, BUT I'LL HAVE TO CHECK THE SUP AND SEE. SO WHAT IS THE EXISTING SUP FOR? OH, I HAPPY TO WEIGH IN. YEAH, ACTUALLY THIS BODY APPROVED THE LAST ITERATION OF THE SUP IN LET'S, IT WAS FEBRUARY AND SO THAT WAS THE LAST, UH, TIME THEY CAME UP FOR RENEWAL. UM, THEY'VE BEEN OUT IN OPERATION WITH AN SUP SINCE 2011, EXCUSE ME, 2012. UM, SO I UNDERSTAND THAT'S PART OF WHY THEY'VE, UH, THEY'VE REQUESTED TO REMOVE IT, IS THEY'VE HAD AN SUP FOR, UH, SEVERAL YEARS AND THEY REQUEST TO, TO NOT GET SUP EVERY, UH, REPEATING PERIOD. UM, AS FOR THE QUESTION WAS, YEAH, THE SUP IS FOR ALCOHOL SALES THAT THEY HAVE AT THIS TIME. UH, SO THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 2012, UH, AND THEN RENEWED MOST RECENTLY THIS YEAR. UH, AS FOR THE, THERE WAS THIS TALK ABOUT A REGIONAL RETAIL SITE WITH A QUIG TRIP. THAT SITE, IT IS, UH, REGIONAL RETAIL, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE, OR EXCUSE ME, IT DOESN'T HAVE A OVERLAY. UM, AND SO YOUR ALCOHOL SALES DON'T DIFFER FROM DISTRICT TO DISTRICT IN, IN REGARDS TO, UM, JUST ALCOHOL SALES WITHIN A STORE OR WITHIN A RESTAURANT. UH, THOSE ARE MORE [00:30:01] GOVERNED BY THE, THE OVERLAYS LIKE THIS ONE. CAN WE CHECK THIS OFF MR. GOVERNOR, PLEASE? YES. . COMMISSIONER RA PLEASE. HOW MUCH TIME DID WE GIVE THEM ON THAT SUP WE APPROVED IN FEBRUARY? UH, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. I BELIEVE IT WAS FIVE COMMISSIONER. YES. FIVE, FIVE YEARS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS. OKAY, WE'LL MOVE TO CASE NUMBER FIVE. THANK YOU MS. ES. UH, UH, COMMISSIONER'S CASE NUMBER FIVE WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO OCTOBER 10TH. WE'LL BRIEF IT THEN WE'LL BRIEF IT THEN TAKES US TO NUMBER SIX, UH, TO MR. CLINTON. GOTTA STEP OUT. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z 2 34 DASH 25 2. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN RR REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT. THE GREATER NORTH OAK CLIFF DEMOLITION DELAY OVERLAY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF EAST NINTH STREET BETWEEN RIGA PLACE AND NORTH DENVER AVENUE. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO MF ONE MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT TO ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES. AND IT'S APPROXIMATELY 5,227 SQUARE FEET IN TOTAL SIZE. UH, QUICK BACKGROUND ON THE SITE AGAIN. IT'S, UH, CURRENTLY ZONED REGIONAL RETAIL. IT'S UNDEVELOPED, UH, VACANT LOT. THIS LOT HAS FRONTAGE ONLY ON EAST NINTH STREET, UH, GEO GEOGRAPHICALLY, UH, LOCATED IN SOUTHWEST DALLAS ABOUT THREE MILES FROM DOWNTOWN. UH, THERE HAVE BEEN TWO ZONING CASES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS AND APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE. HERE IS OUR LOCATION MAP. THIS IS OUR AERIAL MAP. HERE'S THE ZONING MAP WITH THE SURROUNDING USES. UH, ONCE AGAIN, THE CURRENT SITE IS REGIONAL RETAIL TO THE NORTH. THERE'S ALSO REGIONAL RETAIL AND SINGLE FAMILY TO THE EAST, SOUTH, AND WEST ALSO, SINGLE FAMILY. I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT, UM, ALTHOUGH IT'S SINGLE FAMILY USES IT IS ZONED MF TWO. HERE WE ARE ON SITE, UH, LOOKING AT THE, UH, LOOKING NORTHWEST HERE. WE'RE ON SITE LOOKING WEST. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING NORTHEAST. AND HERE WE HAVE SOME IMAGES OF THE SURROUNDING USES. THIS IS IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE SITE. THIS IS ADJACENT TO THE SITE, UH, TO THE SOUTH. THIS IS ADJACENT TO THE SITE, TO THE SOUTHEAST AND THIS IS TO THE IMMEDIATE EAST OF THE SITE OF THE SITE. UM, BRIEF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. SO, UH, THE EXISTING, UH, STANDARDS, 15 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, 20 FOOT SIDE AND REAR ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL. UM, THE HEIGHT, UH, YOU CAN GO UP TO 70 FEET, FIVE STORIES. AND FOR THE PROPOSED, UH, THE FRONT SETBACK WOULD BE THE SAME 15 FEET. UH, FOR THE SIDE AND REAR IT WOULD BE, UM, 10 OR 15 FEET. UH, DEPENDING ON THE ADJACENCIES. SINCE THE ADJACENCY, THE ADJACENCIES ARE SINGLE FAMILY, UM, THERE IS, UH, NONE REQUIRED. THE MAX HEIGHT WILL BE 36 FEET. UH, QUICK, UH, STAFF ANALYSIS. SO THE EXISTING SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL USES, UH, ARE ZONED, AGAIN, ZONED MULTIFAMILY, BUT THEY ARE SINGLE FAMILY USES. UH, THE REQUEST DOES FIT WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. UM, AND IT ALSO COMPLIES WITH, UH, POLICIES OF VARIOUS, UH, AREA PLANS. THEREFORE, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HALL? THANK YOU MR. CLINTON. [00:35:01] UM, WHEN I, I REVIEWED THE CASE, I JUST SCRIBBLED SOME NOTES HERE. UH, IT, THEY WANT TO, THEY'RE REQUESTING MULTIFAMILY, BUT I THINK, DID I READ CORRECTLY THAT WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY GONNA BUILD IS A, A 28 FOOT TALL SINGLE FAMILY HOME? THAT'S CORRECT. SO THAT CONFUSED ME. IF THEY'RE GONNA BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, WHY DID THEY REQUEST MULTIFAMILY WAY? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. SO I THINK BECAUSE OF THE EXISTING, UH, THE EXISTING ZONING IN THE AREA, THEY WANTED TO FIT THAT, UH, FABRIC IN THE, AGAIN, THE EXISTING ZONING IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. SO TO THE WEST, SOUTH, AND EAST OF THE SITE ARE, UH, MULTIFAMILY ZONES, BUT SINGLE FAMILY USES. HMM. WELL MY FIRST THOUGHT WHEN I READ THAT WAS, IS THIS GONNA BE A DUPLEX OR, YOU KNOW, BUT IT SAID SINGLE FAMILY HOME. SO YES. SO THE APPLICANT DID, UH, ASSURE ME THAT THEY ARE ONLY INTERESTED IN DOING A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, 28 FEET MAX HEIGHT. UM, I BELIEVE THEY WILL BE HERE. SO IF YOU HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR INTENTIONS, YOU CAN ASK THEM. OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. YEAH, I, I'M HAVING, UH, TROUBLE WITH THE MF ZONING MYSELF. IF THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IS SINGLE FAMILY AND THEY WANT TO BUILD SINGLE FAMILY AND 28 UM, FEET, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO DEED RESTRICTION OR ANYTHING HERE. MF WOULD ALLOW THEM TO BUILD 36 FEET. UM, WHY WOULDN'T THIS WORK UNDER AN R ZONING AND BE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT? UH, GREAT QUESTION. SO I BELIEVE THAT, UH, AGAIN, THE APPLICANT WANTED TO MATCH THE EXISTING, UH, ZONING USES IN THE AREA, BUT ADDITIONALLY THERE WOULD BE A BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY THAT WOULD COME INTO PLAY. SO REGARDLESS OF WHICH, IF UH, THE APPLICANT WENT WITH AR ZONING, THEY WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE, UM, THE, UH, FRONT YARD SETBACK OF THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENT UH, ZONES. THANK YOU. MR. OCK, IF THIS WAS, UM, IF THE APPLICATION WAS FOR R SEVEN FIVE, WOULD YOU HAVE DENIED IT MADE A RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL? UM, I'M NOT SURE. I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO THAT. I THINK I WOULD HAVE TO EVALUATE THE CASE A LITTLE BIT MORE IF THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL REQUEST. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON OR COMMISSIONER CHERLOCK? ONE MORE, JUST ONE MORE QUESTION. SO, UM, JUST TO CLARIFY MY UNDERSTANDING, OUR ZONING CODE IS PROGRESSIVE IN THE SENSE THAT WHATEVER ZONING CLASS, UM, A PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED AT, THEY CAN ALWAYS, THEY ALWAYS HAVE THE CHOICE TO, TO DO ESSENTIALLY LESS DENT, LESS DENSE OR LESS, MORE, UH, LESS INTRUSIVE STRUCTURES, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY. LESS RESTRICTIVE. SO LESS RESTRICTIVE. SO ANY MULTIFAMILY PROPERTY ALWAYS HAS THE OPTION TO DO R SEVEN FIVE UP TO, UP TO WHAT ZONE? MF ONE, MF TWO, I BELIEVE MF ONE. AND WE DIDN'T GO MF TWO OR MF THREE BECAUSE IT'S MORE INTENSIVE. MORE INTENSIVE. SO THEN THAT WAY IT WOULD RESTRICT BECAUSE OF RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE, IT WOULD RESTRICT THE HEIGHTS, UM, DRASTICALLY. RIGHT. DUE TO THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENCIES. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT DISTRICTS, BUT UM, WHAT YOU'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT IS USES. SO THE MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY USES AS WELL AS DUPLEX AND MULTIFAMILY USES, WHEREAS AN R SEVEN FIVE A DISTRICT WOULD ONLY ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY. UM, ANOTHER IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE, BECAUSE MOST OF THE ZONING IN THIS AREA IS MF TWO, EVEN THOUGH AS LAQUAN NOTED, IT'S SINGLE FAMILY USES, IF YOU HAD AN R DISTRICT RIGHT HERE IN THE CENTER OF THIS BLOCK, THAT WOULD BECOME A SITE OF ORIGINATION FOR RPS, UM, FOR ALL OF THE ADJACENT, UM, MF ZONED LOTS. UM, SO THAT COULD BE PROBLEMATIC, UH, PERHAPS FOR SOME OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THOSE LOTS. SO IF IT WAS MF ONE, THE PROXIMITY SLOPE WOULD JUST, IT WOULD BE A 45, IT'D BE ONE TO ONE. YEAH. SO, UH, AN MF DISTRICT TO AN MF DISTRICT DOES NOT CREATE RPS. UH, AND OUR DISTRICT TO AN MF DISTRICT WOULD, UH, AN MF DISTRICT TO A NON-RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WOULD, UM, BUT MF TO MF DOESN'T TRIGGER RPS COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. WELL THAT GOES TO THE HEART OF WHAT I GUESS I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS THE EXISTING ZONING. AND THERE'S A PRETTY LARGE RECTANGLE IS REGIONAL RETAIL, WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW ANY RESIDENTIAL USES, BUT THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE GROUND TODAY. IS THAT CORRECT? NO, IT'S UNDEVELOPED. [00:40:01] I KNOW THIS ONE IS, BUT THE SURROUNDING AREA. MM-HMM. PER ALL OF YOUR, UM, SITE PHOTOS. BUT AM AM I, I GUESS LET ME START WITH A FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION. DOES REGIONAL RETAIL ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES? NO. THANK YOU. SO THERE ARE, BUT REGIONAL RETAIL IS JUST THIS LOT. AGAIN, THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA IS ALL MF. THERE IS SOME, I'M, I'M ON, I'M ON SIX 14 OF OUR CASE REPORT. I SEE A VERY LARGE RECTANGLE THAT HAS AN RR SO IS THAT RR ONLY THIS SITE AND THE, AND THE DESIGNATION'S KIND OF FLOATING? NO, THE RR ZONING CURRENTLY APPLIES TO THIS LOT. UM, AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER LOTS ALONG THIS STREET HERE AT THIS INTERSECTION THAT ARE RR ZONING. UM, BUT THEN IF YOU GO OUTSIDE THAT ONE TRACK OF RR ZONING, IT'S LARGELY MF TWO A. NO, AND, AND I SEE ALL THAT. I DON'T CAN YOU PULL UP PAGE SIX 14? 'CAUSE I GUESS I'M STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT JUST TO UNDERSTAND. I, I'M CLEAR THAT WHAT'S ON THE GROUND IS ALLOWED, UM, SINGLE FAMILY USES WITHIN MF TWO ZONING. SO IT'S A LOWER DENSITY THAN WHAT'S ALLOWED. UNDERSTAND ALL THAT. BUT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THE IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY TO THIS SITE. SO THAT BLACK RECTANGLE THAT WE SEE ON SIX 14 OF OUR CASE REPORT, IT APPEARS. SO WE'VE GOT RED, WHICH IS OUR SITE, AND THEN THAT LARGER RECTANGLE WHERE YOU'VE GOT THE REGIONAL RETAIL IS THAT ENTIRE RECTANGLE REGIONAL RETAIL. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THEN, UM, AS YOU EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY USES GENERALLY YES. WHICH ARE NON-CONFORMING USES, UH, UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING. UNDERSTOOD PROBABLY OUR HISTORY OF CUMULATIVE ZONING, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. YEAH, UNDER FINE. VERY WELL FAMILIAR WITH THAT. THANK YOU. UM, SO FOR THIS SITE WITH THE ZONING CHANGE TO MF TWO OR WHETHER MF ONE OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE, MF ONE IS THE REQUEST BEFORE US TODAY, IT WILL IMPOSE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE ON THOSE ADJACENT PROPERTIES? THAT'S CORRECT. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE REMAINDER OF THIS BLOCK FACE AS YOU MOVE TO THE NORTHEAST, I CAN'T SEE WHAT THAT STREET IS. IT'S THE RED TWO STORY, UM, IMAGE THAT WAS IN THE CASE REPORT, RIGHT. IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT. AND THEN I, THAT IS MF TWO ZONING. UM, THOSE, UH, HORIZONTAL LOTS TO THE NORTHEAST, THOSE ARE MF TWO I THINK WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS. UM, BUT THAT IS ALL MF ZONING. SO THE REMAINDER OF THIS BLOCK FACED IS RESIDENTIAL. IT'S JUST, UM, THIS TRACT, UH, OF ZONING HERE WITH THE UH, BLACK RECTANGLE, UH, ALONG THIS STREET THAT IS RR ZONING. AND SO IT APPEARED THAT THE NORTHEAST PROPERTY THAT'S MF TWO WITH D RESTRICTIONS IS A SIDE YARD. 'CAUSE THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY AND WHAT MIGHT BE TRIGGERS, UM, WITH THIS REQUEST. BUT IF THAT'S CONSIDERED A SIDE YARD, THIS WOULD BE THE FRONT YARD FOR THIS PROPERTY BASED ON ITS ORIENTATION. SO HOW DOES THAT WELL THE, YEAH, I'M, I ACTUALLY HAD THAT QUESTION TOO ABOUT THE LOTS TO THE NORTHEAST THAT HAVE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. UM, I KNOW THEY'RE ORIENTED THE WAY THEY ARE, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF THE FRONT YARD WOULD ACTUALLY BE, UM, STREET THERE, THERE THEY MAY HAVE MET THE FRONT YARD REQUIREMENT EVEN THOUGH IT'S FUNCTIONALLY IN THE SIDE YARD. RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. UM, YEAH, I BELIEVE THAT'S PROBABLY A SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT OR, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. CLINTON. JUST A COUPLE OF FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS THERE. ONE, I THINK THERE WAS SOME REFERENCE OF A, WHETHER THIS COULD BE ON R SEVEN FIVE. THIS IS 5,500 SQUARE FEET. SO IT'S NOT A LAWFUL BILL FULL, IT WOULD NOT BE A LAWFUL BILL SITE UNDER R SEVEN FIVE. RIGHT. UH, THE TOTAL SIZE IS 5,200 SQUARE FEET. 52. YES. UM, AND NO, IT WOULD NOT. OKAY. SO YOU, YOU COULD DO R FIVE AND UH, JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S QUESTIONS, A R FIVE DISTRICT HAS A 20 FOOT SIDE YARD FRONT YARD SETBACK, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. SO THAT WOULD IMPOSE A, IF, IF BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY APPLIES, THAT WOULD IMPOSE A MINIMUM 20 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ALL LOTS FRONTING ALONG THE STREET. YES. RIGHT. AND ASSUMING THOSE MF LOTS HAD FRONT YARDS ALONG NINTH STREET, THE 15 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, WHICH WOULD NORMALLY APPLY TO AN MF DISTRICT WOULD BUMP BACK TO A 20 FOOT 25TH. THAT'S CORRECT. SO IS THAT POTENTIALLY PART OF THE APPLICANT'S MOTIVATION FOR GOING WITH MF ONE OR LEAST INTENSIVE MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT AS OPPOSED TO NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. OKAY. [00:45:01] THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE'LL KEEP GOING. MR CLINTON'S GOT THE HOT HAND TODAY WITH SEVEN ZONING CASES. MAKE YOURSELF COMFORTABLE THERE SIR. ALRIGHT, THIS IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 54. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE CR COMMUNITY RETAIL, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF EAST GRAND AVENUE BETWEEN COSTAL LOMA AVENUE AND CORONADO AVENUE. UH, PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO MF TWO AND TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 17,000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE AGAIN, UH, CURRENTLY ZONED COMMUNITY RETAIL AND DEVELOPED WITH AN EXISTING BUILDING AND PARKING LOT THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY USED AS A SELF-SERVE CAR WASH. UH, THIS IS A CORNER LOT, SO IT HAS FRONTAGE ON, UH, COSTAL LOMA AND EAST GRAND AVENUES. UH, GEOGRAPHICALLY IT'S IN NORTHEAST DALLAS ABOUT FIVE MILES FROM DOWNTOWN, UM, JUST SOUTH OF WHITE ROCK LAKE. UH, THERE HAS BEEN ONE ZONING CASE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, AND THIS IS A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE. HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP. THIS IS OUR AERIAL MAP AND ZONING MAP SHOWING THE SURROUNDING USES. SO AGAIN, UH, THE SITE IS COMMERCIAL RETAIL TO THE NORTH AND TO THE WEST. UH, SINGLE FAMILY. SO THERE'S, IT'S R SEVEN FIVE A, UH, TO THE EAST IS PD 8 0 8 WITH, UM, COMMERCIAL RETAIL. AND THEN TO THE, UH, SOUTH IS MF TWO WITH RESIDENTIAL USES HERE WE'RE ON SITE LOOKING NORTHWEST. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING SOUTHWEST. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING NORTHEAST. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING SOUTHEAST. UM, THERE'S AN EXISTING, UH, BUS STOP THERE. THIS IS ON EAST GRAND AVENUE LOOKING SOUTHWEST. UH, SAME LOCATION LOOKING NORTHEAST, SAME LOCATION LOOKING, UH, SOUTHEAST TO THE SURROUNDING USES. UH, THIS IS LOOKING SOUTHEAST AGAIN, UH, TO THE, UH, MULTIFAMILY. HERE'S OUR, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. SO CURRENT, UH, FRONT YARD SETBACK WILL BE 15 FEET SIDE AND REAR WILL BE 20 FEET, UM, ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL. AND MAXIMUM HEIGHT WILL BE 54 FEET. UH, AT FOUR STORIES, UH, THEY PROPOSED IS MF TWO A, SO 15 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK. UM, BUT DUE TO BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY, THE ADJACENT UH, R SEVEN FIVE A LOTS WOULD APPLY THE 25 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, UM, TO THE SITE SIDE AND REAR YARD. UH, THERE WILL BE, UH, NONE IMPOSED SINCE THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENCIES R SINGLE FAMILY. THE MAX HEIGHT WILL BE 36 FEET. AND AGAIN, THE USE WILL BE, UH, UH, MULTIFAMILY. SO THERE ARE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES, UM, AGAIN, SINGLE FAMILY AS WELL AS MULTIFAMILY, UM, DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH OF THE SITE. THEREFORE, THE REQUEST DOES FIT WITHIN THE EXISTING, UH, USES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. UM, AND DUE TO THE MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED IN THE PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT, UM, ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WOULD MATCH THE FABRIC. SO THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY ISSUES WITH, UM, TOWERING MULTIFAMILY BUILDING IN THIS, UH, PARTICULAR LOCATION. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. UM, MR. CLINTON, IS IT CORRECT THAT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY THAT THERE'LL BE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE BUFFER PROVISIONS REQUIRED PER ARTICLE 10? SO I BELIEVE IF IT'S RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL, THERE AREN'T A REQUIRED, UH, BUFFER. HOWEVER, UM, I THINK THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DO THAT ANYWAY, JUST TO HONOR THE EXISTING, UH, RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCIES. UM, I'LL GO BACK AND REREAD ARTICLE 10 'CAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS ACTUALLY A REQUIREMENT, UM, IN THE PROVISION BECAUSE OF THE DIFFERENT, UM, USE BETWEEN THE MF TWO AND THE, UM, RESIDENTIAL. UM, SECOND QUESTION WAS TO DO, UM, IS M-I-H-D-B PLAN FOR THE SITE, DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW, IS THAT SOMETHING DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT? UM, I BELIEVE IT IS NOT, BUT I THINK THAT'S BEST SUITED FOR THE APPLICANT. OKAY. UH, [00:50:01] THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THIS SITE HAS BEEN USED, UM, FOR THE LAST MANY YEARS AS EITHER A DILAPIDATED OLD CAR WASH OR TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION PARKING? I'M AWARE OF THE CAR WASH, NOT THE CONSTRUCTION PARKING. UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS A HISTORY OF DOING GENTLE DENSITY IN FIELD DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA? YES. ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS MET WITH THE APPLICANT A COUPLE OF TIMES AND SUPPORTS THIS? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HALL, ONE OF MY TYPICAL QUESTION, WHAT KIND OF MULTI-FAMILY IS PLANNED? I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION, UM, THAT HE'LL SHOW LATER DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO THAT'LL GIVE MORE OF AN IDEA OF WHAT IT'LL LOOK LIKE AND ALL THE DIFFERENT, UH, DESIGN STANDARDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WOULD IT BE, UH, BUT JUST VERY QUICKLY APART, APARTMENTS OR, UH, UH, MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS, I BELIEVE TWO STORY. TWO STORY. YEAH. THANK YOU. MM-HMM, JUST AS AN FYI. THIS CASE IS ON CONSENT, SO WE WILL NOT BE HEARING FROM THE, THE APPLICANT UNLESS ANYONE WANTS TO PULL IT OFF. NO. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS. OKAY, WE'LL STAY WITH YOU SIR. WE'LL GO TO CASE NUMBER EIGHT, UH, WHICH HAS ALSO COME OFF CONSENT, UM, FOR, UH, A COUPLE OF SMALL ADJUSTMENTS TO THE, THE DESTRUCTIONS. ALL RIGHT, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER A, CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 56. AN APPLICATION FOR AN MU ONE MIXED USE, UH, DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE R SEVEN 50, A SINGLE FAMILY WITH EXISTING SUP NUMBER 2 2 5 0 LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF NORTH MASTERS DRIVE BETWEEN OAK GATE LANE AND CHIKOTA, UH, DRIVE. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE, UH, TO MU ONE TO ALLOW A MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 3.31 ACRES IN TOTAL SIZE. UM, THIS IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH AN EXISTING BUILDING AND PARKING LOT PREVIOUSLY USED AS A CHURCH. THIS LOT HAS FRONTAGE ON NORTH MASTERS DRIVE. GEOGRAPHICALLY, IT IS IN SOUTHEAST DALLAS, ABOUT 13 MILES FROM DOWNTOWN. UM, AGAIN, PURPOSE OF THE, THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, UH, AS WELL AS VOLUNTEER DE RESTRICTIONS. UM, APPLICANT IS VOLUNTARY D RESTRICTIONS THAT INVOLVE, UH, PROHIBITING CERTAIN USES PROVIDING BUFFERS, UH, THROUGH FENCING AND GATING THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL AREAS, AS WELL AS LIMITS TO THE MAX HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURES AND LIMITS TO THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, UH, MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL. SO IT WAS, UH, ABOUT 16 TOWN HOMES, UM, OFFICE SPACE AND SMALL RETAIL, UH, RESTAURANT ON THE PROPERTY. THE EXISTING SUP NUMBER 2 2 5 0 IS FOR A CELL TOWER ANTENNA COMMUNICATIONS. AND THAT WILL REMAIN, UH, THE, AGAIN, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE AND THERE HAVE BEEN ZERO CASES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP. HERE IS OUR AERIAL MAP AND THE ZONING MAPS SHOWING THE SURROUNDING USES TO THE NORTH THERE, UH, TOWNHOMES AS WELL AS SINGLE FAMILY. UM, AGAIN, THE SITE IS, UH, R SEVEN FIVE A WITH EXISTING SUP 2 2 5 0 TO THE SOUTH, AND THE WEST IS ALSO SINGLE FAMILY. UM, BASICALLY THE SITE IS SURROUNDED BY R SEVEN FIVE A. UM, BUT TO THE IMMEDIATE WEST IS THE, UM, YOUNG MEN'S LEADERSHIP ACADEMY. HERE ARE SITE VISIT PHOTOS. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING TOWARDS THE, UH, EXISTING BUILDING. UH, SO EAST, THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING NORTHEAST, AGAIN, ON SITE LOOKING NORTH. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING EAST, ON SITE, LOOKING SOUTH, AGAIN, LOOKING SOUTH TO THE BACK OF THE SITE, LOOKING EAST, UH, TOWARDS, UH, SOME OF THE SURROUNDING USES ON SITE LOOKING NORTH. UM, HERE WE HAVE IMAGES OF THE MO UH, CLOSEUP OF THE SURROUNDING USES. UH, THIS IS LOOKING SOUTH OF THE SITE. THIS IS LOOKING SOUTHWEST TOWARDS THE LEADERSHIP ACADEMY. THIS IS LOOKING NORTHWEST HERE. WE'RE [00:55:01] ON, UH, MASTERS DRIVE LOOKING NORTH. UM, QUICK DEVELOPMENT STANDARD. SO AGAIN, THE EXISTING IS R SEVEN FIVE, A 25 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, FIVE FOOT SIDE AND REAR, UM, 30 FOOT MAX HEIGHT. THE PROPOSED MU ONE, SO 15 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, UH, 20 FOOT ADJACENT TO, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES. SO SIDE AND REAR YARD WOULD BE, UH, 20 FOOT, 20 FEET. UM, MAX HEIGHT WOULD BE 90, 90 FEET AT SEVEN STORIES OR 120 FEET AT NINE STORIES. UH, WITH RETAIL, HOWEVER, AGAIN, THE, UH, APPLICANT IS, UH, VOLUNTEERING DE RESTRICTIONS TO LIMIT THE HEIGHT. UH, BRIEF STAFF ANALYSIS. SO THERE ARE EXISTING SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL USES, SINGLE FAMILY, UH, DIRECTLY ADJACENT IN ALL DIRECTIONS OF THE SITE. UH, THE REQUEST WOULD FIT WITHIN THE EXISTING USES OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. UM, WITH THE IMMEDIATE AREA, UH, NOT SO MUCH, BUT DUE TO THE D RESTRICTIONS, UH, THEY WILL ASSIST WITH HELPING THIS PROPOSAL FIT WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. UM, AGAIN, THE APPLICANT, UM, SORRY, NO D RESTRICTIONS FOR, UH, VOLUNTEER FOR SETBACKS. UH, BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY WOULD BE IMPOSED. SO EXISTING R SEVEN FIVE A, AGAIN, THAT 25 FOOT, UH, FRONT YARD SETBACK WOULD BE, UM, IMPOSED. AND THEN RPS DOES COME INTO EFFECT WITH THE PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHTS, UH, LIMITING THE MAX HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING. SO YOU KIND OF HAVE A DOUBLE LAYERING OF, UH, RPS AS WELL AS VOLUNTEER D RESTRICTIONS TO THE MAX HEIGHT THAT WOULD LIMIT, UM, THE TOTAL HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. SO AGAIN, IF THERE'S ANY CONCERNS WITH A TOWERING, YOU KNOW, MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING OR TOWERING ANYTHING, UM, IN THIS IMMEDIATE AREA, THAT WOULDN'T BE, UM, AN ISSUE. SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT, AND I DO REALIZE THAT THERE WERE SOME TALKS ABOUT OR SOME CHANGES TO THE DE RESTRICTIONS. SO, YES. UH, I'LL START THE QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONERS, UH, MR. CLINTON, ARE, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE WAS A SECOND COMMUNITY MEETING ON TUESDAY NIGHT? YES. AND, UH, WERE YOU AWARE THAT, UH, ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT IN, IN THE FIRST COMMUNITY MEETING WAS PROBABLY THE MOST UNHAPPY, IS NOW SUPPORTING THE, THE PROJECT? I WAS NOT. THAT'S GOOD NEWS. YES, IT IS. UH, COMMISSIONER HARA, I THINK YOU JUST TOOK CARE OF MY QUESTION. I WAS ASKING ABOUT COMMUNITY MEETINGS. YES. THERE, THERE WERE TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS, ONE ON TUESDAY NIGHT, AND, UH, WERE YOU AWARE THAT THE, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL DEED RESTRICTION THAT MS. BUCKLEY IS GONNA INTRODUCE HERE THIS AFTERNOON? YES. THANK YOU, SIR. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UM, NOT HAVING ATTENDED ANY OF THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT EXACTLY WAS PRESENTED, SO WHAT THEY'RE SUPPORTING, BUT I, I SEE A POSSIBLE DISCONNECT BETWEEN POSSIBLY WHAT WAS PRESENTED AND WHAT THE, UM, ZONING AND THE COMBINATION OF DEED RESTRICTIONS COULD, UH, RESULT IN, FOR ONE. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND, UM, THE USES AFTER GOING THROUGH THE LIST OF USES THAT ARE PROHIBITED, WHAT I SEE REMAINS, UH, CROPS, CHILDCARE, CHURCH OFFICE, DUPLEX, MULTIFAMILY RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE THROUGH GENERAL MERCHANDISE, LESS THAN 3,500 SQUARE FEET, TRANSIT, SHELTER, POLICE, FIRE STATION, AND CELL TOWER. AND IT SAYS HERE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS IS 16, BUT IT DOESN'T SPECIFY THAT THEY'RE TOWN HOMES. I MEAN, READING THIS, YOU COULD END UP WITH A 16 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND THE REST OF THE ACREAGE COULD HAVE A CHURCH, AN OFFICE, A RESTAURANT. I MEAN, THERE COULD BE A, CONSIDER A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF NON-RESIDENTIAL. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THE INTENTION WAS TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF NON-RESIDENTIAL OR TO TRY TO LIMIT THE RESIDENTIAL TO TOWN HOME STYLE. AND MY OTHER QUESTION WOULD'VE TO DO WITH THE, UM, REQUIREMENT THAT THE PRESIDENTIAL AREAS BE FENCED IN GATED AND THE FENCE SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF SIX FEET IN HEIGHT, BUT THERE'S NO, UM, DESCRIPTION ABOUT WHAT TYPE OF FENCE THAT COULD BE. I DON'T THINK PEOPLE WANNA CHAIN LINK FENCE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. SO WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT ENHANCING THESE, THESE DE RESTRICTIONS? YES, I BELIEVE SO. UM, AND AGAIN, I THINK THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK MORE TO THAT, BUT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, UM, THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO VOLUNTEER A CERTAIN TYPE OF FENCING. I BELIEVE IT'S BOARD FENCING. UM, BUT DON'T QUOTE ME ON THAT. I, I WOULD DIRECT THAT QUESTION TO, TO THE APPLICANT COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, IS THAT THE LIST THAT YOU GOT FROM THE DOCKET? MM-HMM. OKAY. THAT'S A VERY OLD LIST OF LEADERSHIP. YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A COUPLE OF ONE THAT I EMAILED, YOLANDA, SO I'LL SEND IT TO YOU. BUT YEAH, THAT THE ONE IN THE DOCKET IS, GOSH, ALMOST ANCIENT HISTORY NOW. OKAY. YEAH, YOU, THERE IS A REFRESH ONE THAT ALL OF YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED, UH, YESTERDAY, BUT I'LL, I'LL SEND, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT TIME IT WAS SENT? I CAN LOOK. WELL, I DON'T, I I, I KNOW WHAT TIME I SENT IT, BUT I OKAY. YEAH. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. I WILL, I'LL LOOK FOR IT. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE. THE REVISED LIST MAY ANSWER SOME OF MY QUESTIONS. I WILL SAY I HAVE A SIMILAR CASE IN DISTRICT TWO. UM, [01:00:02] BUT WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT, UM, ADDRESSING THE PUBLIC REALM TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS, THINGS THAT WE TYPICALLY SEE? UM, AND AGAIN, I CAN, I'LL CHECK THE OTHER DEED RESTRICTIONS, BUT SIMILAR TO THE LAST CASE, IS IT CORRECT THAT THE U ONE WILL HAVE INCREASED BUFFER STANDARDS, UM, RELATED TO THE ADJACENT, UM, RESIDENTIAL ZONING? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU, UH, AND, UH, JUST MR. CLEAR, YOU AWARE THAT THE CHURCH IS STAYING? YES. THAT'S GOOD NEWS TOO. THE CHURCH IS STAYING. THANK YOU SIR. COMMISSIONER. HALT. SO THERE'S A CURRENTLY AN ACTIVE CHURCH ON SITE RIGHT NOW? YES, I BELIEVE IT IS ACTIVE. UH, HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN, BEEN THERE? DO YOU KNOW ROUGHLY? OH, I BELIEVE ABOUT 20 YEARS. COULD BE MORE. UM, I WOULD'VE TO DOUBLE CHECK, UH, RECORDS, BUT IT'S BEEN THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY, UH, PRIOR USE WAS, UM, WAS THIS H HOUSING IN THE PAST OR HAS IT ALWAYS BEEN THIS, UH, A CHURCH SITE? I'M NOT SURE IF THERE WAS EXISTING HOUSING BEFORE, UM, BUT I CAN FIND THAT OUT. UH, NOT, IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL. IT IS SORT OF CURIOUS ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE SITE, BUT, AND FINALLY, WOULD THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS BE, UH, PUBLIC ENFORCEABLE BY THE CITY? YES. AND NOT PRIVATE, BUT, UH, ENFORCEABLE BY THE CITY? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM? . OKAY. UH, MR. CLINTON, ARE, ARE COMMISSIONER WHEELER HAS A QUESTION. OKAY. I'M SORRY, I CAN'T SEE YOU. COMMISSIONER, PLEASE. COMMISSIONER WHEELER. UM, SO THIS PROPERTY, 'CAUSE I, I COULDN'T YOU, YOU WENT THROUGH THE, THE SITE MAP SO FAST. IS THIS SITE ACTUALLY ON MASTERS? YES, IT IS. SO IS THERE ALSO, UM, IS THERE GOING TO BE A, UM, SO THAT IS A TRAVEL . IS THERE GOING TO, IS THERE ANYTHING IN, IN IT THAT HAS AT LEAST A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK? THERE HAS NOT BEEN TALKS OF THAT, BUT I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A PRESENTATION, UM, AS WELL AS SOME OTHER, UM, IMAGES AND GRAPHICS TO SHOW TODAY. SO THAT MIGHT COME UP DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANY REASON WHY THAT RECOMMENDATION WASN'T PUT IN PLACE? UM, AFTER LOOKING AT THE THOROUGH PRAYER AND SEEING THAT IT'S HIGHLY WALKABLE, BUT IT'S ALSO IS MISSING SIDEWALK THAT SAFETY SIDEWALKS THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR, UM, THE CHILDREN WALKING BACK AND FORTH WITH SCHOOLS? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. AND THERE IS CURRENTLY EXISTING, UM, I BELIEVE FOUR FOOT SIDEWALK WHEN I WAS OUT THERE, UM, DOING MY SITE VISIT. UM, HOWEVER, THIS, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE, SO ANYTHING REGARDING DESIGN STANDARDS, UM, HOW THINGS ARE GONNA BE LAID OUT OR HOW THEY'RE GONNA LOOK, THAT WOULD BE MORE GEARED TOWARDS THE ADVOCATE. UM, AND AGAIN, FOR A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE CASE, WE TYPICALLY DON'T FOCUS ON THOSE SPECIFIC THINGS. OKAY. PROBABLY ONE OF THE REASONS I'M PUSHING FOR DESIGN STATUS AND COMMERCIAL, ME AND THE RESIDENTIAL. OKAY. COMMISSIONER BLAIR, MR. CLINTON, IS IT NOT CORRECT THAT EVEN THOUGH THERE'S FOUR FOOT SIDEWALKS, WOULDN'T THE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF SIDEWALKS HAVE TO BE A DA COMPLIANT? YES. AND THE A DA COMPLIANT REQUIREMENT IS MINIMUM SIX FEET. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. CLINTON. UH, TAKES IT TO CASE NUMBER NINE. THAT HAS ALSO COME OFF CONSENT THAT GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE MY SCREEN? WE CAN. GREAT. UH, THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z 2 3 4 2 6 5. IT IS A NEW SUP FOR 1930 PACIFIC AVENUE. SO IT'S A NEW SUP FOR A BAR, LOUNGER TAVERN AND COMMERCIAL [01:05:01] AMUSEMENT INDOOR LIMITED TO A DANCE HALL. THE REQUEST IS FOR A THREE YEAR TIME PERIOD. IT'S LOCATE, UH, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HARWOOD AND PACIFIC IN DOWNTOWN, AND IT'S LOCATED IN, UH, COUNCIL DISTRICT 14. HERE'S THE LOCATION MAP IN THE AERIAL AS WELL AS THE, UH, SURROUNDING USES AND ZONING. UH, SO LITTLE BACKGROUND. THE BUILDING, UH, IS LOCATED WITHIN PD SIX 19 AND THE PREVIOUS SUP 2050 WAS ESTABLISHED IN 2020 AND IT EXPIRED. THERE ARE SOME SITE, UH, PHOTOS, APOLOGIES FOR THE GRAINY QUALITY. UM, HERE'S THE, THE FRONT ENTRANCE TO, UH, THE NIGHTCLUB. UH, HERE'S ON PACIFIC, LOOKING WEST, UH, AND ON HARWOOD LOOKING NORTH, HERE'S THE SITE PLAN AS YOU, UH, AND AN ENLARGED, UH, VERSION OF THE SITE PLAN. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE MIDDLE, THERE IS A 900 SQUARE FOOT, UH, DANCE FLOOR. AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER KING. SO THIS OPERATIONS, SUP EXPIRED IN APRIL OF 2023, IS THAT CORRECT? YES. AND THEY DIDN'T APPLY FOR A NEW ONE UNTIL JUNE OF 2024? THAT IS, UH, THAT IS CORRECT. AND THEY'VE BEEN OPERATING CONTINUOUSLY WITHOUT AN SUP SINCE APRIL OF 2023? UM, I BELIEVE SO, YES. AND STILL THEY'RE OPERATING TODAY, RIGHT? YES. AND YOU LISTED THE REQUIREMENTS TO GRANT A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOUND IN 51 A DASH 4.219 IN THE CASE REPORT, AND YOU FOUND THAT ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS HAD BEEN MET, RIGHT? UH, I DID, YES. WHAT'S YOUR RATIONALE FOR THAT? UM, SO MY, UH, MY RATIONALE WAS THAT, UH, THIS DOES, UH, COMPLIMENT THE, THE EXISTING, UH, CHARACTER OF THE AREA, THE ENTERTAINMENT USES. UH, IT IS, YES, IT IS, UM, CURRENTLY OPERATING WITHOUT AN SUP, UM, AND, UH, THAT I DO BELIEVE SHOULD HAVE BEEN, UH, TAKEN INTO MORE CONSIDERATION. UM, BUT THAT WAS MY, THAT WAS MY RATIONALE FOR, UM, APPROVAL. SO A COUPLE OF THE FACTORS THAT GO INTO WHETHER AN SUP SHOULD BE GRANTED IS THAT CONTRIBUTES TO ENHANCES OR PROMOTES THE WELFARE OF THE AREA OF REQUESTS AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR GENERAL WELFARE. DID YOU DO ANY RESEARCH ABOUT THIS OPERATION BEFORE DETERMINING THAT IT COMPLIES WITH THOSE CRITERIA? I DID, UH, FOR THE LAND USE CRITERIA, I DID BELIEVE THAT IT COMPLIMENTED THE, THE SURROUNDING USES. UM, I WAS MADE AWARE OF THE, UM, THE CRIME STATISTICS RECENTLY, UM, AND, UH, THAT WOULD HAVE CHANGED MY, UH, MY, UH, RECOMMENDATION SOME. BUT, UH, AS FOR SPECIFICALLY FOR LAND USE, I DO BELIEVE THAT IT COMPLIMENTS THE SURROUNDING AREA BASED OFF OF, UH, THE USES SURROUNDING, UH, WITHIN DOWNTOWN. SO YOU DIDN'T OBTAIN THE CRIME STATISTICS BEFORE YOU MADE YOUR RECOMMENDATION? I'LL JUST ADD, I'M SORRY. OH, I'M SORRY. I TYPICALLY, WE DON'T REQUEST THEM FOR NEW SUVS. AND THIS IS A NEW SUP APPLICATION? WE DO, WE DO HAVE IT NOW IF ANYONE WANTS IT, BUT WE TYPICALLY DON'T REQUEST THEM FOR NEW S UPS 'CAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A, UH, APPLICATION TO ASSOCIATE WITH. BUT YOU KNEW THAT THIS WAS AN SUP THAT EXPIRED IS YEAH, IT'S, IT'S A NEW S BUT IT'S A NEW SUP NONETHELESS. SO IT'S PART OF OUR TYPICAL PROCEDURE IS WHEN IT'S A NEW SUP, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY NECESSARY. UH, WE'RE NOT JUDGING THEM BASED ON THE NEW SUP AND WE'RE NOT GIVING THEM CREDIT AS A RENEWAL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT AT THE SAME RATE. SO YOU DO HAVE THE CRIME STATISTICS NOW THOUGH, CORRECT? YES, I DO. AND WITH THAT INFORMATION, WOULD THAT CHANGE YOUR RECOMMENDATION? IT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD NEED TO LOOK INTO, UM, AND SPEAK WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT MORE. I WOULD JUST ADD IN, YEAH, NO CRIME STATISTICS ARE NOT GONNA AFFECT OUR ZONING AND LAND USE RECOMMENDATION FOR AN SUP. OKAY. BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CONSIDER, WELL, IT'S PART OF THE LEGAL STANDARD, SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD, WE CONSIDER FREQUENTLY, IN FACT. CORRECT. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS, THAT IS SOMETHING I WOULD CONSIDER. AND, AND I DID SEND AROUND A PACKET. I KNOW IT WAS KIND OF LATE, UH, BECAUSE I DIDN'T [01:10:01] GET THE INFORMATION FROM DPD UNTIL YESTERDAY, BUT IT, IT DID HIT ALL OF YOUR INBOXES THIS MORNING. IF YOU WANNA TAKE A LOOK AT IT. THANK YOU FOR THAT. WAS JUST ASKING ABOUT THAT COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOLLOW THAT COMMISSIONER HARA? YES. I'M STRUGGLING WITH THE IDEA THAT WE, THAT CONSIDERATION OF THE LEGAL STANDARD FOR AN SUP IS NOT A COMPONENT IN MAKING A RECOMMENDATION FOR A LAND USE CASE. WHICH LEGAL STATE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? THE, THE CRITERIA LISTED? YEAH. THE CRITERIA THAT IT, YOU KNOW, NOT BE THAT IT CONTRIBUTE POSITIVELY TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE. I KNOW I SENT MR. KRA AN EMAIL FRIDAY NIGHT ASKING IF HE WAS AWARE WITH THE, OF A NOTORIOUS CASE THAT HAD BEEN COVERED IN THE LOCAL PAPER ABOUT, UM, A RAPE THAT OCCURRED IN THE RESTROOM AND A SUBSEQUENT LEGAL, UM, CASE BROUGHT AGAINST THE, UH, THE OPERATION FOR SERVING UNDERAGE GIRLS AND TOLERATING, YOU KNOW, ALL SORTS OF THINGS. AND SO I ASKED, UM, FOR THERE TO BE, YOU KNOW, SOME CONSIDERATION OR SOME INVESTIGATION INTO THE CRIME STATISTICS AND THE TABC RECORD AND ALL THAT. AND I DIDN'T GET A RESPONSE AND I, I DIDN'T HEAR IT ADDRESSED TODAY, SO I, I'M JUST, YEAH, I'M, I'LL JUST, I'M TAKEN ABACK BY THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOT, UM, APPLYING THE LEGAL STANDARD FOR CONSIDERATION FOR AN SEP AND MAKING THESE LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT ON THAT, I'D APPRECIATE IT. YES, THANK YOU FOR THAT. NO, THE, THE CODE STANDARD THAT WE LOOK AT IS THE, UH, 4.219, AND THAT'S, LIKE YOU SAID, NOT JUDGEMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND WHERE WELFARE CONFORM IN ALL OTHER ASPECTS. THAT IS WITH TOOLS THAT WE HAVE IN CHAPTER 51 A, WHICH IS ZONING AND LAND USE. AND WE DO NOT TAKE CRIME AS A CONSIDERATION IN THAT COMMISSIONER HOUSE. RIGHT. UM, MR. PEPE IS THE OWNER AND APPLICANT ON THIS CASE THE SAME AS THE OWNER AND APPLICANT OF THE EXPIRED SUP? AND IF SO, CAN WE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION? NOT SO MY UNDERSTANDING, IT'S A NEW OWNER AND APP APPLICANT. AND SHOULD WE TAKE IT UNDER CONSIDERATION? I WOULD SAY NO. MR. RUBIN, I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND THE LEVEL AT, AT WHICH STAFF IS, IS ANALYZING THIS, THAT SUP STANDARD SAYS THAT THE CITY SHALL NOT GRANT AN SUP FOR A USE EXCEPT UPON A FINDING THAT THEY USE. WELL, AND THEN THERE'S THE FOUR FACTORS, A THROUGH D AT WHAT LEVEL IS, IS STAFF ANALYZING THE USE HERE? THEY ANALYZING THIS AS THE HYPOTHETICAL NIGHTCLUB. THAT COULD BE THERE, THAT COULD BE GREAT, THAT COULD BE TERRIBLE. OR ARE WE LOOKING AT THIS NIGHTCLUB THAT'S BEEN OPERATING ON THE GROUND SINCE SOME TIME? OR IS STAFF, I SHOULD SAY, LOOKING AT THIS AS THE NIGHTCLUB THAT, THAT, THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, HAS BEEN OPERATING ON THE GROUND SINCE TIME X IN THE PAST? I THINK, YEAH, I THINK WHAT YOU POINTED OUT IS A GOOD WAY TO LOOK AT IT. UM, THE, THE USE IS A, THE USE IS COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INDOOR. WE'RE LOOKING AT, IS THAT USE APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA? ARE THEY MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ZONING CODE CHAPTER 51 A AND IS IT APPROPRIATE IN A, UH, IN A USE TO USE ADJACENCY SENSE, IT'S DOWNTOWN. UH, THEY DO MEET THE ZONING CODE. IF THERE ARE OTHER STANDARDS THEY'RE VIOLATING, THAT CAN BE AN ISSUE FOR THEM IN THE LONG RUN, BUT IT'S NOT PART OF ZONING RECOMMENDATION. BUT WE AS WE AS COMMISSIONERS, RIGHT, IF WE SEE A USE THAT'S OPERATING PURSUANT TO AN SUP OR FOR A REQUEST SUP AND SEE REAL PROBLEMS ON THE GROUND WITH THAT USE, WE CAN SAY NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. WE'RE GONNA NOT GONNA ALLOW THIS, YOU KNOW, SU WE'RE GONNA RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS SUP VICE CHAIR RUBEN IS THIS, UH, THE SUP RUNS WITH THE LAND? IT IS A, UH, IT'S A LAND USE. IF WHATEVER, UM, APPLICANT GOES OUT OF BUSINESS NEXT WEEK, THE SUP WILL STILL BE IN EXISTENCE UNTIL THE EXPIRATION DATE AND A SUBSEQUENT PURCHASER CAN COME IN, COMPLY WITH THE SAME SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS, AND USE THAT SUP UNTIL IT EXPIRES. SO IT REALLY RUNS WITH THE LAND. IT IS A LAND USE, NOT A LAND USER. IF WE'VE SEEN PROBLEMATIC EXAMPLES OF THAT USE ON THIS SITE IN THE PAST ASKED, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN FACTOR INTO OUR DECISION ON WHETHER OR NOT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO SUV. THE THIRD FACTOR IS WHETHER OR NOT IT'S DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY IN GENERAL, OR SORRY, PUBLIC, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, OR GENERAL WELFARE. IF YOU THINK THAT THE USE IS DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE, THEN YOU CAN DENY THE SUP. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HERBERT? UM, I THINK THAT THE, THE POINT HERE OR [01:15:01] WHAT NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED, AND MAYBE THE APPLICANT CAN COME DO THAT LATER, BUT, UM, IS THIS A NEW OWNER? UM, FROM WHAT I'M SEEING, IT IS, UM, IN THE, THE NEW OWNER'S REPUTATION FOR RUNNING BUSINESS IS MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THE PREVIOUS OWNER'S REPRESENTATION. BUT I THINK, UM, WILL WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO THE APPLICANT TODAY? YES, THE APPLICANT IS, IS PRESENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. UM, FOLLOW UP FOR MR. MOORE. IS IT CORRECT, SINCE WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS THAT STAFF IS EVALUATING THIS BASED ON THE LAND USE CRITERIA WITHIN 51 A, IF THE EXISTING SUP EXPIRED, WE ARE NOW FUNCTIONALLY REVIEWING A NEW SUP THAT FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, IS A RENEWAL. DOESN'T THAT NOT DEMONSTRATE THE OPERATIONAL STANDARD, WELL, NOT OPERATIONAL STANDARDS, THE LAND USE STANDARDS FOR THIS SITE, IS THAT NOT A CONSIDERATION FOR THIS BODY? THEY CLEARLY WEREN'T ABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE LAND USE STANDARDS COMMISSIONER, THE, I GUESS THE WAY I WOULD SAY YOU CAN THINK ABOUT IT IS ULTIMATELY IT IS THE LAND USE, NOT THE LAND USER. AND IF YOU'VE SEEN THAT THIS USE IS NOT COMPATIBLE IN THAT ADJACENT OR IN THAT AREA FOR WHATEVER REASON, AND YOU THINK THAT ONE OF THE FOUR FACTORS THAT CPC AND COUNSELOR TASKED WITH MAKING, YOU'RE MAKING YOUR RECOMMENDATION BASED ON IF YOU, YOU CAN APPROVE OR DENY BASED ON THOSE FACTORS, DOES THAT HELP YOU OUT? I THINK SO. AND I THINK WE'VE HAD ENOUGH CONVERSATION ON THE CONSIDERATION OF HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE, SO I WON'T FOLLOW UP THERE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. MOORE. UH, CAN I ADD SOMETHING? I'M SORRY. SO I WOULD SAY TO MAKE IT EASIER, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NEW SUP AND AN SUP RENEWAL FOR THE NEW SUP, THE QUESTION GOES BACK TO, IS THIS A GOOD USE OF LAND AT THIS LOCATION FOR A RENEWAL? IS, IS THIS STILL A GOOD USE AT THIS LOCATION? THAT'S IT, NOT THE OPERATOR. DO WE NEED TO ADD OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS TO MAKE IT A GOOD USE OF LAND? THAT'S FINE. I WOULD STILL, AGAIN, IT'S A NEW SUP DO WE, DO WE THINK THIS IS A GOOD USE OF LAND AT THIS LOCATION AT THIS POINT, STARTING NOW? THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION THAT WE HAVE NOW. SO IF YOU ARE RUNNING A BAD OPERATION, THE WAY TO RESET THE CLOCK IS TO LET YOUR SUP EXPIRE AND THEN COME BACK IN AND ACT AS IF YOU'RE AN INNOCENT OPERATOR. I, I'M SORRY, BUT AS I SAID, LIKE SUP IS, THIS IS A LAND USE, AS DANIELLE WAS SAYING, THIS IS, WE'RE NOT BEING PUNITIVE, WE'RE NOT USING THE SUP TO GET APPLICANTS OUTTA BUSINESS OR NOT. THE QUESTION IS LAND USE IS, THIS IS A NIGHT, A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT DOOR THAT CAN BE A LOT OF THINGS, A GOOD USE OF LAND AT THIS LOCATION. AND WE CAN MAKE A LAND USE RATIONALE, DENY OR APPROVE, BUT IT'S NOT, NOBODY'S TRICKING ANYBODY. WE DON'T, AGAIN, OPERATE ON THE PRESUMPTION THAT WE LET IT LIGHT OR NOT MAKE. PLEASE DO MAKE A LAND USE RECOMMENDATION BASED ON THIS PARTICULAR LAND USE. THAT IS A NEW SUP RIGHT NOW. AND IF I CAN ADD TO THAT, COMMISSIONER, YOU CAN CONSIDER HOW THIS LAND USE, OH, SORRY. IS THAT BETTER? OKAY. AND IF I CAN ADD TO THAT, COMMISSIONER, YOU CAN CONSIDER HOW THE LAND USE HAS IMPACTED THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. YOU JUST CAN'T CONSIDER HOW THAT SPECIFIC USER'S USE HAS IMPACTED THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HALL? UH, THIS IS FROM MR. MOORE. UH, WELL, SO WHAT HA SAY THEORETICALLY, ONE, WERE TO DENY THIS REQUEST THAT WOULD NOT SHUT DOWN OPERATIONS. WOULD IT, ASSUMING CPC WERE TO RECOMMEND DENIAL AND THAT EITHER DECISION WAS APPEALED TO COUNSEL AND COUNSEL RECOMMEND OR COUNSEL APPROVED THAT DENIAL OR WAS NOT APPEALED TO CPC? THE USE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED AND IT WOULD BECOME AN ISSUE FOR CODE TO, UH, GO IN AND STOP THE ILLEGAL LAND USE AT THAT POINT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, HOW ARE THEY OPERATING NOW WITHOUT AN SUP? BECAUSE I UNDERSTOOD THAT IF AN APPLICANT APPLIED FOR A RENEWAL BEFORE THEIR SUP EXPIRED, IT WAS CITY POLICY TO ALLOW THEM TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE AS LONG AS THEIR APPLICATION WAS PENDING UNTIL THIS BODY AND OR COUNCIL MADE A DECISION. BUT IF THEY ALLOWED IT TO LAPSE THAT THEY HAD TO SHUT DOWN UNTIL THEY COULD APPLY [01:20:01] AND GET A DECISION. IS THAT CORRECT? YE YES. SO THE FIRST STATEMENT IS, IS CERTAINLY TRUE THAT GENERALLY THEY GET YOU, YOU KNOW, ANY SITUATION IN WHICH THERE'S A NON-CONFORMING NOT, UH, PERMITTED LAND USE, UM, IT'S PRETTY STANDARD FOR CODE TO GIVE THEM BREAKS, UH, AS THEY OPERATE, BUT NOT NECESSARILY A, A HARD AND FAST RULE. UH, ON THE OTHER HAND, IF THEY HAVE A NON-EXISTING SUP, I DON'T THINK THAT, I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY SAY THAT THE SAME APPLIES, BUT THAT IS IN THE, UNDER THE BOUNDS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT. SO IF WE HAVE YOUNG WOMEN BEING RAPED IN THE RESTROOM AND CHILDREN BEING SHOT AS BYSTANDERS, WE'RE GONNA ALLOW THAT OPERATION TO OPERATE WITHOUT A VALID SUP IN THIS CITY, IN DOWNTOWN. THAT'S, THAT'S THE STANDARD. I I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND THAT. I I WOULD LET LET THE ATTORNEY ANSWER THAT AGAIN IN FRONT OF US. RIGHT NOW, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE CRIME OR ALLOWING CRIME TO HAPPEN AT THE PROPERTY. THE QUESTION IN FRONT OF US IS A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE A NEW SUP FOR A NEW COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE A GOOD USE OF LAND AT THIS LOCATION, THE CRIME ASPECT OF IT, WE HAVE DPD, WE HAVE CODE COMPLIANCE TO DEAL WITH THAT. WE CAN PUT THREE ONE ONE COMPLAINTS, WE CAN CALL 9 1 1. WE HAVE THAT, THAT HAS ITS OWN PATH AND RECOURSE FOR US. IT'S WHERE CITY PLAN COMMISSION, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS LAND USE AT THIS LOCATION, COMMISSIONER BLACK. SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS ISSUES GOOD FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, WE CAN, WE COULD LOOK AT THIS AND SAY THAT THIS, THAT THIS PARTICULAR SITE MAY NOT BE GOOD FOR THIS SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. CORRECT? SURE. AND MAKING LENDS RATIONALE. ABSOLUTELY. SO, OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. NO. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HERBERT, PLEASE, SIR. IS THERE ANY WAY TO, TO UM, FIND OUT EVEN BEFORE THE HEARING, IF THIS IS A NEW OWNER, NEW APPLICANT, UM, AND THAT THIS SUP WAS ISSUED TO A DIFFERENT APPLICANT, IS THERE ANY WAY TO CONFIRM THAT BEFORE THE HEARING? BEFORE THE HEARING? THEY CAN, THEY CAN ANSWER THAT IN TERMS OF WHO'S THE APPLICANT AND WHO'S THE OWNER. NOT LONG THEY'VE KNOWN. OKAY. THANK YOU. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'RE STILL APPROVING THE USE, NOT THE USER. GOTCHA. COMMISSIONER HALL, JUST TO, JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON COMMISSIONER BLAIR'S COMMENT, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT THE WAY I WOULD LOOK AT THAT, LAND USE AND OP AND OPERATIONS ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. SO YOU MIGHT FUNCTION THERE AS A NIGHTCLUB AND BE A GREAT NEIGHBOR. COMMISSIONER HALL, IT'S STILL THE BRIEFING, SO I WOULD, WE'LL GO. JUST QUESTION PLEASE. QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION. ALRIGHT, WE'LL KEEP I'M AWARE OF THAT NOW, . OKAY. NEVERMIND. I'LL FOLLOW UP LATER. I'M SURE THERE'LL BE LOTS OF DISCUSSION ON THIS CASE THIS AFTERNOON. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER IT, IT'S OFF CONSENT. IT IS OFF CONSENT. . OH YES, IT HAS BEEN FLAMING OFF CONSENT. UH, LET'S TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK. COMMISSIONERS. IT'S 10:32 AM COMMISSIONERS. IT'S 10 42. WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON THE RECORD. IS IT, WHO'S OVER IS JORGE TODAY? IS THAT JORGE? YES. ARE WE RECORDING SIR? WE ARE RECORDING. IT'S 10 42 COMMISSIONERS. WE'RE GOING TO HEAD BACK INTO THE RECORD. GO INTO THE, UH, WELL, BEFORE WE GET TO THE ZONING CASES, WE'RE TAKE A QUICK STEP BACK TO CASE NUMBER THREE AND DISTRICT FIVE IS GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 10TH. AND SO I THINK THAT TAKES CARE OF ALL THE CASES. AND WE ARE IN ORDER CASE NUMBER 10, I BELIEVE THAT HAS NOT BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE. AND, UM, LET'S TABLE THAT FOR THE MOMENT. LET COMMISSIONER BLAIR, UH, GET BACK IN THE ROOM ON THAT ONE. SO WE'LL, OH, SHE IS HERE. OKAY. WHICH ONE DID YOU WANNA HEAR AGAIN? NO, NUMBER 10. 10? YES SIR. I THINK IT HAS NOT BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE, IS THAT RIGHT? IT'S BEEN BRIEFED. SO LET'S DO, UH, ANY UPDATES IF THERE ARE ANY. [01:25:04] I NEED TO REMIND MYSELF WHICH ONE NUMBER 10 IS, OH, LET ME, ONE MOMENT. YEAH, NO, I'M TOLD THERE ARE NO OFFICIAL UPDATES FOR, FOR 10. OKAY. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS ON, UH, CASE NUMBER 10 Z 2 2 3 3 0 2. ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 11. HAS THIS ONE BEEN BRIEFED? NO, NO. LET'S BRIEF THIS ONE TODAY, THEN, THEN YES. THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z 2 3 4 1 3 4. IT'S A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE FOR, UH, 10 30 AND 10 32 COMMERCE STREET, WEST COMMERCE STREET. UH, SO THIS IS ZONING CHANGE REQUEST FROM AN IR TO A TH THREE TOWN HOME DISTRICT. UH, THE PURPOSE IS TO, UH, IF THE REQUEST IS TO PERMIT RESIDENTIAL U UH, USES ON THE PROPERTY AND IT'S LOCATED AT 10 30 AND 10 32 WEST COMMERCE STREET. HERE IS THE LOCATION AND HERE IS AN AERIAL PROPERTY. IT IS CURRENTLY, UM, VACANT. UM, SURROUNDING USES. THERE IS AN IR, UH, TO THE WEST, UM, AND TO THE NORTH. AND THEN TO THE SOUTH. THERE, UH, IS, UH, CURRENTLY VACANT, BUT PLANNED MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. AND, UH, TO THE SOUTHWEST THERE IS, UH, IT'S PD 9 35 FOR, UH, WITH, UH, UH, TH ONE A. IT'S BACKGROUND. THIS IS AN INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH, UH, ZONING SITE. SITE IS CURRENTLY VACANT WITH A VISIBLE, UH, VISIBLE BUILDING SLAB. UM, SURROUNDING PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN, UH, TO THE SOUTH HAVE BEEN, UH, REZONED TO SIMILAR USES. SO HERE IS, UH, ON COMMERCE STREET LOOKING SOUTH. SO YOU CAN SEE THERE IS THE, UH, THE OAK CLIFF BEHIND. UM, I WAS NOT ABLE TO ACCESS THE SITE, SO, UM, JUST HAVE SOME, UM, THIS IS ON COMMERCE STREET LOOKING EAST. AND THEN, UM, ONCE AGAIN ON COMMERCE STREET, LOOKING SOUTH TOWARDS THE SOUTH, YOU CAN SEE THE TOWN HOMES TO THE TOP. UH, APOLOGIES FOR THE, UM, FOR SAYING BURN UP AT THE TOP, UH, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. SO, UH, THE FRONT, UH, THE PROPOSED SETBACKS WOULD BE, WOULD BE ZERO OR UM, 10 FOR, AND THE SIDE AND REAR WOULD BE 10 FEET FOR NON SINGLE FAMILY USES A LOT. COVERAGE IS 60%. UM, DENSITY IS NO MORE THAN 12 UNITS PER ACRE. 2000 FOOT MINIMUM LOT SIZE. AND THEN, UH, 30 FOOT FEET MAXIMUM HEIGHT, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UM, COMPLIANCE. SO, UH, THIS DOES ALIGN WITH GOALS 1.1 AND 1.3 FOR THE LAND USE ELEMENT, UH, AS WELL AS 2.5, UM, FOR THE ECONOMIC ELEMENT AS WELL AS, UH, GOALS 4.3, 5.1, AND 5.2 FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. PLUS TO EXPAND, UH, SPECIFICALLY TO EXPAND HOME OWNERSHIP WITHIN THE CITY. AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF THIS. QUESTIONS COMMERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THANK YOU SIR. WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 12. THANK. OKAY, LET'S TABLE NUMBER 12 FOR JUST A MOMENT. WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 13. IT'S NUMBER 13. UH, GONNA BE HEARD TODAY, COMMISSIONER, NO, NOVEMBER 7TH. OKAY, HOLD TO NOVEMBER 7TH, NUMBER 13. SO WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 14 TO YOU MR. CLINTON. SIR, [01:30:05] THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 14, CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 24. AND APPLICATION FOUR ONE AND AMENDMENT TWO, TRACK TWO WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2 34 AND TWO. A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A SERVICE STATION ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH COCKWELL HILL ROAD, SOUTH OF COR CORRAL DRIVE. UH, PROPOSAL IS FOR A NEW SUP FOR THE PROPERTY TO PROVIDE SERVICE STATIONS WITH FUEL PUMPS. IT'S ABOUT ONE ACRE AND TOTAL SIZE. UM, AGAIN, CURRENTLY ZONE, UH, PD NUMBER 2 34 SUB-DISTRICT TRACK TWO, UH, CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED VACANT LOT. THIS LOT HAS FRONTAGE ON SOUTH CORA HILL ROAD. UM, AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF OF THE REQUEST IS TO, UM, PROPOSE A SERVICE STATION WITH FUEL PUMPS OPERATING 24 HOURS A DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. UH, THERE HAVE BEEN ONE CASE IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. UM, THIS CASE WAS HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT FROM THE AUGUST 8TH HEARING. UM, THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES SINCE THAT CA SINCE THAT HEARING. HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP. THIS IS THE AERIAL MAP, OUR ZONING MAP HERE, SHOWING THE SURROUNDING USES. UM, AGAIN, THE SITE IS PD 2 34, SUBDISTRICT TRACK TWO TO THE NORTH. WE HAVE R 10, A SINGLE FAMILY, UM, AS WELL AS, UH, OH INTO THE IMMEDIATE NORTH. UM, IS ALSO PD 2 34 SUBDISTRICT TRACT ONE TO THE, UM, EAST OF THE SITE IS, UH, MF ONE A MULTIFAMILY WITH D RESTRICTIONS, UH, Z 8 56 DASH 1 97 TO THE SOUTH AND EAST OF THE SITE ARE MF ONE, UH, RESIDENTIAL. HERE WE HAVE THE SITE VISIT PHOTOS. THIS IS ON, UH, SOUTH CAL HILL ROAD LOOKING NORTH. THIS IS ON THE SAME, UH, AT THE SAME LOCATION LOOKING EAST. SAME LOCATION LOOKING NORTH. AGAIN. UM, SAME LOCATION LOOKING EAST. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING WEST. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING SOUTH, AGAIN, ON SITE LOOKING SOUTH. UH, SURROUNDING USES PHOTOS. THIS IS, UH, ON, ON PROPERTY LOOKING, UH, DIRECTLY WEST. THIS IS ON PROPERTY LOOKING NORTH, UH, ON PROPERTY LOOKING SOUTH. AND THEN, UH, ON PROPERTY LOOKING EAST TOWARDS THE, UH, MULTIFAMILY, UH, THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN IN, UH, STAFF ANALYSIS. SO THE, UH, THE SITE IS A BIT SLOPED, SO THE DESIGN WILL HAVE TO ADDRESS THIS AND MITIGATE ANY EROSION OR RUNOFF THAT WOULD POSSIBLY OCCUR SO THAT THAT DOESN'T, UH, BLEED OVER TO THE EXISTING FAMILY DOLLAR. UH, COMMERCIAL, UH, SITE. THERE IS A MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST AND THE SOUTH OF THE SITE. SO THERE WOULD BE BUFFERS REQUIRED. UM, AND STAFF IS, UH, NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST DUE TO THE PROPOSED USE. UH, STAFF FINDING THE APP, THE PROPOSED USE TO BE INAPPROPRIATE NEXT TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND, UH, THE POTENTIAL HARMFUL IMPACTS TO THE IMMEDIATE, UH, ADJACENT USES AND UN SUITABILITY OF THE SITE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, HARVARD. UM, YES. WAS THERE, UH, ANY CONVERSATION, UH, IN YOUR REVIEW? WERE THERE ANY OTHER, UM, GAS STATIONS OR USES LIKE THIS AROUND THE AREA? UM, UPON MY SITE VISIT, I DID SEE, UM, OTHER, UH, SIMILAR USES IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. MAYBE. UM, LOOKING AT THIS, UH, PD IN THIS, THIS TRACK OF IT, CAN YOU KIND OF DESCRIBE WHAT ELSE COULD GO IN THIS AREA BESIDES A GAS STATION? I THOUGHT THERE WAS A LIST IN THE CASE REPORT, BUT I COULD HAVE BEEN READING ANOTHER. UM, YEAH, SO, UH, THERE, WITHIN THIS SPEC, UH, SPECIFIC TRACK, UH, RESIDENTIAL USES COULD GO THERE, COMMERCIAL USES COULD GO THERE. UM, I DON'T HAVE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD THE SPECIFIC, YOU KNOW, UNDER THOSE TWO CATEGORIES, BUT DEFINITELY RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL. OKAY. AND, AND THE BASIS OF YOUR DENIAL IS THE MULTIFAMILY NEXT DOOR TO THE UM, UH, UH, UH, WEST SIDE, I BELIEVE OF THIS, THIS LOCATION, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THAT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER TURNOCK. WAS THERE ANY NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION? NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. UH, AND I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. IN THE, IN THE STAFF REPORT, YOU HAD LISTED THREE THINGS FOR HAR HARMFUL IMPACTS TO SURROUNDING USES AND [01:35:01] THEN UN SUITABILITY OF THE SITE. CAN YOU, CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE UN SUITABILITY OF THE SITE FOR YOU? UH, SO THE UN SUITABILITY OF THE SITE, I DID, UH, BRIEFLY TOUCH ON THAT WITH THE, UM, SLIGHT, THE SITE BEING SLIGHTLY SLOPED, UM, THE DESIGN WOULD HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT SO THAT WAY, UM, ANY EROSION OR RUNOFF WOULD NOT BLEED OVER INTO THE EXISTING SITE. SO IT'S, UH, ALSO CURRENTLY ON A HILL. UM, SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO REGRADE THE SITE, DO A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT DESIGN, UM, ELEMENTS, SO THAT WAY IT DOES NOT RUN OFF INTO THE, UM, EXISTING FAMILY DOLLAR SITE AS AND ALSO THE PARKING LOT THAT'S THERE. BUT I MEAN, UH, SITE CONDITIONS LIKE THAT ARE TYPICAL. I MEAN, THERE ALWAYS NEEDS TO BE, OFTEN THERE NEEDS TO BE A REWORKING OF THE SITE TO GET PROPER DRAINAGE, ET CETERA. WHY WOULD THAT BE A CON, WHY WOULD THAT BE A CONDITION THAT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND A DENIAL? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. SO I THINK, UH, THAT WAS A CONDITION FOR DENIAL. THAT WASN'T THE MAIN, UH, REASON FOR DENIAL. BUT THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE CONSIDERED WITHIN THE, UM, ANALYSIS. UH, COMMISSIONER HALL THEN I'LL FOLLOW YOU, SIR. UH, SO WHEN YOU SAY POTENTIAL HARMFUL EFFECTS, UH, UH, AS A FACTOR TO DENY THIS REQUEST, BUT, BUT YOU ALSO SAY THAT COMMERCIAL, SOME TYPE OF COMMERCIAL COULD GO IN THERE. WHAT, WHAT ARE POTENTIAL HARMFUL EFFECTS? IS IT THE 24 HOUR OPERATION? IS IT, UH, FUEL FUMES FROM THE FUEL? IS IT THE DANGER OF FIRE? I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT ARE THEY E EVERYTHING YOU JUST STATED ACTUALLY. OKAY. THOSE ARE THE CENTRAL HARMFUL ACCIDENT. JUST THE NATURE OF A 24 HOUR FUEL CENTER EXACTLY. RIGHT. BY THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. QUICK FOLLOW UP FOR YOU. UM, SO IN, IN TERMS OF THE SITE, UH, YOU KNOW, AT, AT A, AT AN ACRE, IT'S, IT'S NOT SMALL, IT'S NOT LARGE, BUT THE WAY THAT THE ORIENTATION, IT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE LENGTH OF THE PIECE IS, UH, PER PERPENDICULAR TO QUA HILL INSTEAD OF PARALLEL, WOULD THAT HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE IN, IN, IN TERMS OF THE, THE ACRE IS REALLY FURTHER INTO, UH, SOME OF THE, THE ADJACENCY VERSUS IF, IF IT'S THE ACRE WOULD'VE BEEN ENTIRELY ON ER, HILL MIGHT'VE MADE A DIFFERENCE POTENTIALLY. UM, BUT WE DIDN'T LOOK, STAFF DIDN'T LOOK AT THAT DIRECTLY. 'CAUSE AGAIN, IT'S, THE REQUEST IS JUST THE SUP TO ALLOW THE, UM, THE 24 HOUR, UH, FUEL PUMPS. PERFECT. UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU, SIR. AND COMMISSIONERS, JUST, JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE, UH, SOMETIMES WE MOVE A LITTLE FAST AND WE, WE SKIP A BEAT. WE DID BRIEF NUMBER 11, IS THAT CORRECT, MR. KERR? YOU, YOU BRIEFED NUMBER 11 WHEN WE CAME BACK FOR BREAK AFTER WE DID 10 AND THEN 11? OR DID WE SKIP 11? WE DID. 11 WAS BRIEFED. YEAH, WE DID 11. WE SKIPPED 10, WHICH HAS BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE. YES. UM, I THINK WE WERE GONNA CIRCLE BACK TO ITEM 12. 'CAUSE IT'S A D SEVEN CASE. YES. UH, I HEARD THAT ITEM 13 IS GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TWO NOVEMBER 7TH. OKAY. UH, AND WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ITEM 13, UM, IF, UH, WE'RE THINKING ABOUT CONSIDERING A PD, UM, AT THE NEXT HEARING, UH, IN THE MOTION, WE'LL NEED, UH, INSTRUCTIONS TO STAFF TO RE ADVERTISE FOR A PD OR, UM, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER, WHATEVER OPTION WE'RE GOING WITH SO WE CAN RE-NOTICE IT. UM, AND THEN WE JUST DID 14. OKAY. WHAT CASE WERE YOU JUST DESCRIBING? THE ONE ON 10. THIS ONE. THE ONE NUMBER 13. 13 IN DISTRICT 10? YES. OKAY. SO JUST TO, FOR THE RECORD, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON NUMBER 11? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, MR. KERR? IS HE THERE? MR. KERR, ARE YOU ON LINE, SIR? THAT'S OKAY. IT CAN WAIT TILL THE HEARING. THE HEARING, YES. THEN, UM, LET'S GO TO NUMBER 15. [01:40:42] ALL RIGHT, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 15, KZ 2 34 DASH 10. AN APPLICATION FOR, UH, ONE, A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR AN R ONE ACRE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT USES AND TWO, DETERMINATION OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 5 8 0 FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL WITH CONSIDERATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL ON PROPERTY ZONE AND R ONE, A ONE ACRE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW MODIFIED, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UH, RELATED TO USES, SETBACKS, FLOOR AREA HEIGHT, LOT COVERAGE, PARKING AND FENCING, UH, TO ALLOW A PRIVATE SCHOOL. AND IT'S APPROXIMATELY THREE ACRES IN TOTAL SIZE. UH, GEOGRAPHICALLY LOCATED IN NORTHERN DALLAS. AGAIN, IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED R ONE ACRE, UH, WITH THE EXISTING SEP 5 8 0. THIS LOT HAS FRONTAGE ON WEST AND NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. UM, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THE CREATION OF A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW PRIVATE SCHOOL USE AND REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING, UM, SUP 5 8 0. UH, THE EXISTING SUP UM, HAS BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE 1989 AND REVISED, UH, A FEW TIMES OVER THE LAST, UH, 30 YEARS. UH, THERE IS AN EXISTING PRIVATE SCHOOL ON THE PROPERTY, UM, AND THAT, EXCUSE ME, THAT, UH, SECTION IS HIGHLIGHTED IN ORANGE. AND THE, UH, FUTURE SLIDES, THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED. UM, AGAIN, WE'LL SHOW THAT ON THE FUTURE SLIDES. AND, UH, THEY HAVE THE INTENTION TO DEVELOP THE NEW SITE, UH, FURTHER TURNING THE SCHOOL INTO A CAMPUS. UM, THE EXISTING SCHOOL IS CURRENTLY PRE-K TO SECOND GRADE, UH, AND THEY HAVE PLANS TO EXPAND TO EIGHTH GRADE IN THE FUTURE. THERE HAS BEEN A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN COMPLETED AS OF FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR, UH, WITH UPDATES TO BE SCHEDULED EVERY TWO YEARS. THE SITE ALSO HAS AN EXISTING CREEK DIRECTLY BEHIND IT. UH, SO THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, MADE STRIDES TO, UM, DO CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION METHODS, UH, AS WELL AS DESIGNED TO MAINTAIN THE CREEK AND THE EXISTING TREES. THE NEW SCHOOL IS SET TO BE TWO STORIES AND UNDER 36 FEET IN TOTAL HEIGHT, UM, PROPERTY TO THE EAST OF THE SITE, UH, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED, IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. AND THE APPLICANT WILL BE PROVIDING SUFFICIENT BUFFER AND SCREENING ALONG THE RESIDENTIAL SIDES OF THE PROPERTY. UM, ADDITIONALLY, THEY WANT, THE APPLICANT WANTS AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE ALONG THE FRONT ENTRANCE OF THE PROPERTY. UM, THEY CURRENTLY HAVE A DALLAS PD OFFICER ON DUTY DURING THE OFFICER OF HOURS OF OPERATION, AND THEY INTEND TO, UM, UH, IMPLEMENT THAT WITH THE NEW SCHOOL. ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT WANTS THE SCHOOL TO BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT AND NOT WITH THE USE OF AN SUP. UM, SO THEIR JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUIRING A PD INCLUDES DEVIATIONS TO PARKING, LOCATION, SPACE COUNT, UM, WANTING THE EIGHT FOOT FENCE, AND ALONG THE FRONT OF ENTRANCE OF THE PROPERTY AND LOCATION OF AN ACCESSORY USE. HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP. THIS IS THE AERIAL MAP, AND AGAIN, JUST HIGHLIGHTING THE EXISTING SITE, WHICH IS AN ORANGE. AND THE, UM, PROPOSED SITE, WHICH WILL BE COMBINED, WHICH IS IN THE RED. HERE'S OUR ZONING MAP, UH, SHOWING THE SURROUNDING USES TO THE IMMEDIATE WEST OF THE SITE IS R ONE ACRE SINGLE FAMILY TO THE SOUTH AND EAST OF THE SITE IS R 16, SINGLE FAMILY. TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE IS PD EIGHT 15. AND THAT IS, UH, CURRENTLY DEVELOPED AS LOVER'S, LOVER'S LANE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH. AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A SINGLE FAMILY, UM, R ONE ACRE TO THE NORTH. UM, NEXT TO THE, THE CHURCH HERE WE HAVE SITE VISIT PHOTOS. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING SOUTH. THIS IS ALSO ON SITE LOOKING SOUTH. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING EAST. THIS IS ON THE, UM, THE, THE NEW SITE WHICH IS OUTLINED IN RED LOOKING SOUTH. THIS IS ON THE PROPOSED SITE LOOKING [01:45:01] SOUTHWEST. THIS IS AT THE BACK OF THAT PROPOSED SITE, LOOKING SOUTH TOWARDS THE CREEK, THE EXISTING CREEK. THIS IS ON THE PROPOSED SITE LOOKING EAST ON THE PROPOSED SITE. LOOKING NORTH, THIS IS BACK ON THE EXISTING SITE, LOOKING NORTH BACK ON THE EXISTING EXISTING SITE LOOKING WEST. UH, SAME LOCATION LOOKING SOUTH, SAME LOCATION LOOKING SOUTHWEST AND, UH, TO THE BACK OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY LOOKING SOUTH. AND LAST ONE LOOKING SOUTHEAST. UH, SO THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, UH, FOR A PD, THEIR JUSTIFICATIONS INCLUDE, UH, RELIEF FROM FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 40 FEET, THE REQUIRED 40 FEET TO 20 FEET, UH, TO ACCOMMODATE THE SCHOOL BUILDING, AS WELL AS ANY PLAYGROUNDS, UH, SPORTS COURTS, AS WELL AS THE ALLOWANCE OF ENCROACHMENTS WITHIN THAT FRONT YARD SETBACK. THE SECOND JUSTIFICATION IS TO REDUCE THE, UM, THE REAR AND SIDE YARD SETBACKS FROM 20 FEET TO 10 FEET, AS WELL AS ALLOWING ENCROACHMENTS WITHIN THAT, THOSE SIDE AND REAR YARD SETBACKS. THE NEXT ONE IS TO, UH, PROVIDE PARKING WITHIN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK. AND FINALLY, THE, UH, THE LAST JUSTIFICATION IS AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE, UH, WANTING AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE AND SECURITY GATE WITHIN THE FRONT YARD. SETBACK HERE IS THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SLIGHTLY ENLARGED, UH, STAFF IS, UH, SORRY, I'LL GET INTO THAT IN THE LATER SLIDE. SO HERE WE HAVE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. UM, THE CURRENT EXISTING BASE IS R ONE ACRE, SO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IS 40 FEET. AND, UM, SIDE AND REAR YARD WOULD BE 10 FEET, UH, DUE TO THE IMMEDIATE SINGLE FAMILY ADJACENCIES. UH, THE MAX HEIGHT WOULD BE 36 FEET. THE NEW, UH, OR THE PROPOSED WOULD BE, UM, REMAINING WITHIN THE R ONE ACRE. UM, BUT DOING A PLAN DEVELOPMENT. UH, THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, AGAIN, THE REQUEST IS TO DO 20 FEET, UH, WITH ENCROACHMENTS. UH, SO THE ENCROACHMENTS INCLUDE A SPORTS COURT, UM, AND PLAYGROUNDS AND SPORTS COURTS MAY ENCROACH WITHIN THE FRONT YARD. UM, AND THEN THE MAXIMUM EIGHT FOOT FENCE, UH, WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE FRONT YARD. UM, AGAIN, AS A PART OF THEIR PD JUSTIFICATION. UM, PROPOSED SIDE AND REAR YARD WILL BE 10 FEET WITH ENCROACHMENTS, AND THE MAX HEIGHT WILL BE 36 FEET. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THOUGH THAT, UH, BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY WOULD BE IMPOSED ON THE SUBJECT SITE REQUIRING A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 40 FEET DUE TO THE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCIES, UH, IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE SITE. UH, SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS ACTUALLY, UM, AN SUP. AND THE PURPOSE OF A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IS TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY WITHIN PLANNING, UM, AS WELL AS, UH, DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS TO ALLOW A COMBINATION OF LAND USES, UH, UNDER A UNIFORM PLAN THAT PROTECTS CONTIGUOUS LAND USES AND PRESERVES SIGNIFICANT NATURAL FEATURES. UH, THESE ARE DEEMED APPROPRIATE IF AND WHEN, UH, THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EXISTING CODE CANNOT ACCOMMODATE A USE OR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF A CONVENTIONAL ZONING DISTRICT. UM, WHERE THERE MIGHT BE UNIQUE SITE CHARACTERISTICS, UM, PRESENT TO THAT NECESSITATE RELIEF OR MODIFICATION FROM, UH, BASE CODE PROVISIONS. AND WHEN CONSIDERING THESE, UH, ALTERATIONS REQUESTED BY, UH, THROUGH THE BASE ZONING, UM, ONLY MINOR ADJUSTMENTS TO A SITE PLAN WOULD BE NECESSARY, UM, AND COULD BE CODIFIED UNDER SUP CONDITIONS, UM, INCLUDING THE EXEMPTION TO THE PROPOSED PARKING ACCESSORY USE AND SETBACKS. SO STAFF, UH, DOES NOT FIND THE, UH, PD JUSTIFICATION TO BE SUBSTANTIAL. UM, THEREFORE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING AN SUP [01:50:01] WITH AN INITIAL APPROVAL PERIOD OF 10 YEARS, UH, WITH NO ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL. AND TO OPERATE UNDER THE SUP, THERE WOULD ONLY BE, UH, MINOR ADJUSTMENTS TO THE DESIGN AND, UH, TO THE SITE PLAN NECESSARY. SO ONE OF THE, UH, ADJUSTMENTS WOULD BE SHIFTING THE FRONT BUILDING FACADE, UH, BACK BY FIVE FEET TO ACCOMMODATE THE, UH, 40 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, UH, REMOVING THAT PARKING FROM THE FRONT YARD, UM, SETBACK, WHICH COULD BE, UM, WHICH COULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH SUP CONDITIONS, AS WELL AS, UM, A COMBINATION OF, UM, OFF STREET PARKING AND ON SITE PARKING. SO HERE IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDED SITE PLAN, AND THIS IS THE ENLARGED VERSION. SO THE DASH LINE HERE IS THE, UH, 40 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK. SO STAFF IS, UH, REQUESTING THAT THE APPLICANT REDESIGN THE SITE TO REMOVE THIS, UH, FIRST ROW OF PARKING OUT OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK. AND AGAIN, THAT COULD BE DONE THROUGH A COMBINATION OF ON-SITE AND OFFSITE PARKING AND WRITTEN INTO SUP CONDITIONS. UM, MOVE THE GATE BACK FROM OUT OF THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ALIGN WITH THE BUILDING, UM, TO ACCOMMODATE U-TURNS. UM, BECAUSE CURRENTLY IT, THAT PRESENTS A SAFETY CONCERN. UM, WHEN WE WENT OUT TO DO OUR SITE VISIT, UM, THERE IS NOT A LOT OF ROOM TO MAKE A U-TURN OR, UH, QUEUE UP IN THE AREA, IF YOU WILL. AND THEN WITH THE PROPOSAL OF THE FENCE BEING DIRECTLY IN THE FRONT YARD, THAT COULD POTENTIALLY CAUSE TRAFFIC ISSUES. UM, AND THE, I GUESS THE LAST THING WAS THE ACCESSORY, UH, THE ACCESSORY USE, UH, THE SPORTS COURT HERE. HOWEVER, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, REORIENTED THE SPORTS COURT SO THAT ANY VERTICAL STRUCTURES ARE, UH, BEYOND THE 40 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK. THEREFORE, THAT WOULD BE AN ALLOWED, UH, USE, SORRY, JUST GOING THROUGH MY NOTES HERE. ALRIGHT, UM, SO AGAIN, APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR A PD, UM, STAFF FOUND THAT, THAT THE REQUEST IS NOT SIGN SIGNIFICANT FROM A LAND USE OR ZONING STANDPOINT. UM, THEIR JUSTIFICATION FOR DEVIATING FROM THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, UM, IS INSUFFICIENT. ADDITIONALLY, THE DEVIATIONS REQUESTED CAN BE ADDRESSED BY USING OTHER METHODS, UM, TO BE IN CLOSER COMPLIANCE WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE. ONE OF THE METHODS IS THROUGH A COMBINATION, UH, GENERAL ZONING CHANGE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A, UM, PERMANENT SUP. HOWEVER, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, UH, THE METHOD OF JUST A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT WITH A LIMITED TIME PERIOD. UM, AGAIN, UH, ANOTHER THING TO CONSIDER THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCIES. UH, BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY, UH, TRAFFIC AND PARKING COULD BE A MAJOR ISSUE. AGAIN, THIS IS A VERY BUSY AND ACT HIGHLY ACTIVE HIGHWAY. UM, WHEN I WAS THERE FOR MY SITE VISIT, YOU KNOW, SPEED LIMIT IS 50, BUT THAT MEANS 70. SO, UM, WE DON'T WANT TO POTENTIALLY CAUSE ANY, ANY FURTHER TRAFFIC, UH, ISSUES OR BACKUP. UH, THEREFORE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE FENCE BE PUSHED BACK TO ALLOW FOR PROPER QUEUING. UM, WE DO ALSO HAVE OUR TRAFFIC AND ENGINEERING, UM, EXPERT HERE THAT CAN SPEAK MORE TO THAT. UH, THERE'S ARTICLE 10 COMPLIANCES THAT, UH, REQUIRES BUFFERS ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE SITE, UM, THAT ARE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL USES. SO THEY, UH, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE, UH, BUFFERS ON THE WEST, SOUTH, AND EAST PORTIONS OF THE SITE. HOWEVER, DUE TO THE EXISTING CREEK THAT TAKES UP A GOOD PORTION OF THE WEST AND SOUTH OF THE SITE, THEY, UH, THE APPLICANT WILL USE THAT TO COUNT TOWARDS THEIR RESIDENTIAL BUFFER. UM, HOWEVER, THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO PLANT, UH, NEW TREES FOR RESIDENTIAL BUFFER ZONE TO, UM, THE EAST PORTION OF THE SITE. AND I'LL GET MORE INTO THAT. UM, IN A FUTURE SLIDE, ACTUALLY, THE NEXT SLIDE, . SO RESIDENTIAL BUFFER ZONE, I'M SORRY, LEMME GET MY NOTES. UM, IS, UH, THE REQUIREMENTS IS THAT, UH, IT MUST HAVE HAVE AN AVERAGE DEPTH OF 10 FEET. UM, A MINIMUM DEPTH OF FIVE FEET AND A MAXIMUM DEPTH OF 30 FEET. UH, NO PORTION OF THE RESIDENTIAL BUFFER ZONE [01:55:01] MAY EXCEED 10% OF THE LOT DEPTH, UM, EXCLUDING PAVED SERVICES AT POINTS OF VEHICULAR OR, AND PEDESTRIAN INGRESS, INGRESS OR EGRESS. UM, ANOTHER REQUIREMENT WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL BUFFER ZONE IS THAT, UH, LARGE TREES, LARGE OR MEDIUM TREES, UM, MUST BE PLANTED. HOWEVER, DUE TO THE, UH, I GUESS THE SITE CONSTRAINTS AND THE WAY THAT THE DESIGN HAS BEEN LAID OUT, UM, THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PLANT THOSE LARGER MEDIUM TREES, THEREFORE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO TWO SMALL TREES IN LIEU OF THE LARGER MEDIUM TREE FOR THAT EASTERN SIDE OF THE, THE PROPERTY. AND I CAN GO BACK TO THE, THE PLAN HERE. SO THIS PORTION OF THE SITE HERE, THEY ARE PROPOSING A RETAINING WALL WHICH CUTS INTO THAT NECESSARY OR THAT REQUIRED, UH, MAXIMUM DEPTH AND WIDTH TO PLANT A LARGE OR MEDIUM TREE. SO AGAIN, THEY WOULD BE, UM, DOING A TWO SMALL TREE IN LIEU OF THE ONE LARGE OR MEDIUM TREE. ADDITIONALLY, THERE, THERE IS A STREET BUFFER ZONE REQUIREMENT. I'LL GO BACK TO THE PLAN HERE. SO ALONG THIS FRONTAGE HERE, UM, THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO DO A STREET BUFFER ZONE. AND AGAIN, THE SAME, THE REQUIREMENTS, UM, FOR THE RESIDENTIAL BUFFER ZONE APPLY AS WELL. SO THERE THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO DO ONE LARGE OR MEDIUM TREE, UH, PER 40 FEET ALONG THIS ENTIRE FRONTAGE HERE. HOWEVER, DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS, THERE ARE UNDER UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, WATER LINES, AS WELL AS OVERHEAD UTILITIES THAT, UM, LIMIT, LIMIT WHAT THEY CAN DO FOR THE, UH, STREET BUFFER ZONE. SO AGAIN, THEY WOULD DO THE TWO SMALL TREES IN LIEU OF THE ONE LARGE OR MEDIUM TREE. UM, STAFF IS ALSO REQUIRING, UM, THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATION OF AN SUP THAT THE APPLICANT, UH, GO ABOVE AND BEYOND AND PLANT, UM, PLANT THIS AREA UP. SO BASICALLY DO AN ENHANCED STREET BUFFER ZONE, UM, AND CREATE A CASCADING OR LAYERING OF PLANTING ALONG THIS FRONTAGE HERE. SO THEY WOULD HAVE THE SMALL TREES TO THE BACK PORTION OF THE, THE BUFFER ZONE, UM, AND THEN GO DOWN TO, UH, MEDIUM SHRUBS AND THEN GO DOWN TO PERENNIALS AND, UH, GROUND COVER. AND THEN LASTLY, ARTICLE 10 CHECKLISTS. UM, THERE ARE CERTAIN NUMBER OF POINTS THAT THE SITE HAS HAS TO MEET. UM, THIS SITE HAS TO MEET, UH, 30 POINTS, UH, AS A PART OF THEIR REQUIREMENT, AND I HAVE GIVEN THE APPLICANT THAT LIST SO THAT THEY CAN LOOK THROUGH THAT AND MAKE THEIR PICK OF WHAT OPTIONS THEY WANT TO CHOOSE TO MEET THOSE 30 POINTS. UM, BUT I AM RECOMMENDING OPTION TWO, WHICH IS THE ENHANCED DESIGN, WHICH IS BASICALLY WHAT I JUST EXPLAINED WITH THE STREET BUFFER ZONE AS WELL AS, UH, I BELIEVE IT'S OPTION 11. AND ALL OF THAT IS, UH, LAID OUT IN DETAILED IN THE CASE REPORT PORT. SO LASTLY, UM, ADJUSTMENTS TO THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AGAIN, UM, AS IT SITS WITH THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE WAY THAT IT, IT IS DESIGNED WOULD POTENTIALLY CAUSE TRAFFIC ISSUES. UM, SO TRAFFIC BACKUP, UM, NO ROOM FOR, UH, QUEUING OF A PICKUP AND DROP OFF AGAIN. UH, WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY IS VERY ACTIVE, VERY BUSY. SO, UH, WE WOULD, UH, I GUESS RECOMMEND THAT THEY DO SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO THAT PLAN. AND AGAIN, UM, OUR EXPERT IS HERE AND HE CAN SPEAK MORE TO THAT IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT. UH, LASTLY, OFF STREET PARKING SCREENING. UM, SO ALL OFF STREET PARKING MUST BE SCREENED FROM ADJACENT STREET FRONTAGE, UM, AND STAFF IS REQUIRING THAT THE APPLICANT PLACE AN ADVANCED SCREENING DESIGNED TO LAYER IN ADDITIONAL SHRUBS AND GROUND COVER FOR THAT OFF STREET, UM, PARKING SCREENING REQUIREMENT. UM, AND THEN THE FINAL THING, UH, THEY REQUIRED PARKING AGAIN. UM, THEY ARE PROPOSING, I BELIEVE IT'S 21 CLASSROOMS. AND SO THE, UH, REQUIREMENT FOR THEIR PARKING WOULD BE 44 PARKING SPACES. I'M SORRY. SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 14 ELEMENTARY CLASSROOMS, SIX MIDDLE SCHOOL CLASSROOMS. UM, AND SO THIS AMOUNT WOULD TYPICALLY REQUIRE 42 PARKING SPACES. UM, BUT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING REMOVING PARKING FROM THE FRONT YARD, WHICH IS PROHIBITED IN THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. UM, AND THE APPLICANT MAY EITHER REORGANIZE THE SPACES WITHIN THE DESIGN WITHIN THE SITE, SO DOING A BETTER, UH, IN A DIFFERENT DESIGN TO FIND THE BALANCE, UM, OR ADJUST THE [02:00:01] REQUIREMENT THROUGH, UH, THE ZONING CASE. SO BOTH THE SUP OR THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CAN ADJUST THE REQUIRED PARKING, UM, TO THE TOTAL, UH, SPACES THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THE THE SCHOOL ON SITE. SO FINALLY, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AND A REVISED SITE PLAN IN LIEU OF A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. THANK YOU, SIR. COMMISSIONER HARA. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. UH, MR. CLINTON, YOU, YOU MENTIONED THE 42 REQUIRED SPACES. UM, I COUNT 38 ON THE PLAN. YOU SAID THERE'S 44, SO MAYBE I'M NOT LOOKING AT THE RIGHT PLAN. SO THERE WAS A NEW DEVELOPMENT PLAN SENT OUT, UM, AFTER THE PUBLISHED DOCKET. UM, I'M NOT SURE IF YOU ALL RECEIVED THAT. HOWEVER, AGAIN, YES, THE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE, UH, 42, AND THEY CAN MEET THAT BY HAVING ONSITE PARKING WITHIN THEIR, THEIR PARKING LOT, UM, DIRECTLY NEXT TO THEIR BUILDING AS WELL AS DOING, UM, OFF STREET, UH, PARKING. SO HAVING AN, AN AGREEMENT WITH, UM, I BELIEVE THERE WAS TALKS OF THAT, OF HAVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE, UH, PROPERTY TO THE WEST. DID YOU COUNT THE SNEAKY PARKING SPOTS PARALLEL ALONG THE BUILDING? THERE SHOULD BE SIX THAT ARE PARALLEL ALONG THE BUILDING. COMMISSIONER BLAIR, CAN YOU BRING UP PAGE 35 WHERE YOU HAVE THE, WHERE YOU EITHER SETBACK THE YEAH, THAT ONE. UM, I COUNT, UH, 14 SPACES PARK, ARE THOSE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES. SO IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY WOULD LOSE THOSE 14 SPACES, AND IT APPEARS THAT THEY ARE CHALLENGED FOR PARKING AT THIS POINT IN TIME, UM, AND THAT, AND ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU SAID WAS THAT THE TMP MAY NEED SOME ADJUSTMENTS, UM, IF THEY, OKAY, SO LET ME ASK THE QUESTION. AND, AND THIS IS, AND, AND I GUESS, AND THIS IS NOT REALLY MY MINE'S TO, TO ASK, BUT I'M ASKING ANYWAY. UM, IN THE, THE DESIGN THAT IS ON THIS PAGE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO PUSH THIS BACK, WOULD THAT NOT CHALLENGE THE WHOLE PRESENTATION OF THIS PARTICULAR SITE? SO IT WOULD PROVIDE SOME CHALLENGES, BUT THOSE CHALLENGES COULD ABSOLUTELY BE MET THROUGH DESIGN CHANGES. SO REWORKING THE DESIGN OF THE SITE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PARKING, I ACTUALLY TOOK A STAB AT THAT MYSELF AND WAS ABLE TO PUSH, NOT ONLY PUSH THE PARKING BEYOND THE 40 FOOT FRONT BACK, BUT ALSO GET THEM WELL WITHIN ABOUT 36 SPACES. SO THEN THEY WOULD JUST HAVE TO MEET, MEET THE OTHER, WHAT, EIGHT SPACES THROUGH, UM, A PARKING AGREEMENT OR, UM, OFF STREET PARKING. BUT IF THIS IS RESIDENTIAL, IF IT'S SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL, WOULD WE REALLY WANT, UM, THEM TO USE RESIDENTIAL, UH, STREETS IN ORDER TO PARK FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE? NO, BUT IT'S A GOOD THING THAT THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST HAS A EXTENSIVE PARKING LOT. AND AGAIN, I THINK I MENTIONED THAT, UM, THERE HAS BEEN TALKS, UM, BY THE APPLICANT IN THAT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY THAT THERE WOULD BE A, SOME SORT OF SHARED AGREEMENT THAT THEY COULD USE SOME OF THEIR PARKING, UM, AS OVERFLOW OR THINGS LIKE THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. UH, BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I ALSO WANT TO ADD THAT, UM, UH, WHETHER IT'S A PD OR AN SUP, UM, THIS IS A USE WHERE THE PARKING REQUIREMENT CAN BE SET BY THE SUP. UM, SO THE PARKING REQUIREMENT COULD ALWAYS BE ADJUSTED, UM, WITH THAT OPTION. SO KEN, MAY I, SO, UM, MR. MULKEY, SO WHEN YOU'RE SAYING THAT, IF YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOUR, THE RECOMMENDATION IS A SUP AND THE PARKING COULD BE SET BY THE SUP WITH, ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU WOULD MAKE A SUGGESTION OR A RECOMMENDATION TO LOWER THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES? WE'RE PRETTY MUCH ALWAYS IN FAVOR OF LOWERING CODE STANDARD PARKING REQUIREMENTS. UH, AND THIS USE WOULD BE NO EXCEPTION TO THAT. BUT IF YOU DO THAT AND THERE IS ALREADY [02:05:01] A CHALLENGE WITH HOW, UM, THEY MANAGE THEIR TRA THEIR, THEIR MA THEIR TRAFFIC AND YOU, AND YOU REDUCE THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES, WOULD THAT NOT ADD TO THE CHALLENGE OF THE TMP? YEAH, SO, UM, AS LAQUAN SUGGESTED, UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THIS WOULD, UM, KIND OF POINT IN THE DIRECTION OF A REDESIGN OF THE SITE. UH, AND THAT REALLY GETS MORE INTO STAFF'S POLICY FOR SCHOOLS, UH, WHETHER IT IS THE, UH, GREAT WORK THAT JENNIFER GYER HAS DONE WITH THE DISD SCHOOLS, THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, UM, OR APPLYING THOSE SAME POLICIES AND STANDARDS TO PRIVATE SCHOOLS, CHARTER SCHOOLS, ET CETERA. UM, THE, THE TREND THAT WE SEE, UH, WITH ALL SCHOOLS IS THAT THE DESIGN WORK IS DONE UP FRONT. UM, THE SITE IS LAID OUT, YOU KNOW, HOWEVER THAT PARTICULAR, UM, APPLICANT WANTS TO LAY OUT THE SITE. UH, AND THEN ZONING IS WHAT COMES AFTER THAT. AND THE ZONING IS TAILORED TO THE DESIGN THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED UPON. UM, WHAT STAFF'S POLICY IS, IS THAT THE DESIGN OF THE SITE, UM, START WITH WHAT THE ZONING IS WITH THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT ARE, UH, AND THEN THE DESIGN IS TO FIT WITHIN THOSE ZONING REQUIREMENTS. SO THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY WHAT STAFF IS, IS ADVOCATING FOR HERE, YOU KNOW, BIGGER PICTURE. UM, AND IT WOULD LEAD TO A REDESIGN OF THE SITE THAT WOULD, OF COURSE NEED TO ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, BUILDING PLACEMENT, PARKING REQUIREMENTS, TRAFFIC FLOW, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YEAH, MY QUESTION IS WHY THIS CASE IS TO US RIGHT NOW FOR APPROVAL WITH SOME, WHAT SOUNDS LIKE SOME VERY SIGNIFICANT, UM, ISSUES UNRESOLVED? UM, WE DON'T HAVE A SITE DESIGN THAT HAS BEEN AGREED TO. WE DON'T, WE HAVE AN UNRESOLVED PARKING SITUATION. YES, THE REPORT SAYS THAT THE PARKING REQUIREMENT CAN BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE SCP OR THE PD, BUT THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY ADJUSTMENT TO THE PARKING. REMOVING A THIRD OF THE PARKING SEEMS TO ME A VERY SUBSTANTIAL PROBLEM HERE CONSIDERING, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING, UH, THE NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. I DROVE BY THIS, UM, SITE THREE TIMES AND TWO TIMES I THOUGHT I WAS IN SERIOUS HARM OF, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO, UH, YOU KNOW, TAKE A LOOK AT THIS. UM, AND WITH THE TMP, UM, COMPLICATION ALSO, I MEAN, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE WE'RE BEING KIND OF CAVALIER ABOUT THIS, AND I, I KNOW WE ARE ALSO GETTING, I, I'LL GET QUESTIONS. ARE YOU AWARE WE GOT A GREAT DEAL OF, UM, EMAIL IN SUPPORT OF THIS SCHOOL, BUT A LOT OF THE SUPPORT WAS PREDICATED ON THE FACT THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE A PD AND I'M ASSUMING THIS CURRENT SITE DESIGN, SO SHOVING THE SCHOOL BACK CLOSER TO THE NEIGHBORS WOULD SEEM TO HAVE SOME IMPACT ON THEM. AND I, I'M CERTAINLY NOT AN ARCHITECT, UM, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT PUSHING IT BACK GETS YOU INTO SOME TROUBLE WITH FIRE LANES AND REQUIRED BUFFERS AND THAT SORT OF THING. AND I WOULD ALSO THINK THAT REMOVING A THIRD OF THE PARKING AND, UM, SUGGESTING THAT OFFSITE PARKING MIGHT SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM IS ALSO TRICKY BECAUSE THIS IS NOT A WALKABLE AREA. YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THESE CARS ARE GOING AND QUEUING ON NORTHWEST HIGHWAY WOULD BE SUICIDAL. SO MY BASIC QUESTION IS WHY IS, WHY IS THIS CASE IN FRONT OF US WITH SO MANY ISSUES UNRESOLVED? I'LL SPEAK TO THAT ONE AS WELL. UM, SO THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL FOR THE PD, UH, THEIR PD CONDITIONS, THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, ALL OF THAT HAS BEEN THOROUGHLY REVIEWED BY STAFF. UH, DAVID HAS REVIEWED THEIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND, YOU KNOW, UH, HE HAS A FEW COMMENTS IN THE, IN THE TRAFFIC SECTION OF THE REPORT. UM, BUT THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL IS, IS ESSENTIALLY IN A FINAL FORM THAT, YOU KNOW, STAFF FELT WAS READY TO PRESENT TO THE COMMISSION. UM, HOWEVER, STAFF IS OF COURSE NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL. INSTEAD, WE'RE RECOMMENDING AN ALTERNATE SCENARIO THAT USES AN SUP. AND WITH THAT, OF COURSE, WE ARE RECOMMENDING OUR STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR SCHOOLS, UM, LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE DO WITH ALL SUVS FOR SCHOOLS. UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, STAFF IS NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF, OF CREATING SITE DESIGNS, UM, AND PRODUCING SITE PLANS, UM, FOR THESE ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING, RATHER WE'RE RECOMMENDING, UH, REVISIONS TO THE SITE PLAN, UM, FOR THE APPLICANT AND FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THEY ARE SEEING THEIR WAY TO STAFF'S ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION. [02:10:01] UH, AND I WILL SAY TO, UM, THAT I FORGET EXACTLY WHEN THIS CASE WAS, WAS FILED. IT WAS FILED EARLIER THIS YEAR, AND, UH, STAFF AND THE APPLICANT HAVE MET SEVERAL TIMES, HAD REALLY EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS, UM, ABOUT THIS CASE. WE HAD ONE PARTICULAR MEETING WHERE THE, UH, APPLICANT'S ENTIRE DESIGN TEAM WAS PRESENT. THE, THE CLIENT FOR THE SCHOOL WAS ALSO PRESENT, UM, WHERE WE REALLY, YOU KNOW, PRESENTED OUR CASE. UM, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT TOOK EVERYTHING UNDER CONSIDERATION, UM, CAME BACK A LITTLE WHILE LATER AND SAID, YOU KNOW, WE APPRECIATE YOUR PERSPECTIVE, BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE GONNA STICK WITH THIS, WITH THIS PD APPROACH. UM, SO THAT'S KIND OF THE HISTORY OF THE CASE, YOU KNOW, BEFORE COMING TO CPC. OKAY. SO FOLLOWING THAT, SO THE, THE PD DID GET APPROVED BY THE, UM, TRAFFIC ENGINEER? YEAH, AS FAR AS I KNOW, OTHER THAN THE COMMENTS IN THE TRAFFIC SECTION OF THE REPORT. MM-HMM. , UH, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER HAS REVIEWED THE TMP, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, IS IS IS GOOD WITH, WITH THE VERSION THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE REPORT, UM, IT, YOU KNOW, IT HAS THE PRINCIPAL'S SIGNATURE, SO WE KNOW THE SCHOOL IS IS ON BOARD WITH IT, YOU KNOW, ALL THAT GOOD STUFF. FOLLOWING UP, IF I MAY ONE QUESTION, UH, 'CAUSE YOU REFERENCED FOLLOWING STANDARD PROCEDURES FOR SCHOOLS. THIS SCHOOL IS OPERATING UNDER A PERMANENT SUP AT THIS TIME. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. BUT SO THEN, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE TREND IN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR SCHOOLS IS TO MOVE TOWARD A PERMANENT SUP. IF THAT IS THE CASE, WHY IS THE, IS IT NOT A PERMANENT SEP FOR THIS PARTICULAR SCOPE? YEAH, I'LL, I'LL BOUNCE THAT QUESTION TO LAQUAN. YES, THANK YOU FOR THAT. UM, SO STAFF WAS LOOKING AT A NON-PERMANENT SEP FOR THIS SPECIFIC CASE. UM, MOSTLY TO, UH, BE ABLE TO GET CERTAIN THINGS IMPLEMENTED WITHIN, UH, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE LANDSCAPING, RIGHT? UM, IN ORDER FOR THE BUFFERING TO BREACH MATURE, UM, HEIGHT AND AGE TO ACTUALLY DO BUFFERING, IT'S GONNA NEED A FEW YEARS, RIGHT? UM, IT'S A NEW SITE, SO THEY NEED TIME TO NOT ONLY, UM, BUILD AND DEVELOP THE SITE, BUT THEN ALSO IMPLEMENT AND INSTALL THE LANDSCAPING. SO IN MY KNOWLEDGE AND BACKGROUND, THAT TAKES ABOUT THREE TO FIVE YEARS, UM, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING, THAT COULD TAKE WHO KNOWS, RIGHT? UM, COUPLE YEARS. SO WE FIGURED DOING A 10 YEAR WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO ALLOW THEM TIME TO GET EVERYTHING IN ORDER, GET THINGS TO WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE IN TERMS OF, UH, THE LOOK, FEEL, AND DESIGN OF THE SITE. AND THEN HAVE THEM COME BACK, UM, IN FRONT OF, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE BOARD, THE COMMISSION, UM, IF THERE WERE ANY CHANGES OR ANYTHING THAT NEEDED TO BE, UH, DONE TO, UH, THIS NEW SITE. THANK YOU. YES, PLEASE. COULD I JUST ADD WITH REGARD TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT, UM, THE PD PROPOSAL HAVING BEEN REVIEWED BY TRAFFIC AND LANDSCAPING AND ALL THAT. I WANT TO, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE PROPOSAL ITSELF IN TERMS OF HOW THE TRAFFIC IS MANAGED AND SO ON. THEY'RE NOT APPROVING A PD OR SUP PER SE. I MEAN THEY'RE BASICALLY, IT'S THIS, THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE DESIGN, THE, THE SITE PLAN DESIGN, RIGHT? SO, BUT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S UP TO THE CASE MANAGER TO DETERMINE HOW THAT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED, WHETHER IT'S VIA SUP OR PD. AND SO I THINK, I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO CROSS OVER THERE AND SAY, YOU KNOW, DAVID APPROVED IT AS A PD, BUT HE WOULDN'T AS AN SUP NO, MY QUESTION REALLY MEANT HE, HE WAS APPROVING THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE, WAS SET IN THE PD. THANK YOU. BUT I APPRECIATE THAT. COMMISSIONER HALL, LET'S SEE IF I CAN PHRASE THESE THIS PROPERLY. UM, IS IT CORRECT THAT IF YOU GO THE SUP ROUTE THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR A COUPLE OF CRITICAL, UH, ASPECTS OF THIS DESIGN? NO, NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE AGAIN, UM, A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING WITHIN THE CHANGES TO THE SITE OR CHANGES TO THE DESIGN, UM, THOSE WOULD BE COMPLIANT. SO FOR PRIME EXAMPLE, IF THE, THE BUILDING WAS PUSHED BACK FIVE FEET, THAT WOULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE BASE, UH, ZONING. UM, IF THE, UM, UH, THE FENCE WAS ALSO PUSHED BACK TO ALIGN WITH, WITH THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, THAT WOULD ALSO BE IN COMPLIANCE. SO THEY WOULDN'T NEED TO GO TO ANOTHER BOARD OR ANOTHER, ANYBODY TO GET APPROVAL IF, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. SO, UH, IS IT CORRECT THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT HAVING TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR, FOR THINGS? I THINK THAT WAS THE INITIAL THOUGHT, IF THEY WERE TO CONTINUE MOVING FORWARD WITH THE [02:15:01] PD AND WANTING THAT FRONT, THAT THAT FENCE TO BE IN THAT FRONT YARD SETBACK. UM, BUT IF WE GO STAFF'S RECOMMENDED ROUTE OF THE SUP, THEY WOULD NOT NEED TO DO THAT. AM AM I CORRECT THAT IF IF ONE, ONE WENT A PD ROUTE THOUGH WAS, AND THE PD WOULD SET CERTAIN CONDITIONS THAT THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO GO TO A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OR L LOSE PARKING SPACES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? SO IF THEY, IF THEY GO WITH A PD, THEY CAN WRITE THE CONDITION IN THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT TALLER FENCE IN THE SETBACK? I THINK QUAN'S POINT IS THAT THEY COULD ALSO GO THE SUP ROUTE WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TO THE BOARD IF THEY CHOSE TO RELOCATE THE FENCE, IT'S ONLY IF THEY DON'T WANT TO COMPLY WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING. IF THEY WANT TO HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD, THEY CAN DO THAT. THE, THE MECHANISM IN PLACE, IN THE BASE CODE TO DO THAT IS TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT THEY CAN ALSO RECESS THE FENCE BACK TO THE SETBACK LINE AND STILL HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT FENCE. OKAY. ARE, UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT, UH, THE ONLY ACCESS TO THIS SITE IS ALONG NORTHWEST HIGHWAY? NOT ALONG, THERE ARE NO RESIDENTIAL STREETS ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY? YES, I'M AWARE. OKAY. ARE YOU AWARE THAT ANY OFFSITE PARKING WOULD RE REQUIRE, UH, AN AGREEMENT WITH LOVER'S LANE METHODIST CHURCH, UH, TO THE NORTH OR TO LOVER LANE LOVER'S LANE METHODIST PROPERTIES TO THE WEST? YES, I'M AWARE. AND THE ON, UH, IF YOU WERE TO REQUIRE OFFSITE PARKING, SAY TO THE NORTH, IT WOULD REQUIRE A SHUTTLE BUS TO RUN BACK AND FORTH, UH, BECAUSE THERE'S NO WAY TO CROSS NORTHWEST HIGHWAY OR GET TO THE SITE, RIGHT. IF YOU WERE TO REQUIRE OR OFF OFFSITE PARKING TO THE FACILITY ON TO THE WEST, IT WOULD REQUIRE CONSTRUCTION OF A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES OVER THE CREEK THAT'S CORRECT. AND THAT IS ACTUALLY PROPOSED IN THEIR SITE PLAN? YEAH, IT'S ACTUALLY ON THE SITE PLAN THAT I'M LOOKING AT. BUT IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED IN THE FUTURE. THAT'S CORRECT. RIGHT. BUT IF WE WENT TO PD, THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET ADEQUATE PARKING ON, ON SITE WITHOUT HAVING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. UM, I YOU ARE, YOU ARE AWARE THAT THERE HAS BEEN EXTENSIVE, UH, OUTREACH TO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ALONG DEVONSHIRE LANE? YES. AND AM I CORRECT THAT THERE'S GONNA BE, UH, THERE'S GONNA BE SOME PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS BETWEEN THE SCHOOL AND THOSE PROPERTIES? PERHAPS? I HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT ANY DE RESTRICTIONS. UM, AND I DON'T, RYAN, IF YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN COMBINE THAT WITH THE PD. WELL, IT WOULDN'T BE, I, I SUSPECT IT WOULDN'T BE PART OF THE PD, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE SOME AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORS ABOUT LANDSCAPING FENCES, UH, AND AND SO FORTH. RIGHT. YEAH. AND UNLESS THERE'S OTHER THINGS LIKE SOME SORT OF, UH, SOMETIMES THERE ARE GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENTS, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT DO NOT GET FILED AS PART OF THE ZONING PROCESS. I THINK THEY KIND OF GET FILED WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S OFFICE, PERHAPS. MM-HMM. . UM, BUT, BUT BARRING THAT, THE OTHER STANDARDS YOU MENTIONED FOR FENCING OR LANDSCAPING OR YOU, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER ELSE, UM, ALL OF THOSE ARE STANDARD CONDITIONS THAT COULD, UM, YOU KNOW, BE INCLUDED IN PD CONDITIONS OR SUP CONDITIONS. THANK YOU. IT COULD GET VERY, UM, MUDDIED FROM A REGULATION PERMITTING STANDPOINT IF WE HAVE A PD OR SUP THAT APPLIES TO THIS PROPERTY, PLUS DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT CONFLICT WITH, UH, THOSE PD OR SUP CONDITIONS. UM, SO JUST SOMETHING, SOMETHING TO BE AWARE OF THERE. BUT AS I HEARD YOU, COMMISSIONER HALL, YOU SAID PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND THOSE WOULD BE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT THE CITY WOULD NOT ENFORCE. UH, CORRECT. I UNDER I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT TOO . NO, I, I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THAT. COMM COMMISSIONER, CAN I ALSO CLARIFY THE, WITH RESPECT TO THE PARKING, AND IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE IN A PD THAT THAT COULD BE ALLOWED EITHER. THAT IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT COULD BE TAKEN CARE OF AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. IF THEY TRULY WANTED THAT PARKING ON SITE IN THE SETBACK. THEY CAN, THAT CAN BE PART OF A BOARD CASE. THIS, THIS REALLY COMES DOWN TO AN ISSUE OF ARE WE GOING TO DESIGN BASED ON THE REGULATIONS IN PLACE? ARE WE GONNA MAKE AN ATTEMPT TO DO THAT, OR ARE WE GONNA DO A PD SO WE CAN GET PARKING AND FENCES IN THE FRONT YARD? MM-HMM. . AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF GENERALLY, BUT PARTICULARLY WITH SCHOOLS HAS, HAS SHIED AWAY FROM. THERE'S A MECHANISM IN PLACE WHEREBY SCHOOLS CAN EXIST IN THESE, UH, ZONING DISTRICTS, AND THAT IS [02:20:01] AN SUP, AND THEN IT'S UP TO THEM TO DESIGN WITHIN THE REGULATIONS OR PURSUE A BOARD CASE FOR THESE DEVIATIONS. OKAY. AND I GUESS FINALLY, UH, YOU UNDERSTAND WE HAVE A LOT OF SCHOOLS, BOTH PRIVATE AND PUBLIC IN DISTRICT 13. UM, AM I CORRECT THAT MOST OF THOSE CURRENTLY OPERATE UNDER PDS? I, WELL, ACTUALLY, I, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT. I CAN ONLY SPEAK TO THIS SPECIFIC CASE. THAT'S SORT OF A TRICK QUESTION BECAUSE I KNOW, I KNOW THAT THEY DO , BUT, BUT TO THAT POINT, MORE RECENTLY, THE ONES THAT HAVE COME THROUGH HAVE BEEN MOVED TO AN SUP RATHER THAN A PD, BUT SUVS WITH A NO TERM LIMIT. IS THAT CORRECT? UM, I THINK THE, THE ONE THAT I'M THINKING OF MOST RECENTLY, IT KIND OF HAPPENED EARLY ON IN OUR SCHOOL'S ENDEAVOR, AND I THINK IT HAD A TIME LIMIT, BUT IT WAS LARGER, SO AND SO, BUT SPECIFIC TO DISTRICT 13, I'M THINKING OF LONGFELLOW, I THINK JUST TO C COMMISSIONERS. YES, SIR. UH, THE DISCUSSION OF ANOTHER SCHOOL'S, SUP THAT WAS APPROVED AT SOME OTHER TIME IS REALLY NOT RELEVANT TO THIS SPECIFIC SITE. UH, I UNDERSTAND COUNSELORS JUST PROVIDING INFORMATION. THANK YOU. AND JUST TO, TO WORK ANOTHER CONSIDERATION INTO THE MIX HERE, YOU KNOW, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS FOR AN SUP WITH A 10 YEAR PERIOD. UM, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, CPC IS UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO FOLLOW THAT REC FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD. IF, IF THE SUP OPTION IS STILL, YOU KNOW, VIABLE IN THE EYES OF CPC, THEY COULD RECOMMEND IT WITH A PERMANENT TIME PERIOD RATHER THAN THE 10 YEARS. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, THANK YOU. UM, I JUST HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS ON THE SITE PLAN. I KNOW I THINK OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE COVERED THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND STAFF'S POINT OF VIEW AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. ONE QUESTION THAT I DIDN'T HEAR ADDRESS IS THAT YOU'D SPOKEN TO THE PARKING, HOWEVER, THE PLAN THAT IS BEFORE US ALSO INCLUDES, UM, A FIRE LANE THAT IS DIRECTLY WITHIN THE FRONT YARD. AND I NOTICED THAT THE IMPERVIOUS AREAS CALLED OUT ON THE SITE PLAN IS 65% LOT COVERAGE IS 40. SURFACE PARKING DOESN'T COUNT TOWARDS LOT COVERAGE. HOWEVER, WITH THE SENSITIVITY OF THE CREEK AND THE OTHER COMPONENTS OF THE SITE, HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT TEAM ON ALTERNATE MATERIALS THAT WOULD HELP ADDRESS THAT VARIANCE? YES. YES. SO THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT I ACTUALLY BROUGHT UP EARLY ON WITH THE APPLICANT, UH, TO DO AS MUCH, UH, PERVIOUS SERVICES AS POSSIBLE. UM, I ALSO ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED THAT THEY DO THAT FOR THEIR FIRE LANE. UM, BUT AGAIN, STAFF CAN ONLY, YOU KNOW, DO SO MUCH. UM, THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO GO FORWARD WITH WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS BEST FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, THEIR SITE, THEIR SITUATION, THEIR PROPOSAL. OKAY. AND THEN FOLLOW UP QUESTION, BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE SITE, THERE'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT GRADE DIFFERENCE. UM, IT CERTAINLY SEEMS THAT WOULD PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MAYBE DOING SOME TUCK UNDER PARKING OR OTHERWISE ADDRESSING SOME OF THE SITE CONSTRAINTS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING THROUGH. WAS THAT ANYTHING THAT WAS, UM, MENTIONED BY THE APPLICANT AS THEY WERE CONSIDERING THEIR SITE PLAN OPTIONS? YES. ONCE AGAIN, THESE ARE A LOT ALL THE THINGS THAT I, I LOOKED AT AND CONSIDERED, UM, WITH THIS SITE. UM, BECAUSE AGAIN, THE BIGGEST THING BEING IF WE JUST DO SOME SLIGHT ALTERATIONS TO THE DESIGN OF THE SITE, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, HIT ALL THESE CHECK MARKS BASICALLY. UM, AND ONE OF THE, UH, I GUESS ONE OF THE CHALLENGES IS, UM, THE BUILDING ITSELF, IT'S A FAIRLY LARGE FOOTPRINT, AND WE DID RECOMMEND REDUCING THAT, UM, IN, IN TERMS OF, I GUESS THE WIDTH AND MAYBE GOING UP A STORY, BECAUSE TECHNICALLY THEY COULD GO UP HIGHER IN HEIGHT. UM, THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS TO THE HEIGHT FOR AN INSTITUTIONAL USE. SO THEY COULD GO ANOTHER STORY, ANOTHER TWO STORIES, REDUCE THAT FOOTPRINT AND POSSIBLY HAVE PARKING UNDERNEATH OR, YOU KNOW, DO SOME SORT OF, UH, ALTERNATE DESIGN TO ADDRESS, UM, MANY OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE SPEAKING ON TODAY. THANK YOU. I'M SURE THE COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE A POINT OF VIEW IF THEY WERE LOOKING, UM, AT SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT INCREASES, BUT AGAIN, BECAUSE OF THE GRADE, IT JUST SEEMED LIKE THERE MIGHT BE SOME OTHER OPPORTUNITY. SO THANK YOU MR. CLINTON. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO ALSO ADD, SO IT IS NOT, SO STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE USE, RIGHT? SO THE, THE PRIVATE SCHOOL USE, BUT STAFF IS JUST RECOMMENDING A [02:25:01] DIFFERENT METHOD TO GET THAT USE. THANK YOU, SIR. UH, COMMISSIONERS, LET'S GO BACK AND PICK UP THE TWO NUMBER, UH, THE TWO DISTRICT SEVEN CASES. SO WE'LL GO TO THE, THE NEXT ONE, I THINK IT'S, WHICH IS, UM, NUMBER 16. AND THEN WE'LL GO BACK AND PICK UP THE OTHER D SEVEN CASE. ME AGAIN, SORRY. IT'S YOU, , I'M TELLING YOU. TOLD YOU TO MAKE YOURSELF COMFORTABLE UP THERE. ALL RIGHT. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 16, CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2064. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF ONE, MULTIFAMILY SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED A CC COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SPRING AVENUE, SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF SPRING AVENUE AND PINE SPRING CONNECTION. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO MF TO AN MF ONE, A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT, AND ALLOW DUPLEX USES. UM, THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY RIGHT UNDER 6,000 SQUARE FEET IN TOTAL SIZE. UM, AGAIN, CURRENTLY ZONED PD 5 9 5 WITH THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT ONE. IT'S AN UNDEVELOPED LOT. UM, THIS LOT HAS FRONTAGE ON SPRING AVENUE. IT IS LOCATED IN, UH, SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ABOUT FOUR MILES FROM DOWNTOWN. UH, THE PURPOSE IS TO REQUEST, UH, I'M SORRY, THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE FOR DUPLEX USES. APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NEW DUPLEX, UH, TOTALING 28 FEET IN HEIGHT. UH, THERE'S ONLY BEEN ONE ZONING CASE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS, AND THIS IS A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE. HERE IS THE LOCATION MAP. HERE IS OUR AERIAL MAP, AND THIS IS THE ZONING MAP SHOWING THE SURROUNDING USES, UM, UH, EVERYWHERE TO THE, SORRY, THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENCIES ARE, UH, PD 5 95 TO THE NORTH IS COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND SINGLE FAMILY TO THE EAST IS, UH, SINGLE FAMILY AND TO THE SOUTH, UH, ALSO SINGLE FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL RETAIL. HERE WE HAVE THE SITE VISIT PHOTOS. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING SOUTHEAST. THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING NORTHEAST. THIS IS ONSITE LOOKING SOUTHWEST. THIS IS ONSITE LOOKING SOUTHWEST. AGAIN, THIS IS LOOKING TO THE SURROUNDING USES. UH, THIS IS NORTH NORTHWEST. THIS IS LOOKING NORTHEAST, UH, BRIEF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CHART. SO THE EXISTING ZONE IS PD 5 95 WITH SUBDISTRICT, UH, CC SUBDISTRICT ONE. UH, THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IS NONE OR 15 FEET. UM, THERE ARE SOME NUANCES WITHIN THIS PD. UM, BUT THAT IS THE FRONT YARD REQUIREMENT. UM, SO THE SIDE AND REAR WOULD BE, UH, 15 FEET ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL AND NONE OR FIVE FEET OR IF ADJACENT TO OTHER. SO THE NONE OR INSERT, UH, THE, THE FOOT, THE, UH, THE FEET THERE IS, I GUESS BECAUSE WITHIN THE PD IT'S NOT REQUIRED. BUT IF IT IS PROVIDED, THEN THE MINIMUM, UM, REQUIREMENT WOULD BE THE, UH, FOR EXAMPLE, THE F THE FRONT YARD WOULD BE THE 15 FEET. AND FOR THE SIDE AND REAR YARD, IT WOULD BE THE FIVE FEET. UH, SO THE HEIGHT, UH, MAX HEIGHT WOULD BE 54 FEET AT FOUR STORIES. UM, AND THEN FOR THE PROPOSED, UH, ZONE, THEY, UH, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN MF ONE. UH, THE FRONT YARD SETBACK WILL BE 15 FEET. THE SIDE AND REAR YARD, UH, SETBACKS WOULD BE, UH, IF ADJACENT TO A DUPLEX, FIVE OR 10 FEET IF ADJACENT TO OTHER USES 10 OR 15 FEET. BUT BECAUSE THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENCIES ARE, UH, RESIDENTIAL, UM, SINGLE FAMILY, THE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE, UH, NONE. AND THEN THE MAX HEIGHT WOULD BE 36 FEET. SO, UH, BRIEF STAFF ANALYSIS. THE EXISTING SURROUNDING, UH, UH, USES INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY, AND DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE, UH, WHICH ARE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE SUBJECT SITE. UH, THE REQUEST DOES FIT WITHIN [02:30:01] THE EXISTING USES OF THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDING AREA, AND BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY WOULD BE IMPOSED. THE AREA REQUEST DOES COMPLY WITH, UM, VARIOUS, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND SPECIFICALLY THE HATCHER STATION AREA PLAN. THEREFORE, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? I JUST HAD A GENERAL COMMENT OR QUESTION. EXCUSE ME. IT, DO I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY? THIS IS CURRENTLY WITHIN PD 5 95, AND THE REQUEST IS TO REMOVE THIS LOT FROM PD 5 95. AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY? N NO. SO IT WOULD, IT WOULD REMAIN WITHIN 5 95, BUT BASICALLY WE ARE, WE WOULD, UM, CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT TO A, UH, MF MF ONE. SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE CREATING A SINGLE SUBDISTRICT WITHIN THIS TO ACCOMMODATE A DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT? NO, WE'RE NOT CREATING ANYTHING. WE'RE JUST CHANGING THE CURRENT SUBDISTRICT FROM CC TO MF ONE, WHICH IS ALLOWED UNDER PD 5 95. OKAY. AND IT'S ADJACENT TO A DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT. IT IS ADJACENT TO A DDU, DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT, BUT HOWEVER, THE USE ON THAT LOT IS NOT A DUPLEX. OKAY. I THANK YOU. IT'S COMPLICATED THERE. SO COMPLICATED THERE. IT'S VERY, YEAH. THAT'S WHY WE LOVE PD 5, 9 5, UH, . UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE. SO THE ONLY WAY TO DO A DUPLEX ON THIS LOT, UH, YOU CAN'T DO DUPLEX ZONING BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE 6,000 SQUARE FEET. MF ONE WOULD MAKE IT 3000 MINIMUM. AND OKAY. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . YEAH, THAT'S, UM, THE HANDCUFFS. THE HANDCUFFS, YEAH. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER WHEELER HAS A QUESTION. COMMISSIONER WHEELER. UH, MY APOLOGIES. I DON'T SEE YOU ONLINE, SO I I APPRECIATE THAT. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, WE CAN. UM, ARE YOU, UH, ARE YOU AWARE THAT ANY, UM, ANY CASES THAT WE, UM, THAT ARE RELATED TO HOUSING THAT WE ASK THE PLANNERS TO ALSO, UM, LOOP IN LONG, THE LONG TERM PLANNING TEAM WHO, UH, IS WORKING IN THIS AREA WITH THE COMMUNITY, UM, ANY TYPE OF HOUSING, UM, ANY TYPE OF, UM, ZONING CHANGES THAT WILL RELATE RELATED TO HOUSING? YES. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, UM, OUR LONG RANGE PLANNERS DO ATTEND OUR INTERNAL STAFF REVIEW MEETING, THE ZRT ZONING REVIEW TEAM MEETING. UM, SO THEY'RE INVOLVED IN ALL OF OUR CASES ALREADY. SO SPECIFICALLY LENS, SO WAS SPECIFICALLY LINDSEY AND PATRICK IN THOSE MEETINGS? UM, IF THEY WEREN'T, UM, SOME OF THEIR COLLEAGUES WERE OKAY, WELL, SPECIFICALLY, WELL, LET ME BE MORE, UM, SO SPECIFICALLY LINDSEY AND, AND, UM, WAS LINDSEY AND PATRICK DUR, NOT THE COLLEAGUE, THOSE TWO WHO WAS ACTUALLY WORKING WITH, UH, WITH WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY ON PD 5 9 5, AND THEY'VE REQUESTED AND ALSO MM-HMM, , I SENT OUT A GENERAL EMAIL TO, I SENT AN EMAIL TO ALL THE HEADS RELATED TO THIS BECAUSE OF THESE TYPE OF SITUATIONS. YEAH, LIKE I SAID, WE, WE DON'T TAKE ATTENDANCE ON OUR INTERNAL STAFF REVIEW MEETING, UM, BUT WE DO, UH, INVITE LONG RANGE PLANNERS TO ATTEND AND GIVE OUR ZONING CASE PLANNERS ANY COMMENTS ON OUR CASES, UH, FROM A LONG RANGE PLANNING LENS. UM, SO OUR LONG RANGE PLANNERS WERE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE REVIEW OF THIS ZONING CASE. OKAY. CAN YOU JUST, OKAY, JUST PAUSE ONE SECOND. COMMISSIONER, WE, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN SEE YOU AND, AND APPARENTLY THE SCREENS HERE ARE NOT SHOWING YOU. CAN YOU SEE HER COMMISSIONER? BOTH. IT'S NOT. OKAY. BUT I THINK WE'RE SUPPOSED TO SEE HER AT ONE OF THESE, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YEAH, THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO SEE. OKAY. JUST PAUSE ONE SECOND. I'M THE PEOPLE I'M ON. Y'ALL CAN SEE ME. WE, YEAH, WE, OKAY, NOW WE CAN SEE YOU ON THE YEAH, WE, WE HAVE TO SHOW YOU ON THE SCREENS TO THE PUBLIC, AND THEY WEREN'T BEING SHOWN. OKAY, COMMISSIONER, PLEASE CONTINUE. OKAY. THANK YOU. I WAS, UM, SO, UM, THERE WERE YOU, UM, WERE YOU AWARE THAT THERE WAS CONCERNS BECAUSE OF THE, THE LOCK SIZE OF THE DUPLEXES BEING PROPOSED THAT, UH, THAT WAS EXPRESSED TO THE APPLICANT? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? WERE YOU AWARE THAT THERE WAS A, THAT BECAUSE OF THE LOT SIZE, THAT IT WAS A, THAT THERE WAS A CONCERN AND IT WAS [02:35:01] SOLD TO THE APPLICANT THAT, UH, IT WAS NOT? UM, YEAH, SO WE, THERE IS AGAIN, THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE WON'T, LINDSEY AND PATRICK LOOPED IN. UM, SO, UM, IT ARE YOU, SO, UH, SO FOR A MATTER OF FACT, THIS CASE IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE HELD BECAUSE WE NEED TO HAVE COMMUNITY MEETINGS. ARE YOU, UM, BUT THE IMMEDIATE COMMUNITY, WERE YOU AWARE THAT THE REASON THAT THE, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE DUPLEX SLOTS IN SOUTH DALLAS PROPOSED, UH, TO 6,000 IS TO AVOID THESE, UM, SUBDISTRICTS, UH, LOCKED? NOT AWARE. SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. SO WE'RE NOT, IT'S NOT A DUPLEX, UH, WE'RE NOT CHA THE APPLICANT IS NOT GOING FROM A CC SUBDISTRICT TO A DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT. THEY'RE GOING TO AN MF ONE SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW DUPLEX USES BECAUSE OF THE, UH, THE LOT SIZE. SO WERE YOU SPEAKING TO THAT OR? YES. OKAY. AND THEN THAT'S THE P WERE YOU AWARE THAT THE PD 5, 9 5 SET UP THOSE 6,001, THE, THE ONES WHO CREATED PD 5 95 AND THOSE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON PD 5, 9 5 9 5 ARE THESE 6,000 SQUARE FOOT WAS WHAT THEY WANTED FOR MINIMUM? RIGHT. AND SO BECAUSE THE SITE IS RIGHT UNDER 6,000, THAT'S PART PART OF THE REASON WHY THE REQUEST IS, UH, WELL, ACTUALLY THAT IS MAJORITY OF THE REASON WHY THE REQUEST IS NOT GOING TO A DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT, BUT GOING TO AN MF ONE SUBDISTRICT, UM, TO ALLOW FOR, UH, THE DUPLEX USE BE BECAUSE THAT LOT IS NOT MEETING THE DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT OF 6,000 SQUARE FEET. OKAY. UM, I'M GONNA ASK THIS CASE BE HELD. WE, WE, WE NEED TO LOOP IN, I NEED TO ENSURE THAT THE, UH, LOT, THE LOT THOSE WHO ARE WORKING WITH THIS COMMUNITY AND LONG TERM PLANNING, IS IT PROPERLY FIT THIS CASE AND ALSO THE COMMUNITY. YEAH, I, I, BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I CAN KIND OF SPEAK TO THAT QUESTION A LITTLE BIT MORE. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, I THINK YOU'RE KIND OF ZOOMING OUT A LITTLE BIT THERE. UM, YEAH, NO, I, WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, THE SOUTH DALLAS AREA PLAN IS CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS OF BEING REVISED. UM, HOWEVER, JUST TO PLAY REFEREE FOR A LITTLE BIT, UM, UNTIL AN UPDATE TO THAT AREA PLAN HAS BEEN ADOPTED BY COUNCIL AND BECOMES COUNCIL ADOPTED POLICY, WE, IN CURRENT PLANNING, UM, CANNOT CONSIDERATE, CANNOT FACTOR INTO OUR CONSIDERATION OF ZONING CASES. ANY KIND OF POLICIES OR IMPLEMENTATION STEPS THAT MAY COME OUT OF THAT AREA PLAN. UM, THAT THE, THAT'S KIND OF JUST, YOU KNOW, THE RULES WE HAVE TO PLAY BY JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE MAY HAVE A NEW UPDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THE NEAR FUTURE, BUT, UH, UNTIL THAT PLAN BECOMES COUNCIL ADOPTED POLICY, WE ARE NOT ABLE AS ZONING STAFF TO CONSIDER THAT, UH, WHEN WE OU WHEN WE ANALYZE CASES. SO I'M NOT REFERRING TO I UNDERSTAND THAT, AND I'M NOT REFERRING TO WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN THOUGH. E EVEN THOUGH THAT THE AREA PLAN IS GOING THROUGH A REVISING PERIOD, WE ARE THE REASON THAT I'M ASKING THEM TO BE LOOPED IN BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS THAT WE ARE HAVING IS ASKING A, ALONG WITH WHAT IS CURRENTLY IN PD 5 95, THAT, AND THAT WE'RE ON THE BRIEF OF GENTRIFICATION, THAT ALL HOUSING RELATED CASES BE VETTED BY BOTH OUR LONG-TERM PLANNERS AND OUR COMMUNITY BEFORE MOVING IN. AND I HAVE SENT OUT AT LEAST TWO EMAILS LOOPING IN ALL, UH, BOTH ANDREA AND ANDREA AND, UM, LIEUTENANT, I MEAN DIRECTOR LOU, AND BOTH OUR PLANNERS, AND I BELIEVE ALSO YOU, RYAN, THAT THESE BE, THAT, THAT THE COMMUNITY BE INVOLVED IN ALL HOUSING, UM, RELATED CASES, AND THAT IS NOT HAPPENING. RIGHT. AND, AND THAT THE WAY THAT PLUGS INTO CURRENT PLANNING STAFF'S, UH, POLICIES AND PROCEDURES IS THAT OUR LONG RANGE PLANNERS ARE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO, IN INTER TO, UH, PARTICIPATE IN OUR INTERNAL STAFF REVIEW MEETINGS ON ALL OF OUR ZONING CASES, UH, THAT'S THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE US FEEDBACK LIKE THE FEEDBACK YOU'RE DESCRIBING. UM, SO, SO THAT DID HAPPEN WITH THIS CASE AS IT DOES, UH, WITH ALL OTHERS. OKAY. SO AGAIN, WE'RE GONNA HOLD THIS CASE IN ANY CASES THAT COME UP IN THIS MATTER AS HOUSING RELATED, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE IT'S PROPERLY READ BY THE COMMUNITIES. AND I CAN TELL YOU THIS CASE WILL NOT. YEAH, AND I, I, I THINK THE ANGLE YOU'RE, YOU'RE COMING FROM, I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU SPEAK WITH, UH, PATRICK AND LINDSAY, UM, ABOUT THAT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE WILL BE HOLDING, WE'LL HOLD THIS CASE UNTIL, UM, COMMISSIONER WHEELER. UH, THIS IS NOT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, SO YOU CAN HOLD IT, BUT IT [02:40:01] WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN AT THE 12 AFTER DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AFTER 1230. OKAY. THANKS TO, TO WHAT DATE COMMISSIONER THE FIRST, UH, MEETING IN NOVEMBER. NOVEMBER, YES. OKAY. THAT'S NOVEMBER 21ST. THE 20, THE FIRST ONE. THE FIRST ONE IS NOVEMBER, NOVEMBER 7TH. OH, OKAY. I DON'T HAVE THAT ON MY CALENDAR. SOMEBODY DOUBLE. WE DO HAVE ONE, LET HAVE IT. WE'LL, DOUBLE CHECK. NO, NO, WE HAVE NUMBER NOVEMBER 7TH. THEN IF YOU GET IT WRONG, YOU GOT EIGHT PEOPLE TELLING YOU VERY QUICKLY TOO. OKAY. THEN LET'S GO BACK TO THE OTHER, UH, D SEVEN CASE, I THINK IS NUMBER 12. YEP, THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING. WHERE'S MY CHAIR? I'M, I'VE BEEN UP HERE LIKE AN HOUR NOW. OKAY. NUMBER 12, KZ 2 34 DASH 1 74. OOPS, LET ME SHARE, SORRY. OKAY, ZZ 2 34 DASH 1 74. AN APPLICATION FOR A TH THREE TOWNHOUSE SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE AND R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF HURLING STREET BETWEEN SOUTH SECOND AVENUE AND CROSS STREET. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO TO TH THREE, UM, TO ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES APPROXIMATELY 25,000 SQUARE FEET IN TOTAL SIZE. UH, THE AREA FOR REQUEST IS CURRENTLY ZONED R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT, UM, CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED LOTS AND LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTH DALLAS NEIGHBORHOOD. SO IT'S THREE CONSECUTIVE LOTS ON A REG RESIDENTIAL BLOCK WITH FRONTAGE ON HURLING STREET. UH, THERE'S BEEN ONE ZONING CASE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO TH THREE. UM, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE. UM, APPLICANT HAS ALSO VOLUNTEERED D RESTRICTIONS TO HEIGHT, FRONT YARD SETBACK, AND LOT COVERAGE. UM, THIS CASE WAS HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, UH, FROM THE JULY 11TH CPC, AND THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES TO THE CASE SINCE THEN. HERE'S OUR LOCATION MAP. HERE'S OUR, OUR AERIAL MAP. AND THIS IS, IS THE ZONING MAP SHOWING THE SURROUNDING USES. UH, TO THE NORTH IS PD 5 95, SINGLE FAMILY TO THE EAST PD 5 95 SINGLE FAMILY TO THE SOUTH COMMERCIAL RETAIL. UM, ALL OF IT IS PD 5 95, BUT TO THE SOUTH IS, UH, COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND TO THE WEST COMMERCIAL RETAIL. THIS IS ON HURLING STREET, UH, LOOKING NORTHEAST. UH, THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING NORTHEAST. THIS IS ON HURLING STREET LOOKING NORTHWEST, UH, UH, HURLING STREET LOOKING SOUTHWEST. SAME POSITION, LOOKING AT THE SURROUNDING USES. SO, UH, SOUTHEAST, THIS IS ON SITE LOOKING SO, AND THIS IS AT THE INTERSECTION. LOOKING AT SOME OF THE SURROUNDING USES. UH, THE COMMERCIAL RETAIL, UH, SAME LOCATION AT THE INTERSECTION LOOKING NORTHWEST TO THE SURROUNDING USES, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. SO EXISTING, UH, THE EXISTING ZONING IS R FIVE A, UH, 20 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, UH, FIVE FOOT REAR AND SIDE YARD SETBACK, 30 FOOT MAX HEIGHT. UM, DUE TO THE BLOCK FACE, UH, BEING DIVIDED BY TWO OR MORE ZONING DISTRICTS, THE FRONT YARD FOR THE ENTIRE BLOCK FACE MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DISTRICT WITH THE GREATEST FRONT YARD REQUIREMENT. SO THAT MEANS, UH, THE LOTS, UH, IN THE AREA OF REQUEST WOULD BE SUBJECT TO A 20 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK. UH, DUE TO THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENCY OF THE R FIVE A, UH, SUBDISTRICT LOTS, [02:45:02] THE PROPOSED ZONING WOULD BE TH THREE. SO THE FRONT, UH, FRONT YARD SETBACK, UH, THE REQUIREMENT IN THE TH THREE IS ZERO. HOWEVER, AGAIN, DUE TO BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY, THEY WOULD BE, UH, THEY WOULD HAVE THAT 20 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK AND IMPOSED, UH, THE SIDING REAR, UH, SETBACKS ARE, UH, ZERO, UH, DUE TO THE IMMEDIATE ADJACENCIES TO SINGLE FAMILY. AND THE, UH, MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED IS 36 FEET. BUT AGAIN, THE APPLICANT IS VOLUNTEERING DEED RESTRICTIONS TO LIMIT THE MAX HEIGHT. UM, AGAIN, THE, THE VOLUNTEER DUE RESTRICTIONS, UM, LIMITING THE MAX HEIGHT TO 30 FEET TO MATCH THE EXISTING, UH, FABRIC OF THE, UH, THE IMMEDIATE BLOCK, UH, THE 20 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK, AND THEN REDUCE LOCK COVERAGE TO MATCH THE R FIVE, A SUBDISTRICT LOCK COVERAGE OF 45%. UH, RESIDENTIAL BUFFERS WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE BOUNDARY OF THE SITE THAT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL USES, WHICH WOULD BE THE, I BELIEVE THE WEST, THE NORTHWEST OF THE SITE. UH, THE PROPOSED USE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA AND ON THE, UH, IN THE IMMEDIATE, UH, BLOCK AND STAFF, UH, SUPPORTS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND FINDS THE PROPOSED RE ZONING TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA AS IT WOULD FIT THE EXISTING FABRIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT IS VOLUNTEERING DE RESTRICTIONS TO, UM, MAKE SURE ENSURE THAT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WOULD, UH, FIT WITHIN THIS IMMEDIATE AREA, UM, AS WELL AS THE COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. UH, AND THE REQUEST IS FOUND TO BE APPROPRIATE HERE AS THERE, UM, IS A ZONING, UH, THERE'S A DUPLEX, UH, ON THE SAME BLOCK, I THINK MAYBE TWO, TWO HOUSES UP, OR, I'M SORRY, DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE SUBJECT SITE. UH, SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO D RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU, SIR. QUESTIONS MR. WHEELER? COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE. UM, WERE YOU, WERE YOU AWARE THAT THERE WAS A MEETING, UM, WITH THE, WITH STAFF AND THIS APPLICANT, UM, CONCERNING, UM, UM, HIS APPLICATION? I WAS, I AM AWARE, UM, UM, ARE YOU ALSO AWARE THAT, IS THERE ANY REASON WHY HE WASN'T, WHY A DUPLEX? UH, UM, WHY, WHY DUPLEX, UH, ZONING WASN'T, UM, CONSIDERED BECAUSE OF THE PREVIOUS, BECAUSE OF WHAT'S IN THE AREA ALREADY? YES. SO SIMILAR TO THE PREVIOUS CASE THAT WAS PRESENTED, THE LOTS DO NOT MEET THE, UM, THE LOT SIZE REQUIREMENT. SO THAT'S WHY THE APPLICANT IS GOING WITH THE TH THREE INSTEAD OF THE, THE DUPLEX. UH, THERES ALSO THE BLOCK FACE CONTINU CONTINUITY ISSUE. YES. AND ALSO THE BLOCK FACE CON CONTINUITY COMING INTO PLAY AND BEING IMPOSED ON THE, UM, PROPOSED LOTS, UH, WAS A CONSIDERATION FOR THE, TO GO WITH THE TH THREE. AND HE'S PROPOSING DUPLEXES ON EACH LOT, I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE BEST SUITED FOR THE APPLICANT. I AM NOT AWARE OF THAT, UH, THE INTENT OF THE, I GUESS THE DEVELOPMENT FOR EACH LOT. OKAY. SO WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS, WHAT ALL COULD HE HAVE IN THE CH ONE'S OWN? IN TERMS OF THE USES? YES. UH, SINGLE FAMILY OR DUPLEX, SINGLE FAMILY OR DUPLEX? UM, I, THE REST OF THE QUESTIONS I ASKED THE APPLICANT, BECAUSE WE DID HAVE QUITE A LONG, UH, WE HAD A MEETING WITH WHAT CITY, CITY STAFF WAS, UH, COUNCIL OFFICE AND, UH, PLANNERS, UM, TO BETTER UNDERSTAND HIS BILL. BUT, WE'LL, WE, I GUESS WE'LL FINISH THIS, THE EXTRA HELP. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. THANK YOU. SO THIS IS ACTUALLY A QUESTION THAT'S KIND OF BEEN PERCOLATING. I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY THE TIME TO ASK IT. SO WE'VE GOT TWO CASES, BOTH IN PD 5 95, BOTH ARE TRYING TO DO DUPLEX INFILL HOUSING. ONE'S IN OUR FIVE DISTRICT, ONE WAS IN A COMMERCIAL ZONE DISTRICT. WE'RE COMING UP WITH DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS TO TRY TO ADDRESS WHAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY JUST AN INFILL HOUSING. THIS IS A PD. HAS THERE BEEN A CONSIDERATION OF CREATING A NEW MODIFIED DUPLEX INFILL HOUSING SUBDISTRICT THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LOT SIZE FOR THE, UM, [02:50:01] SETBACKS? I KNOW WE'VE DONE THIS IN OTHER PDS WHERE THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY TAILORED TO MEET THE EXISTING CONDITIONS ON THE GROUND. WOULD THAT NOT BE A SOLUTION THAT WOULD BRING SOME CONTINUITY TO HOW THESE ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED? YEAH, I SECOND THAT. I THINK THAT'S A WONDERFUL IDEA. UM, HOWEVER, THE TASK BEFORE US RIGHT NOW WITH THIS ITEM IS TO EVALUATE IF THIS ZONING PROPOSAL IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. UM, HOWEVER, I SINCERELY HOPE THAT COMMISSIONER WHEELER WAS LISTENING CLOSELY TO EVERYTHING YOU JUST SAID. WELL, AND, AND I, BUT I GUESS, I MEAN, WE'RE CREATING A SUBDISTRICT, IS IT A FUNCTION OF THE FACT THAT A TH THREE IN THIS CASE SUBDISTRICT ALREADY EXISTS? SO IT SIMPLY IS CHANGING THE DESIGNATION IN LIEU OF CREATING, BUT I MEAN, I GUESS WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS WHY COULDN'T IT BE A RECOMMENDATION FOR A NEW SUBDISTRICT? YEAH, SO, SO I, THERE'S A CONFUSION IN TERMINOLOGY THAT'S COMING INTO PLAY, UH, THAT'S PRESENT IN PD 5 95 AS WELL AS PD 1 93. UM, WHEN WE SAY SUBDISTRICT HERE, WE DON'T MEAN, YOU KNOW, LIKE A SUBDISTRICT ONE OR A SUB SUBDISTRICT A OR, OR, OR SOMETHING LIKE A SUBSET OF REGULATIONS WITHIN A PD. UH, WHAT WE MEAN HERE WITH A TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE SUBDISTRICT, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY A BASE SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD 5 95. THIS IS ALSO PRESENT IN, UM, PD 1 93. SO THE CURRENT, UH, IT'S KIND OF A BASE DISTRICT WITHIN THE PD. SO THE CURRENT BASE DISTRICT FOR THIS PROPERTY TODAY IS R FIVE. SO IT FOLLOWS ALL THE STANDARD REGULATIONS OF R FIVE. AM I NOT GETTING AT YOUR QUESTION? I THINK I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT, AND I'M TRYING TO PULL UP PD 5 95 'CAUSE IT'S NOT IN THE CASE REPORT, BUT I THINK YOU'VE ANSWERED MY QUESTION, SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, STICK AROUND PLEASE. UM, TO ANSWER THAT PORTION IN MR. MONKEY, ARE, ARE YOU AWARE THAT SOME OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS ARE BEING, UM, CONSIDERED THROUGH, UM, IN THE, THE CHANGES, THE UPDATES TO THE AREA PLAN IN THE FUTURE? UM, SO I KNOW WE'RE PHRASING THESE AS QUESTIONS, BUT THIS IS STARTING TO SOUND LIKE JEOPARDY AND TURN INTO DISCUSSION OF THINGS BEYOND JUST THIS ONE ZONING CASE. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS FEELS COMPELLED TO GET ON THE MIC, BUT THEY'RE NODDING THEIR HEAD AT WHAT I'M SAYING, SO MAYBE THEY DON'T NEED TO. OKAY. UM, WERE YOU AWARE, UM, ARE YOU ALL AWARE THAT THE REASON, UM, THIS THIS CASE, UH, IS ON CONSENT IS BECAUSE OF, AND, AND THE ISSUE WITHIN PD FIVE WITHIN DALLAS PERIOD IS THE, THAT THE DE ONCE WE, ONCE WE ALLOW FOR THE ZONING CASE, WE, IN THE GENERAL ZONING CASE, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO, UM, CONSIDER DESIGN STANDARDS? THE, THE QUESTION WAS DESIGN STANDARDS RELATED TO THIS? THE REASON THAT THIS CASE IS BECAUSE OF THE, THE, THE ISSUE IS MORE THAT WE CAN'T CONSIDER DESIGN STANDARDS IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE. I, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION. I WILL SAY THAT IN THE PAST WHEN WE'VE HAD, UH, CASES SIMILAR TO THIS, UH, WHERE WE'RE KIND OF DOING AN INFILL HOUSING SOLUTION, UM, APPLICANTS HAVE VOLUNTEERED DEED RESTRICTIONS IN ADDITION TO THE GENERAL ZONING CHANGE. UH, THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS COULD BE USED TO REQUIRE SOME DESIGN STANDARDS, UH, ON THE PROPERTY. UH, ONLY IF THE APPLICANT WERE WILLING TO VOLUNTEER THOSE STANDARDS. OKAY. I'M ON MY WAY TO THE, TO BE THERE, . OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, MEMBERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? ALRIGHT, I THINK THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO BRIEF, DO WE? ALRIGHT. IT IS 1213, UM, AND THAT CONCLUDES THE BRIEFING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION. WE WILL BE BACK FOR OUR PUBLIC HEARING AND WE WILL TRY TO GET ON THE RECORD FOR THAT AT 12:45 PM HEARING GETS CANCELED. SO WE'RE GONNA GO [CALL TO ORDER] AHEAD AND START COMMISSIONERS, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND BEGIN WITH A ROLL CALL. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. DISTRICT ONE COMMISSIONER SCHOCK HERE, DISTRICT TWO, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. PRESENT DISTRICT THREE. COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DISTRICT FOUR. COMMISSIONER FORSYTH PRESENT DISTRICT FIVE COMMISSIONER, UH, I'M SORRY, CHAIR SHA. DID PRESENT DISTRICT SIX. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER PRESENT? DISTRICT SEVEN. COMMISSIONER WHEELER REAGAN. DISTRICT EIGHT. COMMISSIONER BLAIR [02:55:01] PRESENT DISTRICT NINE. COMMISSIONER SLEEPER. HERE. DISTRICT 10. COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. PRESENT? DISTRICT 11. COMMISSIONER LER. PRESENT DISTRICT 12 VACANT. DISTRICT 13. COMMISSIONER HALL, DISTRICT 14. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBEN, I'M HERE. YOU HAVE QUORUM, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. TODAY IS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 19TH, 2024. IT IS 12:51 PM WELCOME TO THE DALLAS CITY POINT COMMISSION HEARING. A COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS BEFORE WE GET STARTED. OUR SPEAKER GUIDELINES, EACH SPEAKER WILL RECEIVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. UH, PLEASE BEGIN WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. UH, THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING. WE'LL HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ONLINE. I WILL PLEASE REMIND ALL OUR SPEAKERS ONLINE. THAT STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU. SO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE YOUR CAMERA ON AND WORKING WHEN IT IS TIME FOR YOU TO SPEAK. UH, AND AGAIN, I WOULD ASK THAT ALL OF YOU BEGAN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. UH, AND WITH THAT WE'RE [ZONING CASES –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n application for an MF-2(A) Multifamily District on property zoned an NS(A) Neighborhood Service District with deed restrictions [Z889-187 Tract 2] and an A(A) Agricultural District, on the north line of West Camp Wisdom Road, between Clark Road and Royal Cedar Way.] ITEM ONE IS Z 2 2 3 2 2. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY OWNED AND NS, A NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE DISTRICT WITH THE RESTRICTIONS Z 8 89, 180 7 TRACK TWO AND A AND, AND A A AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF WEST CAMPUS AND ROAD BETWEEN CLARK ROAD AND ROYAL CEDAR WAY STAFF. RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS THE APPLICANT HERE. ANYONE HERE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? YES SIR. THE MICROPHONE. THERE'S A LITTLE BUTTON THERE. THERE YOU GO. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. MY NAME'S MATTHEW KRUEGER, PRESIDENT WILDWOOD DEVELOPMENT. UM, I LIVE AT 1 0 1 0 7 NORMAN COURT, IRVING, TEXAS 7 5 0 6 3. SO, UM, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE COMMISSION, UM, TODAY FOR GIVING ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF CREEKSIDE AT CLARK RIDGE CANYON. UH, BEFORE I GET TO THE PRESENTATION, I DID WANT TO, UH, SHARE A LITTLE OF, UH, THE BACKGROUND OF OUR INVOLVEMENT IN THIS COMMUNITY AS WE'VE BEEN DEVELOPING IN IT FOR OVER 25 YEARS. UH, IT STARTED WITH RIDGE PARK, A TWO-PHASE, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY, UH, ALONG CLARK ROAD. UM, WE, UH, FOLLOWED THAT UP WITH AN, UH, ADJACENT SITE WITH A TWO-PHASE SINGLE FAMILY, UH, SUBDIVISION CLARK RIDGE THAT WE COMPLETED DEVELOPMENT IN 2006. AND THEN IN 2020, UH, WE FILED THAT UP WITH A CLASS A MARKET RATE, 248 UNITS, ALL SINGLE STORY RETIREMENT AGE FOCUSED COMMUNITY, UH, UM, UH, RIDGE CANYON APARTMENTS JUST IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST OF THE SITE. UH, IN ADDITION TO, UH, THAT COMMUNITY, WE DID DONATE, UH, $200,000 TO THE CITY, UH, FOR A STOPLIGHT ALONG CLARK ROAD, UH, WHICH AT THE TIME WAS, UH, DEEMED OR RATED BY THE CITY AS ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS INTERSECTIONS, UH, IN DALLAS. UH, SO WITH THIS COMMUNITY CREEKSIDE AT CLARK RIDGE CANYON, WE REALLY HOPE TO, UH, HAVE ANOTHER, A SUCCESSFUL ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS COMMUNITY, UH, THAT'S BEEN, UH, SUCCESSFUL. LIKE, UH, LIKE OUR PREVIOUS, UH, DEVELOPMENTS. AS FAR AS THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, CREEKSIDE OF PARKRIDGE CANYON, IT'S AN UPSCALE MARKET RATE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. UH, WE ARE TARGET MARKETING. OUR TARGET MARKET IS YOUNG PROFESSIONALS AND SENIORS, UH, LOOKING FOR A MINIMAL IMPACT TO THE ENVIRONMENT. UH, ONLY ONE MAIN BUILDING ON THE 4.8 ACRES. UH, WE'RE LOOKING AT APPROXIMATELY 223 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 21 TOWN HOMES. UH, THE COMMUNITY WOULD BE GATED, UH, WITH UNDERGROUND AND COVERED PARKING, UH, HIGH-END APPLIANCES AND AMENITIES. AND ALSO WE WOULD BE DONATING, UH, 14 ACRES, UH, TO A TREE PRESERVE. UH, THIS IS A LAND TO THE, UH, IMMEDIATE NORTH OF THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT. UH, AS FAR AS THE, THE, THE SITE PLAN ITSELF, UM, YOU'VE GOT CAMP WISDOM ROAD RIGHT HERE. YOU'VE GOT THE MAIN GATED ENTRANCE IN THIS AREA. YOU'VE GOT TOWN HOMES HERE, 21 TOWN HOMES ALONG THIS AREA. AND THE, UH, MAIN BUILDING HERE, UM, IN THE CENTER, UH, YOU'VE GOT THE, UM, UH, CLARK RIDGE CANYON APARTMENTS HERE TO THE, UH, [03:05:01] NORTHWEST. AND YOU'VE GOT THE SINGLE FAMILY, UH, SUBDIVISION TO THE IMMEDIATE EAST. UM, THE TREE PRESERVE, UH, WOULD BE MANAGED BY WILDWOOD FOUNDATION, A PUBLIC NONPROFIT THAT WE STARTED IN 2018, UH, WHICH WOULD BE MANNING MAINTAINING, UH, AND IMPROVING THE 27 ACRE TREE PRESERVE. THAT'S 14 ACRES THAT WE'RE ADDING WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND 13 ACRES THAT CA THAT WE, UH, DEEDED, UH, WITH THE COMPLETION OF CLARK RIDGE CANYON APARTMENTS TO THE IMMEDIATE WEST, WE'D BE UNDER BRUSHING AND REMOVING THE DEAD TREES AND VEGETATION ON THE PROPERTY AND OTHER POTENTIAL HAZARDS, FIRE HAZARDS, UH, BRUSH THAT'S, UH, GONE, UH, LONG ON MAINTAIN. THANK YOU, SIR. YOUR TIME IS UP COMMISSION. MY NAME IS STEVEN RECHT. I LIVE AT 37 48 VINE CREST DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO SPEAK. UM, I AM GOING TO, UH, FAST FORWARD A LITTLE BIT, UH, TO, UH, THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT THAT WE DID REPRESENT IN, IN ADDITION TO THIS CASE. YOU KNOW, THIS CASE WAS OFFICIALLY FILED, UM, MARCH 2ND, 2023, BUT ACTUALLY DATES BACK TO MAY OF 2019. UH, THIS CASE WAS, UH, HAD SUPPORT UNFORTUNATELY THROUGH, UH, VARIOUS, UH, SCENARIOS IN ADVANCE OF, OF COVID HAPPENING. UH, COMMISSIONER RESIGNED. WE WENT THROUGH A REDESIGN. IT WAS A SMALLER 2.9 ACRE TRACT, IS CURRENTLY A 4.8 ACRE TRACT WITH A CLASS A DEVELOPMENT. THIS CLASS A, UH, DEVELOPMENT WAS, UH, REALIGNED AND WE HAVE WHAT WE WE SEE TODAY. UM, AS MATTHEW MENTIONED, WE DID, UH, DONATE A, UM, A TRAFFIC LIGHT TO THIS DEVELOPMENT. UM, WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, WITH COVID-19 AND MANY OF THE DELAYS, WE ARE RESUBMITTING THIS APPLICATION NOW, SUBMITTED MARCH 2ND, 2023. UM, WE INITIALLY, UH, INTERACTED WITH COUNCILMAN GRACIE AND COMMISSIONER HERBERT TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF OUR PROJECT AS WELL AS THE MF TWO APPROVAL THAT WE RECEIVED FROM STAFF. WE FURTHER HAD A DISCUSSION WITH THE GROUP, UH, ON FEBRUARY THE EIGHTH TO GIVE A A FEW MORE DETAILS, UM, TO DISCUSS THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH. AND COMMISSIONER HERBERT ENCOURAGED US TO ENGAGE, UH, ELLEN TAF WITH, UH, MOUNTAIN CREEK ALLIANCE. UH, WE DID, SO WE HAD SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH, UH, WITH MS. TAF, A COUPLE NOTABLE ON, UH, MARCH THE EIGHTH WAS THE FIRST ONE, JUST TO GIVE HER A HISTORY OF WILDWOOD, WHAT WE DO TO LISTEN AND HEAR HER CONCERNS. UH, WE ALSO WANTED TO REITERATE TO HER THAT THIS IS GONNA HAVE A 27 ACRE TREE PRESERVE ATTACHED TO IT ALL. AND, AND, UH, WHEN IT'S ALL SAID AND DONE ON 26TH, WE, UH, SHOWED HER SOME OF OUR PROJECTS. SORRY, PLEASE, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICRO MICROPHONE'S. I'M SORRY. THERE SOME FOLKS ONLINE THAT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO HEAR YOU. THANK YOU. ON, ON APRIL 26TH, WE TOURED THROUGH SOME OF OUR PROJECTS JUST TO SHOW HER THE TYPE OF WORK THAT WE DO. WE ARE ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS AND THEN WE WANT TO HAVE A LOW IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AS WELL AS SERVING OUR COMMUNITY. ON JUNE 10TH, SHE WAS VERY GRACIOUS WITH HER TIME. WE SET UP A COMMUNITY OUTREACH MEETING AND SHE, UH, WE WENT DOOR TO DOOR WITH 300 PLUS FLYERS, UH, PRESENTED THIS, UH, COMMUNITY, THIS RESIDENCE COMMUNITY TOO, ABOUT 20 NEIGHBORS. IN DOING SO, WE HAD SOME TOUGH CONVERSATIONS. YOU KNOW, WE HAD SOME OPPOSITIONS AND, UM, I ENGAGED WITH SOME OF THE, UH, COMMUNITY MEMBERS AFTER WE HAD, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT SUPPORT. BUT, UM, IT WAS, IT WAS A TOUGH MEETING. I HAD A LONG CONVERSATION WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT AND WE DECIDED TO TAKE A MORE PERSONAL APPROACH. SO I PERSONALLY, ON AUGUST 14TH, 26TH AND 30TH, WALK THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, STARTING AT 25 28 ROYAL CREEK. THANK YOU, SIR. YOUR TIME IS UP. THANK YOU. PLEASE STAND BY. THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION? IS MS. JONES ONLINE? NO, NOT ONLINE. MR. KRUEGER, I THINK SPOKE OR MR. KRUEGER? YES, SIR. OKAY. AND, UH, LET'S SEE, APPLICANT. OKAY, SO THEN WE'RE READY FOR OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION, PLEASE TAKE A SEAT, GENTLEMEN. AND, AND THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. DO, WE'RE GONNA TAKE DOWN THAT [03:10:01] PRESENTATION AND THEN, AND THEN, UH, WE'LL GO TO YOU, MICHAEL. YEAH, HE'S, HE'S GONNA TAKE THE PRESENTATION DOWN REAL QUICK. GEORGE, PLEASE. I THOUGHT I PUSHED IT. THANKS. OKAY. WE'RE NOT PLAYING IT RIGHT THIS MINUTE. MM-HMM, . OKAY. WHAT, AND YOU'LL HELP ME PUSH IT. YEAH. GREAT. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ELLEN TAFT. I LIVE AT 79 24 GLEN WAY DRIVE DALLAS, TEXAS. I HOPE THAT YOU LOOKED AT THE OPPOSITION REPORT THAT WE MAILED OUT ON TUESDAY. THIS CHANGE IN ZONING TO MULTIFAMILY, IT'S ON 2.96 ACRES AND IS NOT WELL SUITED FOR A FIVE STORY BUILDING ON TOP OF AN UNDERGROUND 300 CAR GARAGE, PLUS 21 TOWN HOMES. TO BUILD, THIS DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO ASK FOR EXEMPTIONS TO BUILD IN THE 1.552 ACRES OF THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT BECAUSE ZONING CASES CANNOT ELIMINATE OR MODIFY EASEMENT LINES. AND THIS EASEMENT CURRENTLY CARRIES A MAJOR WATER LINE, ROUGHLY 670 FEET. THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO ASK FOR EXEMPTIONS TO CHANGE THE EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT STATE THE BUILDING HEIGHT CANNOT BE MORE THAN TWO STORIES. THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE TO ASK FOR EXEMPTION TO SURPASS THE PRES RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE. ASK FOR EXEMPTIONS TO BUILD IN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. ASK FOR EXEMPTIONS TO BUILD ON TWO PIECES OF DALLAS CITY PROPERTY TO CREATE THEIR EGRESS AND INGRESS ONTO CAMP WISDOM. AND YET THERE WILL BE NO TURN IN LANES, SO TRAFFIC WILL BACK UP IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. THEY'LL NEED TO ASK FOR EXEMPTIONS FROM VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS TO DISRUPT AND CHANGE THE FLOW OF THE ARTISAN CREEK. CURRENTLY THEIR SITE PLAN SHOWS THEM BUILDING THEIR RETAINING WALL IN THE CREEK, SO THEY WILL NEED TO MOVE THE WHOLE CREEK TO THE EAST, NEARER TO THE EXISTING HOMES. THE CREEK MAY RUN SLOW MOST DAYS, BUT WHEN IT RAINS, THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS AND SOUNDS LIKE. OH, SORRY. THOUGHT JORGE WAS RIGHT THERE. THIS IS AFTER A RAINSTORM, SOMEHOW WE'RE NOT COMING OUT. WHY IS IT NOT BROADCASTING IT? WELL, IT'S, BUT YOU DON'T HEAR IT. WE NEED TO HEAR IT, PLEASE. SORRY, THIS IS THE CREEK. THAT'S OKAY. THAT'S FINE. I APOLOGIZE. WE DIDN'T GET THE DRAMA THAT WE WERE HOPING FOR. WHEN THIS CREEK IS AFTER A RAINSTORM, THE CREEK RUNS OVER ON BOTH THE EAST AND WEST SIDE AND HAS ERODED THE BANK ALL THE WAY DOWN THIS EASEMENT AT LEAST EIGHT TO 10 FEET ALREADY. AND ALSO IMPORTANT TO US IS THAT ONLY FEET AWAY FROM THIS LOT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CAMP WISDOM AND CLARK ROAD. THERE IS A LARGE LOT ALREADY ZONED FOR MULTIFAMILY THAT WON'T REQUIRE THANK YOU YOUR TIME AS REQUIRE 10 EXEMPTIONS. SO WE HOPE YOU LOOK AT THOSE EXEMPTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M FRANCIS ESCOBAR. CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME? OKAY? UM, I ACTUALLY WAS HERE LIKE IN 2019, UH, AND WE WERE OPPOSED IN THE SAME PROJECT AND THEY, THEY LOST AND THEY EXTENDED IT TO NOW. SO I'M EX TALKING ABOUT SPEAKING FOR MY COMMUNITY AND HERE ARE THE REASONS WHY THEY'RE AGAINST IT OR WE'RE AGAINST IT. UH, OUR PROPERTY VALUE WILL DE INCREASE, UH, DECLINE WHEN WE SELL OUR HOUSES. OUR TAXES ARE GONNA GO UP. UH, THE TRAFFIC ON CAM WISDOM, IF THEY DON'T DO SOMETHING ABOUT LIGHTS OR SOMETHING WHERE THERE'S ONLY 1, 2, 2, UH, EXITS ON THE APARTMENT COMPLEXES, THE TRAFFIC IS GONNA BE AWFUL BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE GONNA START, UH, MAKING U-TURNS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET TO TRY TO GET TO GO NORTH. [03:15:01] I MEAN, EAST OR WEST. UM, ALSO, UH, THERE'S GONNA BE MORE CRIME IN THE AREA AND OUR WILDLIFE HAVE TO GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. UM, THE TENANTS IN THE, IN THE NEW FIVE STORY APARTMENT BUILDING, WHEN IT IS BUILT, THEY'RE PROBABLY GONNA BE ABLE TO LOOK IN AND SEE OUR BACKYARDS AND PROBABLY SEE OUR THROUGH OUR WINDOWS. AND I'M NOT SURE IF, UM, THAT'S THE CASE OR NOT, BUT I'M THINKING IT PROBABLY IS. ANOTHER ISSUE IS HOW SHE MENTIONED THE CREEK. THE CREEK IS IF, IF THEY DO START KNOCKING THOSE TREES DOWN AND EVERYTHING, THE, THE CREEK IS GONNA BACK UP AND IT'S GONNA BACK UP INTO OUR YARDS. SO I, UM, WE ASKED A MEETING TO HAVE WITH THE OWNER, I MEAN YEAH, WITH THE OWNER OF THE LAND, AND IT TURNED INTO A FIASCO. THEY, HE JUST STARTED CHATTING AND SCREAMING AT EVERYONE. SO WE DIDN'T GET ANY OF OUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED. AND IN THE FUTURE, WE'D HOPE TO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING WITH THEM SO WE CAN DISCUSS THAT. THIS IS WHAT WE TRULY WANNA DO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. HAVE A GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU. CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, MA'AM? OH, I'M SORRY. FRANCIS ESCOBAR, 6 9 1 5 ROLLING CREEK LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS SEVEN FIVE THROUGH 2 3 6. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION PLEASE. MY NAME IS DEAN BOWMAN. I LIVE AT 69 31 ROLLING CREEK LANE, RIGHT ON THE CREEK THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THIS BUILDING THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, IT'S GONNA BE A MASSIVE URBAN TYPE BUILDING. IT'S PROBABLY, IT'S FIVE STORIES, ABOUT 65 FEET TALL. THE WAY THE SITE SLOPES TO THE CREEK, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO PROBABLY DO A 30 OR FOOT, 40 FOOT RETAINING WALL THERE, MAKING ALL THIS GETTING CLOSE, APPROACHING A HUNDRED FOOT TALL. ALSO, IT IS A FLOODPLAIN. AND WHEN THEY BUILD THE WALL RIGHT UP ON THE CREEK, IF THAT'S WHAT THEY REALLY ARE GOING TO DO, IF NOT MOVING THE CREEK, THEY'RE GONNA BE TAKING AWAY HALF OF THE FLOODPLAIN. AND THIS IS A MAJOR CONDUIT DRAINING THE AUSTIN SHOCK ESCARPMENT DOWN PAST I 20 TO MOUNTAIN CREEK PARKWAY. WE ALREADY HAVE A GLUT OF APARTMENTS IN THE AREA. THE SCHOOLS ARE GONNA BE OVERLOADED. WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO BUILD NEW SCHOOLS. OUR TAXES ARE GONNA GO UP WHILE OUR PROPERTY VALUES GO DOWN. AGAIN, AS I SAID, THE CITY OWN THE, THE, THE CITY'S OWN CRIME, UH, WEBSITE BEARS OUT THAT THE CRIME HAS INCREASED AND THERE'S APARTMENT COMPLEXES AROUND THERE. UM, AND SO, UM, PROPERTY TAX MISS THE FLOODPLAIN, THE EASEMENT THAT HAS TO BE MOVED TO. AND UH, AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S THE GLUT. THIS IS AN URBAN BUILDING. IT DOESN'T BELONG IN THIS AREA. THIS IS ONE STORY. RESIDENTIAL HOUSES AND JUST A, JUST A SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD. A 10 STORY OR 10 A HUNDRED FOOT TALL BUILDING DOES NOT HAVE ANY PLACE IN HERE. I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOUNDS LIKE GROWTH, BUT GROWTH FOR ID, THE GROWTH FOR THE SAKE OF GROWTH IS THE IDEOLOGY OF A CANCER CELL WHEN IT'S NOT CONTROLLED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, SIR. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. PATRICIA EBER 1 1 5 SOUTH GREENSTONE LANE DUNCANVILLE 7 5 1 1 6. SO WHEN THE CREEK HAS ALL THE EARTH MOVING EQUIPMENT IN THERE, WHETHER THEY MOVE IT OR NOT, IT'S GOING TO HAVE AFFECT THE STORM DRAINAGE THAT GOES DOWN TO CAMP WISDOM, WHICH IS DUNCANVILLE, FLOWS DOWN TO THE HIGH SCHOOL, DUNCANVILLE HIGH SCHOOL, WHICH IS DUNCANVILLE. AND I AS A TAXPAYER DON'T WANNA HAVE TO PAY TO CLEAN ALL THAT UP. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM IN OPPOSITION? YES. OKAY. GENTLEMEN, PER OUR WILLS, YOU GET A REBUTTAL TIME. TWO MINUTES. I HAD LIKE TO START OUT AND SAY THAT, UM, OBVIOUSLY WE WANT TO BE A, A VERY CONSCIOUS MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY, UM, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, ADDRESSING, I GUESS THE MAIN CONCERN FIRST, THE, THE DRAINAGE. UH, ULTIMATELY WHAT WE'VE PUT TOGETHER SO FAR [03:20:01] HAS BEEN A, JUST A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN. UM, ULTIMATELY THE DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS AND THE DRAINAGE NEEDS OF THE SITE WILL BE A, A CONVERSATION AND, AND OBVIOUSLY A FURTHER REVIEW BY THE CITY OF, UH, DALLAS' ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. UM, ULTIMATELY THIS IS A ZONING CASE, NOT A, UH, WE'RE NOT SUBMITTING PLANS NOR HAVE WE SUBMITTED PLANS TO THE CITY OF DALLAS, UH, FOR REVIEW ON, UH, THE CIVIL ENGINEERING SIDE. SO ULTIMATELY IT'S NOT OUR INTENT, UH, TO DISTURB ARTISAN CREEK OR TO DO ANYTHING TO IMPACT, UH, ANYONE, UH, DOWNSTREAM OR TO THE EAST OF, UH, OF THIS, UH, OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND ULTIMATELY WHAT WE PLAN ON DOING WITH ARTISAN CREEK IS CLEARING OUT SOME OF THE TREES AND DEBRIS, DEBRIS TO THE NORTH THAT HAVE ACCUMULATED OVER TIME THAT ARE A HAZARD, A FLOODING HAZARD, A A FIRE HAZARD IN THE SUMMER. AND ULTIMATELY THINGS THAT, UH, WE DO NEED TO ADDRESS. AND AS PART OF THAT 27 ACRE TREE PRESERVE, WE FEEL THAT WE CAN CREATE A, JUST A GREAT COMMUNI, UH, GREAT COMMUNITY ASSET, UH, NOT JUST FOR THE, THE, UH, INDIVIDUALS AT CREEKSIDE, AT, UH, AT, UH, CLARK RIDGE CANYON, BUT ALSO CLARK RIDGE CANYON APARTMENTS AS, AS WELL AS THE, THE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY TO THE EAST. SO WITH THE TRAIL IMPROVEMENT AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, UH, WITHIN THE TREE PRESERVE, WE, WE JUST FEEL THAT THAT, UH, IS NOTHING BUT A POSITIVE, UM, IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY AND ONE THAT OUR RESIDENTS AND, AND WE WOULD, WE WOULD HOPE THAT THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTS, UH, WOULD, WOULD ALSO, UH, ENJOY IN SHARON AS WELL. THANK YOU SIR. COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. THANK YOU. UM, I'LL START BY JUST SAYING, COULD YOU BRIEFLY, UM, I I THINK YOU HAD SOME COMMUNITY OUTREACH THAT YOU WANTED TO SPEAK TO US TOO. IF YOU COULD JUST MAYBE JUST RECAP THAT SUPER BRIEFLY. YEAH. THE END OF YOUR PRESENTATION. IN, IN, IN THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH PIECE, YOU KNOW, WE WANTED TO TRULY ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY AND I PERSONALLY LEFT NOTES, GAVE CARDS, LETTERS, MAILED, EMAILED BECAUSE WE WANTED TO ANSWER ANY AND ALL QUESTIONS THAT THEY MAY HAVE AND PERHAPS DISPEL SOME OF THE MISINFORMATION THAT WAS OUT THERE. LIKE, WE'RE NOT GONNA BUILD ON TOP OF THE CREEK, WE'RE NOT, UH, MOVING OR REDIRECTING MOTHER NATURE 'CAUSE THAT NEVER WORKS. AND SO THAT WAS OUR GOAL. UM, AS THE MEDIA DIDN'T GO WELL, THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO TAKE A MORE PERSONAL APPROACH. NOW, THE PEOPLE I INTERACTED WITH ON THE STREET, THE PEOPLE I INTERACTED WITH ON THE STREET, UM, FRANKLY WERE ENGAGING. YOU KNOW, THERE WAS ONE INDIVIDUAL THAT, UH, WAS VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE PROJECT 'CAUSE SHE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE 27 ACRE TREE PRESERVE PROTECTS HER BACKYARD, PROTECTS THE DEVELOPMENT AT LARGE FROM FUTURE, UM, DEVELOPMENT IN AND AROUND THAT AREA. SO WE JUST WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE POSITIVES AND THAT IS SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER DEVELOPER IS DOING IN THIS PART OF TOWN. SO THAT COMMUNITY AVERAGE WAS IMPORTANT TO US. SO THAT'S GONNA START WITH MY FIRST QUESTION. THE TREE PRESERVE, CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND, BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE SEE THAT AS A PART OF A DEVELOPMENT REQUEST THAT COMES THROUGH TO US. THIS IS STRAIGHT ZONING, SO WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY. IS THAT A PARKLAND DEDICATION? HOW IS THAT BEING CODIFIED AND, AND SERVING AS THE AMENITY FOR THE COMMUNITY THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT? SO CURRENTLY THERE'S 13 ACRES. WE PLAN TO, UH, DONATE AN ADDITIONAL 14 ACRES AND WE WANT TO AMENITIZE THAT WITH MEANDERING TRAILS, PARKS, CLEAN THIS AREA UP TO WHERE WE HAND UNDERBRUSH REDUCE THE FIRE HAZARD AND MAKE THIS A USABLE PIECE OF LAND. AT THE MOMENT, IT'S, IT'S NOT USABLE, IT'S THERE. SO I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY 27 ACRE TREE PRESERVE, AND NOW I JUST HEARD YOU SAY 13. SO CURRENTLY IT'S 13 AND WE ARE GONNA DONATE AN ADDITIONAL 14, WHICH WILL BRING IT TO 27 PLUS ACRES TOTAL. YES MA'AM. AND, AND SO HOW, AND AGAIN, ARE, HOW ARE YOU WORKING WITH THE CITY? IS THAT BECOMING A NON-PROFIT ENTITY? IS IT A PARKLAND DEDICATION? SO CURRENTLY WILDWOOD FOUNDATION, UH, HOLDS AND CONTROLS THE 13 ACRES. WE WILL DONATE THE ADDITIONAL 14 ACRES TO THE WILDWOOD FOUNDATION, AND THEY WILL IN TURN, UH, MAINTAIN AND, AND AMENITIZE THAT IN, IN OUR, OUR HOPE AND GOAL IS THAT THAT WILL BE DONE IN PERPETUITY. SO YOU'RE CREATING A FOUNDATION TO HOLD THE LAND AND THE LAND WILL BE UNDER AN A OR IT'LL KEEP, ITS, ITS A DESIGNATION, AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT, BUT THE CITY'S NOT INVOLVED IN THIS. YOU'RE KEEPING THIS AS A PART OF YOUR FOUNDATION THAT'S TIED TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. THE, UH, WILDWOOD FOUNDATION WAS FOUNDED BACK IN 2018, UM, AND AS PART OF THE, UM, APARTMENT COMPLEX TO THE WEST, WHICH WE BUILT IN 2020, WE DEDICATED 13 ACRES INTO THE, INTO THE FOUNDATION. AS PART OF THE INITIAL TREE PRESERVE, WE'RE DONATING ANOTHER 14 ACRES, UH, IN THE, WITH CREEKSIDE AT PARKRIDGE CANYON FOR 27 TOTAL ACRES OF TREE PRESERVE. NOW, IT WOULD BE PRIVATELY HELD BY THE FOUNDATION. IT WOULDN'T BE A, [03:25:01] A CITY, UH, A CITY RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAIN FOR MAINTENANCE. IT WOULD BE A, A MAINTENANCE PART OF, UH, OR MAINTENANCE. UM, IT WOULD BE MAINTAINED BY THE WILDWOOD FOUNDATION. AND SO, AND AGAIN, THIS IS ALL THE, THE TREE, UM, SORT OF EXISTING COVERAGE THAT'S TO THE NORTH OF THIS SITE? YES MA'AM. OKAY. AND THEN, SO DO YOU HAVE A GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMUNITY? I MEAN, WHAT'S THE COMMU, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND YOUR INTENT, I TAKE YOU AT YOUR WORD, BUT WHAT IS THE COMMUNITY'S ASSURANCE THAT IT'S THERE FOR THEM AS, AS AN AMENITY THAT'S PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE? SO THAT IS PART OF OUR PERSONAL COMMITMENT THAT WE HAVE MADE TO THE COMMUNITY. YOU KNOW, UM, IT'S NOT BEEN PUT INTO WRITING, BUT THAT IS OUR DESIRE ALONG WITH THIS ZONING THAT THIS WILL CREATE, AS MENTIONED, THE 27, UH, ACRE TREE PRESERVE. UM, I DID WANNA MENTION, WE HAVE, UM, A QUICK SLIDE IF I CAN PULL THAT UP FOR YOU. UH, SO CURRENTLY YOU DON'T HAVE A PLAN TO CODIFY THAT I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR FOUNDATION. I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I MEAN, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO INCLUDING A GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD GIVE THE COMMUNITY MAYBE MORE INSURANCE? YOU, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY OPENING TO WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. UM, IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A COUPLE OF FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS, PLEASE. SO I THINK I ALSO HEARD YOU MENTION THE DRAINAGE. UM, CLEARLY THE CREEK IS GONNA DO WHAT THE CREEK'S GONNA DO. ARE YOU ENCROACHING ON THE EXISTING DRAINAGE EASEMENT, OR YOUR PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE OF THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT? CURRENTLY IT'S STILL UNDER, IT'S STILL UNDER DEVELOPMENT. THE, THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE IS CONCEPTUAL. SO WHEN IT COMES TO SUBMITTING CIVIL PLANS TO THE CITY, UM, THAT WOULD BE THE ACTUAL PHYSICAL LOCATION. THE ACTUAL, WELL, HERE'S WHERE A RETAINING WALL, IF THERE WAS A RETAINING WALL, WOULD BE, WOULD BE, UH, ESSENTIALLY DONE AT THAT TIME. AND IT WOULD BE AT THE, THE CITY'S DISCRETION AS TO, UH, WHATEVER, UH, DRAINAGE EASEMENTS NEED TO BE EXTENDED OR, OR TO BE ADJUSTED. UM, BUT ULTIMATELY WHAT WE'VE PROVIDED WAS THE, THE, THE CONCEPT PLAN THAT THAT SHOWS IT, UH, OUTSIDE OF THE CREEK, BUT ULTIMATELY, UM, WE'LL TAKE, UH, UH, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EFFORT IN, IN PUTTING TOGETHER CIVIL PLANS TO GET THE, THE PRECISE DETAIL AS TO WHERE AND HOW THAT WOULD BE BUILT. LET ME SEE IF I CAN REPHRASE. SURE. DOES YOUR CURRENT PROPERTY HAVE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON IT, OR IS THE PROPERTY LINE OUTSIDE OF THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT? UM, I APOLOGIZE. I I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. NO, THAT'S FINE. I, I APPRECIATE THE ADDITIONAL CONTEXT. YES, THERE, THERE IS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT ON, ON, ON THE VERY EXTREME, UM, SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY, BUT HOW THAT WOULD IMPACT THE DEVELOPMENT IS STILL UNDETERMINED. OKAY. AND THEN THE STAFF REPORT, AND YOU MAY HAVE HEARD IT DURING THE BRIEFING, IS THAT BECAUSE THERE'S ESSENTIALLY FLANKING EACH SIDE OF YOUR PROPERTY KEEPS THE A ZONING THAT THERE'S GONNA BE BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY, SO YOUR PROJECT'S GONNA START A MINIMUM OF 50 FEET BACK. IS THAT CORRECT? I COULDN'T QUITE TELL ON YOUR SITE PLAN. I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE SO. I, I DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I DO BELIEVE SO, UM, JUST ONE THING TO NOTE HERE, AND, AND THIS GOES TO KIND OF THE HEIGHT, IT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING AS WELL, AND THE PROXIMITY SLOPE. OBVIOUSLY WE'D HAVE TO BE WITHIN, UM, THE, THE REQUIREMENT PRO REQUIRED PROXIMITY SLOPE. UM, UH, BUT ULTIMATELY THIS, THIS SITE SITS ABOUT 10 FEET BELOW GRADE, UH, BELOW CAMP WISDOM ROAD. UM, SO ULTIMATELY WHEN YOU GET OFF CAMP WISDOM, YOU, YOU GO DOWN A SIGNIFICANT DISTANCE, UH, BEFORE YOU, YOU START TO BUILD UP. SO JUST, UH, JUST WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR, I KNOW WE'VE BEEN TALKING HEIGHT, BUT ULTIMATELY, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS, THE SITE'S SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW GRADE, SO, AND THAT WAS GONNA BE ONE OF MY FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS 'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY HAS A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL RETAINING WALL, UM, AS IT'S HEADING. I'M GONNA LOSE MY DIRECTION ON THIS EAST. YEP. AND SO ARE, ARE YOU ANTICIPATING YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A RETAINING WALL OR YOU'RE GOING TO WORK WITH THE EXISTING GRADES, WHICH MEANS YOU'LL ACTUALLY BE STEPPED DOWN A BIT? OR IS IT GOING TO STAIR STEP, AND I KNOW YOU HAVEN'T DONE ALL OF YOUR FULL PLANNING, BUT DO YOU THERE WILL BE RETAINING WALLS ON THE PROPERTY ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY? UM, ULTIMATELY WE WERE LOOKING AT A, A PODIUM. SO, UH, ESSENTIALLY THAT LOWER CALL IT BELOW GRADE AREA WOULD ACTUALLY BE PARKING. UH, INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, LIVING SPACE OR A RETAINING WALL OR DIRT, UH, YOU BUILD ON TOP OF THAT. SO, UM, ULTIMATELY WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO THE, THE RETAINING WALLS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD HAVE SOME RETAINING WALLS, UM, THAT WOULD, UH, OBVIOUSLY KEEP, UH, KEEP, UH, EROSION AT BAY. UH, BUT ULTIMATELY, AGAIN, THAT'S JUST, UH, IT'S, IT'S A FUNCTION OF ENGINEERING MORE SO THAN IT IS A FUNCTION OF, OF, OF THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN. OKAY. AND WE DID HEAR, AND WE'VE RECEIVED SOME COMMENTS THAT, UM, THERE'S A FIVE STORY BUILDING PROPOSED. AND SO IS THAT INCLUDING YOUR PARKING AND YOUR UNITS ABOVE? OR THE, OR THE, UM, HABITABLE SPACE IS INTENDED TO BE FIVE STORIES. YEAH. UM, THE INTENT IS NOT A FULL FIVE STORY BUILDING. AND, AND REALLY THE, THERE'S TWO ISSUES WHEN IT COMES TO BEING FIVE STORIES. UM, ONE IS THE PROXIMITY SLOPE, UH, WHICH ON ONE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WOULD PRECLUDE US HAVING A FIVE STORY ON THAT SIDE. UM, [03:30:01] AND TO THAT POINT, UH, THE ACTUAL, AND, AND AS WE'VE LOOKED INTO THIS, UH, THE, THE CONSTRUCTION, UM, THE CONSTRUCTION COST OF BEING FIVE STORY, BECAUSE IT'S EXPONENTIALLY ACTUALLY MORE EXPENSIVE TO GO TO A FIFTH STORY 'CAUSE YOU HAVE TO CHANGE THE DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS OF THESE STORIES BELOW THEM. SO THIS IS NOT A GUARANTEE THAT'S A FIVE STORY STRAIGHT ACROSS BUILDING. IT NEVER WAS BY PROXIMITY SLOPE, AND IT MAY NEVER BE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT IT JUST MAY NOT BE COST EFFECTIVE TO DO SO. SO HOW DOES THAT WORK WITHIN THE REQUESTED MF TWO ZONING, WHICH ONLY ALLOWS 36 FEET OF HEIGHT? IS IT BECAUSE OF THE GRADE DIFFERENTIAL ON THE SITE? UH, IT'S IN PARTS AND, AND ALSO THERE IS THE, UM, UH, A, I, I BELIEVE THE, THE BONUS MIH THAT IS PART OF THAT, THAT WOULD ALLOW US THAT SORT OF FLEXIBILITY ON CERTAIN SIDES TO, TO DO THAT. UM, BUT ULTIMATELY, UH, AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF, IF FIVE STORIES BECAME JUST IN PROHIBITIVELY EXPENSIVE, IT WOULD NEVER BE A FIVE STORY BUILDING OR PART OF A BE A FIVE STORY BUILDING. OKAY. BUT YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE WANTING TO PRESERVE THAT FLEXIBILITY THAT YOUR BASE OWNING IS MF TWO, IF YOU DID WANT AN ADDITIONAL STORY THAT YOU WOULD THEN INTEGRATE M-I-H-D-B INTO YOUR MIXED INCOME HOUSING BONUS WITHIN THE PROJECT? YES. WE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE HOUSING BONUS, YES, MA'AM. OKAY. AND THEN, UM, FINAL QUESTION. THERE WERE, UM, COMMENTS YOU LIKELY HEARD TALKING ABOUT VISUAL INTRUSION. IS THAT ANYTHING THAT YOU'VE CONSIDERED WITH YOUR PLANNING AND WITH YOUR LAYOUT THAT YOU COULD INCORPORATE, UM, INTO THE DESIGN TO HELP ALEVE, UM, COMMUNITY CONCERNS YES. ABOUT HOW THIS INTEGRATES. I APOLOGIZE. YES. IN, IN PART, UM, THE EAST SIDE WOULD BE LOWER THAN THE WEST SIDE. AND TWO, THERE ARE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF VERY TALL TREES THAT WOULD REMAIN IN THE CREEK. UM, I, I THINK THAT THERE WAS KIND OF AN ASSUMPTION THAT, UH, WE WOULD JUST TEAR OUT ALL THE TREES ALONG THE CREEK CREEK IN DEVELOPMENT. WE DON'T NEED TO TOUCH THINGS IN THE FLOOD PLAIN. WE DON'T NEED TO TOUCH THINGS ON THE EAST SIDE OF THAT CREEK. SO A LOT OF THE NATURAL BARRIER THAT EXISTS BETWEEN US AND THE SINGLE FAMILY TO THE EAST WOULD BE PRESERVED, UM, BASED ON THIS CURRENT SITE PLAN. THERE'S NO REASON TO TEAR OUT ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T NEED TO BE TOUCHED. AND ULTIMATELY, WHEN WE'RE SELLING, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, FUTURE TENANTS AND, AND, UH, FUTURE INDIVIDUALS, UH, WHO WANNA LIVE HERE, THEY WANT THAT NATURAL ASPECT. THEY DON'T WANT TO SEE, YOU KNOW, HOMES. THEY WANT TO SEE A NATURAL CREEK. THEY WANT TO SEE VEGETATION, THEY WANT TO SEE SOMETHING MUCH MORE NATURAL THAN, THAN JUST CITYSCAPE AND, AND OTHER, OTHER PEOPLE'S HOMES. SO WE WANT TO KEEP THAT VISUAL BARRIER AS MUCH AS, AS THE INDIVIDUALS TO THE EAST DO. SO, TWO FINAL QUESTIONS, IF I MAY. UM, FIRST ONE IS, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED MAYBE, UM, INCLUDING A, UH, BUFFER TO HELP GIVE THE RESIDENTS SOME CERTAINTY THAT AS YOU'RE DEVELOPING YOUR PLANS, THAT SOME OF THAT TREE PROTECTION WILL BE INTEGRATED WITHIN THE PLANS? YEAH, I, I MEAN, ULTIMATELY THAT'S ABSOLUTELY SOMETHING WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE IS, IS TO HAVE THAT, UH, BUFFER FOR, FOR THEM AS FOR AS WELL FOR US. YES. AND THEN FINAL QUESTION IS, UM, I KNOW WE HAVE DEED RESTRICTIONS IN OUR DOCKET, WE WERE GIVEN A PACKET THAT APPEARS TO HAVE DEED RESTRICTIONS WITH ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS. HAVE YOU, AND THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE TWO DEED RESTRICTIONS OUT THERE. ARE YOU AWARE OF THESE OTHER DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH US? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WERE SPECIFIC TO, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES AND BUILDINGS, UH, WITHIN THAT DESIGNATION, UM, AND DID NOT, UH, EXTEND, UH, BEYOND A, A CHANGE IN ZONING. OKAY. I'LL FOLLOW UP WITH THE CITY STAFF ON THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. MR. PEPE. I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER IT NOW, ACTUALLY. SO THERE ARE TWO DE RESTRICTIONS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA THAT HAVE THE SAME, UM, DE RESTRICTION NUMBER. THEY'RE ACTUALLY RECORDED IN THE SAME DOCUMENT. ONE OF THEM IS TRACK ONE AND ONE OF THEM IS TRACK TWO. UM, THESE, THIS PROJECT IS IN TRACK TWO, AND THE ONLY RESTRICTIONS THAT APPLY TO THAT ARE GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE IS PROHIBITED AND MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION IS PROHIBITED. THE TALK ABOUT THE MULTIFAMILY USE, UH, RESTRICTION OF THE HEIGHT AND STUFF LIKE THAT IS THE TRACT ONE, WHICH IS ABOUT A HUNDRED FEET TO THE WEST WHEN THEY APPROVED A MULTIFAMILY THERE. SO IN OUR CASE REPORT ON PAGE ONE 16, THERE'S A Z 8 8 9 DASH 180 7 TRACK ONE. IS THAT THE, IN OUR IN CASE REPORT, WHAT PAGE WOULD YOU SAY? PAGE ONE DASH 16 AND UNDERNEATH THE 16 OH, ONE'S DESIGNATED AS TRACK TWO, YOU CAN SEE THE TRACK ONE TO THE WEST. THOSE ARE THE REST, WHAT I THINK WAS DESCRIBED AT ONE POINT ABOUT A HEIGHT RESTRICTION AND SOME OTHER THINGS ARE THE TRACT ONE RESTRICTIONS. OKAY. THESE ARE TRACK TWO RESTRICTIONS, WHICH MAINLY GOVERN, WHICH WERE INTENDED TO APPLY TO A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LIKE THE ONE ON THE GROUND RIGHT NOW. AND ARE, DO WE KNOW, DO WE HAVE ANY INFORMATION BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT WAS A DIFFERENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION IF THE INTENT WAS THAT ANY MULTIFAMILY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE OTHER DEED RESTRICTIONS. [03:35:01] NOW THEY HAVE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON PRIOR CASE HAVE, UH, NOT TOO MUCH. THEY HAVE INDIVIDUAL DEED RESTRICTIONS. THERE WAS NO IMPLICATION, LEGAL IMPLICATION IN THAT DOCUMENT THAT SAYS THAT THEY APPLY TO ONE OR THE OTHER. UH, BECAUSE THE BORING ANSWER IS THAT THEY HAVE INDIVIDUAL DESCRIPTIONS THAT APPLY TO INDIVIDUAL SPOTS, WHICH IS WHY THEY'RE INDEPENDENTLY MAPPED. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER HALL? YES, SIR. UH, TO THE WEST IS THE APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT CURVES AROUND IT. IS THAT CLARK RIDGE? CANYON? YES, THAT'S CLARK RIDGE CANYON APARTMENTS. WE BUILT THAT, UH, UH, BETWEEN 2018 AND 2020. OKAY. AND ARE, IS THAT TWO LEVELS? TWO STORIES? UH, THOSE ARE ALL, UM, ONE STORY, UH, SINGLE FOURPLEXES ESSENTIALLY. OH, ONE STORY. ONE STORY. SO IT WAS OVER, UH, 22 ACRES. IT WAS A SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER SITE THAT ALLOWED US TO SPREAD THE, TO, TO DO A DIFFERENT TYPE OF PRODUCT. SO WE DID A, WE'VE DONE SINGLE FAMILY IN THE AREA. WE'VE DONE TWO STORY IN THE AREA. WE'VE DONE A FOURPLEX LIKE AT CLARK RIDGE, THE 248 UNITS AT, AT, UH, CLARK RIDGE. AND THEN THIS IS A DIFFERENT PRODUCT. AGAIN, ALL, ALL, UH, ALL MARKET, UH, UPSCALE, UH, AGAIN, JUST A DIFFERENT TYPE OF PRODUCT, JUST GIVING VARIETY TO THAT AREA. OKAY. DO THOSE DEPARTMENTS SIT ABOVE THE TREE CANOPY OR ARE THEY, ARE THEY, THEY'RE GENERALLY JUST BELOW THAT CANOPY? UH, THERE IS A RETAINING WALL, UH, THAT'S ANYWHERE BETWEEN, I BELIEVE, 15 AND 25 FEET. UM, JUST BECAUSE OF, OF, OF THE GRADE CHANGE ON THE WEST SIDE. MM-HMM. . UM, BUT, UH, AGAIN, THEY, YOU KNOW, AS, AS FAR AS WHAT THEY SEE, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE STILL BELOW THE ABSOLUTE TREETOP, BUT THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, ABOVE, SIGNIFICANTLY ABOVE GRADE. OKAY. AND ONE FINAL QUESTION. UH, ANY RETAINING WALL THAT YOU BUILD A ALONG THE CREEK, DOES IT HAVE A LIFESPAN? IS IT A 20 YEAR LIFESPAN, A HUNDRED YEAR LIFESPAN? I MEAN, IS THERE ANY WAY TO ESTIMATE THAT THERE, THERE'S NO WAY TO ESTIMATE IT. BUT ULTIMATELY WITH THE, UM, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE LOOK AT THE, THE, THE SAME RETAINING WALLS THAT, THAT WE HAVE ALONG, UH, CLARK RIDGE CANYON, UM, THAT ARE OF THE 15 TO 25 FEET VARIETY THAT HAVE THOSE HOMES ON, UH, OR THOSE FOURPLEXES ON TOP OF THOSE ARE A, A LIFETIME, UH, IN, IN INDEFINITE, UH, UM, TIME, UH, WALL THAT AGAIN ARE, ARE, UM, ARE DESIGNED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, INSPECTED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, AND ULTIMATELY APPROVED AND STAMPED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER UPON THE, UPON COMPLETION ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT. SO, UH, THERE'S SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF OVERSIGHT WITH ANY SORT OF RETAINING WALL, UH, THAT MAY BE BUILT. UM, WHETHER IT'S CLOSE TO A CREEK, IT'S IN AN ESCARPMENT, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S ON THE WEST SIDE OR EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. ALL OF THAT WOULD BE DESIGNED AND DONE BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. AND, AND FINALLY, WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR INSPECTION AND REPAIR RETAINING WALLS? UM, AT THE END OF THE DAY, UH, THAT WOULD FALL, UM, AFTER DEVELOPMENT, UH, WOULD FALL TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE MANAGEMENT, UH, WHOEVER OWNS THAT PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD BE US. UH, AND UNTIL THERE WOULD IN, UNTIL OR IF THERE WOULD BE A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP, BUT IT WOULD ALL BE PRIVATE, IT WOULD NOT BE CITY. YEP. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, I'LL FOLLOW YOU. THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, THANK YOU, UM, FOR ASKING A LOT OF THOSE QUESTIONS. I THINK THEY WERE PREPARED BECAUSE I ASKED THEM ALREADY. NO, UM, BUT I'M GLAD THEY'RE ON RECORD. 'CAUSE A LOT OF THAT, UM, WAS NEEDED. UH, UH, ABOUT TRANSPORTATION, THE, THE STREET, IT'S ON CAMP WISDOM, IT'S A PRETTY BUSY STREET. UM, CAN YOU DESCRIBE YOUR INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THIS PROPERTY AND HOW WE INTERFERE WITH CAMP WISDOM? YES. SO, UM, AND AGAIN, WE, WE'VE GOT, UH, BASED ON THE PRELIMINARY CONCEPT, WE'VE EXTENDED AND, AND WIDENED, UM, AND DEEPENED THE ENTRANCE. THERE'S ONE MAIN ENTRANCE, GATED ENTRANCE, UM, OFF OF CAMP WISDOM. UM, AND THERE ALSO IS A, UH, DEDICATED EXIT ONLY ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO ENTRANCE ON THE, ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. AND, UH, UH, UH, THE, UM, EXIT ON THE EXIT ON THE EAST AND, AND ENTRANCE THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE GATED AREA ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO HELP ME VISUALIZE THAT COMING INTO THE PROPERTY, YOU'RE SAYING THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DRIVE OFF INTO YOUR PROPERTY BEFORE HAVING THE, INTO THE GATE, TAKING TRAFFIC OFF OF CAMP WISDOM? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES. SO THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, AGAIN, THAT, THAT AREA WAS EXTENDED IN, IN ON THE, UM, ON THE WEST SIDE TO, UH, ALLOW PEOPLE TO GET OFF OF CAMP WISDOM BEFORE ENTERING THE GATE. THEY'RE NOT WAITING ON CAMP WISDOM TO OPEN A GATE. THERE'S, THERE'S SUBSTANTIAL, UH, SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF, OF STACKING ABILITY WITHIN THAT ENTRANCE TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO GET OFF THE ROAD AND THEN ULTIMATELY, UH, TURN, UH, GET INTO THE, GET INTO THE GATED COMMUNITY AND NOT, NOT TO BE, UM, UM, IMPACTING TRAFFIC ALONG CAMP WISDOM. GOTCHA. AND, AND THAT AREA CAMP WISDOM, WHEN YOU'RE APPROACHING YOUR SITE, IT'S A, IT'S A BIT OF A INCLINE DECLINE COMING OUT OF THE EXIT. [03:40:01] WILL THERE BE FULL VISIBILITY BOTH WAYS FOR YOUR, UM, UM, UH, RESIDENTS COMING OUT? YES. ON, ON BOTH SIDES. UM, THERE, THERE'S VISIBILITY, UM, ON THAT EXIT, LOOKING BOTH WAYS. YES. OKAY. UM, OTHER THINGS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, THERE'S SOME HOMES THAT YOUR PROPERTY ABUTS THAT, UM, ARE ON THE CREEK TODAY AND HAVE BACKYARDS, UM, ON THIS CREEK. UM, IS, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED WHAT YOUR DEVELOPMENT WOULD DO TO THEIR HOMES? UM, WHO, SOME ARE VERY CLOSE TO CAMP WISDOM, BUT BACKYARDS ARE VISIBLE, UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THE CREEK. SO FIR ONE QUESTION, IS THE CREEK BETWEEN YOUR PROPERTY AND THEIR PROPERTY ONE, AND WILL YOUR STRUCTURE HAVE AN EFFECT ON THOSE SPECIFIC HOMES? YES. SO YES, THERE IS SPACE IN BETWEEN AS YOU CAN KIND OF SEE, UM, IN THIS AREA HERE. AND, UH, ULTIMATELY, UM, WE DO NOT WANT TO IMPACT AND, AND HAVE BASED ON, ON THE PRELIMINARY CONCEPT PLAN, DO NOT IMPACT, UH, THE CREEK AND, AND ULTIMATELY THE, THE HOMES, UH, TO THE EAST THAT, UH, ARE CLOSE TO CAMP WISDOM, BUT ALONG THAT CREEK AND ULTIMATELY WANNA DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO AVOID, UH, YOU KNOW, ANY, ANYTHING, UM, THAT, THAT MAY COME UP. SO ULTIMATELY, THAT WOULD ALSO BE A DESIGN CONSIDERATION OF THE, UH, CITY AND CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT WHEN THEY REVIEW PLANS AS TO HOW THIS WOULD IMPACT THE, UH, SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. POINT OF CLARIFICATION, CHAIR. CAN WE HAVE A VIEW AT WHAT HE'S LOOKING AT? 'CAUSE I THINK IT'LL HELP. THANK YOU. SORRY. I'M SORRY I DIDN'T, WE CAN'T SEE ANYTHING. OKAY. YOU HELP ME OUT WITH THIS ONE. SORRY. THANK YOU. SORRY. UM, SO, UM, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, UH, AGAIN, HERE'S THE, THE CULVERT, HERE'S THE PROPERTY OVER HERE, AND THIS WOULD BE, UH, ESSENTIALLY THE, THE HOMES AND, AND THE, UM, UH, UH, DEVELOPMENT TO, TO THE EAST AS WELL. SO AGAIN, WE DO NOT WANT TO ENCROACH, NOR DO WE WANT ANYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING TO, UM, TO A ROAD OR TO, UH, CREATE ANY SORT OF ISSUES FOR, FOR ANYBODY TO THE EAST. AND, AND WE'RE, WE'RE CONFIDENT WE CAN DO THAT. AND WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT THE, THE CITY OF DALLAS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, UH, WILL MAKE SURE THAT, UH, UH, THAT WE MEET EVERY REQUIREMENT NECESSARY TO AVOID, AVOID DOING. SO THAT'S, AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THAT IS WHERE, IS THAT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER WHERE THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT WE SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER IS YES. OKAY. IN THIS AREA OVER HERE? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. YES, SIR. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE TOWN HOMES? I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THE BUILDING A LOT, BUT WE HAVE NOT SPOKEN ABOUT THE TOWN HOMES A LOT. UH, CAN YOU SPEAK ABOUT THOSE? YES. SO THE TOWN HOMES ARE, AND, AND I HOPE YOU CAN SEE THE CURSOR HERE, UM, ALONG THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, HERE. UH, ESSENTIALLY THEY WOULD BE A LOWER GARAGE AND, AND BASICALLY A, UH, THE, THE HOME WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY ABOVE THE GARAGE. TOWN HOME WOULD BE ABOVE THAT GARAGE. UH, SO THERE ARE 21, UM, THAT, UH, KIND OF LINED THE, UH, WE'LL CALL IT THE WESTERN AND AND NORTHERN PART OF, OF THE PROPERTY. THEY, UM, QUADS, SINGLE BUILDINGS. DO YOU KNOW YET, UH, THEY MOST LIKELY SINGLE BUILDINGS, UM, INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS AND 21 INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS. UM, YEAH, COMMON WALL. THANK YOU. UM, A BIT MORE TO, JUST TO HONE IN ON THE DRAINAGE. UM, THERE'S A COUPLE CREEKS THAT DRAIN TO THIS AREA, INCLUDING ONE USED BY THE BOY SCOUTS AS MENTIONED, I THINK, UM, THERE'S SOME FROM DUNCANVILLE AND OTHER NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORING AREAS. UM, HAS THAT BEEN CONSIDERED IN THIS PROJECT YET, OR, UM, ARE YOU AWARE OF THOSE ISSUES? YES. UM, ULTIMATELY WHEN IT COMES TO, UM, THIS SITE SPECIFICALLY AND, AND THE DRAINAGE IMPACT IT MAY HAVE, UM, YOU KNOW, FURTHER DOWNSTREAM AS WELL. UH, ULTIMATELY ANY SORT OF, UH, UH, DETENTION RETENTION OF, OF WATER ON SITE, UM, WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE WOULD BE BOUND BY IN, IN DALLAS'S OWN, UM, ON, UM, UH, UH, SPECIFICATIONS AS, AS TO HOW MUCH AND HOW LONG WE WOULD HOLD THAT WATER. SO ULTIMATELY THOUGH I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO SAY EXACTLY WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, ULTIMATELY, WE ARE STILL BOUND BY, UM, DALLAS ORDINANCES AS FAR AS DRAINAGE AND, AND WHAT WE NEED TO HAVE ON SITE, UH, TO, UH, TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE. UM, IT, THANK YOU. UM, MY COUNTERPART MENTIONED A GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT. I THINK THAT'LL BE IMPORTANT FOR YOU AS YOU MOVE THIS. IF THIS IS APPROVED, UM, WE, THAT GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT IS, MAY BE THE ONLY THING THAT, UM, THE NEIGHBORS COULD HAVE TO KIND OF SAY THAT THAT AREA WILL BE CONSERVED. UM, THAT'S A, A HUGE ACREAGE OF [03:45:01] LAND, UM, OF TREES THAT I THINK SHOULD BE PRESERVED AND PROVIDE QUALITY OF LIFE, UM, FOR THE RESIDENTS IN THE AREA. UM, BUT CAN YOU SAY YOU'RE GONNA GET THAT GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT WORKED OUT AND, UM, MAYBE WORK WITH MICHAEL PEPE, UH, AND GET THAT DELIVERED? YES. I MEAN, AGAIN, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE'D LOVE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SHARE IN THIS 27 ACRES. UM, WE'VE DONE THIS, WE DID THIS IN, UH, DESOTO. WE'VE, UH, GOT A, UM, UH, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND A PIT, UH, IN DESOTO TO PUT IN FOUR MILES OF TRAILS. UM, THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE DONE. UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ENJOY DOING. UM, AND FOR, UH, THE RESIDENTS OF PARKRIDGE CANYON TO THE WEST, UM, CREEKSIDE AT PARKRIDGE CANYON, UH, TO THE SOUTH, AND THEN THE, UM, UH, RESIDENTS TO THE EAST, WE'D LOVE FOR THEM TO ALL SHARE IN THE 27 ACRES AND SPEND THE TIME AND, AND, UH, AND NECESSARY EFFORT TO IMPROVE IT, AMENITIZE IT, AND, UH, HAVE IT BE A, UH, PERPETUAL ASSET, UH, TO THE COMMUNITY. OKAY. AND, AND I KNOW THAT NOT TO GIVE BROKEN PROMISES, THIS WILL BE A GATED COMMUNITY, SO GIVEN ACCESS TO THOSE RESIDENTS WILL TAKE SOME EXTRA STEPS THAT PROBABLY CAN BE DISCUSSED HERE, BUT JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT OUT THERE. OKAY. MR. FORT, I FOLLOW YOU. COULD YOU, UH, POINT OUT, UH, ON THIS, UH, MAP THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE ON THE SCREEN WHERE THIS TREE PRESERVE IS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE THE 13, UH, CURRENT ACRES ARE AND WHERE THE 14 NEW ACRES, UH, YOU KNOW, ARE? SURE. UM, I'LL START ON, ON THIS SLIDE. UM, THIS AREA TO THE NORTH HERE, UM, AND I JUST GOTTA, I BELIEVE, GO A LITTLE FURTHER. SO THIS RIGHT HERE IS CAMP WISDOM ROAD. ON YOUR RIGHT, ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, UH, HERE'S THE DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. UH, THIS DARKER SHADED GREEN AREA ON THE WEST SIDE, WHICH WOULD BE THE WEST, UH, ADJACENT TO, UH, CLARK RIDGE CANYON APARTMENTS HERE. THAT'S THE CURRENT 13 ACRES. OKAY. UH, THE 14 ACRES IS THIS LIGHTER SHADED, UM, A GREEN AREA HERE ON THE EAST SIDE. UM, AND THEN YOU KIND OF SEE THAT THERE IS, UM, SOME ACCESS OR ACCESS POINTS, UH, THAT OBVIOUSLY ALLOW US CON UH, CONTACT WITH, UH, ALLOW THIS TO BE ENJOYED BY CREEKSIDE WITH, UH, RIDGE CANYON. AND, AND THERE ARE AREAS, UH, THAT'S, UH, CITY OWNED PROPERTY, UM, ALONG, ALONG THIS BORDER HERE THAT WOULD ALLOW CONNECTIVITY TO THAT, UH, SUBDIVISION AS WELL. SO THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO ON A CAMP WISDOM ROAD AND THROUGH, THROUGH THE, THE DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO ACCESS THE AMENITY. OKAY. WHAT, WHAT TYPE OF, UH, DEVELOPMENT WORK HAVE YOU ALREADY DONE WITH THE 13 EXISTING ACRES? IS IT, IS IT CURRENTLY USABLE? ARE THERE TRAILS THERE? IS THE UNDERBRUSH BEEN CLEARED, OR IS IT JUST ALL WOODS THAT, THAT HAS, UM, BRUSH HAS BEEN CLEARED ON PART? UM, ULTIMATELY ADJOINING THE 14 ACRES WAS WHAT WE WANTED TO DO, UH, BEFORE WE WENT AHEAD AND STARTED TO AMENITIZE IT. IT'S HARD TO AMENITIZE JUST THE, THE, THE WAY THAT IT'S SPLIT. AND SINCE THAT 13 ACRES IS KIND OF VERY LONG, SO TO SPEAK, IT, IT KIND OF GOES ALONG THIS RETAINING WALL. IT'S DIFFICULT TO REALLY BUILD SORT OF AMENITIES INTO IT. IT REALLY NEEDS THAT 14 ACRES IN ORDER TO, UH, FULLY BE REALIZED. SO ULTIMATELY THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, LARGELY THE DEVELOPMENT, EVEN THOUGH THIS HAS BEEN CLEANED AND CLEARED, UH, IN AREAS, UH, ULTIMATELY THE, UH, EASTERN SIDE IS, IS, IS REALLY NECESSARY IN ORDER TO, UH, REALLY FULL, FULLY UTILIZE THE ENTIRE 27 ACRES IN, IN AMENITIZED IN A TRAIL FORMING FASHION. OKAY. UM, GOING BACK TO THE, UH, PROPERTY ITSELF, UM, THE RETAINING WALL THAT YOU'RE, YOU, THAT, THAT WOULD LIKELY NEED TO BE BUILT, I I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S QUEST LINE OF QUESTIONINGS. WILL THE RETAINING WALL BE, UH, ON YOUR PROPERTY, OR WILL IT ACTUALLY BE RIGHT ON, ON THE CREEK? WILL IT, WILL IT, WILL IT REQUIRE, UH, YOU KNOW, ALL THE CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TO BE ACTUALLY IN THE CREEK AND COULD POSSIBLY CAUSE DAMAGE TO THE CREEK WHEN YOU'RE BUILDING THAT RETAINING WALL? RIGHT. ULTIMATELY, AND, AND, AND AS I HAD MENTIONED BEFORE, SINCE I DON'T HAVE A SET OF CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANTS, I CAN'T TELL YOU EXACTLY WHERE THAT FALLS ULTIMATELY TO AVOID AVOIDING ANY SORT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, UM, ANY ISSUES WITH THE CREEK OR, OR TO, UH, YOU KNOW, BEING IN THE CREEK OR AROUND THE CREEK OR CAUSING FURTHER EROSION TO THE CREEK. IS, IS WHAT THE CITY'S GOING TO WANT TO AVOID AND ULTIMATELY WILL BECOME A, AN ISSUE WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AS WELL, UH, WHEN WE GET THAT FAR. BUT ULTIMATELY THE INTENT HERE WAS TO KEEP THE DEVELOPMENT FAR ENOUGH AWAY FROM THE CREEK TO NOT ALLOW THE CREEK TO BECOME A DETRIMENT TO, TO EITHER, UH, PEOPLE DOWNSTREAM A DETRIMENT TO THE PEOPLE TO THE EAST, OR A DETRIMENT TO OUR OWN DEVELOPMENT, WHICH ULTIMATELY WE WOULD NOT WANT OUR EXIT OR, OR OUR EASTERN SIDE ERODING INTO CREEK ANYMORE THAN, THAN THE INDIVIDUALS TO THE EAST WOULD, WOULD WANT THE CREEK DISTURBED AT ALL. SO ULTIMATELY, THE, THE, THE INTENT HERE IS TO AVOID THE CREEK, AND ULTIMATELY, UH, WE BELIEVE WE CAN. UH, BUT I, I CAN'T SIT AND AND DEFINITIVELY ANSWER YOUR [03:50:01] QUESTION WITHOUT AN, AN ENGINEER, UH, A CIVIL ENGINEER ACTUALLY TELLING YOU EXACTLY WHERE THAT WALL SHOULD GO. THANK YOU. I, I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. I, I GUESS I'LL START OUT. I THINK COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, SHE ASKED, UH, ALL THE GOOD QUESTIONS. SO I DO HAVE ONE FOLLOW UP TO OUR QUESTION. UH, UH, IN TERMS OF THE HEIGHT, UH, SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING FOR AN MF TWO, AND IT SEEMS, UH, THAT YOU WILL BE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE MISSED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS, UH, BUT YOU'RE LIMITED BY RPS. SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT ON ON THE SIDE, THAT PROJECTS THAT RPS IS THAT THAT'S ON THE EAST SIDE, THOSE ARE THE HOMES CLOSEST TO YOU, THOSE ARE THE HOMES MOST CONCERNED ABOUT THE HEIGHT, RIGHT? UH, SO IF YOU DO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE M-I-H-D-B, IT'S FAIR TO SAY, WOULD BE ON THE, ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF YOUR PROPERTY? THAT'S CORRECT. UM, AGAIN, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, BARRING, I MEAN, THAT'S ASSUMING THAT WE DID GO FIVE STORIES AT ALL, UH, ENTIRELY, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR COST CONSIDERATIONS THAT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S LOOKING RELATIVELY UNLIKELY, UH, BUT NEVERTHELESS, TO, TO THAT POINT, AND WE'D BE BOUND BY THE PROXIMITY SLOPE REGARDLESS OF WHAT BONUSES WE HAD. SO ULTIMATELY, UM, THAT, THAT PROXIMITY, UH, SLOW BEARS OUT HOW HIGH THAT CAN BE, WHICH BASED ON OUR PRELIMINARY ESTIMATIONS WAS, WAS NO HIGHER THAN FOUR STORIES. AND, UM, IN YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOUR DISCUSSIONS WITH COMMISSIONER HERBERT, UH, WERE, WERE THERE ANY SENSITIVITIES TO THAT SIDE OF YOUR PROPERTY OR REALLY THE, THE HEIGHT SENSITIVITIES ON ONE SIDE OR, OR WAS IT JUST A GLOBAL ISSUE? A ABSOLUTELY. WE UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT SUNSHINE IN THE BACKYARD. THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY LOOKING OUT AT THEIR BALCONY INTO THEIR BACKYARD. THEY WERE, YOU KNOW, WORRIED ABOUT, UH, ALL THE TREES BEING REMOVED AND ALL OF THOSE CONCERNS WERE, WERE ADDRESSED. AND THOSE NATURAL BARRIERS, WE WANT THEM TO STAY. WE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS THEM TO STAY, IT BENEFITS OUR DEVELOPMENT AS MUCH AS THE VEN BENEFITS THE, THE CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD AT LARGE. AND SO, WITH THAT BEING SAID, SIR, ABSOLUTELY THOSE CONSIDERATIONS HAVEN'T TAKEN, UH, UNDER ADVISEMENT. AND YOU SAID THAT THEY WERE ADDRESSED SPECIFICALLY HOW THEY THEY WERE, WELL, THEY WERE, I MEAN, FOR ME TO TELL YOU EXACTLY HOW THE BUILDING IS GOING TO, TO LAY OUT, UM, WE DON'T WANT, YOU KNOW, BALCONIES OVERLOOKING THAT, UH, PART OF THE, UH, THE PROPERTY. SO YES, SIR, IT HAS BEEN, HAS BEEN ADDRESSED, BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN FINALIZED AS THE FINAL ENGINEERING IS NOT COMPLETE, BUT WE'RE CERTAINLY SENSITIVE TO IT. FAIR ENOUGH. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HEMPTON, PLEASE. SO THIS IS JUST A FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON MY APOLOGIES FOR MAYBE COMING IN BEHIND CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED, BUT THE ADJACENT PD 9 38 IS THE ADJACENT MULTIFAMILY TO YOU ALL. DO I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ALL DEVELOPED THAT OR YOU DID NOT? UM, AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE THE RIDGE CANYON, CLARK CANYON, WE DIDN'T DEVELOP. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. SO DID THAT NOT PROVIDE A MODEL FOR YOU ALL FOR THINKING ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT? IT, IT DOES. UM, ULTIMATELY WHAT KIND OF DICTATES WHAT WE DESIGN HAS TO DO WITH HOW MUCH ROOM WE HAVE. UM, WITH CLARK RIDGE, WE HAD 22 ACRES OF ROOM, SO WE WERE ABLE TO SPREAD OUT AND, AND DO A, A VERY UNIQUE CONCEPT. YOU DON'T SEE A LOT OF FOURPLEX ONE STORY, ONE STORY APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN PART BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NOT ALWAYS FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE TO DO. SO IT JUST HAPPENED TO BE THE RIGHT TIME TO PUT A PRODUCT LIKE THAT. WE LIKE TO DO DIFFERENT THINGS IN, IN THE COMMUNITY AS, AS, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, WE'VE DONE A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS IN THIS COMMUNITY. UM, AND ULTIMATELY THIS IS, UH, AGAIN, SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, A LITTLE DIFFERENT MARKET, A A LITTLE DIFFERENT, UM, TARGET MARKET, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, WHO, UH, WHO WE FORESEE AS, AS FUTURE TENANTS. RIGHT. AND SO I UNDERSTAND, I THINK I JUST HEARD YOU SAY YOU ONLY ENDED UP DEVELOPING IT AS ONE STORY, BUT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR THE PD IS 35 FEET. MM-HMM. , I MEAN, IT SEEMS TO HAVE A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. IT HAD PROVISIONS FOR RAILINGS AND FOR STOOPS AND STAIRS, AND IT JUST, AGAIN, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYTHING YOU'RE MAYBE TALKING ABOUT DOING, I MEAN, YOU MAY END UP DOING A WRAP, TREAT THE PARKING DIFFERENTLY, TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE GRAY, DIFFERENT SITE, DIFFERENT PROVISIONS. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THIS WOULD'VE BEEN A NATURAL, PERHAPS EXTENSION OF THAT PD CRAFTED FOR WHAT YOU NEEDED FOR THIS SITE. WAS THAT ANYTHING THAT YOU ALL CONSIDERED? WELL, PART OF IT IS, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO, YOU KNOW, WHY IT'S NOT SIMILAR TO, YOU KNOW, WHY IT'S NOT TWO STORY OR, OR ONE STORY LIKE IT WAS, OR THREE, OR YOU END UP, WELL, I UNDERSTAND, UH, OUR, OUR BASICALLY WHAT DI WHAT DICTATES WHETHER WE CAN BUILD ON IT IS, IS REALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE, THE STORIES IS DICTATED BY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO MAKE THIS, YOU KNOW, A A A GOOD DECISION TO BUILD A A FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE ONE TO BUILD? AND ULTIMATELY, WE DON'T NEED TO, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T NEED TO GO 10 [03:55:01] STORIES TO, TO BUILD SOMETHING SUCCESSFUL, BUT ULTIMATELY YOU DO SOMETIMES, ESPECIALLY WITH A BELOW GRADE, JUST FOUR POINT ACRE LOT, IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT TO, TO DO A PRODUCT LIKE CLARK RIDGE CANYON OR, OR LIKE THE, LIKE RIDGE PARK ON THAT PROPERTY AND HAVE THE NUMBERS MAKE SENSE. IT JUST DIDN'T, UH, BASED ON ON THAT. SO PART OF THE DESIGN ITSELF HAS, HAS MORE TO DO WITH THE ECONOMICS OF, OF WHAT IS FEASIBLE TO BUILD IN THE FIRST PLACE THAN IT REALLY IS DICTATED BY A CONTINUATION OF A DESIGN THAT WE'VE DONE IN THAT, IN THAT AREA. WELL, I JUST, I, I THINK I'M PERHAPS DID NOT PHRASE MY QUESTION IN AN EFFECTIVE WAY. I WASN'T SAYING THAT YOU WOULD BE MIRRORING THAT ONE. FOR ONE, IT WAS THE CONCEPT OF A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, ABOUT BUFFERS, ABOUT HOW YOU'RE GONNA RESPOND TO THE SITE. THAT WOULD ALL NATURALLY BE PROVISIONS THAT WOULD BE CODIFIED IN THE PD. AND SINCE YOU HAD AN EXISTING PD, IF YOU CREATED A NEW SUBDISTRICT FOR THIS PROJECT THAT WAS CRAFTED SPECIFICALLY FOR THOSE SITE CONSTRAINTS, IT JUST SEEMED TO ME LIKE IT MIGHT'VE, UM, GIVEN THE COMMUNITY MORE CERTAINTY ON, AND AGAIN, YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE GOTTEN EVERYONE ON BOARD, BUT YOU WOULD'VE BEEN ABLE TO FIND A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE THAT CURRENTLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE BELIEVE YOU, THAT YOU INTEND TO DO WHAT YOU SAY YOU'RE GONNA DO, BUT YOU KNOW, THE ZONING IS GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO DO MORE THAN I THINK WHAT YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT DOING. I, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR CONCERN, I UNDERSTAND THAT CONCERN. YES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HERBERT, JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, IN THE SUBMISSION OF THIS PLAN, YOU GOT, UM, EITHER A APPROVAL OR A GO AHEAD FROM TRANSPORTATION. WERE THERE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT LETTER? UM, NOT THAT, UH, I, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS, THERE WAS ANYTHING THAT, UM, THAT THEY CAME BACK WITH IN, IN A NEGATIVE RESPONSE OR THAT WE, THAT WE DIDN'T ADDRESS OR SHOULD HAVE ADDRESSED. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANOTHER FOLLOW UP TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. UH, FOR ME, UH, SHE MADE AN EXCELLENT POINT, UH, ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE FLEXIBILITIES THAT WE HAVE WITH THE PD, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE HAVE HERE TODAY. AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE IN THIS LANE NOW HERE FOR NOW ANYWAY. WHAT ABOUT DEED RESTRICTIONS? UM, IT'S AS FAR DID YOU CONSIDER THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY SOME OF OUR QUESTIONS COULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH A, A SET OF DEED RESTRICTIONS? DID WE CONSIDER THOSE? UM, I, I, I GUESS IT WOULD DEPEND ON, ON EXACTLY WHICH RESTRICTIONS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. FOR EXAMPLE, I I ASKED YOU EARLIER ABOUT THE HEIGHT ON THE, ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AND, UH, THE GENTLEMAN, FORGET YOUR NAME, SIR, MENTIONED NO BALCONIES THERE. WELL, WE COULD PUT A DE RESTRICTION IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE THAT, RIGHT. THE, THE KIND OF THINGS THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON SPOKE ABOUT, BUFFERS AND SETBACKS AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS COULD BE INCLUDED IN THE SET OF DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT, UH, WOULD ADDRESS ALL THAT. UH, UNDERSTOOD. UM, AGAIN, WE WOULD, UM, I, OFF THE CUFF, I'M, I'M TRYING TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT I, YOU KNOW, KIND OF FULLY UNDERSTAND THE RAMIFICATIONS OF DOING SO. UM, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I'D CERTAINLY BE AMENABLE TO, TO, TO, UH, ADDRESSING SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS. I, I JUST DON'T KNOW IF I CAN, CAN SPEAK CLEARLY AS TO WHICH ONE OF THOSE, UM, WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE BASED ON WHERE WE'RE AT. YEAH, I, I WOULD ADVISE YOU IN FACT, NOT TO DO IT RIGHT NOW AT THIS MOMENT AT THE HEARING , UH, BUT JUST A CONSIDERATION, UH, I COULD BE A WAY FOR YOU TO EXPLORE A WAY THAT, TO MEET SOME OF THE FOLKS HERE HALFWAY AND, UH, KIND OF SCRATCH OFF SOME OF THE, THE MAJOR CONCERNS THAT I THINK COULD BE DONE THROUGH DEED RESTRICTIONS WITH NO HARM TO YOUR PROJECT. UNDERSTOOD. COMMISSIONER HERBERT, UM, THANK YOU CHAIR FOR BRINGING THAT UP. THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT EARLIER IN THIS CASE. UM, AND I THINK, UM, IT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD SUPPORT, UM, IN, IN FIGURING OUT. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'LL MAKE A MOTION. UH, WE DO HAVE QUESTIONS FOR OUR FOLKS IN OPPOSITION, OR ARE THERE QUESTIONS COMMISSIONERS FOR OUR FOLKS IN OPPOSITION? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE. YES, FOR STAFF. UH, WHY, WHY IS THIS CASE BEFORE US AS OF STRAIGHT ZONING CHANGE, GIVEN THE COMPLEXITY OF THE SIDE AND THE VAST NUMBER OF ISSUES, IT SEEMED TO ME AS COMMISSIONER HAMPTON SAID, THAT WOULD BE BETTER ADDRESSED AS FAR AS, UM, GIVING THE NEIGHBOR SOME CERTAINTY IS WHAT'S GONNA GO ON. WAS THAT, WHY IS IT HERE AS A STRAIGHT ZONING CHANGE? ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. THE COMPLEXITY OF THE SITE IS WHY A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE IS PROBABLY A BETTER WAY TO DO IT BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT TYPE OF ENGINEERING THEY HAVE TO DO. UH, SO BOXING [04:00:01] THEM IN WITH THE WAYS THAT PDS WORK WHERE IT'S IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE DIFFICULT AND IT DOESN'T WORK AS WELL WITH THE BASE CODE, UH, PRESENTS A LIKELY DIFFICULTY. SO THE FLEXIBILITY THAT NORMAL ZONING DISTRICTS, GENERAL ZONING DISTRICTS HAVE PRESENTS THAT POSSIBILITY AND THAT THAT, UM, ABILITY TO, THERE'S NOT NECESSARILY OTHER SITE CONCERNS. THERE'S A LOT OF RESTRICTIONS THAT THE GENERAL ZONING CHANGE ALSO HAS PLACED ON IT. UH, RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY, SLOPE BLOCK SPACE CONTINUITY, UH, THOSE, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS AND BUFFERS ARE ALL REQUIRED IN GENERAL ZONING CHANGE. AND THOSE PUT IN VERY SPECIFIC, UH, LIMITS TO THE PROPERTY. AND THOSE ARE, ARE VERY SIGNIFICANT. AND I WOULDN'T DISCOUNT WHAT THOSE DO WHILE ALSO WORKING ACTUALLY WITH THE REST OF OUR CODE RATHER THAN CONFLICTING WITH IT AS CAN HAPPEN IN A PD. ACKNOWLEDGING THOUGH THAT, I MEAN, TAKING THE APPLICANT'S AT THEIR WORD, WE STILL HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WITH THE STRAIGHT ZONING CASE, NOTHING THAT THEY ARE SHOWING US NOTHING WHATSOEVER ABOUT THAT SITE PLAN OR THE PROMISES ABOUT TREE PRESERVATION OR ENHANCED BUFFERS IS LEGALLY BINDING. IF IT'S AN MF TWO ZONING, YOU KNOW, THE PROPERTY CAN FLIP, THEY CAN CHANGE THEIR MIND. ABSOLUTELY. ANYTHING THAT, THAT MEETS MF TWO COULD BE BUILT. CORRECT. THAT'S TRUE. AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS NOT, IT'S NOT BEARING ON THOSE PROMISES, RIGHT? CORRECT. SO IT'S BEARING ON GENERAL ZONING REQUIREMENTS. RIGHT. SO, UM, WHILE WE HAVE DISCUSSED DEED RESTRICTIONS, THE STAFF BELIEVE THAT SOME GENERAL DEED RESTRICTIONS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT WOULD BE A WAY TO PERHAPS GIVE SOME, UM, ASSURANCE OF WHAT'S ACTUALLY GONNA BE DEVELOPED ON THIS PROPERTY WHILE PRESERVING SOME FLEXIBILITY THAT A PD WOULDN'T ALLOW AT THIS POINT. YEAH, THEY DISTRIBUTIONS WOULD BE FEASIBLE. UM, SOME DIRECTION WOULD BE GOOD. I THINK I HEARD SOME. UM, I, THE ONLY OTHER THING I'VE HAD THAT HAS NOT COME UP IS IF THEY UTILIZE THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS, WHICH IS THEIR ONLY WAY IN WHICH THEY COULD GO OVER 36 FEET, THEY'RE ALSO HELD TO THE MIXED INCOME DEVELOPMENT BONUS DESIGN STANDARDS FOUR POINT 1107 IN THE RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE, JUST ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY. UM, I UNDERSTOOD, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE AID DISTRICT WOULD HAVE A 50 FOOT SETBACK, PARKING WOULD BE ALLOWED WITHIN THAT SETBACK. IS THAT CORRECT? IN A, UH, MULTIFAMILY ZONE? YES, BELIEVE SO. YES. AND I ONLY ASKED BECAUSE THAT APPEARED TO BE WHAT WAS INDICATED ON THE CONCEPT PLAN THAT WAS BEFORE US. AND SO WHILE THE BUILDING MIGHT BE SET BACK 50 FEET AND WITH THE 10 FOOT IN GRADE DIFFERENCE THAT WAS MENTIONED, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT MIGHT BE A RATHER SUBSTANTIAL RETAINING WALL ESSENTIALLY AT THE FRONTAGE WITH NO, AND I UNDERSTAND IT'S NOT CURRENTLY WALKABLE, BUT IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRAILS, YOU HAVE INLETS. IT'S JUST A QUESTION, I THINK, ON TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT, HOW THAT MIGHT END UP BEING EXECUTED. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE MOTION, SIR? AND IF I GET A SECOND, I'LL HAVE SOME COMMENTS. UM, I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING OF OCTOBER. I MEAN, I'M SORRY, NOVEMBER, UH, I'M SORRY. OCTOBER 3RD. OCTOBER. OCTOBER. OCTOBER 10TH. YES. 10TH. 10TH. IT IS THE 10TH. IT IS NOT THE FIRST THURSDAY OF THE MONTH. IT'S THE SECOND. OKAY. YEAH. PERFECT. JEWISH HOLIDAY. YES. I I WE HAVE THREE WEEKS BETWEEN MEETINGS THIS TIME. GOTCHA. UH, COMMERS, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HERBERT, SECOND BY I, VICE CHAIR RUBIN, TO HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 10TH. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE OF THOSE? YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER HERBERT. SO THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU GUYS DID AND THE QUESTIONS ASKED. UM, THIS HAS BEEN, UH, LONG AND DRAWN OUT CASE BECAUSE OF THE NEIGHBOR IMPACT, UM, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS THAT WERE ESSENTIAL. UM, THEY WERE HARD MEETINGS. UM, ONE MEETING ENDED VERY ABRUPTLY BECAUSE IT GOT IRATE. UM, I, I'VE COME A LONG WAY TO GET TO THIS DEVELOPMENT AND WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPERS ON THIS CASE. UM, THE, THE, THE AMOUNT OF RESPECT THAT I'VE ASKED FOR TO BE GIVEN TO THE CITIZENS HAVE, HAVE BEEN GIVEN, UM, BY THE STAFF AND OF THAT, AND, AND I APPRECIATE THE MEETINGS, I APPRECIATE THE TOURS TO MS. TAF. UM, I APPRECIATE THE KNOCKING ON THE DOORS AND, AND THESE NEIGHBORS ARE EXTREMELY, UM, CONCERNED ABOUT THIS PROJECT. I WILL SAY THIS DEVELOPER HAS BEEN [04:05:01] IN OUR COMMUNITY FOR A VERY LONG TIME. UM, THEY'VE DEVELOPED GOOD PROJECTS, INCLUDING SOME OF THE HOMES THAT THE RESIDENTS LIVE IN TODAY. UM, I, I LIKE THAT THEY'RE BEEN HERE AND I LIKE THAT THEY'VE BEEN A PART OF OUR COMMUNITY. UM, BUT RIGHT NOW IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO, UM, FIT A SQUARE INTO A ROUND HOLE. AND TO GET THERE, I WOULD LOVE, UM, FOR STAFF TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER A LITTLE BIT MORE ON FI UM, FINESSING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND ENSURING THAT THOSE HOMES, I THINK IT WAS 20 HOMES, MAYBE LESS ON, UH, ALONG THAT CREEK ARE PROTECTED. SO THAT, THAT'S WHY I MADE THE, THE, THE DECISION TO HOLD. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT? FAK COMMISSIONER PLAYER. UM, YEAH, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. I THINK WE'RE HOLDING THIS CASE FOR, FOR GOOD REASONS. HAVING SAID THAT, I, I JUST WANT TO ADD A COUPLE OF OTHER THOUGHTS. ONE, UM, I HOPE WE FIND A WAY TO APPROVE THIS CASE. UH, THIS SITE NEEDS HOUSING AND, AND SECOND, UM, IT IS A LITTLE BIT HARD TO HOLD IT WHEN THE APPLICANT'S BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR FIVE YEARS, AND SOME OF THESE DELAYS ARE OUTSIDE OF THEIR CONTROL. SOME OF THEM, UH, PERHAPS ARE, ARE HOW THEY'VE RUN THE CASE, BUT, UM, I'VE SAID THIS KIND OF THING BEFORE, IT JUST SHOULDN'T TAKE FIVE YEARS TO BUILD A COUPLE HUNDRED APARTMENT UNITS IN DALLAS. THAT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, THAT I, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD EXCUSE OURSELVES FOR THAT, BUT I WILL SUPPORT HOLDING THIS TO, UH, GET IT RIGHT. THANKS, COMMISSIONER BLAIR. UM, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR ABOUT THE, THE TIME TO HOLD THIS. I, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THE HOLDING THIS AND WHILE YOU WORK ON DEEP RESTRICTIONS. UM, BUT WHEN WOULD THERE NEED TO HAVE ALL THE STUFF DONE BEFORE IT COMES BACK TO CPC? WOULD IT BE FRIDAY OR WOULD THEY HAVE LONGER TIME BECAUSE IT'S THREE WEEKS GETTING IT INTO THE, TO GET IT INTO THE DOCKET? LEMME LOOK AT A CALENDAR REALLY QUICK. WOULD I JUST DON'T WANNA HAVE TO, IT WOULD BE NEXT, UH, THE FRIDAY AFTER, YOU KNOW, IT DEPENDS ON THE COMPLEXITY OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, BUT THE, THE DOCKET IS PUBLISHED O OBVIOUSLY THE WEEK, THE FRIDAY BEFORE, WHICH IS OCTOBER THE FOURTH. UM, THE RESTRICTION IS BEING MORE RESTRICTIVE. UH, WOULDN'T NEED THE NOTIFICATION, I, I BELIEVE. UH, BUT YES, I, IF, IF WE'RE JUST MAKING IT MORE RESTRICTIVE, DEPENDS ON THE COMPLEXITY, BUT THERE SHOULD BE TIME. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FORIN. CAN I ASK, UH, THE, THE, ONE OF THE POINTS THAT COMMISSIONER HAMPTON MADE IN, IN OUR QUESTIONING WAS ABOUT CODIFYING THE, UH, TREE PRESERVE. IS IT POSSIBLE TO INCLUDE OR ASK THAT IT BE CONSIDERED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT THE TREE PRESERVE BE CODIFIED? COMMISSIONER THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WOULD HAVE TO BE VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT, RIGHT? AND THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CPC COULD REQUIRE. I'M NOT ASKING NO, BUT I THINK HIS QUESTION IS IT COULD HE, COULD IT BE DISCUSSED? YEAH, WELL, BUT THAT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THE, THE REQUEST. SO IT COULD NOT, IT WOULD ONLY BE IN THE AREA OF REQUEST THAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WOULD BE OPERATIVE FOR. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? UM, IF I MAY, UM, THANK YOU, MR. MOORE. WOULD IT BE CORRECT THOUGH THAT IF THE COMMITMENT IS THAT IT IS A ACCESSIBLE AMENITY FOR THE COMMUNITY? SO IT WOULDN'T, IT WOULD SIMPLY BE SAYING THAT THERE WOULD BE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACCESS FUTURE GREEN SPACE? I THINK THAT WE WOULD, SIMILAR TO TRAIL ACCESS OR OTHER COMPONENTS TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, I, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO SEE WHAT THE APPLICANT VOLUNTEERED AND SORT OF TAKE A HARD LOOK AT IT. UH, I UNDERSTOOD. IIII CAN'T SAY RIGHT NOW, NO. AND UNDERSTOOD, BUT JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF WHAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER FORZA. THANK YOU. THANK YOU BOTH. I, I WON'T TURN WON SUPPORT. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. I, I HAVEN'T HEARD REALLY, UM, I'M NOT COMPELLED BY, I KNOW WE'VE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS, BUT I'M NOT COMPELLED BY THESE QUESTIONS ON WHY THERE, THERE'S A NEED TO HOLD THIS OVER. I THINK THAT STRAIGHT ZONING IS, IS DEFINITELY APPROPRIATE, UM, AS OPPOSED TO SWITCHING THIS TO A PD. AND WHEN I, I READ THE, UM, OPPOSITIONS, UH, COMMENTS AND EMAILS AND I CLOSELY TODAY AND, UM, TO THEIR COMMENTS AND, AND SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT THEY BROUGHT UP, I THINK ARE REASONABLE QUESTIONS. I, I HEARD THINGS ABOUT SCHOOLS BEING OVERLOADED. I HEARD THINGS ABOUT TAXES BEING INCREASED. I HEARD THINGS ABOUT CRIME. I HEARD THINGS ABOUT ENGINEERING FLOODPLAIN, UH, CONCERNS AND, UH, SIMILAR, UH, DRAINAGE EASEMENTS. UM, ONE THO THOSE ARE OUTSIDE OF [04:10:02] THE, THE CONSIDERATIONS OF WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO WITH SEEING IF THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE LAND USE. AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE GOING TO BE A PART OF ANY CASE, EVEN IF THERE WASN'T A ZONING CHANGE, THE, THE EXISTING ZONING THAT'S IN PLACE WOULD STILL HAVE THOSE QUESTIONS, COULD STILL BE RELEVANT. AGAIN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT, YOU'RE NOT WRONG FOR ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS. THEY'RE VERY REASONABLE QUESTIONS. IF I WAS A AN ADJACENT NEIGHBOR, I, I WOULD MAYBE BE ASKING THE SAME QUESTIONS. IT'S JUST FOR THIS BODY. WE'RE HERE TO SEE WHAT THE APPROPRIATE LAND USE IS. AND THERE'S SOME OTHER CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP. THERE'S PROXIMITY SLOPE AND, UM, CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC. AND WE, UH, THOSE ARE GERMANE TO WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT. AND, BUT WE ALSO HAVE PROTECTIVE MEASURES AT THE TIME OF PERMITTING FOR REVIEWS OF THOSE THINGS. UM, PROXIMITY SOAP WILL BE LOOKED AT VERY CAREFULLY. TRAFFIC, UH, UH, PLAN REVIEW WILL BE LOOKED AT VERY CAREFULLY, AS WILL THINGS ABOUT DRAINAGE EASEMENTS AND FLOODPLAIN ENGINEERING AS WELL. SO I, I'M NOT, I'M NOT HERE. I I'M JUST NOT COMPELLED TO HOLD THIS ANY LONGER KNOWING THAT WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS FOR AS LONG AS WE HAVE COMMISSIONER, WE, THIS IS ONE OF THE, UM, I'M COMPELLED TO HOLD IT. AND BECAUSE IT'S ONLY ONE MEETING, IF IT WAS LONGER, MAYBE NOT, BUT ONE MEETING BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IN A STRAIGHT ZONING CASE, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CASES THAT I ALWAYS COMPLAIN ABOUT THAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE DESIGNS OF, OF WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED, WHAT IS BEING BROUGHT BEFORE WE APPROVE SOMETHING. AND SO OFTEN THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN. AND WITH THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WITH COMMISSIONER HERBERT AND, AND COUNCIL MEMBER GRACIE INPUT, IT IS, IT IS, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN SEE OBTAINABLE AND THEY'VE ALREADY DONE PROJECTS IN THE AREA, WHICH GIVES US A LITTLE BIT MORE FAITH IN THEIR PROJECT. UM, BUT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS TO JUST GET US ACROSS THE HILL, UM, IS VERY IMPORTANT SO THAT THE COMMUNITY AROUND IT WILL FEEL SECURE, ESPECIALLY IN THE TIMES THAT WE'RE IN WHEN WE HAVE SO MANY PROPERTIES, SO MANY THINGS BEING BUILT, UM, IN A STRAIGHT ZONE IN CASE THAT WE ARE NOT ABLE TO LOOK AND SEE WHAT THAT PRODUCT MIGHT LOOK LIKE. SO, UM, AS MUCH AS WE COULD SEND IT AND WAIT FOR THEM TO DO IT AT COUNCIL, I THINK GETTING IT RIGHT AT CPC WILL ALLOW COUNCIL TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE EASE. UM, IT IS A HARD DECISION. FIVE YEARS IS TOO LONG, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY. THEY'RE LETTING US SEE, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE GOING, WHAT THEY'RE PUT ON THE GROUND IS WHAT WE'RE SEEING TODAY. SO I'M GONNA SUPPORT OUR, OUR, UM, THE COMMISSIONER OF THAT AREA, SECOND ROUND. COMMISSIONER HERBERT, THANK YOU, UM, TO, UH, COMMISSIONER SCHUCKS POINT. I APPRECIATE THAT AND I APPRECIATE YOU LAYING THAT OUT FOR THE RESIDENTS. UM, UNFORTUNATELY THEY HAVE THE PASSION THAT THESE RESIDENTS HAVE, UM, WAS NOT PUT INTO PAPER CORRECTLY, IF I MUST SAY THIS, SAY THAT, RIGHT? UM, THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE CREEK, UM, COMES RIGHT UP TO ONE OF THE RESIDENT'S BACK GATES THAT I SAW WITH MY OWN EYES. IT WAS SCARY. UM, SO GIVEN JUST THE, UH, AND I MADE THIS MEETING, THE NEXT MEETING ON PURPOSE BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK I, I TOO AGREE THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME AND NOT AT THE FAULT OF THE CITY. UM, THE DEVELOPER HAD, HAS CHOSEN TIMING, UM, FOR SEVERAL REASONS, BUT EVEN PUTTING THIS APPLICATION IN 2023 AND WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY IS STILL A LONG TIME. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT I WOULD LIKE, UM, SOME CONSIDERATION FOR AS MANY DE RESTRICTIONS OR AS LITTLE DE RESTRICTIONS AS WE CAN TO OFFER SOME, UM, PROTECTION TO THE NEIGHBORS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND TO, UH, HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 10TH, KEEPING THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. BE OPPOSED. ONE IN OPPOSITION. UH, MOTION PASSES. UH, IT IS 10 10. LET'S TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK. BE BACK AT, SORRY, BACKWARDS. IT'S TWO 10. WE'LL BE BACK AT TWO 20. ALL RIGHT. IT IS 2:25 PM AND WE ARE GOING [3. 24-2912 An application for 1) a Planned Development District for WMU-5 Walkable Urban Mixed Use District uses and standards; 2) the termination of Specific Use Permit No. 1646 for a transit passenger station or transfer center; and 3) the termination of a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay on property zoned an IM Industrial Manufacturing District, a CS Commercial Service District, and Subarea 4 within Planned Development District No. 366, the Buckner Boulevard Special Purpose District, on the southwest corner of South Buckner Boulevard and Elam Road.] BACK ON THE RECORD ON CASE NUMBER THREE. GOOD AFTERNOON. Z 2 34 2 2 6 IS AN APPLICATION FOR ONE, A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ON WMU FIVE, WALKABLE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT USES AND STANDARDS. THE TWO, THE TERMINATION OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 1646 FOR A TRANSIT PASSENGER STATIONS TRANSFER CENTER. AND THREE, THE DETERMINATION OF D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE PROPERTY ZONED IN. I AM INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING DISTRICT, A CS [04:15:01] COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT AND SUB AREA FOUR WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 360 6 BUCKINGHAM BOULEVARD. SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR WMU FIVE DISTRICT USES AND STANDARDS SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLANNING CONDITIONS. TWO. APPROVAL OF TERMINATION OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1646 AND THREE APPROVAL OF THE TERMINATION OF A D ONE LAKER CONTROL OVERLAY. ALL RIGHT, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS ONE IS GOING TO BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL 10 10, BUT IF THERE'S ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, UM, WE'RE HAPPY TO HEAR FROM YOU. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON Z 2 3 4 2 2 6. SIR, ARE YOU HERE TO SPEAK ON CASE NUMBER THREE? YES. ALRIGHT. YES, RANDALL EDWARDS, IF YOU COULD SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE. RANDALL EDWARDS, SEVENTY NINE FORTY EIGHT WEST HODGES ROAD, 7 5 2 1 7, DALLAS, TEXAS. WE ARE ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THIS PROJECT AT THE CORNER OF BUCKNER AND ELAM ROAD. IT TAKES IN PROPERTY THAT WAS PURCHASED FOR WITH THE TAXPAYERS FOR DART FOR A PARKING LOT FOR THE PARKING RIDE. AND NOW THEY WANT TO TAKE THIS PARTIAL OF THIS WHERE WE SPENT $400,000 OF TAX MONEY FOR TREES AND LANDSCAPE AND STUFF. AND I WANT ALL THESE TREES IF YOU DO THIS, I OWN ALL THOSE TREES RELOCATED. THEY'RE NOT THAT OLD, THEY'RE NOT THAT BIG. I'VE ALREADY COUNTED UP TO 86 TREES THAT WILL HAVE TO BE RELOCATED AND MOVED. I DON'T WANT 'EM CUT DOWN. I DON'T WANT THIS APARTMENT COMPLEX BUILT. PEOPLE WHO RENT APARTMENTS HAVE NO TIES TO THE COMMUNITY OTHER THAN RENT AND SALES TAX. MY FAMILY HAS OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR OVER 65 YEARS. I'M A RARITY IN THIS TOWN. I'M A NATIVE DALLAS SIDE. I'M 72 YEARS OLD AND I'VE SEEN EVERY CHANGE GOOD AND BAD THAT'S HAPPENED IN THIS CITY. I CAN GIVE YOU A PRIME EXAMPLE REAL SIMPLE. WHEN THE, WHEN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND THE STATE GOT TOGETHER AND REDID THE INTERCHANGE DOWN HERE, IF YOU'RE COMING FROM FORT WORTH AROUND, THERE IS NOT AN EXIT TO GET OFF AT IVY AND ALL THAT. IF YOU'RE COMING STRAIGHT FROM THE WEST IN THE OLD DAYS BEFORE THEY REDID THE INTERSECTION, YOU COULD GET OFF AT LAMAR AND ALL THAT. NOW YOU HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 75 AND TURN NORTH AND COME BACK TO MAINE JUST TO GET TO THIS ESTABLISHMENT. THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE. WE DON'T NEED AN APARTMENT COMPLEX. I'M, I REPRESENT THE NEIGHBORS ON MY STREET. I'VE TALKED TO ALL OF THEM. WE'RE ADJACENT RIGHT THERE, LESS THAN 1200 YARDS FROM WHERE THEY WANNA BUILD A FOUR STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX, DESTROY A BUNCH OF TREES, CAUSE A TRAFFIC JAM, BUILD FOUR STORY PARKING GARAGES WITH ONLY ONE PARKING PLACE PER APARTMENT. PUT IN SOME TOWNHOUSES. NO, WE DON'T NEED THAT. THAT PROPERTY WAS BOUGHT FOR PARKING. THEY USED EMINENT DOMAIN TO GET IT. DART IS A DISASTER IN ITSELF. IT'S MISMANAGED. WE'RE THE LAST INSTOCK OF THE STATE, SIR. THANK YOU. THAT'S YOUR TIME. WE'RE THE LAST IN, DON'T SIR, BUILD APARTMENT COMPLEX, SIR, YOU, THAT'S YOUR TIME. I GOT HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE DON'T THAT APARTMENT, SIR. THANK YOU. WE, WE THANK YOU'VE HAD YOUR THREE MINUTES. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SAYING NONE? CHAIR SHADI, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, I DO. IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 3 4 2 2 6. I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 10TH. THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIR. DID FOR YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER HOUSE FOR YOUR SECOND. UM, ANY DISCUSSION? SAY NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, SIR. UH, COMMISSIONERS WILL KEEP MOVING ALONG. WE'RE [4. 24-2913 An application for removal of a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay on property zoned an MU-1 Mixed Use District with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay with Specific Use Permit No. 1933, on the southwest corner of South Zang Boulevard and West Suffolk Avenue.] AT, UH, CASE NUMBER FOUR Z 2 34 2 2 7. [04:20:08] GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR REMOVAL OF A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON PROPERTY ZONE. AN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIFT CONTROL OVERLAY WITH SPECIFIC USE. DEPARTMENT NUMBER 1933 ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ZANE BOULEVARD AND WEST SUFFOLK AVENUE. STAFF. RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? GOOD AFTERNOON. HI EVERYONE. UH, I HAVE BEEN IN THIS PROPERTY SINCE. MY NAME IS SAMA , THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY. AND I HAVE BEEN IN THIS PROPERTY SINCE 2001. AND EVERY FIVE YEARS, YEARS WE APPLY FOR RENEWAL OF, UH, LIQUOR, UH, I MEAN, UH, TO SELL BEER IN THIS PROPERTY. AND, UH, I APPLIED THIS TIME FOR, TO REMOVE THE D ONE, UH, LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY. AND THAT'S ALL. AND THANK YOU. AND IN GENERAL, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION FROM ANY NEIGHBORHOOD. EVERY TIME WE WE RENEW, WE DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE AND APPLY. I THIS TIME I APPLY TO REMOVE THE D ONE. THANK YOU. COULD YOU JUST PLEASE STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, SIR? A HOME ADDRESS, ANY ADDRESS YOU'D LIKE. YES. UH, 2 1 1 6. TEXAS 7 5 1 0 4. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU SIR. ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER CHAR, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. CAN YOU COME, COME BACK DOWN. THANK YOU. ARE ARE THERE LIQUOR SALES CURRENTLY HAPPENING AT THE LOCATION? NO, WE DON'T SELL LIQUOR. WE SELL ONLY BEER. JUST BEER. JUST BEER. WE DON'T HAVE LICENSE. SO YOU CURRENTLY SELL BEER AND YOU ONLY BEER? ONLY BEER. AND UH, AND THE, THE REASON FOR WANTING TO REMOVE THE OVERLAY IS WHAT? UH, BECAUSE EVERY FIVE YEARS FIVE YEARS WE HAVE TO, UH, APPLY FOR APPLICATION. SO I DON'T, I MEAN I HAVE BEEN APPLYING FOR, UH, MORE THAN FOUR TIMES OR THREE TIMES. SO EVERY FIVE YEARS I APPLY FOR A NEW APPLICATION. IT TAKES TWO, THREE, UH, LAST TIME I APPLY IT WAS LAST YEAR AND I CAME TO APPLY LIKE ABOUT, UH, 70 DAYS BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE. AND THEY SAID I HAVE TO COME 90 DAYS BEFORE, SO I HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE COUNCIL THROUGH TOO MANY. UH, THEY MAKE IT TOO LONG. AND, UH, NOBODY TOLD ME THAT I HAVE TO COME, UH, TO APPLY 90 DAYS BEFORE. SO, UH, HOW MANY RE SUP RENEWALS HAVE YOU GONE THROUGH? EXCUSE ME? HOW MANY SUP RENEWALS CYCLES HAVE YOU GONE THROUGH? I GUESS YOU MENTIONED YOU SAID THREE, FOUR LAST TIME. FOUR. FOUR. SO THAT WAS YOUR FOURTH AND YOU'VE BEEN SELLING BEER AT THE LOCATION FOR HOW LONG? LIKE, UH, SINCE 2014 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? 12 OR I CANNOT REMEMBER. MAYBE 12 OR 13. YEAH. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? COMMISSIONER TURNOCK? NO. ANY QUESTION PLEASE? NO, NO QUESTIONS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE. UH, MY QUESTION'S FOR MR. MOORE. UH, THIS PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS AN SUP TO BE ABLE TO SELL ALCOHOL, CORRECT? YES. IT WAS APPROVED BY COUNSEL THIS PAST SPRING. AND THE ONLY REASON WHY THAT SUP IS REQUIRED IS BECAUSE THEY ARE SELLING ALCOHOL, CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. SO IF WE DO RE VOTE TO REMOVE THE D ONE OVERLAY, THAT SUP WOULD JUST BECOME NULL AND VOID, IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, IF, IF THE D ONE OVERLAY IS REMOVED, THE SUP SORT OF POINTLESS, IT'S JUST A, THE CELL OF LIQUOR WOULD JUST, OR CELL OF ALCOHOL WOULD JUST BE BASED ON TABC RULES, NOT IN THE SUP. THAT AND THE D ONE OVERLAY COULD NEVER BE REIMPOSED ON THE PROPERTY. THAT IS ALSO CORRECT. AND SO SINCE THE ZONING GOES WITH THE LAND AND NOT THE OPERATOR. ANYONE IN THE FUTURE OPERATING THIS USE WOULD NO LONGER HAVE TO HAVE AN SUP TO SELL ALCOHOL? CORRECT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. ALWAYS, ALWAYS, UH, ALWAYS. NO, YOU ALWAYS POINT OUT THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, SO I APPRECIATE IT. AND YOU DID THERE, THAT WAS THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM. UH, ZONING GOES WITH THE LAND, UH, COMMISSIONER [04:25:01] HALL. YEAH. I GUESS THIS IS JUST FOR MR. MOORE OR THE STAFF. UM, THIS SUP IS ONLY FOR THIS LOT, IS THAT CORRECT? YES. SO IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE FOR AN AREA. JUST THE LOT. OKAY. YES. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, ARE THERE OTHER, UM, ALCOHOL SELLING ESTABLISHMENTS NEARBY THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE AN SUP? I BELIEVE THE QT THAT'S UP FROM THIS LOCATION DOES NOT, UM, HAVE A SUP. OKAY. FOLLOW UP IF I MAY. IS THERE A RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY TO THE, TO THE OTHER SITE? IT'S PART OF A DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICT. I BELIEVE WE WERE REVIEWING AT THE, UM, BRIEFING. YES. THIS IS NOT THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HARA, PLEASE. I'M JUST WONDERING IF AT SOME POINT WE AS A COMMISSION COULD GET A BRIEFING OR A HISTORY ON D ONE OVERLAYS, HOW THEY'VE BEEN ESTABLISHED AND WHETHER THEY SERVE THE INTEREST OF THE CITY. I THINK IT WOULD BE AN INTERESTING, I'D LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT IT. UM, JUST SOMETHING TO FOR STAFF TO THINK ABOUT. PERHAPS I'LL PUT THAT ON THE RECORD AS, AS HIGHLY INTERESTED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT CI . ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS BEFORE WE GET TO A MOTION? YES, PLEASE. COMMISSIONER, HAS THERE BEEN ANY ISSUES IN THE PAST YEARS THAT HE'S HAD THE SUP? FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, NO. WHEN I REVIEWED THAT, THAT CASE REPORT FOR THE SUP, NO. SO IF WE'RE NOT GOING, SO IF WE'RE NOT, UM, REMOVING THE OVERLAY, IS THERE, BECAUSE HE'S ALREADY PROVEN UP TO THREE TIMES, IS THAT, IF I BELIEVE, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE CAN EXTEND HIS SUP FOR A LONGER PERIOD? I'M NOT FOR SURE ABOUT THAT. UM, MICHAEL, CAN YOU HELP ME OUT WITH THAT ONE? SO THE, THE HEARING THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US IS NOT, UM, AN AMENDMENT OR RENEWAL OF THE SUP, UH, AND A POTENTIALLY COULD BE RE-ADVERTISED AS AN SUP AMENDMENT. BUT BEYOND THAT, THE, THE WAY THE CASE IS STRUCTURED RIGHT NOW, IT'S JUST A, A GENERAL, IT'S CONSIDERED GENERAL ZONE CHANGE AND A MODIFICATION TO THE DRY OVERLAY. UH, BUT, UH, IF, IF THEY RE ADVERTISE AS AN SUP AMENDMENT, IT MIGHT BE FEASIBLE. COR YEAH, IF THE, SORRY, I MISSED THE QUESTION, BUT IF THE QUESTION I'M UNDERSTANDING THE QUESTION IS, UH, COULD THE SUP LENGTH BE EXTENDED SO THAT IT'S NOT FIVE YEARS? YES. SO, BECAUSE IF HE, IF WE'RE NOT READY TO DO THE OVERLAY, AND THIS IS NOT A NEW SUP AND HE'S PROVEN IN THE PAST AND HAS NOT HAD ANY, UH, ISSUES, UM, VIOLATIONS OF HIS CURRENT SUP, COULD WE MAKE IT LONGER? THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU COULD DO TODAY. WE WOULD HAVE TO, LIKE MICHAEL SAID, ADVERTISE THAT IT'S, UH, FOR, UH, AN AMENDMENT TO SUP NUMBER 1933. BUT, UM, AND WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO DO THAT? IT WOULD HAVE TO BE, UH, JUST AN SU HE WOULD HAVE TO COME IN, PAY THE FEE FOR THE SUP, UM, AMENDMENT. STAFF WOULD GO THROUGH THE PROCESS LIKE THEY WOULD ANY SUP AND IT WOULD COME BEFORE THE BODY AT A FUTURE DATE. SORRY, I, I HAD STEPPED OUT FOR THE FIRST PART OF THE CONVERSATION. UM, BUT THE APPLICANT DID JUST RECEIVE A RENEWAL OF THEIR SUP IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR. AND SO HE'S COMING IN. THE REASON THAT I ASKED THAT QUESTION IS BECAUSE HE, SO THE AMENDMENT TO THAT, HE'S ASKING FOR THE, BECAUSE HE'S CAME BACK SO MANY TIMES, THAT IS THE REASON THAT HE'S ASKING FOR THIS D ONE, UH, OVERLAY TO BE REMOVED. AND SO MY QUESTION WAS, IF THE D IF THE D ONE OVERLAY, UM, IF THAT'S NOT THE WAY THAT WE WERE GOING, IS THERE A WAY THAT HE COULD GET AN EXTENSION, A LONGER EXTENSION, AND HE'S SAYING YES BY BRINGING BACK IN AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENT SUP AND EXTENDING IT TO TWO 10 YEARS INSTEAD OF FIVE YEARS. AND THAT WAS THE TIME PERIOD? UH, THE TIME PERIOD WAS FIVE YEARS WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTO. YEAH. SO THE, THE MOST RECENT SUP RENEWAL, THE INITIAL PERIOD WAS FIVE YEARS WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS. SO HE HAS, HE ALREADY HAS THE AUTO RENEWAL OPTION, UH, THAT WOULD PRECLUDE HIM NEEDING TO COME BACK BEFORE THIS BODY, UM, AS LONG AS HE STAYED WITHIN THE AUTO RENEWAL WINDOW. UM, SO I, I, I THINK REALLY WHAT'S, WHAT'S, UH, THE QUESTION WITH THIS CASE IS [04:30:01] WE HAVE AN APPLICANT WHO, YOU KNOW, WANTS TO HAVE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES WITHOUT NEEDING AN SUP OR, OR COMING BEFORE THIS BODY, UM, OR, OR STAFF REALLY FOR AUTO RENEWALS, UM, AT ALL. UM, SO THAT'S REALLY THE QUESTION. I I'M NOT SURE IF FURTHER AMENDMENTS OR RENEWALS TO THE SUP WOULD REALLY, UM, ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING. 'CAUSE THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT THE QUESTION IS. COMMISSIONER BLAIR. OKAY. SO IF HE, I DON'T KNOW WHO I'M ASKING. UM, BUT I KNOW IT'S LEGAL NEEDS TO WEIGH IN, I THINK. I THINK SO. IF HE IS COMING TO THIS, OKAY, SO IF HE RENEWED HIS SUP LAST YEAR, CORRECT, THIS YEAR, THIS YEAR, AND HE'S BACK BEFORE THIS BODY TO REMOVE THE D ONE LIQUOR OVERLAY AND HE'S IN A D ONE LIQUOR OVERLAY AREA, WHAT MESSAGE IS THAT SENDING? IF WE APPROVE THIS AND THEN THERE IS SOMEONE ELSE THAT'S NEXT THAT COMES BACK BEFORE THIS BODY AGAIN AND SAYS, I'M IN A D ONE LIQUOR OVERLAY. I CHOOSE NOT TO TO GO THROUGH THE SUP PROCESS. SO ARE WE JUST GONNA THEN HOPSCOTCH ALL OVER THE CITY AND, AND, AND REMOVE D ONE LIQUOR OVERLAYS? SO MY FIRST QUESTION FOR YOU, BLAIR, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, UM, IS THERE SUCH A THING AS PRECEDENT WITH ZONING CASES? NO, BUT WE DO IT ALL THE TIME, . SO LEGALLY SPEAKING, THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS PRECEDENT WITH ZONING CASES. THE BODY COULD MAKE A DECISION TODAY AND THEN MAKE A TOTALLY DIFFERENT DECISION IN A SIMILAR SCENARIO ON ANOTHER CASE IN THE FUTURE. AND THERE'S NOTHING LEGALLY WRONG WITH THAT. UM, THE OTHER THING, IT'S NOT REALLY AN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, BUT I DO WANNA POINT OUT IS, UM, THE SURROUNDING AREA IS NOT A D ONE OVERLAY. IT'S A D OVERLAY. SO EVERY PROPERTY AROUND THIS PROPERTY, EXCEPT THIS ONE, CAN'T SELL ALCOHOL AT ALL. UM, AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST, THIS PROPERTY AND ONLY THIS PROPERTY WAS GRANTED A D ONE OVERLAY TO SELL ALCOHOL WITH AN SUP. SO IT'S ALREADY SORT OF A, UM, A A YEAH, A LITTLE ISLAND, UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE SURROUNDING OVERLAY. UM, SO YEAH, IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT THERE. OH, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE PRECEDENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION HAS ALREADY BEEN SET, THAT HE WAS NO PRECEDENT, HAS NOT BEEN SET WE CAN PLAY SEMANTICS. SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT SOMEWHERE PREVIOUSLY IF HE DID NOT HAVE A D LIQUOR OVERLAY, THEN HE WOULD NOT BE BEFORE THIS BODY AT ALL FOR SUP AND SUP RENEWAL IF HE DID NOT HAVE A D ONE OVERLAY, DD ONE. RIGHT. WHATEVER. RIGHT. SO HE DIDN'T HAVE THAT. IF HE IS THE ONLY ONE WITH THAT OVERLAY, I'M, THEN I'M CONFUSED. YEAH. SO, SO A D OVERLAY MEANS YOU CANNOT SELL ALCOHOL AT ALL. UH, THAT'S WHAT MOST OF THE SURROUNDING AREA, THAT'S THE RESTRICTION THAT MOST OF THE SURROUNDING AREA IS SUBJECT TO. D ONE MEANS YOU CAN SELL ALCOHOL, BUT ONLY BY SUP. HE HAS A D ONE LIQUOR OVERLAY. CORRECT. AND HE'S THE ONLY PROPERTY IN THIS AREA THAT DOES, AND HE'S THE ONLY PRO. SO THE QUESTION THEN WOULD BE WHAT, WHY DOES HE THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD WANT TO GO AND LOOK AT THE CASE HISTORY AND FIND THE CASE THAT, UH, TRANSITIONED THIS PROPERTY FROM A D TO A D ONE OVERLAY, UH, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT THE CASE REPORT, LOOK AT WHAT STAFF AND CPC RECOMMENDATION WERE AT THAT TIME. YOU KNOW, MAYBE GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE VIDEO FROM THAT MEETING, DEPENDING ON HOW LONG AGO IT WAS JUST TYPICAL RESEARCH. SO IF HE'S THE ONLY BODY THAT HAS THE D ONE LIQUOR OVERLAY IN THIS AREA, AND IS THAT FUNGO? HUH? AND, AND HE'S HERE ASKING FOR IT TO BE REMOVED AND HE WOULD BE LOOKING JUST LIKE ALL THE OTHER, UM, BUSINESSES THAT ARE SELLING ALCOHOL IN THIS COMMUNITY? NO, BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER, ALL THE OTHER LOTS IN THIS AREA CAN'T SELL ALCOHOL AT ALL. HE WOULD BE ABLE TO SELL ALCOHOL JUST WITHOUT AN SUP AND HE WOULD BE THE ONLY, UH, LOT IN THIS AREA ABLE TO DO THAT. MAY, MAY I SPEAK, ARE WE IN, UH, STAFF QUESTIONS OR, OKAY. YEAH, WE, WE'VE ALREADY PASSED THE STAFF QUESTIONS. YEAH. QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. WE'RE AT STAFF QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER HERBERT, SIR, JUST TO CLARIFY, IF, IF THE OWNER OR THE APPLICANT DECIDES TO [04:35:01] MOVE TOMORROW, THE D ONE OVERLAY WILL REMAIN, OR THE REMOVAL OF IT WILL REMAIN AT THIS PROPERTY? THAT, AND THAT DOESN'T PUSH IT BACK TO D GOTCHA. NO, SO, SO, UM, ANY KIND OF ZONING DESIGNATION, WHETHER IT'S THE SUP FOR ALCOHOL SALES THAT HE HAS TODAY, OR THE D ONE OVERLAY OR THE REMOVAL OF THE D ONE OVERLAY, WHATEVER, ANY KIND OF ZONING DESIGNATION DOES NOT RUN WITH AN OPERATOR. IT RUNS WITH THE LAND. AND YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? I CAN'T REMEMBER IT NOW. SO IF, IF WE SAY HE, HE'S NOT D ONE, WHAT IS HE? OKAY, SO THE WAY THE D AND D ONE OVERLAYS WORK IS, UM, I ALWAYS THINK ABOUT IT AS THOSE LIKE SPIKY THINGS AT THE EXITS TO PARKING GARAGES. LIKE YOU CAN GO OVER THE SPIKES, BUT IF YOU REVERSE, YOU'RE GONNA SLASH YOUR TIRES. THAT'S JUST THE, THE, UM, MNEMONIC DEVICE I USE. UM, SO YOU CAN GO FROM A D TO A D ONE, YOU CAN GO FROM A D ONE TO NO OVERLAY, AND YOU CAN ALSO GO FROM A D OVERLAY TO NOTHING, BUT YOU CAN'T GO BACKWARDS. SO ONCE YOU'VE GONE FROM A D TO A D ONE, YOU CAN'T GO BACK TO A D. AND ONCE YOU'VE GONE TO NOTHING, YOU CAN'T GO BACK TO A D ONE OR A D KIND OF LIKE GRADUATING HIGH SCHOOL. NO, THANK YOU. SURE. UM, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NOW GOING THERE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, JUST ONE GENERAL QUESTION. IS IT CORRECT THAT D AND D ONE OVERLAYS GENERALLY EXIST WHERE THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCIES? UM, I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU KNOW THE ANSWER ALREADY. , I WOULD SAY CERTAINLY LOOKING AT THIS CASE, IT'S ESTABLISHED LAND USES OTHERS THAT I AM FAMILIAR WITH WITH MI DISTRICT HAVE BY AND LARGE BEEN WHERE THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCIES AND IT PROVIDES FOR THE SUP REQUIREMENT. SO IT CAN BE EVALUATED BY THIS BODY AND ALLOW, YES, THAT'S THE INTENT OF THE D AND D ONE WHEN THEY WERE ESTABLISHED. THANK YOU, MR. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER TURNER, YOU HAVE I DO. THANK YOU. CHAIR, UH, IN THE MATTER OF KZ 2 34 DASH 2 27, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DENY THIS ITEM AND NOT FILE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER TURNOFF FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSIONS PLEASE? UH, SO, UM, I HAD MADE THE MOTION THAT I DID, UH, THE FIRST THING I'D LIKE TO SAY IS THAT WE, WE HAVE AN OPERATOR THAT HAS BEEN SEEMINGLY A GREAT OPERATOR AND A GREAT NEIGHBOR. AND I WANT TO SAY THAT I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE BEEN A GOOD OPERATOR AND YOU ARE ENCUMBERED BY HAVING TO CONTINUALLY FILE THESE SUVS. I WISH THERE WAS A WAY TO REWARD GOOD OWNERS, AND IN A SENSE, THERE KIND OF IS WHERE WE CAN EXTEND THAT SUP RENEWAL OUT FARTHER. SO THE FIRST THING I WOULD SAY IS I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU AT THE NEXT TIME OF YOUR RENEWAL TO, UH, FILE TO HAVE IT EXTENDED OUT MAYBE 10 YEARS. BY THAT TIME, I HOPE THE, THE COMMISSION HERE HAS BEEN FURTHER INFORMED ON THE CURRENT THINKING AT THE LOCAL AND STATE LEVEL ON OVERLAYS, DRY OVERLAYS. UM, I AM NOT VERY WELL VERSED IN MY KNOWLEDGE OF THAT, ALTHOUGH I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN UNDERSTANDING. UH, AND SO THAT IS THE REASON WHY I'M NOT COMFORTABLE REMOVING IT. OKAY. MAY I, MAY I SPEAK? I, UH, UNFORTUNATELY NOT. UM, AND THEN I ALSO WANNA RECOGNIZE THAT WE DO HAVE SOME RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY AND, UH, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO BE MINDFUL OF THAT. UH, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION TO LET GO COMPLETELY OF THE, UM, ABILITY TO HAVE SOME KIND OF CONTROL OVER LIQUOR BE OR, UH, BEER AND WINE BEING SOLD AT THIS LOCATION. ANY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? WELL, I'M GONNA FOLLOW YOUR LEAD, BUT I WOULD'VE GONE WITH A REMOVAL TOO. I THINK SALES IS ONE THING AND CONSUMPTION IS ANOTHER. UM, I HAVE NOT TURNED DOWN A REMOVAL OF A D OVERLAY IN MY DISTRICT SINCE I GOT IN THIS SEAT. AND WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY PROBLEMS WITH ANY OF THE ONES I'VE TURNED DOWN. I THINK THESE THINGS LARGELY ARE A HOLDOVER OF BYGONE ERA AND, UM, I THINK THEY IMPOSE AN ENCUMBRANCE ON BUSINESSES. AND WHEN I'LL TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT'S ON THE GROUND HERE, FRANKLY, I THINK THIS NEXT TIME THIS IS UP FOR RENEWAL, THIS AREA IS GOING TO CHANGE SO DRASTICALLY. THANKS TO THE NEW, UM, DECK PARK DOWN THERE, THAT PROBABLY WON'T BE THAT BIG AN ISSUE. BUT, UH, I, I DO THINK THAT COMMISSIONER HOUSE RIGHT'S REQUEST FOR, UM, A BRIEFING ON THE HISTORY OF THESE THINGS AND WHERE THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY SERVE AND, [04:40:01] AND HOW WE SHOULD BE EVALUATING IS PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA. THANK YOU. THAT'S TRUVIN . OH, UM, YEAH, I MEAN, THIS IS A ONE WHERE I COULD HAVE PROBABLY GONE EITHER WAY. I DO WANNA SAY THAT I, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND WHERE THIS APPLICANT IS COMING FROM AND I DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST THAT THIS REQUEST WAS IN ANY WAY UNREASONABLE THAT THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE IS WHETHER IT MAKES SENSE TO DO A STRAIGHT DENIAL HERE OR TO DO A DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE. I'M NOT SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, NECESSARILY ANYTHING IS COMING WITHIN THE NEXT TWO YEARS, BUT I THINK THE FACT THAT WE'RE DENYING THIS REQUEST, YOU KNOW, SHOULDN'T NECESSARILY PRECLUDE THEM FOR, IF WHATEVER REASON THEY NEED TO COME IN FOR A ZONING CHANGE IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS. SO I, I PROPOSE THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, UH, ACCEPTED. I, I ACTUALLY READ THAT WRONG. I, I WANTED TO DENY THIS WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS WELL. GREAT. THANKS COMMISSIONER HERBERT. THANK YOU. I TOO, UM, I, I SUPPORT THE MOTION. UM, I COMMEND YOU FOR BEING A GREAT, UM, UM, OWNER AND A GREAT, UM, PARTICIPANT IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I VISIT YOUR STORE QUITE FREQUENTLY AND KNOW THE AREA QUITE FREQUENT. UM, I WILL, TO COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S POINT, I WOULD AGREE THAT SELLING ALCOHOL AND CONSUMPTION IS DIFFERENT. UNFORTUNATELY, WE'VE HAD BAD STORE OWNERS IN OUR DISTRICTS THAT CODE COMPLIANCE HAS NOT HAD THE OPPORTUNITY OR EVEN THE STAFFING TO CONTROL. AND UNTIL WE HAVE A BETTER, UM, MINDSET OR, OR, UM, WAY TO MONITOR BAD ACTORS, UNFORTUNATELY THE ONLY THING WE HAVE IN OUR COMMUNITY IS THESE OVERLAYS. SO, THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER ? I, I DO, UM, I AGREE BECAUSE THE COMMISSIONER THAT THE DISTRICT IS, IS MADE THE RECOMMENDATION. BUT WHEN WE FIND GREAT, UM, WHEN WE FIND PEOPLE WHO HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE, THE LAWS AND THE STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN SET BEFORE THEM WITH THE S-U-P-I-I, UM, I WOULD HAVE RATHER VOTED THAT THE D ONE B LIFTED. I AND I, I BELIEVE THE ONLY OTHER OPTION YOU MIGHT HAVE IS TO DO AN AMENDMENT TO YOUR CURRENT SUP TO GET A LONGER TIME PERIOD. AND SO THAT WOULD, UM, BUT I, I WILL VOTE WITH OUR, WITH THE COMMISSIONER IN THAT DISTRICT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER. SHE SECOND THAT. EXCUSE ME. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? NO, SIR. SORRY. I HAVE TOTALLY SUPPORT FROM ALL MY NEIGHBORS. THANK YOU, SIR. ALL MY NEIGHBOR, THE TIME HAS ALREADY PASSED FOR PUBLIC INPUT. MY APOLOGIES. UH, WE HAVE A MOTION THE SECOND TO, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DENY THE APPLICATION WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. GOOD [5. 24-2914 An application for an MU-1 Mixed Use District on property zoned an IR Industrial Research District, on the southwest line of Mohawk Drive, southeast of Empire Central Drive.] CASE NUMBER FIVE, AN APPLICATION FOR A MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE AND IR INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHWEST LINE OF MOHAWK DRIVE, SOUTHEAST EMPIRE CENTRAL DRIVE. STATE RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? IT SAYS ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, BOTTOM OF PAGE TWO Z, 2 34. 2 47. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO. AND I HAVE VERY BRIEF COMMENTS. I HAVE A SECOND IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 3 4 DASH 2 47. I MOVE TO LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND KEEP THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 10TH. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. UH, COMMENTS, UM, JUST THANK THE COMMISSIONERS. UM, HOPE YOU'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION. WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING. AND, UM, APPRECIATE MS. BUCKLEY CONTINUING TO WORK WITH THE, UH, COMMUNITY, ADDRESS THE CONCERNS AND LOOK FORWARD TO BEING THIS BACK BEFORE US. AND YOU'LL BE SEEING SOME VOLUNTEER DUE RESTRICTIONS WHEN THIS RETURNS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION. AND, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISE HIM UNTIL OCTOBER 10TH. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY, AYE. YOU OPPOSED? I HAVET. UH, NUMBER EIGHT, CASE NUMBER EIGHT, MR. CLINTON, THIS IS [8. 24-2917 An application for an MU-1 Mixed Use District on property zoned an R-7.5(A) Single Family District with Specific Use Permit No. 2250 for a tower/antenna for cellular communication, on the east line of North Masters Drive, between Oak Gate Lane and Checota Drive.] ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 56. AN APPLICATION FOR AN U ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN R SEVEN 50. A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2 2 5 0 4 A TOWER ANTENNA FOR CELLULAR COMMUNICATION ON THE EAST LINE OF NORTH MASTERS DRIVE BETWEEN OAK GATE LANE AND [04:45:01] CHIKOTA DRIVE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT. ALRIGHT, MS. BUCKLEY, GOOD AFTERNOON. ANDRE BUCKLEY. 1414 BELLEVUE STREET, SUITE ONE 50, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 5 HERE REPRESENTING THE OWNER AND APPLICANT. YES, THAT IS IT. YEAH, WE CAN USE THE KEY. I THINK YOU CAN USE THIS IF THAT'S OKAY. YEAH, JUST, OKAY, LET ME, OKAY, HOLD ON. THERE WE GO. OKAY. I HEARD YOUR COMMENTARY IN THE BRIEFING. WE ARE ASKING FOR AN MV ONE WITH VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS. WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS ON THIS AND ORIGINALLY WE CAME IN WITH 16 TOWN HOMES AND A PRIVATE RECREATION CENTER WITH A LITTLE JUICE BAR IN THERE. AND THAT WAS NOT WELCOMED AT ALL BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAD A FOLLOW UP MEETING TUESDAY NIGHT, AND WHAT WE HAVE COME UP WITH NOW IS STRICTLY THE ONLY USES THAT ARE GONNA BE ALLOWED IS GONNA BE THE EXISTING CELL TOWER, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE CROSS OUT FRONT, THE EXISTING CHURCH. AND THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE MULTIFAMILY IN THE FORM OF TOWN HOMES. SO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT I NEED TO READ INTO THE RECORD THAT ARE NOT IN WHAT YOU HAVE, I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THE WHOLE LIST OF PROHIBITED USES, BUT EVERYTHING IS PROHIBITED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE CHURCH CELL TOWER AND THE MULTI-FAMILY. THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS ARE GONNA BE FENCED AND GATED. THESE WILL BE BOARD ON BOARD AT A MINIMUM OF SIX FEET ALL THE WAY AROUND. OUR MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS 30 FEET AND IT'S SUBJECT TO RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE. NOW AROUND THE PERIMETER WE HAVE R SEVEN FIVE. SO RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE HITS US ALL THE WAY AROUND, BUT WE DO KNOW THAT THERE'S GONNA BE A RENOVATION OF THE CHURCH THAT IS PRETTY MUCH IN THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY. SO WE DON'T WANT THAT TO EXCEED 30 FEET ON THE REMODEL OF THAT. THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS THAT WE'LL HAVE ON THE SITE IS 25, AND WE WILL HAVE THOSE BUILT IN PHASES AND WE WILL HAVE THOSE BUILT AS TWO STORY TOWN HOMES AND MAINTAIN A CONSISTENT FACADE DESIGN THROUGH EVERY PHASE. SO THIS WILL GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT THESE UNITS ARE GONNA LOOK LIKE. WE DID WANNA PUT SOME ELEVATIONS TOGETHER FOR YOU. UH, THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS IN ANY ONE STRUCTURE WILL BE FIVE. AND THEN THIS WILL GIVE YOU KIND OF A SIDE VIEW. THE THING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND HERE IS EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE UNITS HAS A 20 FOOT BACKYARD BECAUSE WE HAVE A 20 FOOT BUFFER. SO WE WENT AHEAD, JUST MADE THAT THE BACKYARD. AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PRIVACY FENCE ON THE, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TWO FRONTS AND TWO SIDES. SO ON THE SIDE WE HAVE 15 FOOT ALLEYS IN ADDITION TO THE 20 FOOT BUFFER, 15 FOOT ALLEY IN THE BACK, 20 FOOT BUFFER. AND THEN WE'VE GOT A 30 FOOT BUILD LINE UP FRONT. AND WE HAVE A 35 BUILD LINE ON THE EAST SIDE. SO ON THE SOUTH SIDE. SO WHAT WE HAVE, THERE ARE PLATTED BUILDING LINES THAT SUPERSEDE ANY SETBACK. SO, WHICH IS GREAT BECAUSE DOING THE MIXED JUICE, IT ALLOWS US TO DO SOME REALLY SNAZZY THINGS OUT THERE, UH, ADJACENT TO THE STREETS. SO, AND ONE OF OUR CONVERSATIONS, I BELIEVE IT WAS WITH DAVID NEVAREZ AND WITH PHIL ERWIN, WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK. UH, WE'LL ALSO HAVE TO HAVE A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT PLANT STRIP, AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO PROVIDE SOME STREET LIGHTS, WHICH ARE GONNA BE MUCH NEEDED IN THIS AREA ANYWAY. SO THAT'S, UH, BASICALLY WHAT WE'VE GOT. IT'S JUST THANK YOU MS. BUFFER. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THAT WAS PERFECT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON CASE NUMBER EIGHT Z 2 34 DASH 2 56. ALRIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. BUCKLEY? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, MS. BUCKLEY, ARE AGRICULTURAL USES STILL REMAINING ON THIS SITE? UH, NO. THEY, THEY'VE BEEN REMOVED. THAT'S GONE? YES. OH, OKAY. BECAUSE OF THE, I KNOW THE LAST EMAIL I HAD HAS AGRICULTURAL CHURCH TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER AND MULTIFAMILY. SO NOW IT'S JUST THE THREE REMAINING USES CHURCH TELE. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT. COMMISSIONER WHEELER. UM, BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS, UH, ALONG MASTERS, AM I CORRECT? MM-HMM. , IS THERE GOING TO BE ANY TYPE OF FENCING? UM, BECAUSE THAT IS A VERY HEAVILY TRAVELED STREET. UM, YES. AND NOT ONLY THAT, IT IS A, UH, OFTEN UNSAFE STREET. THERE HAS BEEN PLENTY OF WRECKS PEOPLE HIT. UM, SO WE KNOW THAT YOU, ONE OF MY CONCERNS WAS THE FIVE FOOT, UH, SIDEWALK, WHICH THANK YOU. UM, BUT THE FENCING IN FRONT OF THE TOWN HOMES ARE, THE FENCING WILL WRAP AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE UNITS. AND, AND WHAT TYPE OF FENCING WOULD THAT BE? WHAT TYPE OF FENCING WOULD THAT BE? IT'D BE A BOARD ON BOARD. [04:50:01] BOARD ON BOARD? MM-HMM. WHAT ABOUT ON THE, SO DOES THESE TOWN HOMES FACE, UH, MASTERS? YEAH, WE HAVE SOME THAT FACE MASTERS AND THEN SOME THAT FACE THE, THE CHURCH AND FACE MASTERS FROM THE BACK WHERE IT WRAPS AROUND. SO, SO THE ONES ON MASTERS, YOU'RE PUTTING BOARD ON BOARD? YES. WOULD YOU LIKE SOMETHING ELSE THERE? I MEAN, IT IS A FRONT STREET, SO I WOULD, WE WOULD PREFER, UH, LIKE A WROUGHT IRON? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. YES MA'AM. UM, AND THAT WOULD BE, BE BEHIND, WOULD THAT BE IN FRONT OR WOULD THAT BE BEHIND THE PARKING? I MEAN, UM, WOULD THAT BE IN FRONT OF THE SIDEWALK? THERE'S SOMEBODY BEHIND THE SIDEWALK, RIGHT? RIGHT. OKAY, THANK YOU. IT WOULD BE RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE. THANK YOU. OKAY, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, THAT PERFECT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MS. BUCKLEY? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF VICE CHAIR RUBIN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. BUCKLEY. BASED ON THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT SHE VOLUNTEERED, I HEARD YOU SAY A, YOU WERE VOLUNTEERING A TOWNHOUSE USE THAT IT'S A TOWNHOUSE STYLE MULTIFAMILY, YES. SO, BUT TOWNHOUSE IS NOT A USE IN CHAPTER 50. SO DOES THAT MEAN LIKE A MULTIFAMILY? IT'S MULTIFAMILY, YES. OKAY. SO THAT'S, IT'LL JUST BE TOWNHOUSE STYLE. OKAY. SO THE USE YOU'RE VOLUNTEERING OR KEEPING YES. IS MULTIFAMILY? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALRIGHT, CHAIR, DID YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO. AND I HAVE BRIEF COMMENTS. UH, IF I GET A SECOND IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 34, 2 56, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, SUBMIT TO THE DUE RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT, AS WELL AS THOSE, UH, THAT WERE EMAILED AND ALSO, UH, AMENDED HERE AT THE PODIUM, THE ADDITIONAL ONES. GREAT. THANK YOU CHAIR SCH FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER BLAIR, FOR YOUR SECOND, YOUR COMMENTS. THANK YOU. I JUST, UH, WANTED TO, TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR, UH, THEIR FLEXIBILITY. UH, WE DID HAVE TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS. UNFORTUNATELY I WAS UNABLE TO MAKE THE FIRST ONE, UH, BUT WE DID MAKE THE SECOND ONE. AND, UH, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CASES THAT WAS, WAS KIND OF HONED IN BY, UH, THE COMMUNITY SPEAKING OUT. AND THEY MORE OR LESS SAID THAT WE DON'T MIND THE HOUSING, WE LIKE NICE HOUSING, BUT LET'S KEEP THE COMMERCIAL PIECE, UH, TO ANOTHER DAY. AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE CHOSE TO DO HERE WITH THIS ONE TODAY AND I APPRECIATE THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO, TO STEP UP ON THAT. HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION BY THE CHAIR, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR, UM, TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AS EMAILED AND AS AMENDED AT THE PODIUM. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. VICE CHAIR RUBIN, UH, COMMERS. THAT MOVES US TO CASE NUMBER NINE. THIS CASE NUMBER NINE. UH, THIS IS Z 2 34, 2 65 WK. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT LISTED, UH, LIMITED TO A BAR, LOUNGE, TAVERN AND COMMERCIAL INDOOR AMUSEMENT LIMITED TO A DANCE HALL ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT A WITHIN PD NUMBER SIX 19 WITH H 48 HARWOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH HARWOOD STREET AND PACIFIC AVENUE STAFF'S. RECOMME RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A THREE YEAR TIME PERIOD SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS. THANK YOU, SIR. SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE STACK RECOMMENDATION STATING THAT, UM, WE'RE SEEKING APPROVAL AND RECOMMENDING, RECOMMENDING THAT THERE WOULD BE APPROVAL. MY NAME IS PATRICIA MORGAN HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. UM, UH, AS FAR AS ADDRESS, UH, PURPOSES 2 0 1 NORTH HARDWOOD STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 1. UM, WE ARE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE LOCATION KNOWN AS VIVO, UH, LIVE L LOVE. UM, WE OPERATE AS A, LET'S SEE, A BAR, LOUNGE OR TAVERN. WE'RE SEEKING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR SPECIAL PERMIT TO ALLOW IT TO BE A DANCE HALL SO THAT WE CAN, UM, ENTERTAIN OUR GUESTS, OUR GUESTS, UM, SERVE THE, THE COMMUNITY IN THAT WAY. VIVO IS MORE THAN JUST AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A NIGHT OUT. IT SERVES ALSO AS EMPLOYMENT FOR HUNDREDS OF INDIVIDUALS HERE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS. UM, COMMUNITY OUTREACH, SPONSORSHIP, UH, SCHOLARSHIP, YOU NAME IT. SO WE BELIEVE THAT IN BEING ABLE TO GROW THE OUTREACH, ALLOW AN OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR, THE COMMUNITY TO COME CELEBRATE AND, AND DO THE THINGS THAT THEY WANNA DO ON THE PREMISES WITHOUT ANY RISK OF INJURY TO THE PUBLIC. UH, BUT THERE, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ASK FOR THAT RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FROM A SAFETY PERSPECTIVE. UM, WE, WE TAKE EVERY MEASURE WE CAN TO ENSURE THAT THE PREMISES ARE SAFE. IN THE TIME THAT WE'VE BEEN OPEN. WE'VE HAD VERY FEW INCIDENTS, UM, AND LITTLE TO NONE ACTUALLY ON OUR PREMISES. WE KEEP AT LEAST 25 OR SO SECURITY MEMBERS ON STAFF AT ANY GIVEN TIME. [04:55:01] SO WE, WE APPRECIATE THAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR APPROVAL AND WE THANK Y'ALL FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? YES, MA'AM. THINK I NEED TO PULL? OKAY. HI, MY NAME IS DR. DEBORAH KELLY HILL, AND I'M ALSO HERE TO SPEAK ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE ACTUALLY DO, UH, FOR THE COMMUNITY. SOME OF OUR EVENTS THAT WE HAVE. ONE OF THE MAIN ONES THAT WE HAVE, WHICH WAS, UH, CALLED MISSING BLACK GIRLS, DEALING WITH MISSING BLACK GIRLS AND, UM, PEOPLES WELL MISSING BACK, BLACK GIRLS BEING ABDUCTED. SO THAT WAS A BIG EVENT AND NOT ONLY DID WE HAVE JUST THE LOCAL COMMUNITY, BUT WE HAD, UH, CITY OFFICIALS, CITY OFFICIALS, UH, LOCAL OFFICIALS, EVERYONE TO COME BECAUSE IT WAS SUCH A BIG CONCERN OF YOUNG LADIES BEING MISSING FROM THE COMMUNITY. IT WAS SUCH A BIG CONCERN AND I DIDN'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF A BIG CONCERN IT WAS. IT ACTUALLY KINDA TERRIFIED ME TO KNOW THAT OUR YOUNG LADIES SOMETIME HAVE TO BE AFRAID THAT THEY BEING ABDUCTED. UH, SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO, UH, WHICH DEALT WITH TRAFFICKING. TRAFFICKING WAS, IT WAS REALLY SCARY FOR ME. UH, EVEN ONE OF OUR INDIVIDUALS WHO WORKED WITH ON THE PROGRAM WITH US HAD A CHILD THAT WAS ABDUCTED FOR AT LEAST 30 DAYS. SO WE TRIED TO REACH BACK OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO KINDA LET THEM KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE COMMUNITY. WE DO MORE THAN JUST SAY, THEY CALL IT PARTY LOVE OF WHAT, UH, BUT THERE'S OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT GO ON. THERE'S THE ACTIVITIES. UH, WE HAD AN EVENT THAT DEALT WITH THE, UH, BLACK, UH, AIRPLANE, UH, BLACK PILOT BLACK PALACE, IF YOU WOULD SAY. WE ALSO HAVE AN EVENT CALLED, UM, IT'S CALLED KITCHEN AND COCKTAILS, UH, KENTUCKY DERBY, WHERE WE HAVE A BUNCH OF WOMEN WHO COME TOGETHER TO LOOK AT WAYS THAT WE CAN DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY TO HELP IMPROVE THE COMMITTEE, UH, COMMUNITY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FROM YOU ALL, UH, AFTER THIS IS OVER, SAID WE GO TAKE A SEAT. IF YOU ALL COULD SOMEHOW COME TO SOME OF THOSE MEETINGS AND WE GET SOME IDEAS FROM YOU ALL IS ACTUALLY HOW CAN WE AS A TEAM ALL WORK TOGETHER FOR THIS COMMUNITY? WE DO LOVE DALLAS. WE HAVE BEEN IN THIS COMMUNITY OVER 40 SOME YEARS. OUR BUSINESS IS, IS, UH, NEW. WE PURCHASED THE BUILDING, SO WE ACTUALLY OWN THE WHOLE BUILDING. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE WANNA GIVE BACK TO THE COMMUNITY. WE NOT ONLY EMPLOY, UH, PEOPLES, BUT WE GIVE BACK. WE DO, UH, SCHOLARSHIPS. WE DO, UH, YOU KNOW, I GUESS IT'S COACH DRIVES. WE, UH, FEED THE COMMUNITY. WE HAVE DIFFERENT EVENTS WHERE WE GO IN AND, UH, WE ADOPT THE SCHOOLS TO HELP SUPPORT THOSE SCHOOLS ALSO. SO, LIKE I SAID, IT IS NOT JUST, UH, A CLUB. I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME THINGS THAT MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED, BUT WE DO ALL THAT WE CAN TO SUPPORT ANYONE THAT COMES INTO THE ESTABLISHMENT. LIKE I SAID, LIKE PATRICIA MENTIONED, WE HAVE ALL THE SECURITY, SO WE DO DO OUR BEST TO WHATEVER WE CAN TO SUPPORT. WAS THAT THE THREE MINUTE? THAT'S YOUR TIME. YES. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER HAS QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS. COMMISSIONER KINGTON, ARE YOU AWARE THAT WE RECEIVED SEVERAL, UH, LETTERS IN OPPOSITION FROM YOUR NEIGHBORS COMPLAINING ABOUT VIOLENT CRIME FROM THE PATRONS THAT COME TO YOUR PLACE? I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OR ANYBODY THAT'S COME TODAY, AND OBVIOUSLY THEY'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY. UM, HOWEVER, ANYTIME THERE'S BEEN ANY COMPLAINT ABOUT AN ISSUE ON THE PREMISE, DANGEROUS, YOU HAVE IT. WE'VE FULLY COOPERATED WITH LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT, WHOEVER WE NEED TO. UM, AND SO I THINK WITH ANYBODY WHO'S INVOLVED IN NIGHT, THE NIGHTLIFE HERE ON THIS PANEL, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A RISK OF THINGS THAT MAY HAPPEN IN THE NIGHTLIFE, BUT AS A COMPANY, WE CAN'T CONTROL THIRD PARTY INTERCEDING ACTIONS OR CRIMINAL ACTIONS THAT MAY TAKE PLACE ON OR NEAR THE PREMISES IF IT'S A SOMEBODY ELSE AT FAULT FOR THAT. BUT WE TAKE A LOT OF SECURITY MEASURES, INCLUDING AT LEAST 25 SECURITY STAFF MEMBERS ON THE CLOCK AT ANY GIVEN TIME DURING OPERATIONAL HOURS, UM, SO THAT WE CAN TRY OUR BEST TO THWART ANY OF THOSE ATTEMPTS FOR VIOLENT OR DANGEROUS, UH, YOU KNOW, ACTIVITY ON OUR, ON OUR PROPERTY. NOW WE'RE ALSO AWARE OF SEVERAL INCIDENTS THAT HAVE HAPPENED NEAR OUR PROPERTY AS RECENT AS, AS A SHOOTING AT THE PARK RIGHT NEXT DOOR. UM, THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH US. HOWEVER, THAT PERSON THAT WAS INJURED CAME TO OUR PROPERTY. THE SECURITY HELPED THEM WITH THEIR MEDICAL ATTENTION THAT WAS NEEDED, AND WE DID WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO AS A BUSINESS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, [05:00:01] YOU KNOW, KEPT THE SITUATION SAFE AND, AND ACTED ACCORDINGLY. SO I WOULD SAY IN NIGHTLIFE THERE ARE GOING TO BE INSTANCES WHERE PEOPLE WITH ALCOHOL INVOLVED, YOU HAVE IT GET HURT, COME INTO SOME SITUATIONS, BUT WE DO EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN AS A COMPANY TO TRY TO TAKE A PROACTIVE APPROACH TO THAT WITH SECURITY, WITH METAL DETECTORS AND EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN WITHIN OUR CONTROL TO, I GUESS, SECURE THE PROPERTY AS BEST AS WE CAN. NOW, AS TO ANY LETTERS OF OPPOSITION, I DON'T HAVE THEM IN MY POSSESSION. UM, WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANYTHING BY MAIL OR ANYBODY THAT'S, THAT'S ACTUALLY STATED A FORMAL OPPOSITION. BUT WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO GIVE A REBUTTAL AND TO REITERATE THE SAME, THAT WE TAKE SO MANY SAFETY PRECAUTIONS WITH SECURITY METAL DETECTORS TRYING TO TAKE A PROACTIVE APPROACH TRAINING, UH, WHETHER IT'S OUR STAFF MEMBERS, WHETHER IT'S MAKING SURE THAT OUR OUTSIDE SECURITY OFFICERS HAVE TRAINING OF THEIR OWN, UH, WE DO EVERYTHING THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN WITHIN OUR CONTROL AS A BUSINESS TO TRY TO KEEP THE PREMISES AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE. ARE YOU AWARE THAT A 14-YEAR-OLD GIRL WAS SHOT BY SOMEONE WHO CLAIMS TO HAVE BEEN AT YOUR CLUB? THAT THAT'S FINE. UM, I AM NOT AWARE OF THE FACTUAL NATURE OF THAT MATTER. OKAY. THANK YOU. NOW, ARE YOU AWARE THAT AN 18-YEAR-OLD YOUNG WOMAN CLAIMS THAT SHE WAS RAPED IN THE BATHROOM OF YOUR CLUB? ALL OF THESE ARE ALLEGATIONS THAT YOU'RE RAISING. OKAY, THANK YOU. ARE YOU AWARE THAT DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT LAST YEAR FOUND 24 VIOLATIONS INCLUDING NINE VIOLENT, UH, CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS AT YOUR CLUB? YES, AND EVERY, AND LIKE I SAID, WE'VE COOPERATED WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT ON EVERYTHING THAT COMES OUR WAY, BUT THAT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR A NIGHTCLUB. OKAY. AND YOU'RE AWARE THAT YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE TABC VIOLATION? YES, AS I SAID, WE'VE COOPERATED WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT ON EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE HAD TO. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. UH, ONE MORE, COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. NOW, YOU ALL HAVE OWNED THIS PROPERTY SINCE 2018, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT. AND YOU HAVE OPERATED THIS BUSINESS SINCE WHEN? I CAN'T THINK OF THE ORIGINAL DATE. UM, I HONESTLY, IT WAS BEFORE THE BUILDING HAD BEEN OWNED SINCE 2018, BUT BEFORE OUR ACTUAL, UH, COMPANY CAME INTO POSSESSION, THERE WAS ALREADY A COMPANY THAT WAS RUNNING IT BEFORE. SO WE HAVEN'T ALWAYS BEEN THE ORIGINAL OWNERS. UH, THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE AS AN ENTITY IN THE STATE OF TEXAS SINCE 2015, IS THAT CORRECT? UM, KEVIN CHRISTIAN, 26, YES, IT HAS, BUT IT HASN'T ALWAYS OWNED THIS NIGHTCLUB SINCE THEN. OKAY. HAS IT BEEN OPERATING THE NIGHTCLUB CONTINUOUSLY FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS? IT HAS IN THE PER, UH, IN THE PERMITTED USE. I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE THE DATES IN FRONT OF ME AS TO THE PERMITTED USE. YES IT HAS, BUT NOT AS A DANCE HALL. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT. AND ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE SPECI, THE SUP TO OPERATE EXPIRED IN APRIL OF 23? WELL, THAT'S WHY WE'RE REQUIRED REQUESTING THE NEW AND MM-HMM. , WE FOUND THAT OUT WHEN WE SUBMITTED OUR PAPERWORK FOR THE DANCE HALL LICENSE. THE LAST, THE LAST SIGNATURE THAT CAME SAID THAT THE SUP HAD EXPIRED. WE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF EVEN KNOWING ABOUT AN SUP. SO NO, WE DID. NO WE DID NOT. WHEN WE PURCHASED THE BUILDING, NONE OF THAT WAS MENTIONED. WE DID NOT, THERE WAS A SUP APPARENTLY ALREADY IN ALREADY THERE, SO WE NEVER KNEW. THE ONLY WAY THAT WE KNEW WAS WHEN WE WENT FOR THE D FOR THE DANCE HALL LICENSE AND THEY SAID IN ORDER TO GET IT, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO THE SUP, YOUR SUP. OTHER THAN THAT, WE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF IT. AND MR. KELLY WHO OWNS THE BUILDING AS A LAWYER, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. AND SO YOU'VE BEEN OPERATING SINCE THE S SINCE THE SUP EXPIRED IN APRIL OF 2023 WITHOUT AN SUP, IS THAT CORRECT? FOR WITHIN THE, THE YEAST THAT IT'S ALLOWED FOR? CORRECT. BUT YOU'VE BEEN OPERATING AS A BAR TAVERN WITHOUT AN SUPI DON'T DUNNO, I CAN'T THINK OF THE DATES OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. BUT SINCE, SINCE IT HAD BEEN ACQUIRED BY AND BECAME VIVO THEN YES, IT'S BEEN OPERATING. AND HAVE YOU HAD A DANCE FLOOR DURING THAT TIME? [05:05:01] WELL, THIS ESTABLISHMENT HAS A DANCE FLOOR. I'M SORRY, CAN YOU PLEASE STEP UP TO THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE WE HAVE FOLKS CAN'T HEAR YOU. THE ESTABLISHMENT ITSELF HAS A DANCE FLOOR, IF YOU WILL, BUT THERE'S TABLE SETTINGS THERE. SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT IT'S OPEN FLOOR FORMAT FOR A DANCE HALL. NOW I CAN'T HELP THAT. IF PEOPLE WANNA DANCE, IF A SONG COMES ON, I MIGHT BE ABLE TO DANCE RIGHT HERE, BUT THERE'S NOT A NECESSARILY A DANCE FLOOR. THERE'S TABLE SET UP FOR WHEN PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE THEIR DRINKS TO STAND AROUND. UM, TALL, HIGH TOP TABLES, SMALLER TABLES. SO THERE'S NOT NECESSARILY AN OPEN CONCEPT DANCE FLOOR. I MEAN, ALL THE PICTURES ON THE INTERNET THAT SHOW PEOPLE CROWDED ONTO A DANCE FLOOR. ALL THE COMMENTS ON THE INTERNET TALKING ABOUT HOW PEOPLE GO THERE TO DANCE. WHAT'S THAT ABOUT? I CAN'T HELP BUT PEOPLE POST ON SOCIAL MEDIA. OKAY. I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER, WE THERE, WHAT PROMPTED YOU ALL TO HAVE TO GO GET THE DANCE HALL LICENSE? WAS THAT, WAS IT BECAUSE THERE WAS A VIOLATION BY COURT CODE ENFORCEMENT OR, UH, BY, NO, IT'S EVERY YEAR WHEN YOU HAVE A DANCE HALL LICENSE, YOU HAVE TO RENEW THEM EVERY YEAR. SO DID YOU ALREADY HAVE A DANCE HALL LICENSE? WE ALREADY HAD A DANCE HALL LICENSE. AND SO YOU, YOU HAD A DANCE HALL LICENSE, UM, ALONG WITH THE SUP AND THEY DID NOT TELL YOU WHEN YOU WENT TO RENEW THE SUP WENT TO RENEW THE DANCE HALL LICENSE THAT THE SUP ALSO WAS SUBJECT. WE GOT READY TO RENEW THIS YEAR. SEE FOR THE PAST THREE, WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD TO RENEW EVERY YEAR WHEN WE GOT READY TO RENEW THIS YEAR AND THE LAST, THAT'S WHEN THEY SAID YOUR SUP. SO, SO THAT'S, SO THERE WAS A SUP ALREADY IN PLACE. SO WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU WENT TO GO RENEW LAST YEAR, THEY DIDN'T GIVE YOU, BECAUSE I'M ASKING YOU THIS, THERE WAS NOWHERE ON THE APPLICATION THAT SHOWED YOU AT THE, THAT THAT NOTIFIED YOU THAT YOUR SUP WAS GOING TO RUN, THAT IT WAS GOING TO RUN OUT BEFORE THE END OF THE DANCE HALL LICENSE. WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANYTHING. RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. OKAY. THE ONLY TIME I HEARD ANYTHING WAS WHEN THE OFFICER SAID THE SUP FOR THAT SIGNATURE WE KEPT, THAT'S THE ONLY TIME WE DID NOT RECEIVE NOT ONE NOTICE, NOT NOTHING. SO WHEN WE DID RESEARCH, THAT'S WHEN WE FOUND OUT, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF IT AT ALL. SO AN OFFICER TOLD YOU THAT, OR THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TOLD YOU THAT I RESEARCHED IT? NO. YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT WHEN THE OFFICER TOLD YOU, DID THE OFFICER TELL YOU THAT, UH, OFFICER TELL YOU THAT? OR DID DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TELL YOU THAT? WELL, WHEN WE, WHOEVER WE SENT FOR THE, FOR THE SUP FROM DANCE HALL LICENSE, WE WERE NOTIFIED THEN. OKAY. UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER CLUBS IN PROXIMITY TO YOU ALL? I'M SORRY, REPEAT THAT. IS THERE ANY OTHER CLUBS THAT ARE IN DIRECT PROXIMITY TO YOU ALL? ANY OTHER CLUBS? MM-HMM. THAT, YEAH, IT'S LIKE, IS CLOSELY CLOSE. UHHUH. . OKAY. ALEX? I WOULD SAY SO, YES. IN THAT NOT ONLY IN THAT DOWNTOWN AREA, BUT ALSO DEEP EL IS, IS NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT NO, UM, DIRECTLY DIRECT. SO DIRECTLY ATTACHED. SO THE ONES IN DEEP EL THEY HAVE LIKE ROWS OF BARS. CORRECT. BUT IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, YOU ALL SEE IT ON THE CORNER OF PACIFIC AND PEARL. PEARL? NO. PACIFIC AND HARWOOD. YES. IS THERE ANY CLUBS IN DIRECT PROXIMITY TO YOU ALL? UM, I'M HONESTLY, I'M NOT SURE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT, NOT SURE. OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS? I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION. UM, UM, SORRY TO GET IN THOUGH, BUT, UM, ARE YOU AWARE OF KIND OF THE HURDLES THAT WE LOOK AT WHEN WE LOOK AT THESE KINDS OF CASES AND, AND, AND THE KIND OF LANGUAGE THAT WE LOOK AT WHEN WE'RE, UH, DOING OUR DUE DILIGENCE ON A, ON IMPROVING THESE CASES? IN TERMS OF AN SUP? THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE, YEAH, THIS IS PICKING ON MICROPHONE. OKAY. WHAT SHE'S SAYING IS THIS IS THE FIRST TIME DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE AS WE'VE MENTIONED THE FIRST TIME, US KNOWING THAT IT'S EVEN EXPIRED AND HAVING TO GET THIS. SO IF YOU CAN EDUCATE US, THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR US HERE TODAY. SURE. YEP. THE, THESE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT, THAT MOST OF US HAVE READ THOUSANDS OF TIMES AND WE PRACTICALLY HAVE 'EM, YOU KNOW, TATTOOED TO OUR BRAINS. BUT I'LL, I'LL READ 'EM TO YOU THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SSUP UH, WILL COMPLIMENT OR BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING USES OF THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES. THEN TWO, CONTRIBUTE TO ENHANCE OR PROMOTE THE WELFARE OF THE AREA OF REQUESTS AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THREE, NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE. AND FOUR, CONFIRM CONFORM TO ALL OTHER ASPECTS, TO ALL APPLICABLE ZONING REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS. SO [05:10:01] WITH THOSE FOUR ITEMS, DO YOU, YOU FEEL THAT YOU HAVE COMPLIED TO THOSE? WE DO. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE APPLICATION TO BE APPROVED HERE TODAY. UM, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, IT'S NOT JUST A NIGHTCLUB, IT'S NOT JUST A PARTY. IT'S A PLACE THAT EMPLOYS HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE HERE WITHIN OUR CITY. SO WE'RE DEFINITELY PROMOTING ECONOMIC BENEFIT TO THOSE AROUND US. UM, IT'S A PLACE THAT DOES COMMUNITY SERVICE, COMMUNITY OUTREACH, SPONSORSHIP. SO WE'RE DEFINITELY PROMOTING THE WELLBEING, UM, OF, OF THE PREMISES. THAT CLUB, EVEN THOUGH IT HADN'T ALWAYS BEEN VIVO, WAS MEDUSA AND HAD OPERATING, HAD BEEN OPERATING FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS TOTAL. SO THIS IS A, THIS IS A LONGSTANDING BUSINESS THAT'S BEEN, THERE WE'RE JUST NEW OWNERSHIP, FINDING OUT THAT CERTAIN PERMITS AND REQUIREMENTS HADN'T BEEN PUT IN PLACE AND TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING. I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHETHER THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD THOSE PERMITS, HAD THAT REQUIREMENTS AND WHATEVER THEY, THEY DID NOW, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE NOW BEING PENALIZED FOR TRYING TO GET THINGS ON TRACK. UM, SO AGAIN, THE BUSINESS HAD BEEN OPEN FOR 20. YOU SAID THE OWNERSHIP, I'M SORRY, WHEN DID YOU GUYS TAKE CONTROL OF THE FACILITY? IT, I, UH, THE DATE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I CAN'T RECALL. I WANNA SAY IT WAS MAYBE 20 21, 20 22. BUT IT WAS WELL AFTER THE TIME THE BUILDING HAD BEEN PURCHASED, THERE WAS ALREADY AN OWNER OF THAT NIGHTCLUB THERE. OKAY. SO I KNOW 'CAUSE YOU YOU USED THE WORD WERE, WERE THE NEW OWNERS NEW, IT'S RELATIVE TERM, RIGHT? THREE YEARS MIGHT BE NEW TO SOME PEOPLE, MIGHT NOT BE NEW TO ME, CORRECT? RIGHT. THREE YEARS IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT TIME TO RUN A BUSINESS. RIGHT. ESPECIALLY ONE THIS INTENSE, RIGHT. AND AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS IN THREE YEARS COMPARED TO THE 20 YEARS THIS NIGHTCLUB HAS OPERATED AS A NIGHTCLUB, IT IS RELATIVELY NEW RIGHT. FOR US TO REALIZE THAT THESE ISSUES I KNOW OR HAD GOTTEN SEMANTICS, BUT YOU'RE NOT A NEW OWNERSHIP. RIGHT? NEW OWNERSHIP MEANS YOU JUST, YOU PURCHASED IT, YOU PURCHASED IT AFTER THESE ITEMS HAD ALREADY HAPPENED AND THE REGULATION HAD SOME TIME HAD RUN OUT. THAT'S NOT THE CASE, RIGHT? THREE YEARS IS, IS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME TO GET THESE THINGS IN ORDER. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE. PREVIOUS TO THIS, YOU EXPAND. 'CAUSE WHAT YOU AM I, AM I CORRECT IN SAYING THAT YOU ALL ASKED YOU TO EXPAND, UH, TRUTH, UH, KITCHEN INTO THIS BUILDING? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? AM I, IS IT, AM I TRUE IN STATING THAT YOU ALL ORIGINALLY, I MEAN YOU ORIGINALLY WASN'T IN THIS PORTION OF THE BUILDING THAT YOU ALL EXPANDED INTO THIS PORTION OF THE BUILDING WHEN YOU FIRST OPENED TRO THE, WHEN YOU FIRST CAME AND OPENED TROOP, UH, KITCHEN, THIS, YOU WERE, YOU DIDN'T TAKE OVER THE WHOLE POSSESSION OF THE BUILDING. YOU HAD THE FRONT THAT'S CORRECT. AND, AND THERE WAS NO INCIDENTS DURING THAT PERIOD. CAN YOU REPEAT THE LAST PART? THERE WAS NO INCIDENTS DURING THAT PERIOD. AM I CORRECT? THERE WAS NO, I CAN'T UNDERSTAND. THERE WAS NO INCIDENTS DURING THAT PERIOD. NOT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE. AND THEN YOU ALL LATER WHEN YOU ACQUIRED THE BUILDING, EXPANDED THE RESTAURANT INTO THE CLUB AREA. AM I CORRECT? I DON'T, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE. AND GO AHEAD. HAD ORIGINALLY WENT, WAS BEFORE THE RESTAURANT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU. BEFORE THE RESTAURANT, IT WAS A LAW FIRM. IT WAS A LAW FIRM AND THEN THE CLUB WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE. MM-HMM. . SO WE NEVER EVEN SAW IT. WE JUST SAW THE LAW FIRM. MM-HMM. . SO THEN WE HAD THIS OTHER BIG OPEN SPACE, WHICH WAS DOWNSTAIRS JUST SIT THERE FOR A WHILE AND THEN KOBE CAME, DECIDED TO DO A RESTAURANT. MM-HMM. . UH, AND THE CLUB WAS STILL OPERATING UNDER SOMEONE ELSE, NOT ON US. AND SO WHEN YOU ALL ARE SAYING THAT YOU ARE PRETTY, YOU NEW IT IS BE, IS IT TRUE TO SAY THAT IT IS? BECAUSE ORIGINALLY YOU WERE JUST A RESTAURANT WITH A, WITH A BAR BUT NOT A CLUB. AND THEN YOU EXPANDED INTO WHAT IS NOW WHAT WAS THEN MEDUSA AND CHANGED OVER TO V AM I CORRECT BECAUSE I'M, I'M SORRY. UM, YES. SO THE BUILDING IN ITSELF IS, IS BASICALLY MADE UP OF THREE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS. SO A LAW FIRM, A RESTAURANT, AND A NIGHTCLUB. MM-HMM. . SO WHEN THE BUILDING WAS FIRST PURCHASED, THERE WAS ALREADY AN OWNER OF THE NIGHTCLUB IN THAT SPACE. SO WE DIDN'T PURCHASE THE BUILDING AND THEN AUTOMATICALLY TAKE OVER THE NIGHTCLUB. MM-HMM. . OKAY. AND SO THAT MEANS, BUT THE, WHEN THE, WHEN IT WAS JUST THE RESTAURANT AND THE BAR, THERE WAS NOT THESE PARTICULAR INCIDENTS? NO, I I WOULDN'T SAY THAT IT JUST WASN'T ANYTHING. I NO, IT WASN'T. SO WHEN YOU, SO WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK BACK AT THE HISTORY. HOLD ON, I'M GOING SOMEWHERE WITH IT. SO WHEN THERE WAS THE REST, WHEN YOU WERE, WHEN YOU HAD THE RESTAURANT PORTION RIGHT BEFORE YOUR EXPANSION, RIGHT? YOU ALL HAD, DIDN'T HAVE THESE PARTICULAR INCIDENTS, AM I CORRECT? THERE WAS NOT, YOU WERE YOUR RESTAURANT, YOUR BAR RAN WELL, OKAY. CORRECT. THE RESTAURANT ITSELF. AND THEN YOU EXPANDED INTO THE CLUB, WHICH WAS IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. YES. BUT HOW LONG HAD YOU ALREADY BEEN AT THE, AT THE FIRST PORTION OF THE BUILDING. HOW MANY YEARS HAD YOU BEEN THERE BEFORE? MAYBE FOUR. CALL IT FOUR YEARS. OKAY, SO THE FOUR YEARS, AND THEN YOU EXPANDED INTO THIS PORTION OF THE BUILDING? YES. OKAY. THAT'S CORRECT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BLAIR, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. YES. COMMISSIONER [05:15:01] BLAIR, DID YOU NOT SAY THAT YOU GUYS FOUND OUT THAT YOU NEEDED YOUR, THIS SUP WHEN YOU WENT ANNUALLY, YOU HAD TO GET YOUR UM, TABC LICENSE? NO, I SAID WHEN IT WAS TIME, NOT THE TADC LICENSE HOLD. OH, YOUR DANCE HALL LICENSE? YEAH. YES. OKAY. SO, AND SO YOUR YOUR SUP EXPIRED IN 2022. 23. 23. 23. SO, OKAY, SO ARE, SO WHEN YOU, YOU SAID, SO WHEN YOU WENT AND GOT YOUR DANCE HALL, YOUR ANNUAL DANCE HALL LICENSE, DID THEY NOT TELL YOU OR DID THEY, DID YOU NOT WHEN YOU SUBMIT FOR THE DANCE HALL LICENSE, UH, RESUBMIT LIKE AN APRIL. SO YOU SUBMIT YOUR PAPERWORK AND THEN YOU WAIT, THEY'LL TELL YOU IT'S ABOUT 30 TO 60 DAYS BEFORE YOU GET AN ANSWER. SO YOU WAIT TO GET AN ANSWER. AND SO AT THAT POINT, THAT'S WHEN WE WERE TOLD THAT THE DANCE, THAT THE, UH, SUP AND THAT WAS OUR FIRST KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUP. SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE ONLY WAY YOU KNEW YOU, YOU HAD A SUP REQUIREMENT IS BECAUSE YOU HAD A, YOUR DANCE HALL LICENSE EXPIRED? NO, WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE ONLY REASON WE HAD A SUP IN THE BEGINNING, IN THE VERY BEGINNING IS BECAUSE WHOEVER THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THAT SPOT, THE SUP WAS ALREADY THERE. AND I KNOW THE SUP WAS ON THE LAND, BUT I, I'M DONE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT, PLEASE MOTION TO CALL THE QUESTION. PRESS A MOTION. THERE'S NO MOTION. NO, THERE'S, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO DISCUSSION. NOW , THERE'S NO MOTION BEFORE THE BODY. THERE'S NO MOTION. YEAH, BUT I, I THINK WE'RE CLOSE TO, UM, I'LL CALL, WE'RE CLOSE TO A MOTION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT'S COMMISSIONERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? I DO IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 34 DASH 2 65 A MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DENY THE APPLICATION. AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I HAVE COMMENTS. YOU DO HAVE A SECOND. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS. THANK YOU. UM, GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF FEEDBACK I HAVE RECEIVED FROM THE NEARBY RESIDENTS, THE DATA I HAVE REVIEWED FROM PUBLIC AGENCIES, INCLUDING THE DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE TABC, UM, AND OTHER INFORMATION THAT W HAS BECOME AVAILABLE AND THE APPLICANT'S OWN ADMISSIONS HERE TODAY, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS APPLICANT, UM, THAT, THAT, THAT THIS APPLICATION COMPLIES WITH 51 A DASH 4.219 FOR SPECIALTY USE PERMIT. SPECIFICALLY, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT, UM, IT COMPLIES WITH SUBSECTION C AND THAT IT WOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE, WELFARE, UH, OF THIS AREA. AND THEREFORE I ASK THAT IT BE DENIED AND I HOPE THAT YOU ALL WILL SUPPORT ME IN THAT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER. I WILL NOT BE, UH, UM, FOLLOWING THAT RECOMMENDATION, I RECOMMEND. MY RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. UM, AND I HAVE COMMENTS. UM, THERE IS, THERE IS QUITE PLAUSIBLE THAT, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DID NOT NOTIFY AND THEY SH THEY, AND, AND I KNOW THIS PERSONALLY, THAT THEY, THE SUP, THAT THE SUP WAS SUBJECT TO A RENEWAL AT THE LAST TIME THAT THEY WENT TO APPLY. I ALSO AM LOOKING, IF I'M LOOKING AT THE, UM, DATA THAT WAS RELEASED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THAT DATA, THAT DATA AND RELATED TO OTHER CLUBS IS NOT AS HIGH. IT IS MINIMUM. UM, AND IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO DENY THEM AND SUP NOW I DO KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN TROUBLE AT THE CLUB, BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THIS PARTICULAR, UM, RESTAURANT, THIS WAS A RESTAURANT THAT HAS, HAS AT ALL TIMES HAVE HELD TO A STANDARD AND THEM, THEM MOVING INTO THE NIGHTCLUB BUSINESS, I CAN SEE MAYBE A ONE YEAR SUP, BUT I DO NOT THINK IT IS A ENOUGH TO, TO TAKE ON TO SAY THAT THEY ARE, UH, A NUISANCE WHEN THERE IS PLENTY OF NUISANCE RIGHT ACROSS [05:20:01] THE, UP UNDER THE UNDERPASS THAT WOULD, UH, COULD CAUSE THIS. UM, BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT, THAT THEY, THAT IT IS A, TO THE DEFECT THAT THEY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN AT LEAST A ONE YEAR SUP. UM, JUST BASED OFF OF WHAT WE, WHAT I, WHAT I KNOW PERSONALLY SEEING AND BEING AROUND AND KNOWING HOW THEY STARTED AND THEY JUST NOW GETTING INTO THE CLUB BUSINESS, THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE AT LEAST A YEAR TO GET EVERYTHING IN ORDER. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER I CALL A QUESTION. QUESTION IS CALLED, UH, COMMISSIONERS. WE HAVE A, A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR TO CLOSE ABOVE KING FILE STAFF. NOT FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT RATHER DENY THE APPLICATION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? WE HAVE TWO IN OPPOSITION, COMMISSIONER WHEELER AND HERBERT. MOTION PASSES. UH, LET'S GO NEXT CASE AND WE'LL TAKE A BREAK AFTER NUMBER 10. THIS CASE NUMBER Z 2 2 3 [10. 24-2920 An application for a CS Commercial Service District on property zoned an R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the southwest line of C. F. Hawn Freeway, between Silverado Drive and Jordan Valley Road.] DASH 3 0 2. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE R SEVEN FIVE A STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MS. BRIDGES IS Z TWO 30, Z 2 23. 3 0 2 NUMBER 10. I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL. THANK YOU. UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES. GOOD AFTERNOON. YES, SIR. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. IT'S A PRIVILEGE TO, UH, WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, SIR. MY NAME IS DENNIS THOMAS. I REPRESENT CLAY STRUCTURES. OUR BUSINESS IS LOCATED AT 1 2 1 5 OH CF HA FREEWAY DALLAS, TEXAS. YOU CAN BEGIN WITH YOUR REMARKS, SIR. YOU CAN START WITH YOUR REMARKS. OKAY. UH, ONE, IT'S UH, IT IS A PRIVILEGE TO ADDRESS SUCH A DISTINGUISHED GROUP OF PEOPLE. UH, WE LOVE OUR BUSINESS IN DALLAS AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO EXPANDING IT. WE BOUGHT OUR PROPERTY THAT WE'RE PRESENTLY USING IN 2003. WE'VE BEEN CONTINUALLY IN OPERATION THERE SINCE THAT DATE. DURING THAT TIME, WE FEEL LIKE WE'VE COLLECTED ABOUT 6 MILLION, $60 MILLION WORTH OF REVENUE THAT WE PAID TAXES ON. WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THAT. UM, WE'RE IN THE BRICK BUSINESS. 30% OF ALL THE BRICK IN THE UNITED STATES ARE SOLD IN THE STATE OF TEXAS. DALLAS FORT WORTH IS THE LARGEST BRICK MARKET IN THE NATION AND WE NEED TO EXPAND OUR BUSINESS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT GROWTH AND WE'RE THANKFUL THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO IT IN DALLAS. UH, WHEN YOU CONSIDER WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, WE ASK THAT YOU GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. YES, SIR. TYLER THOMAS. 1 2 1 5 0 CF HA FREEWAY. IN JANUARY OF 99, DAD STARTED CLAY STRUCTURES IN MAYBANK, TEXAS. IN CASE YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE MAY MAYBANK IS A SMALL TOWN, 45 MINUTES SOUTHEAST OF DALLAS ON CEDAR CREEK LAKE. HE WANTED A DALLAS ADDRESS TO BE MORE CREDIBLE WHEN DEALING WITH SUPPLIERS. NOT EVERYBODY IN THE UNITED STATES KNOWS WHERE MAYBANK IS, BUT EVERYBODY KNOWS WHERE DALLAS IS. DAD PURCHASED THE INITIAL PROPERTY AT 1 2 1 5 0 CF HA FREEWAY IN SEPTEMBER OF 2003, AS HE SAID, AND LESS THAN A MONTH LATER, HE PURCHASED THE THREE RESIDENTIAL LOTS AT THE BACKSIDE OF OUR PROPERTY. AND THEN THE NEXT FEW YEARS PROCEEDED TO PURCHASE ADDITIONAL LOTS ALONG HA FREEWAY TOWARDS JORDAN VALLEY. THAT BRINGS US TO OUR CURRENT SITUATION. WE HAVE WANTED TO UPDATE OUR FACILITIES FOR OVER 10 YEARS NOW, BUT WE'RE NEVER IN A FINANCIAL POSITION [05:25:01] TO COMFORTABLY DO SO. IN JUNE OF 2021, WE HIRED MR. FAGAN TO BE OUR ARCHITECT. OUR INITIAL PLAN WAS TO BE IN ADDITION TO OUR CURRENT FACILITIES, BUT IT DIDN'T TAKE US LONG TO DETERMINE THAT THAT WOULD NOT WORK. IT WAS APPARENT THAT A COMPLETE TEAR DOWN AND REBUILD WAS THE ONLY FEASIBLE COURSE OF ACTION. THIS NEWS WAS NOT TAKEN AS A NEGATIVE. IN FACT, WE EMBRACED THE OPPORTUNITY TO DESIGN OUR OFFICES TO REFLECT OUR STYLE AND THE QUALITY OF THE PRODUCTS WE SELL TO OUR CUSTOMERS AND THE COMMUNITY AROUND US. THE BUILDING WAS DESIGNED TO LOOK LIKE AN INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE OR MANUFACTURING FACILITY FROM THE TURN OF THE CENTURY WITH A FEW SUBTLE DESIGN CUES TAKEN FROM MAY STREET MAIN STREETS AND SMALL TOWNS ACROSS AMERICA. WE WANTED THE DESIGN TO HAVE A DEEP ELM FEEL. IN FACT, I SENT A PICTURE OF THE ADAMS HATS BUILDING TO JOE FOR INSPIRATION. IT WAS DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS THAT WE WERE MADE AWARE OF THE ZONING AND THE BACK. LOTS OF OUR PROPERTY, THESE LOTS HAVE BEEN A PART OF OUR FACILITY FOR OVER 20 YEARS. THEY HAVE NO ACCESS TO THEM EXCEPT THROUGH OUR PROPERTY AND BY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY BEHIND THEM. WHEN WE PRESENTED OUR PLANS TO THE COMMUNITY OF KLEBERG, IT WAS MET WITH OVERWHELMING SUPPORT. I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS A SINGLE NEGATIVE COMMENT MADE. WE WANT OUR FACILITY TO BE A BEAUTIFUL ADDITION TO THE AREA, ENCOURAGE OTHER BUSINESSES TO INVEST IN THAT AREA AS WELL. IT IS OUR HOPE TO GET THESE LOTS REZONED AND OUR FACILITIES BUILT, BUILT SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO OUR BUSINESS AT THIS LOCATION THAT HAS BECOME OUR HOME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, MY NAME IS JOE FAGAN. I LIVE AT 5 7 7 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD IN FAIRVIEW, TEXAS. I'M A REGISTERED ARCHITECT IN THE DALLAS, IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, AND I'VE BEEN RETAINED TO PROVIDE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR DENNIS AND TYLER THOMAS ON THIS SUBJECT PROJECT. AS YOU KNOW, THE PLANNING STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED THAT YOU RE YOU, UH, DENY THE REQUEST FOR REZONING OF THE 1.13 ACRES, UH, THAT WE HAVE. UH, AS A PART OF THE PROPERTY. I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THE REASON FOR THE OBJECTION IS THAT REZONING WOULD BE IN CONFLICT WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. BEFORE YOU MAKE YOUR FINAL DECISION, I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT SOME FACTS THAT THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, A VARIANCE SHOULD BE GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS. NUMBER ONE, WE HAVE A STRONG CASE THAT THIS PROPERTY SHOULD BE GRANDFATHERED INTO YOUR PLAN BECAUSE WHILE THE CITY OF DALLAS ADOPTED A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN 2007, MY CLIENTS HAD PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY AND HAD BUILT AND ESTABLISHED THEIR BUSINESS IN 2003 AT THIS LOCATION. SECONDLY, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED R 75, BUT PLEASE CONSIDER THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AROUND IT. THE RED INDICATES THE 1.13 ACRES THAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN. THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IN FRONT OF IT IS OF COURSE, CLAY STRUCTURES. AND THEN ONTO THE WEST SIDE, WHICH IS THE LEFT SIDE OF THE GREEN OR LEFT SIDE OF THE, OUR PROPERTY IS A 7.6 ACRE TRACK THAT IS COMMERCIAL ZONED. SO I THINK ALL OF US WOULD AGREE THAT MOST PEOPLE WOULD NOT WANT TO LIVE IN THIS AREA THAT IS SANDWICHED BETWEEN TWO COMMERCIAL LOTS. THE ONLY ACCESS TO THE 1.13 ACRE IS CURRY LANE. THE LAST POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS, UM, SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY STATED, AND THAT IS, UM, THAT WE RECEIVED FAVORABLE SUPPORT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS PRELIMINARY CONCEPT PLAN, THAT WE HAVE MOVED THE STRUCTURES AS FAR AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS POSSIBLE. WE ARE TRYING TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. YOU'VE SEEN THE EXISTING BUILDING THAT WE HAVE NOW, WE WOULD LIKE TO TEAR THAT ONE DOWN AND BUILD A BUILDING THAT WOULD UPGRADE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. SIR, ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, EITHER IN SUPPORT OR IN OPPOSITION? YES, SIR. UH, HI. I AM DAVID CARRANZA. I LIVE AT 1 4 4 6 4 CLEAVER ROAD, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 5 3. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, CLEAVER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND CRIME WATCH. UM, I'M SPEAKING TODAY IN STRONG SUPPORT OF THE Z 2 23 DASH 3 0 2 GBA PROPOSAL THAT HOLDS SIGNIFICANT IMPORTANCE TO OUR COMMUNITY. AT ONE OF THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, [05:30:01] WHICH WAS ONE OF THE MOST PRODUCTIVE AND POSITIVE WE'VE EVER HAD, COMMISSIONER BLAIR SHARED SEVERAL ZONING CASES OF WHICH ONLY ONE, UM, DID NOT. PA DIDN'T, WE WEREN'T IN FAVOR OF EVERYTHING ELSE WAS UNANIMOUS, PARTICULARLY THE Z 2 23 3 0 2. WE EMBRACED IT AND OBVIOUSLY WE FELT IT WAS A NECESSARY STEP FORWARD. CLAY STRUCTURES, A LONGSTANDING AND RESPECTED BUSINESS IN KLEBERG IS PROPOSING AN UPGRADE THAT WILL ENHANCE BOTH ITS OPERATION AND THE OVERALL APPEARANCE OF OUR AREA. BY CONSTRUCTING A TWO NEW, TWO NEW BUILDINGS ON THIS PROPERTY, THERE WILL NOT ONLY IMPROVE THE PROFESSIONALISM OF THEIR OWN, UH, BUSINESS, BUT ALSO SET NEW STANDARDS FOR THE AESTHETICS ALONG ICE. UH, 1 75 FREEWAY. THIS SECTION OF THE FREEWAY IS CURRENTLY DOTTED WITH TRUCKING COMPANIES AND AGING AUTO, UH, REPAIR SHOPS AND MOBILE HOMES. CLAY STRUCTURE'S PROPOSAL IS A KEY STEP FORWARD IN BEAUTIFYING THE GATEWAY INTO KLEBERG AREA, AND WE HOPE WE ARE HOPEFUL THAT IT WILL INSPIRE OTHER BUSINESSES TO FOLLOW SUIT. OUR COMMUNITY IS OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORTS THIS PROJECT. WHEN WE DISCUSSED THE, THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS AND THE EXCITEMENT TO SEE THIS CASE MOVE FORWARD WAS PALATABLE. WE RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL AND URGE YOU TO STAND WITH US IN PROPOSING, UH, SUPPORTING THIS PROPOSAL. WHILE WE VALUE THE RURAL, UH, CHARACTERISTICS OF OUR AREA, THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE WANTED TO LOOK NEGLECTED OR RUN DOWN. THIS PROJECT IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO START TRANSFORMING THE IMAGE OF OUR COMMUNITY FOR THE BETTER. WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT TO BEGIN THE TRANSFORMATION. PLEASE HELP US TAKE THIS FIRST STEP TOWARD A MORE BEAUTIFUL AND VIBRANT KLEBERG. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? YES, MA'AM. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JESSICA RAMIREZ AND I LIVE WITH SITE AT 2 7 2 WEST LAWSON ROAD, TRAILER NUMBER FOUR, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 5 3 ON THE SOUTHEAST SIDE OF DISTRICT EIGHT ON BEHALF OF, ON BEHALF OF THE COLLIBRA COMMUNITY. EXCUSE ME. I'M WRITING TO INFORM YOU THAT, UH, THE ASSOCIATION DOES SUPPORT ZONING CHANGE Z 2 2 3 3 0 2. FOR OVER 20 YEARS, CLAY STRUCTURES HAS BEEN DOING BUSINESS IN KLEBERG, WHICH HAS BEEN A HIGHLIGHT OF OUR ECONOMIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. CLAY STRUCTURES NOW SEEKS EFFORTS IN, IN REVITALIZATION, WHICH SOME OF THE PROPERTY SITS ON A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT. THE BUSINESS, THIS BUSINESS SITS ALONG HIGHWAY 1 75 AND IS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT. NOBODY SEES A FUTURE RESIDENTIAL POTENTIAL HERE AND THEIR REVITALIZATION EFFORTS. THIS CHANGE WOULD ALLOW FOR OFFICE, SHOWROOM, WAREHOUSE, AND LIGHT MANUFACTURING USES AS TREASURER OF THE BERG NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. HERE ARE SOME BENEFITS TO CONSIDER. ONE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, TWO, INCREASED TAX REVENUE. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES CAN LEAD TO A HIGHER TAX VALUE AND AN INCREASED TAX REVENUE, WHICH CAN REV, UH, BE REINVESTED INTO OUR COMMUNITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE. THREE. A DI DIVERSIFICATION OF LOCAL SERVICES. FOUR. COMMUNITY INVESTMENT. FIVE. ENHANCED PROPERTY VALUES, SIX. SUPPORT FOR LOCAL ECONOMY. LOCAL BUSINESSES CAN STIMULATE THE ECONOMY BY SOURCING MATERIALS AND SERVICES FROM OTHER LOCAL PROVIDERS. ACCORDING TO CODE, CLAY STRUCTURES QUALIFIES AGAINST MOST OF THESE FOR DALLAS 2.0. 2.0 MUST RECOGNIZE THESE BENEFITS THAT HIGHLIGHT THE POTENTIAL POSITIVE IMPACTS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE SUCH AS THIS. I KNOW THERE'S NO PRECEDENTS AND WHATNOT, BUT, UM, THIS WOULD BE A PRECEDENT FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WHILE STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED DENIAL, WE BELIEVE THIS DEVELOPMENT COULD ENHANCE OUR COMMUNITY'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND WE URGE THEM TO RECONSIDER THIS CASE THAT WOULD BENEFIT, UM, KLEBERG. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. COMMISSIONER. UH, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. ANY, THAT'S ALL OUR SPEAKERS, RIGHT? COMMISSIONERS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER BLAIR? THANK YOU. YOU KNEW I WAS GONNA CALL YOU, RIGHT? YES, MA'AM. UM, DID YOU, DID YOU NOT PROVIDE ME WITH THIS LIST OF, OF USES THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW THAT YOU WOULD WISH NOT YES, MA'AM. NOT TO USE IN YOUR LOCATION? AND WE AGREED TO, UH, NOT DO THE THINGS THAT WE DON'T NEED TO DO . OKAY. BECAUSE IT'S, AND ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS HERE ON THE FLOOR DID GET A COPY OF THIS LIST OF USES THAT THE APPLICANT IS DEED RESTRICT THAT IS OFFERING UP [05:35:01] AS DEED RESTRICTIONS. UM, SO, UM, LET ME ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION. THE USES THAT THE, THE PROPERTY THAT YOU PURCHASED IN THE BACK YES, MA'AM. THAT IS THE ZONE RESIDENTIAL. THE REASON WHY YOU'RE HERE TODAY. UM, YOU ARE, YOU, YOUR WISH IS TO MAKE IT ALL UNIFORMLY ZONED AS ONE LO AS ONE ZONING TRAFFIC LAND, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. UM, AND IN DOING SO, THEN YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THE UPGRADES AND MODIFICATIONS THAT YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. IS AS YOU SHOWED THE, WHAT YOUR LOT LOOKS LIKE TODAY, THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF TREES IN THE BACK. ARE ARE, IS IT MY UNDERSTANDING THERE, THERE IS NO MORE, THERE IS NOT A NEED TO REMOVE ANOTHER TREE. I'M SORRY. WE DO NOT HAVE TO BUILD THE BUILDINGS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING. WE WILL NOT REMOVE ANOTHER TREE. THAT'S THAT THE YEAH, SAY THAT AGAIN. UH, TO, TO BUILD THE BUILDINGS THAT WE HAVE ASKED FOR. WE WILL NOT REMOVE ANOTHER TREE. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THEY ARE ALL BEYOND THAT. SO ANY RESIDENTIAL USE, BUSINESS USE, OR ANY OTHER USE BEHIND YOU IS ALL GOING TO BE BETWEEN AFTER THOSE, THAT TREE LINE THAT'S IN YOUR LOTS, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO THEN YOU HAVE A NATURAL B UH, BUFFERING OF TREES BETWEEN YOU AND THE NEXT, WHAT, WHATEVER TYPE OF USE IS BEHIND YOU, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT INCLUDES ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE AS WELL? YES. SO I NEED TO CORRECT ONE THING THAT MY SON SAID. WHENEVER WE BOUGHT THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS, WE DID NOT BUY THEM BY THEMSELVES. EVERY TIME WE PURCHASED ROAD FRONTAGE, WHICH WAS ZONE COMMERCIAL, THE THOSE LOTS WERE ATTACHED IN THE DEAL. WE NEVER BOUGHT A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL LOT, WHICH KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WE WERE BUYING THE, THE, THE FRONTAGE AND THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS CAME WITH IT. SO I UNDERSTAND. SO WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE, WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE LAND, THE SELLER SOLD YOU THAT WHOLE BLOCK? YES. OF, SO IT WASN'T YOUR, YOU DID NOT GO OUT AND PURPOSEFULLY PURCHASE RESIDENTIAL LAND FOR YOUR BUSINESS PURPOSE. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. COMMISSIONER, WERE THERE. I THINK, I THINK, UM, I'M LOOKING AT THE RESTRICTIONS, UM, AND THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, I THINK IT MAY BE, UM, THEY NEED THAT. I'M, I'M ASKING THAT BECAUSE IS EVERYTHING HIGHLIGHTED IS IS NOT WHAT THEY'RE DOING? CORRECT. SO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL IS HIGHLIGHTED. THEY'RE NOT GONNA DO IT. OKAY, SO YOU, YOU DON'T NEED NO, NO MA'AM. UM, WHICH WAS THE INSIDE MANUFACTURING MA'AM? I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. INSIDE MANUFACTURING? NO, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. MR. HERBERT, UM, I, ON THE CURRENT PROPERTY, I NOTICED THAT YOUR BRICKS ARE OUTDOORS. WILL YOU HAVE A SECTION DEDICATED FOR THAT ON THIS NEW PROPERTY OR WILL EVERYTHING COME INSIDE THE BUILDING? NO, THAT, THAT WILL CONTINUE TO HAPPEN. OKAY. UH, BUT WE WILL BE, WE WILL HAVE A WAREHOUSE WHERE WE CAN BRING MORE PERISHABLE STUFF AND SOME BRICK STUFF WE LIKE IF WE'RE SELLING THIN BRICK. MM-HMM, THAT COMES IN BOXES THAT YOU REALLY NEED TO KEEP OUT OF THE WEATHER, WE WILL BE PUTTING THAT INSIDE THE WAREHOUSE. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. PLEASE COMMISSIONER BLACK. OKAY. UM, I'M SORRY, I WAS, I'VE BEEN GIVEN THESE INSTRUCTIONS. I AM GOING TO READ THE LIST OF THINGS THAT YOU ARE PROHIBITING AND CAN YOU, UM, FOR YOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS, I NEED TO HAVE, I NEED TO PHYSICALLY GET IT READ INTO THE RECORD. SO I'M GOING TO READ WHAT IS ON THE LIST. OKAY. AND IF YOU ARE, AND CAN YOU AFFIRM THAT THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE AGREEING TO RESTRICT OUT? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. SO THAT WOULD BE COMMERCIAL BUS STATION, TERMINAL, COMMERCIAL CLEANING, LAUNDRY PLANT, ELECTRONIC SERVICE CENTER JOB OR LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTING MACHINERY, HEAVY EQUIPMENT OR TRUCK SALES AND SERVICE, MEDICAL OR SCIENCE, LABORATORY VEHICLE OR ENGINE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE. UM, GAS DRILLING AND PRODUCTION, INDUSTRIAL INSIDE FOR LIGHT MANUFACTURING. TEMPORARY CONCRETE, ASPHALT, BATCH, PLANT, CEMETERY, MAUSOLEUM, EXTENDED STAY, HOTEL OR MOTEL LODGE, BOARDING HOUSE, OVERNIGHT, GENERAL PURPOSE, SHELTER, CARNIVAL OR CIRCUS. [05:40:01] ALTERNATIVE FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENT. FINANCIAL INSTITUTE WITHOUT DRIVE IN WINDOW FINANCIAL INSTITUTE WITH DRIVE IN WINDOW MEDICAL CLINIC, AMBULATORY SURGICAL CENTER, PRIVATE RECREATION CENTER CLUB OR AREA COLLEGE DORMITORY. FRATERNITY OR SORORITY HOUSE, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, AMBULANCE SERVICE, ANIMAL SHELTER, CLINIC WITHOUT OUTSIDE RUNS. ANIMAL SHELTER CLINIC WITH OUTSIDE RUNS. AUTO SERVICE CENTER. BUSINESS SCHOOL, CAR WASH, COMMERCIAL, AMUSEMENT INSIDE, COMMERCIAL USE AND OUTSIDE. CONVENIENCE STORE WITH DRIVE THROUGH, DRIVE IN THEATER, DRIVE, CLEAN OUR LAUNDRY STORE, FURNITURE STORE HOUSEHOLD EQUIPMENT OR APPLIANCE REPAIR, LIQUIFIED NATURAL GAS, FUELING STATION, LIQUOR STORE, MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION, PARAPHERNALIA SHOP, PAWN SHOP, TAXI, TAXIDERMIST, TRANSIT, PASSENGER SHELTER, TRANSIT, PASSENGER STATION OR TRANSFER CENTER, COMMERCIAL RADIO, TELEVISION, TRANSMITTING STATION, ELECTRONIC STEP SUBSTATION, CONTRACTORS, MAINTENANCE YARD, FREIGHT TERMINAL MANUFACTURE BUILDING SALES LOT, MINI WAREHOUSE, PETROLEUM PRODUCT STORAGE WAREHOUSE. IS THAT WHAT YOU, UH, WHAT YOU HAVE OFFERED AS DEED RESTRICTION? YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, I THINK THERE, THERE MAY BE A NEED FOR ONE ADJUSTMENT. UH, MS. BRIDGES, COMMISSIONER BLAIR, THEY DO NEED THE INDUSTRIAL INSIDE FOR LIGHT MANUFACTURING BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEIR INTENDED USE IS. THAT'S THE, WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO, THAT'S HOW IT'S DEFINED IN THE CODE. OKAY. SO THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT NEED CORRECTION. OKAY, THEN THANK YOU FOR YES, MA'AM. AND THEN CORRECTING MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT IS. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU. SO WE CAN REMOVE THAT ONE. YOU'RE WITHDRAWING THAT ONE, SIR, IS THAT CORRECT? YES. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. FOLLOW UP. COMMISSIONER BLAIR, FOLLOW UP QUESTION. NO, I'M DONE. NO. OKAY. VICE CHAIR. UM, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. I TOOK A PEEK AT YOUR WEBSITE AND THERE'S SOME NEAT DRONE FOOTAGE. IS THAT FROM THE MAYBANK FACILITY? THAT, THAT'S THE MAYBANK FACILITY. OKAY. I SAW A FEW PILES ON THE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE BRICK AND MASONRY PRODUCT THAT THEY'RE, UH, MASON, IT'S MASONRY SAND DECOMPOSED GRANITE FOR LANDSCAPING THAT YOU WERE LOOKING AT. AND WE DO HAVE SOME OF THOSE PRODUCTS AT OUR DALLAS LOCATION. OKAY. WITH THE SITE EXPANDING TO NOW, YOU KNOW, BE AT THE REAR OF THOSE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ALONG JORDAN VALLEY, WILL ANY OF THAT STORAGE BE ON THE REAR OF THOSE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS? IT, IT, IT DOESN'T GO THAT FAR. OKAY. THE, THE, THERE WILL STILL BE A BUFFER THERE. OKAY, GREAT. I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME ISSUES IN THE PAST WHEN THERE'S STORAGE OF LANDSCAPING MATERIALS AND OTHER THINGS AND PILES LIKE THAT AND, AND, AND BLOWING WIND AND STUFF LIKE I COULD I UNDERSTAND. SO THAT, THAT'S NOT EXPANDING BEYOND ITS CURRENT. NO, THAT'S, IT'S NOT. GREAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BLAIR SECOND ROUND. I DON'T HAVE ANY NO. COMMISSIONER WHEELER. ARE YOU ALL HAVING ANY TYPE OF, UH, FENCING OR ANY BUFFERING? SO THOSE MATERIALS, WE, WE AGREED TO DO THAT. OKAY. TO PUT UP A NICE FENCE BETWEEN US AND THOSE AREAS THAT WE NEED TO STOP, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO, UM, YES. AND UH, AND A SETBACK TO WHERE WE DON'T GET SO CLOSE TO THE FENCE, BUT NONE OF THE BUILDINGS GET ANYWHERE CLOSE. NO, I'M TALKING ALONG THE FRONT AND ALSO, UM, SOME BUFFERING FOR THOSE ITEMS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE OUTSIDE OR NO? UM, NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT FROM THE FREEWAY SIDE. THIS FACES IS CF JUAN, RIGHT? MM-HMM. IT, IT, IT FACES CF HA. YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. AND WE HAVE A NICE FENCE THERE NOW. OKAY. I THINK THAT ONCE WE GET OUR BUILDING UP, THAT THAT NICE FENCE WON'T BE NICE ENOUGH , I THINK, I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE IT NICER. NICER. OKAY. THAT'S, THERE'S NO TELLING HOW MUCH IS IT GONNA COST. SO IS THERE, IS THERE ANY TYPE OF, UM, SO I I, I KNOW THE COMMISSIONER, UH, HERBERT WAS UH, ASKING KIND OF WOULD YOU, HAVING THE BRICKS OUTSIDE, IS THERE ANY TYPE OF BUFFER THAT WILL, UM, OR FENCING THAT WILL KIND OF ENCASE THAT? OR IS IT NEEDED FOR ADVERTISING TYPE OF DEAL? WE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD, UH, WE'VE ADDRESSED EVERY ISSUE THAT OUR NEIGHBORS HAVE EVER HAVE EVER COMMENTED ON, AND WE'VE CORRECTED THEM BECAUSE IF WE'RE NOT A GOOD NEIGHBOR, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. SO, UH, I THINK WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED THAT. UH, OKAY. AND, AND WE WE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. CAN I SAY, SO THERE IS THE, THE FEW RESIDENTIAL, UH, UH, HOW LOTS WHERE THERE ARE ACTUALLY [05:45:01] RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THERE. THERE'S KIND OF A HODGEPODGE OF CHAIN LINK METAL FENCE AND STUFF LIKE THAT BETWEEN THEM AND US. AND WE PLAN ON COVERING THAT WITH A MONOCHROMATIC FENCE BETWEEN US AND THEM. AND, AND WHEN THEY ASK US TO CLEAN UP SOMETHING, WE CLEAN IT UP AND, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, THIS WILL BE, UH, OUR LARGEST OFFICE AND, AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO BEING ABLE TO HIRE HAVING A LARGER EMPLOYEE POOL AND, AND MOVE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IN MAYBANK WE'RE, IT'S, IT'S SMALL AND WE'VE GOT A GOOD TEAM THERE, BUT WE NEED TO HIRE MORE IN DALLAS AND, UH, THIS GIVES US THAT OPPORTUNITY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER BLAIR? UM, MR. BBAR, CAN I ASK YOU A COUPLE QUESTIONS, PLEASE? OH, I'M, OH, YOU GUYS, I'M, WE'RE DONE WITH YOU. YOU GUYS ARE GOOD. YOU'RE GOOD? OKAY. YES, MA'AM. UM, ONCE THIS, THIS REQUEST IS, IS COMPLETED AND IT'S ALL ONE ZONING CLASSIFICATION, IF THIS APPLICANT, UM, CHANGES, WOULD THIS APPLICANT THEN BE, BE, UM, COULD THIS APPLICANT THEN, THEN REPL THEIR PROPERTY? SO IT'S ALL ONE SINGLE SOLID PLAT, THAT'S ALL ONE JU UH, ZONING JURISDICTION. COMMISSIONER BLAIR, THE A PLATTER FUTURE PLAT ISN'T BEFORE THE BODY AT THIS TIME. IT'S JUST THE ZONING REQUEST RIGHT NOW, BUT, BUT IF YOU GIVE ME A MINUTE, I'LL GET YOU, I'LL, UH, GIVE A LITTLE LATITUDE, UH, ATTORNEY, UH, ATTORNEY MOORE. JUST SO JUST ONE OR TWO QUESTIONS. FOCUS ON THE ZONING. OKAY. OH, I AM GONNA GO TO ZONING, IS THAT CORRECT? GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. IT'S GONNA BE UP TO THE APPLICANT IF THEY WISH TO REPL THEIR PROPERTY OR NOT. HOWEVER, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THEY WOULD REPL SO THEY BE ABLE TO USE ALL, UH, PORTION OF THEIR PROPERTY AND THERE WON'T BE ANY LOT LINE BECAUSE, UH, PARKING, UTILITIES STRUCTURE, THEY CANNOT CROSS PROPERTY LINE AND LOT LINE. THANK YOU MUCH. YES, MA'AM. MS. UH, BRIDGES IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION WAS DENIAL WAS BECAUSE OF THE, THE MIX OF, OF THAT, THE BORDERING THE RESIDENTIAL AND, AND NOT HAVING ENOUGH BUFFER TO, TO CORRECT THAT? YES. WAS IT ALSO BECAUSE OF THE, THE DIFFERENT PRO, UH, LOT LINES THAT WAS IN INCLUDED IN THIS ZONING CASE? I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY SAY THE LOT LINES, BUT WHERE ISID IN RELATION TO OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES? YES. KNOWING THAT THERE IS OVER A ACRE OF BUFFERING OF NATURAL TREES, UM, THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE ALTERED. DOES THAT, THAT, THAT HELP YOU WITH UNDERSTANDING THE USE OF THIS LAYA? YES, BUT THAT WASN'T SOLELY MY BASIS FOR DENYING THIS PARTICULAR CASE. OKAY, THANK YOU. YES MA'AM. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, UM, DID YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THEY WERE AN EXISTING BUSINESS ALREADY? CAN YOU REPEAT THAT QUESTION? WERE, DID YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THEY WERE AN EXISTING BUSINESS ALREADY AT THIS LOCATION AND THEY WERE JUST DOING EXPANSION? THIS WASN'T A NEW, UM, PROPERTY OWNER OR A NEW BUSINESS? YES AND NO. UM, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE AN EXISTING BUSINESS, THAT'S NOT THE BASIS OF MY EVALUATION OF THIS PARTICULAR CASE. DID YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, YOU DIDN'T TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, DID YOU? MOSTLY YES, A LITTLE BIT, YES. AND WERE YOU A PART OF ANY THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETINGS? NO, I WAS NOT. DID YOU KNOW ABOUT 'EM? I DID KNOW ABOUT THE COMMISSIONER DID MENTION IT TO ME, YES. OKAY. YOU WERE, WERE YOU INVITED TO THE DEMO? YES. OKAY. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS. CM COMMISSIONER BLAIR, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? YES, I DO. AND, UM, AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I DO HAVE SOME COMMENTS IN THE MATTER OF THE 2, 2 3 3 0 2, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, NOT FOLLOW STATUS RECOMMENDATION, BUT TO APPROVE THIS, UM, WITH [05:50:01] THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS. COMMISSIONER BLAIR. UM, AS OF THE APPLICANT SAID THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO CHANGE THE VIEW OF A, AS YOU COME INTO CLEAVER, SOON AS YOU GET OFF, AS SOON AS YOU GO EAST ON 20 AND YOU'RE GOING INTO KLEBERG, YOU MA YOU GO, I CALL IT SOUTH, BUT THEY CALL IT EAST, I THINK THEY CALL IT , AND THEY CA OKAY. UH, THEY, I CALL IT SOUTH ON ONE SEVENTY FIVE, BUT WHEN YOU GET ON IT, YOU GO EAST ON 1 75 AND THE FIRST THING YOU SEE ARE TWO MAJOR BUSINESSES. YOU SEE MARLOW'S THAT WE JUST APPROVED. AND THEN RIGHT NEXT TO MARLOW'S, RIGHT THERE ON SILVERADO IS, UM, CLAY STRUCTURES. CLAY STRUCTURES HAS BEEN A STAPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY FOR THE LONGEST. UM, THERE BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME CHALLENGES IN TRAFFIC, WORKED WITH TRAFFIC IN ENGINEERING, AND WE'RE GONNA GET SOME OF THAT, THOSE CHALLENGES REPAIRED AND FIXED. SO WHEN, SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ONE OF THE THINGS, UM, WE SAY IN DISTRICT EIGHT, A CLEAN NEIGHBORHOOD IS A SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THIS IS STEP ONE OF CLEANING UP THE ENTRYWAY INTO KLEBERG SO THAT THERE ARE THOSE THAT WANT TO COME HERE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, UH, FOR THE CITY OPPOSED TO LOOK AT IT AND SAY THEY JUST WANNA DUMP HERE. SO I ASK THAT YOU FOLLOW, UM, OUR REQUEST TO APPROVE THIS, AND I WANT TO ALSO THANK, UM, MR. CARRANZA AND MS. RAMIREZ FOR COMING UP. AND IT'S NOT AN EASY TRIP FROM ONE ONE FROM CLE TO DOWNTOWN TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF CLEAVER. I KNOW THAT THEY ARE VERY INTERESTED IN CLEANING IT UP. UM, WE NOT ONLY DO WE WORK TOGETHER ON MANY OCCASIONS, THERE ARE TIMES THAT WE ARE NOT TOTALLY IN AGREEMENT, BUT WE DO WHAT WE HAVE TO DO TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY. AND THE, THE BA THE BASIC THING THAT WE WANT IS THAT CLEAVER GETS ITS FAIR SHARE AND THAT IT LOOKS PRETTY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WHEELER. I'M GONNA BE IN TOTAL A GRIEVANCE WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER BLAIR. I, I WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR COMING FROM A SMALL CITY, CREATING A JOB BASED IN, IN DALLAS, AND ESPECIALLY IN A PART THAT THERE IS, IT'S SO FAR FROM, UM, MOST OF THE, OF OTHER JOBS THAT THEY COULD GO TO WORK WHERE THEY HAVE TO DRIVE IN TOWN OR DRIVE NORTH. CREATING THIS AND CREATING JOBS FOR THOSE WHO IN THAT AREA ARE WORKING CLASS WHO ARE INTO CONSTRUCTION. THAT IS INTO, UM, INTO WHAT YOU, UH, INTO, UM, THESE PARTICULAR TYPE OF JOBS. OPENING UP THAT, AND HOPEFULLY WITH YOU ALL BUILDING A NEW BUILDING, IT'S ALWAYS GREAT TO SEE SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN IN THE AREA FOR A TIME UPGRADE AND BE ABLE TO UPGRADE IN A MANNER THAT IT WOULD ADD TO OUR JOB MARKET. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. UM, CF HUNT, UM, HAS BEEN SO LONG FORGOTTEN. THE ONLY TIME WE DID GET ANY ANY ACTION IS WHEN THE, WHEN THEY WANTED A GOLF COURSE IN THE AREA AND, AND, AND LAND WAS TAKEN. SO CF HUNT, GETTING SOME TYPE OF UPGRADE BY PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY LIVE WORK AND PLATER IS, IS AMAZING. AND HOPEFULLY THAT YOU ALL SPARK SOME OTHER COMPANIES TO COME ALONG. CF HUNT THAT ARE GENTLE IR, I MEAN INDUSTRY THAT WILL ALLOW FOR THOSE WHO WORK IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO WALK TO WORK, RIDE A BIKE TO WORK, AND NECESSARILY WE DON'T HAVE TO DRIVE ACROSS TOWN TO WORK. SO THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. WELL, COMMISSIONER WHEELER BEAT ME TO IT. UH, JUST WANNA THANK THE APPLICANT FOR THEIR INVESTMENT IN THE CITY OF DALLAS AND THEIR ENTHUSIASM TO BE HERE AND FOR THEIR, THEIR PATIENCE WITH OUR, OUR PROCESS. AND, UH, THANK THEM FOR THEIR JUST WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UH, I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION AND JUST KUDOS TO COMMISSIONER BLAIR. UH, SOMETIMES THESE CASES NEED A SECOND, THIRD ROUND, AND, UH, AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE, UH, AS COMMISSIONER HAUSER SAID, UH, THIS IS A GOOD INVESTMENT OF THE COMMUNITY. AND, UH, ALSO INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, MR. FAGAN MENTIONED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND, UH, YOU KNOW, [05:55:01] FREQUENTLY WE, WE SOMETIMES DENY CASES THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS WE SHOULD APPROVE. AND EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE WE GET ONE LIKE THIS, ONE THAT THE, THE COMP PLAN SAYS WE SHOULD DENY, BUT THEN THE FACT PATTERN ON THE GROUND AFTER DUE DILIGENCE BY A COMMISSIONER SEES THAT IN FACT IT PROBABLY SHOULD GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD. SO I'M VERY HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT. COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND NOT FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT RATHER APPROVE THE APPLICATION, UH, INCLUDING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AT THE HORSESHOE. ALTHOUGH IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. THE OPPOSED AYES HAVE IT, UH, COMMISSION 4 0 6. LET'S TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK. AND WHEN WE COME BACK, UH, A COUPLE OF MOVING PARTS WILL BE TAKING CASE NUMBER 15 NEXT AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK, UH, TO ORDER OF THE A, A DOCKET. ARE WE RECORDING? WE ARE RECORDING COMMISSIONERS. IT'S 4 24. WE'RE GONNA BACK ON THE RECORD. CAN YOU READ THIS ONE OUT? ITEM [15. 24-2910 An application for 1) a new Planned Development District for R-1ac(A) Single Family District uses; and 2) the termination of Specific Use Permit No. 580 for a private school with consideration for a Specific Use Permit for a private school on property zoned an R-1ac(A) Single Family District, on the south side of the intersection of West-Northwest Highway and Meadowbrook Drive.] NUMBER 15? ITEM NUMBER 15, AN APPLICATION FOR ONE, A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR R ONE ACRE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT USES AND TWO, DETERMINATION OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER FIVE 80 FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL WITH CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A NEW PRIVATE SCHOOL ON PROPERTY ZONED AN R ONE ACRES SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY AND MEADOW BROOK DRIVE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD, SUBJECT TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AND THE REVISED SITE PLAN IN LIEU OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. AND, UH, Z NUMBER IS Z 2 3 4 1 1 10. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND WE'RE GONNA BEGIN WITH OUR, OUR SPEAKER THAT IS ONLINE. YES. I APPRECIATE IT. MR. RISKY IS, UH, FEVERISHLY TRYING TO CATCH A FLIGHT, I THINK AND IS GONNA TRY TO SPEAK BEFORE THE STEWARDESS TELLS HIM TO TURN OFF THAT PHONE. OKAY. IF WE HAVE MR. RISK IS, IS MR. RISK ONLINE? HE IS MR. HE IS ON. WE'RE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS, MR. RISK, IF YOU CAN HEAR US, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU HAVE YOUR CAMERA ON. WONDERFUL. IT'S, UH, FIVE NOW. YES, SIR. WE CAN SEE YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. OH, WONDERFUL. GREAT. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. UM, GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS, PLANNERS, STAFF, NEIGHBORS. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO HOP IN HERE AND, AND DISRUPT THE FLOW. UM, MY NAME IS STEVEN RISK RESIDE AT 9 1 3 1 DEVENS SHIRE DRIVE. WE SHARE THE LONGEST ADJACENT BOUNDARY WITH THE COMPASS SCHOOL'S NEW DEVELOPMENT. IT'S AT 5,500 NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. WE HAVE ABOUT 180 FEET OF, UH, BORDERING PROPERTY THERE. SO LET ME BEGIN BY JUST EXPRESSING FULL SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPASS SCHOOL AND OUR EXPERIENCE. THEY'VE DEMONSTRATED STRONG COMMITMENT TO THE COMMUNITY, THEY'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH US, CERTAINLY TO ENSURE THE PROJECT PROJECT RESPECTS OUR PROPERTY, ITS VIEWS. WE WOULD LIKE TO STRONGLY ALSO RECOMMEND THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT BE DESIGNATED AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT RATHER THAN THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT. WE THINK A PD PROVIDES MORE ENDURING PRODUCTIONS, UH, FOR BOTH US THE NEIGHBORS AND THE SCHOOL ITSELF. SO ENSURING THAT, UH, THAT PRESERVATION OF OUR PROPERTY BOUNDARIES AND VIEWS, UH, A PROTECTION THAT THE SUP WOULD JUST NOT OFFER. SO, UM, ADDITIONALLY, A PD WOULD ALLOW FOR PARKING ALONG NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, WHICH WOULD BE A HUGE BENEFIT FOR THE COMMUNITY AND IMPROVE CONDITIONS FOR THE NEIGHBORS. SO WE BELIEVE THAT AN UNLIMITED PD TERM WOULD PROVIDE LONG-TERM STABILITY, UNLIKE THE 10 YEAR LIMIT LIMITATION OF AN SUP. SO, IN GENERAL, WE ARE IN FAVOR OF A PD IN GENERAL. WE ARE IN FAVOR OF AN UNLIMITED, UH, UH, UH, TIME HORIZON FOR THAT PD JUST TO ENSURE PROTECTION BOTH FOR THE SCHOOL, BUT ALSO FOR US AS, UH, THE NEIGHBORS. WE ARE ESPECIALLY APPRECIATIVE OF THE SUPPORT WE'VE RECEIVED. COMMISSIONER LARRY HALL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. REALLY, THE NEIGHBORS REALLY APPRECIATED, UH, THE GUIDANCE THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS. AND, UH, AND ALSO THE CONSULTANTS ENGAGED BY THE COMPASS SCHOOL OF ROBIN AND MARGOT. THEY'VE BEEN PROFESSIONAL, THOROUGH IN THEIR EFFORTS. LASTLY, JUST EXTENDING A NOTE OF GRATITUDE TO THE COMPASS SCHOOLS BOARD. THEY'VE BEEN TRANSPARENT, THEY'VE BEEN COLLABORATIVE, UH, AND HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE BEEN CRITICAL IN MAKING THIS A POSITIVE AND PRODUCTIVE EXPERIENCE TOGETHER. WE'VE WORKED TO ESTABLISH A SERIES OF AGREEMENTS, WHICH WE'RE GONNA BE FORMALIZING IN THE PD AS PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORS. SO THESE INCLU, THESE AGREEMENTS, UH, WHICH INCLUDE ROBUST LANDSCAPING WITH 20 FOOT MAGNOLIAS, INCLUDES A 30 FOOT SETBACK FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE SPECIFICALLY AS WELL AS OUR NEIGHBORS. SO THE COMPASS SCHOOL'S COMMITMENT TO MAINTAINING THAT HARMONIOUS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS REALLY APPRECIATED. UM, WE ARE CONFIDENT THE NEW SCHOOL WILL BE A WONDERFUL ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE VIBRANCY IT WILL BRING. UM, WE SORT OF HUMOROUSLY MENTIONED ONCE THE KIDS ARE HERE, OUR PROPERTY'S GONNA BE EVER YOUNGER THAN EVER, SO WE'RE REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT. ON A PRACTICAL NOTE, WE HAVE PREPARED SEVERAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS FOR THE PANEL'S REVIEW. I [06:00:01] KNOW THAT I HAVE TO HOP OFF, BUT I THINK ROB AND OTHERS HAVE THOSE DOCUMENTS INCLUDING, UH, DETAILED SURVEYS, RENDERINGS SHOWING THE IMPACT ON THE PROPERTIES FEES AND ANY OTHER RELEVANT MATERIALS. AND OF COURSE, DELIGHTED TO, YOU KNOW, WALK THROUGH THOSE AT SOME POINT, UH, IN THE FUTURE IF NEEDED. UM, THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. PERFECT TIMING. PERFECT TIMING, MR. BALDWIN. THANK YOU, STEVEN. I APPRECIATE IT. UH, THANK YOU. HAVE A GOOD TRIP. THANK YOU. UM, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ROB BALDWIN, OFFICE AT 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B IN DALLAS, AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE COMPASS SCHOOL IN THE REQUEST FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ON THEIR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 54 14 AND 5,500 WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. THIS IS THE, THE PROPERTY IT'S LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, WEST OF THE TOLLWAY IN DEVENS SHIRE. UH, INWOOD HERE IS ON OUR LEFT. AND THEN THE, UH, THE LEVERS LANE. UNITED METHODIST CHURCH IS THE, THE BIG STRUCTURE ON THE, ON, JUST ON THE WEST NORTHWEST AND JUST WEST OF US IS ANOTHER LOVER'S LANE, UH, UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF THE REBUILDING OF THE 12 STEP BUILDING THERE. AND THAT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION TODAY. SO THIS IS A BLOW UP OF THE PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING SCHOOL IN THE TRIANGULAR SHAPED PROPERTY THAT SCHOOL'S BEEN THERE, UH, YOU KNOW, 50 YEARS. UH, IT'S LAST OPERATED BY THE MEADOWBROOK SCHOOL UNDER A PLAN DEVELOPMENT, I MEAN A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT WITH A A PERMANENT TIME PERIOD. WE'VE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR, WE'D LIKE TO EXPAND AND WE HAVE OUR FULL DESIGN TEAM HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE, THE, THE REALLY COOL DESIGN THEY HAVE FOR THIS BUILDING. UM, SO, UH, WHAT'S OUR REQUEST? WE'RE ASKING FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR, UH, A PK THROUGH EIGHTH SCHOOL PRIVATE SCHOOL CALLED THE COMPASS SCHOOL WITH A MAXIMUM CLASSROOM COUNT OF 21. UH, AS MR. KY SAID, WE'VE WORKED REALLY HARD WITH OUR NEIGHBORS AND COME UP WITH A GREAT SET OF, UH, COMPROMISES ON WHY THIS WORKS AND WHY THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IS THE RIGHT VEHICLE FOR THIS. ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT IS THE HEIGHT. WE'RE LOWERING THE HEIGHT FROM 36 FEET TO 30 FEET. UM, TWO STORIES. UM, WE ARE ASKING FOR, UH, DIFFERENT LOT COVERAGE. I MEAN DIFFERENT, UH, SETBACKS. THE IMPORTANT THING IS, UH, WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN. DEVELOPMENT PLAN GIVES ASSURANCES TO OUR NEIGHBORS THAT WE'LL DO WHAT WE SAY WE'RE GONNA DO, UH, BY HAVING A 30 FOOT SETBACK NEXT TO MR. RISK'S HOUSE. UM, WE ARE, UH, PARKING THE CODE. WE HAVE A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT DAVID'S REVIEWED. WE THINK IT'S APPRO. THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR A SCHOOL, THIS CORRIDOR FOR, FOR THE LOTS. THAT FRONT ONTO NORTHWEST HIGHWAY IS REALLY NOT A RESIDENTIAL AREA ANYMORE. UH, IT'S MOSTLY, UH, INSTITUTIONAL USES BETWEEN INWOOD AND NORTHWEST INWOOD AND TOLLWAY. AND UNLESS THEY BACK TO THE, THE HIGHWAY, UH, ARE THE ONLY OTHER RESIDENTIAL RIGHT ON THE CORNER IS RIGHT ON THE CORNER OF INWOOD AND NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. IT'S A 20,000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE GOING UP RIGHT NOW. SO, UM, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A, NOT REALLY A RESIDENTIAL, THIS, THIS, WE THINK THIS USE MAKES A LOT OF SENSE AND IT'S BEEN VERY THOUGHTFULLY DESIGNED. THIS IS A SITE PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT PLAN. YOU'LL SEE MORE OF THIS AS WE GET IN WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT TEAM, BUT IT SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDING, LOCATION OF THE PLAY AREA. AND, UH, AND I'M OUT OF TOWN, SO I'D LIKE TO TURN IT OVER TO SCOTT HALL, WHO IS OUR ARCHITECT, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS SCOTT HALL. I'M THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT HALL ARCHITECTURE STUDIO AT 33 0 3 LEE PARKWAY IN DALLAS. SO OUR, UH, OUR THEME TODAY IS A THOUGHTFUL AND, UH, UH, CONTEXT SENSITIVE AND MISSION-DRIVEN DESIGN. THE SITE, THE THREE ACRES IS COMBINED OF THE TWO PROPERTIES. THE ORGANIZATION OF THE PROPERTY HAS THE, UH, VEHICULAR CIRCULATION, UH, THE CARPOOL DROP OFF, UH, UH, COMPRISED OF TWO, UH, CURB CUTS ALONG NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. THERE ARE FOUR NOW WE'RE GONNA GET RID OF TWO OF THEM. THE PUBLIC SIDE OF THE BUILDING, UH, WHERE DROP OFF OCCURS IS THERE ALONG THE, UH, THE DRIVEWAY. THOSE ARE THE MORE PUBLIC, UH, ASPECTS OF THE BUILDING. THE GYMNASIUM ADMINISTRATION AREAS. THERE IS A, A, UH, MAIN PUBLIC LOBBY, UH, RIGHT OFF OF THAT. THE, UH, AND SO THE BUILDING IS TWO STORIES. THE, UH, WITH A BASEMENT, THERE'S A FEMA, UH, STORM SHELTER BASEMENT, UH, ALSO PROVIDED, UH, BELOW [06:05:01] GRADE THE, UH, COHORTS. THE CLASSROOM AREAS ARE ORIENTED TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS THE PRESERVED AND NATURAL SETTING, WHICH IS, UH, KEY TO THE, UH, THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE SCHOOL, UH, WHERE THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IS. THE THIRD TEACHER, THE IDEA THAT STUDENTS, THE TEACHERS, BUT ALSO THE ENVIRONMENT IS VERY IMPORTANT. SO THERE ARE SOME ASPECTS OF ENGAGING WITH THAT PROPERTY, THE BEAUTIFUL SETTING OF THE TREES AND THE CREEK. UH, ALL OF THAT IS AN IDEAL, UM, ENGAGEMENT WITH THE INTERIOR SPACES, WHICH ARE ALSO WARM AND INVITING. THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, THIS IS A VIEW SHOWING THE, UH, THE DROP OFF AREA. IT'S ACTUALLY ABOUT, UH, 16 FEET TALL. THERE'S A, UH, A PORTION OF IT THAT'S TALLER. YOU CAN SEE THE STONE, THE METAL, THE WOOD, UH, AND STEEL AND LANDSCAPING THROUGHOUT. WE'LL COVER MORE ON THAT. THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. UH, THESE ARE THE COHORTS, THE CLASSROOMS, THEY'RE ORIENTED TO ENGAGE WITH OUTDOOR, UH, PATIOS SUCH THAT THEY CAN, THE CLASSROOMS CAN HAVE OUTDOOR TIME AS WELL AS THE INDOOR TIME. THE PLAYGROUNDS AND ACTIVITY AREAS ARE ALSO SHOWN IN THE FOREGROUND. SO THIS IS A VIEW FROM THE CREEK. ANOTHER VIEW, THIS IS A LITTLE CLOSER, IT'S KIND OF SHOWING THE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES, THE GARDENS, THE PLAY AREAS, THE STRUCTURES VERY INTENDED TO BE AS NATURAL AND, UM, UH, ENGAGED IN JUST NATURE AS POSSIBLE. THIS SHOWS THE STEPPING DOWN OF THE PROPERTY. SO THERE'S A LOT OF TOPOGRAPHY FROM NORTHWEST HIGHWAY DOWN TO THE CREEK. AND SO THE IDEA IS TO SPLIT THE BUILDING, UH, SUCH THAT IT STEPS DOWN WITH THAT TOPOGRAPHY. SO OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH THE DALLAS FIRE DEPARTMENT REGARDING APPARATUS ACCESS AND, UM, SUCH ARE TO, UH, ARE TO MAINTAIN THAT ACCESS. THE INTERIOR SPACES ARE WARM AND INVITING. IT IS WARM. I THANK YOU. YEAH, SURE. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M JEFFREY SLATER. OUR FIRM'S ADDRESS IS 3 3 0 1 ELM STREET IN DALLAS, AND WE ARE THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS FOR THE PROJECT. THIS SITE, AS YOU KNOW, IS SITTING IN A VERY NATURAL AREA, AND WE WANTED TO INCORPORATE, ESPECIALLY THE WEST SIDE AND THE CREEK, TO KEEP THOSE AREAS AS THEY PRESENTLY ARE AND USE THEM IN THE LEARNING ASPECTS OF THE SCHOOL. THE PLAN WILL PRESERVE THE CREEK EDGE WHILE ADDING ADDITIONAL CANOPY TREES AND VEGETATION TO HELP STABILIZE THE AREA AND TO AID IN EROSION CONTROL. THE SITE WILL IMPLEMENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ALONG THE PERIMETER. THERE WILL BE BUFFER YARDS TO HELP SCREEN ADJACENT PROPERTIES FROM THE SITE. SO ALONG NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, WE ARE PRESERVING MANY OF THE EXISTING CANOPY TREES, MOSTLY ALONG BY THE PARKING LOT AREA, PROPOSING ADDITIONAL CANOPY TREES IN THE BUFFERY YARD ADJACENT TO THE PO PROPOSED PARKING AND ADDITION, A ROW OF MAGNOLIA TREES AT 10 FEET ON CENTER ADJACENT TO THE SCHOOL SIDE ON NORTHWEST HIGHWAY ALONG THE EAST SIDE YARD. NEXT TO THE NEIGHBORS ALONG DEVONSHIRE, WE ARE PROPOSING MAGNOLIA TREES AT 10 FEET ON CENTER, AND ALONG THE SOUTH AND WEST SIDE, THERE'LL BE ENHANCED PLANTING IN AREAS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE CREEK. ALL LANDSCAPING ON THIS SITE WILL COMPLY WITH ARTICLE 10. A HEAVIER PLANTING OF CANOPY TREES IS PROPOSED IN THE PARKING AREA TO HELP WITH THE LOSS OF TREES THAT WILL BE REMOVED DUE TO THE DEVELOPMENT. THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE DEDICATED TO OUTDOOR LEARNING USE. WE'LL HAVE AREAS SUCH AS OPEN FIELDS SEEDING A TREE HOUSE INTERACTIVE AREA BY THE CREEK ELEMENT. A PROPOSED PARKING LOT WITH 44 SPACES ARE GONNA MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR PARKING. TWO CONTROLLED ACCESS GATES ARE PROPOSED ALONG NORTHWEST HIGHWAY WITHIN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK. THESE GATES WILL BE LEFT OPEN DURING DROP OFF AND PICKUP AND CLOSED DURING SCHOOL HOURS AND OFF HOURS. THESE GATES ARE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE VISIBILITY OF VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, THOUGH ALONG NORTHWEST HIGHWAY IS PROPOSED AN EIGHT FOOT TALL FENCE, ALSO PROPOSED ALONG NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. IT'S AN EIGHT FOOT TALL FREESTANDING MASONRY WALL THAT IS USED TO SCREEN THE SLIDING GATE MECHANISM FOR THE IN GATE ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY. A PROPOSED NINE FOOT BOARD ON BOARD FENCE IS PROPOSED, AND ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY AND SOUTH PROPERTY, A FOUR FOOT HIGH TRANSPARENT FENCE AND ALSO STONEWALL ELEMENTS IS PROPOSED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S FRANCIS HARRISON AND, UM, THE SCHOOL'S LOCATED AT 54 14 WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, DALLAS, TEXAS. THE COMPASS SCHOOL OF TEXAS IS A NONPROFIT 5 0 1 C3, FOUNDED IN 2022 BY MOTHERS WHO REALIZED THAT DALLAS WAS IN DESPERATE [06:10:01] NEED FOR MORE SCHOOLS. THE POPULATION OF THE CITY HAS GROWN EXPONENTIALLY, AND WE NEED MORE SCHOOLS WITH VARYING APPROACHES TO EDUCATION TO SERVE MORE FAMILY AND MORE STUDENTS. THE MISSION FOR THIS, FOR THE SCHOOL OF TEXAS IS TO EQUIP STUDENTS WITH A STRONG ACADEMIC FOUNDATION THAT FOSTERS ANALYTICAL THINKING AND INSTILLS THE JOY OF LEARNING IN A WHOLESOME ENVIRONMENT AND INSPIRES THE PURSUIT OF PURPOSE THAT IT SCHOOL HAS FIVE CORE VALUES, COMMUNITY, FAMILY, LEADERSHIP, PURPOSE, AND RESILIENCE. THE COMPASS APPROACH IS A BLENDED APPROACH WITH OUTDOOR EDUCATION, ROBUST ACADEMICS, DAILY SPANISH, AS WELL AS PROJECT BASED LEARNING. THIS APPROACH TO CURRICULUM INTEGRATES THE UNDERSTANDING OF BROAD THEMES AND IDEAS ACROSS THE CONTENT AREAS, SUCH AS SCIENCE, LITERACY, AND MATH TO MAKE MEANING AND CON AND CONNECTIONS WITHIN THE REAL WORLD. THE SCHOOL ENCOURAGES HEALTHY LIVING AND THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING IN NATURE IS WOVEN INTO OUR DAILY ACTIVITIES, ONE OF WHICH IS OUR FARM TO TABLE AND MINDFULNESS CLASS. THE SCHOOL EMPHASIZES THE MENTAL HEALTH BENEFITS OF BEING OUTDOORS, TAKING CARE OF OUR ENVIRONMENT, AND GIVES STUDENTS UNIQUE OPPORTUNITIES TO DEVELOP INDEPENDENCE AND RESPONSIBILITY. WHETHER IT'S WATCHING THE SPROUTING VEGETABLES IN THE STUDENT GARDENS, LEARNING FINANCIAL LITERACY THROUGH THE SALE OF EGGS, CHICKEN, EGGS, OR LEARNING ABOUT LIFE CYCLES OF A TADPOLE. THE COMPASS SCHOOL OF TEXAS BELIEVES THAT HANDS-ON EXPERIENCES IN NATURE HELP RETAIN INFORMATION AND SUPPORT MENTAL HEALTH. THE COMPASS SCHOOL OF TEXAS LAUNCHED ITS FIRST ACADEMIC YEAR IN 2023 WITH 43 STUDENTS IN PRE-K FOUR THROUGH SECOND GRADE. THIS YEAR, OUR ENROLLMENT HAS GROWN TO 62 STUDENTS. 7% OF OUR STUDENT POPULATION ARE ON FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE, AND WE CURRENTLY HAVE 21% DIVERSITY. I'M PROUD TO SAY THAT THE COMPASS SCHOOL OF TEXAS IS COMMITTED TO EQUITABLE EDUCATION. THE SCHOOL'S CAMPUS IS LOCATED AT 54 14 WEST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. THE LEADERSHIP TEAM WAS DRAWN TO THIS LOCATION DUE TO ITS NATURE FILLED PROPERTY THAT COMPLIMENTS THE SCHOOL'S APPROACH TO EDUCATION IN NATURE. WITH A CREEK SERVING AS A LIVING SCIENCE LAB AND A BUFFER TO OTHER NEIGHBORS, THIS PROPERTY WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE A UNIQUE SETTING NEEDED BY THE SCHOOL. THIS PROPERTY WAS PREVIOUSLY OWNED BY THE MEADOWBROOK SCHOOL UNDER A PERMANENT SEP, WHICH IS SEP FIVE 80. THE MEADOWBROOK SCHOOL OPERATED AT THIS SITE FROM 1970 UNTIL 2023. THAT'S OVER 50 YEARS OF SERVING THIS COMMUNITY AS A SCHOOL, WE'RE HONORED TO CONTINUE THE EDUCATIONAL LEGACY THAT WAS LAID PREVIOUSLY WITH HOPE TO EXPAND THE CAMPUS TO INCLUDE THE ADJACENT LOT. OUR VISION IS TO SERVE PRE-K FOUR THROUGH EIGHTH GRADE ON THIS PROPERTY. WHEN SPEAKING WITH THE NEIGHBORS IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, MANY WERE EXCITED TO SUPPORT THE REZONING EFFORT AND RECOGNIZE THE NEED TO EXPAND. MANY MENTIONED THAT THEY'VE LIVED NEXT TO THE SCHOOL ON THAT PROPERTY FOR DECADES, AND THIS IS SIMPLY AN EXPANSION OF WHAT THEY ALREADY KNOW. I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. HI, I'M CHRISTIE LAMBETH, LAMBATH, ENGINEERING 63 0 1 GASTON AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 4. WE DID THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR COMPASS SCHOOL. WE DID OBSERVATIONS FOR ITS PRIOR USER AT MEADOWBROOK AND ALSO FOR WHEN COMPASS TOOK OVER IT. AND WE, THE REPORT WAS COMPLETED LAST SCHOOL YEAR, SO WE DID SOME ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS TO VALIDATE THAT THE NEW PLAN INCLUDES, UH, TWO DRIVEWAYS, THE FIRST DRIVEWAY ON NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, THE WEST DRIVEWAY. PARENTS WILL ENTER IN THROUGH THERE AND LOOP AROUND AND BE PICKED UP WITH THE STAFF. THE STAFF IS HIGHLY ENGAGED HERE. WHEN THE, AS THE SCHOOL GROWS AND THEY HAVE ENOUGH PARENTS WHERE THEY'RE GONNA START TO GET CLOSE NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, THEN THEY'LL HAVE, THEY HAVE A POLICE OFFICER, SO THEY KNOW THE POLICE OFFICER WILL HAVE TO BE HIGHLY, HIGHLY ENGAGED THERE. THEY'RE ON BOARD WITH THAT, AND THE POLICE OFFICER WILL PUT CONES AT THE DRIVEWAY TO STOP THE DRIVEWAY, AND THEN THE OVERFLOW WILL GO TO THE EAST DRIVEWAY AND PARENTS WILL ENTER IN THERE. THEY CAN FORM TWO QUEUE LANES THROUGHOUT THE SITE AND CIRCULATE THROUGH. AND SO THIS FITS 36 VEHICLES AT ONE TIME. OUR TOTALS GOT CUT OFF, SORRY, THE RIGHT NOW, IN LAST SCHOOL YEAR, THEY HAD 40 STUDENTS. THIS SCHOOL YEAR THEY HAVE 60, AND THE BUILD OUT SCENARIO IS 340 STUDENTS. SO HOW DO WE ACCOMMODATE THOSE STUDENTS? WE HAVE FOUR DISMISSAL PERIODS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SCHOOL'S VERY INVOLVED AND THEY'RE AWARE THAT THEY NEED TO BE SPACED FAR APART TO LET ONE DISMISSAL COMPLETELY CLEAR. THEY'RE AWARE THAT THEY NEED TO GROUP SIBLINGS TOGETHER SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE SAME PARENT COMING TO FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES AND THEY'RE ON BOARD WITH THAT. THEY DON'T WANT PARENTS BACKING UP THEIR NORTHWEST HIGHWAY EITHER. THE, THE FIRST QUEUE WITHOUT EVEN HAVING TO USE THE SECOND DRIVEWAY, CAN ACCOMMODATE 23 VEHICLES. AND SO WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO THAT. WE WON'T NEED THIS ALTERNATIVE BACKUP QUEUE VERY MUCH. UM, SO WE HAVE A GREAT PLAN IN PLACE AND THEY'RE COMMITTED TO FOLLOWING IT, AND THEY'VE BEEN ACTIVELY INVOLVED WITH CREATING THE TMP [06:15:02] AND ALSO IT'S GONNA TAKE A LONG TIME BEFORE THEY GO TO THAT BUILD OUT SCENARIO. SO THEY HAVE A LOT OF YEARS TO NAVIGATE THE SYSTEM AND FINE TUNE IT AS THEY GO. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M MARGO MURPHY, 39 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B, DALLAS, TEXAS, M 5 2 2 6. UM, IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE HERE AND IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL. UH, THE FIRST THING I, I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. UH, SO A SHOUT OUT TO MR. RISK WHO TOOK THE TIME WHILE GETTING ON A PLANE. AND WE HAVE A GREAT NUMBER OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS HERE, AND IF THEY WILL JUST SHOUT OUT AND WAVE AT US, THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. UM, AND THANK YOU TO ROB FOR, UH, TAKING ME OFF MY TIPPY TOES. UM, UH, SO, SO YOU'VE SEEN ALL THE COMMUNITY AND THEY'RE WAVING AT YOU, AND THANK YOU FOR SEEING US EARLY SO THEY CAN GO HOME. UH, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, WE'VE DONE A TON OF IT. UH, THE FIRST COMMUNITY MEETING WAS HELD AT THE HOME OF, UH, PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN THE NOTICE DISTRICT. THE SCHOOL MILLED MAILED BEAUTIFUL INVITATIONS TO EVERYONE IN THE NOTICE AREA. WE USED THE PREVIOUS NOTICE AREA FROM THE MEADOWBROOK SCHOOL WHO HAD JUST HAD A CASE. AND WE HELD A KICKOFF MEETING JUST TO KIND OF INTRODUCE THE CASE. A YEAR LATER, APRIL 24TH, 2024, WE HELD A MEETING AT THE WALNUT HILL RECREATION CENTER. IN ALL CASES, PROPERTY OWNERS WERE MAILED INVITATIONS. WE ALSO SENT PDFS OF THE INVITATIONS TO THE PRESIDENTS OF THE TWO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS THAT OVERLAPPED FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ONE IS THE DE DEVENS SHIRE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, AND THE OTHER ONE IS THE INWOOD NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. WE MET WITH CITY OFFICIALS BEFORE, DURING, IN, IN, BEFORE WE FILED. AND, AND DURING THIS PENDENCY, WE ALSO MET A LOT OF, WITH COMMISSIONER HALL, A SHOUT OUT TO HIM AND, AND COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS FOR ALL THE MEETINGS. UM, WE MET WITH THE PRESIDENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS AND WE ALSO MET WITH THE LOVERS LANE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH. THEY'RE THE LARGEST PROPERTY OWNER THERE. UM, AND WE MAILED INFORMATIONAL LETTERS TWICE AND ALSO GAVE PDFS TO THE PRESIDENTS OF THE HOAS TO DISSEMINATE THEM BECAUSE WE KNOW NOT EVERYONE OPENS THEIR MAIL AND WE HOPE THEY OPEN EMAIL, BUT EVEN THAT IS RISKY. THIS IS, WE'RE VERY PROUD OF OUR SUPPORT MAP. UH, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO EITHER TURNED IN A CARD OR, UM, IN SOME CASES ONE, ONE OF THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS IS IN ITALY WHEN THE CARD CAME. BUT WE WENT AHEAD AND FILLED IT OUT BECAUSE WE, WE GOT A LETTER OF SUPPORT. BUT THIS IS, UM, THE SUPPORT OF PEOPLE IN THE NOTICE AREA. YOU WILL SEE THAT THE PROPERTY NORTH OF NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, THAT'S THE CHURCH. UM, AND JUST WEST OF US. AGAIN, THOSE TWO PROPERTIES ARE OWNED BY THE CHURCH. UM, MR. RISK IS JUST TO THE RIGHT OF THE CHURCH. AND THEN OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS, WE'RE VERY PROUD OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT. GOT A LOT OF LETTERS. I THINK YOU GUYS MIGHT HAVE RECEIVED THEM. WE, WE COMPILED ONE PDF, SO IT WOULD BE AN EASY READ FOR YOU. MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE LIVE IN THE DEVEN SHIRE NEIGHBORHOOD. I EXPANDED THE MAP A LITTLE BIT AND IT'S EVEN GREATER THAN THAT, BUT THAT'S AN EXPANDED VERSION. SO WE THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF, OF, OF NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT. UM, I, I DO WANNA GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO, UM, THE PLANNER WHO WORKED WITH US. WE MET WITH US MANY TIMES, ALL HANDS MEETINGS AND UH, AND ALL. I DID MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS OVER THE WEEKEND AND THEY ASKED ME, WHAT DID YOU THINK OF THE, THE CASE REPORT? AND I, I RESPONDED, TWO WORDS WELL WRITTEN. SO A SHOUT OUT TO HIM. OH, OUT OF TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? WE HAVE OUR SUPPORTERS. THEY'RE WELCOME. ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK? ALRIGHT, YOU, YOU PAID FOR PARKING? MIGHT AS WELL. WHILE MY NAME'S FRANK HARRISON. I LIVE AT 33 0 3 MILTON 7 5 2 0 5. I'M A, UM, A PROUD GRANDFATHER WITH THREE, UH, GRANDCHILDREN RIGHT NOW, PRESENTLY GOING TO THIS SCHOOL. AND I HAVE ANOTHER FOUR BEHIND THEM. SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITIES. UM, I REALLY WANTED TO COME DOWN AND SEE HOW AWESOME YOU GUYS WERE. UH, I WAS LISTENING TO FOUR OR FIVE HOURS OF YOUR, UH, INTERVIEWS WITH DIFFERENT, UH, UH, UH, CONTESTANTS HERE. AND, UH, YEAH, I, I'M NEVER SEEN A GROUP OF MEN AND WOMEN WORK SO CLOSELY TOGETHER AND, UH, IT'S REALLY, UH, REWARDING TO SEE OUR CITY, UH, COMMISSIONERS COURT ACT LIKE THIS. I HOPE THAT YOU'LL, UH, GRANT THE ZONING FOR THIS SCHOOL. IT'S, UM, IT'S A GREAT SCHOOL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, MR. BALDWIN, MY QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT, ABOUT THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE HANDED OUT TODAY. THE DEPARTMENT, I'M SORRY, MY, MY QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT THE DOCUMENTS, THE REVISED DOCUMENTS THAT WERE HANDED OUT TODAY? YES MA'AM. THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHOWS THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT. UM, ITEM NUMBER NINE IS 36 FEET. IS THAT INTENDED TO BE [06:20:01] CORRECTED TO 30 FEET? YES. 30 FEET, YES MA'AM. OKAY. AND IN THE TEXT OF THE PD ITSELF, WHERE IT SAYS UNDER FENCING THE FENCE ALONG THE CREEK NEAR THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE OPEN, ET CETERA. IS THAT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OR IS THERE A CREEK AT THE, IS KIND OF ORIENTED WRONG. IT'S THAT BETWEEN US AND OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS TO THE, I ALWAYS CALL IT THE SOUTH, BUT IT'S KINDA THE SOUTH IT'S SOUTHWEST THOUGH, RIGHT? YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SOLID FENCE OR THE NO, THE FENCE NEAR THE CREEK, NEAR THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE OPEN METAL OR PICKET TYPE FENCE. OH, THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S, YEAH, IT SHOULD, SHOULD BE SOUTHWEST, RIGHT? RIGHT. NO, IN THE CREEK IT IS SOUTHEAST. OKAY. SOUTHWEST NORTH ARROW. OKAY. I'M CONFUSED AND CLARIFICATION. WOULD YOU CONFIRM THE NORTH ARROW IS CORRECT ON THE SITE PLAN? MA'AM? I THINK THE NORTH ARROW MAY NEED TO BE CORRECTED ON YOUR SITE PLAN. WE'LL GET THAT DONE. OKAY. UH, LET'S SEE. UH, ANOTHER QUESTION WHERE IT SAYS, FOR THE EAST FACING BUILDING FACADE, WINDOWS AND STAIRWELLS SHALL BE FROSTED GLASS ALONG THE EASTERN FACADE. IS IT ONLY THE WINDOWS AND STAIRWELLS THAT ARE OF CONCERN? WELL, THE STAIRWELLS ARE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET, RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE MR RISK'S PROPERTY. OKAY. AND HE DOESN'T WANT 'EM LOOKING INTO THAT? YEAH, AS YOU CAN SEE, UH, THE STAIRWELLS HERE ARE IN THE WHITE, UH, MIDWAY IN THE BUILDING. OKAY. THAT'S OVERLOOKING MR. RISK'S PROPERTY. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANNA MAKE SURE IS, UH, WHERE IT'S NOT TRANSPARENT SO PEOPLE CAN SEE INTO THE BACKYARD. OKAY. AND THEN LASTLY, UNDER ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS, THERE'S A SENTENCE THAT SAYS MASONRY STONE MATERIALS OR METAL MATERIALS MUST BE USED ON THE BUILDING FACADE. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS, UM, ACCEPTABLE ANYMORE. IS THAT CORRECT MR. MOORE? ALL I CAN. OKAY. SO IS THAT GOING TO BE REMOVED OR HAS IT BEEN REMOVED? WE HAD TO TRY TO GET THAT IN THERE. UNDERSTAND THAT IS THAN THE PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS WE HAVE WITH OUR NEIGHBORS. BUT IN THE PD IT WILL NEED TO BE REMOVED. I UNDERSTAND IT WILL BE REMOVED. BUT THANK YOU QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE. THANK YOU. UM, MR. BALDWIN, AND YOU CAN DEFER TO OTHER TEAM MEMBERS. YOU MAY HAVE HEARD THE QUESTION AT THE BRIEFING REGARDING, UM, STAFF'S REQUEST REGARDING THE FRONT YARD SETBACK WHERE YOU'VE GOT THE BUILDING SHOWN, IT'S CURRENTLY, I THINK 35 AND A HALF FEET, BUT YOU HAVE A FIRE LANE THAT'S SHOWN. UM, WAS THERE A CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATE MATERIALS THAT WOULD HELP ADDRESS PERMEABILITY, IMPERVIOUS SURFACES WITHIN THE THERE? YES MA'AM. FOR THE, THE PARKING ITSELF, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT WE CANNOT DO IT ON A FIRE LANE. THE, THE CITY OF DALLAS FIRE DEPARTMENT DOES NOT ALLOW THAT ANYMORE. UH, THERE, UH, ANY FIRE LANE HAS TO UH, ACCOMMODATED 80,000 POUND TRUCK. YES, NO, UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT YOU HAVE PARKING AREAS, YOU HAVE OTHER AREAS. YEAH. AND THERE ARE ACTUALLY ALTERNATE MATERIALS. SO YOU'RE SAYING THE CITY WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO UTILIZE AN ALTERNATE MATERIAL FOR YOUR FIRE LANE FOR FIRE LANES, NOT FOR FIRE LANES, BUT FOR OTHER AREAS? YOU CAN. IS THAT A CHANGE IN THE CITY? I KNOW THERE'S, UM, OTHER INSTITUTIONAL USES IN THE CITY THAT HAVE, UM, BEEN ACCOMMODATED WITH THE EXCEPTIONS. MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE DALLAS FIRE DEPARTMENT'S ALL BEEN POSITIVE, BUT IT'S BEEN, UH, A REGULATORY CREEP, UH, OKAY. FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. I I WILL LEAVE IT THERE. THANK YOU FOR THAT RESPONSE. AND THEN COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I THINK ADDRESSED THIS, BUT THE, UM, MAGNOLIA TREE PROVISIONS WITH THE, IF READILY AVAILABLE, AM I CORRECT, ARE YOU ADDRESSING THAT EITHER TO REMOVE THAT OR TO NOTE THAT IT'S OTHER EVERGREEN TREE SPECIES AS APPROVED BY THE ARBORIST? OR HOW ARE YOU WE'RE COMMITTED TO PUT THE, THE MAGNOLIAS THERE, WHICH WE THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT SPECIES, BUT TRYING TO GET 20 FOOT TALL, UH, MAGNOLIAS I UNDERSTAND CAN BE PROBLEMATIC. UH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE COMMITTED TO DO. BUT IF THERE'S, IF WE CANNOT FIND 20 FOOT TALL MAGNOLIAS, WE DON'T WANT TO BE, UH, NOT BE ABLE TO GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY BECAUSE OF THAT BE 15. SO SHOULD, SHOULD THERE BE LANGUAGE THAT GIVES YOU FLEXIBILITY IN THE HEIGHT THAT YOU KEEP 15 OR 15 AS YOUR MINIMUM OR SOME OTHER, SO AGAIN, SO THAT THE INTENT, BECAUSE THIS WOULD EFFECTIVELY SAY YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO PUT ANY TREES IN AS IT'S WRITTEN. WELL, I, LET ME WORK WITH, UH, MR. MOORE OR MS. MORRISON, UH, ON, ON THE RIGHT LANGUAGE. SO THE 10 IS, UH, IF YOU, WE ARE GONNA HAVE MORE THAN 15 TREES ALONG THERE AND OF, OF THOSE MAGNOLIA TREES THAT WERE SPREADING ALONG OUR ENTIRE, UH, SOUTHEAST BORDER, AT LEAST 15 OF 'EM HAVE TO BE 20 FEET TALL. IF YOU CAN FIND 20 FOOT TALL TREES. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO. ALRIGHT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO CORRECT MYSELF, I BELIEVE THAT THE NORTH ARROW ON YOUR SITE PLAN MAY BE CORRECT, [06:25:01] WHICH MEANS THAT YOUR SOUTHEAST DESIGNATION LIKELY SHOULD BE SOUTHWEST. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, IF I COULD, UM, INTERRUPT FOR JUST A SECOND PLEASE. LAURA MORRISON, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. THE PROBLEM WITH THE LANGUAGE, UM, IF READILY AVAILABLE IS WHO MAKES THE DETERMINATION OF IF THEY'RE READILY AVAILABLE OR NOT? IS THAT A DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL? IS THAT A DETERMINATION OF THE APPLICANT? SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE A HARDER LOOK AT THAT. WE, WE CAN MAYBE AT, YOU KNOW, WITH CONFIRMATION FROM THE CITY ARBORIST OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WE'LL, WE'LL WE'LL GET TO, WE CAN GET THAT LANGUAGE RIGHT HAND. QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU, MS. LAMBETH, WHO DO YOU WANT? MS. LAMBETH? YEAH, SO I KNOW IT'S HARD WHEN YOU ONLY GET TO THREE MINUTES AND YOU HAVE YOUR, YOU KNOW, YOUR FIVE SLIDES. UH, AND SO YOU DID GO THROUGH THIS, UH, A LITTLE BIT QUICKLY IN, IN THE, THE MANAGEMENT OF THE OVER OVERFLOW QUEUE LANES. SO I'M WONDERING IF YOU COULD NOW JUST TAKE YOUR TIME AND, AND KIND OF WALK US THROUGH THAT LITTLE PIECE. YES. AND THANK YOU FOR UNDERSTANDING THAT. SO BASICALLY WE HAVE A COUPLE OPTIONS. IDEALLY WE WOULD LIKE TO SAY EVERYBODY JUST ENTER FROM THE WEST DRIVEWAY FROM THE FIRST DRIVEWAY, YOU KNOW, TURNING RIGHT AND THEN EXIT ON THE NORTHWEST HIGHWAY RIGHT TURN ONLY. THAT WOULD BE IDEAL. THAT CAN FIT 23 VEHICLES. AND AS THEY GROW, I BELIEVE THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT FOR A VERY LONG TIME. LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, WE OBSERVED, THEY HAVE CURRENTLY HAVE ABOUT 60 STUDENTS AND THE PQ WAS 13 VEHICLES AND THAT ONLY LASTED FOR A FEW MINUTES. AND THIS DOUBLE Q THE INITIAL DOUBLE Q CAN ACCOMMODATE 23 VEHICLES. SO I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE MOST OF THE TRAFFIC AND I THINK THEY CAN ADJUST THAT. BUT WE KNOW IT'S NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, WE CAN'T COME CLOSE TO TOUCHING NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. AND SO THE SECOND OPTION WOULD BE LET CARS COME IN THERE. 'CAUSE THAT'S THE EASY WAY WHEN THAT GETS FULL, PUT CONES AND THEN THEY GO TO THE SECOND DRIVEWAY. SO IT'S A NATURAL PROGRESSION. ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE COULD BE PHYSICALLY, HOW'S THAT DONE? THE POLICE OFFICER? UH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WANNA HEAR. YEAH, BECAUSE THEY HAVE A POLICE OFFICER THERE NOW AND THEY ARE AWARE THAT THE POLICE OFFICER IS NEEDED ON NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. THEY'RE FULLY AWARE OF THAT. AND SO THE POLICE OFFICER WOULD DO THAT. ANOTHER OPTION WOULD BE YOU'RE GONNA LOSE A COUPLE OF SPACES, BUT YOU COULD JUST, IF, IF CERTAIN PERIODS ARE CONTINUALLY REACHING THAT POINT, THEY COULD JUST PUT THE CONES THERE DURING THAT PERIOD AND EVERYBODY COULD ENTER ON THE SECOND DRIVEWAY AND LOOP AROUND. SO THERE'S OPTIONS AND THEY KNOW, UM, THERE'S GONNA BE LITERALLY YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS THEY'LL HAVE SEVERAL TMP UPDATES BETWEEN NOW AND THEN. AND 'CAUSE I AM PRETTY MUCH ASSURE YOU THEY WILL DO THEIR TMP UPDATES AND UH, SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO ADJUST AND MODIFY AND THEY'RE AWARE THAT THE, I'LL BE HONEST, LIKE FOUR DISMISSALS WHEN I OFTEN WE SEE FOUR DISMISSALS, NOT VERY OFTEN, BUT THEY KNOW THAT'S WHAT'S NEEDED, UM, TO HAVE THIS BEAUTIFUL CAMPUS. THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE, THEY KNOW THEY NEED TO DO THAT. THAT'S PERFECT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE. COMMISSIONER HOLT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION SIR? I DO. MR. CHAIR, THANK YOU. IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 3 4 1 1 0, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF A PRIVATE SCHOOL USE AND TERMINATION OF SUP FIVE 80, BUT WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IN LIEU OF AN SUP AND WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS TO PD CONDITIONS IN INCLUDED IN THE DOCKET UNDER YARD LOT AND SPACE REGULATION SECTION SECTION 51 P 1 0 8 B ONE, CHANGE THE FIRST SENTENCE TO READ EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS PARAGRAPH. MINIMUM SIDE YARD IS 10 FEET ALONG DEVIN SHAR DRIVE. MINIMUM SIDE YARD IS 30 FEET. SECTION 51 P 1 0 8 B THREE. CHANGE TO READ FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL. MAXIMUM STRUCTURE HEIGHT IS 30 FEET OFF STREET. PARKING AND LOADING SECTION SECTION 51 P 1 0 9 B ONE. CHANGE TO READ OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL IS A MINIMUM OF 44 SPACES. ADD SECTION 51 P 1 0 9 B TO OVERNIGHT STORAGE OF FULL SITE BUSES, FULL SIZE BUSES OR TRAILERS GREATER THAN 35 FEET IN LENGTH IS PROHIBITED UNDER LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION SECTION EXCEPT STAFF'S. RECOMMENDATION CONDITIONS IS SET FORTH IN THE BOX CONDITIONS ON PAGE 15 DASH 17 OF THE BRIEFING, WHICH [06:30:01] READS SECTION 51 P ONE 11 A EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THIS SECTION. LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION, REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT MUST BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 10 OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS AMENDED. SECTION 51 P 111 B. PLANT MATERIALS MUST BE MINED IN A HEALTHY GROWING CONDITION. ITEM ONE AND THE REQUIRED RESIDENTIAL BUFFER ZONE, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL MAY APPROVE TWO SMALL TREES TO BE SUBSTITUTED FOR EACH LARGER MEDIUM TREE ITEM TWO. AN ENHANCED STREET BUFFER ZONE IS REQUIRED AND MUST INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING FROM THE FRONTAGE INWARD. THREE FEET OF GROUND COVER THREE FEET OF ROWS OF PERENNIAL PLANTINGS APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR AT A SPACING OF NO MORE THAN THREE FEET AND FOUR FEET OF SHRUB PLANTINGS APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR AT A SPACING OF NO MORE THAN SIX FEET WITH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF FOUR FEET. NO FENCES MAY BE LOCATED IN THIS ZONE. ADD ITEM C, 15 FOOT TREES SHALL BE PLANTED ALONG THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE WITH DEVON. SHOWER DRIVE IS SPECIFIED IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. FENCING SECTION ADD SECTION 51 P 1 12 1 A CAA NINE FOOT, OH, I'M SORRY, A NINE FOOT BOARD ON BOARD FENCE IS REQUIRED ALONG THE DESHAW PROPERTY LINE. ADD SECTION 51 P 100, 12.1 A D ALONG THE CREEK ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER. A FOUR FOOT OPEN METAL OR PICKET FENCE IS REQUIRED. OUTDOOR LIGHTING ADD NEW SECTION. ALL OUTDOOR LIGHTING WERE PERMITTED MUST BE HOODED DIRECTED DOWNWARD OR AWAY FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES TO MINIMIZE SPILLAGE. AND FINALLY, UNDER SIGNS ADD NEW SUBSECTION TO 51 P ONE 12. THE ONLY ILLUMINATED SIGN PERMITTED IS ALONG NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. AND IF I CAN GET A SECOND, I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS SECOND. OKAY. YOU DO HAVE A SECOND. UH, AND A QUESTION. COMMISSIONER PARKER, I GOT A CLARIFICATION. UM, DID YOU MEAN TO INCLUDE UNDER ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS D FOR THE EAST FACING BUILDING FACADE? WINDOWS AND STAIRWELLS SHALL BE TRANSLUCENT GLASS ALONG THE EASTERN FACADE WITHIN 30 FEET OF THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE? UH, NO COMMISSIONER. OKAY. BECAUSE THOSE ARE NOT ALLOWED. OKAY. AND COULD YOU PLEASE REPEAT WHAT YOUR, UM, WORDING WAS FOR THE TREES, BECAUSE I HEARD 15, 15, 20 FOOT TREES ARE REQUIRED ALONG THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE WITH DEVIN SHAR DRIVE. OKAY, BUT YOU'RE LEAVING OUT THE MAGNOLIA TREES. CORRECT? THAT WAS ANOTHER THING. AND, AND THE OTHER PHRASE ABOUT IF AVAILABLE. YES. RIGHT. JUST WE CAN'T DO IT. OKAY. I WAS JUST GETTING A CLARIFICATION ON THOSE TWO ITEMS, BUT THANK YOU. MM-HMM, . I DO SECOND IT. I ALSO HAD A CLARIFICATION. COMMISSIONER HALL, UM, I BELIEVE THERE WAS AN UPDATED VERSION OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN CIRCULATED LIKE TODAY. UM, WAS YOUR RECOMMENDATION SUBJECT TO THAT VERSION OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN? IT WOULD BE, YES. OKAY, COOL. THANK YOU, SIR. OH, AND ALSO WITH THAT PLAN, WITH THE CORRECTION OF THE HEIGHT BEING 30 FEET INSTEAD OF THE 36 FEET ON THE PLAN, BECAUSE THE TEXT OF THE PD SAYS 30 FEET NOW, BUT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT WE GOT HANDED TODAY SAYS 36 FEET. UH, IT SHOULD BE 30 FEET. OKAY. ANY OTHER CLARIFICATIONS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? AND THIS MAY BE FOR STAFF. I DON'T WANT TO SHORT CIRCUIT MR. HALL'S MOTION, BUT IS IT CORRECT THAT YOU CAN SPECIFY A TRANSLUCENT MATERIAL WHILE NOT SPECIFYING GLASS? THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. SO YOU CAN REQUIRE TRANSPARENCY, BUT NOT A TRANSLUCENT MATERIAL. I'LL LET, I MAY COME AND ASK A FOLLOW UP QUESTION, BUT I'LL, UM, YIELD TO COMMISSIONER HALL READY FOR YOUR COMMENT, SIR. THANK YOU. UM, THANK YOU. FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. YOU KNOW, THIS IS A DIFFICULT LOCATION. WE RECOGNIZE THAT WITH ONLY ACCESS ON NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, A CREEK ON ROUGHLY TWO SIDES AND CHANGES IN ELEVATION. AND IT MAY APPEAR TO BE AN AGGRESSIVE DESIGN, PERHAPS, BUT IT DOES BLEND IN WITH THE LAND AND THE TREES. UH, IT'S ACTUALLY IN HARMONY WITH NATURE THERE. IT'S A BEAUTIFUL SITE, AND I THINK THE BUILDING IS GONNA FIT IN JUST IN A REALLY NICE WAY. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE GOALS OF, OF, UH, OF THE STUDENT, UH, FOR THE SCHOOL TO BE TEACHING THE STUDENTS IS HARMONY WITH NATURE. THERE'S BEEN OVERWHELMING NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT. WE REALLY HAVE NOT HAD ANY NEGATIVE AND, UH, COMMENTS AND OPPOSITION. THE SCHOOL BOARD WORKED WITH ADJACENT NEIGHBORS TO ALLEVIATE CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY THEM, ESPECIALLY ALONG DEVIN SHIRE, AND THEY CAME UP WITH THE COMPROMISES AND SO FORTH [06:35:01] THAT HAVE BEEN MENTIONED TODAY, AS WELL AS PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS. UH, APOLOGIES TO STAFF FOR GOING AGAINST YOUR RECOMMENDATION, BUT I FEEL I'M CONVINCED AND I FEEL THAT A PD IS THE WAY TO GO FOR THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HALL. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. VICE CHAIR RUBIN. YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO, UH, COMMEND COMMISSIONER HALL FOR HIS EXCELLENT WORK. OBVIOUSLY, ALL OF THESE SCHOOL CASES ARE VERY HARD. UM, AND, AND YOU DID REALLY GOOD WORK HERE ALONG WITH THE, THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES AND STAFF AND, AND PARTICULARLY FOR THE FACT THAT WE, WE GOT THIS ONE DONE ON OUR FIRST BITE OF THE APP OF THE HORSESHOE. I'M REALLY THRILLED TO SEE THAT HAPPEN BECAUSE I'VE SEEN MANY SCHOOL CASES, AS, AS MS. MURPHY KNOWS, THAT CAN DRAG OUT ON AND ON AND ON. SO, UM, REALLY HAPPY TO SEE THIS ONE GET RESOLVED, UH, ONCE IT LANDED DURING LABS PROMPTLY. COMMISSIONER HERBERT QUICK COMMENT FOR THE SCHOOL, ADD ZONING AND PERMITTING TO YOUR CURRICULUM. THANK YOU. , THEY CALLED THEM CONTEST CONTESTANTS. COME ON. THIS IS LIKE THE HUNGER GAMES OUT HERE. UH, I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION. I WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER HALL AND THE TEAM AND THE NEIGHBORS AND, AND VICE TRUVIN IS RIGHT. YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S A PLEASURE TO GET A SCHOOL WHEN THIS IS THE KIND OF, UH, AMBIANCE THAT WE HAVE BECAUSE IT'S RARE. UH, AND SO I GREATLY APPRECIATE IT. I KNOW THAT IT'S DIFFICULT. UH, I APPRECIATE, UH, THE CASE OF REPORT MR. CLINTON VERY WELL WRITTEN. UH, AND I THINK THIS IS THE BEST FIT FOR THIS SITE, AND SO I'M, I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT. UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION BY, UH, COMMISSIONER HALL, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, NOT FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT RATHER APPROVE THE PD WITH THE UPDATED, UH, DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ALL THE CONDITIONS AS READ INTO THE RECORD BY COMMISSIONER HALL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF PLEASE SAY, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER, IT TAKES US TO CASE NUMBER 16. OH, SORRY. GOSH, THANK YOU. [11. 24-2922 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.] WE NEED TO GO BACK TO 11. DARN IT. THIS IS CASE NUMBER 11. IT'S Z 2 3 4 1 3 4. IT'S 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 STAFF'S. RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THIS IS NUMBER 11. UH, PAGE FOUR. GOING ONCE. GOING TWICE NOW. COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? C NONE. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF CASES Z 2 3 4 DASH 1 3 4. I MOVE TO, WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND NOT FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT INSTEAD, RECOMMENDATION, RECOMMEND, UM, DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION. I'LL SECOND IT. DISCUSSION. WE HAVE A MOTION. SECOND TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ANY COMMENTS, PLEASE? UH, BRIEFLY. UM, I GAVE THE, UM, APPLICANT SOME FEEDBACK INITIALLY AND THERE'S BEEN NO CONTACT SINCE THEN. THEY'RE NOT HERE TODAY. THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANY COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OR OUTREACH. I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY OF RESIDENTIAL GIVEN THE, UM, NATURE OF THE INDUSTRIAL, UM, BUSINESSES SURROUNDING THIS. SO I DO NOT THINK THIS IS APPROPRIATE LAND USE. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. A IMPOSED AYES HAVE IT. LET'S GO TO 12. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 12, KZ [12. 24-2923 An application for a TH-3(A) Townhouse Subdistrict on property zoned an R-5(A) Single Family Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 595, the South Dallas/Fair Park Special Purpose District, on the northwest side of Herrling Street, between South 2nd Avenue and Cross Street.] 2 34 DASH 1 74. AND APPLICATION FOR A TH THREE A TOWNHOUSE SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED AND R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF HURLING STREET BETWEEN SOUTH SECOND AVENUE AND CROSS STREET STAFF. RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT. SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE. GOOD EVENING. THE MICROPHONE'S OFF. YEAH. MY NAME IS ANISH ER, UH, 32 0 8 COLE AVENUE, DALLAS. UH, SOUND 5 2 0 4. I'M HERE REQUESTING A, OH, UM, CAN I GET TECH OR SOMEBODY? YOU HAVE A PRESENTATION? YEAH. OKAY. [06:40:01] I'VE GOT SOME SLIDES. WE'LL GET YOU UP. I'M HERE REQUESTING, UH, UH, GENERAL ZONING CHANGE, UM, TO, UH, TO TH THREE WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS ON, UH, ON, UH, ON HARLING STREET FOR, UH, FOUR, UH, THE LOT. THE PARCEL IS, UH, PLATTED IN FOUR SEPARATE LOTS EACH, EACH LOT AVERAGING 6,200 SQUARE FEET, UH, FROM 35 15 TO 35 20 27 HURLING STREET. OKAY. WHICH WAS AGAIN, SORRY. UM, IT'S 1 3 4 RIGHT THERE. OH, THERE WE GO. YEAH, SORRY. AND THEN TO SWITCH BETWEEN THEM, JUST CLICK THE TABS UP HERE. OH, I GOTCHA. OKAY. MM-HMM, . SO HOW'S IT, THERE YOU GO. ARE YOU TRYING TO ZOOM IN? NO, I'M TRYING TO, IS IT SUPPOSED TO GO UP THERE? OH, SORRY. FORGOT STEP WE SHARE. OKAY. SO THE TOTAL FOOTAGE OF THE PARCEL IS 24,000, 24,000 SQUARE FEET, BUT IT'S PLATTED IN FOUR SEPARATE, FOUR SEPARATE LOTS. AND EACH ONE IS 6,200 SQUARE FEET. I'M PROPOSING TO BUILD, UM, BUILD TWO, UH, A TWO STORY, UM, STRUCTURE ON EACH LOT. UM, EACH, EACH STRUCTURE WILL HAVE TWO, TWO UNITS, THREE BEDROOM, TWO BATH UNITS. UM, AND I'VE, LET'S SEE WHERE IS, OH, AND I'VE PRESENTED IT TO EVERYBODY THAT LIVES ON THE STREET AND THEY'VE ALL SIGNED A PETITION SAYING THEY SUPPORT THE PROJECT. UM, AND THAT'S WHAT I HAVE. I'M OPEN FOR QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. YES. COMMISSIONER. WE HONOR ISN'T THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON THE STREETS YOUR TENTS? NO. OKAY. THE SIX UNITS ACROSS THE STREET, WHICH WAS A ZONING CASE APPROVED LAST YEAR, THOSE ARE, BUT I DON'T OWN THE REST OF THE STREET. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, ARE THERE OTHER DUPLEXES NEARBY? YES. UH, ACROSS THE STREET THERE ARE SIX, UH, THREE DUPLEXES. AND ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE UNIT, THERE ARE, THERE ARE ANOTHER THREE DUPLEXES. THEY'RE BEING OPERATED AS DUPLEXES. I'M NOT, I KNOW THEY HAVE THREE, TWO METERS ON EACH. I'M NOT SURE IF THEY'RE ACTUALLY ZONED, BUT THEY'RE BEING OPERATED AS DUPLEXES. I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE TWO ADDRESSES ON EACH UNIT. SO, AND ON THE OTHER SIDE IS BOB SEAFOOD, SO IT'S COMMERCIAL COMMISSIONER. SO THESE ARE DUPLEX STRUCTURES THAT YOU'RE SHOWING US. IS IT IS LIKE A ONE UNIT ON TOP OF ANOTHER UNIT, IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. THANK YOU. SURE. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, JUST ONE QUESTION. I KNOW YOU'VE DEVELOPED, UM, OTHER PROPERTIES, UM, BOTH IN, UM, MY DISTRICT AND IN, UM, DISTRICT SEVEN. AS YOU WERE REVIEWING, AND I THINK AS YOU'RE SHOWING IN YOUR IMAGES, UM, DID YOU CONSIDER INCLUDING A PROVISION THAT THERE'LL BE FRONT DOORS, UM, ENGAGING WITH THE STREET JUST TO, UM, SPEAK TO THE PUBLIC REALM AND PUBLIC AC ACTIVATION? I KNOW THAT'S TYPICALLY OF, OF HOW YOU DEVELOP YOUR PROJECTS. UM, FRONT DOOR, I MEAN, THE FRONT, YOU'RE, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TWO, BOTH UNITS ARE GONNA FRONT ONTO THE STREET, CORRECT? YEAH. SO IT, SO THERE'S ONE THAT DOOR ON THE RIGHT, ON THE RIGHT IS FACING THE STREET, AND THE OTHER DOOR IS KIND OF ON THE, ON THE RIGHT PROJECTED ELEMENT. YEAH, I I MEAN I CAN SWING THAT AROUND. NO, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. OKAY. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. YOU COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONERS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I HAVE A MOTION. AND IF I CAN GET, UH, IN A SECOND. I HAVE COMMENTS. YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE MOTION. I WILL. I, UH, I MOVED TO, HOLD ON, HOLD ON. [06:45:03] I DO NOT CASE IN THE MATTER OF CASE Z 2 34 DASH 1 74. I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS SUBJECT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTARY BY THE APPLICANT, UM, AND FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION. AND COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS NEEDS MORE, UM, DENSITY IN THIS CASE. EVEN THOUGH WE'RE SEEING THIS, MY HOPE IS THAT THIS IS WHAT IS ACTUALLY GONNA BE PUT ON THE GROUND. AND I HAVE CALLED, UM, AND HAVE SPOKE WITH SEVERAL STAFF MEMBERS ON HOW TO START THE PROCEDURES OF, OF CHANGING OUR CODE, THAT DESIGN THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEN IT COMES TO HOUSING. UM, AS MUCH AS THIS, UM, IS A BETTER VERSION OF WHAT WAS INITIALLY PRESENTED TO ME, UM, I HAVE VERY MUCH CAUSED THE PAUSE WHEN IT COMES TO THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT BECAUSE I, THE COMMUNITY ITSELF IS, IS, IS HAVING ISSUES WITH WHAT IS BEING BUILT AROUND US. AND, AND HAVING SOMEONE THAT TELLS US AND OR, AND KNOWS THE CODE ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT THEY CAN BUILD, ONCE THEY GET THE ZONE, THEY CAN BUILD WHAT THEY WANT. I'M GONNA HOPE THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THAT WHAT WAS PRESENTED IS ACTUALLY WHAT IS BEING BUILT, UM, BECAUSE OTHER, OTHER PLACES, WHAT WAS PRESENTED IS NECESSARILY WAS NOT UPDATED AND CHANGED IN A PARTICULAR CASE PRIOR TO THIS. SO I'M GOING TO HOPE. BUT, UM, THERE IS THE, THERE IS DUPLEXES ON THIS STREET. MAJORITY ARE OWNED BY THE APPLICANT. UM, THIS IS A WAVE BARRIER VERSION OF WHAT HAS BEEN BUILT, AND I'M HOPING THAT IT IS BUILT ACCORDING TO WHAT HE HAS PRESENTED TO ME, MYSELF, STAFF AND COUNCILMAN BA'S OFFICE. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HERBERT TO CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING AND FALSE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS, VOLUNTEER BY THE APPLICANT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 13. UH, 13 IS [13. 24-2924 An application for a TH-3(A) Townhouse District on property zoned an LO-1 Limited Office District, on the north line of East Northwest Highway, east of Lockhaven Drive.] CASE Z. 2 34 DASH 1 78. AN APPLICATION FOR TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN L OH ONE, LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE EAST, NORTHWEST HIGHWAY EAST OF LOCKHAVEN DRIVE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU, SIR. IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER HOUSER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? WELL, I'M GOING TO HAVE A, A MOTION WE, UH, TO, TO HOLD THIS. I'M CONFERRING WITH STAFF ABOUT WHETHER IT NEEDS TO BE READVERTISED AND I'M NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR IF WE'RE GONNA RE ADVERTISE AS A PD OR SUP. SO, AND I THINK THEY'RE, WE'RE DISCUSSING IT BACK THERE. UM, CAN WE MAYBE WE CAN COME BACK, GO TO A DIFFERENT CASE AND COME BACK. YES. YEAH, WE CAN COME BACK TO THIS ONE. LET'S, LET'S, UH, TABLE IT FOR THE MOMENT. WE'LL GO TO 14 AND WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS ONE. BACK AGAIN, MR. CLINT. ALL RIGHT. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER [14. 24-2925 An application for a 1) an amendment to Tract II within Planned Development District No. 234; and 2) a Specific Use Permit for a service station, on the east side of South Cockrell Hill Road, south of Corral Drive.] 14, CASE Z, 2 34 DASH 2 24. AND APPLICATION FOR A ONE, AN AMENDMENT TO TRACK TWO WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 2 34 AND TWO, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A SERVICE STATION ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH ROE HILL ROAD, SOUTH OF CORRAL DRIVE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL. SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE. GOOD EVENING. SO YOU HIT SHARE? YEAH, YOU HIT SHARE AND NOTHING HAPPENED. I HIT THE MIDDLE. YOU GOTTA, [06:50:06] PERFECT. THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. MY NAME IS PETER KAVANAUGH. MY ADDRESS IS 1620 HANLEY DRIVE IN DALLAS, REPRESENTING, UH, UH, THE PROPERTY AT 64 50 SOUTH, UM, SOUTH COCKRELL HILL. UH, THE OWNERS ARE COCKER HILL PLAZA, UH, SIMON MCCONNEY, UH, UH, OWNER OF THAT GROUP IS, IS HERE WITH ME AND WE'LL BE SPEAKING IN A FEW MINUTES. OUR REQUEST IS SIMPLY FOR AN SUP TO ALLOW GAS PUMPS AT A NEW LITTLE LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER. THE AREA HERE, I'M, I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF SLIDES SHOWING YOU KIND OF WHERE WE ARE. UH, THAT LITTLE HEAVY WHITE THING KIND OF NOW TOWARD THE TOP IS AN EXISTING FAMILY DOLLAR STORE. TO THE SOUTH OF THAT IS AN OPEN SPACE. THAT'S OUR PROPERTY. SOUTH OF THAT IS A 536 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT DOES VERY WELL. UH, NOW IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF JUST OF A CLOSEUP, IF YOU WILL. UH, OUR PROPERTY, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE WALKWAY PEOPLE WALK FROM THE APARTMENTS OVER TO THE FAMILY DOLLAR STORE. WE'RE GONNA FIX THAT PROBLEM BY PUTTING IN A NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL BE WELL LIT. AND THAT LIGHTING, BY THE WAY, WILL SERVE THE FAMILY DOLLAR STORE. WE, OF COURSE, DID TALK TO THEM. UH, THEY'RE GLAD TO SEE THAT BECAUSE THE AREA GETS VERY DARK LATE AT NIGHT, AND THAT'S WHEN THEY SOMETIMES HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THEIR DUMPSTERS AND BAD GUYS, SO TO SPEAK. OUR SITE PLAN WAS DEVELOPED ALONG WITH THE FAMILY DOLLAR PEOPLE A LONG TIME AGO, SO THAT WE SHARE A DRIVEWAY. UH, UH, OUR OWNERS HAVE OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND ACTUALLY WE'RE A OWNER HERE AT THE TIME THE FAMILY DOLLAR WAS BUILT, IT JUST GOT DELAYED, IF YOU WILL, BY THE PANDEMIC. UM, OUR OWNERS ARE VERY EXPERIENCED IN THIS BUSINESS, HAVE, HAVE A NUMBER OF STORES IN SOUTH OAK CLIFF. THIS IS A STORE THEY HAVE AT THEIR, UH, IN, UH, UH, IN THE AREA OF OVERTON AND BECKLEY. UH, I WANT, I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THE STAFF REPORT. AND THE STAFF REPORT BASICALLY SAYS THAT THIS BUSINESS DOES NOT BELONG HERE. IN FACT, THE APARTMENT COMPLEX. WE MET WITH THE MANAGER TWICE. SHE'S THRILLED THAT WE'RE COMING. WE ARE AN ABSOLUTE, UM, INVITED GUEST, IF YOU WILL, TO THIS, TO THIS AREA. WE'RE GONNA PROVIDE THE THINGS THAT THEY WANT A COUPLE MORE USES FOR THE PEOPLE TO EITHER WALK TO, WE'RE DRIVE THROUGH, WE'RE GONNA PROVIDE SECURITY FOR THEM. ON THE NORTH SIDE, WHICH IS A VERY DARK SIDE OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY. UM, THE, UH, PD CLEARLY SAYS THAT WE ARE PERMITTED USE WITH AN SUP. THE STAFF REPORT SAYS THE PUMPS USE USE IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA, BUT WE ARE ON A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY COMPATIBLE. WE WILL PROVIDE LIGHTING. OUR OWNER WILL RE WILL REPEAT, I THINK HER SUCCESSES FROM OTHER LOCATIONS IN OAK CLIFF. AND I'D LIKE LAST TO SAY THAT, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS WHEN COME INTO A CASE, YOU'RE ALWAYS SAY, WELL, YOU'RE KIND OF HERE TO BE GLAD THAT NOBODY CARES. THERE'S NOBODY HERE BEHIND US OPPOSING US. BUT IN FACT, OUR NEIGHBORS DO CARE AND THEY'RE GLAD THAT WE'RE HERE. SO WE ARE NOT A, UH, SOMETHING NEW THAT COMES THAT PEOPLE DON'T WANT, BUT WE'RE SOMETHING HERE THAT, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE DO WANT. THANK YOU. NOW WE'LL LET SIMON SPEAK FOR HER COMPANY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IF YOU WANT TO GET GOOD EVENING MINUTES, JUST HIT THAT WHEN YOU START. OKAY. THAT WAY YOU'LL GET YOUR THREE. HI EVERYONE, MY NAME IS SIMON MCCONNEY. I, UM, MY OFFICE IS AT 5 6 0 0 TENON PARKWAY, PLANO, TEXAS 7 5 0 2 4. UM, MY PARENTS, UM, AND I OWN THIS PROPERTY FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS, AND MY PARENTS HAVE BEEN, UH, THEY OWN A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT FIRM WHERE THEY PRIMARILY DEVELOP, UH, COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE, UM, SPECIFICALLY SMALL RETAIL SHOPS OR GAS STATIONS. UM, SORRY, MY HEART'S LIKE BEATING A LITTLE FAST. UM, BUT THEY'VE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS FOR THE PAST 35 YEARS. UM, HERE WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE A ONE STOP SHOP, UM, LIKE A CONVENIENCE STORE WHERE WE'LL PROVIDE GAS, FOOD, GROCERIES, UM, AND IT'LL ALSO PROVIDE TWO SMALL RETAIL, UH, AREAS. SO WE WILL LEASE OUT TO A TENANT. UM, WE'RE GONNA LEASE OUT THE F UH, FOOD AREA OR THE RESTAURANT TO A TACO AREA THAT'S OWNED BY A SMALL FAMILY THAT WE, UM, HAVE LEASED OUT IN THE PAST, UH, LIKE, UH, LOCATIONS, INCLUDING THE OVERTURN LOCATION HERE. UM, WE HAVE SPOKE WITH, OR I HAVE SPOKE WITH, UM, MARIA, WHO'S THE MANAGER AT THE, UH, APARTMENTS, UM, NEAR THE ER, UH, [06:55:01] PROPERTY. UM, SHE SAID THAT IT'S A GREAT WALKABLE, UM, ADDITION TO, UM, THEIR AREA. AND WE'VE ALSO ISSUED ALL THE SAFETY ISSUES AND LIGHT ISSUES. UM, SO WE'LL HAVE A SECURITY GUARD THAT WILL BE THERE DURING THE NIGHT. SO WE'LL HAVE, UH, 24 HOURS, UM, CAMERA SYSTEM AND WILL PROVIDE LOTS OF LIGHTS, UM, EVEN AT NIGHT. UM, WHICH ALSO THE FAMILY DOLLAR HAD AN ISSUE WITH WHICH WE, UH, RESOLVED. UM, AGAIN, I THINK THIS PROPERTY WILL PROVIDE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE WE HAD SIMILAR, UM, ISSUES AND DEMOGRAPHICS AT THE OVERTON, UH, PLAZA, AND IT WAS A GREAT ADDITION TO THAT COMMUNITY. IT PROVIDED A LOT OF RES UH, LIKE OPPORTUNITIES. IT BROUGHT THE COMMUNITY TOGETHER. UM, AND WE'RE, WE HONESTLY WANT TO DO THE SAME THING HERE AS WELL. UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. THANK YOU. DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS? SORRY? DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS? YES. PERFECT. UH, COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR OUR TWO SPEAKERS. COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YES. UM, PREVIOUS, UM, COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN MYSELF, UM, BETWEEN MR. PETER AND, AND YOU GUYS, WE, WE TALKED ABOUT FOUR ISSUES, BROKEN PUMPS AT YOUR CURRENT STATIONS, GREASING, GAS STAINS ACROSS THE CONCRETE AND LANDSCAPING NEGLECT. AND MY LAST QUESTION WAS REFERRING TO GAMING. UM, YOU GUYS ANSWERED, UM, WITH SAYING BROKEN PUMPS ARE A PART OF THE INDUSTRY AND IT HAPPENS, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE HAPPENING AT EVERY GAS STATION IN THE CITY. UM, THE GREASE STAINS AND GAS STAINS, YOU AGREED YOU'LL WORK ON CLEANING THOSE. THE LANDSCAPE AND NEGLECT, I THINK YOU SAID YOU WOULD REPLANT A SHRUB OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. UM, THESE ARE THE ISSUES IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT CREATE BAD DEVELOPMENT. HAVE YOU HAVE A PLAN TO, UM, DO YOU HAVE A PLAN TO KEEP THESE THINGS UP IN THIS TYPE OF, IN THIS DEVELOPMENT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD? YEAH, SO, UM, I'LL GO STEP, UH, I'LL GO ONE BY ONE. SO FOR THE BROKEN PUMPS, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S DUE TO HEAVY RUSH OF THE BUSINESS, UM, AND IN THE AREA. UM, BUT WE DO, IT HURTS OUR BUSINESS THE MOST, BUT IT, WE DO, UM, WHENEVER IT IS A BROKEN, LIKE A BROKEN PUMP, WE CALL IN, UH, MAINTENANCE SERVICE AND WE CALL, UH, THIRD PARTY FIXERS AS WELL. SO WE, WE GET THAT FIXED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. UM, SECOND, THE LANDSCAPING ISSUE. UM, THE CITY, UH, HAS, SO WE WATER THE LANDSCAPE TWICE A WEEK. UM, AND SOMETIMES WE GET RESTRICTIONS FROM THE CITY BECAUSE OF A, A WATER SHORTAGE, SO WE HAVE TO CUT BACK ON THE WATER. UM, AND WE HAVE REPLACED THE SHRUBS AND THE LANDSCAPE MULTIPLE TIMES, BUT WITH THE HEAT AND WITH THE LIMITED USE OF, UH, WATER, UM, IT JUST, YOU KNOW, IT DIES DOWN SOMETIMES. UM, THE THIRD ISSUE, WHAT WAS THE THIRD ISSUE AGAIN? CONCRETE. YES. SO WE HAVE A WATER POWER, UH, WATER POWER WASH EVERY MONTH. UM, AND WE HAVE A MAINTENANCE WORKER THAT MAKES SURE THEY WATER DOWN THE, UH, PROPERTY EVERY MONTH. AND IF THERE'S ANY GRAY GREASE STAINS, WE WATER THAT DOWN AS WELL, LIKE EVERY WEEK OR SO. SORRY, MR. CHAIR, MR. CHAIR, MR. CITY ATTORNEY. I, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE DEAL WITH LAND USE, NOT OPERATIONS. IS THIS SOMETHING WE, IT'S UP. TALK ABOUT HERE. IT IS. IT, IT'S AN SUP? THAT'S CORRECT. UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. IT'S, IT'S A LAND USE DECISION AND A LAND USE DISCUSSION, NOT A DISCUSSION ON THE INDIVIDUAL OPERATOR. SO DISCUSSION OF THE, THE MAINTENANCE OF GAS PUMPS AT A DIFFERENT PROPERTY IS REALLY NOT GERMANE TO THIS CASE, CORRECT? I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT, YES. THANK YOU. SO IF A CLIENT IS BEFORE US AND THEY HAVE BROKEN EQUIPMENT ON THE SPECIFICS THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR AT OTHER SITES, WE CAN'T CONSIDER THAT. UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, YOU SHOULD FOCUS ON THIS SPECIFIC SITE AND THE REQUEST, THE, THE SUP THAT IS BEFORE THE COMMISSION. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. SCENE NINE. COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES. IN THE CASE OF Z 2 3 4, I'M SORRY, 2, 2, 4? YES. IN THE CASE OF Z 2 3 4 2 6 2 2 4 14, NUMBER FOUR, TWO. YES. IN THE CASE OF IT'S, [07:00:03] YOU SAID 2, 3, 4, RIGHT? MM-HMM. IN THE CASE OF Z 2 3 4 2, 2 4. THANK YOU, . IT WAS LIKE, WAIT, UM, I, I, UM, MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND GO WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL. AND IF I HAVE A COMMENT A SECOND, I'LL COMMENT. IS IT, DO WE HAVE A SECOND COMMISSIONERS? WELL, IS IT WITH OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE? STRAIGHT DENIAL OR WITHOUT? UH, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO COME BACK IN TWO YEARS WITH A BETTER PROJECT. SO WITHOUT PREJUDICE. WITHOUT PREJUDICE, YEAH. OKAY. WE HAVE A SECOND. COMMISSIONERS SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. ANY COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YES. IN MY DISCUSSION WITH THE STAFF, MY DISCUSSION WITH THE APARTMENT COMPLEX AND THE NEIGHBORS, UM, ACROSS THE, UH, CAMP WISDOM, UH, THE, THE FACT THAT THE GAS STATIONS WERE SO CLOSE TO THE FAMILY DOLLAR AND THE APARTMENT COMPLEX, UM, WAS KIND OF THE ISSUE. UM, SOME OF THE SAME THINGS BEING SOLD IN THE FAMILY DOLLAR WOULD BE SOLD HERE. HAVING A GAS PUMP SO CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS WAS ALSO A CONCERN, UM, BECAUSE OF THE DENSENESS OF THE APARTMENT COMPLEX, UM, AND IS ALL REASONS WHY I WENT WITH THE DENIAL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, HOUSEWRIGHT? UM, I'LL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. I MEAN, THIS IS A, THIS IS A HIGH TRAFFIC CORRIDOR. IT'S A COMMERCIAL USE. UM, I, I SEE NO REASON TO DENY, UH, THIS APPLICATION SEEMS LIKE AN APPROPRIATE USE FOR THE LOCATION. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? YEAH, I'M NOT GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION EITHER. I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF VACANT LAND HERE AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE IMPOSING OPERATIONAL IMPEDIMENTS TO A LAND USE DECISION. I MEAN, IF THIS OPERATOR HAS ISSUES IN OTHER PLACES, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE CODE. AND IF ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE WANNA DENY THIS IS BECAUSE THEY MIGHT CREATE COMPETITION FOR A NEARBY USER, I THINK THAT'S INCREDIBLY WRONG. UM, I, WE HAVE GAS STATIONS NEXT DOOR TO RESIDENTIAL USES ALL OVER THE CITY. UH, THAT'S NOT A A VALID REASON. I MEAN, WE TALK ABOUT FOOD DESERTS IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR ALL THE TIME, AND WE'VE GOT AN OPERATOR WHO WANTS TO PUT IN A PLACE THAT'S GONNA HAVE GROCERY PRODUCTS, A TAQUERIA, UH, ANOTHER, UM, VENDOR THAT MAY END UP PRODUCING THINGS FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN WALKING DISTANCE. AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DENYING IT FOR REASONS THAT DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH LAND USE. SO I, I CAN'T SUPPORT THE MOTION COMMISSIONER WEAVER. I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION. AND WHEN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT IS TALKING ABOUT, UH, FOOD DESERT, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT PREDATORY, UH, COMPANIES LIKE FAMILY DOLLAR WHO OVERCHARGED FOR FOOD. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GROCERY STORES THAT ARE ACTUALLY OF DECENT PRICE. WE ARE DEFINITELY NOT TALKING ABOUT OVERWHELMING FAMILY DOLLARS. AND, AND, AND THOSE AND GAS STATIONS WHO PRICES ARE TRIPLE THE TIME, SIZE OF REGULAR GAS THAT GROCERY STORES. CAN I ASK A QUESTION PLEASE? UH, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT FAMILY DOLLAR HERE, ARE WE? OKAY. THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HANON. THANK YOU. I DID SECOND THE MOTION. UM, PRIMARILY BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE THE SITE PLAN THAT'S SUBMITTED BEFORE US. I DO THINK THAT WE HAVE PROVISIONS IN OUR CODE THAT SPEAK ABOUT BUFFER ZONES, UM, THAT WOULD ADDRESS ITS IMMEDIATE RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY. I THINK THAT THOSE ARE THINGS THAT COULD BE INTEGRATED WITHIN A PLAN AND, UM, WORK WITH THE COMMISSIONER AND THE COMMUNITY FOR A BETTER PROJECT THAT I THINK I COULD SUPPORT. I WOULD NOT HAVE SUPPORTED A STRAIGHT DENIAL, BUT I DO THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE. I THINK STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS CORRECT, THAT THERE'S SOME ADJACENCY ISSUES THAT SHOULD BE AND COULD BE ADDRESSED IN A PLAN. AND I DO HOPE THAT THE APPLICANT WILL WORK TO GET THOSE ADDRESSED AND PERHAPS BRING US BACK A, UM, A PLAN THAT COULD BE SUPPORTED. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER CHERNO? UH, I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. I I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE STAFF PRESENTATION IN THIS, IN THE REASONING THAT WAS CITING THERE AROUND SURROUNDING USES IMPACTS OF SURROUNDING USES. I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING COMPELLING ON THAT. UM, ON SUITABILITY OF THE SITE, I DIDN'T SEE ANY, ANYTHING THAT WAS COMPELLING THERE. I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING IN THE DISCUSSION THAT MAKES ME FEEL, UM, DIFFERENTLY, UH, AS WELL. UM, I I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A WELL-CONCEIVED PLAN AND IT'S AN APPROPRIATE USE. WE HAVE GAS STATIONS NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY. THAT'S NOT UNUSUAL, SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS, MR. ? YEAH, I, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. UM, LARGELY FOR, UM, THE REASONS THAT COMMISSIONER HAMPTON STATED AS WELL AS SOME OF COMMISSIONER HERBERT'S [07:05:01] REASONS. I I DO THINK WE NEED TO BE PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE WHEN WE'RE PLACING GAS STATIONS NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS, BUT THAT THEY'RE SINGLE FAMILY OR MULTI-FAMILY. BUT I, I DO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER KINGSTON THAT ANY COMPETITION WITH, WITH FAMILY DOLLAR FOR, FOR SELLING PRODUCTS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD NOT BASE A LAND USE DECISION ON. WE SHOULD FURTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMPETITION, COMPETITION HERE, NOT, NOT RESTRICT THEM SECOND ROUND. UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT FILED A COMMISSIONER HOUSER. TO BE CLEAR, MY, MY MOTION WAS NOT ABOUT THE ECONOMIC COMPETITION OF FAMILY DOLLAR IN THE STORE. IT WAS THE FACT THAT THESE STORES OFFER LIMITED AMOUNTS OF GROCERY AND FOOD OPPORTUNITIES TO THESE FOOD DESERTS, UM, IN GROCERY DESERTS. AND THAT HAVING BOTH OF THEM NEXT TO EACH OTHER WOULDN'T BE, UM, CONDUCIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, THERE'S SEVERAL GAS STATIONS IN THIS AREA THAT WOULD PROVIDE TRUE COMPETITION TO THEM THAT WAS NOT BOUGHT UP AND WAS NOT INTENDED HERE. UM, THIS IS NOT A GAS DESERT. UH, THIS IS A SMALL LOT, UM, THAT THINK, I THINK NEEDS TO BE APPROPRIATELY FITTED. UM, AND GIVEN THE DENIAL GIVES THEM TIME TO MAKE THE SITE PLAN, UM, FIT BETTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ITS ADJACENCY TO, UM, THE RESIDENCES THAT ARE THERE, COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT? UM, THIS IS NOT A PERFECT CASE, BUT A DENIAL HERE IS A VERY CLEAR SIGNAL THAT WE'RE GONNA LET PERFECT BE THE ENEMY OF GOOD. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER? SEEING NONE. LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE PLEASE. I, I HAVE, UM, PLEASE, COMMISSIONER BLA IS IN LISTENING TO ALL OF THIS, IS THERE THAT, THAT SEEMS AS THOUGH THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO NOT DENY IT, NOT APPROVE IT, BUT TO HOLD IT AND TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO WORK OUT THE BUFFERING ISSUES, UM, AND THEN BRING IT BACK. A OPPOSED TO HAVING A DENIAL, WHICH MEANS THEY HAVE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN AND I, I, CAN I MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? NO, I CAN'T. COMMISSIONER BLAIR, I CAN IF IT FAILS, IF THIS, IF THIS MOTION FAILS, YES, YOU CAN. BUT A MOTION TO HOLD TO A DATE CERTAIN WOULD TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THE MOTION TO DENY IT. WOULD, IT WOULD. SO THAT WOULD BE THE MOTION THAT THE BODY VOTES ON IF THERE'S A MOTION TO HOLD TO A DATE CERTAIN, BUT YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DENY BECAUSE IT WOULD BE CONTRARY. SO I CAN, I CAN MAKE A MOTION TO HOLD TO A SAFE A DATE CERTAIN WITHIN WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WITH ALL PARTIES OR TO WORK TOGETHER TO BETTER THE, THE, THE SITE AND, AND PUT THE BUFFERING IN AS IT NEEDS TO BE. UM, A MOTION TO HOLD TO A DATE CERTAIN WOULD TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THE MOTION TO DENY AND WHAT WOULD BE ON THE FLOOR FOR THE BODY TO DECIDE? YEAH. HE'S STATING YOU CANNOT DO THAT. I CAN'T DO THAT. YOU CANNOT? NO. OKAY. THIS, THIS FIRST MOTION HAS TO FAIL. OKAY, THANKS. NO, YOU CAN'T. THE, YEAH, THE MOTION TO HOLD WOULD MY APOLOGIES BE THE, THE MOTION THAT THE BODY VOTES. OKAY. I JUST A, A THING TO ADD FROM THE STAFF PERSPECTIVE, AGAIN, SINCE THE MOTION WAS DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE, UM, THERE'S BEEN A FEW INSTANCES IN THE PAST YEAR WHERE THAT'S THE MOTION THAT'S BEEN MADE. UM, AND THE APPLICANT REFILES PRETTY MUCH MONDAY MORNING. UM, AND, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M REALLY ON TOP OF CASE ASSIGNMENTS. I ASSIGN THEM TO THE SAME CASE PLANNER 'CAUSE THEY ALREADY KNOW THE SITE AND IT'S BACK BEFORE THE BODY. LIKE, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THEY DON'T EVEN NEED TO GO TO ZRT BEFORE IT GOES BACK TO CPC. SO, YOU KNOW, AND, AND OF COURSE THAT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT. YEAH. IT'S NOT A BIG CHANGE. YEAH. BUT, BUT YEAH. BUT THEN ISN'T THAT, ISN'T THAT CHARGING THE APPLICANT TWICE? CORRECT. SO HOLDING THE CASE TO A DATE CERTAIN WOULD GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE, TO GO TO, TO DO THE SAME THING YOU'RE SAYING WITHOUT THE COST? YEAH. THANK YOU. DID YOU MAKE THAT MOTION? I AM MAKING THE MOTION TO HOLD THIS CASE TO A DATE CERTAIN. AND, AND, AND, AND I KNOW AND SHE, SHE'S GONNA GIVE IT ON, UM, NOVEMBER THE FIRST. THE FIRST, WHAT WAS IT? NOVEMBER 7TH. SEVENTH. WHO'S SOMEBODY SECOND IT. SECOND IT. OKAY. SO NOW WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS, UH, THE YOU AND, AND ANY MOTION. I HAVE A SECOND. SO I HAVE COMMENTS. YOU DO, PLEASE. THEY'RE GONNA COME BACK THERE. THERE REALLY ARE. AND IT, AND IT'S, AND IT'S GONNA BE RIGHT BACK BEFORE YOU, [07:10:01] AND WE'RE GONNA BE RIGHT BACK HERE, UM, IN ANOTHER YEAR LOOKING AT THE SAME PROJECT. AND THIS PROCESS GIVES THEM A OPPORTUNITY TO BE BACK IN A FEW, IN A MONTH, IN A MONTH AND A HALF OPPOSED TO A YEAR OR SIX MONTHS. IT'S MORE COST EFFECTIVE THAN, IT'S A EASIER WAY TO DO BUSINESS WITH DALLAS THAN TO DENY IT WITHOUT PREJUDICE. UM, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, UH, UM, BECAUSE I, I JUST FEEL THAT THIS IS A BETTER WAY TO DO IT AND THAT THE BUFFERING AND THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, YOU CAN GO BACK TO THEM TOMORROW AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT I NEED. AND THEN IF THAT, IF THAT DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A, UM, A BETTER DESIGN, THEN YOU COULD ALSO SAY, I'VE DONE EVERYTHING I CAN DO. I HAVE A QUICK COMMENT. UH, I WAS GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION TO, UH, DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE. UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL. UM, AND I, I FOLLOW THE, THE RATIONALE OF COMMISSIONER HERBERT. UH, BUT I, I WAS HEDGING THERE AT THE END BECAUSE COMMISSIONER HERBERT, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU OPENED THE DOOR THERE AT THE END OF YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT POSSIBLY SEEING THE CASE AGAIN. AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE COMMISSIONER VALE NOW HAS KIND OF STEPPED INTO THAT, THAT THAT THRESHOLD. SO I'M KIND OF IN LIMBO HERE. IF YOU, IF YOU THINK THAT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO SEE THIS AGAIN, AND I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY A WISE MOVE, IF NOT, THEN LET'S JUST VOTE IT UP OR DOWN. YEAH. SO I, KNOWING THE AREA, KNOWING HOW CLOSE THIS IS TO CAMP WISDOM AND, AND THE RED BIRD MALL, KNOWING THE OTHER GAS STATIONS AROUND IT, UM, I, I THINK THEY NEEDED MORE TIME THAN JUST, UM, A HEARING TO GET THIS PLAN TOGETHER, UM, AND CONSIDER IT IN HOPE. SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THAT MOTION. MR. CHAIR THEN, THEN, WOULD YOU THINK A DECEMBER DATE WOULD BE A BETTER DATE? I DON'T, I DON'T WITH THANKSGIVING AND THEN THE HOLIDAYS, I DON'T. NO, I DON'T. THEN, UM, WHEN DO YOU THINK THAT IT, YOU, YOU, IT COULD COME BACK? I JUST DON'T, UH, UH, HERE'S MY RATIONALE. I'M NOT TRYING TO STEP ON YOUR TOES. MM-HMM. . UM, BUT HERE'S MY RATIONALE. IF THE APPLICANT'S GONNA COME RIGHT BACK, I UNDERSTAND THEN IT, IT MAKES, IT'S MORE, IT WOULD MAKE MORE PRUDENT SENSE TO NOT TO BE, TO SHOW THAT DALLAS IS, I I EXPLAINED SEVERAL ISSUES I HAD WITH THE APPLICANT. UM, I DON'T THINK THOSE ISSUES CAN BE RESOLVED IN A YEAR PERIOD. OKAY. SO WE'RE DISCUSSING NOW HOLDING THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL NOVEMBER. OR YOU, DO YOU WANT TO ADJUST THAT TO DECEMBER? OR YOU'RE GONNA KEEP THE NOVEMBER, NOVEMBER 7TH? YES. I'LL NOVEMBER 7TH. AND, UH, COMMISSIONER FORESITE SECOND OF THE MOTION. I'LL LET YOU F GO FIRST IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON, ON HOLDING THAT. I, I WOULD VOTE, UH, TO GO ALONG WITH COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, UH, ON THIS CASE AND, AND, AND, AND ALLOW THEM TO, UH, YOU KNOW, OPEN THEIR BUSINESS. BUT I'M, I THINK THAT AT THE VERY LEAST A GOOD COMPROMISE IS THAT WE HOLD THIS AND GIVE THEM TIME TO WORK THIS OUT. I, I, I, I FEEL THAT THIS IS A REPUTABLE BUSINESS HERE, AND I THINK THAT THEY HAVE A REP, A GOOD BUSINESS PLAN. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER WHEELER. THE HARDEST THING ABOUT THIS JOB RIGHT HERE IS SAYING THAT WE JUST HAVE TO VOTE ON THIS PARTICULAR LAND, RIGHT? UM, AND I'M GONNA GO, I WOULD, I'M GONNA GO AGAINST THAT, THE RECOMMENDATION THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED TO HOLD THIS OFF YOU. IF AN OTHER PART, IF, IF, IF THE PROPERTY OWNER, IF THE PROPERTY OWNER OWNS MULTIPLE OF THESE, AND AS WE KNOW IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT, RIGHT? IF THEY'RE A BAD ACTOR AT ONE, WHAT MAKE US THINK THAT THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE A GOOD ACTOR AT THIS ONE. IF THEY HAVE GAMING MACHINES AT ONE, WHAT MAKE ME THINK THEY'RE NOT GONNA HAVE WOMAN EARTH. SO, YEAH. SO THEY, THIS IS NOT, THIS IS NOT A SINGLE USE OWNER. THIS IS AN OWNER THAT OWNS THROUGHOUT THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT, AND IN, IN BOTH 8, 5, 7 3, THERE'S GAMING MACHINES THAT WE ARE CONSTANTLY FIGHTING AGAINST. AND THAT HAS THE, THE OTHER PROPERTIES THEY OWN HAVE GAMING MACHINES [07:15:01] AND, AND THINGS. AND CODE ENFORCEMENT IS NOT DOING NOTHING. SO WE'RE GIVING THEM A CHANCE TO, TO VIOLATE AGAIN. RIGHT? AND THAT'S WHAT HE'S GETTING AT. THAT'S WHAT HE'S GETTING AT. COMMISSIONER WHEELER. THE MOTION IS A MOTION TO HOLD TO NOVEMBER THE SEVENTH. THAT'S WHAT I'M GONNA, UH, THAT IS, I'M GONNA VOTE AGAINST THAT, THAT THAT IS THE MOTION. AND, UH, ALSO, I JUST WANNA POINT OUT THAT THE ONLY USE UNDER CONSIDERATION WITH THIS SUP APPLICATION IS A SERVICE STATION, UM, WHICH USUALLY WE DON'T SEE SUVS FOR, BUT THAT IS REQUIRED BY SUP AND THIS PD. SO, AND THANK YOU. BUT, AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST FOR THE, THE, THE GAMING MACHINES, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, WELL, THERE'S, THERE'S A LOOPHOLE IN THE LAW, UH, ALTHOUGH I I'LL SAY FOR THE RECORD THAT, UH, THERE'S NOT A SINGLE ONE IN DISTRICT FIVE. AND, UM, SO THE, THE APPLICANTS, UH, DO NOT PUT THEM IN THERE. AND THEY KNOW THAT THERE COULD BE PROBLEMATIC. AND SO I'M, UH, I'M SURPRISED THAT THAT'S EVEN AN ISSUE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE TODAY. UH, BUT ANYWAY, I JUST, UH, I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE IF WE, IF THIS, IF AND WHEN THIS COMES BACK, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, FOLLOWED BY MR. RUBEN, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION TO HOLD. WE'VE HAD ALL THIS DISCUSSION. THE FIRST TIME WE HEARD ABOUT GAMING MACHINES IS JUST NOW I DON'T REALLY KNOW THE LEGALITY OF 'EM. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY EVIDENCE OF IT. IF THAT'S REALLY AN ISSUE FOR COMMISSIONERS, THEN PERHAPS WE COULD SEE SOMETHING ABOUT THAT AND WE COULD GET SOME BRIEFING ON IT, BECAUSE IT'S REALLY SORT OF UNFAIR TO THOSE OF US WHO ARE NOT DEALING WITH THOSE SORT OF ISSUES ALL THE TIME TO SAY, OH, WELL NOW IT'S AN ISSUE. AND, AND, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY IF IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE LEGAL. AND THAT JUSTIFIES IN MY MIND, HOLDING THIS. SO IF THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED THAT MAY IMPACT AN SUP AND THE STANDARD WE APPLY TO S SUVS, THAT WE ARE GIVEN THAT OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER THAT EVIDENCE. UM, BECAUSE WHAT I'VE HEARD TODAY DOESN'T MAKE ME WANNA SAY NO TO THIS CASE, AND THAT SEEMS TO BE A JUSTIFICATION FOR A HOLD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. RUBEN. CALL BY COMMISSIONER SCHOCK. YEAH, I WILL SAY ON, ON SOME CASES, I HAVE A GOOD IDEA ON, ON WHETHER THE CAKE IS FULLY BAKED OR NOT, OR WHETHER A HOLD MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL. AND, AND, AND ON THIS ONE, I'M, I, I'M STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT AND YOU KNOW, THE PERSON WHO I KNOW THAT THAT IS CLOSEST TO IT IS COMMISSIONER HERBERT SINCE HE HAS WORKED THE CASE AND WORKED, UM, WITH THE APPLICANT. SO I AM INCLINED TO DEFER TO HIS WISDOM ON HOLDING VERSUS DENYING IT. HOWEVER, I, I, MAYBE COMMISSIONER HERBERT COULD GIVE US A LITTLE MORE MEAT ON WHATEVER PATH HE SEES AS IDEAL HERE. IF IT IS A DENIAL, WHAT WORK REMAINS TO BE DONE, SINCE IT WOULD BE A DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE, OR IF IT WERE TO BE A HOLD, WHAT WOULD THE IDEAL HOLD PERIOD LOOK LIKE? SINCE NONE OF US HAVE BEEN WORKING THIS ONE IN DETAIL, LIKE HE HAS. I THINK IT STARTS WITH THE, THE, THE, THE SITE, THE, THE LAND USE, RIGHT? THE, THE TROUBLE I'M HAVING WITH THE LAND USE IS THE APPLICANT, THE OPERATOR, RIGHT? MY QUESTION ABOUT BROKEN EQUIPMENT WAS RESPONDED WITH. THAT'S AN INDUSTRY ISSUE. THAT'S NOT WE ARE GONNA FIX IT. THAT'S NOT, WE HAVE A PLAN FOR IT. THAT'S A INDUSTRY ISSUE. EVERY QUESTION I ASKED CAME BACK WITH, UM, NOT AN ANSWER, BUT AN EXCUSE. THOSE ITEMS ARE IMPORTANT TO THE RESIDE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND IN MY AREA BECAUSE A CLEAN SITE IS A SAFE SITE. UM, AND IT REDUCES CRIME, IT REDUCES VAGRANT AND SO ON. I DON'T THINK THE APPLICANT UNDERSTANDS THAT. UM, AND I HAVE NO TOOLS TO HOLD THEM TO THAT OTHER THAN GETTING IT RIGHT AT THIS HORSESHOE. UM, I DON'T THINK WHAT'S PRESENTED TO US TODAY, THE SITE PLAN THAT'S PRESENTED TO US TODAY, THE LOCATION OF IT, THE PROXIMITY TO THE SCHOOL, I MEAN THE, THE CHURCHES, UM, DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREA AND THE MAJOR THOROUGH FLOOR OF CAMP WISDOM, UM, AND, UH, BY RAY BIRD MALL. I JUST DON'T THINK WHERE I'M AT TODAY THAT THIS IS [07:20:01] A GOOD SITE AND THAT I CAN BE CONVINCED OF THAT IN TWO WEEKS. UM, I THINK THEY NEED TIME TO THINK IT THROUGH, UM, AND CONSIDER, UH, HOW THEY WANT TO PRESENT THIS PROJECT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH OH, PLEASE, COMMISSIONER. UH, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. UM, UH, I THINK FROM WHAT I HEARD THAT THERE WAS, UH, SOME COMMUNICATION BY OTHER PLAN COMMISSIONERS THAT THEY WOULD FEEL DIFFERENTLY IF WE COULD WORK ON THIS A LITTLE BIT. UM, AND THEN IN LIGHT OF COMMISSIONER WHEELER'S COMMENTS, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A WHOLE LOT MORE BEHIND THE SCENES HERE THAT I, I DON'T KNOW, I'M IN THE DARK ABOUT. AND, UM, I WOULDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE VOTING ON SOMETHING THAT I JUST AM FRANKLY IN THE DARK ABOUT. SO I, I, I THINK THAT THIS IS A, EVERYBODY KNOWS I DON'T LIKE HOLDING CASES . UM, BUT THERE ARE TIMES WHERE I THINK IT'S APPLICABLE AND I THINK THIS IS ONE. OKAY. UH, AND ONE LAST COMMENT FOR ME. UH, YOU KNOW, AFTER PERSONALLY DOING MAYBE A HUNDRED OF THESE, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS IS FOR AN SUP AND I, I VERY QUICKLY FOUND WHAT AN AMAZING INCENTIVE IT IS FOR THESE FOLKS TO GET THAT SUP AND TO MAINTAIN THEIR PROPERTIES AND, AND EVEN MORE SO FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS. UH, WHEN, WHEN THIS PROCESS BEGAN 10 YEARS AGO, UH, WE HAD A RUSH OF PROBABLY TWO DOZEN OF THESE IN DISTRICT FIVE. AND I WILL TELL YOU, A LOT OF THOSE STORES NEEDED A LOT OF WORK, NEEDED A LOT OF ROOF REPAIR, NEEDED A LOT OF PATCHING, AND IT WAS THAT SUP HANGING, YOU KNOW, DANGLING OVER THEIR HEAD THAT ALLOWED THEM ALL TO REALLY RISE UP. UH, AND, UH, SO THIS IS FOR AN SUP, YOU KNOW, ANY ISSUE, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE ISSUES THAT I THINK YOU MAY SEEM, UH, MAYBE PROBLEMATIC, UH, CAN, CAN BE ADDRESSED WITH A TIMEFRAME OF AN SUP. SO THEY COME BACK. BUT WITH THAT, I THINK WE'RE READY FOR A VOTE. UH, THE MOTION IS TO, UH, KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. HOLD THE MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT TO NOVEMBER 7TH, MADE BY COMMISSIONER BLAIR, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT. WE'LL TAKE A RECORD ROAD ON THAT. DISTRICT ONE. YES. DISTRICT TWO, NO. DISTRICT THREE, NO. DISTRICT FOUR. HE'S GONNA TRY TO VOTE, BUT HE LEFT. UH, DISTRICT FIVE. YES. DISTRICT SIX? YES. DISTRICT SEVEN, NO. DISTRICT DATE? YES. DISTRICT NINE, ABSENT. DISTRICT 10? YES. DISTRICT 11? YES. DISTRICT 12 VACANT. DISTRICT 13. YES. DISTRICT 14? YES. AND PLACE 15. NO. MOTION PASSES. WE'LL GO TO CASE. UM, COMMISSIONERS, ARE WE READY FOR, UH, DINNER BREAK? MM-HMM. ? YES. OKAY. LET'S, LET'S, LET'S JUST GO PICK, GET OUR PIZZA AND COME BACK. HOW ABOUT THAT? LET'S TAKE 15 MINUTES TO GO AND WE CAN EAT WHILE WE WORK. COMMISSIONERS, LET'S GET BACK ON THE RECORD. I THINK WE HAVE ONE MORE, RIGHT? 16, 17. YEAH. ARE WE GOING 17 OR 13? GOING TO 16. OKAY. OH, THAT'S RIGHT. WHICH ONE WAS THAT? 13? YEAH, LET'S DO THAT ONE. YEAH, LET'S GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE TAKE YOUR SEAT. WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON THE RECORD. THAT'S [07:25:50] IS ONLINE. OH, HE'S ONLINE. OKAY. AS EARLY POSSIBLE. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. WE NEED THREE MORE COMMISSIONERS. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. OKAY, WE DO HAVE EIGHT IN THE ROOM. UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 13. THANK YOU. ITEM 13 IS CASE Z. 2 34 DASH 1 78. AN APPLICATION FOR TH THREE A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT AND PROPERTY ZONED IN L OH ONE. LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT ON THE NO LINE OF EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, EAST LOCKHAVEN DRIVE. STAFF. RECOMMENDATIONS. APPROVAL. THANK YOU, SIR. NO ONE, NO ONE IS HERE. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT? DO YOU HAVE MOTION? I DO. AND APOLOGIES FOR NOT BEING BETTER ORGANIZED LAST TIME. WE'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF AN UNUSUAL ONE HERE, BUT, UM, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 34 DASH 1 78, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. UM, HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL NOVEMBER 7TH AND RE ADVERTISE FOR AN SUP FOR A PRIVATE RECREATION FACILITY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU, SIR. WE'LL [16. 24-2918 An application for an MF-1(A) Multifamily Subdistrict on property zoned a CC Community Commercial Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 595, the South Dallas/Fair Park Special Purpose District, on the southeast line of Spring Avenue, southwest of the intersection of Spring Avenue and Pine Spring Connection.] GO TO 16 NOW. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 16, KZ 2 34 DASH 2 64. AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF ONE A FROM MULTIFAMILY SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED A CC COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 95, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF SPRING AVENUE, SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF SPRING AVENUE AND PINE SPRING CONNECTION STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU, SIR. UH, NO ONE IS HERE. NO ONE ONLINE? I THINK WE DID. WE DO HAVE SOMEONE ONLINE. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS IT MR. STEWART OR WHO'S MS. MS. MS. UM, MS. CLAY. MS. CLAY, WE'RE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS. BLESS YOU. YOU, WHEN YOU NEED TO UNMUTE, UNMUTE YOURSELF. SORRY. PERFECT. THANK YOU. HELLO. THANK YOU ALL FOR HAVING ME. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I'M INTERESTED IN BUILDING A DUPLEX IN THAT AREA, THUS THE PROPERTY, UM, THAT I OWN IS ALREADY IN BETWEEN TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND THERE ARE OTHER NEW AND UPCOMING PROJECTS IN THE AREA. DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS, MS. CLAY? YES. COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. SEEING NONE. UM, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION IN THE MATTER OF CASE NUMBER? UM, Z 2 34 DASH 4 64? I MOVED TO, UH, I SAID SIX FOUR IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 34 DASH 2 64. I MOVED TO, UH, KEEP THIS, KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND, UM, HOLD THIS MATTER UP ON ADVISEMENT AND UNTIL NOVEMBER 7TH. SEVENTH, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? YES, WE'RE HOLDING [07:30:01] UP ON AN ADVISEMENT SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A COMMU, UH, HAVE SOME, SOME COMMUNITY INPUT, UM, BECAUSE THERE IS NOT ANY DUPLEXES IN CLOSE PROXIMITY AND WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THE COMMUNITY IS ON BOARD WITH HAVING A DUPLEX OR AGAINST HAVING A DUPLEX IN THAT LOCATION. THERE IS NEW DEVELOPMENT GOING ON IN THAT AREA, BUT THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE GOING ON ARE ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, LITERALLY RIGHT TO RIGHT IN THE CONNECTION WITH THIS. ALL THE, THOSE, ALL THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, HOUSER, PLEASE. WITHOUT A QUESTION FOR STAFF FOR MR. CLINTON. UM, MR. CLINTON DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS APPLICANT, IS THAT NOT A DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO I BELIEVE I JUST HEARD A COMMENT THAT THERE'S NO DUPLEXES, SO YOU WANNA COMMENT ON THAT? UM, SO FOR CLARITY, THERE'S, IT'S A DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT, BUT IT ALLOWS OTHER USES, SO IT'S NOT A DUPLEX USE. MR. CLINTON, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE'S CONSTRUCTION GOING ON ON THAT TRACK? WE'RE DISCUSSING? THAT LOOKS LIKE RESIDENTIAL TO ME. YES. SO IT IS RESIDENTIAL. UM, BUT AGAIN, IT, IT, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE NEW CONSTRUCTION. UM, I, I WAS OUT TO THE SITE, BUT I DID NOT NOTICE ANY CONSTRUCTION DURING THAT TIME. HOWEVER, THE EXISTING USES, UM, AGAIN, THEY MAY BE UNDER DU THE DUPLEX ZONING, BUT THE, THE SPECIFIC USE IS, UH, SINGLE FAMILY AND WE'RE WAY PAST STAFF QUESTIONS , BUT UM, I DID JUST WANNA SAY THAT YES, THERE IS A DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET, UM, THAT ALLOWS FOR BOTH SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX USES. SO, UH, A DUPLEX COULD BE CONSTRUCTED ON THOSE DUPLEX ZONE LOTS ACROSS THE STREET. COMMISSIONER WHEELER AND THAT BECAUSE, UM, MY COMMENT IS THAT I'M NOT LOOKING AT GOOGLE. I'M IN THE AREA EVERY SINGLE DAY THAT THEY ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT ARE BEING BUILT. AND EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A SUB A DISTRICT, THERE IS NO DUPLEXES IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THAT. AND THIS PARTICULAR SITE IS NOT ZONED FOR DUPLEX. EVERYTHING THAT'S NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT IS BEING BUILT IS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND THEY BUILT FIVE IN THE LAST THREE WEEKS. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER? SEE? NONE OF IS FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. LET'S GO TO THE, UM, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT. THANKS, Y ALL. THANK YOU, SIR. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. ITEM NUMBER [17. 24-2927 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.] 17 IS 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 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 STAFF. RECOMMENDATION IS FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND THE ZO OAC RECOMMENDATION IS NOT TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM HAS STEPPED OUT OF THE CHAMBER COMMISSIONERS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT? DO YOU HAVE MOTION? UH, YES, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. UH, AFTER DISCUSSING THIS WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, I MOVE TO, UH, IN THE MATTER OF DCA 2 0 1 DASH 0 1 1. I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN, HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER THE 24TH. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HOUSE FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSIONS? NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES IT. GO TO NUMBER 18, PLEASE. NO, LET'S READ IT IN PLEASE. GOOD. UH, AFTERNOON, UH, MR CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE CITY, UH, PLAN, COMMISSION. MY NAME IS GUI, I'M WITH THE SCIENCE, UH, UH, TEAM. [18. 24-2928 An application to create “The Frontier Subdistrict” within the Downtown Special Provision Sign District on a property zoned Planned Development District 193 Heavy Commercial District, on the northwest corner of McKinney Avenue at St. Paul Street, along Akard Street and Cedar Springs Road.] UM, ITEM, UH, 18 IS AN APPLICATION TO CREATE THE FRONTIER SUB-DISTRICT WITH THE DOWNTOWN SPECIAL PROVISION SIGN DISTRICT ON A PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, 1 93 HEAVY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH, UH, WEST CORNER OF, UH, MCKINNEY AVENUE AT ST. UM PAUL STREET, ALONG ER STREET IN, UH, SU SPRING ROAD. STAFF. RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO ALL SIGNS ON THE [07:35:01] PROPERTY BEING, UH, TURNED OFF FROM, UH, 10:00 PM TO 6:00 AM SUNDAY TO, UH, THURSDAY, AND FROM, UH, 11:59 PM TO 6:00 AM FRIDAY TO, UH, SATURDAY. THE SPECIAL ASSIGNED DISTRICT, UH, ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS, UH, RECOMMENDED, UH, APPROVAL. UH, PLEASE, UH, BE ADVISED THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING DENIAL WITH THAT, UH, PREJUDICE FOR THIS APPLICATION. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO MAKE THE PRESENTATION? I DON'T THINK SO. I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY UNLESS ANYONE REQUESTS IT. NO REQUESTS. UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? YEAH, READY FOR MOTION? WE ARE READY FOR MOTION. ALRIGHT. AND Z 2 34 DASH 2 64. I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. NO. OH, IT'S THIS ONE. I'M 18, SORRY. POINTED TO THIS ONE. TESTING US, SORRY. AND MATTER SPSD 2 23 DASH 0 0 3 MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DISMISS IT WITHOUT PREJUDICE. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR MOTION. AND COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND. I HAVE, UH, UH, DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE ANY DISCUSSION. IT'S PURSUANT TO THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. THEY WANTED TO WITHDRAW IT, BUT THERE'S NOT REALLY MECHANISM TO DO THAT. EXCELLENT. UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AND YOUR OPPOSED AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU, SIR. TEXAS TO [SUBDIVISION DOCKET - Consent Items] OUR SUBDIVISION DOCK CAN SEND AGENDA ITEMS CONSISTING OF CASES 19 THROUGH 24. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS AND EVERYONE, THE CONSENT AS IN THAT CONSISTS OF SIX ITEMS. ITEM 19 S 2 34 DASH 180 1, ITEM 20 S 2 3 4 DASH 180 2, ITEM 21 S 2 3 4 DASH 180 3, ITEM 22 S 2 3 4 DASH 180 4, ITEM 23 S 2 3 4 DASH 180 5, ITEM 24 S 2 34 DASH 180 6. ALL CASES HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR A HEARING AT THIS TIME. AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS. ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THOSE ITEMS? OKAY, SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? NINE 19 THROUGH 24 MOTION MATTER 19 THROUGH 24 THAT THE MATTER 19 THROUGH 24 THAT WE JUST READ INTO THE RECORD, MOVE THAT WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THEM. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER BLAIR FOR YOUR SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. A. YOU OPPOSED? I HAVET 25 PLEASE. [25. 24-2935 An application to replat a 0.326-acre tract of land containing part of Lots 4, 5 and 6 in City Block F/7238 to create two 0.163-acre (7,094.92-square foot) lots on property located on Duluth Street at Guymon Street, northeast corner.] ITEM 25 S 2 3 4 DASH 180 7. AN APPLICATION TO REPLY. THE 0.362 ACRE THREE 0.326 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING PART OF LOTS, FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX IN CITY BLOCK F OVER 7, 2 3 8 TO CREATE TWO 0.163 ACRE. THAT IS 7094.92 SQUARE FOOT LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED, LOCATED ON DULUTH STREET AT GUYMAN STREET NORTHEAST CORNER. 27 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2024. WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLYING OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET ARE AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, WE DO HAVE ONE REGISTERED SPEAKER ONLINE. IS HE ONLINE? YES. MR. FLUKER, ARE YOU ONLINE, SIR? [07:40:08] MR. STEVE? UH, FLUKER, IF YOU CAN HEAR US, ARE WE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS, SIR? I HAVE NO COMMENTS AT, AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE, WE CAN HEAR YOU BUT WE CAN'T SEE YOU YET. I'M ON MY PHONE, BUT I CAN'T SEEM TO GET THE CAMERA TO TURN ON. I AM SORRY. I DON'T SEE AN OPTION TO TURN MY CAMERA ON. OKAY. OKAY. UH, AND PLEASE STAND BY. I, I THINK, UH, YOU'RE THE APPLICANT, IS THAT CORRECT? I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT, YES. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, COMMISSIONERS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF S 2 34 DASH 180 7 I'LL MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSIONS. SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR. SAY AYE. YOU OPPOSED AYES HAVE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ITEM 26 [26. 24-2936 An appeal of the Landmark Commission’s decision of denial without prejudice to replace existing slate shingle roof with DaVinci Province Synthetic Slate in the color "Vineyard".] IS CA 2 3 4 3 9, 5. AND APPEAL OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION OF A DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO REPLACE EXISTING SHINGLE ROOF WITH DAVINCI PROVINCE SYNTHETIC SLATE. AND THE COLOR ARD STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. LANDMARK COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MOORE. COMMISSIONERS. THIS IS AN APPEAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, WHICH WAS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION. AT ITS HEARING ON JULY 1ST, 2024, ON SEPTEMBER 5TH, 2024, THE APPLICANT SENT AN EMAIL TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION STAFF STATING THAT THE APPLICANT WISHES TO WITHDRAW THEIR APPEAL. STAFF FORWARDED THIS EMAIL TO, UH, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS. HOWEVER, CHAPTER 51 A DOES NOT PROVIDE A MECHANISM FOR AN APPLICANT TO WITHDRAW THE LANDMARK COMMISSION APPEAL. ONCE IT HAS BEEN FILED, THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS ADVISED THAT A MOTION AFFIRMING THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION OF THE DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE WILL HAVE THE SAME EFFECT AS WITHDRAWAL. DO I HAVE A MOTION? IT'S A SEVEN. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO? IT'S SEVEN. IT'S NOT DISTRICT SEVEN. IT'S DISTRICT 14. IT'S 14. WELL, THERE WE GO. , I'M NOT IN THE MATTER OF CA 2 3 4 DASH 3 9 5. I MOVE THAT WE AFFIRM, AFFIRM, AFFIRM THE LANDMARK, UH, COMMISSION'S DECISION. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGTON FOR YOUR MOTION. AND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEE YOU. NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. UH, DO WE WANT TO ATTEMPT [APPROVAL OF MINUTES] THE MINUTES? COMMISSIONER HANFORD. SO, AS WE KNOW, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF COMPLEX MINUTES. YOU ALL RECEIVED AMENDED MINUTES FOR THE AUGUST 8TH AND AUGUST 22ND EARLIER. IF IT SUITS THE BODY, I WOULD MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE AUGUST 8TH AND AUGUST 22ND MAINTENANCE AS AMENDED THE SEPTEMBER 5TH AS SUBMITTED AND HOLD JUNE 17TH IN JULY 25TH, UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 7TH. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND AND, UH, FOR ALL YOUR WORK ON THE MINUTES. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, THE DATE TO HOLD IT. UH, CAN YOU, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT AGAIN? SECOND, THE SEVENTH WE HAVE NO, IT'S THE 10TH. THE 10TH. KEEP CONFLATING OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER. ME TOO. OCTOBER 10TH. OCTOBER 10TH. [07:45:01] DO YOU NEED HER TO REPEAT THE, DID YOU GET THE, DID YOU GET ALL THAT? YES. OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. IN YOUR POST, AYES HAVE IT, UH, COMMISSIONERS BEFORE WE ADJOURN, UH, JUST LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THIS IS AT MR. MOORE LAST EVENING WITH US. TALK ABOUT, SO IT, IT IS, SO SAY IT ISN'T. SO IT IS. SO, AND I, I WANT TO THANK MR. MOORE FOR, UH, HIS, UH, ALL HIS HARD WORK AND, UH, VERY SAGE ADVICE AS ALWAYS. AND I'M GONNA MISS SEEING YOU OVER THERE, RIGHT OVER THE SHOULDER IN GOOD HANDS. UH, WE ARE IN GOOD HANDS. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME I'VE, I'VE, UH, HAD THE PLEASURE OF, UM, OF SERVING WITH MS. MORRIS. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT AGAIN, BUT I, I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR HARD WORK, WORK. YOU REALLY TOOK CARE OF US. I THANK YOU FOR THAT. MR. MOORE'S NOT LEAVING THE CITY OF DALLAS. I JUST, HE'S, HE'S GOING TO BE IN THE BUILDING SO WE CAN STILL TRACK HIM DOWN AND WE'LL, UH, I'M GONNA DO A LOT OF LEGISLATIVE CARRIE ROGERS. YEAH. SO YOU'LL SEE. WE LOOK FORWARD TO BEING IN CONTACT WITH YOU. MR. MOORE. YES. YOU LOOKING FORWARD? YES. THANK YOU. UH, BEING A BABY COMMISSIONER, YOU ARE VERY HELPFUL FOR ME, UM, IN SEVERAL WAYS. BUT CAN WE ALSO SAY WELCOME TO, UM, MS. MORRISON FOR THOSE OF US WHO HAVEN'T WORKED WITH HER AND DON'T KNOW HER, . UM, I HOPE YOU ENJOY THE RIDE. BUCKLE UP. HAVE YOU GAVE READY MR. CHAIR? IF YOU'LL ALLOW ME PLEASE TO INTRODUCE MYSELF TO THE COMMISSION. UM, I'M LAURA MORRISON. I'VE BEEN WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS FOR, IT'LL BE NEARLY 16 YEARS. UM, AT THE END OF THIS YEAR, THIS WILL BE MY THIRD ROUND BEING THE LEGAL COUNSEL FOR THE PLAN COMMISSION. SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO, UM, DIVING BACK INTO ZONING WITH Y'ALL. SO THANKS FOR HAVING ME. AND YOU KNOW, AS DANIEL SAID, HE'LL STILL BE AROUND, SO, AND YOU'RE NICE. AND I'M HIS BOSS, SO SO I'M GLAD Y'ALL ENJOYED HIM. , THAT IS THE ANSWER. YOU CAN TAKE THAT AS A NO , BUT SHE'S STILL NICE. IT'S JUST NOT AS NICE, BUT NICE. CAN WE GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BLAIR. IT IS 6:31 PM COMMISSIONERS AND HAVE A GREAT EVENING . * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.