[00:00:04]
CAN YOU PLEASE TURN US OFF AT THE ROLL CALL?
[BRIEFINGS]
GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SCHOCK.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT HERE.
DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HERE AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBIN, I'M HERE.
UH, GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS.
TODAY IS THURSDAY, JANUARY 23RD.
IT IS 9:09 AM WELCOME TO THE BRIEFING OF THE DALLAS PLAN COMMISSION.
UH, LET'S TRY TO KEEP A BRISK PACE TODAY.
UH, ESPECIALLY THIS AFTERNOON.
UH, WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH, UH, THE VERY FIRST BRIEFING ITEM, WHICH IS AN OVERVIEW OF THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK AREA PLAN.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR, UH, VICE CHAIR, UH, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS PATRICK BLADES CHIEF PLANNER, UH, WITH NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY PLANNING.
I'M HAPPY TO PRESENT AN OVERVIEW OF THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK AREA PLAN.
UM, THIS IS JUST AN OVERVIEW AND A BRIEFING ON THE PLAN AND THE PROCESS.
UM, WE'RE ALWAYS OPEN TO FEEDBACK.
HOWEVER, WE ARE GONNA COME BACK TO YOU.
UM, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A COPY OF THE PLAN.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE AMPLE TIME TO REVIEW THE PLAN.
THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING IN FRONT OF CPC.
SO THIS IS AN OVERVIEW ON THE PROCESS AND THE BIG, UM, UM, THE BIG RECOMMENDATIONS OR THE BIG PICTURE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FROM IT.
UM, I'M GONNA BEGIN THE PRESENTATION WITH REMINDING EVERYONE, UM, ON THE COMMISSION, UM, THAT THIS IS THE SOUTH DALLAS AREA.
AND SO WHEN WE'RE ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, THIS IS NOT SOUTHERN DALLAS.
THIS IS THE SOUTH DALLAS AREA.
SO THE SAME WAY THAT YOU WOULD REFER, REFER, REFERENCE WEST DALLAS OR EAST DALLAS.
UM, THAT'S THE WAY THAT WE WOULD REFERENCE THIS AREA.
UM, I WOULD ALSO FRAME THE CONVERSATION, UM, AND MANY OF YOU COMMISSIONERS ARE AWARE, UM, UH, THE SOUTH DALLAS COMMUNITY, UM, HAS GONE THROUGH CONSIDERABLE COMMUNITY TRAUMA.
THERE IS A LOT OF HISTORIC INEQUITIES IN SOUTH DALLAS.
AND SO AS WE'RE HAVING THAT CONVERSATION, JUST WANNA BE MINDFUL OF THOSE HISTORIC INEQUITIES HERE IN SOUTH DALLAS.
UM, WITH THAT, UM, I'M HAPPY TO HAND THE PRESENTATION OFF TO MY COLLEAGUE, MS. LINDSAY JACKSON.
UH, MY NAME IS LINDSEY JACKSON, SENIOR PLANNER.
I'M EXCITED TO BE PRESENT TODAY.
SO WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.
UM, JUST GONNA DO A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF THE BACKGROUND AND THE HISTORY OF SOUTH DALLAS, UM, THE AREA PLAN AND THE ENGAGEMENT.
AND THEN I'LL HAND IT BACK TO PATRICK SO HE CAN REVIEW THE, UM, LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS.
I KNOW YOU ALL ARE EAGER TO HEAR.
AND WE'LL, UM, TALK ABOUT SOME IMPLEMENTATION THAT IS GOING ON IN REAL TIME, NEXT STEPS AND A BRIEF, UM, Q AND A.
SO, AS PATRICK MENTIONED, THIS IS SOUTH DALLAS.
AND JUST TO ORIENT YOU ALL, THE STAR IS WHERE, UM, SOUTH DALLAS IS LOCATED.
VERY ADJACENT, RIGHT ADJACENT TO THE, UM, FAIR PARK.
SO THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF PLANS OVER THE YEARS, UM, WITHIN SOUTH DALLAS.
ONE BEING THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR PLAN.
BACK IN 2001, WE'VE UM, HAD THE DART STATION AND THE HATCHER STATION PLAN.
AND MOST RECENTLY, UM, NOT A CITY OF DALLAS PLAN, BUT THE FAIR PARK, A MASTER PLAN IN 2020.
AND SO THERE'S ALL THIS PLANNING THAT'S BEEN GOING ON, AND THERE HAS BEEN A LACK OF IMPLEMENTATION.
AND SO IN 2020, COUNCIL MEMBER, UM, UA INITIATED A, UM, FIVE SIGNATURE MEMO FOR THE AREA PLAN AND THE AUTHORIZED HEARING PROCESS.
AND SO OF COURSE IN 2020 THE PANDEMIC OCCURRED AND, UM, THINGS GOT A LITTLE BIT THROWN OFF.
AND SO DURING THAT TIME, THEY WERE ABLE TO KINDA REGROUP A LITTLE BIT LATER AND COUNCIL MEMBER BAIDU PUT TOGETHER THE TASK FORCE.
AND SO JUST WANNA HIGHLIGHT THAT.
THIS, THESE ARE COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND STAKEHOLDERS, UM, THAT HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN SOUTH DALLAS.
UM, JUST TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT A FEW PEOPLE, UM, SCOTTY SMITH IS OUR CHAIRPERSON.
[00:05:02]
HE IS A REAL ESTATE, UM, BROKER AND DEVELOPER.UM, COMMISSIONER WHEELER AT THAT TIME, SHE WAS OUR, UH, CO-CHAIR PERSON.
NOW SHE IS THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR DISTRICT SEVEN.
UM, AND JUST VARIOUS DIFFERENT GROUPS FROM TREK, UM, REPRESENTATIVES TO FRAZIER REVITALIZATION, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS LIKE QUEEN CITY.
UM, BRIAN WELLEN WITH FAIR PARK FIRST.
SO THERE IS JUST A MULTITUDE OF DIFFERENT, UM, PEOPLE THAT REPRESENT SOUTH DALLAS FROM FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS.
YEAH, AND I JUST WANTED TO, TO HIGHLIGHT HERE, UH, WHEN YOU SEE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND WHEN YOU SEE THE PLAN, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT STAFF JUST SAT DOWN AND SAID, THESE ARE OUR IDEAS.
THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT CAME FROM THESE COMMUNITY MEMBERS IN SOUTH DALLAS.
UM, THEY WERE ALL RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THEY SAID, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO DO.
UM, BECAUSE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT SHOW UP IN SOUTH DALLAS AND SAY, WE'RE HERE TO HELP.
HERE ARE SOME GREAT IDEAS THAT WE THINK CAN CHANGE SOUTH DALLAS, UM, STAFF'S APPROACH IN THIS AREA PLAN WAS NOT TO DO THAT.
WAS TO, I MEAN, MS. JACKSON AND I, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN THERE FOR THREE YEARS.
THIS IS NOT US PARACHUTING IN AND SAYING, THESE ARE SOME GREAT IDEAS TO, TO, TO HELP SOUTH DALLAS.
THIS IS US STANDING IN THAT ROOM OR SITTING IN THAT ROOM LISTENING TO WHAT THOSE COMMUNITY MEMBERS SAID THEY WANTED.
AND THEN FIGURING OUT WAYS TO ACHIEVE THOSE THINGS.
UM, AND SOMETIMES IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF DIFFERENCE.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT THERE TO HELP.
WE'RE THERE TO BASICALLY STAND THERE OR SIT THERE.
AND WHEN SOMEONE SAYS, YOU KNOW, AS THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND THESE MEMBERS IN OUR TASK FORCE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE IDEAS AND THINGS THEY WANT TO DO, THEY WOULD THEN TURN AND SAY, OKAY, MS. JACKSON, DID YOU GET THAT? MR. BLADES? DID YOU GET THAT? AND WE SAY, YES, WE DID.
WE'RE HERE TO HELP YOU ACHIEVE THAT.
IT'S NOT US COMING IN WITH THESE IDEAS.
THESE ARE ALL COMING FROM THE COMMUNITY.
SO AS YOU WERE REVIEWING THE PLAN, UM, JUST WANT EVERYBODY ON THE COMMISSION TO BE MINDFUL OF HOW YOU CAN DO THAT SAME PROCESS, THAT YOU ARE THERE TO HELP FACILITATE AND ASSIST THE COMMUNITY AS OPPOSED TO BRINGING IN, YOU KNOW, IDEAS TO SAY, THESE ARE MY GREAT IDEAS OF HOW I CAN HELP SOUTH DALLAS FOR HOW I CAN BETTER SOUTH DALLAS.
SO, UM, THE STAKEHOLDERS, THE TASK FORCE, THEY CAME UP WITH GUIDING PRINCIPLES.
AND SO IT WAS CRITICAL THAT THEY WANTED TO FOCUS ON LAND USE.
UM, IN THE CONTEXT OF ADDRESSING SOME CHALLENGES WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT, 5, 9, 5, AND JUST LOOKING AT FUTURE, UM, LAND USE TO DETERMINE HOW DO WE WANT THE COMMUNITY TO LOOK IN THE FUTURE, WHAT USES ARE MISSING, WHAT IS NECESSARY TO GET SMALL LOCAL BUSINESSES BACK INTO SOUTH DALLAS.
UM, THEY'RE LOOKING AT HOUSING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE, OR THE LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S NEEDED TO SPUR MORE DEVELOPMENT IN SOUTH DALLAS AND PROTECTING THE HISTORY AND CULTURE OF SOUTH DALLAS.
AND JUST OVERALL COMMUNITY WELLBEING WITH LOOKING AT HOMELESSNESS AND TRYING TO TACKLE SOME OF THOSE ISSUES.
SO WE DID A LOT OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
UM, FORTUNATELY DURING THIS PROCESS WE WERE ALSO WORKING TOWARDS, UM, FORWARD DALLAS.
AND SO EVERYTHING THAT YOU SEE HERE IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH, UM, OUR CITYWIDE APPROVED FORWARD DALLAS PLAN.
WE WENT TO NUMEROUS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS, UM, DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS THROUGHOUT SOUTH DALLAS.
AND WE HAD A REALLY GOOD TIME JUST GETTING FEEDBACK FROM ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
UM, HERE'S A BRIEF HIGHLIGHT OF JUST SOME OF THE MEETINGS.
WE DID DIFFERENT PRESENTATIONS, POPUPS, UM, WE'VE HAD TOURS IN SOUTH DALLAS WITH OUR HOUSING DEPARTMENT AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
AND I'LL COVER A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT LATER.
BUT ALSO JUST DOING EDUCATION WORKSHOPS SO THAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE AWARE OF, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW TO FORM A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
SO ALL OF THIS WAS CRITICAL TO, UM, GATHERING INFORMATION FOR THIS PLAN.
AND THIS IS JUST TO KINDA SHOW ALL THE DIFFERENT, UM, STAKEHOLDERS AND INVOLVEMENT THAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS.
ALSO, WE WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT SINCE THIS IS AN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, WE HAVE LOOKED AT OUR DIFFERENT INTERDEPARTMENTAL PLANS FROM INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT TO THE DALLAS HOUSING POLICY, PREVIOUS BUDGETS, AS WELL AS, UM, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND RACIAL EQUITY PLAN.
SO WHEN YOU SEE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, JUST KNOW THAT THIS WAS, UM, DRAWN FROM EXISTING PLANS SO THAT ALL DEPARTMENTS ARE SOMEWHAT IN
[00:10:01]
ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO DO.UM, HERE ARE THE FIVE FOCUS AREAS, THE TASK FORCE, WE HAD TO EXPLAIN TO THEM, HEY, WE CAN'T DO EVERYTHING.
'CAUSE INITIALLY THERE WAS ABOUT 13 DIFFERENT FOCUS AREAS AND WE SAID, HEY, WE'VE GOTTA NARROW IT DOWN.
AND SO, UM, THE TASK FORCE DECIDED ON SECOND AVENUE, GIVEN ITS PROXIMITY TO FAIR PARK, YOU KNOW, WHAT COULD THIS BE? COULD THIS BE AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT LINED WITH, UM, SMALL BUSINESSES? WE'RE LOOKING AT LC FAY HIGGINS.
THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITIES THERE, UM, AT SECOND AVENUE WITH THE SHOPPING CENTER THAT IS CURRENTLY THERE, MLK DART STATION, ALL OF THE AREAS SURROUNDING THAT.
UM, MALCOLM X BOULEVARD AS WELL AS QUEEN CITY, WHICH IS A, UM, HISTORICAL RESIDENTIAL, UM, AFRICAN AMERICAN NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO JUST TO HIGHLIGHT SOME THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON IN REAL TIME, UM, IT WAS COMMISSIONER WHEELER WHO, UM, HELPED ORGANIZE THE SOUTH DALLAS NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION.
UM, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN NEEDED FOR A VERY LONG TIME, AND WE WERE ABLE TO PRETTY MUCH GATHER ABOUT 50, UM, RESIDENTS AT THIS MEETING.
UM, COUNCIL MEMBER BAIDU ATTENDED.
AND FROM THERE, THIS IS THE GROUP THAT KINDA, UM, HELPED US ANALYZE SOME, UM, HOUSING DESIGN STANDARDS THAT PATRICK WILL SPEAK ABOUT LATER.
UM, WE MEET QUARTERLY NOW, UM, WITH THIS NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION, AND IT'S A WAY FOR THEM TO EXCHANGE INFORMATION WITH ONE ANOTHER AND KEEP EVERYONE ABREAST OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS POINT.
SOUTH REVITALIZATION COMMITTEE, THIS IS A GROUP OF LAND OWNERS PROPERTY OWNERS IN SOUTH DALLAS.
AND, UM, THEY MEET EVERY MONTH.
THEY ALWAYS HAVE REPRESENTATION FROM CITY STAFF PRESENT.
AND SO CURRENTLY THEY ARE WORKING ON SOME, UM, ACTION ITEMS AND INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS WITH, UM, OUR CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.
AND SO THEY'RE TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH DEVELOPMENT AND REALLY FOCUSED ON THE MLK DART STATION AREA.
SO ALSO WANNA HIGHLIGHT THE, UM, AGAIN, INTERDEPARTMENTAL COLLABORATION.
THIS IS THE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY.
SO WE STARTED HOSTING THESE MEETINGS PRETTY MUCH QUARTERLY, UM, GETTING OUT OF THE OFFICE, GETTING PROPERTY OWNERS AND LAND DEVELOPERS INVOLVED TO SEE WHAT FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES COULD OEQS ASSIST THEM, UM, WITH THEIR DIFFERENT PROJECTS.
ALSO, ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM A HOUSING PERSPECTIVE WITH THE AREA PLAN WAS FOR SOUTH DALLAS TO BE A TARGET STRATEGY AREA.
WELL, HOUSING HAS DESIGNATED SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK TO BECOME A NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION STRATEGY AREA.
AND SO WHAT THIS SIMPLY MEANS IS THAT IN THE FUTURE, FEDERAL FUNDING DOLLARS THAT HOUSING HAS WILL BE ALLOCATED IN THIS SPECIFIC AREA FOR LONG-TERM DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING.
AND, UM, CURRENTLY, QUEEN CITY HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
THIS WAS LAST JUNE OF 2024, UM, TO GET HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
AND SO CURRENTLY WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS WORKING WITH OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION TEAM TO DETERMINE, UM, WHAT WILL, WHAT EXACTLY THEY WILL PRESERVE AND HOW THEY WILL DO, UM, NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN THE FUTURE.
AND, UM, THEY SHOULD BE HAVING A SURVEY COMING UP THIS SPRING WHERE WE'RE GONNA GO OUT AND TAKE PHOTOS OF ALL THE, UM, HISTORICAL HOMES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY LINES.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE, BUT THAT LITTLE RED SQUARE, UM, THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN THE MIDDLE, THAT IS QUEEN CITY.
AND SO AT THIS TIME, I'M GONNA PASS IT BACK TO PATRICK SO HE CAN GO OVER THE EXCITING LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS.
UH, SO IN THE AREA PLAN, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT REVOLVE AROUND INFRASTRUCTURE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNITY WELLBEING, UM, HISTORY AND CULTURE AND HOUSING, UM, THOSE FOCUS AREAS OF THE TASK FORCE.
UM, UM, WANTED TO, UH, TO FOCUS ON, UM, ALL OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AGAIN, COME FROM, UM, THOSE COMMUNITY MEMBERS, THOSE TASK FORCE MEMBERS, UM, AS MS. JACKSON HAS KIND OF GONE OVER A LOT OF THOSE, UM, ARE REAL TIME IMPLEMENTATIONS.
UM, SO THAT'S WORKING WITH HOUSING TO GET THEM OUT THERE.
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMUNITY WELLBEING, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE NEED TO DO ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION.
SO THAT'S GETTING OEQS OUT THERE AND HAVING THOSE TOURS.
UM, IN THE PLAN WE ARE UPLIFTING.
UM, A NUMBER OF THOSE THINGS ARE THINGS THAT, UM,
[00:15:01]
CPC YOU MAY NOT HAVE DIRECT AUTHORITY OVER.UM, WE'RE LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK ON THOSE, BUT JUST BE MINDFUL THAT THE ONES THAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING FOR, UH, FOR FEEDBACK ON ARE GONNA BE THE LAND USE AND THE ZONING RECOMMENDATIONS BECAUSE THIS AREA PLAN IS GONNA BE THE BASIS FOR AN AUTHORIZED HEARING THAT'S GONNA MAKE CHANGES IN SOME OF THE P IN THE PD THAT'S OVER THERE.
SO, UM, AS I SIMILAR, THE LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, AS MS. JACKSON MENTIONED, UM, A LOT OF THE BIG BROAD, UM, LANE'S RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, WERE PUT INTO FOR DALLAS.
UM, THE MAP THERE, UM, IS THE PLACE TYPE MAP THAT SHOWS THE YELLOW, UH, AS THE NEIGHBORHOODS, THE BROWN OR THE RED AS THE CORRIDORS, THE GREEN AS THE PARKS, THE BIG BLUE THERE, THAT'S FAIR PARK IN THE MIDDLE.
UM, USUALLY AN AREA PLAN WOULD HAVE MORE DETAIL ON THOSE LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, OR SOME CHANGES FOR THE, UH, FOR THE PLAY SITE MAP.
BUT BECAUSE THE SOUTH DALLAS, UH, FAIR PARK AREA PLAN PROCESS AND THE FOR DALLAS PROCESS WERE BASICALLY CONCURRENT PROCESSES, UM, THE INPUT FROM SOUTH DALLAS, UM, FOR THAT, THAT MAP, UM, WAS PUT DIRECTLY INTO FORWARD DALLAS.
UM, AS I MENTIONED, THE AREA PLAN, UM, IT WILL BE THE BASIS FOR THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, FOR THE AUTHORIZED HEARING IN PD 5 9 5, WHICH I'M GONNA GO OVER.
SO THAT PD, UH, 5 9 5, IT WAS CREATED ABOUT 20 YEARS AGO, AND IT WAS CREATED TO ADDRESS CERTAIN ISSUES THAT WERE GOING ON IN THAT COMMUNITY AT THE TIME.
UM, THE TASK FORCE MEM MANY OF THOSE TASK FORCE MEMBERS WERE THERE IN THAT COMMUNITY AT THE TIME, AND THEN CAN SPEAK DIRECTLY TO WHAT THOSE ISSUES ARE.
UM, ONE OF THE BIG ONES WAS, UM, BACK THEN, UM, YOU, IF YOU WERE IN DALLAS, YOU MIGHT REMEMBER DALLAS DID NOT.
WE, WE HAD WET AREAS AND WE HAD DRY AREAS, UM, THAT CHANGED ABOUT 12 YEARS AGO.
UM, BUT AT THE TIME IN SOUTH DALLAS, THERE WERE A LOT OF CONVENIENCE STORES THAT SOLD NOTHING BUT BEER AND ALCOHOL AND JUNK FOOD.
UM, MANY OF YOU, UM, PROBABLY HAVE HEARD OF A FOOD DESERT.
UM, PEOPLE NOW TALK ABOUT SOUTH HOUSES AS A FOOD SWAMP.
UM, AND SO THAT WAS THAT THEY WERE JUST, YOU KNOW, A BUNCH OF, UM, CONVENIENCE STORES THAT WERE SELLING, AGAIN, NOTHING BUT BEER AND WINE AND A BUNCH OF JUNK FOOD.
AND SO PART OF 5 9 5 CLARIFIES THAT LAND USE.
AND SO WE TALK ABOUT IN THE AUTHORIZED HEARING ABOUT KEEPING AREAS IN THE PD AND NOT REMOVING THEM.
PART OF IT IS TO CONTINUE TO, UH, TO FOCUS ON THAT, UH, OR TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT ISSUE, UH, THE, THE TASK FORCE MEMBERS.
THOSE, UM, EMPHATICALLY STATED TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THEY WANT TO CHANGE 5, 9 5, HOW DO WE CHANGE 5 9 5, WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT 5 9 5? BECAUSE, UM, THERE ARE CURRENT ISSUES THAT, UM, SOUTH DALLAS WAS FACING THAT AREN'T ADDRESSED IN THAT PD.
AND A, I AM GONNA STOP PRESENTING FOR A SECOND BECAUSE THE POWERPOINT IS LAGGING BEHIND MR. CHAIR.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION WHILE WE'RE OF COURSE.
UH, COULD YOU GUYS TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT QUEEN CITY? I MEAN, WHAT'S THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THIS? UM, SO I KNOW, UM, I WISH MS. JONES COULD BE HERE TO TELL YOU ALL ABOUT QUEEN CITY.
UM, BUT QUEEN CITY IS A HISTORIC AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY IN SOUTH
[00:20:01]
DALLAS.UM, IT'S BEEN THERE, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD STARTED ABOUT A HUNDRED YEARS AGO, IN FACT, A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN A HUNDRED YEARS AGO.
UM, WITH, UH, WOODEN FRAMED HOMES THAT WERE BUILT, UM, IN THE TWENTIES, THIRTIES, AND INTO THE FORTIES.
THAT'S WHERE MOST OF THE HOUSING WAS BUILT.
MOST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, WAS POPULATED AT THAT POINT.
IT WAS AN AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY, UM, THROUGHOUT THE FIFTIES AND SIXTIES, WAS A VERY STRONG MIDDLE CLASS AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY.
UM, CENTERED A LITTLE BIT AROUND SECOND AVENUE, WHICH IS JUST KIND OF TO THE NORTH OF IT, WHICH WAS KINDA THE COMMERCIAL AREA.
UM, QUEEN CITY, UH, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THERE WERE SOME HISTORIC INEQUITIES AND UNDERINVESTMENT IN SOUTH AUS IN QUEEN CITY AROUND THAT TIME, BOTH IN THE PRIVATE BOOK AND PRIVATE SECTOR.
UM, BY THE NINETIES, UM, THERE WAS HISTORIC PRESERVATION MOVEMENTS, UM, THAT OCCURRED, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST IN QUEEN CITY, BUT THROUGHOUT DALLAS.
UM, AND QUEEN CITY WAS PUT ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.
UM, IT DID NOT BECOME A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
MR. BLADES, MY, MY APOLOGIES, HAVE BEEN ADVISED THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE A PAUSE NOW.
I THINK WE, I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST A POWERPOINT, BUT WE LOST A FEED.
SO LET'S TAKE A, A FIVE MINUTE, UH, BREAK AT 9:29 AM WE ARE RECORDING.
IT IS, UH, 9:57 AM MY APOLOGIES FOR THE DELAY.
WE ARE BACK ONLINE AND WE'LL CONTINUE WITH THE BRIEFING.
I, UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
UH, SO AGAIN, TALKING ABOUT THE AREA PLAN AND THE LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS HERE IN SOUTH DALLAS, UM, THE TWO BIG POINTS THAT THE PLAN STATES IS TO HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR NEW HOUSING IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN SOUTH DALLAS.
THE OTHER ONE IS TO REVITALIZE COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS AS MIXED USE CORRIDORS AND HAVE MIXED USE AREAS AROUND OUR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.
THAT MIGHT SOUND A LITTLE SIMILAR TO THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD A COUPLE MONTHS AGO.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE MIXED USE AREAS OF SOUTH DALLAS, SO A LOT OF SOUTH DALLAS, UM, UH, THE MAIN CORRIDORS OR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS OR OLDER COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS, THERE ARE ZONE FOR, UM, SOLELY COMMERCIAL.
AGAIN, THIS WAS ADOPTED AS FORWARD DALLAS, BUT IN THE AREA PLAN IT'S, UM, CONSISTENT AS WELL.
UM, THE YELLOW ON THE MAP, AGAIN, THOSE ARE THE NEIGHBORHOODS, THE BROWN ON THE MAP, UM, THOSE ARE GONNA BE MOST OF THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS.
UM, IF YOU GO TO THE RIGHT OR THE EAST OF THE BLUE, THAT'S FAIR PARK, THAT'S GONNA BE FITS YOU.
UM, AND THEN WE HAVE SECOND AVENUE, LC FAYE, HIGGINS, MAR, UH, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MALCOLM X.
UM, THOSE ARE THE AREAS THAT ARE DEFINED AS, UM, THE,
[00:25:01]
UM, THE, THE LOW RISE MIX USE.UM, THE BRIGHT RED, THOSE ARE GONNA BE THE MID TO HIGH RISE MIX USE.
AND THE DARK RED IS GONNA BE THE, UH, MID TO HIGH-RISE MIX USE.
AGAIN, GOING OVER THE, UH, THE LOW-RISE AREAS IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL.
THAT'S GONNA BE FITZ U THAT'S TO THE EAST OF, UH, FAROH PARK.
THAT'S SECOND AVENUE THAT'S COMING OFF OF FITZ U.
UM, THEN IT'S OIE FAYE HIGGINS.
IT'S GONNA COME DOWN, UM, THERE ON THE SOUTH.
UM, THEN WE HAVE, UM, UH, MALCOLM X AND THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF, UH, MARTIN LUTHER KING.
UM, AGAIN, THESE ARE ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL RIGHT NOW.
UH, THE AREA PLAN SAYS THAT THESE SHOULD BE, UM, CHANGED TO AREAS THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL OFFICE RETAIL, UM, AND MIXED USE OF, OF A LOW RISE.
THAT WOULD BE FOUR STORIES OR LESS.
THE LOW TO MID-RISE, THAT'S GONNA BE THE, UH, THE, THE BRIGHT RED AREAS.
THAT'S THE AREA IN THE EU FAR EAST.
THAT'S GONNA BE AROUND THE HATCHER STREET STATION.
UM, IN HATCHER STREET IS NOW OIE FAYE HIGGINS.
UM, IT'S ALSO JB JACKSON, THAT STREET THAT'S GONNA BE THE STREET THAT'S, UM, A COUPLE OF BLOCKS OFF OF FAIR PARK TO THE SOUTH OF IT.
AND THEN THE AREA THERE, THERE'S AN ORANGE AREA, THAT'S JEFFREY MYERS.
UM, THAT'S GONNA BE, UH, THE AREA AROUND JEFFREY MYERS THAT'S IN THE PD WOULD ALSO BE THAT, UM, COMMUNITY, UM, MIXED USE OR THAT LOW TO MID-RISE MIXED USE.
THE MID TO HIGH RISE, THAT'S GONNA BE THE STEP THAT'S CLOSEST TO FAIR PARK.
UM, THAT'S GONNA BE, UM, AROUND THE MLK STATION, ALONG ROBERT B CULLUM, WHICH IS THE STREET THAT FRONTS FAIR PARK.
AND THEN THE NORTHERN PART OF, UM, OF MLK.
UM, AGAIN, THAT'S GONNA BE THE AREA THAT'S KIND OF IN THE, THE, THE BURGUNDY OR THE, UM, THE, THE DARK RED.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF SOUTH DALLAS, UM, AND WE TALK ABOUT THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
SO THIS IS A CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD OVER THE COURSE OF ABOUT FOUR YEARS.
UM, IN THE BEGINNING OF THE CONVERSATION, THEY SAID, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THE, WE WANNA PRESERVE THE HOUSING IN, IN SOUTH DALLAS.
WE DON'T LIKE ALL OF THESE NEW HOUSES THAT ARE BEING, UH, THAT ARE BEING BUILT, UM, NEXT TO THE EXISTING HOUSING.
UM, AND AS WE CONTINUED THAT CONVERSATION, WHAT WE REALLY GOT TO WAS, UM, ONE, UH, TASK FORCE MEMBER TALKED ABOUT THE GROSSLY INCOMPATIBLE HOUSING.
IT WASN'T NECESSARILY THAT ALL THE HOUSING THEY DIDN'T LIKE IT WAS THE ONES THAT WERE THE MOST EGREGIOUS.
AND WE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, OKAY, IF THAT'S WHAT THE IDEA IS, WHAT ARE THE TOOLS TO GET THERE? TALKED ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION OVERLAY.
WE BROUGHT IN CONSERVATION DISTRICT STAFF AND HISTORIC DISTRICT STAFF.
AND AS MS. JACKSON MENTIONED, QUEEN CITY, 100% JUMPED ON THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
WE WANNA BE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
BUT AS WE TALKED TO THE OTHER COMMUNITIES, THEY WERE APPREHENSIVE ABOUT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND EVEN THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT BECAUSE THERE WAS AN IDEA, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA DO ONE BIG CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
BUT WHAT FOLKS IN SOUTH DALLAS TOLD US IS, WELL, NO, THAT DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE THE HOUSES ON ROMINE AREN'T LIKE THE HOUSES ON PINE AND THE HOUSES ON PINE AREN'T, LIKE THE HOUSES ON PENNSYLVANIA AND THE HOUSE ON PENNSYLVANIA AREN'T THE ONES ON METROPOLITAN.
AND WELL, OKAY, WELL, COULD WE DO 13 DIFFERENT CONSERVATION DISTRICTS? OKAY, WELL, OKAY, IF WE'RE GONNA DO THAT, THEN WE'RE STILL GONNA BE DOING CONSERVATION DISTRICTS IN 2035 BECAUSE OF JUST THAT WORKLOAD.
AND SO WHEN WE REALLY STARTED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT ARE THOSE CONCEPTS, WHAT PREVENTS THE GROSSLY INCOMPATIBLE HOUSING THAT GOES UP THERE, UM, WE GOT TO BASICALLY FIVE DIFFERENT CONCEPTS THAT FOLKS IN SOUTH DALLAS TALKED ABOUT THAT WE WERE ABLE TO PUT TOGETHER.
AND I USE MY HAND TO TO TO TO, UM, TO REFERENCE THEM BECAUSE IT'S HOW I REMEMBER.
IT'S A PORCH IN THE FRONT, IT'S A GARAGE IN THE BACK.
IT'S MAXIMUM TWO STORIES OF HEIGHT, SOME TYPE OF A PITCHED ROOF, AND A SMALLER DRIVEWAY UP FRONT.
AND I KNOW THAT RIGHT NOW, SOME OF YOU, UM, CPC MEMBERS ARE SAYING, OKAY, WHAT DOES A GARAGE IN THE BACK MEAN? AND OKAY, WHAT IS A FRONT PORCH IS? AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE WIDTH AND WHAT'S THE DEATH AND WHAT'S THE PITCH ON THE ROOF? BUT BEFORE WE GET INTO THOSE DETAILS, AGAIN, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WITH THOSE FIVE CONCEPTS, WHAT'S THE GROSSLY INCOMPATIBLE HOUSE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAY? WE DON'T WANT THAT.
SO HERE ON THE SCREEN, WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT HOUSES.
ONE HAS A FRONT PORCH, HAS A PITCHED ROOF.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT MEETS THOSE STANDARDS THAT WE TALK ABOUT.
PORCH IN THE FRONT GARAGE IN THE BACK, TWO STORIES MAX PITCHED ROOF, THE ONE THERE ON THE RIGHT, THAT'S THE TYPE OF HOUSE THAT SOUTH DALLAS SAID.
THAT'S THE TYPE OF HOUSING WE DON'T WANT, RIGHT? THE GARAGE IS THAT FRONT.
THE FRONT YARD IS ALL DRIVEWAY.
THAT'S THE TYPE OF HOUSE THEY SAID.
THAT'S THE GROSSLY INCOMPATIBLE ONES THAT WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT NOT HAVING IN SOUTH DALLAS.
SO AGAIN, PORCH IN THE FRONT GARAGE IN THE BACK, MAXIMUM TWO STORIES.
SOME TYPE OF A PITCHED ROOF IN A SMALLER DRIVEWAY.
AND TO BE CLEAR, WHEN WE SAY GARAGE IN THE BACK, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ALLEY ACCESS SOUTH DALLAS.
THEY'RE NOT ALLEYS IN ALL OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS.
IN FACT, A NUMBER OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS DON'T HAVE ALLEY ACCESS.
SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT ACCESS FROM THE BACK.
IT COULD BE IN THE FORM FROM ACCESS FROM THE BACK.
IT COULD BE ACCESS FROM THE SIDE.
IT COULD BE A DETACHED GARAGE THAT'S IN THE REAR, 30%.
IT COULD BE A, UM, ATTACHED GARAGE THAT'S THEN OFFSET FROM THE FRONT FACADE BY A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OR A CERTAIN LINEAR FEET.
[00:30:01]
ABOUT WHAT THAT GARAGE ON THE BACK WOULD BE.YOU KNOW, THERE'S PROBABLY FIVE OR SIX DESIGN ELEMENTS OF A PORCH WITH DEATH.
UM, ELEVATION DIFFERENCE FROM THE GRADE.
IS IT COVERED? IS THERE A RAILING IT MOST LIKELY IN THE AUTHORIZED HEARING? THOSE ARE THOSE DETAILS THAT ARE GONNA FLUSH OUT TO SAY, OKAY, HERE ARE THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS.
AND TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT, YOU HAVE TO HIT, YOU KNOW, FOUR OUT OF THE SIX DIFFERENT DETAILS.
UM, THE AUTHORIZED HEARING IS GONNA GET THROUGH SOME OF THOSE DETAILS.
WE'VE ALREADY HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH THIS, UM, THE, EXCUSE ME, THE SOUTH DALLAS NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION ABOUT SOME OF THOSE DESIGN IDEAS AND, YOU KNOW, GETTING A LITTLE BIT IN FRONT OF THAT AUTHORIZED HEARING.
BUT TO BE CLEAR, THOSE DESIGN GUIDELINES ARE GONNA COME IN THE AUTHORIZED HEARING.
THE AREA PLAN SAYS THESE ARE THE FIVE THINGS THAT WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT.
SO WE HAD FURTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS ABOUT WHAT THEY LIKE, WHAT THEY DON'T LIKE, AND WHAT THEY'RE KIND OF, WHAT WE WANTED TO LEARN MORE ABOUT.
AGAIN, WHAT THEY LIKE THE EXISTING HOUSING THAT'S OUT THERE, THE NEW HOUSING THAT LOOKS LIKE THE OLDER HOUSING, WHAT THEY DON'T LIKE, THE NEW HOMES THAT ARE GROSSLY INCOMPATIBLE.
WHAT THEY DON'T LIKE WAS BIG APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE INTERIOR OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
WHAT THEY SAID, WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THIS IS DUPLEXES AND ADUS.
'CAUSE THEY SAID THERE ARE PLENTY OF DUPLEXES IN ADUS ALREADY IN SOUTH DALLAS.
AND AS ONE, UH, TASK FORCE MEMBER PUT IT, A DUPLEX IS JUST A HOUSE WITH TWO FRONT DOORS.
BUT THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE EXISTING IN SOUTH DALLAS, THE ONES THAT WERE BUILT 50 YEARS AGO, 80 YEARS AGO, A HUNDRED YEARS AGO.
AND SO THEY SAID, IF YOU CAN MAKE THE NEW DUPLEXES LOOK LIKE THE DUPLEXES THAT ARE ALREADY OUT THERE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING.
IF WE CAN HAVE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS ABOUT IT, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD OR WE'RE LOOKING INTO.
SO THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DUPLEXES.
SO TO BE CLEAR, THE AREA PLAN DOES NOT RECOMMEND ALLOWING DUPLEXES IN ANY OF THE SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS.
IT DOES NOT RECOMMEND ALLOWING THOSE DUPLEXES BY RIGHT IN THE R FIVE, THE R 7.5, OR THERE'S AN R 3.8 SUBDISTRICT.
AND IF ANYONE SAYS, OH, IT'S GONNA DO THAT, NO, IT 100% DOES NOT MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION.
IF YOU WANT TO BUILD A DUPLEX IN AN AREA RIGHT NOW IN SOUTH DALLAS, IT'S ZONED FOR A SINGLE FRAME THAT YOU WOULD STILL HAVE TO APPLY TO CHANGE THE ZONING ON THAT AREA OR ON THAT PROPERTY TO BUILD A DUPLEX.
UM, AND I, I'M, I KNOW CPC, YOU'RE ALREADY GETTING THOSE REQUESTS ALMOST AT EVERY MEETING GETTING THOSE REQUESTS IN SOUTH DALLAS TO BUILD THOSE DUPLEXES.
SO WHAT THE AREA PLAN RECOMMENDS IS THAT THAT DUPLEX ZONING DISTRICT HAVE THE SAME DESIGN STANDARDS AS THE R DISTRICTS, THE THE SAME PORCH IN THE FRONT GARAGE IN THE BACK MAX TWO STORIES, SOME TYPE OF A PITCH ROOF IN A SMALLER DRIVEWAY.
AND SO IT GIVES THE OPTION THAT IF SOMEONE COMES IN AND SAYS, I'D LIKE TO BUILD A DUPLEX HERE, YOU STILL HAVE TO CHANGE THE ZONING, BUT IT GIVES A BASE ZONING DISTRICT IN THE PD THAT HAS THE SAME DESIGN STANDARDS AS THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES OUT THAT ARE OUT THERE, UM, TO ADD IN.
SO IN THAT CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD ABOUT THE DUPLEXES, BECAUSE IN SOUTH DALLAS, WE HEARD THAT'S A, THAT'S A GOOD OPTION.
IT'S NOT AN EVERYWHERE OPTION.
WE DON'T WANT IT BY RIGHT? BUT IT'S AN OPTION THAT WE COULD PUT OUT THERE.
BUT THEY ALSO WANTED TO TALK ABOUT, UM, OWNERSHIP BECAUSE IN SOME NEIGHBORHOODS IN SOUTH DALLAS THAT AREN'T IN THE PD, THEY'RE BUILDING DUPLEXES, BUT THEY'RE ABLE TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY WHERE THEY'RE ABLE TO SELL THE LAND AND THE HOUSE THAT'S ON TOP OF IT, AS OPPOSED TO JUST HAVING IT BE A RENTAL OPTION.
SO WE HAVE THESE TWO, UH, WE HAVE THESE TWO DIAGRAMS THAT'S ON THE SCREEN.
THE ONE ON THE LEFT IS ONE LOT AND A DUPLEX LAND USE WHERE YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT UNITS ON IT.
THE ONE ON THE RIGHT IS TECHNICALLY TWO LOTS.
IT'S STILL THE SAME STRUCTURE, BUT YOU'RE ABLE TO SUBDIVIDE THAT PROPERTY.
AND WHEN YOU'RE ABLE TO DO THAT, YOU'RE ABLE TO SELL BOTH THE LAND AND THE STRUCTURE TO SOMEONE.
AND SO WHEN WE TALK WITH SOUTH DALLAS IN PARTICULAR, UM, OUR, OUR CHAIR, UM, SCOTTY SMITH AND, AND THE FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER, DIANE RAGSDALE, THEY TALKED ABOUT, OKAY, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN BECAUSE THAT PROMOTES HOME OWNERSHIP.
THAT'S A WAY FOR FAMILIES IN SOUTH DALLAS TO BUILD WEALTH, THAT YOU'RE NOT JUST BUILDING A DUPLEX THAT THEN YOU CAN THEN RENT, BUT YOU'RE BUILDING THE SAME STRUCTURE THAT YOU'RE THEN ABLE TO SELL TO TWO HOUSEHOLDS.
SO THE, THE AREA PLAN HAS THAT RECOMMENDATION THAT THAT'S ANOTHER POSSIBILITY.
UM, NOT THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO BUY A, A, A PROPERTY, REZONE IT FOR A DUPLEX, AND THEN BUILD FOUR UNITS.
YOU'RE STILL BUILDING THE SAME STRUCTURE.
IT'S JUST YOU'RE ABLE TO SUBDIVIDE THAT STRUCTURE AND SELL BOTH THE LAND AND THE HOUSE FOR ADUS.
AGAIN, THEY TALKED ABOUT HOW THESE, THAT'S, THAT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A GRANDDADDY'S HOUSE.
UM, AND THEY'RE OUT THERE ALREADY IN SOUTH DALLAS, AND SOME OF THEM WERE PERMITTED AND SOME OF THEM WEREN'T PERMITTED.
AND IN SOUTH DALLAS, THEY SAID, THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN HAVING.
WE JUST WANT THEM TO HAVE THE SAME DESIGN STANDARDS, UM, THAT THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES WOULD HAVE.
AND THAT THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE IN 51 A TO SAY, THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE WANT.
WE DON'T WANNA HAVE TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO BUILD THESE.
[00:35:01]
THAT WE CAN DO TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE HOUSING THAT'S GOING ON TO ALLOW THESE.UM, AND SO THE AREA PLAN RECOMMENDS ALLOWING THESE BY RIGHT SUBJECT TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WOULD BE IN EACH ONE OF THOSE.
UM, THE R UM FIVE, THE R SEVEN FIVE, AND THE R 3.8, UM, ZONING DISTRICTS, WHICH AGAIN, PORCH IN THE FRONT GARAGE IN THE BACK.
TWO STORIES, THE HEIGHT, UM, UH, SOME TYPE OF PITCHED ROOF, SMALLER DRIVEWAY.
AND THEN 51 A HAS SOME DESIGN STANDARDS ABOUT WHAT AN ACCESSORY DRILLING UNIT IS.
SO THERE WERE A COUPLE OTHER LAND USES, UM, THAT THE PLAN MAKES, UH, MAKES, UH, CHANGES TOO.
UM, AGAIN, WHEN YOU GET THE PLAN, YOU CAN GO OVER THEM.
IT TALKS ABOUT HOW YOU SHOULD ALLOW CATERING.
RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE TO GET AN SEP TO BE A CATERER IN SOUTH DALLAS.
UM, RIGHT NOW YOU CAN'T DO A RESTAURANT WHERE ALL YOUR FOOD IS TO GO.
MASSAGES AREN'T ALLOWED, BUT WE WOULD ALLOW THEM AS AN ACCESSORY USE IF YOU'RE DOING A NAIL SALON OR PERSONAL SERVICE.
RIGHT NOW, TOBACCO STORES ARE NOT ALLOWED.
AND IT'S MOVING THAT THE, THE VAPE SHOPS INTO THAT TOBACCO LAND USE.
UM, WE WOULD BE KEEPING CONVENIENCE STORES AS AN SUP BECAUSE THERE'S STILL THAT CONCERN.
UM, THE OTHER ONE TO BRING UP IS PARKING.
UM, SO THAT WAS BROUGHT UP TIME AND TIME AGAIN BY OUR BUSINESS OWNERS AND OUR PROPERTY OWNERS IN SOUTH DALLAS, THAT THAT WAS A DETRIMENT TO THEM BEING ABLE TO DEVELOP THEIR PROPERTIES.
UM, AND THAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS WERE FRUSTRATED THAT THEY, THEY DIDN'T HAVE THOSE RESTAURANTS THAT RETAIL, THAT PERSONAL SERVICE TO GO TO IN SOUTH DALLAS A LOT OF TIMES BECAUSE THOSE LOCAL BUSINESSES COULDN'T OPEN UP.
SO I KNOW CPC AND COUNCIL IS LOOKING AT PARKING RIGHT NOW.
UM, IF IT'S ADDRESSED THROUGH CPC AND COUNCIL, THEN THE AREA PLAN WOULDN'T HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO CHANGE ANYTHING IF IT'S NOT ADDRESSED THROUGH COUNCIL, UM, OR THROUGH CPC AND COUNCIL.
THEN THE AREA PLAN RIGHT NOW, IT CALLS FOR A REDUCTION OR REMOVAL OF THE LOCATION AND THE AMOUNT OF THE PARK PARKING MANDATE.
UM, AND AGAIN, THAT WOULD GET A LITTLE BIT MORE FLESHED OUT IN THE AUTHORIZED HEARING ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY THAT MEANS.
UM, BUT TO BE CLEAR, IT SAYS THAT RIGHT NOW THE, THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE PARKING IS TOO HIGH.
AND THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL PROVISION IN THE PD THAT SAYS NO PARKING CAN BE ANYWHERE IN THE FRONT, THE, THE FRONT, UM, 30 FEET.
SO IT'S REMOVING THAT 30 FEET AND THEN EITHER REMOVING THE MANDATE OR LOOKING AT REDUCING THAT MANDATE FOR PARKING.
SO THE NEXT STEPS, AGAIN, UH, WE'LL HAVE A DRAFT OF THE PLAN, UM, TO Y'ALL.
CPC ALSO POSTED ONLINE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, MOVING FORWARD, WE WOULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AT CPC BASED UPON THAT PUBLIC HEARING, THE INPUT FROM CPC, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION AT THAT TIME OR AT A LATER MEETING.
UM, EVENTUALLY WE WOULD HAVE COUNCIL ACTION.
AND THEN ONCE COUNCIL HAS TAKEN ACTION, WE WOULD DO THE AUTHORIZED HEARING, WHICH IS THAT PROCESS.
WE WOULD BE COMING BACK TO YOU SAYING, OKAY, WHAT DO WE MEAN WHEN WE SAID PORCH? IS IT EIGHT FEET DEEP? IS IT SIX FEET DEEP? IS IT HALF OF THE FACADE? IS IT 10 FEET WIDE? WE WOULD HAVE THOSE DETAILS AT THAT POINT.
UM, AND WITH THAT, UM, MYSELF AND MS. JACKSON WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER, ER, PLEASE.
UM, I KNOW THAT I POSED THE QUESTION IS, UM, COULD YOU ANSWER, UM, WHAT WAS THE KIND OF FEEDBACK ON THE QUESTION THAT WE ASKED? UM, WHAT DO YOU LEAVE SOUTH DALLAS FOR ON SATURDAY MORNINGS? SO IT WAS A LOT OF, I'M, I'M, I'M LEAVING SOUTH.
'CAUSE THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT OUR, UM, THAT WE ASKED OF YOU.
IF YOU LIVE IN SOUTH DALLAS, BUT YOU'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENED SATURDAY MORNING? WHERE ARE YOU GOING? UM, IT WAS A LOT OF, I'M, I'M GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE TO EAT.
I'M GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE TO GET GROCERIES.
I'M GOING, GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE TO GET MY HAIR DONE, TO GET MY NAILS DONE.
I'M GOING SOMEWHERE ELSE TO WORK OUT.
UM, IT WAS ALL, A LOT OF THAT RETAIL RESTAURANT AND PERSONAL SERVICE USE, UM, THAT WEREN'T, THAT WOULD, THAT IS NOT AMPLE IN SOUTH DALLAS.
AND WAS THAT BECAUSE OF SOME, UM, A GOOD MAJORITY OF THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE VACANT IS NOT NECESSARILY BY CHOICE.
IT'S BECAUSE OF THE HINDERING AND ZONING, ESPECIALLY RELATED TO THE PARKING.
THAT IS A HURDLE FOR MANY OF THE BUSINESS OWNERS WHO TRIED TO OPEN UP IN SOUTH DALLAS, IS THEY COULDN'T MEET THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS, UM, NAMELY THE PARKING, UH, REQUIREMENT TO OPEN UP THEIR BUSINESS THERE.
UM, COULD YOU, UM, AS FAR AS, AS IT, AS IT GOING, AS THIS IS LEADING TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU ALL HAVE DONE A GREAT AMOUNT OF WORK THAT, UH, OR IF, UH, IN OTHER DISTRICTS WHEN THEY'RE PREPARING FOR PUBLIC HEARING, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO ANOTHER FIVE YEARS, BUT YOU ALL HAVE DONE A GOOD AMOUNT OF THAT FOUNDATION WORK, UM, WITH THE COMMUNITY? UH, I WOULD SAY THE COMMUNITY IS PROBABLY BETTER SUITED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
UM, FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, WE HAVE BEEN INCREDIBLY ACTIVE IN SOUTH DALLAS.
COMMISSIONER HALL, IN THE, UM, HIGH RISE ZONE, IS
[00:40:01]
THERE A MAX HEIGHT FOR, FOR THE HIGH RISES? SO IN THE AUTHORIZED HEARING, WE DEAL WITH THE MAX HEIGHT.UM, WHEN WE TALK TO PROPERTY OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS OUT THERE, UM, THEY'RE NOT REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT BECAUSE, UM, THEY'VE, THEY'VE TOLD US, AT LEAST FOR THE HERE AND NOW THAT THAT EIGHT AND 10 AND 12 STORIES THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT THINKING ABOUT ANYTHING HIGHER THAN THAT.
UM, BUT WE CAN GET INTO WHAT A HYPOTHETICAL MAX HEIGHT WOULD BE IN THE AUTHORIZED HEARING AND THEN CODIFY WHAT THAT HEIGHT WOULD BE.
IT'S PROBABLY NOT LIKELY YOU WOULD HAVE BUILDINGS LIKE YOU DO IN THE CENTRAL DOWNTOWN DISTRICT.
SO, UH, I MEAN, A AGAIN, IT'S KIND OF LOOKING INTO THE FUTURE.
THE DEVELOPERS THAT WE TALKED TO SAID, NO, THEY DON'T THINK 40 STORIES IS SOMETHING THAT'S APPROPRIATE HERE.
OR THAT THEY COULD GET FUNDING FOR.
UM, BUT I WILL ALSO POINT OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, ACROSS THE FREEWAY IN DEEP L HEIGHTS HAVE GOTTEN BIGGER THAN THEY, YOU KNOW, IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
AND SO IT'S SOMETHING TO DEFINITELY BE COGNIZANT OF.
I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE TASK FORCE LOOKED AT WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT HEIGHT WAS, UM, MAKING IT AT ROBERT B COLUMN ACROSS FROM FAIR PARK TO SAY, THAT'S WHERE WE CAN GO REALLY TALL.
BUT THEN SAYING, NO, NO, NO, NO, A COUPLE OF BLOCKS IN THAT SHOULD BE LOWER MID-RISE TO SAY YES, THERE MIGHT BE SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOME, SOME PRETTY TALL BUILDINGS, BUT NOT MANY OF THEM.
I WAS INTRIGUED BY THE DIAGRAM WHERE YOU SPLIT A DUPLEX IN HALF AND YOU SOLD ONE SIDE, TWO DIFFERENT PROPERTIES.
IS THAT BECAUSE THE HOUSE IS ALREADY BUILT ACROSS THE PROPERTY LINE, OR, UH, WOULD YOU HAVE TO RE REPL A PROPERTY TO SPLIT THAT HOUSE IN HALF? SO THAT, THAT CAME FROM, SO AGAIN, UM, IN THE JEFFREY MYERS AREA, UM, WE HAVE BUILDERS WHO ARE BUILDING THE DIAGRAM ON THE RIGHT, WHICH IS, THEY'VE GOT, THEY TOOK A PROPERTY, THEY REPLANTED IT FOR TWO LOTS, AND THEY BUILT A STRUCTURE THAT IS CONNECTED IN THE MIDDLE THAT LOOKS LIKE A DUPLEX WALKING ON THE STREET.
YOU, AND I WOULD SAY IT'S A DUPLEX, BUT TECHNICALLY THEY'VE SUBDIVIDED THE LAND AND NOW THEY CAN SELL THE LAND AND THE HOUSE.
SO IT WOULD BE MORE OF A CASE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION OF PEOPLE SAYING, WE WANT TO CREATE A HOME OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITY.
'CAUSE WE ALSO HEARD THAT FROM THE NON-PROFIT, YOU KNOW, THE HABITAT AND THE CHODOS THAT ARE OUT THERE TO SAY, YEAH, IF WE COULD, IF WE COULD DO THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT DOUBLES OUR OUTPUT ON THE NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS AND THE NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR HOUSEHOLDS TO BUILD THAT WEALTH.
UM, BUT RIGHT NOW YOU, YOU CAN'T DO THAT IN SOUTH DALLAS.
SO IT'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT IN THAT DUPLEX ZONING DISTRICT, YOU CREATE THAT OPTION.
YEAH, I, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT.
IT'S JUST SEEM, IT'S INTERESTING CONCEPT.
UH, DO OUR CODE CITY CODES, DESIGN STANDARDS, ET CETERA, ALLOW SOMETHING BASICALLY TWO HOUSES THAT ARE RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
BUT THAT THERE IS A WAY TO WRITE, OUR BUILDING CODE DOESN'T PROHIBIT THAT INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE DOESN'T PROHIBIT THAT IT IS JUST OUR ZONING OR DEVELOPMENT CODE.
AND SO IT'S JUST CREATING THAT OPTION IN THE PD TO SAY, HERE'S A DISTRICT THAT COULD ALLOW THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER FORESITE? THE, UH, COULD YOU SHOW THE MAP OF THE, THE, THE, THE, THE AREA PLEASE? IS, IS, IS THIS WHOLE AREA AND THE PD 5 95? UM, IT IS NOT.
THERE ARE SOME AREAS, 'CAUSE THIS IS, UH, THE, THE SERVICE DISTRICT MAP.
UM, THERE ARE SOME AREAS ON THIS MAP THAT ARE NOT IN THE PD.
UM, THIS AREA PLAN PROVIDES, EXCUSE ME, GUIDANCE FOR THE ENTIRE AREA, BUT IT MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT CHANGING PACIFIC AREAS IN THE PD.
AND WE CAN GET YOU A MAP OF THE, THE PD OUTLINES.
IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO TO SEE BECAUSE IT'S NOT ALWAYS CONTINUOUS.
IT, IT, IT'S KIND OF LOOKING, IT, IT'S, WE CAN GET YOU THAT MAP.
IT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT DIFFICULT TO, TO LOOK AT AND TO UNDERSTAND FROM A CONCEPT IS, IS IT 80% OR 90% OF THIS AREA? IT'S, SO IS IT FULLY CONTIGUOUS WITHIN THIS AREA TOO? RIGHT.
SO IF IT DOESN'T INCLUDE, SO THE, THE BIG GREEN AREA, IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THAT, IT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE BLUE AREA THAT'S GONNA BE FAIR PARK, BUT BASICALLY THE MAJORITY, 90% OF THE AREA THAT IS TO THE WEST OF THE BLUE AND IS TO THE SOUTH, SORRY, IS TO THE WEST OF THE GREEN AND THE SOUTH OF THE BLUE.
THERE ARE SOME CARVE OUTS THOUGH.
AND ARE THESE DESIGN STANDARD CHANGES THAT YOU'VE ADDRESSED IN YOUR POWERPOINT PRESENTATION? ARE THEY TO, UH, TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE PD 5 95? YES, THEY WOULD BE THERE.
THE AREA PLAN MAKES THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.
THE AREA PLAN DOESN'T, WHEN THE AREA PLAN
[00:45:01]
IS APPROVED, IT'S APPROVED WITH THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.A NEW HOUSE DOESN'T HAVE TO COMPLY, BUT THEN THE ZONING WOULD BE CHANGED.
AND IN THE NEW ZONING, WHEN YOU SUBMIT YOUR BUILDING PLAN, IT WOULD SAY, HERE ARE THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS.
SO JUST LIKE THERE'S A SETBACK RIGHT NOW IN, IN THE PD IT WOULD SAY, HERE'S A SETBACK AND HERE'S A STANDARD FOR THE, THE GARAGE OR THE FRONT PORCH OR THOSE THINGS.
IT WOULD HAVE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU WOULD THEN HAVE TO COMPLY WITH IF YOU'RE GONNA BUILD A NEW HOUSE IN SOUTH DALLAS.
BUT THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS APPLY TO THE PD 5 95, NOT TO THE WHOLE AREA? THAT'S CORRECT.
I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON ONE QUESTION THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER HALL HAD ASKED EARLIER ABOUT THE, UM, DESIGNATION OF QUEEN CITY, WHICH IS UNDERWAY.
ARE THERE OTHER NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICTS THAT ARE WITHIN THE STUDY AREA BOUNDARIES THAT THE COMMUNITY WOULD BE INTERESTED IN CONSIDERING FORMALIZING WITHIN THE CITY PROCESS? SO IN THE STUDY AREA, THERE ARE HIS, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL HISTORIC DISTRICTS THAT ALREADY HAVE THAT DESIGNATION.
UH, WHEATLEY PLACE, UM, SOUTH BOULEVARD PARK ROW.
UM, THERE, THERE ARE NOT OTHER AREAS IN THE STUDY AREA THAT DO NOT ALREADY HAVE A HISTORIC DISTRICT, THAT ARE NOT QUEEN CITY, THAT EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO DO A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND SO, BUT THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE OTHER, BECAUSE THERE, I BELIEVE THERE'S TWO OTHER, AND AGAIN, I'M JUST ASKING THE QUESTION IF IT WAS ANYTHING MM-HMM
THAT THE COMMUNITY WAS AWARE THAT THEY HAD THOSE OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE.
YES, WE DID HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES ABOUT THAT POSSIBILITY.
AND, UM, AT THE END OF THE DAY, UM, THEY DID NOT EXPRESS A DESIRE TO DO THAT, TO DO THAT CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
UM, WE CONNECTED THEM WITH CITY STAFF TO TO, TO EXPLORE THAT OPTION.
UM, BUT THEY, UM, AT THIS POINT THEY HAVE NOT CHOSEN TO DO THAT.
COMMISSIONER, ER SECOND ROUND PLEASE.
UM, WOULD YOU SAY THAT COLONIAL HILLS IS ACTUALLY ONE OF THOSE DISTRICT THAT IS, UH, UH, OPEN TO THAT, UM, WHICH IS DIRECTLY ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF S AND WRIGHT BOULEVARD, UH, FROM QUEEN CITY FOR THAT DESIGNATION? IT, YES.
AND SO WE, YOU KNOW, WE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH COLONIAL HILLS ABOUT THAT POSSIBILITY.
AND AGAIN, IF MOVING FORWARD THEY DECIDE TO PIVOT, UM, WE CAN MAKE CHANGES TO THE AREA PLAN TO SAY YES, THEY WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO DO THAT.
UM, WHAT I WOULD ALSO SAY IS, UM, BECAUSE THE RECOMMENDATIONS RIGHT NOW FOR THE AUTHORIZED HEARING WOULD BE TO REMOVE QUEEN CITY FROM THE PD IF IN DOING THE AUTHORIZED HEARING COLONIAL HILLS DECIDES THAT THEY ALSO WANT TO DO THAT OPTION AND THEY DON'T WANT THE DESIGN STANDARDS, THEY WANNA DO A HISTORIC DISTRICT, WE CAN WORK WITH THEM IN THE AUTHORIZED HEARING TO, TO DO A SIMILAR PROCESS TO QUEEN CITY.
UM, COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL PDS THAT ARE INSIDE OF PD 5 95 WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF PD 5 95 THAT WERE SET ASIDE FOR? UM, BECAUSE CERTAIN BUSINESSES, HISTORICAL BUSINESSES, UH, WOULD NOT MEET THE STANDARDS OF PD 5 95 AND WOULD ESSENTIALLY CLOSE, UM, ESPECIALLY ALONG THAT SECOND AVENUE CORRIDOR AND BEAR STREET.
YES, THERE'S AREAS IN THE STUDY AREA THAT ARE NOT IN, UH, TECHNICALLY NOT IN THE, IN PD 5 95, HAVE THEIR OWN PED, UM, TO ADDRESS CERTAIN ISSUES.
THAT INCLUDES BAYER STREET, THAT INCLUDES THAT AREA SECOND AVENUE, UM, THAT'S FURTHER SOUTH OR SOUTHEAST.
UM, AGAIN, THERE ARE SIMILAR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THOSE AREAS, UM, TO SAY THAT IF A PRIVATE ZONING CHANGE COMES UP, YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THE AREA PLAN.
BUT BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN PD 5 95, THERE'S NOT A DIRECT RECOMMENDATION THAT WE CHANGE THE ZONING IN THOSE OTHER PDS, UM, TO, TO MAKE THEM MIX USE SPECIFICALLY.
UM, ALSO COULD YOU EXPLAIN LIKE THOSE AREAS THAT HAVE, UH, SUCH AS THAT, THAT ARE LONGER, UM, CORRIDORS, PRETTY MUCH BUSINESS CORRIDORS, BUT THEY HAVE DIFFERENT, UM, SUCH AS MALCOLM X, SECOND AVENUE, LC, FAYE HIGGINS, HOW THOSE CORRIDORS WE HAD TO ADDRESS AND LOOK AT EACH CORRIDOR SEPARATELY, UM, TO APPLY ZONING IN SECTIONS, I MEAN RECOMMENDATIONS IN SECTIONS INSTEAD OF JUST A FULL CORRIDOR BASED OFF OF THE FLOOR TRAFFIC.
AND SO WHAT COMMUNITY, WHAT THE AREA PLAN RECOMMENDS IS THAT THOSE CORRIDORS BECOME MIXED USE AND THAT WE CHANGE THE ZONING.
AND SO IF THERE, 'CAUSE THERE ARE AREAS ALONG THOSE CORRIDORS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE COMMERCIAL ZONING, THEY JUST HAVE, UM, RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
AND SO THE RECOMMENDATIONS ISN'T NECESSARY TO CHANGE THAT ZONING, BUT IT'S TO CHANGE THE COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTY THAT ARE ON THOSE CORRIDORS.
AND SO IF YOU GO DOWN LC FAY OR IF YOU'RE ON, UM, AT MALCOLM
[00:50:01]
X, THERE ARE POCKETS WHERE IT'S JUST HOUSING.IT'S JUST SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING.
AND THE RECOMMENDATION ISN'T TO CHANGE THAT, BUT IT'S TO CHANGE THOSE AREAS THAT ALREADY HAVE THE COMMERCIAL ZONING ON IT TO MAKE THOSE THE MIXED USE AREAS.
UM,
YEAH, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THE TASK FORCE BROUGHT UP WAS EXACTLY THAT POINT, UM, THAT THERE WAS, UM, KIND OF SOMETIMES A LACK OF, UM, COORDINATION BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
AND SO ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS IS TO CREATE EITHER A FORMAL OR INFORMAL GROUP THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO WEIGH IN ON ISSUES IN SOUTH DALLAS AS A WHOLE.
UM, THE TWO DIFFERENT GROUPS, UM, THAT STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING WITH THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED, UM, SINCE THE AREA PLANNING PROCESS STARTED IS THE SOUTH DALLAS NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION, UM, WHICH MEETS QUARTERLY AND THEN THE POINT SOUTH REVITALIZATION COMMITTEE, WHICH MEETS MONTHLY.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION IS MORE A COALITION OF THE FOLKS THAT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE POINT SOUTH GROUP IS MORE OF BUSINESS OWNERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS.
UM, WE MEET WITH BOTH OF THOSE GROUPS AND I WOULD POINT OUT THAT BOTH THOSE GROUPS, UM, VERY MUCH SO, UM, HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WALKING HAND IN HAND THAT YOU ARE PRESERVING THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS WHILE ALLOWING FOR MORE DEVELOPMENTAL ALONG THOSE CORRIDORS.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT BOTH OF THOSE GROUPS HAVE SAID THEY ARE INTERESTED IN.
UM, AND THAT AS ZONING CASES COME UP AS HOUSING WANTS TO HAVE MEETINGS, AS TRANSPORTATION COMES UP TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS, THOSE ARE THE GROUPS WHERE THEY, WHERE THEY CALL LINDSAY OR PATRICK PATRICK UP AND SAY, WE WANT TO TALK TO SOUTH DALLAS.
WE SAY, OKAY, GO TALK WITH THESE TWO GROUPS.
LET'S GET YOU SET UP TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH BOTH OF THEM.
I KNOW THAT A LOT OF CONCERN IS AROUND HOUSING, HOW THIS, BY THIS AREA OF PLANNED TASK FORCE NOT BEING CLOSED OUT CURRENTLY, HOW WE'VE ALSO BEEN HAD TO ADDRESS, UM, WITH THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ON HOUSING THAT MIGHT NOT BE CONFORMING.
UM, BUT BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE STREET MEETS, UM, IS HAVE SETBACKS THAT THAT, UM, THE RECOMMENDATION SHOULDN'T BE TO TEAR DOWN A HOUSE TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE WHOLE STREET AS A WHOLE, PREFERABLY PINE STREET.
SO THERE ARE, UM, SOME STREETS IN SOUTH DALLAS THAT, UM, THE MAJORITY OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE ON THOSE PROPERTIES ARE NON-CONFORMING.
THEY BASICALLY DON'T MEET SETBACKS.
THEY'RE TOO CLOSE TO THE STREET FOR THE, THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS.
UM, AND WHEN WE HAD THOSE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IF WE CHANGE THOSE SETBACKS, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT HOUSE? BECAUSE CHANGING THOSE SETBACKS MIGHT MEAN THAT THEN SOMEBODY CAN COME IN AND SAY, I'M GONNA KNOCK DOWN THAT OLDER HOUSE AND I'M GONNA BUILD A VERY NEW HOUSE VERY CLOSE TO THAT STREET.
AND SO IN, SORRY, AREA PLAN TALKS ABOUT HOW WE CAN AGAIN, CREATE THOSE NEW DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THOSE DIFFERENT HOUSES, BUT THAT WE'RE NOT CREATING DESIGN STANDARDS ON CERTAIN STREETS THAT WOULD LEAD TO MORE DISPLACEMENT BECAUSE OF THOSE OLDER STRUCTURES BEING REMOVED BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE CHANGING SOME OF THOSE SETBACKS TO BE MORE ACCOMMODATING FOR, FOR NEW HOUSES.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE NEED TO PICK UP THE PACE A LITTLE BIT.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT AND, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, TAKE US HOME.
UH, I DON'T REALLY HAVE A QUESTION JUST TO COMMENT THAT, UM, THE DESIGN STANDARDS, I THINK, UM, ARE THE SOMETHING WE'RE GONNA NEED.
WELL, ONE, I THINK THEY'RE VERY APPROPRIATE.
TWO, I THINK WE WILL NEED CONSIDERATION OF THAT KIND OF DESIGN STANDARD REALLY ALL OVER THE CITY SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.
UH, WHEN WE, WE GET SO MANY CONCERNS FROM RESIDENTS COMING DOWN HERE IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE THIS, UH, REDEVELOPMENT, UM, MOMENTUM GOING ON IN THEM.
AND IT'S GENERALLY THE SAME COMMENTS ABOUT THE BIG DUPLEXES AND THE FLAT ROOFS AND THE BIG GARAGES.
AND SO, UM, I, UM, I CAN SUPPORT THE KIND OF THINGS YOU ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT THERE AND THERE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
AND JUST ONE FOLLOW UP, AS YOU ALL ARE TALKING WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT, UM, CONSIDERATION OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND DESIGNATIONS, I NOTED THAT WHEATLEY PLACE, WHILE A DESIGNATED DISTRICT VARIES FROM THEIR NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARIES, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE CITY OR THAT THE, UH, RESIDENTS WANTED TO CONSIDER.
AND I CAN'T FIND THE DESIGNATION AREA FOR QUEEN CITY TO CONFIRM ANY VARIANCE, BUT THERE'S AN ADJACENT, AND I WILL APOLOGIZE, I'M PROBABLY GONNA MISPRONOUNCE THE NAME.
ROMINE AVENUE IS ALSO A DESIGNATED, UH, NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT MAY OR MAY NOT WANNA CONSIDER THAT AS
[00:55:01]
YOU ALL ARE ALSO TALKING TO COLONIAL HILL.SO JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT AND HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP WITH COMMISSIONER WHEELER OFFLINE.
SO, SO, UH, I THINK IT'S, TO COMMENT ON IT, SO THE MAJORITY OF, I MEAN, QUEEN CITY FOR WHATEVER REASON, THE HISTORICAL DISTRICT, IT BEING, BEING A HISTORICAL DISTRICT, IT ALSO, UM, SOME KIND OF WAY IT NEVER MADE TO THE CITY AND WE DON'T KNOW WHY.
UM, BUT R MINE IS DEFINITELY BECAUSE OF THE HISTORICAL PROPERTIES, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN BECAUSE OF THE NATIONAL, IT HAS BEEN ALTERED SOME AND THAT'S WHY YEAH, R MINE IS DEFINITELY ONE OF THE, IT HAS THE OLDER BUILDINGS.
UM, AND I GUESS I'D MAKE A COMMENT.
I I I, I'VE NEVER BEEN MORE PLEASED WITH CITY STAFF, UM, ESPECIALLY WITH THESE TWO YOUNG PEOPLE RIGHT HERE WORKING, UM, DILIGENTLY AND NOT JUST WORKING AS SAYING, THIS IS MY JOB, BUT ACTUALLY PUTTING, PUTTING, GETTING TOGETHER WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF AND SAYING, HEY, THIS IS WHO YOU GO TO, THIS IS, AND IT'S BEEN FLOW AND THEY HELP US FLOW SO WELL WITH OTHER ISSUES THAT REALLY ADDRESS IN REAL TIME BEFORE THIS MAKES IT TO, UM, THE AUTHORIZED HEARING.
BUT THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING THINGS IN REAL TIME THAT WE WOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO ADDRESS IN THE PAST WITHOUT THE HELP OF THIS PUD STAFF.
AND, AND ESPECIALLY TALKING WITH UH, COM, UM, DIRECTOR LOU AND SAYING, HEY, HOW DO WE DO GET DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE MAJORITY OF DALLAS AND HOW DO WE DO GO ABOUT DOING THAT? SO I HAVE BEEN VERY PLEASED, I CALL THEM REGULARLY ABOUT, HEY, THIS IS SOMETHING NEW.
AND SO WHERE OTHER, THE OTHER 13 TASK FORCE CLOSED OUT EARLY, UM, WE HAVE, WE'VE BEEN OPEN FOR FIVE YEARS BECAUSE WE KEEP ADDRESSING NEW ISSUES AND, AND SO THANK THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING, WE ARE NEAR THE END AND WE'RE READY.
JENNIFER CAN OH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT PLEASE, SIR? YES.
I KNOW WE'RE PUSHING FOR TIME.
I JUST, UM, AGAIN, UM, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.
QUEEN CITY, UM, I KNOW IS KIND OF BROKEN UP IN THE SECTIONS.
UM, FOR INSTANCE WHERE JUANITA CRAFT HOUSES IS QUEEN CITY, A BLOCK AWAY I THINK ISN'T IN THE DESIGNATION.
HAS THE DESIGNATION BEEN EXPANDED TO OTHER HOUSES WHO HAVE BEEN BUILT IN THE SAME TIME PERIOD OR IS IT STILL THE SAME? UM, UM, HISTORIC DESIGNATION AS BEFORE, SO ARE HISTORIC STAFF IS WORKING ON THE BOUNDARIES OF, OF QUEEN CITY AND SERVING NOT JUST QUEEN CITY, BUT COLONIAL HILLS AND THE SURROUNDING AREA.
UH, AND BASED UPON THAT WORK AND THEN WHAT QUEEN CITY THAN COMMUNITY, UH, COMES TOGETHER TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION WITH, THEY WOULD BE DEFINING THEIR BOUNDARIES, WHICH MAY BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE NATIONAL HISTORIC DISTRICT ARE.
SO IF THEY WANT TO INCLUDE CERTAIN AREAS OR NOT INCLUDE CERTAIN AREAS, THEY CAN DO THAT.
AND, UH, MR. BLAZE AND MS. JACKSON, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE BRIEFING.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GONNA JUST KEEP GOING RIGHT INTO THE DOCKET.
WE HAVE OUR, UH, CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS NOW CONSISTENT OF CASES TWO THROUGH 12 CASES SEVEN AND 11 AT THIS POINT HAVE COME OFF.
CONSENT SEVEN AND 11 HAVE COME OFF AND 10.
SEVEN, 11 AND 10 HAVE COME OFF AND, AND 12 7 11.
SO WE HAVE, UM, 7, 10, 11, AND 12 HAVE COME OFF CONSENT AT THIS POINT.
UH, THREE THREE HAS COME OFF CONSENT AS WELL TOO.
SO WE HAVE 3, 7, 10, 11, 12, SORRY, 16.
IF IT'S ON CONSENT, CAN YOU PULL IT? IT'S NOT ON CONSENT.
SO WE'LL BEGIN WITH CASE NUMBER TWO.
UH, THIS ONE WE WILL BRIEF ONLY AT REQUEST AND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER IS OKAY, NOW SEVEN CAN COME BACK ON.
SO SEVEN HAS, WE WILL KEEP THAT ONE ON CONSENT.
UH, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON NUMBER TWO BEFORE WE MOVE ON? OKAY.
HOW ABOUT, UH, THREE HAS COME OFF CONSENT, SO LET'S BRIEF THAT ONE.
WE'RE GONNA KEEP THREE OFF CONSENT, RIGHT? COMMISSIONER WHEELER.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND BRIEF THAT ONE THEN.
[01:00:01]
NUMBER THREE ON YOUR AGENDA.2 3 4 DASH ONE ONE OVER ON SOUTH BUCKNER.
IT'S A REQUEST FOR RENEWAL, A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2269 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A CONVENIENCE STORE, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS.
UH, IT'S AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTH BUCKNER AND 48 ROAD.
IT'S A LITTLE OVER A HALF ACRE OF LAND, UH, DEVELOPED WITH A CONVENIENCE STORE THAT'S A LITTLE OVER 3000 SQUARE FEET.
UH, IT IS IN THE LI THAT'S THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.
UH, IT DOES HAVE A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.
THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRING THE SUP.
UM, SO OVER TOWARDS THE EASTERN PORTIONS OF THE CITY, YOU CAN SEE IT'S RELATIONSHIP THERE TO BUCKNER AND FORNEY.
UH, LOOKING AT SURROUNDING USES OFFICES, SOME UNDEVELOPED PROPERTIES.
UH, THE ALLIED DISTRICT, UH, TO THE NORTH, UH, SOUTH AND EAST WITH A, UH, MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO THE WEST ACROSS SOUTH BUCKNER.
UH, DURING THE SITE VISIT, UH, TAKING A LOOK, THIS IS SOUTH, HEADING SOUTHBOUND ON, UH, SOUTH BUCKNER.
UH, TAKING A LOOK BACK AT THE SITE, UH, TAKING A LOOK ON THE SITE.
AND THIS IS ACTUALLY A, A STREET GOOGLE STREET VIEW.
APOLOGIZE, I DIDN'T GET A SITE, A PHOTO FROM THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE SITE, SO JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT FOR REFERENCE IF WE NEED IT.
UH, NO CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, UH, WHAT THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING.
APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, UH, WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY.
UH, LET'S GO TO CASE NUMBER FOUR.
UH, THAT IS STAYING ON CONSENT.
I DON'T NEED IT BRIEFED UNLESS SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT OR HAS ANY QUESTIONS ON IT.
TAKES US TO CASE NUMBER FIVE, CHAIR A SECOND.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, YOU, YOU, WOULD YOU LIKE THIS ONE BRIEF, SIR? OR NO, SIR? NO.
ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS ON NUMBER FIVE OR WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST TO BRIEF IT, SIR? YES, SIR.
COMMISSIONER HALL ON THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD WAS I, I DIDN'T SEE HOW MANY YEARS OF CRIME STATISTICS WERE IN THERE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FOR THE QUESTION.
I USUALLY REQUEST FOR THE SAME TIME PERIOD BACK OR FROM THE PREVIOUS, UM, RENEWAL.
THAT'S USUALLY THE TIMEFRAME THAT I REQUEST FROM OUR FOLKS OVER AT POLICE, IS THAT, OH, I'M, MAYBE I WASN'T PAYING ATTENTION, BUT, OKAY.
BUT HOW MANY YEARS WAS THAT? UH, THAT WOULD BE, I BELIEVE FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD.
A QUICK QUESTION, CHERYL, ON THAT ONE.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT? UM, YES.
IS THE APPLICANT PLANNING ANY, UM, IMPROVEMENTS TO THE, TO THEIR SITE, UM, OR THEIR SECURITY PLANS? IS IS A HIGH CRIME AREA, RIGHT? DO YOU KNOW ANY OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THEIR APPEARANCE, CLEANING UP THE PLACE, ANY OF THAT LANDSCAPE PLAN, ANY OF IT? I'M UNAWARE OF THAT.
UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, THAT MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, IF YOU'D WANT TO ASK THE APPLICANTS ANY QUESTIONS, WE CAN TAKE IT OFF.
UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'D LIKE TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS.
SO LET'S TAKE NUMBER FIVE OFF, TAKE OFF CONSENT.
LET'S CIRCLE BACK ON NUMBER SIX, IT TAKES US TO, AND SEVEN NUMBER EIGHT.
MR. FRANKLIN, WOULD YOU LIKE THAT ONE BRIEFED? NO, WE CAN KEEP THIS ON CONSENT.
ANY, ANY QUESTIONS OR REQUEST A BRIEF NUMBER EIGHT? NUMBER EIGHT.
COMMISSIONER FORSET, WOULD YOU LIKE THAT ONE BRIEFED, SIR? NO, UH, YOU CAN KEEP THIS ON CONSENT.
ANY QUESTIONS OR REQUEST A BRIEF? YES.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT? I GUESS THIS WOULD BE FOR MR. CLINTON, BUT I DON'T, I DON'T SEE HIM.
UM, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS APPLICANT IS SUBJECT TO THE RESIDENTIAL BUFFER ZONE.
I MEAN, IT'S RESIDENTIAL NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL, SO THERE'S SOMETHING THAT I CLEARLY DON'T UNDERSTAND.
UH, BUT THE, THE APPLICANT SEEMS TO BE BURDENED WITH THIS WHEN THEY'RE, THEY'VE GOT A, AN UNUSUALLY SMALL LOT AND THEY'RE RIGHT NEXT TO OTHER RESIDENTIALS.
SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHY WE'RE ASKING THEM TO CREATE THIS BUFFER ZONE? YES.
SO THAT WAS ACTUALLY, UH, A TYPO ON STAFF'S PART, SO THAT'S
[01:05:01]
NOT REQUIRED.I I CAN ADD THAT I ASKED THAT QUESTION OF, UH, MR. IRWIN YESTERDAY, AND HE CONFIRMED THAT IT'S NOT REQUIRED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, WOULD YOU LIKE THIS ONE BRIEFED NUMBER 10? YEAH.
ARE WE GONNA HEAR IT OR SHOULD WE, WE'RE GONNA HOLD IT UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY THE SIXTH AND NO BRIEFING NEEDED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER.
SO WE'LL HOLD THAT ONE UNDER ADVISEMENT TO FEBRUARY 6TH.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, WOULD YOU LIKE THAT ONE BRIEFED? NO.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON NUMBER 11? OKAY.
COMMISSIONER
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UM, IN THE REPORT IT SAYS THAT REMOVAL OF THE URBAN FARM SETBACK IMPROVES WALKABILITY.
I WAS WONDERING HOW THAT WAS DECIDED.
I GENERALLY, IN THE PLANNING FIELD, A LOWER SETBACK MEANS BUILDINGS ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO BE CLOSER TO THE STREET, AND A BUILDING CLOSER TO THE STREET IS TYPICALLY BETTER FOR WALKABILITY.
COULD YOU ALSO, UM, ELABORATE ON THE, UM, INTRUSIONS INTO THAT 15 FOOT SETBACK THAT ARE BEING ADDED? IS THIS BE, I'M TAKING IT THAT THIS, UM, WHOLE CASE IS COMING BACK BECAUSE THE, UH, THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING DID NOT MEET THE PD IN CERTAIN WAYS, AND SO THEY MUST HAVE A DESIGN THAT HAS CERTAIN, I MEAN, CANOPY AND WALKWAYS THAT ARE NOT MEETING THE STANDARDS? YES, AND IT'S, IT'S MAINLY AROUND THAT.
I MEAN, WE HAD, THERE WERE PROJECTIONS OR AS YOU SAY, ENC OR AS THE CODE SAYS ENCROACHMENTS MM-HMM
INTO THE SETBACK PERMITTED BEFORE, UM, THERE WAS A COUPLE ELEMENTS.
THIS ONE HAS, UH, ALSO ADDED PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY, ENTRANCE DRIVE, AND CANOPY STRUCTURES AND MECHANICAL AIRWAYS.
UH, SO PART OF THAT IS ACCOMMODATE, UM, A BUILDING THAT'S GOING TO BE, IN THIS CASE, I BELIEVE, ON FOREST PARK, WHERE IT WOULD PROJECT A, UM, LIKE A DROP OFF AREA WHERE THEY HAVE A DROP OFF AREA.
PRETTY TYPICAL OF HOSPITALS, BUT IT'S TO ACCOMMODATE THAT.
AND A LOT OF IT IS BECAUSE OF, UM, JUST ADJUSTMENTS TO THE, THE PLAN VERSUS THE ORIGINAL PD.
UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE PRIMARY REASON FOR THE REQUESTS HAVE TO DO WITH THE PARKING GARAGE? UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT FROM A, OR I'LL JUST ASK FROM A LAND USE RATIONALE, WOULD THE USE AS A PARKING GARAGE REMOVING A SETBACK ALSO BE CONSIDERED WALKABLE? WELL, SO IMPROVING WALKABILITY, I'D RATHER HAVE SOME BUILDING NEAR THE STREET THAN NO BUILDING BUILDING'S.
GOING TO A BUILDING, EVEN IF IT'S A PARKING GARAGE, IT'S STILL GONNA CAST, UH, THINGS LIKE SHADE AND DEFINITION.
SO I'M NOT GONNA SAY THAT IT'S GOING TO BE, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS, THAT, THAT PART IS MAINLY FOR THE PARKING GARAGE, UM, IS GOING TO BE WALKABLE NECESSARILY, BUT IT'S, IT'S AN IMPROVEMENT, ANY IMPROVEMENT.
UH, SO I, I AS A PLANNER WOULD RATHER HAVE A BUILDING OF SOME KIND, CLOSE TO A STREET TO CACHE AND OTHER THINGS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, THAT WAS, THAT WAS 12.
AND THAT TAKES US TO OUR CASES UNDER ADVISEMENT.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY CHANGES OR UPDATES TO CASE NUMBER 13? DO WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR A BRIEFING OF CASE NUMBER 13? OKAY, SURE.
WE'LL GET MS. MUNOZ JUST, JUST, UH, IN CASE THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.
[01:10:17]
SO YOU WOULD LIKE TO RUN THROUGH THIS ONE THEN? GOOD MORNING, MS. MUNOZ.OKAY, MS. MS. MUNOZ IS HERE, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE FOR MS. MUNOZ? ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR FOLKS ONLINE? OKAY.
UH, WILL WE BE RE BRIEFING THIS ITEM RIGHT NOW? PARDON ME? WOULD YOU LIKE THIS ITEM TO BE RE BRIEFED AT THIS TIME? NO, THERE WAS NO REQUEST FOR BRIEFING AND, AND THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. MUNOZ.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'LL GO TO CASE NUMBER 14.
UH, HAS THIS BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE? OH, IT HAS BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE, YES.
ANY QUESTIONS OR CHANGES? COMMISSIONER HERBERT, WOULD YOU LIKE IT BRIEFED AGAINST HER? UM, I'M NOT SURE IF OUR NEWER COMMISSIONERS HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THIS CASE CASE THOROUGHLY.
IT MAY, IT MAY, UH, HELP THEM.
IT MAY BE A GOOD LEARNING LESSON, UM, TO HAVE IT BRIEF.
SO WE'D JUST LIKE TO GO THROUGH THE POWERPOINT AGAIN AS A REFRESHER, CORRECT? YES.
OUR WEBEX, UH, CRASHED HERE, SO I NEED HOPEFULLY 30 SECONDS.
OKAY, SO HERE ONCE AGAIN IS, UH, THIS CASE Z 2 2 3 2 20.
I'LL JUST KIND OF GO THROUGH QUICKLY TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY, BUT IT'S GENERAL ZONE CHANGE.
IT'S LOCATED DOWN SOUTHWEST PART OF THE CITY OFF CAMP WISDOM, AND IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR MF TWO, A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED NSA NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE DISTRICT WITH THE RESTRICTIONS Z 8 8 9 180 7.
UM, AND IN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF WEST CAMPUS ANDM ROAD BETWEEN CLARK ROAD AND ROYAL CEDAR WAY, IT'S FOUR AND A HALF, 4.8 ACRES, AND THE PURPOSE IS TO PER, UH, PERMIT RESIDENTIAL USE ON THE SITE.
AS YOU'LL RECALL, THE CURRENT ZONING IS THAT COMMERCIAL, NSA, THERE'S SOME MULTI-FAMILY PD ZONING TO THE NORTHWEST, UH, OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMIT IS TO THE SOUTH, AND THERE'S A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD ACROSS THE WAY TO THE EAST.
AND SO ZONED TO NSA UN ENVELOPED RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE PROPOSING THOSE RESIDENTIAL USES.
UH, THERE ARE EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT DON'T, UH, INTERFERE WITH WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO SINCE THEY REGULATE COMMERCIAL USES.
UH, THAT MF TWO IS GONNA BE APPROPRIATE, UH, ON THIS SITE, GIVEN THE MACRO FACTORS.
AND AS FOR THE SITE OVERALL, I'LL RUN DOWN ALONG CAMP WISDOM, LOOKING DOWN CAMP WISDOM OUTSIDE CITY LIMIT.
UM, THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST PROPERTIES, THOSE ARE ACTUALLY TO THE EAST.
NO, THEY'RE THE WEST LOOKING SOUTHWEST.
AND THERE'S THE PROPERTY AS IT IS.
I DID INCLUDE THE, UH, THE FLOOD PLAIN LAYER, SO YOU, BECAUSE THERE WAS QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT AND THE OVERALL LAY OF THE LAND ON THE SITE.
SO EXISTING, WE'VE GOT THAT COMMERCIAL NSA, AND THEN WE'VE GOT MULTIFAMILY AS TO, AS THE PROPOSED ZONING STAFF RECOMMENDATION
[01:15:01]
IS APPROVAL.QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER HERBERT? ANY QUESTIONS, SIR? NO, JUST, UM, QUICK, WE'VE, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS, A LOT OF TALK ABOUT, UM, THE SPECIFIC SITE.
UM, I KNOW WE'VE HAD A LOT OF FLACK ABOUT HOLDING CASES, BUT THIS WAS A VERY UNIQUE LOCATION, UM, WITH A LOT OF UNIQUE CHALLENGES.
UM, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS AROUND ENGINEERING AND OTHER THINGS OUTSIDE OF ZONING.
UM, BUT IT TOOK THAT CONVER IT TOOK A LOT OF CONVERSATION TO GET THERE AND TO UNDERSTAND, UM, THAT A LOT OF THIS IS KIND OF OUT OF OUR PURVIEW.
UM, WE HAVE SOME ISSUES AROUND THE LAND USE AND THE APPROVAL, BUT, UM, OUTSIDE THAT, UH, THE, THE MAJOR ISSUES WERE OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW HERE, AND I JUST WANTED TO GET EVERYTHING OUT, UM, THAT FROM THE BEGINNING SO THAT THE NEW COMMISSIONERS WERE ABLE TO SEE IT.
UH, NO, NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, BUT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ANY ADDITIONAL CHANGES, RIGHT, MICHAEL? NOT OFFICIAL ONES THAT ARE IN RELATION TO THE ZONING CASE THAT WE CAN HAVE ON THE RECORD.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT.
YOU'RE RIGHT, WE DO HAVE SOME, UH, COUPLE OF NEW COLLEAGUES AND THE, UH, THE HISTORY OF THIS CASE, UH, WAS VERY HELPFUL TO GET ON THE RECORD, SO I APPRECIATE IT, SIR.
UH, COMMISSIONERS TAKES US TO CASE.
UM, YOU'RE, YOU'RE AWARE WE'VE HAD THIS CASE UNDER ADVISORY SINCE SEPTEMBER, SO, UH, IT MIGHT BE NICE IF WE COULD GET THIS DONE.
UH, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, AND I THINK COMMISSIONER HERBERT MAYBE DID IT FOR US, BUT THIS BODY IS ONLY CONSIDERING ZONING AND LAND USE.
NOT ANY, NOT ANY CHALLENGES RELATED TO ENGINEERING, TOPOGRAPHY,
UH, YES, ALL OF THOSE THINGS HAVE PROCESSES THAT EXIST WITHIN THE CITY, WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS THAT MUST BE FOLLOWED.
I MEAN, SO ON ONE SIDE, ON ONE HAND, WE DON'T HAVE PURVIEW TO CONTROL THOSE WITH THE ZONING CASE, BUT AT THE SAME RATE, CHANGES IN THE ZONING DOESN'T CHANGE OR GIVE THEM ANY EASIER TIME GOING THROUGH THOSE PROCESS THAN THEY DO TODAY.
YOU STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH IT.
IF THEY'VE DEVELOPED UNDER THEIR COMMERCIAL ZONING, IT COULD BE PRETTY STRINGENT.
SAME THING WILL APPLY UNDER THE MULTIFAMILY.
AND SO EVEN IF WE APPROVED THE REQUESTED ZONING, THEY STILL HAVE A BUNCH OF HURDLES TO JUMP THROUGH TO, TO BRING A, A MULTI-STORY FACILITY INTO, UH, INTO FRUITION.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE, THE, THE REALLY STRONG SLOPE OF THIS LAND FROM CAMP WISDOM DOWN.
I WAS JUST CURIOUS HOW PROXIMITY SLOPE OR, OR ANYTHING TO DO WITH HEIGHT THAT'S MEASURED WHEN YOU HAVE SUCH A A STEEP TOPOGRAPHY CHANGE? YOU ASK.
YEAH, YOU ASK A GREAT QUESTION.
AND IT, IT SPAWNED ABOUT 45 TO AN HOUR OF TALKING WITH MY, MY COLLEAGUES ABOUT HOW WHEN WE TAKE RPS TO MEASURE ON A, ON A GRADE, I GUESS THE SIMPLEST WAY TO PUT IT IS RPS ACTS ON SITES FROM POINTS OF ORIGINATION AND IT ACTS FROM PROPERTY LINES.
THE GRADE OF THE SITE THAT IT'S ACTING UPON AND WHERE THOSE BUILDINGS ARE LOCATED ON IT, UH, DETERMINES HOW RPS IS BEING APPLIED TO THEM, THE GRADE OF THE PROPERTY LINES.
SO IN THIS CASE, OUR PROPERTY LINE'S KIND OF UP A HILL, SO THEY'RE UP A HILL.
THE RPS DOES NOT JUST GENERATE FROM THE TOP OF THAT HILL WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE LIVES, IT GENERATES RELATIVE TO THE AVERAGE GRADE OF PROPOSED BUILDINGS RELATIVE TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
UH, AS, AS, SO YOU TAKE YOUR AVERAGE GRADE OF WHERE THE BUILDINGS ARE AT, DRAW A LINE OVER TO THE PROPERTY LINE AT THAT SAME ELEVATION, AND THEN GENERATE AN RPS SLOPE FROM THAT RELATIVE TO THE BUILDING.
SO IT'S A LONG COMPLICATED WAY OF SAYING THAT THEY HAVE TO, UH, TO A DEGREE ADJUST THEIR BUILDINGS DOWN THE SLOPE.
YOU DON'T GET, YOU DON'T GET SUPER EXTRA CREDIT FOR BEING ON A HILL, POTENTIALLY, YOU HAVE TO REACH THE AVERAGE ACROSS THAT HILL.
SO AS YOU HAVE RPS ACTING ON IT, AS, AS IF THEY BUILD DOWN THE SLOPE, IF THEY DO BUILD DOWN THE SLOPE, THE RPS, UH, IS GOING TO BE BROUGHT DOWN AS THE AVERAGE, UH, GRADE OF THAT BUILDING MOVES DOWN THE SITE.
SO IT LEADS TO A LOWER BUILDING THAN IF YOU JUST SAID, AH, MY RRP S GENERATES FROM THE TOP OF THIS HILL WHERE THIS PROPERTY LINE OVER IN THE EAST IS, IT'S ACTUALLY A BIT LOWER BECAUSE THEY, IF, IF THEY SO CHOOSE TO BUILD THEIR BUILDING NICE AND LOW, UH, IF, IF IN THE LOWER PARTS OF THEIR SITE THAT RPS IS GONNA SLOPE DOWN WITH THEM.
I SAID THE SAME THING A COUPLE TIMES, BUT IT TOOK ME A FEW TIMES
[01:20:01]
TO FIGURE IT OUT.UM, AND I'D BE HAPPY TO POINT YOU TO MORE RESOURCES ON IT BECAUSE IT'S VERY INTERESTING.
COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT, PLEASE.
UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THE ORIGINAL PROPERTY THAT WOULD LIMIT THE HEIGHT OF THE, UH, THE, THE, THE DEVELOPMENT ON THAT PROPERTY.
ARE, ARE THESE, UH, ARE THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS, UH, MOOT, UH, IF WE CHANGE THE ZONING? NO.
SO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT APPLY INTO THE PROPERTY, UH, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO PROPOSAL TO MODIFY THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UH, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH ARE LABELED, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS Z 8 8 9 180 7, TRACK TWO, THOSE STAY IN PLACE.
THOSE STILL, UH, APPLY TO ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT, UH, IS BUILT ON THE PROPERTY.
JUST THOSE DE RESTRICTIONS AS LISTED IN THE REPORT, SAY, YOU KNOW, A GENERAL MERCHANDISE FOOD STORE OF LESS THAN 3,500 IS PROHIBITED.
A MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION IS PROHIBITED.
ALL OTHER USES ARE, ARE ALLOWED.
SO THAT'S WHAT THE D RESTRICTIONS APPLY THERE.
THE, I I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY BE REFERENCE TO D RESTRICTIONS, UH, THAT REGULATE HEIGHT.
THOSE ARE THE NEIGHBORING D RESTRICTIONS FOR TRACT ONE OF Z 8 8 9 180 7.
SO THE, THE RESTRICTIONS DO STAY IN PLACE, BUT THEY LIMIT THEY ARE IN REGARDS TO COMMERCIAL ZONING.
SO YOU SAY THAT THEY DON'T APPLY THEN IF THIS, UH, RE IS REZONED TO A MULTIFAMILY? THEY DO, THEY DO CONTINUE TO APPLY, BUT THEY DON'T REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE, UH, GENERAL, BECAUSE COMMERCIAL USES ARE ALREADY PROHIBITED IN THE MULTIFAMILY ZONE, SO THEY'LL CONTINUE TO STAY THERE.
IF SOMEONE CAME AND CHANGED IT FROM MULTIFAMILY TO COMMERCIAL IN 20 YEARS, AGAIN, THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS WILL STILL APPLY.
THOSE COMMERCIAL DEED RESTRICTIONS WILL STILL APPLY.
IT'S JUST THEY DON'T REALLY DO ANYTHING.
UM, IF YOU SAY YOU CAN'T BUILD A GAS STATION IN A, UH, MULTIFAMILY ZONE, THEY DON'T REALLY DO ANYTHING, BUT THEY STILL REMAIN AND APPLY.
SO, UH, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT THE PROPOSED, UH, DEVELOPMENT IS OF A HIGHER, UH, A GREATER HEIGHT THAN WHAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS CURRENTLY ALLOW.
IS THAT NOT THE CASE? THERE ARE TWO SETS OF D RESTRICTIONS IN THE AREA.
YOU, IF YOU CAN SEE THIS MAP, IF I NEED TO ZOOM IN, THERE'S Z 8 89 180 7 TRACT ONE.
THAT'S A MULTIFAMILY, UH, ZONING.
AND IT HAS D RESTRICTIONS ON IT, THAT LIMIT HEIGHT.
I DON'T REMEMBER EVERYTHING ELSE THOSE, UM, REGULATE.
BUT THEY ARE A SEPARATE SET OF DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THEY'RE FOR TRACK ONE, THESE ARE FOR TRACK TWO, TRACK TWO DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE, WHICH MAKES SENSE.
THEY APPLIED TO COMMERCIAL ZONING, THE COMMERCIAL ZONING THAT WAS APPROVED FOR THIS SITE.
SO TWO SEPARATE, UM, PARTS OF A DOCUMENT, TWO SEPARATE SETS OF REGULATIONS ATTRACT ONE REGULATIONS HAVE NEVER APPLIED FOR THIS SITE BECAUSE THEY'RE TWO GEOGRAPHICALLY SEPARATE SETS, BUT TRACK TWO REGULATIONS DEFINITELY CONTINUE TO APPLY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
DO WE NEED IT BRIEF? ANY QUESTIONS ON CASE NUMBER 15? ANY REQUEST FOR BRIEFING? OKAY, CASE NUMBER 16 COMMISSIONERS HAS, UH, IS GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 6TH.
AND LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER RUBIN HAS A CONFLICT ON THAT.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS ON 16TH? OKAY, TAKES US TO 17 AT, UH, ALSO GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 6TH.
I THINK THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS BEFORE.
ANY QUESTIONS ON NUMBER 18? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE? YES, UM, I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS BECAUSE IT, UM, THE SUP IS FOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE, BUT IT ISN'T, UH, IT DOESN'T SPECIFY WHAT TYPE OF COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE IT IS.
AND FOR, UM, PARKING, IF YOU FALL INTO THE CATEGORY OF OTHER, THE, UM, PARKING RATIO IS ONE TO PER HUNDRED, AND THIS PARKING RATIO WAS CALCULATED ONE TO 300.
SO I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW THAT CAME ABOUT.
AND, AND DOES THE SUP NEED TO SPECIFY WHAT TYPE OF COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE IT IS? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE QUESTION.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UH, I DON'T HAVE A SLIDE IN A PRESENTATION IF YOU WANT ME TO SHARE.
UM, GOOD CATCH AND GOOD EXPLANATION TO GIVE COMMERCIAL
[01:25:01]
AMUSEMENT INSIDE USES, THERE ARE A WIDE VARIETY AND THERE ARE SOME THAT ARE CALLED OUT BY CODE AND LIKE A DANCE HALL OR A BALLING ALLEY.SO IF YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC REQUEST FOR THAT, WE WOULD SAY LIMITED TO A DANCE HALL.
IF NOT IS A, IT FALLS BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DEFINITION OF COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE, WHICH THIS ONE IS.
WHEN IT GOES TO PERMITTING, THEY CANNOT APPLY FOR A DANCE HALL BECAUSE THE SUP DOESN'T SAY DANCE HALL, IT SAYS COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE.
SO THEY WILL BE FUNNELED INTO THE COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE USE THAT IS WIDER.
THE APPLICANT EXPLAINED HE WANTS TO DO SOME SORT OF A VISUAL ART GALLERY, SOME SORT OF AN EVENT SPACE.
UH, WHEN THEY APPLY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR THIS USE SPECIFICALLY, THERE IS A QUESTIONNAIRE, THERE ARE QUESTIONS, AND IF THERE'S SOMETHING SUSPICIOUS THAT THROWS THEM INTO A DIFFERENT TYPE OF COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE THAT DOESN'T, UH, COMPLY WITH THE SUP, THEN THEY WILL NEED TO EITHER AMEND THEIR OPERATION AND COME BACK TO AMEND THE SUP.
SO COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE IT HAS TO FALL BACK ON THE DEFINITION ON THE CODE, UH, AND IS CORRECT.
IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE LIMITED TO, BECAUSE THEY DON'T INTEND TO DO ONE OF THOSE USES THAT REQUIRES SPECIFIC USE PERMIT OR SOMETHING ELSE.
NOW, AS FAR AS PARKING, YOU ARE RIGHT AS WELL, LIKE EACH TYPE OF COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE HAS A DIFFERENT PARKING RATIO.
UM, USUALLY PARKING AS WE KNOW, AND WE SAY FOR EVERY ZONING CASE IS CHECKED AT PERMITTING IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN GET OUT OF.
THEY WILL HAVE TO SHOW IT AT PERMITTING.
THERE ARE 18 PARKING SPACES ON SITE FOR THE FOUR SUITES.
UM, AND, UM, THEY CAN, HE IS STRIPED ALL OF THOSE.
HE'S GONNA EXPLAIN IF AGAIN, AT PERMITTING IS DEEMED THAT THEY NEED MORE PARKING SPACES, THEY WILL HAVE TO EITHER MODIFY TO HAVE A SMALLER FOOTPRINT OR FIND MORE PARKING.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THEY CANNOT GET OUT OF IT.
HOWEVER, UM, FOR A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE USE, THE SUP CAN SPECIFY A DIFFERENT RATIO.
SO IF THE BODY WANTS TO SAY THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR THIS IS EIGHT SPACES OR FIVE SPACES, YOU CAN DO THAT.
UM, ONE RECOMMENDATION THAT I HAD, AND I WAS GONNA PRESENT IT TO THE BODY, IS TO PUT IN THE SUP CONDITION, A MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 2,200 SQUARE FEET.
THIS IS, THE UNIT SIZE IS NOT INCLUDING CURRENTLY IN THE CONDITIONS.
I WOULD RECOMMEND TO INCLUDE THAT.
UM, I CHECKED WITH THE APPLICANT AS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE UNIT, AND THAT'S A MAXIMUM.
AS I SAID, THAT DOESN'T PROHIBIT THEM TO DO SMALLER IF THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING.
I WAS TRYING TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAVING TO COME BACK TO US IF THEY, UH, YOU KNOW, COULDN'T MEET, UM, THE PARKING RATIO BECAUSE IT DIDN'T LOOK LIKE THEY WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO WITH A, WITH, WITH A USE THAT FELL INTO OTHER, UM, YES, I WOULD DEFINITELY RECOMMEND.
UM, I HAVE TO ASK THIS A QUESTION.
DOESN'T IT SEEM THE WAY TO UM, MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS WOULD BE TO, UH, LIMIT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND ALSO SPECIFY A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PARKING? YES, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT AS WELL.
BUT I HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION.
IF THEY'RE NOT SPEC, THEY'RE, IF THEY'RE NOT RESTRICTED TO A PARTICULAR TYPE OF, OF COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE, THIS COULD ALSO BECOME AN EVENT CENTER, WHICH WOULD THEN PRESENT SOME PROBLEMS WITH PARKING.
I DON'T THINK TOO MANY EVENT CENTERS WOULD FUNCTION WELL WITH, WITH, YOU KNOW, A HANDFUL OF PARKING SPACES WHILE THE, THE, UM, ART, THE VISUAL AND AUDIO ART GALLERY MIGHT.
IS THERE A WAY TO, TO HIM, I DON'T THINK VISUAL AND AUDIO ART GALLERY ARE DEFINED, IS THERE A WAY TO, UH, WRITE A SUP CONDITION THAT THIS CANNOT BE AN EVENT CENTER? WOULD THAT BE THE EASIEST WAY TO SOLVE IT? I, I DON'T THINK SO.
I WOULD SAY THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE SUP.
SO IF IT COMES BACK AND WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE KNOWN ISSUES WITH THEIR EXTENDED OPERATION, UM, THEN THAT, AGAIN, THAT'S WHY WE PUT A TERM LIMIT.
THIS IS, THAT IS A NEW SUPI TALKED TO THE APPLICANT.
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME HE'S PLANNING TO CREATE THIS USE.
SO I WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE SUP TO HAVE A LIMITED TERM.
COMMISSIONER HALL, JUST REAL QUICK, AUDIO VISUAL THING, SORT OF LIKE MEOW WOLF OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT?
UH, DOES THE CONCEPT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, HE'S GONNA BE HERE TODAY, I WOULD SAY YOU CAN ASK HIM AND THEY CAN, THEY CAN EXPLAIN WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.
[01:30:01]
OKAY, THANK YOU.UM, WILL NEED TO BE RENO NUMBER 19.
NUMBER 19, NUMBER 20 WILL NEED TO BE RENO, UH, 21.
WE HAVE HEARD IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE, WE NEED TO HAVE.
UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS A CONFLICT, SHE NEED TO STEP OUT.
ANY QUESTIONS ON 21? UH, COMMISSIONER FORT SIDE.
I KIND OF SEE YOU GOING TOWARDS THE MICROPHONE, SIR, WHICH ONE WOULD YOU LIKE? I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.
UH, ON 20, ARE WE GOING TO, UH, HEAR THIS, UH, CASE, UH, GET A BRIEFING ON THIS? OR NUMBER 20? OR CAN I ASK QUESTIONS REGARDING IT? UH, LET'S, LET'S ASK, THERE, THERE WAS A, UH, A NOTICE ERROR ON THAT ONE IN TERMS OF THE STICKER.
SO I, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE CAN EVEN, UH, HOLD IT.
UH, I THINK IT'S JUST, I'M NOT ASKING HOLD YEAH, IT'S IT AS IF IT'S NOT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HARPER.
IT SAYS IF IT'S NOT EVEN PRINTED ON HERE, BECAUSE IT WASN'T NOTICED CORRECTLY, SO IT'S LIKE WE DON'T EVEN HAVE IT.
OH, SO IT, IT WILL HAVE TO COME BACK, WE NOTICED AND COME BACK.
UH, I'M NOT SURE WE HAVE A DATE CERTAIN FOR THAT.
WE ARE LOOKING AT THE NEXT HEARING.
SO WE HAVE TO JUST PRETEND IT WASN'T EVEN ON, ON THIS DOCKET.
QUESTIONS CAN STILL BE ASKED TO THE, THE PLANNER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT BY EMAIL, SO STILL TOTALLY FINE TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS.
DID YOU CATCH THAT COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT? I DID NOT.
CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, REPEAT THAT, SIR? DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE CAN'T ASK QUESTIONS OR DISCUSS IT HERE, WE CAN STILL ASK QUESTIONS TO THE PLANNER AT ANY TIME.
OFFLINE, YEAH, YOU CAN EMAIL HIM.
COMMISSIONERS TAKES US TO NUMBER 22.
YOU, YOU ASKED TO HOLD NUMBER 16.
UM, I DIDN'T PUT THAT REQUEST IN.
OH, 16 WAS NOT GONNA BE HELD, COMMISSIONER.
NO, I, WE NEED, I WOULD LIKE, THANK YOU.
I MIGHT'VE GOTTEN MY WIRES CROSSED ON THAT ONE.
UM, DO WE NEED THAT BRIEFED? YES, DEFINITELY.
DO YOU HAVE CONFLICT ON 16? OH, YEP.
OKAY, LET'S HOLD ON ONE SECOND.
UH, VICE CHAIR RUBIN HAS A CONFLICT ON NUMBER 16 AND IS GONNA STEP OUT.
AND IN FACT, HE HAS STEPPED OUT OF THE CHAMBER.
SO LET'S HAVE A BRIEFING ON THIS ONE.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HERBERT.
I WAS, I WAS LIKE, I HADN'T HEARD THAT, BUT HERE WE ARE.
UM, NO, I DON'T WANT AN AI ASSISTANT.
UM, ALRIGHT, SO THIS IS Z 2 2 3 3 0 4.
AND THIS IS LOCATED IN FAR SOUTHWEST DALLAS.
AND IT'S AN APPLICATION ONE FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT USES.
AND TWO, THE TERMINATION OF DE RESTRICTIONS.
8 3 4 DASH 1 23 ON PROPERTIES OWNED IN RR REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT WITH THE RESTRICTIONS 8 3 4 1 2 3 WITH CONSIDERATION FOR AN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF WEST CAMPUS, WEST ROAD, NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST CAMP WISDOM ROAD AND CLARK ROAD.
AND IT'S ABOUT 13 ACRES IN SIZE.
SO THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, PRIMARILY RELATING TO SIDEWALKS, LANDSCAPING, MIXED INCOME HOUSING AND DESIGN STANDARDS TO DEVELOP THE SITE WITH MULTIFAMILY USES.
HERE'S THE SITE AS IT EXISTS TODAY.
YEAH, SO IT'S, IT'S THAT RR ZONING AND THERE'S MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTHEAST UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY TO THE EAST.
UH, THERE'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION TO THE SOUTH AND THAT RR ZONING, UH, THERE'S SOME MULTIFAMILY ACROSS, UH, CAMP WISDOM TO THE SOUTH, AND THERE'S SOME MULTIFAMILY TO THE WEST.
UH, IT'S CURRENTLY G ZONE THAT OUR REGIONAL RETAIL, IT'S CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.
THEY ARE PROPOSING JUST MULTIFAMILY USES.
UH, THEY'RE PROPOSING A PD THAT ALMOST COMPLETELY DEFAULTS TO MU ONE.
UH, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND JUST AN MU ONE BASE WITHOUT THE PD.
UM, THERE ARE D RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY THAT NEED TO BE TERMINATED TO DEVELOP THE PROJECT REGARDLESS OF THE BASE DISTRICT SINCE THEY PROHIBIT MULTIFAMILY USES, BUT THEY ACT ON THAT RR DISTRICT.
SO I QUICKLY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE NECESSITY FOR PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
SO AGAIN, IT DOESN'T ALTER THE BASE, UH, CHARACTERISTICS OF MU WINE, HEIGHT, SPACE, YARD, LOT SPACE, THAT KIND OF STUFF.
UM, THE PD DOES NOT INCLUDE REALLY, YOU KNOW, THE UNIQUE MIXES
[01:35:01]
OR, OR, UH, UNIQUE PROPERTY, UH, CHARACTERISTICS THAT THE, UH, PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CALLS FOR IN OUR CODE.IT ALSO DOESN'T OFFER ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, TYPICAL ATYPICAL OF A BASIC ZONING CASE THAT YOU WON'T SEE.
WE HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS BUILT INTO THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING BONUS THAT APPLY DESIGN STANDARDS REGARDLESS OF THE PD OR NOT.
AND IT DOES, THEY, THE PD IS POTENTIALLY THE ONLY THING IT DOES DO IS OFFER MINOR EXEMPTIONS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF FOUR POINT 1107.
THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DESIGN STANDARDS.
UM, THE STAFF HOPES THAT THEY CAN MEET, UH, THEY WOULDN'T NEED A PLAN TO, TO BE ALTERED TO DO THAT, BUT THEY, WE HOPE THAT THEY CAN JUST MEET THOSE RATHER THAN THE, THOSE EXEMPTIONS.
LET'S, LET'S GET DOWN TO THE SITE.
SO HERE WE ARE ON CLARK RIDGE, LOOKING SOUTHEAST.
AS I GO AROUND THE SITE LOOKING NORTH AND IT'S LOOKING NORTH, I'M GONNA MOVE DOWN TOWARDS THAT GAS STATION UNDER CONSTRUCTION, THEN TURN AROUND THE CORNER, GO UP TOWARDS CLARK.
UH, THE NORTH, NORTH PART OF THIS PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN THE AREA REQUEST, SO IT, IT KIND OF STRETCHES FROM TWO PROPERTIES TO ANOTHER.
AND THERE'S CLARK RIDGE ACROSS CLARK RIDGE, THE MULTIFAMILY THAT EXISTS TODAY AND ACROSS, UM, CAMP WISDOM, THE PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH MULTIFAMILY AND AN UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY GAS STATION UNDER CONSTRUCTION THERE.
UH, DIRT STOP ACROSS CLARK LOOKING EAST, LOOKING EAST AT, UH, UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY, A MULTI-FAMILY UP CLARK.
AND THEN THE, UH, NEIGHBORING LOT TO THE NORTH IS UNDEVELOPED AT THIS TIME.
SO HERE'S A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS, UH, PROPOSED.
IT DOES STRETCH FROM BUILDING, UH, FROM STREET TO STREET, KIND OF, UH, WITH, UH, NUMBER OF BUILDINGS LOCATED WITHIN MULTIFAMILY USES ONLY HERE IS A LITTLE MORE ZOOMED IN.
SO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UH, AGAIN, WE'VE GOT RR RIGHT NOW.
UH, THEY'RE PROPOSING MIXED USE BASE PD.
UH, WE'RE PROPO PROPOSING MIXED USE AS A RECOMMENDATION.
UH, IT DOESN'T ALTER THOSE, THOSE ALL REMAIN THE SAME UNDER MIXED USE.
UH, I DO FIND A MIXED USE IS GONNA BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE DISTRICT HERE.
UH, IT IS CURRENTLY ZONE COMMERCIAL.
UH, I THINK MIXED USE WILL ALLOW AT LEAST KIND OF ZONE CAPACITY FOR, UH, MIX OF USES, POTENTIALLY COMMERCIAL IF IF NECESSARY IN THE LONG RUN.
UH, BUT IT'LL ALLOW THE MULTIFAMILY SO IT'S STILL APPROPRIATE ON SITE.
EITHER WAY, THEIR PD, UH, STILL DEFAULTS TO THAT ONLY CHANGES.
THEY KIND OF SPECIFY THEIR MIXED INCOME HOUSING DENSITY SHOULD THEY USE THAT BONUS, UH, DESIGN STANDARD.
THESE ARE JUST THE FOUR POINT 1107 DESIGN STANDARD.
UH, GENERALLY THEY DO ASK FOR EXEMPTIONS ON THE HEIGHT OF FENCES AND OF THE, UH, AMOUNT OF UNITS THAT HAVE TO HAVE DIRECT CONNECTIONS ON THE SIDEWALK.
UM, AND, AND WHERE PARKING CAN BE PLACED.
UH, STAFF GENERALLY LIKES TO SEE THOSE THINGS, UH, IN ANY MIXED INCOME PROJECT.
MAKE HIGH QUALITY PROJECTS FOR EVEN THE, THE UNITS WHERE WE HAVE, UH, REDUCED, UH, RENTS OR FIXED RENTS.
UM, SO WE, WE'D LIKE TO SEE THOSE 4.7 OF SANDERS MET, UH, BY APPROVING THE, UH, BASE MU ONE, BUT THOSE ARE THE ONLY EXEMPTIONS THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING AT THIS TIME.
UH, THE RELEVANT TEACHER RESTRICTIONS THAT APPLY, IF YOU CAN READ THOSE, LET ME KNOW.
UH, BUT IT, IT, IT'S, IT'S REALLY, RIGHT NOW IT JUST LIMITS THE, THE FLOOR AREA RATIO.
UH, AND IT'S A VERY SMALL 2.25 TO ONE, UH, IS GONNA BE PRETTY DIFFICULT TO, TO BUILD OUT ANY KIND OF, UH, MULTIFAMILY ON, YOU CAN ONLY HAVE A QUARTER OF YOUR LOT DEVELOPED, UH, AS A FLOOR AREA.
SO THEY DO REQUEST TO TERMINATE THOSE.
AND THEN THE MORE DETAILED TRACKED WITHIN THE DR, UM, IS A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 0.5 IS TO ONE, BUT THEN IT DOES SAY THAT MULTIFAMILY IS PROHIBITED.
SO THAT'S A, A BIG PART OF WHAT THEY NEED TO TERMINATE THROUGH THIS.
UH, AND THAT'S REGARDLESS OF THE PD OR THE, UH, MIXED USE THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO BUILD A PROJECT.
SO POINT BEING, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF AN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT IN LIEU OF THAT PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
AND TWO, TERMINATION D RESTRICTIONS, DR 8 34 DASH 1 23 QUESTIONS.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? YES, MICHAEL, UM, UH, STARTING OUT THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE, UM, IT WAS, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE RETAIL.
THE NEIGHBORS ALWAYS WANTED IT TO BE, BUT UM, IT SEEMED TO BE INUNDATED BY OTHER MULTIFAMILY, IS THAT CORRECT? THERE'S A LOT OF MULTIFAMILY SURROUNDING, UM, THIS PROPERTY, OBVIOUSLY, WHEN I WENT AROUND THE SITE, I LISTED THREE, FOUR DIFFERENT MULTIFAMILY LARGE PROPERTIES NEARBY.
UM, SO MY STAFF, IF WE WERE LOOKING FOR A GOOD DISTRICT TO ALLOW A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY, BUT ALLOW SOME ZONE
[01:40:01]
CAPACITY AND FLEXIBILITY FOR FUTURE, UH, COMMERCIAL THAT IS, I WOULD SAY NECESSARY, UH, FOR A HEALTHY AREA TO HAVE A MIX OF USES, UH, WE RECOMMEND THAT MIXED USE DISTRICT.SO ORIGINALLY I THINK THE VISION WAS TO HAVE A LARGE BOX STORE HERE, UM, AND THEN TODAY THAT JUST WOULDN'T EVEN BE FEASIBLE, IS THAT CORRECT? OH, I, I, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE FEASIBILITY, BUT IT IS ZONED TO OUR, OUR REGIONAL RETAIL, WHICH ALLOWS A LOT OF, UH, HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND LARGE AMOUNT OF, UH, LARGE AMOUNT OF RETAIL USES.
AND, UM, IN REGARDS TO THE EXEMPTIONS, YOU MENTIONED THERE WAS A EXEMPTION FOR, UH, SIDEWALK, I THINK 60% OF THE GROUND LEVEL, UM, HAD TO HAVE ACCESS TO SIDEWALKS.
CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE DEEPER, UM, ON WHY, WHY WE WOULD GIVE THAT EXEMPTION, UM, AND WHY THIS TYPE OF, UM, INTERCONNECTIVITY IS IMPORTANT? YEAH, SO THAT IS BASED OFF THE STANDARDS THAT ARE TYPICAL TO 4.017, THEY'RE BAKED INTO MIXED INCOME HOUSING PROJECTS WHERE 60, IT'S NOT 60% OF GROUND FLOOR UNITS, BUT IT'S 60% OF, OF STREET FACING, UH, UNITS WHERE, SO YOU, YOU HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF UNITS THAT ARE ON THE GROUND FLOOR WHERE THOSE UNITS FACE THE STREET, WHERE THEY'RE ON THE GROUND FLOOR, A PERCENTAGE OF THEM, 60% HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE SIDEWALK EITHER THROUGH USUALLY, AND USUALLY THAT'S DONE THROUGH A DOOR OR A, UM, A GATE OF SOME KIND THAT'S CONNECTED TO THEIR UNIT INDIVIDUALLY.
YOU'LL SEE THAT A LOT, UM, IN SOME OF THE URBAN PROJECTS, UH, THAT COME AROUND WHERE PEOPLE CAN DIRECTLY ACCESS THE SIDEWALK, UH, GET A LITTLE ACTIVATION, BUT ALSO MAKE IT SAFER AND EASIER FOR THEM TO, TO GET OUT OF THEIR UNIT, GET TO THE STREET, UM, USE THE STREET AND GET TO NEARBY DESTINATIONS AND TRANSIT.
SO STAFF DOESN'T RECOMMEND, UM, ELIMINATING THAT, UH, WE'LL PUSH FOR IT IN A LOT OF PROJECTS, YOU'LL SEE.
UH, SO WE DO RECOMMEND MAINTAINING IT BY APPROVING THE MIXED USE DISTRICT, WHICH IT WILL APPLY JUST BY NATURE OF BEING A, UH, MIXED INCOME HOUSING PROJECT.
AND, UH, CAMP WISDOM IS A, IT, IT'S THE BUSIEST STREET ON THAT, THAT SIDE OF THE WORLD.
UM, IT WALK IS BUSY TOO, BUT ARE THE, ARE THERE PARTAKE, ARE THEY ASKING NOT TO HAVE THESE SIDEWALKS ON THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARE OF CAMP WISDOM, OR IS THERE SOMETHING DEEPER THERE THAT SIDEWALKS ARE STILL GONNA BE, SO SIDEWALKS THEMSELVES ARE GONNA BE REQUIRED.
THIS EXEMPTION WOULD APPLY TO ACTIVATION OF SIDEWALK AND IT'S NOT, UM, TARGETED OR ANYTHING NECESSARILY.
SO WE'RE STILL GONNA HAVE TO HAVE THE SIDEWALKS AT SIX FOOT UNOBSTRUCTED.
OH, I DIDN'T NOTE THAT IN HERE.
UM, SO THOSE ARE STILL GONNA BE REQUIRED.
IT'S THAT, UM, ACTIVATION FROM INDIVIDUAL ENTRIES WHERE 60% OF THE STREET LEVEL DWELLING UNITS ADJACENT TO A STREET HAVE TO HAVE THAT ENTRY.
UH, SO IT'S, IT'S REALLY ABOUT HOW THE BUILDING INTERACTS WITH THE STREET MORE SO THAN THE SIDEWALK AND THE STREET.
AND ARE THEY ASKING FOR THESE, AND I'LL ASK THE APPLICANT, BUT ARE THEY ASKING FOR THESE EXEMPTION? BECAUSE THE ACTIVITY ON CAMP WISDOM, UH, I'LL LET THEM, I'LL LET THEM SPEAK TO IT, BUT MY PLANNER PROFESSIONAL OPINION IS WE ACTIVATE A STREET BETTER, IT'S GOING TO BE A BETTER STREET REGARDLESS OF HOW THE STREET IS.
IS THERE ANY OPEN SPACE HERE? I DON'T SEE A LOT OF GREEN SPACE ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
UM, I THINK IT WAS MENTIONED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, UH, BUT JUST WANTED YOU TO, TO TALK TO IT.
YEAH, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE 10% OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS AGAIN, PART OF THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS.
UH, THERE ARE SOME QUALITY STANDARDS BAKED INTO THE FOUR POINT 1107, UH, STANDARDS AS WELL.
WHEN I SAY QUALITY STANDARDS, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT CAN BE BUILT IN THERE.
UH, OPEN SPACE MAY CONTAIN PRIMARILY GRASS, VEGETATION OR OPEN WATER.
ABBY USES GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AREA PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES SUCH AS FOUNTAINS, BENCHES, OR SHADE STRUCTURES.
SO THERE IS, UH, A MINIMUM 10%.
UH, WE DON'T REQUIRE THEM TO SAY EXACTLY WHERE THAT'S GOING TO BE ON, ON A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO LOCK THEM IN, UH, BUT IT, IT IS GONNA HAVE TO BE PROVIDED.
AND THAT 10%, IT COULD INCLUDE THAT DETENTION POND IS WHAT I JUST HEARD.
ACCORDING TO 4.0107, UH, IT CAN CONTAIN PRIMARILY GRASS, VEGETATION, OR OPEN WATER AND MAYBE USED AS GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AREA.
SO THAT CAN INCLUDE THOSE AREAS AND HOW THIS CODE IS WRITTEN.
UM, STILL TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE FULL IMPACT OF PD VERSUS THE, UM, MULTIFAMILY, BUT I WILL LET, UM, ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES ASK ANY QUESTIONS IF THEY HAVE ANY.
QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HEMP, FELLOW COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
UM, MR. PEPE, I GUESS ONE THING AS I, SIMILAR TO WHAT COMMISSIONER HERBERT JUST ASKED, IT APPEARS THAT WITHIN THE PD CONDITIONS THAT THERE ARE SOME INTERNAL REGULATIONS TALKING ABOUT HOW WE'RE CROSSING DRIVE AISLES WHERE SIDEWALKS WOULD BE REQUIRED.
NONE OF THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO BE CODIFIED IN A BASE ZONING DISTRICT.
[01:45:01]
TRUE, BUT THOSE WERE ADDED AT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO MITIGATE THE POTENTIAL, UH, CONCERNS OF GIVING THAT EXEMPTION.SO WE SAID, UH, IF YOU GO DOWN THIS PD ROUTE, YOU COULD BE GET THAT 60% GROUND FLOOR UNIT EXEMPTION.
I THINK THAT, UH, THE CODE THAT WE HAVE FOR THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE GROUND LEVEL ACCESS IS, IS GOOD AND IT SHOULD BE MAINTAINED.
BUT IF THEY'RE GONNA ASK FOR AN EXEMPTION TO THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED THOSE CONDITIONS AS A MITIGATION, UH, MEASURE TO THAT.
AND THAT ALSO INCLUDES THE COMMUNITY AMENITIES.
AND IT APPEARS THAT THE LANDSCAPING STANDARDS MAY BE MORE ROBUST THAN BASE COAT AS WELL.
AND I SPECIFICALLY NOTED THE TREE SPACING DISTRICTS APPEARED TO BE THE THAT'S THE ONLY, YEAH.
AND THAT'S, I WAS TRYING TO GO BACK AND CHECK THE, I THINK THEY'VE GOT THE, UM, REQUIRED LANDSCAPE POINTS IS 50, SO 50 WOULD BE THE BASE REQUIREMENT FOR THIS TYPE OF PROJECT.
WHEN YOU HAVE, WHEN YOU PUT TOGETHER YOUR PLAN, YOU HAVE TO HAVE, MEET A CERTAIN NUMBER OF POINTS AND THAT IS YEAH, I AGREE.
AND THEN, UM, SO THE AMENITIES THAT ARE LISTED FOR THE SWIMMING POOL, FITNESS FACILITY, DOG RECREATION CENTER, THOSE WOULD BE STANDARD AS WELL.
THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING STAFF LOOKS TO REQUIRE FOR, UH, A MULTIFAMILY PROJECT.
SO, MR. BABB, YOUR, UM, OPINION IS THAT THE PD MOSTLY SERVES TO LESSEN DESIGN STANDARDS RATHER THAN ENHANCING THEM? THAT'S PRIMARILY WHAT IT ORIGINALLY WAS.
I MEAN, THE, SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE ADDED, WE WERE AT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UM, TO MITIGATE THEM.
BUT I DON'T THINK IT ADVANCES US VERY FAR RELATIVE TO THE RISK AND THE DOWNSIDES THAT A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT GIVE US, WHICH ARE, UH, THE INFLEXIBILITY OF DESIGN, UH, THE DIFFICULTY OF THE PERMITTING PROCESS AND THE LONG-TERM RAMIFICATIONS OF A LIMITED DISTRICT.
UH, NORMALLY, UH, DETENTION POND WOULD NOT SATISFY, UM, REQUIREMENTS FOR OPEN SPACE, IS THAT CORRECT? DEPENDS HOW THOSE OPEN SPACE REGULATIONS ARE WRITTEN.
UH, HOW THE ONES THAT ARE BUILT INTO THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING DESIGN STANDARDS ARE, IT'S GROUNDWATER RECHARGE IS A POTENTIAL THING, UH, THAT CAN SATISFY OPEN SPACE, BUT IT HAS TO MEET ALL THOSE OTHER THINGS WHERE, UH, IT HAS TO BE, YOU KNOW, PRIMARILY VEGETATION, GRASS OPEN SPACE, UM, WITH CERTAIN ALLOWANCES FOR ARCHITECTURAL THINGS, UH, SMALL STRUCTURES THAT ARE, UH, FOR ACTIVE OR PASSIVE RECREATION.
UH, BUT GROUNDWATER RECHARGE IS LISTED AS ONE OF THE, UM, SPACES THAT CAN SATISFY THAT, BUT IT'S WITH THE QUALIFIERS.
SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT IS WRITTEN INTO THE STANDARD 1107 YES.
REQUIREMENTS, BECAUSE IT'S NOT, AND AT LEAST DURING THE TIME I'VE BEEN ON CPC, UM, WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT DETENTION PONDS GENERALLY ARE NOT CONSIDERED TO BE OPEN SPACE.
THEY'RE REQUIRED TO BE FENCED AND PEOPLE AREN'T SUPPOSED TO GO ON THEM.
SO IT JUST SEEMS LIKE, UH, THERE'S A, A DEFICIT OF OPEN SPACE HERE.
IF, IF THAT DETENTION, FAIRLY LARGE DETENTION AREA COULD BE USED TO SATISFY THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT, RIGHT? AND SO IT CAN BE MET, BUT IT HAS TO MEET SOME OF THOSE OTHER REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE BUILT IN THERE.
SO THAT'S ONE SAYS IT CAN BE FOR ACTIVE OR PASSIVE RECREATION, PLAYGROUND ACTIVITY, GROUNDWATER RECHARGE YOUR LANDSCAPING, BUT THEN THERE'S OTHER QUALIFICATIONS THERE THAT, THAT MAKE IT, UH, SORT OF QUALITY STANDARDS, IF YOU WILL.
UH, THE OTHER THING IS WE DON'T KNOW NECESSARILY IN A BASE DISTRICT, WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO A DETENTION AREA.
THEY DO UNDERGROUND, OTHER SORTS OF THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, AND THEY SHOULDN'T TYPICALLY BE LOCKED INTO THAT IN A ZONING PROCESS.
UH, THEY HAPPEN TO DEPICT ONE ON THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN, BUT UNDER A BASE DISTRICT, THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY TIED TO HAVING A ABOVE GROUND WATER STORAGE AREA.
UH, ONE LAST SORT OF TECHNICAL THING ON PAGE, UH, 4 27.
DID YOU NOTICE THAT UNDER C3 WHERE IT SAYS GROUND LEVEL DWELLING UNITS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE DIRECT CONNECTIONS VIA SIDEWALK TO STREET SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 51, P 1 0 9, C 1 0 9 C ONE, UM, HAS TO DO WITH PADE, UH, WITH, UH, AMENITIES? IT, IT, THAT SHOULD READ 1 0 9 B FOUR, I BELIEVE.
WHERE NUMBER THREE, WHERE THE, IT'S, IT REFERS TO 1 0 9 C 1, 1 0 9 C ONE, AT LEAST IN THE VERSION THAT I'M LOOKING AT.
DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE GROUND LEVEL DWELLING UNITS CONNECTING TO A SIDEWALK.
SO, UM, I'M THINKING IT SHOULD BE 1 0 9 B FOUR.
[01:50:01]
IT'S A REFERENCE BECAUSE REFERENCE IS CHANGE, PRESUMABLY.I THINK THAT'S A REFERENCE AREA.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? UH, JUST A COUPLE, PLEASE.
UM, SO JUST, UM, IN REFERENCE TO THE UNITS, THE, THE, IN, IN A LOT OF THIS I'VE MENTIONED TO YOU GUYS BEFORE, DEVELOPMENTS IN MY DISTRICT, I KIND OF HAVE TO PROTECT THINGS IN CASE THESE PROPERTIES ARE SOLD OR THIS, THIS, THIS CHANGE IS, IS, IT'S BASICALLY LEGACY, RIGHT? SO I WANT TO BE SURE WE'RE GOING ON ROUND PAT, BUT, UH, CURRENTLY THE MU ONE, UH, PROVIDES FOR 65 UNITS.
THE PD IS ASKING FOR 35 UNITS PER ACRE.
IS THAT, IS THAT ACCURATE? ONE MOMENT.
SO, MIXED USE ZONING, MIXED USE ONE LIMITS YOU TO 25 UNITS PER ACRE.
ONLY IF YOU HAVE MULTIPLE USES GOING ON THERE.
IF YOU'RE A SINGLE USE PROPERTY LIKE THIS ONE IS, IF YOU INCLUDE MIXED INCOME HOUSING, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO SEE, IT ALLOWS THEM TO INCREASE THEIR DENSITY UP TO 65.
UM, UNDER THAT, UH, JUST THE SINGLE USE.
SO IT'S TIED TO THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING.
THEY CAN ONLY INCREASE THEIR DENSITY IF THEY'RE PROVIDING BETTER, UH, MORE ATTAINABLE HOUSING.
ALSO, UM, THEY PROVIDED, UH, MORE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING, I THINK THAT'S BEEN MENTIONED.
UM, THERE IS NO WAY TO HOLD THEM TO THAT IN THE MU ONE, IS THAT CORRECT? NOT NECESSARILY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
UH, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT VICE CHAIR RUBIN CAN NOW COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBER.
UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER WHEELER, WE'RE GONNA CIRCLE BACK TO CASE NUMBER NUMBER THREE IN THE BACK.
IS SHE IN THE BACK OR WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO BRING THAT UP? WE'RE JUST TAKING A QUICK PAUSE.
COMMISSIONER SW, WE'RE UH, ON, ON HOLD THERE FOR THE MOMENT.
UH, WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT NUMBER 21.
SO COMMISSIONER KINSTON HAS A CONFLICT FOR THE RECORD NUMBER 22.
IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT, AND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON HAVE A, A CONFLICT ON NUMBER 22.
SO IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, WE WILL, UH, ASK THEM TO TAKE A QUICK BREAK.
ANY QUESTIONS ON 22? OKAY, NOTHING THERE.
COMMISSIONERS, UH, ANYTHING ON NUMBER 46 ON THE SIGNS COMMISSIONERS? 46 47 48 OUR AUTHORIZED HEARING? I BRIEFED.
[01:55:01]
LET'S HAVE A BRIEF.I TRYING TO REMEMBER WHICH ONE IT WAS.
YEAH, IS HE DOING IT? HE'S, WHAT'S THAT? GOOD MORNING.
SO WE WILL DO THE BRIEFING OF THE AUTHORIZED HEARING NUMBER 48, AND THEN WE'LL CIRCLE BACK TO, UH, THE CASE NUMBER THREE.
OKAY, SO, UM, THIS IS A NORTH, UH, CLIFF NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER AUTHORIZED HEARING, UM, CASE NUMBER Z 1 8 9 DASH 1 27.
UM, I'M SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE AUTHORIZED HEARING TEAM HERE.
THIS REQUEST, UH, IS A CITY PLAN COMMISSION AUTHORIZED HEARING TO DETERMINE THE PROPER ZONING ON A PROPERTY ZONE SUB AREA TWO, IN CONSERVATION DISTRICT NUMBER EIGHT, THE NORTH CLIFF, UH, CONSERVATION DISTRICT WITH CONSIDERATION TO BE GIVEN TO APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE AREA TO INCLUDE, BUT NOT LIMITED TO USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND OTHER APPROPRIATE REGULATIONS.
UM, THIS IS LOCATED ALONG BOTH SIDES OF PIERCE STREET, BETWEEN THE ALLEY NORTH OF GLADSTONE, DRIVE TO THE NORTH AND CATHERINE STREET TO THE SOUTH.
UM, AND THE SIZE IS APPROXIMATELY FIVE POINT, UH, 15 ACRES.
HERE WE HAVE A, A LOCATION MAP FOR YOU ALL TO VIEW.
UM, ON THE LEFT YOU SEE, UH, A, A VIEW OF THE ENTIRE CONSERVATION DISTRICT WITH THE SUB AREAS, UM, IDENTIFIED.
AND ON THE RIGHT WE HAVE A, A MORE DETAILED VIEW OF THE SUB AREA WITH THE STREETS IDENTIFIED.
SO SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION, UM, ON NOVEMBER 1ST, 2018, THE CPC UH, COM, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION AUTHORIZED A HEARING TO DETERMINE PROPER ZONING FOR THE NORTH CLIFF NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE CATHERINE PIERCE TROLLEY STOP.
UH, THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN WAS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 26TH, 2022.
UH, AND THIS SERVED AS A GUIDING, UH, AREA PLAN FOR THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING.
UM, THE WCAP PROCESS HELPED EVALUATE THE COMMUNITY'S LONG RANGE VISION FOR THE NORTH CLIFF NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER, UH, AND THE AUTHORIZED HEARING AIMS TO IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF WCAP.
UM, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THIS IS CONSERVATION DISTRICT NUMBER EIGHT.
UH, THE NORTH CLIFF CONSERVATION DISTRICT WAS APPROVED ON AUGUST 28TH, 1996.
THE AUTHORIZED HEARING AREA IS ZONED SUB AREA TWO WITHIN THAT CONSERVATION DISTRICT, WHICH IS INTENDED TO ACCOMMODATE CONVENIENCE RETAIL SHOPPING SERVICES, UH, AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES PRINCIPALLY SERVING AND COMPATIBLE IN SCALE AND INTENSITY OF USE WITH ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USES.
UM, THIS CONSERVATION DISTRICT OR THIS SUB AREA, DOES NOT ALLOW RESIDENTIAL USES, RETAIL OR RESTAURANT.
SO SOME OF THE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THIS CONSERVATION DISTRICT, UH, THERE ARE 15 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UH, ONE UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY, UM, THREE VACANT RETAIL BUILDINGS IN A CHURCH.
AND HERE WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS OF THOSE EXISTING LAND USES.
AND THIS IS A CHURCH VACANT LOTS, SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND MORE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND MORE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
SO THE, UH, WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN WCAP, UM, RECOMMENDS, UH, FOUR PRIMARY, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ZONING.
UM, ONE OF WHICH IS TO AMEND SUB AREA.
TWO, TO ALLOW A DUS AND LIVE WORK UNITS IN ADDITION TO EXISTING USES, INCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY USES, UH, AMEND SUB AREA TWO, TO ALLOW
[02:00:01]
ART GALLERIES AND STUDIOS, PERSONAL SERVICE OFFICES AND RESTAURANTS IN ADDITION TO EXISTING USES, UM, MAINTAIN THE HEIGHT AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, UM, ALLOW FOR REDUCED PARKING RATIOS, SHARED PARKING AGREEMENTS WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, AND ALLOWING ON STREETE PARKING TO COUNT TOWARDS REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES TO ENABLE EASIER REDEVELOPMENT OF LEGACY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.SO, UM, UH, THESE NEXT FEW SLIDES WILL SHOW HOW STAFF'S PROPOSAL ALIGNS WITH THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN.
SO FOR THE FIRST ONE, UM, STAFF IS PROPOSING TO ADD SINGLE FAMILY AND ACCESSORY USES, UH, SPECIFICALLY ACCESSORY OUTDOOR STORAGE DAY HOMES, UH, HOME OCCUPATION AND SWIMMING POOL, PRIVATE SWIMMING POOLS.
UM, WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO ADD, UH, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT ADU IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT OVERLAY IN SECTION 51 A DASH 4.1, FOUR POINT 10.
UH, SUBSECTION C OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING, UH, MINIMUM FLOOR AREA OF 200 SQUARE FEET.
UM, A MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA, UH, THE GREATER OF 700 SQUARE FEET OR 25% OF THE MAIN BUILDING.
UM, IT MAY NOT BE SOLD SEPARATELY FROM THE MAIN BUILDING.
UM, CANNOT BE LOCATED IN FRONT OF THE MAIN BUILDING AND CANNOT EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE MAIN BUILDING.
AND IT ALSO WOULD REQUIRE ONE PARKING SPACE.
ADDITIONALLY, UM, TO MEET THAT FIRST ONE.
UM, STAFF IS ALSO PROPOSING TO ADD LIVE UNIT AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO, UH, ANY NON-RESIDENTIAL USE ALLOWED IN SUB AREA TWO, SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF 51 A DASH 4.2 17 SUBSECTION 8.1 SUMMARIZED BELOW.
UM, AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE ONE ACCESSORY, UH, L UNIT PER LOT, UM, MAY BE ATTACHED OR DETACHED.
UM, IT CANNOT EXCEED THE FLOOR AREA OF THE MAIN USE.
UH, ONE ADDITIONAL OFF STREET PARKING SPACE WILL BE REQUIRED AND IT CANNOT BE SOLD SEPARATELY BY MEETS AND BOUNDS.
FOR THE SECOND ONE, UM, STAFF IS PROPOSING TO DEFINE ART GALLERY AND ART OR CRAFT PRODUCTION STUDIOS AND TO ALLOW PERSONAL SERVICE AND OFFICE USES, UH, WHICH ARE ALREADY ALLOWED IN SUB AREA TWO.
UM, WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO ADD GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE, UH, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS.
UM, ADD RESTAURANTS WITHOUT DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE WITH RESIDENTIAL ADJACENCY REVIEWS, LIMIT NON RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE PARCEL WHERE THEY EXIST TODAY.
UH, CURRENTLY ALLOWED THROUGH SUB AREA TWO AND REMOVE TEMPORARY CONCRETE BATCH AND MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION USES, WHICH, UH, THIS PROPOSAL REMOVES.
STAFF IS ALSO PROPOSING TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING HEIGHT AND SETBACKS, UM, AS CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT SUB AREA TWO.
AND SO WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE ANYTHING.
UM, CURRENTLY THE HEIGHT ALLOWS 30 FEET, UM, A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 15 FEET AND NO REAR AND, UH, SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
AND FOR THE LAST ONE, UH, STAFF IS PROPOSING NO PARKING FOR EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES OR FOR NEW RES, NON-RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION THAT DOES NOT EXCEED THE FLOOR AREA OF THE EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.
IT IS REPLACING, UH, AN ADDITION OF FLOOR AREA REQUIRES PARKING IN ACCORDANCE WITH OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE USE.
UM, THE OPTION TO MEET STAFF IS ALSO PROPOSING THE OPTION TO MEET PARKING REQUIREMENTS THROUGH A REMOTE OR A SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT, UH, WHICH CURRENTLY EXISTS.
UM, IF PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE ELIMINATED, UM, THROUGH THE PARKING REFORM THAT'S CURRENTLY GOING ON WITH THE CITY, UH, THE PARKING AGREEMENTS IN THE ALLOWANCE OF ON STREET PARKING TO COUNT TOWARDS PARKING REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT BE NECESSARY.
AND HERE IS A CON, UH, CONCEPTUAL DRAWING OF THE AREA FROM, UH, THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN.
QUESTIONS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE.
SO TO CLARIFY, THE CURRENT NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BE REPLACED WITH RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION? CORRECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON YES, PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN? UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
UH, FOR THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, UH, HOW LARGE ARE THE CURRENT LOTS? UM, THE CURRENT LOTS ARE, UM, I'M, I'M NOT SURE THE EXACT DIMENSIONS, BUT THEY'RE APPROXIMATELY 6,500 SQUARE FEET.
THEY, THEY KIND OF FALL IN LINE WITH WHAT'S ALLOWED IN
[02:05:01]
R 7.5 A, UH, TRADITIONAL, UM, LOT SIZE FOR THAT AREA.PLEASE, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I DO HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION.
UM, THE CHURCH THAT FALLS WITHIN THIS, UM, AREA, IS IT AN ACTIVE CHURCH OR IS IT A SITE THAT IS GONNA BE LIKELY, UM, AVAILABLE TO BE REDEVELOPED? I BELIEVE THAT THAT CHURCH IS ACTIVE, YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, PLEASE? COMMISSIONER FORSIGHT, ARE THERE ANY CHANGES, UH, BEING PROPOSED WITH THIS PLAN TO THE RESIDENTIAL USES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OTHER THAN THE ADUS? UM, SO I, THE MAIN PROPOSAL IS TO ALLOW THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT ARE WITHIN THAT BOUNDARY TO EXIST BY RIGHT.
AND SO THAT'S THE PRIMARY CHANGE OF IT IN THE ADU.
BUT NO, NOTHING IN THE PLAN WILL, WILL GET RID OF THAT, THOSE RESIDENTIAL UNITS? CORRECT.
COMMISSIONER CHERNO, IT'S, IT'S TRUE THAT THE CURRENT CONDITIONS NOW IN THE ZONING DON'T ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
AND THE CHANGE WOULD THEN ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL FOR THOSE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS ON THIS ITEM? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, GENTLEMEN.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, LET'S GO BACK TO CASE NUMBER THREE, MR. CHAIR? YES.
JUST ONE CLARIFICATION AS WE'RE PULLING THAT UP ON OUR LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA ITEM, UH, HANG ON.
49, I BELIEVE THAT'S IN COUNCIL DISTRICT 14, NOT SEVEN AS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
IS THAT CORRECT OR I'M, I'M ASKING IF STAFF WOULD PLEASE CONFIRM THAT.
IT'S IN THE JU HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
OKAY, LET'S GO BACK TO THREE AND THEN WE'LL TAKE OUR BREAK.
WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO BRING THAT PRESENTATION BACK? I BELIEVE WE GOT THROUGH IT THIS MORNING.
YES, WE DO NEED TO BRIEF IT, PLEASE.
MAKE SURE I HAVE MY, CAN EVERYONE SEE THAT IN CHAMBER? YES, SIR, WE CAN.
THAT'S OF REQUEST FOR RENEWAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 2269, THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONVENIENCE STORE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FORNEY ROAD AND SOUTH BUCKNER ROAD.
THAT'S LOCATED IN THE LI INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WITH THE D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY.
THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRING THE SUP OVER HERE TOWARDS THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE CITY.
AND SEE IT'S AT THAT HARD CORNER OF SOUTH BUCKNER AND 40, UH, SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES LI TO THE EAST, NORTH AND SOUTH, UH, MC ONE, MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL ACROSS SOUTH BUCKNER WITH AN UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY.
THERE ARE OFFICES AND SOME MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL IN THE AREA WITH, UH, A, UH, CADDY CORNER UNIT THAT IS SELLING, UH, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION.
UH, SIMILAR REQUEST, UH, TAKING A LOOK AT THE SITE VISIT, UH, LOOKING ACROSS SOUTH BUCKNER, UH, TOWARDS THE SITE, TAKING A LOOK, UH, ONCE ON THE SITE TOWARDS THE SOUTH, DOWN SOUTH BUCKNER.
DIDN'T CATCH A PHOTO LOOKING NORTH, BUT WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT CONTEXT.
UM, TAKING A LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, NO PROPOSED CHANGES FROM THE PREVIOUS RENEWAL.
UH, WITH THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, UH, WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS, SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
WILL, DO YOU KNOW IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WITHIN PROXIMITY WERE NOTIFIED? UM, I MEAN, DID THE APPLICANT TALK WITH ANY OF THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS? UM, POSSIBLY BUCKMAN TERRA.
I'M UNAWARE COMMISSIONER IF THEY HAVE.
I'M GONNA ASK TO HOLD THAT ON A ADVISEMENT UNTIL THE FIRST MEETING IN JAN, JANUARY, SO THAT WE CAN SPEAK WITH THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD SUBSTATION IN FEBRUARY.
WE WILL HOLD IT TO FEBRUARY 6TH.
[02:10:01]
ANOTHER ADVISEMENT.UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER.
UH, CHAIRMAN SHADI, CAN I ASK A, UH, JUST A, A QUESTION, UH, OF, FORGIVE ME FOR MY LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, OF COURSE.
W WHEN, WHEN THEY HAVE, UH, APPROVAL FOR THE FIVE YEAR EXTENSION WITH, UH, ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, DOES THAT MEAN THAT AFTER THE FIVE YEARS FOR THIS S-A-P-S-U-P, THAT THEY WOULD BE ON AUTOMATIC RENEWAL AFTER THAT? WHAT'S THE REQUEST? COULD YOU CLARIFY? I JUST, YOU KNOW, JUST EDUCATION.
IT'S JUST A GENERAL QUESTION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN AUTOMATIC RENEWALS YES.
UM, IT MEANS THAT IF THEY SUBMIT WITHIN THE WINDOW OF ELIGIBILITY TO SUBMIT FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.
IT BECOMES AN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW WITH STAFF.
WHEN WE REVIEW AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL SUP, WE REVIEW COMPLIANCE WITH THE SITE PLAN AND WITH THE CONDITIONS WE SEND LETTERS TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS 200 FEET WITHIN THE AREA OF REQUEST.
IF WE RECEIVE 20% OR MORE IN OPPOSITION, OR IF WE FIND NON-COMPLIANCE, WE AUTOMATICALLY SCHEDULE IT FOR CITY PLAN COMMISSION AND IT BECOMES A NORMAL SUP CASE.
THE WINDOW FOR THEM TO SUBMIT FOR THE ORDER RENEWAL IS 90 TO 120 DAYS BEFORE EXPIRATION.
I WON'T PUT A NUMBER ON IT FOR APPLICANTS TO MISS THAT WINDOW AND IT TURNS INTO A RENEWAL.
THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION.
UH, ANY OTHER ITEMS? COMMISSIONERS, SHALL WE TAKE OUR BREAK OR, UH, WE DO HAVE ONE QUICK ANNOUNCEMENT FOR DR.
DEAR COMMISSIONERS, I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT IS THE TIME OF THE YEAR.
THE REGISTRATION FOR THE NATIONAL A PA CONFERENCE IS OPEN.
WE DO HAVE FUNDS SET ASIDE, UH, JUST FOR THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
I DIDN'T DO A MATH, BUT PROBABLY WE MAY BE ABLE TO SEND THREE, FOUR, EVEN MORE COMMISSIONERS, BUT WE WANNA SEE WHO'S INTERESTED FIRST.
THE NATIONAL AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE THIS YEAR IS GONNA BE IN DENVER.
TABITHA KNOWS MARCH 29TH TO APRIL 1ST.
UM, AND IF YOU WANNA GO, JUST, I WOULD SAY EMAIL, LILIANA.
SHE'S GONNA CENTRALIZE THE NAMES AND NUMBERS AND WE'LL LET YOU KNOW.
UM, HISTORICALLY, WE DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF INTEREST, BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU BECAUSE AS I SAID, UH, CITY COUNCIL SET ASIDE FUNDS JUST FOR YOU.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, IT IS 11:49 AM THAT CONCLUDES THE BRIEFING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAIN COMMISSION.
[CALL TO ORDER]
JORGE, ARE WE RECORDING? WE ARE RECORDING.CAN YOU PLEASE START US OFF WITH A ROLL CALL MS. LOPEZ? GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
DISTRICT ONE COMMISSIONER SCHOCK, DISTRICT TWO.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT PRESENT, DISTRICT FOUR.
COMMISSIONER FORSYTH, DISTRICT FIVE.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN PRESENT? DISTRICT NINE.
DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBEN, I'M HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
WELCOME TO THE, UH, HEARING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
TODAY IS JANUARY 23RD, 2020 5, 12 35.
UH, A COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS BEFORE WE GET STARTED.
OUR SPEAKER GUIDELINES, UH, EACH SPEAKER WILL GET THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
UH, ON CASES WHERE WE DO HAVE OPPOSITION PER OUR RULES, THE APPLICANT WILL GET A, UH, TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UH, OUR RULES ALSO ALLOW US TO ADJUST THE, UH, THE SPEAKER TIMELINE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
AND IN CASES WHERE WE HAVE, UH, USUALLY AROUND 15 SPEAKERS OR SO, WE'LL SHAVE THAT DOWN TO ONE MINUTE PER SPEAKER.
WE WILL HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ONLINE.
I'LL PLEASE REMIND ALL OUR FOLKS ONLINE.
THAT STATE LAW REQUIRES US TO SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU.
SO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR CAMERA IS ON AND WORKING AND I'LL REMIND ALL SPEAKERS TO PLEASE, UH, BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
[02:15:01]
UH, ALSO FOR THOSE OF YOU HERE IN THE CHAMBER WITH US, WE DO HAVE THESE LITTLE YELLOW CARS DOWN HERE AT THE TABLE AT THE BOTTOM TO YOUR RIGHT AT SOME POINT, PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT YOU GRAB ONE OF THESE AND FILL IT OUT SO WE CAN HAVE A RECORD OF YOUR VISIT WITH US HERE TODAY.AND WITH THAT, WELCOME, WE LOOK FORWARD TO
[Zoning Cases - Consent]
HEARING FROM YOU.WE'RE GONNA START WITH OUR, UH, ZONING CASES, CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS CONSISTING OF CASES TWO THROUGH 12 AT THIS POINT, UH, CASES 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, AND NUMBER THREE HAVE COME OFF CONSENT.
THEY WILL BE DISPOSED OF INDIVIDUALLY.
THAT LEAVES CASES 2, 4, 7, 8, AND NINE THAT WILL BE DISPOSED OF IN ONE MOTION, UNLESS THERE IS SOMEONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE CASES.
IT'S BEGINNING ON PAGE TWO OF THE AGENDA.
IF YOU'D LIKE AN AGENDA, WE DO HAVE SOME COPIES DOWN HERE.
WELL, ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON CASES 2, 4, 7, 8, OR NINE.
OKAY, LET'S GET THOSE RIGHT INTO THE RECORD PLEASE.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR THE RENEWAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR NUMBER 2 4 3 OH FOR A BAIL BONDS OFFICE ON PROPERTY ZONE WITHIN THE MIXED MASTER RIVERFRONT SUBDISTRICT OF PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 7 84, THE TRINITY RIVER CORRIDOR SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE EAST LINE OF SOUTH RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF REUNION BOULEVARD.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS.
ITEM FOUR IS Z 2 3 4 2 18 AND APPLICATION FOR THE AMENDMENT TWO AND RENEWAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 2 4 6 9 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISER.
FOODS WHO ARE GREATER THAN, OR EXCUSE ME, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS ON PROPERTY ZONED IN NSD ONE, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ELAM ROAD IN PLEASANT DRIVE.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO AMENDED SITE PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN R FIVE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED NC NEIGHBOR, COMMERCIAL SUB DISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 9 5 9 5 SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHWEST LINE OF LAGO STREET BETWEEN CANAL STREET AND SPRING AVENUE.
APPROVAL ITEM EIGHT IS Z 2 3 4 3 18.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SUB AREA A WITH PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 7 9 7 5 ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF JORDAN HIGHLAND HILLS DRIVE, SOUTH AMERICA.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
AND NINE IS AN IS Z 2, 3, 4, 3, 2, 1.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE IN LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF COMPTON STREET, WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF COMPTON STREET AND GLIDDEN STREET.
ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THESE FIVE CASES? 2, 4, 7, 8 OR NINE.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES IN THE MATTER OF THE SUB OF THE, UH, ZONING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 2, 4, 7, 8, AND NINE.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL AS IT APPEARS IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION AND VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[3. 25-315A An application for the renewal of Specific Use Permit No. 2269 for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise or food store 3,500 square feet or less on property zoned an LI-D-1 Light Industrial District with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the northeast corner of South Buckner Boulevard and Forney Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a five-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional five-year periods, subject to amended conditions. Applicant: Bert & Bob Investment Co. Representative: Andrew Ruegg, MASTERPLAN Planner: Connor Roberts Council District: 7 Z234-111(CR)]
NOW GO TO CASE NUMBER THREE.CAN YOU HEAR ME? CAN WE HEAR YOU? EXCELLENT.
ITEM THREE IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH ONE 11 AND APPLICATION FOR THE RENEWAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 2269 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL MERCHANDISER FOOD STORE.
3,500 SQUARE FEET LESS ON PROPERTY ZONED AN LID ONE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTH BUTNER BOULEVARD AND FORNEY ROAD STAFF'S.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO AMENDING CONDITIONS.
ANDREW REIG, UH, 2201 MAIN STREET HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, UH, FOR THIS SEP RENEWAL REQUEST.
UH, WE HAD JUST A QUICK NOTE ON THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST.
UH, WE HAD ORIGINALLY RECEIVED, UM,
[02:20:02]
UH, THE PREVIOUS SEP AUTOMATIC RENEWAL APPROVAL DOCUMENTATION FROM STAFF THAT NOTED THAT THIS WOULD BE ANOTHER AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.UM, WE SUBMITTED AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR THIS AND THEN WE'RE TOLD BY STAFF THAT THERE WAS ACTUALLY AN ERROR IN THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL DOCUMENTATION SITTING THAT IT WAS ONLY ELIGIBLE FOR ONE PARTICULAR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY, UH, GETTING THEM BACK ON TRACK FOR THIS PARTICULAR STORE, UH, UNDER THE REGULAR RENEWAL PROCESS.
AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS SHOULD THERE BE ANY.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR MR. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE.
HAVE THERE BEEN ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBOR AND NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, BUCKNER TERRACE, UH, UM, RELATED TO THIS ITEM? YES, WE HAD SOME, UH, EMAIL COMMUNICATION WITH, UH, BUCKNER TERRACE.
I BELIEVE THEY ARE SUPPORTIVE OF A, UH, SUP REQUEST, BUT WITHOUT AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, UH, AS AN AVAIL AVAILABLE OPTION.
SO I HADN'T HEARD ANY, DO YOU KNOW, UM, DO YOU KNOW IF THEY SENT ANYTHING AS, AS FAR AS RELATED TO THAT OR, UM, WE HAD SOME COMMUNICATION WITH DANIEL, UH, WITH BUCKNER TERRACE.
UH, JUST STATING THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE PARTICULAR REQUEST.
I DO KNOW THAT THEY JUST ARE, I THINK THEY WANT TO SEE IT GO THROUGH THE RENEWAL PROCESS AND WE'RE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.
THAT WAS, UH, MR. DANIEL WOODS COMMISSIONERS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF CASE NUMBER, UM, Z 2 3 4 DASH 1 1 1.
I'M MOVED TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS, UH, ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL THE FEBRUARY 6TH, UM, MEETING SO THAT I MIGHT CAN MEET WITH THE COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, UH, WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION.
UH, ANY COMMENTS? NO, JUST WE WANNA, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, UM, THAT THEY HAVE MADE WITH THE COMMUNITY.
'CAUSE I HAVEN'T USUALLY, UM, DANIEL DOES SEND SOMETHING.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WHEELER.
UH, SEEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[5. 25-317A An application for the renewal of Specific Use Permit No. 1883 for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise or food store 3,500 square feet or less on property zoned a CS-D-1 Commercial Service District with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the east corner of South Belt Line Road and C.F. Hawn Freeway. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a five-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional five-year periods, subject to conditions and site plan. Applicant: SEJ Asset Management & Investment Company Representative: Andrew Ruegg, MASTERPLAN Planner: Connor Roberts Council District: 8 Z234-270(CR)]
PASSES.ITEM FIVE IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH TWO 70.
AND APPLICATION FOR THE RENEWAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1883 FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE.
3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS ON PROPERTY ZONE CS D ONE COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE EAST CORNER OF SOUTH BELTLINE ROAD AND CF HAN FREEWAY STAFF'S.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
AND THE SITE PLAN, I SEE THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
ANDREW REIG, 2201 MAIN STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS M 5 2 0 1.
UH, THIS IS ANOTHER SUP RENEWAL REQUEST WITH SEVEN 11.
UM, WE AGAIN HAD A SIMILAR ISSUE ON THE THINKING.
THIS WAS AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL AND SUBMITTED FOR THAT, UH, THE CITY'S ZONING MAP INDICATED THAT THIS AUTOMATIC RENEWAL WAS ELIGIBLE, UH, SUBMITTED THAT AND THEN WE'RE TOLD BY STAFF LATER THAT THERE WAS AN ERROR IN THE CITY'S ZONING MAP.
SO AGAIN, HERE IN FRONT OF YOU, UH, TO GET SEVEN 11 BACK ON TRACK FOR THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST.
UH, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER HERBERT, IF YOU HAVE ANY, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APP? UM, YEAH, ACTUALLY CHAIR, I HAD CONFUSED WITH FOUR, BUT NEITHER HERE, THERE, UM, I THINK I, I'VE SEEN THE SITE AND THEY, THEY'RE DOING A GOOD JOB.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER? I I THINK IT'S A HIGH TRAFFIC AREA.
UM, IT'S, IT'S CLOSE TO RESIDENTIAL.
UM, SO YES, THERE WAS A LOT OF CRIME THERE, BUT I KNOW OUR PURVIEW AND CRIME AND THERE'S JUST A LOT THERE.
BUT YEAH, AS FAR AS MY CONCERNS WERE A LOT OF THE EXTERIOR FACADE, UM, AND FROM MY OPINION, YEAH.
PLEASE, COMMISSIONER, WE'RE THAT, IS THIS QUESTIONS FOR, IS THIS FOR FIVE, RIGHT? YES.
UM, I THINK I'M SO WORRIED ABOUT CRIME.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, OR ARE, UM, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT THEY'RE CONTROLLING THE, UM,
[02:25:03]
SO HIGH HOMELESS, UH, POPULATION? THERE IS, THEY ARE.DO, IS THERE ANYTHING IN PLACE TO CONTROL OF THE HANGING OUT OR ANY OF THAT THAT'S COMING FROM? I DON'T THINK THE CRIME ITSELF, I THINK IT'S BECAUSE OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE AREA ALTOGETHER.
AND I'LL, I'LL ADDRESS THAT HERE BRIEFLY.
UM, THIS IS AT A MAJOR INTERSECTION ON LINE CF HA.
THERE IS A BIT OF A, UH, TRANSIENT POPULATION IN THAT AREA.
SEVEN ELEVEN'S POLICY IS TO, YOU KNOW, GENTLY SAY, HEY, YOU GUYS CAN'T BE ON OUR PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
UM, THAT MIGHT BE RELATED TO SOME OF THE CALLS FOR SERVICE THAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THE STAFF REPORT, BUT THAT'S GENERALLY THEIR POLICY IS TO, YOU KNOW, NOT ESCALATE ANY SITUATIONS AND ASK, UM, PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT PATRONS OF THE PARTICULAR STORE TO, UH, LEAVE THE PROPERTY.
DO THEY HAVE ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT, UM, THAT, UH, PARTICULAR, I KNOW SOME SEVEN ELEVENS HAVE CERTAIN HOURS, THEIR LAW ENFORCEMENT IS THERE, DO THEY HAVE ANY THOSE THEY HAVE THAT IN PLACE? UM, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY IF THEY HAVE LIKE A PARTICULAR, UM, UH, LIKE A SPECIFIC CONTACT FOR THIS STORE.
IF IT'S MORE OF JUST A GENERAL, IF SITUATIONS ESCALATE, THEY'LL MAKE A, YOU KNOW, A CALL FOR SERVICE.
UM, BUT I I I'M NOT SURE IF THERE, THERE'S A, A SPECIFIC CONTACT THEY HAVE WITH THE, UH, POLICE DEPARTMENT TO, YOU KNOW, HELP WITH THOSE KINDS OF SITUATIONS.
IS THERE COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBOR HOOD, UH, ASSOCIATION THAT'S IN THAT AREA? WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE KIND OF, THEY ARE, YEAH.
CLE WE'VE HAD COMMUNICATION WITH, UH, CLE BIRD, RILEY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FOR THIS, UH, REQUEST.
AND, UH, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH IT, UM, FOR THE, FOR THE RENEWAL.
I HAVE ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP FOR YOU, MR. REIG.
UM, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M WONDERING JUST IF YOU, UH, SINCE YOU HANDLE A LOT OF THESE, IF, IF YOU NOTICE THE PATTERN IN THIS PART OF TOWN WHERE, UH, CONVENIENCE STORES THAT KIND OF ABUT 1 75, THERE TEND TO HAVE ELEVATED NUMBERS, AND THE FURTHER YOU GET AWAY FROM 1 75, IT SEEMS THAT, UH, WE HAVE A DECLINE IN THESE KINDS OF THINGS.
UH, AND THEY SEEM TO BE A LITTLE BIT, UH, HOTTER AREAS THERE RIGHT OFF 1 75 ALL UP AND DOWN.
IS THAT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU'VE SEEN FROM, FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN, YES.
AND JUST ANOTHER KIND OF NOTE, SINCE I'VE HANDLED A LOT OF THESE CONVENIENCE STORES, PARTICULARLY SEVEN ELEVENS, UM, I, I'LL FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR THIS PARTICULAR ONE, THERE IS A, THERE IS A TRANSIENT POPULATION THAT'S IN THE AREA OFF CFO.
YOU TYPICALLY SEE LESS ONCE YOU GET OFF THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARES.
AND THEN, UM, CERTAIN STORES THAT ARE LOCATED ON THE HARD CORNER OF THESE INTERSECTIONS, SOMETIMES THOSE CALLS FOR SERVICE AREN'T NECESSARILY RELATED TO THAT PARTICULAR STORE FOR AN INCIDENT, BUT RATHER, YOU KNOW, I THINK I SAW LIKE ROAD RAGE ON, UH, THE LIST AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE PULL IN TO THE NEAREST AVAILABLE, UM, SAFE SPOT TO MAKE A CALL AND THAT'S WHERE THE CALL GETS ASSIGNED TO IS KIND OF SOME OF THE, THE THINGS I'VE PICKED UP ON, UM, IN DOING THESE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMERS, PLEASE.
UH, I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR EMPLOYEES AT SEVEN 11 TO WANT TO DEESCALATE THE SITUATION AND DON'T WANT TO MAKE THINGS WORSE, UH, THAN IT, IT COULD BE.
UM, BUT THE, THE APPROACH THAT SEVEN 11 IS TAKING, HAVE YOU ALL FOUND IT TO BE EFFECTIVE? AND IF NOT, WHAT OTHER MITIGATING FACTORS, UH, COULD SEVEN 11 IMPLEMENT TO KEEP THE TRANSIT POPULATION, UH, FROM THAT SPOT IN IMPACTING CUSTOMERS GOING TO IN AND OUT? I THINK THEIR, THEIR CURRENT, UM, POLICY, WHICH IS REALLY JUST NOT TO TRY TO ESCALATE THE SITUATIONS AND SAY, HEY, ARE YOU GUYS, UH, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE YOU DON'T, SOMETIMES YOU DON'T KNOW, UM, WHO'S COMING IN THE STORE.
IT'S A, YOU KNOW, CONVENIENCE STORES HAVE A HIGH TURNOVER RATE.
IF IT'S SOMEONE PATRONIZING THE STORE BUYING SOMETHING, THEY'RE, THEY'RE A CUSTOMER, UM, OR PURCHASING FUEL, THEY'RE, THEY'RE A CUSTOMER.
UM, SO I THINK IT, YOU KNOW, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE AND IN OTHER CONVENIENCE STORES THROUGHOUT THE CITY, UM, IF IT'S WARRANTED TO BRING ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ON, UM, THE SITE, THEN I THINK THEY CAN MAKE THOSE CONTACTS.
BUT AS, AS FAR AS ANYTHING SPECIFIC FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T, I I HAVEN'T BEEN TOLD OF ANY SPECIFIC STRATEGY.
SO IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THEY, THEY'RE NOT TRYING ANYTHING NEW? NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, REALLY JUST ENSURING THAT THEY HAVE A SAFE SPACE FOR, FOR THEIR, UH, CUSTOMERS AND THAT THEY'RE NOT CREATING, UH, ADDITIONAL ISSUES BY, YOU KNOW, ESCALATING TENSE SITUATIONS IF THEY DO COME UP.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS? OH, REALLY QUICK, PLEASE.
MR. RU, UM, PASSING ASIDE, I KNOW IT'S WINTERTIME AND UM, THINGS HAVE FAILED IN REGARDS TO
[02:30:01]
FLUSHNESS OF GARDEN AND LANDSCAPING, BUT HAVE YOU HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT YOUR, WITH YOUR TEAM IN THAT COMMUNITY, UM, THAT STORE OWNER ABOUT UPDATING HIS LANDSCAPING? UM, OFTEN TREES HAVE DIED FROM WHAT, HOW IT BEGAN WHEN THEY BUILT IT IS DEFINITELY DIFFERENT NOW, UM, FROM MY PERSONAL OPINION.UM, HOW CAN THEY BRING BACK THE ROBUSTNESS OF THEIR LANDSCAPING, UM, AS THEY MOVE FORWARD? YEAH, AND THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT WE LOOK AT ON A LOT OF THESE STORES IS ENSURING THE LANDSCAPINGS, UM, UP TO ARTICLE 10, I KNOW THIS PARTICULAR STORE HAS SOME, UH, MATURE TREES THAT WERE PLANTED, UH, I BELIEVE, UH, WHEN THE STORE WAS ORIGINALLY OPENED BACK IN 2011.
UM, SO IT'S ESSENTIALLY ENSURING THAT THOSE TREE UH, TREES AND LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPING ITEMS ARE, UM, STILL IN PLACE WHEN WE GO THROUGH THESE RENEWALS AND LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, UH, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
UM, SO THE SUP IS ONLY RELATED TO THE ALCOHOL, SO THE ALCOHOL WASN'T THERE.
YOU STILL COULD, THE STORE WOULD, THE STORE ITSELF DOESN'T NEED A SUP, AM I CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
SO IT'S ONLY RELATED TO THE ALCOHOL, UM, UH, RELATED TO THIS.
HA HAVE, DO YOU KNOW IF YOUR, UM, AGAIN, ALONG THE MAJOR CORRIDORS, UM, TRAVEL PLAZA, CFR QUITE OFTEN, AND THERE IS HOMELESS UNDER AVERY BRIDGE AS FAR AS YOU CAN GO DOWN 1 75, WHICH WASN'T TYPICALLY THERE ALREADY IN THE PAST.
UM, HAVE YOU, DO YOU KNOW IF THE APPLICANT HAS REACHED OUT TO, UM, UH, HOMELESS SOLUTIONS TO MAYBE TEAM WITH THEM OR BE OPEN TO THAT SUGGESTION WITH THE CITY HOMELESS SOLUTIONS TO, TO, TO HELP WITH, WITH THAT AT THEIR SITE? YEAH, I'M, I'M NOT AWARE IF THEY HAVE, BUT I, I DO LIKE THAT IDEA AND I CAN CERTAINLY PASS THAT ALONG SINCE I'M DEALING WITH A LOT OF THESE STORES, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND SOME OF 'EM HAVE, YOU KNOW, ISSUES SIMILAR TO, TO THIS STORE.
SO I'M HAPPY TO PASS THAT INFORMATION ALONG TO, UH, UH, JUST SO YOU ALL KNOW, EACH STORE HAS AN AREA LEADER, WHICH IS KIND OF, UH, AND I'M TALKING ABOUT SEVEN 11 SPECIFICALLY, UH, HAS AN AREA LEADER THAT IS KIND OF RESPONSIBLE FOR OVERSEEING THAT PARTICULAR STORE.
SO I WORK CLOSELY WITH THEM TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE EVERYTHING IN LINE WHEN THESE RENEWALS DO COME UP.
SO I'LL, I'LL CERTAINLY BRING THAT UP.
AND THIS STORE IS NOT, UH, IS NOT SURROUNDED SO MUCH BY, UM, BY RESIDENTIALS.
SO THE HANGING IS PRETTY MUCH BECAUSE OF WHAT, UH, WHAT WE HAVE THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
IN YOUR BELIEF, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT Y YEAH, THIS PARTICULAR STORE IS IN A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.
I DON'T THINK I JUST FLIPPED OVER TO THE AERIAL MAP.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, YOU KNOW, WITHIN 500 FEET OR MAYBE, YOU KNOW, A MILE OR SO.
UM, SO THIS IS A COMMERCIAL AREA AND IT'S REALLY JUST ESSENTIALLY WHAT YOU SAID, UH, PARTICULARLY ON CFO AND EVERY, EVERY UNDERPASS.
UH, JUST HAS SOME TRANSIENT POPULATIONS, UM, AND IT'S OFF RIGHT OFF THE HIGHWAY, SO THAT CAN CREATE ADDITIONAL, YOU KNOW, CALLS FOR SERVICE AND UM, THI THINGS LIKE THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. RUAG? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? UH, YES, MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 3 4 DASH 2 7 0, UH, MOVE TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE, UH, THE SPEC, THE SPECIFIC PERMIT IS APPROVED FOR FIVE YEARS WITH NO ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? UM, I JUST WILL RECOMMEND, UM, ESPECIALLY ALONG OUR CORRIDORS WHERE CONVENIENCE STORES COULD BE HIGHLY AFFECTED AND CAN APPEAR TO BE THAT THE ISSUE IS THAT THE, THE OWNER DOES NOT CARE TO REACH OUT TO HOMELESS, UH, SOLUTIONS.
UM, AND, AND, AND KIND KEEP A DIALOGUE WITH THAT SO THAT IN THE FUTURE WHEN COMING BACK, THEY CAN SHOW THAT THEY HAVE MADE EFFORTS TO, UM, ENSURE THAT IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT DIRECTLY AFFECTING, THAT THEIR STORE IS NOT DIRECTLY DOING, BUT IT'S ANOTHER DEPARTMENT IN THE CITY CAN HELP THEM OUT TO KINDA REDUCE WHATEVER CRIME OR POLICE CALLS THAT THEY HAVE.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE HIGHLY, UH, ESPECIALLY ALONG CF ON PRETTY MUCH ALL OUR FREEWAYS RIGHT NOW.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS? YES.
UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT? UM, YES, JUST WANTED TO MENTION, UM, A NO TRESPASSING AGREEMENT WITH THE POLICE OFFICE.
UH, POLICE DEPARTMENT MAY BE HELPFUL TO THIS TEAM.
UM, I AGREE WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER WHEELER.
THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE, UM, SEVEN 11.
IT'S BUILT TO REFLECT THE COMMUNITY.
UM, I JUST WANT TO ENSURE THAT, UM, IT'S BEAUTIFIED
[02:35:01]
IN, IN MY EXPERIENCE IN RESEARCH, THE BETTER THE LANDSCAPE, THE CLEANER THE PROPERTY, THE LESS TRANSIENT ACTIVITY YOU HAVE.SO, UM, LOOK AT THAT AS AN EFFORT TO, UH, REDUCE SOME OF THE, THE PROBLEMS YOU HAVE AS WELL.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE COMMENTS? ALRIGHT, SINGLE.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, BUT WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR ALL AUTOMATIC RENEWALS.
[6. 25-318A An application for a Planned Development District for TH-3(A) Townhouse District uses on property zoned an R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the southeast line of Ferguson Road, between Hibiscus Drive and Pasteur Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a conceptual plan and conditions. Applicant: Karrington Realty Representative: Jennifer Hiromoto Planner: Martin Bate Council District: 7 Z234-311(MB)]
ALRIGHT, UM, NUMBER SIX, AND I BELIEVE WE DO NEED THAT BRIEFED MR. BATE.THIS IS ITEM Z 2 3 4 DASH THREE 11.
AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR TH THREE.
A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTIES ZONE IN R 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT.
IT'S ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF FERGUSON ROAD BETWEEN HIBISCUS DRIVE AND PASTURA AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY FOUR ACRES IN SIZE.
UH, HERE WE SEE IT ON THE LOCATION, SORT OF THE FAR EASTERN PART OF, UH, THE CITY.
HERE'S AN AERIAL MAP SHOWING THE SITE, UH, THE ZONING MAP.
AS WE SEE, THERE'S A SURROUNDING OF VARIOUS RESIDENTIAL USES.
UH, THERE'S AN MF TWO, A DISTRICT TO THE SOUTH AND EAST, AN R 7.5, A DISTRICT THAT IS PART OF TO THE NORTH NORTHWEST R 7.5 A FURTHER TO THE SOUTH, AND THEN PD 1105 TO THE WEST SOUTHWEST, UH, WHICH INCLUDES A PRIVATE SCHOOL, DAYCARE, A LIBRARY, AND ALSO A CHURCH.
UH, THE SURROUNDING USES IT IS A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL USES WITH MULTIFAMILY CHURCHES IN THE MEDIA VICINITY.
THE SITE ALSO HAS AN SUP FOR A CELLULAR TOWER.
UH, THE SITE IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED FOR THE CHURCH.
THE APPLICANT WISHES TO DEVELOP A DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY AS A SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT DUE TO SOME OF THE SAD OR SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
UH, THEY LIMIT THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT ARE ALLOWED IN AN SAD BELOW WHAT THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO BUILD.
AS SUCH, THEY'RE REQUESTING A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
UH, HERE'S A PHOTO ON HIBISCUS DRIVE LOOKING NORTHEAST, AND I'LL JUST TAKE YOU KIND OF THROUGH A TOUR HERE OF THE SITE.
LOOKING NORTH ON HIBISCUS, THEN LOOKING NORTHWEST AT THE SITE, LOOKING NORTH TOWARDS THE SITE.
AND WE'RE DOWN AT THE SOUTH CORNER OF THAT.
AND YOU CAN SEE A LITTLE SALT TOWER THERE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE LOOKING EAST.
UH, THIS IS THAT MF TWO, A DISTRICT THAT'S IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT.
ASCENT, THEN LOOKING WEST ACROSS THE WAY IS, UH, SOME NEW DEVELOPMENT GOING ON THERE.
I BELIEVE IT IS RETIREMENT HOUSING.
THEN LOOKING NORTH NORTHWEST HERE, WE'RE ON SITE LOOKING SOUTHEAST AGAIN AT THAT NEIGHBORING MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
THEN LOOKING NORTHEAST, UH, THIS IS STILL ON THE SITE AND THERE'S THAT CELL TOWER AS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY.
THEN ON SITE LOOKING SOUTHWEST TOWARDS HIBISCUS, LOOKING NORTH NORTHWEST ON SITE, LOOKING NORTHEAST, NORTHEAST HERE, WE'RE ON FERGUSON, LOOKING SOUTH AND LOOKING WEST ALONG FERGUSON AND LOOKING NORTH ACROSS THE WAY THERE WE SEE ONE OF THOSE CHURCHES LOOKING NORTHEAST.
UH, HERE'S SOME OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS.
SO THERE ARE SOME ENHANCEMENTS WHICH ARE DEFINED AS BEING STRICTER THAN WHAT IS UH, PERMITTED IN THE BASE DISTRICT.
WE ARE HAVING A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF FIVE FEET MINIMUM AND SIDE YARD SETBACK OF FIVE FEET MINIMUM.
TWO STORIES, MAXIMUM HEIGHT OR TWO STORIES MAX.
FOR THE STORIES DEVIATIONS WHERE THEY ARE MORE PERMISSIVE IN THE BASE DISTRICT INCLUDE THE DWELLING UNIT DENSITY, WHICH IS AT 53 UNITS, WHICH IS ABOUT 13 DING UNITS PER ACRE.
INCREASE IN LOT COVERAGE AND A DECREASE IN LOT SIZE.
UH, OTHER PROVISIONS ARE FOR SHARED ACCESS IS THAT 53 LOTS MAY BE SHARED BY FOUR SHARED ACCESS POINTS.
UH, THERE'S ALSO SOME DESIGN STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED HERE.
THERE'S A REQUIREMENT FOR INTERNAL SIDEWALKS WITH A MINIMUM WIDTH OF FOUR FEET ON AT LEAST ONE SIDE OF THOSE INTERNAL ACCESS DRIVES.
AND A REQUIREMENT FOR SIX FOOT SIDEWALK WITH FIVE FOOT WIDE BUFFERS ON THE PUBLIC STREET FRONTAGES.
THERE'S ALSO A REQUIREMENT FOR PEDESTRIAN SCALE LIGHTING ALONG THOSE STREET FRONTAGES AND THAT THEY'RE DOWN ORIENTED SUCH THAT IT'S NOT FLOODING LIGHT INTO THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
AND A REQUIREMENT FOR 6,000 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE WITH OUR TYPICAL DEFINITIONS OF WHAT OPEN SPACE IS.
HERE'S THE PHOTO, OR NOT PHOTO, BUT A SCREENSHOT OF THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN AS PROPOSED.
SO WE SEE 53 LOTS, 22 FOOT ACCESS DRIVES, UH, WITH THE CONFIGURATION WITH THE OPEN SPACE IN THE MIDDLE.
AND THEN AGAIN THAT LITTLE CELL TOWER THERE ON THE RIGHT.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
[02:40:03]
MR. BATE, AM I READING THIS CORRECTLY, THAT ALONG FERGUSON ROAD, UM, THEY'D BE ALLOWED TO PUT AN EIGHT FOOT SOLID WOODEN FENCE ALONG THAT ENTIRE STREET FRONTAGE? YES.DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERN ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, THE STREET ACTIVATION, THE SAFETY, THE, THE LIVABILITY OF A, OF A, OF THAT STREET FACING FACADE WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE FIVE FOOT PLANT, YOU HAVE FERGUSON ROAD, YOU HAVE THE FIVE FOOT PLANTING STRIP, A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK, AND THEN AN EIGHT FOOT WOODEN FENCE WITH THE BACKYARDS OF, OF TOWN HOMES.
AND THE QUESTION IS, ARE CON THERE CONCERN AROUND ACTIVATION THAT SEEM TO BE A A A A GROUND FLOOR ACTIVATING? I MEAN, DOES IT RE DOES IT MEET ANY STANDARDS FOR WALKABILITY AND, YOU KNOW, ACTIVATION IN TERMS OF PEDESTRIAN ACTIVATION? I WOULD SAY THAT IT IS A LITTLE, I WOULD SAY THAT IT IS NOT IDEAL TO HAVE THAT AMOUNT OF SCREENING AWAY FROM THE, UH, FROM THE STREET AND WHATNOT.
UH, WE DID DISCUSS THIS WITH THE APPLICANT AND THEY SHARE THAT THEIR CONCERN IS GIVEN, I THINK SOME OF WHAT'S IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THERE WAS, I THINK, CONCERN ABOUT SOME TRANSIENT POPULATIONS THAT ARE NEARBY THE DESIRE THE DEVELOPERS TO HAVE MORE OF THE DEVELOPMENT FACING INWARD AND HAVING SOME OF THE SCREENING.
UH, FOR, I GUESS FOR THE PURPOSES OF WHAT THE DESIRES OF THE POTENTIAL OWNERS HERE WOULD BE, I DO THINK THAT HAVING A CLOSER FRONT YARD AND REDUCING THE, UH, FENCING WOULD CERTAINLY PROVIDE GREATER PEDESTRIAN ACTIVATION ALONG FERGUSON ROAD.
UH, ONE OF THE, NOT CONCESSIONS, BUT ONE OF THE ITEMS WE CAME TO AGREEMENT UPON WAS THE PROVISIONING OF THESE SIDEWALKS.
UH, WHERE ORIGINALLY THERE WAS NO PROVISION FOR THE SIDEWALKS.
UH, WE DID FEEL THAT GIVEN THE AREA PLAN FOR THIS, THE TWO POINTS TO WHITE ROCK EAST AREA PLAN MM-HMM
IT DOES CALL FOR THIS TO BE AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH HAS A GENERALLY MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT.
AND WE FELT THAT IF YOU AT LEAST GET THE SIDEWALKS PUT IN THERE TO INCREASE SOME OF THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY, HAVING THE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED LIGHTING, IT DOES PROVIDE AT LEAST A BIT OF A COMPROMISE BETWEEN SOME OF THE SCREENING THAT'S PROVIDED ALONG FERGUSON VERSUS DOING ALL THAT WITHOUT ANY SIDEWALKS.
WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATE FENCING MATERIAL, MAYBE COMBINATION OF MASONRY AND WOOD OR WITH PERHAPS SOME DEGREE OF OPENNESS TO, TO NOT HAVE THAT FORBIDDING 350? MY ESTIMATE OF 350 FEET OF SOLID WOOD FENCE, UH, THAT HAD NOT BEEN DISCUSSED? NO.
BUT WE WOULDN'T BE OPPOSED TO A, A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SCREENING.
AND THEN ON THE, UH, OTHER STREET FRONTAGES, PAST AND HIBISCUS, IT WOULD BASICALLY BE THE SAME CONFIGURATION, BUT THE FENCE HEIGHT WOULD BE SIX FEET INSTEAD OF EIGHT FEET, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.
UM, MOVING ON TO OPEN SPACE, I MEAN, THIS IS FOUR ACRES OF, UM, LAND, SO 174,240 SQUARE FEET AND THEY'RE PROPOSING 6,000 SQUARE FOOT OF OPEN SPACE, WHICH IS LIKE WHAT, THREE, THREE AND A HALF PERCENT.
WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT BEING AN AN AN, AN INADEQUATE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE FOR 53 UNITS OF HOUSING? YES, WE INITIALLY DISCUSSED TRYING TO GO WITH THE INITIAL, THE, THE STANDARD 10% REQUIREMENT MM-HMM
UH, THAT WE OFTEN SEE WITH OUR MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE GENERALLY DO LIKE TO SEE THE 10%.
UH, THE APPLICANT INDICATED THAT THEIR CONSTRAINTS OF, I GUESS FOR FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT AND ALL THAT, FOR HOW MUCH THEY WOULD LIKE TO BUILD ON THE SITE, UH, THAT WAS THE MOST THAT THEY COULD PROVIDE FOR OPEN SPACE.
ARE THEY, UM, IN THE, UH, IN THE REPORT, IN THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, IT, IT ALLUDES TO SOME, UH, DEVIATION FROM THE STANDARDS FOR LANDSCAPING.
BUT IN THE ACTUAL PD IT LOOKS AS IF THEY'RE PLANNING TO MEET THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 10, ARE THEY GOING TO BE ABLE TO MEET A 15% LANDSCAPE AREA WITH THIS CONCEPTUAL PLAN? 'CAUSE THAT'S THE NORMAL REQUIREMENT FOR A SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT OF THEY, SO 15% OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT, LANDSCAPE AREA.
UH, YES, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO MEET THAT.
UH, THE CITY ARBORIST HAS REVIEWED THE, UH, MOST RECENT, UH, PLANS FOR IT AND THEY SAID THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO MEET IT.
UH, MOVING ON TO THE SHARED ACCESS DRIVES AND THE HEIGHT, UH, THE SHARED ACCESS DRIVES HERE ARE 22 FEET, WHICH MR. NAVAREZ TELLS ME IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE NUMBER OF UNITS HERE.
HOWEVER, UH, WITH THE ACCOMPANYING HEIGHT OF 36 FEET, HE SAYS THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WOULD REQUIRE 26 FEET.
SO CONSIDERING THAT THE, THE UH, UNITS ARE LIMITED TO TWO STORY, WOULD IT BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO SET UP A HEIGHT LIMIT OF 30 FEET, WHICH WOULD BE, WHICH WOULD WORK WITH THE 22 FEET? I THINK THAT HAVING A HEIGHT LIMIT, IT WOULDN'T BE, IT WOULDN'T BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT.
I WILL SAY THAT THE WAY THAT THIS WILL LIKELY PROGRESS IS IF THIS WERE TO ULTIMATELY BE ADOPTED AS A ZONING CHANGE.
UH, WHEN THE APPLICANT GOES TO PLATTING, IF THEY REQUEST 22 FOOT EASEMENTS AND THAT PLAT IS GRANTED THEN AT PERMITTING WHEN THEY GO TO PULL THEIR CONSTRUCTION PERMITS AND WHATNOT AS PART OF THE REVIEW,
[02:45:01]
THEY WOULD LOOK AT WHAT'S ALLOWED AS AN EASEMENT THERE AND THEY WOULD SEE 22 FEET MM-HMMAND THAT WOULD INHERENTLY PUT A LIMITATION ON THE HEIGHT.
UM, IF THEY WANTED TO GO WITH A 36 FOOT STRUCTURE, EVEN IF IT'S ALLOWED WITHIN THE ZONING REGULATIONS, THE FIRE CODE WOULD, WOULD HAVE TO RULE THAT AND SAY, SORRY, YOU'VE GOT 22 FOOT EASEMENTS.
THE MOST YOU CAN DO IS 30 FEET.
SO THESE 22, THIS 22 FOOT WIDE DRIVE WOULD ONLY WORK WITH THE 30 FEET AND HIGH.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER BEAT ME TO THE PUNCH ON THE OPEN SPACE QUESTION.
SO I'LL MOVE ON TO, UH, GUEST PARKING.
WAS THERE ANY, UH, CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT EXCEEDING THE BARE MINIMUM ON GUEST PARKING? 'CAUSE I, THE WAY I CALCULATED IT, IT IS AT THE MINIMUM, UH, NO, THERE WAS NO ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION ON THE GUEST PARKING.
UH, WE FELT COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED.
COMMISSIONER FORESITE, MY QUESTION IS TO DOVETAIL WITH COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, COULD YOU, UH, HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND, UH, THE PARKING REQUIREMENT IS, IS ONE PARKING SPACE FOR EVERY UNIT UNIT, RIGHT? CORRECT.
I IS, ARE, IS THE PARKING LIKE IN THE GROUND LEVEL OF THE UNIT ITSELF AND THE, AND THE UNITS ARE BUILT ON TOP OF THE GARAGE? I BELIEVE THAT THEY WILL BE EITHER ON THE GROUND LEVEL OR WITH THE GARAGE, BUT THAT WOULD BE A BETTER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
THE A THE APPLICANT IS HERE, COMMISSIONER FORSET.
SO WHEN WE GET TO THE HEARING, UH, YEP, THERE SHE IS.
SO WE, WE CAN, UH, CIRCLE BACK ON THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, WE'LL GO BACK SECOND AROUND TO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
ARE YOU AWARE THAT THERE WAS, UH, UH, WHETHER THERE WAS ROBUST, UH, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FROM THE UH, FRI UH, NEIGHBORHOOD OF GROUP OF NEIGHBORHOOD OF ASSOCIATIONS? YES, WE ARE AWARE OF, UH, EXTENSIVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WITH THE FERGUSON ROAD INITIATIVE AND SOME OTHERS, AND I BELIEVE THAT THEY HAVE RECEIVED, UH, SOME OTHERS OF SUPPORT FROM THOSE ORGANIZATIONS AS WELL.
UM, AND WERE YOU AWARE THAT THE PLANS THAT CAME, THAT WERE CREATED TO GET THIS APPLICANT TO AN APPROVAL, UM, THAT THE, THAT THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS HELPED, UH, TO APPROVE, TO APPROVE AND, UH, APPROVE THAT THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT IS WHAT THEY SAW FIT FOR THAT AREA? YES.
SECOND ROUND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES.
FOLLOWING UP ON COMMISSIONER HOUSE, WRIGHT'S QUESTION, UH, 'CAUSE I HAD IT IN MY NOTES AND FORGOT TO BRING IT UP ABOUT THE GUEST PARKING IS YOU SAY THAT YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THE MINIMUM, UH, NUMBER OF SPACES REQUIRED.
ARE YOU ALSO FAM COM COMFORTABLE WITH THE CONFIGURATION THAT, YOU KNOW, CLUSTERS THESE GUEST PARKING SPACES AT THE CORNERS, WHICH MAKES THE GUEST PARKING SPACES, YOU KNOW, PRETTY FAR FROM A LARGE NUMBER OF THESE UNITS? I, I WOULD SAY THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, YES.
UM, IT IS, THEY ARE CERTAINLY CLUSTERS OPPOSED TO SPREAD OUT.
I THINK THAT IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S FLEXIBILITY ON THE, ON THE DEVELOPER SIDE, IF THEY CAN MOVE THOSE AROUND, THEN UH, THAT WOULD BE FINE AS WELL.
BUT PART OF THE, I THINK, ADVANTAGE OF HAVING THE ACCESS DRIVE SIDEWALKS, UH, REQUIREMENT IS IT DOES IMPROVE SOME OF THAT WALKABILITY.
SO EVEN IF YOU DO HAVE TO PARK ON THE OTHER END, IT'S A FAIRLY, IT'S A MORE PLEASANT WALK TO GET FROM THERE TO WHERE YOU'RE VISITING VERSUS IF THERE WERE NO SIDEWALKS, HOW ARE YOU ANTICIPATING THAT ANY SORT OF LOADING AND DELIVERIES ARE GONNA BE ACCOMMODATED, ACCOMMODATED HERE? I SAY IF A, IF A MOVING VAN OR A DELIVERY VAN WAS EVEN TO BE AT ONE OF THESE, UM, UNITS, IT WOULD SEEM THAT THE ROADWAY WOULD BE IMPASSABLE.
UH, THAT MIGHT BE, UM, I MIGHT ASK, UH, MR. NAVAREZ IF HE'S PRESENT.
UH, BUT THAT BEING SAID, UH, THAT WASN'T A CONCERN THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY MR. NAVAREZ DURING HIS REVIEW.
UM, HE FOUND THAT IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR TYPICAL MOVEMENTS, UH, THROUGHOUT SUCH A SUBDIVISION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE? COMMISSIONER HAN, AND THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT I JUST NOTED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT THERE'S ONE OF THE LOTS THAT'S NOTED TO HAVE A ZERO REAR YARD SETBACK ON WHAT I THINK WE WOULD TRADITIONALLY, UM, CONSIDER TO BE A SIDE YARD.
IT'S ON THE, THE LOWEST, UM, INTERIOR LOT, IF YOU WILL, ON THE PLAN.
I WAS JUST CURIOUS, SINCE THE TYPICAL SIDE YARD IS NOTED AS FIVE, WAS THERE A REASON WHY THAT HAS A VARIANCE? I I WOULD DEFINITELY DEFER TO THE APPLICANT ON THAT, BUT I SUSPECT IT IS JUST BECAUSE THE ADJACENCY TO THE CELL TOWER, UM, IT'LL ALLOW THEM TO THANK YOU.
UM, IS IT TYPICAL IN THE SHARD ACCESS AREAS THAT THE PARKING, UM, THE ADDITIONAL PARKING IS IN CLUSTERS, UM,
[02:50:01]
AND THAT IT IS LIMITED OFTENTIMES WHEN IT'S OF, UM, UNITS THAT ARE MORE FOR SALE THAN A MULTI-FAMILY? I WOULD SAY THAT, UH, IN MY EXPERIENCE, UH, WITH SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENTS, I I'VE SEEN A MIX OF HOW THEY PROVISION THE GUEST PARKING.TYPICALLY IT IS CLUSTERED OR IT IS PLACED INTO A CERTAIN AREA.
UH, I AM WORKING ON A SIMILAR CASE WHERE THE GUEST PARKING IS PROVISIONED.
JUST KIND OF ONE SET HERE, ONE SET THERE.
I I WOULD SAY IT'S COMMON, YES.
AND THAT THEY USUALLY, UM, WHOEVER PURCHASE OR MOVE INTO IT KINDA UNDERSTANDS THAT THEY ARE MOVING INTO AN AREA THAT DOESN'T HAVE, IT'S NOT COMMON TO HAVE A SUPER AMOUNT, I GUESS IF WHAT YOU HAVE AS FAR AS GARAGE, BUT UNITS IS KIND OF YOUR PARKING, I WOULD SAY YES.
TYPICALLY THE PEOPLE WHO MOVE IN ARE AWARE OF THAT.
COMMISSIONER HALL, MR. VATE? UH, THE CELL TOWER IS REMAINING.
YES, AND WE PUT IN, I BELIEVE IN THE USES WE, WE EXEMPTED THE, UH, CELL TOWER USE FROM REQUIRING A, UH, DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
IT'LL JUST USE THE EXISTING SUP SITE PLAN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? I NEED TO READ IT IN THE RECORD.
LET'S, LET'S REREAD IT IN THE RECORD PLEASE, SIR.
ITEM SIX IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH THREE 11.
AN APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ZONE IN R 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF FERGUSON ROAD BETWEEN HIBISCUS DRIVE AND PASTURE AVENUE STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONCEPTUAL PLANNING CONDITIONS.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
HI, MOTO, 1 0 2 3 3 EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY IN DALLAS, 7 5 2 3 8.
UM, I TRY TO TAKE NOTES ON THESE QUESTIONS AS QUICKLY AS I CAN, BUT YOU CAN CONTINUE TO ASK ME QUESTIONS.
WE'RE LOOKING TO PROVIDE 53 DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT WILL BE FOR SALE, UH, WITH TWO CAR, UH, GARAGES ATTACHED.
UM, THIS IS LOCATED ON FERGUSON ROAD, JUST, UH, SOUTHWEST OF THE BUCKNER INTERCHANGE.
UM, THIS IS SIX LANES DIVIDED AND UM, WE DID REQUEST FOR SOLID FENCING ALONG FERGUSON BECAUSE THOROUGH FEARS ARE INHERENTLY NOT WALKABLE AND THESE ARE GONNA BE FOLKS THEIR BACKYARDS.
UM, WE WERE WANTING THEM TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE SOLID SCREENING IF THAT WAS WHAT THEY CHOSE.
THE SUBDIVISION PLAN FOR THE FENCE IS TO PROVIDE FOR ROD IRON FENCING.
UM, WITH THE SIDEWALK AND STREET PLACEMENT THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER FROM THE PLANNER, WE WILL COMPLY WITH FIRE CODES AS IN REGARDS TO THE SHARED ACCESS WIDTH OF THE EASEMENTS AND THE HEIGHTS OF THE BUILDINGS.
UM, WANTED TO POINT OUT THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL PLAN THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IN THE PD, NOT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
UM, THE SITE HAS NOT BEEN ENGINEERED, BUT AN ENGINEER DID PREVENT PROVIDE THIS PLAN.
UM, SO THAT'S WHY WE'VE PROVIDED THE 6,000 SQUARE FOOT OF OPEN SPACE AND THAT CENTRAL LOCATION, UM, TO GIVE US A LITTLE BIT OF WIGGLE ROOM FOR WHEN THE SITE DOES GET FULLY ENGINEERED.
UM, I THINK WITH THAT I'LL JUST KEEP ANSWERING QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT, UH, YOU INDICATE, UH, THAT THE PARKING WILL BE TWO, UH, CAR GARAGE ATTACHED? YES, SIR.
SO WILL IT BE LIKE THE, UH, A MULTI-LEVEL WHERE THE, YOU'LL HAVE THE, UH, THE, THE GARAGE IS THE GROUND LEVEL AND THEN THE TOWN HOME UNIT WILL BE ABOVE THAT? YES SIR.
IT'S A SIMPLE TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
THEY'RE DETACHED WITH THREE FOOT SEPARATION.
SO JUST SIMPLE, UM, ATTACHED GARAGES.
UM, WE DID PROVIDE THE GUEST PARKING SPACES, UH, DURING THE COURSE OF THE, THE PD.
WE WERE SORT OF LED TO BELIEVE THAT THE GUEST PARKING WAS NOT IMPORTANT.
WE STILL PROVIDED THE CODE REQUIREMENT.
THERE WILL BE THE ABILITY FOR ON-STREET PARKING ON HIBISCUS AND PASTOR ON THOSE EDGES.
UM, AND UH, I THINK THAT BECAUSE OF THAT ABILITY FOR ON-STREET PARKING, THERE IS SOME CAPACITY IF THERE'S MORE GUESTS THAN WHAT WE'RE PROVIDING SPACES FOR
[02:55:08]
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.YOU ANSWERED MOST OF THE QUESTIONS.
UM, I JUST JUST WANT TO GET CLARITY.
UM, THERE'S ONE, UM, ONE OF THE LOTS APPEARS TO HAVE A ZERO REAR YARD SETBACK ADJACENT TO THE CELL TOWER.
IS THAT INTENTIONAL? IS THERE A FUNCTIONAL REASON WHY THAT ISN'T ABLE TO HAVE THE TYPICAL SETBACK FOR ALL THE OTHER LOTS? UM, WELL IF YOU RECALL IN SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENTS, THERE ARE NO INTERNAL SETBACKS.
UM, AND I JUST WANTED TO BE PROTECTIVE THAT THE, SINCE IT HASN'T BEEN ENGINEERED AND FULLY THE SITE'S LAID OUT ON THE SPACING ORIENTATION, I DIDN'T WANT THEM TO HAVE A CONFLICT, UM, WHEN THEY GO TO DESIGN THAT INDIVIDUAL LOT UNDER.
AND I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY, AND I UNDERSTAND THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY WRITTEN IN, BUT IF YOU'RE INTENDING TO DO DETACHED HOUSING, THERE WILL IN FACT BE SEPARATIONS BETWEEN EACH OF THE HOUSING, UM, LOTS OR FOR BUILDING CODE PURPOSES, CORRECT? YES MA'AM.
AND THEN ONE COMMENT, I THINK YOU HEARD THE NUMBER OF QUESTIONS.
I HAD A SIMILAR ONE ON THE OPEN SPACE.
WAS THERE, DO YOU HAVE A CALCULATED AMOUNT OF WHAT YOU ACTUALLY THINK WILL BE PERMEABLE AREA UNDERSTANDING? IT HASN'T BEEN FULLY VETTED, UM, BUT I THINK THREE PERCENT'S RATHER LOW FOR WHAT WE TYPICALLY SEE.
NO, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT CONCERN.
UM, AND WE DEMONSTRATED A CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN IS WHAT MR. BATES WAS REFERRING TO.
UM, AND HE WAS FANTASTIC THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
JUST WANNA THANK HIM FOR THAT.
UM, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN DOES SHOW THE, THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE ARTICLE 10, THE 15%.
SO THAT COUNTS THE OPEN SPACE AREA, BUT IT ALSO COUNTS THE INDIVIDUAL YARDS THAT WE'LL HAVE LANDSCAPING.
UM, WE, IT IS JUST TRYING TO FIT THAT MANY HOMES.
'CAUSE WE STARTED WITH 56 AND WE HAD TO REDESIGN TO MEET SOME OTHER CITY STANDARDS.
UM, WE FELT THAT THIS WAS APPROPRIATE, UM, BECAUSE OF THE, THE LAYOUT OF IT AND BEING A CENTRAL LOCATION, WE THOUGHT THAT WAS REALLY GOOD.
UM, THIS, IT IS NOT A WALKABLE AREA, BUT WE HAVE A LIBRARY THAT'S, UM, JUST SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET TO OUR SOUTH.
UM, THERE'S A PARK CITY PARK HALF A MILE FROM HERE.
UM, AND WE ARE IN THE WHITE ROCK AREA, SO WE ARE HOPING THAT THAT WAS ADEQUATE FOR THIS.
UM, I BELIEVE THE SENIOR HOUSING THAT'S NEXT DOOR DID NOT HAVE AN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT, SO WE DID KIND OF FOLLOW THAT PD A LITTLE BIT FOR SOME GUIDANCE AS TO WHAT THIS, WHAT IS EXPECTED FOR THIS AREA.
AND I WILL SAY I KNOW THAT THE COMMUNITY IS VERY INTERESTED IN DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPES COMING IN.
AND UM, I, AS COMMISSIONER WHEELER NOTED, WE DID RECEIVE THE LETTERS OF SUPPORT, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
UM, YEAH, JUST A FEW QUESTIONS.
ONE, UM, I'M A BIG FAN OF SHARED ACCESS.
WE'VE HAD A LOT OF SUCCESS WITH IT IN MY DISTRICT, BUT WE'VE HAD SUCCESS WITH IT WHEN IT'S DONE AT A HIGH LEVEL OF QUALITY, UM, BRICK AND LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AROUND THE EDGES OF IT.
UH, MEANINGFUL GREEN SPACE IN THE INTERIOR OF THE PROJECT.
UM, THOSE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS I'M NOT REALLY SEEING HERE.
UM, THE, UH, LITTLE STRIP OF LAND IN THE MIDDLE BEHIND THE HOUSES DOESN'T, YEAH, I MEAN IT CALCULATES OUT TO A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF OPEN SPACE.
IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A PLACE THAT I WANNA SPEND TIME IN OR I WANT TO TAKE MY DOG TO OR MY CHILDREN TO OR ANYTHING.
DID, DID YOU ALL HAVE ANY EARNEST DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW TO MAKE THIS A LITTLE HIGHER QUALITY DEVELOPMENT? HAVE YOU, IS YOUR APPLICANT, UM, WOULD THEY CONSIDER UPGRADING THE PERIMETER OF THE PROJECT WITH A LANDSCAPE AND BRICK? I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE PD ABOUT A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF MASONRY ON THESE BUILDINGS.
UM, MAYBE I MISSED THAT, BUT I, I BELIEVE THE STATE LAW PROHIBITS THE REGULATION OF BUILDING MATERIALS.
IS THAT STILL IN EFFECT? OKAY, FINE.
ALRIGHT, I'LL TAKE TWO OUTTA THREE THEN.
I KNOW I'M, I'M NOT UP TO DATE ON EVERYTHING, BUT, OKAY.
UM, I, I, I THINK THAT WE WOULD BE WILLING TO COMMIT TO THE PERIMETER FENCING BEING WROUGHT IRON OR A COMBINATION OF ROD IRON AND SOLID.
UM, WE, I THOUGHT THAT THE, UM, PD CONDITIONS THAT, UM, MR. BATE ASKED FOR AS FAR AS THE, THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND THE SIDEWALK WIDTHS.
I, I THOUGHT THAT WAS, UM, VERY GOOD.
I'M ALSO COMPARING WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TO CITY CODE AND HAD THERE BEEN A ROUTE THROUGH THE REGULAR SHARED ACCESS REGULATIONS, I WOULD'VE BEEN ASKING FOR A STRAIGHT ZONING DISTRICT.
SO, UM, I'VE SEEN LOTS OF SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENTS TOO, AND I I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS THAT BAD.
WELL, UH, MY, MY COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS ON THE GREEN SPACE STAND.
WELL, UM, CAN I JUST ADD REAL QUICK PLEASE.
THE, THE ARTICLE 10 LANDSCAPING, UM, THAT DOES REQUIRE, UM, THE NOT ONLY STREET TREES
[03:00:01]
BUT ALSO PLANTING GROUPS.UM, AND THAT'LL BE PLACED, UM, IN THE PARKWAY AREAS.
SO, UM, WE'RE GONNA BEAUTIFIED ON THE OUTSIDE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
I'M TALKING ABOUT USABLE GREEN SPACE.
I'M GONNA LIVE IN A DENSE COMMUNITY, UH, THAT HAS A VIR HAVE VIRTUALLY VERY, VERY LITTLE OUTDOOR SPACE, THIS KIND OF, THIS FORMAT OF HOUSING.
AND SO I'M LOOKING FOR SOMETHING IN THIS COMMUNITY WHERE THERE IS SOME USABLE VISIBLE OPEN SPACE.
THAT'S SAFE PLACE I WANNA BE IN COMMISSIONER FORSYTH, PLEASE.
WHAT IS THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE AND IS THERE A FRONT YARD AND A BACKYARD? UH, PROVIDED IN WITH, BECAUSE I DON'T SEE THAT ON THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
I WAS CAUGHT A LITTLE BIT OFF GUARD WITH I THINK THIS BRIEFING OCCURRING IN THE AFTERNOON RATHER THAN IN THE MORNING.
UM, SO I'M A LITTLE BIT, UM, CAUGHT OFF GUARD ON SOME OF THIS.
UH, THE LOT SIZES I BELIEVE ARE 1700 SQUARE FEET.
UM, THERE WILL BE SOME FRONT YARD AND THERE WILL BE SOME BACKYARD.
UM, THE, I BELIEVE THE BACKYARD IS AROUND 10 FEET.
UM, THE, GOING OFF OF MEMORY, THE LOT DEPTHS OVER 75 OR 80 FEET AND THE DEPTH OF THE PAD IS 55 FEET.
IT'S, IT'S NOT GONNA BE A HUNDRED PERCENT LOT COVERAGE.
SO THE, ON THE CHARGE ACCESS, UM, THE GREEN SPACE IS GOING TO BE SOME TYPE OF YARD SPACE ALSO? YES.
IT'LL BE LANDSCAPED IN THE REAR LIKE MOST OF THEM ARE DOING.
SO THAT WOULD KINDA BE THE, THE USABLE GREEN SPACE ON EACH EACH SITE? YES.
EACH SITE WILL HAVE SOME YARD, IT'LL BE MINIMAL.
I MEAN, THIS, THIS IS COMPACT SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S NOT BIG YARDS HERE.
UM, AND THEN THE 6,000 SQUARE FOOT OPEN SPACE IN THE CENTER WILL BE LANDSCAPED.
SO EACH LODGE IS ABOUT 28 APARTMENTS, ABOUT EACH TOWN HOME'S ABOUT 25 BY 40 IS THE AVERAGE AND EACH TYPE OF, AND CREATES ADDITIONAL IN FRONT AND BACK.
UM, WHAT DO YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE PROXIMITY TO THE NEAREST PARK TO THIS? I'M SORRY, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING YOU.
WHAT IS THE, DO YOU KNOW THE PROXIMITY TO THE NEAREST PARK TO TO THIS? UH, IT'S A HALF MILE.
UM, AND WHAT WAS THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, UM, WITH FRI CONCERNING THE TYPE OF HOUSING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN AREA? UM, YES.
THEY WERE VERY EXCITED FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY PRODUCT.
THEY WERE VERY EXCITED FOR IT BEING FOR SALE.
UM, WE, UM, HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE PROCESS.
UM, I MAILED LETTERS TO THE NEIGHBORS.
WE HELD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AT THE LIBRARY IN OCTOBER.
EVERYONE IN ATTENDANCE SIGNED THE SUPPORT PETITION, WHICH HAS BEEN SHARED WITH EVERYONE.
UM, AND THEN YOU RECEIVED SOME ADDITIONAL EMAILS AND SUPPORT FROM A COUPLE OF THE HOA GROUPS.
UM, AND WERE THIS, AND DO YOU, WERE YOU AWARE THAT THIS WAS BECAUSE OF THE OVERSATURATION OF, OF, OF HOME FOR RENT, UM, APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN THE AREA THAT THEY WANT TO SEE SOME YES.
UM, THAT WOULD BE MORE FOR SALE THAN JUST FOR RENT.
SO THERE'S UM, OLDER HOUSING, MULTIFAMILY HOUSING STOCK THAT'S ADJACENT TO US ON THE NORTHWEST AND THE SOUTH, NO, NO, NORTHEAST AND SOUTHEAST.
THERE'S OLDER MULTIFAMILY STOCK ALONG BUCKNER.
UM, AND THEN THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IS SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, SO THIS DOES PROVIDE A SORT OF A UNIQUE HOUSING CHOICE FOR THIS AREA.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE SENIOR HOUSING THAT'S GOING ONTO THE SOUTHWEST UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS PLEASE, COMMISSIONER, I'M JUST GONNA ASK THE QUESTION.
UM, I THINK YOU'VE HEARD THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT OPEN SPACE AND I JUST DID SOME QUICK MATH BECAUSE YOUR PERIMETER LOTS ARE 75 FEET DEEP.
THE CENTER LOTS WHERE YOU HAVE THE OPEN SPACE ARE 80.
IF YOU SIMPLY REDUCE THOSE TO 75, YOUR OPEN SPACE GOES UP AGAIN, STILL MODEST, BUT YOU'RE EFFECTIVELY 40 FEET WIDE, ALMOST 8,000 SQUARE FEET GETS YOU CLOSER TO 5% OF OPEN SPACE.
WOULD PROVIDING 5% MINIMUM OPEN SPACE BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 5%? YES, I THINK WE COULD MAKE THAT WORK.
UM, THE, THE REASON WHY THERE'S TWO, UM, DIFFERENT LOT SIZES IS THERE'S GONNA BE A VARIETY OF THE HOUSING.
SO THEY'RE NOT GONNA ALL BE THE SAME.
AND, BUT DOES, WOULD THAT TRANSLATE INTO UM, FEWER, WELL I KNOW IT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE A SMALLER HOUSING TYPE.
IS IS THAT FAIR OR IS IT JUST DIFFERENT? UM, AMENITIES
[03:05:01]
RELATED TO THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS.AND I'M BEING CAREFUL BECAUSE I'M CONCERNED I'M GOING BEYOND, UM, LAND USE QUESTIONS.
BUT ALSO AS COMMISSIONER WHEELER SAID, I UNDERSTAND THE STRONG DESIRE IN THIS COMMUNITY TO HAVE THE VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES.
SO, UM, I BELIEVE THAT WE COULD PICK UP SOME OF THE DIFFERENCE FROM THE LANDSCAPING THAT WE WERE ALREADY INTENDING TO PROVIDE.
BENEFIT OF HAVING AN ARCHITECT ON THE BODY, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER SECOND ROUND.
I NEED TO ASK SOMETHING BEFORE I ASK HER SOMETHING.
IT, UM, SO ON EACH OF THESE PROPOSED PLATS, THERE IS GOING TO BE GREEN SPACE AS FAR AS YARDS FOR EACH UNIT.
I THINK THE NEXT QUESTION WOULD PROBABLY BE THE STAFF 'CAUSE OKAY.
WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO STAFF NEXT.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFFING BECAUSE I, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.
I KNOW THAT THE, THE SHARED GREEN SPACE IS WHAT WE HAVE COMPLAINT WE'RE KIND OF FIGURING ON.
BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE HAVING EACH HOME, EACH ONE OF THESE PLAS ARE GOING TO HAVE WHAT IS TYPICALLY SOME TYPE OF YARD SPACE, UM, THAT DOES CREATE ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE.
SO BASED ON HOW IT ENDS UP PLATTED, UM, WITH EVERY LOT, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF 75%.
SO IF YOU HAD JUST A, I'M GONNA BE REALLY SIMPLE WITH THIS 'CAUSE I CAN'T DO THE MATH RIGHT NOW, BUT LET'S JUST DO A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT LOT.
YOU COULD ADD 7000, 750 SQUARE FEET THAT IS DEDICATED TO THE STRUCTURE ITSELF.
UH, YOU WOULD PROBABLY HAVE SOME THAT'S DEDICATED FOR DRIVEWAY OR AN ENTRANCE OF THAT SORT.
SO LET'S SAY YOU HAVE 20% LEFT, UH, 200 SQUARE FEET PER LOT.
UM, THAT WOULD BE A YARD SPACE.
UM, GIVEN THE ACTUAL LOT SIZES, WE'RE TALKING MORE ABOUT 2000 SQUARE FEET, SO YOU CAN JUST DOUBLE THAT.
WE CAN SAY ABOUT 400 SQUARE FEET OF YARD SPACE.
IT MIGHT BE DISTRIBUTED MAYBE 150 SQUARE FEET IN THE BACK, UM, 50 SQUARE FEET IN THE FRONT, THAT SORT OF THING.
UH, SO THERE WOULD BE SOME AMOUNT OF GREENERY AND GREEN SPACE IN GENERAL, I THINK ON THESE LOTS, UH, JUST DUE TO THAT MINIMUM OR THAT MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENT.
I THINK MAYBE I'M ASKING KIND OF DEALING WITH TOWN HOMES, A GOOD MAJORITY THAT I SEE ON THESE TYPE OF LOTS.
YOU THINK, UM, SOMETIME THEY'RE OFTEN BUILT OR THEY OFTEN BUILT LIKE 25 FEET WIDE, 25 FEET WIDE, ABOUT 40 IN DEPTH WITH THE BACKYARD.
UM, AND I MAY AND IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD INCREASE THE YARD SPACE IN THE REAR AND THE FRONT AND TO GET WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
I THINK IT'S MORE OF A COMMENT.
'CAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THE, THE ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE IS ON SITE.
I, I DON'T, NO, I THINK, I BELIEVE IT'S HARD FOR US TO SEE IT.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT IT'S HARD FOR US TO SEE IT BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING MORE AT A PLAT AND NOT THE ACTUAL CONCEPTIONAL DRAWINGS? UH, WHAT I WOULD SAY, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE, UH, WITH THE PRO, UH, THE TERMINOLOGY IN THE, IN THE REPORT IS YES, THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN, IT'S INHERENTLY, IT'S A CONCEPT.
YOU'RE GENERALLY JUST LOOKING AT THE CONFIGURATION OF LOTS AT A 50,000 FOOT LEVEL, LET'S SAY, UM, AT FINAL PLATTING, THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD, THE FINAL PLAT WILL SERVE AS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THIS.
AND WITH THE FINAL PLAT, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO BETTER SEE WHAT THE FINAL SETBACKS AND ALL THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
SO IT IS A LITTLE HARD TO ENVISION ON A CONCEPTUAL PLAN WHAT THE ULTIMATE CONFIGURATION OR NOT THE CONFIGURATION, WHAT THE ULTIMATE LOT ITSELF WOULD LOOK LIKE.
UH, GOING BACK TO SOMETHING YOU DID SAY, MENTION EARLIER ABOUT THE TYPICAL TOWNHOUSE CONFIGURATION, I WILL SAY THEN MOST OF THESE TOWNHOUSE TYPE DEVELOPMENTS, WHETHER THEY ARE ATTACHED OR DETACHED, THEY GENERALLY DO JUST HAVE SMALLER, THEY JUST HAVE SMALLER YARDS.
IT'S, I THINK A FUNCTION OF WHAT THE DEVELOPER'S ENVISIONING AND WHAT THE MARKET FOR THESE TYPES OF HOUSES IS, IS THAT FOLKS MIGHT BE MORE INTERESTED IN HAVING ADDITIONAL HOUSE VERSUS ADDITIONAL YARD.
UM, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT WITH, WITH THE CONDITIONS AS IS, EACH LOT WOULD HAVE, UH, SOME AMOUNT OF GREEN SPACE IN IT.
FOLLOWING UP ON THAT, THE CONDITIONS AS OUTLINED, I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY.
THERE'S NO MINIMUM REAR YARD REQUIRED.
AND SO WITH THE 75% LOCK COVERAGE, THEY COULD IN THEORY PUT THE BUILDING.
AND AGAIN, I KNOW THEY HAVE BUILDING CODE AND OTHER THINGS THEY NEED TO GO THROUGH.
BUT THAT WOULD ORIENT WITH YOUR EXAMPLE.
AND IF WE USE 2000 SQUARE FOOT LOT, THAT'S AVERAGE, I THINK 1750, BUT QUICKER NUMBERS.
SO 2000 SQUARE FOOT LOT, 75% LOT COVERAGE, IT'S 1500 SQUARE
[03:10:01]
FEET ON THE GROUND.AND SO THEN YOU'VE GOT, UM, DO THE MATH 250 ON THE ON FRONT YARD, 28 FEET WIDE.
SO ROUGHLY 10 FEET OF FRONT YARD.
AGAIN, ROUND NUMBERS I KNOW I DIDN'T DO EXACTLY 250 FEET THERE.
AND SO PART OF THAT'S GONNA BE DRIVEWAY BECAUSE WE'RE TWO CAR GARAGES BASED ON THEIR CALCULATIONS AND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
SO IF THEY PUT IN, AND AGAIN, I KNOW THEY'VE GOT A BALANCE IT OUT WITH THEIR PERMEABLE AREA, BUT IF THEY HAVE A TWO CAR GARAGE, 24 FOOT DRIVE, 10 FEET, THE FUNCTIONAL FRONT YARD IS GOING TO BE ROUGHLY 10 FEET DEEP BY WHATEVER THE BALANCE OF THEIR DRIVEWAY WIDTH ENDS UP BEING.
SO YOU MIGHT HAVE A SMALL WALKUP, BUT THERE WON'T BE POTENTIALLY, AND AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW PRECISELY, BUT WORKING WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS, THAT WOULD BE A REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF WHAT COULD BE BUILT AT THE MAXIMUM.
I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S REASONABLE TO SAY.
AND SO IS THAT PARTLY WHY, UM, MAYBE UNDERSTANDING WHERE, UM, AND AGAIN, I RECOGNIZE AND WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE MR. HERTO SAID THEY'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE 15% CALCULATION THAT THEY'RE GONNA BE REQUIRED.
SO THERE WILL BE SOME SMALL AREAS SPRINKLED WITHIN EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENTS, BECAUSE THEY STILL NEED TO MEET ARTICLE 10.
BUT IN TERMS OF WHAT I WANNA GO OUTSIDE AND WALK MY DOG, IT'S PROBABLY WHATEVER THE, THE COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE IS.
WOULD THAT BE FAIR? I WOULD SAY THAT'S, OR WALKING AROUND ON THE SIDEWALK, I'M, YOU KNOW, TAKING ADVANTAGE OF MY OTHER AMENITIES.
I THINK THAT THE OPEN SPACE THAT WOULD BE THE MOST, UH, THE MOST CONVENIENT TO ACCESS FOR THE COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE ITSELF, THAT WOULD BE THE MOST CONVENIENT ACCESS FOR RESIDENTS.
UH, THERE WOULD BE SOME OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS AS WELL, UH, WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT I THINK THIS AREA IS STILL SORT OF IN TRANSITION, UM, IN TERMS OF HOW IT HAS DEVELOPED PREVIOUSLY AND HOW IT IS DEVELOPING NOW WITH THINGS SUCH AS THE, UH, EXISTING AREA PLAN FOR THE TWO POINTS TO WHITE ROCK.
ONE, LIKE I SAID, AS IT CALLS FOR AN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THIS IS ALWAYS, I THINK, A DIFFICULT THING TO BALANCE, WHERE INHERENTLY, I THINK DENSER URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS, YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE QUITE AS MUCH GREEN SPACE AS YOU DO IN A MORE RESIDENTIAL OR, UH, COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL TYPE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, ONE FOLLOW UP FOR YOU, AND THEN I THINK ONE FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, UM, FERGUSON ROAD HAS THEIR AREA PLAN, AND I BELIEVE THEY HAVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THAT THOROUGHFARE.
IS THIS COMPLIANT WITH THOSE? I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE, UH, FERGUSON ROAD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
UM, AND I, I WON'T SAY IT'S A DEVELOPMENT STANDARD PER SE, BUT ANYWAY, I WON'T DERAIL US ON THAT QUESTION, BUT I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, FOLLOWING UP ON COMMISSIONER HOUSE, WRIGHT'S QUESTION ABOUT WHAT IS THE FRONT DOOR OF THIS GOING TO LOOK LIKE, AND AS IT'S PRESENTED TO US, IT'S A FIVE FOOT BUFFER, A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK, AND THEN AN EIGHT FOOT WOODEN FENCE.
YES, THERE WOULD BE THE FENCE.
YEAH, IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD LOOK LIKE THAT.
AND AGAIN, JUST TRYING TO THINK THROUGH KIND OF HOW THIS INTEGRATES WITH THE LARGER, UM, COMMUNITY VISION.
WHICH BRINGS ME TO MY QUESTION, I BELIEVE FOR MS. MORRISON, I CAN'T QUITE SEE HER.
IS IT CORRECT THAT WHILE WE ARE PROHIBITED FROM REQUIRING, UM, MATERIALS RELATIVE TO BUILDING MATERIALS, ARE THOSE ABLE TO BE APPLIED FENCES? UH, COMMISSIONER, THE STATE STATUTE PROHIBITING CITIES FROM REQUIRING, UH, CERTAIN TYPES OF BUILDING MATERIALS ONLY APPLIES TO THE BUILDING.
SO IF THE BODY WANTED TO CONSIDER A MASONRY FENCE ON FERGUSON ROAD, THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, PLEASE? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, FOR MS. MORRISON.
UM, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE, UH, COMMUNITY'S DESIRE IS FOR OWNERSHIP HOUSING, THERE IS NOTHING HERE THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THIS FROM BEING RENTAL HOUSING.
WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO WRITE, UM, CODE THAT REQUIRES SOMETHING TO BE OWNERSHIP.
THAT WOULD NOT BE A FUNCTION OF ZONING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? UM, YES, IN THE MATTER OF Z, UM, A Z 2 34 DASH 3 1 1.
I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, SUBJECT TO CONCEPTIONAL PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
AND IF I CAN GET A SECOND, I HAVE COMMENT.
[03:15:01]
SECOND COMMENTS.UM, IN A LOT OF AREAS OF DALLAS, WHEN WE HAVE HOUSING, UM, UM, WHEN WE HAVE ZONING CHANGES, UM, WE DON'T YEAH, OFTEN HEAR A STRONG VOICE FROM THE COMMUNITY, FROM THE CONCEPTION OF THIS PLAN.
UM, WITH THE APPLICANT IDEA FOR THIS WAS ORIGINALLY TO WHAT WE HAVE TODAY WAS NOT ON DEAF EARS.
THE COMMUNITY, UM, SSON ROAD INITIATIVE IS ALWAYS A HIGHLIGHT TO WORK WITH BECAUSE THEY DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE.
USUALLY BY THE TIME I CALL THEM, THEY'RE ALREADY AWARE OF THE PROJECT.
THEY'RE ALREADY, THEY'RE GIVING ME, UM, THEY'RE GIVING ME, UM, ADVICE.
UM, AND THEY DO A REALLY GOOD JOB OF GETTING WHAT THEY NEED.
THIS AREA IS OVERSATURATED IN APARTMENT COMPLEXES.
UM, THE SCHOOLS ARE AT CAPACITY AND FERGUSON ROAD, UH, AND THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS THAT MAKE IT UP, UH, ARE ALWAYS ON TOP OF WHAT THEY WANT.
UM, THIS WASN'T THE INITIAL PLAN FOR THE, THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT, BUT I BE, I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS, IS THE TRUE VOICE OF THE COMMUNITY.
UM, THEY'VE LOOKED AT EVERY ASPECT OF IT.
I'VE EVEN MADE SOME, UH, GAVE THEM SOME ADVICE ON, ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, UM, EVEN TO WHAT'S NEXT DOOR TO THEM AS A SENIOR HOUSING.
THAT WAS A FEAT WITHIN ITSELF BECAUSE FERGUSON ROAD, UH, AND THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS REALLY DON'T WANNA SEE ANY MORE, UM, MULTI-FAMILY IN THEIR COMMUNITIES.
THEY WANT MORE OWNERSHIP SO THAT IT CAN BE STRONGER AREA.
UM, AND SO EVEN THOUGH THERE IS SOME NUANCES IN THIS, I DO BELIEVE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE DEVELOPER, ALL HAVE COME TO A, UM, A, A GREAT COMPROMISE.
UM, AND, AND FURTHER NOW FERGUSON ROAD, THERE IS, THERE IS DEVELOPMENTS THAT DO HAVE FENCING, THAT IS SOLID FENCING.
AND I KIND OF CAN UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THERE IS SOME WALKABILITY, ESPECIALLY WITH SO MANY MULTI-FAMILY UNITS AROUND THEM.
UM, AND I, I'M DEALING, I DEAL WITH A COUPLE OF DUPLEX, I MEAN, SHARED ACCESS, UM, TOWN HOMES, AND MOST PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THESE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENTS UNDERSTAND THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF PARKING.
THEY'RE OKAY WITH THE SMALL BACKYARDS AND, AND SO IT'S REALLY UP TO THE BUYER OR, OR WHO RENTS THIS PARTICULAR SPACE.
BUT I, I'VE NOT SEEN YARD ACCESS IS NOT GOING, NOT BEING LIVED IN, AND THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GETTING, A SMALLER FOOTPRINT, A SMALLER UNIT.
UM, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT WE, THIS, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN PROPERLY VETTED BY MULTIPLE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS TO GET TO WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY.
WOULD YOU CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO REQUIRE 5% OF OPEN SPACE AND A MASONRY FENCE ON FERGUSON ROAD ONLY? WOULD THE HEIGHT STAY THE SAME? YES, MA'AM.
UH, WITH THAT, I WILL JUST THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I THINK, I MEAN, WE CAN ALL LOOK AT THIS AND, AND UNDERSTAND HOW THERE MIGHT BE OTHER ADJUSTMENTS.
I THINK BY SIMPLY DEFINING THE PERCENTAGE, IT GIVES THE APPLICANT THE ABILITY TO EITHER LOOK AT THEIR LOT CONFIGURATION, WHETHER IT'S DEPTHS, WHETHER THEY GO TO 52 UNITS VERSUS 53.
IT GIVES THEM THE FLEXIBILITY AS THEY'RE GOING THROUGH ENGINEERING TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO MEET THAT REQUIREMENT WHILE PROVIDING USABLE OPEN SPACE FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AND I ABSOLUTELY WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE, UM, COMMISSIONER WHEELER'S COMMENTS.
THIS IS A VERY ENGAGED COMMUNITY.
THEY ARE VERY CLEAR IN THEIR DESIRE FOR VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES.
THIS IS DIRECTLY WHAT I, LAST MEETING I ATTENDED WITH AND WHAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I CERTAINLY DO SUPPORT THE PROJECT.
I DO CERTAINLY SUPPORT, UM, THE GOALS THAT IT IS MEETING WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.
I JUST THINK THIS GIVES IT A LITTLE BIT MORE TOWARDS HOPEFULLY A DIRECTION THAT OTHER PROJECTS AS THEY'RE LOOKING AT COMING INTO THE AREA, UM, CAN REFERENCE ON THE DIRECTION, UM, FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT.
SO I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER WHEELER'S CONSIDERATION.
I, LOOK, I TOTALLY SUPPORT THE LAND USE.
I'M GLAD THAT THE FRI WAS INVOLVED IN IT, THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE JUST TRYING TO, UM, AND BY WAY OF, OF COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S AMENDMENT, UH, TRYING TO JUST IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF THIS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO GIVE THEM A BETTER PROJECT THAT WILL HAVE, UH, UM, JUST A BETTER FUTURE.
AND SO, UH, I, I SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[03:20:02]
THE AYES HAVE IT, UH, UNANIMOUSLY.[13. 25-325A An application for a Planned Development District for MU-2 Mixed Use District uses on property zoned a CR Community Retail District, on the southeast corner of Preston Road and Belt Line Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a conceptual plan, a development plan, and staff’s recommended conditions. Representative: Masterplan, Lee Kleinman and Andrew Ruegg Planner: Jennifer Muñoz U/A From: December 5, 2024. Council District: 11 Z212-358(JM) (Part 1 of 2)]
UH, COMMISSIONERS, IT IS 1:41 PM ON JANUARY 23RD, 2025.THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION WILL NOW GO INTO CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 5 5 1 0.07, ONE OF THE TEXAS OPENS MEETINGS ACT ON THE FOLLOWING MATTER DESCRIBED ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
WE'LL GO STRAIGHT BACK TO THE BRIEFING ROOM.
COMMISSIONERS, I THINK PROBABLY 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
UH, THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION HAS COMPLETED ITS CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 5 5 1 0.07, ONE OF THE TEXAS OPENS MEETINGS ACT.
AND AT 2:03 PM ON JANUARY 23RD, 2025, WE HAVE RETURNED TO OPEN SESSION.
AND AT 2 0 3 WE'LL TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK.
[10. 25-322A An application for an amendment to Planned Development District No. 917 on the northwest line of Manor Way, between Maple Avenue and Denton Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to amended conditions. Applicant: DLF Denton, LLC Representative: Tommy Mann and Daniel Box, Winstead PC Planner: Michael V. Pepe Council District: 2 Z234-326(MP)]
NEXT CASE IS NUMBER 10 F, EXCUSE ME, Z 2 34, 3 26.OKAY, ITEM 10 IS Z 2 3 4 3 2 6.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 9 1 7 ON THE NORTHWEST LINE OF MAINOR WAY, MAPLE AVENUE AND DENTON DRIVE.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS.
SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE, HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD, UH, ON THIS ITEM? AGAIN, THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 10, PAGE FOUR OF THE AGENDA COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? YES.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 34 DASH 3 26.
I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 6TH.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[11. 25-323A An application for a Specific Use Permit for an alcoholic beverage establishment limited to a bar, lounge, or tavern on property zoned Planned Development District No. 619 with H/87 Republic National Bank (Davis) Building Historic District Overlay, on the north line of Main Street, east of South Field Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a five-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional five-year periods, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: Davis 1309 Main, LLC Representative: David Martin Planner: Connor Roberts Council District: 14 Z234-347(CR)]
WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 11.OH, CAN YOU HEAR ME? CHAIRMAN? YES, SIR.
ITEM 11, THIS CASE Z 2 34 DASH 3 47.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO A BAR, LOUNGE, OR TAVERN ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER SIX 19 WITH H 87 REPUBLIC NATIONAL BANK.
DAVIS BUILDING HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY ON THE NORTH LINE OF MAIN STREET, EAST OF SOUTHFIELD STREET.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE-YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES SIR.
DAVID MARTIN, 1615 MAIN STREET ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
I BELIEVE THIS ITEM CAME OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA TO REMOVE THE ABILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS AND WE'RE, WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT CHANGE AND HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MARTIN? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN MATTER Z 2 3 4 DASH 3 4 7.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTION THAT WE ELIMINATE THE ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KING FOR YOUR MOTION.
AND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I MUST HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG.
WE HAD A MINOR CHANGE TO THE FORMATTING OF THE SITE PLAN THAT WE DISTRIBUTED.
SO WE COULD SAY SITE PLAN AS DISTRIBUTED OR BRIEFED.
SITE PLAN AS DISTRIBUTED THIS WEEK.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, UH, IS A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR A FALSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, NO AUTOMATIC RENEWAL, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS AS DISTRIBUTED.
[12. 25-324A An application for an amendment to Planned Development No. 1112 generally located northeast of Harry Hines Boulevard, southeast of West Mockingbird Lane, and on the northeast and southwest line of Forest Park Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to amended conditions. Applicant: Pediatric Health Management Services Representative: Tommy Mann, Winstead PC Planner: Michael V. Pepe Council District: 2 Z245-113(MP)]
12 SIR.[03:25:01]
FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT.GENERALLY LOCATED NORTHEAST OF HARRY HINES BOULEVARD, SOUTHEAST OF WEST MOCKINGBIRD LANE, AND ON THE NO E AND SOUTHWEST LINE OF FOREST PARK ROAD.
RECOMMENDATION IS, SUB IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITION AMENDED CONDITIONS.
TOMMY MANN 500 WINSTEAD BUILDING.
THIS IS A NEW CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL THAT WAS BEFORE YOU RECENTLY.
THE PER THE IMPETUS FOR THIS REQUEST IS A COUPLE OF ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP IN PERMITTING.
WE ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION RELATED TO THE PARKING STRUCTURE.
JUST A REMINDER, THIS PARKING STRUCTURE IS FOR STAFF, PHYSICIANS, UH, AND PERSONNEL.
THIS FACILITY WILL OBVIOUSLY BE MANNED 365 24 7.
UM, BEAU MAR IS THE, BY FAR THE LEAST LINEAR FRONTAGE OF ANY STREET WE HAVE.
IT REALLY DOESN'T FUNCTION LIKE A FRONT AND WE HAVE AN URBAN FORM SETBACK THERE.
FOREST PARK IS ACTUALLY, JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS, THE BUILD THE CURB TO BUILDING DIMENSION IS GONNA REMAIN 20 FEET.
PLUS THERE'S SEVERAL WEIRD EASEMENTS FROM WHICH WE'RE HAVING TO MEASURE, SO WE'RE DANCING THAT LINE TO REDUCE IT.
UH, I'VE WORKED WITH COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE COMFORT, BUT IF IT READS LIKE WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOMETHING RIGHT ON TOP OF THE CURB, THAT WILL NOT BE THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE DOWN THERE.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR, BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR MR. MATT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? I DO.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 45 DASH 13, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE APPEAR PUBLIC HEARING.
APPROVE THE REQUEST PER, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS WITH THE FOLLOWING.
CHANGE IN SECTION 1 0 9 B THREE, AMEND TO READ FOREST PARK BOULEVARD.
MINIMUM FRONT YARD IS 15 FEET FOR A MINIMUM OF 40% OF A BUILDING FACADE.
MINIMUM FRONT YARD IS 20 FEET.
NO URBAN FORM SETBACK IS REQUIRED.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION AND VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE.
WELL, I JUST WANNA THANK MR. MANN FOR WORKING WITH ME.
THE THE PRIMARY GOAL OF ALL OF THIS IS TO MAINTAIN THE ABILITY FOR WALKABILITY.
THE PRIMARY, UM, RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY IS COMING FROM BEAU MAR.
AND AS PEOPLE ARE NAVIGATING THE SITE JUST TO MAINTAIN, UM, THAT ABILITY TO HAVE, UM, PEDESTRIAN ENGAGEMENT, HOPE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION AND THANK YOU TO MR. MANN AND HIS TEAM.
[13. 25-325A An application for a Planned Development District for MU-2 Mixed Use District uses on property zoned a CR Community Retail District, on the southeast corner of Preston Road and Belt Line Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a conceptual plan, a development plan, and staff’s recommended conditions. Representative: Masterplan, Lee Kleinman and Andrew Ruegg Planner: Jennifer Muñoz U/A From: December 5, 2024. Council District: 11 Z212-358(JM) (Part 2 of 2)]
NUMBER 13, PLEASE.THE NEXT ITEM IS AN APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MU TWO MIXED USE DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ZONED A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PRESTON ROAD AND BELT LANE ROAD.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. MUNOZ.
UH, MEMBERS OF THE PLAN COMMISSION, ANDREW REIG, 2201 MAIN STREET, UM, HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, HENRY S. MILLER.
UM, I UNDER, YOU KNOW, WE ALL UNDERSTAND THIS CASE WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED, UM, LAST YEAR.
UH, HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I HAVE THE, UH, POWERPOINT GEARED UP IF THERE'S ANY, UH, PARTICULAR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE, UM, PD CONDITIONS OF THE CASE.
I I THINK THE MICROPHONE WENT OFF THERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND HONORABLE MEMBER, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
I WORK FOR MASTER PLAN AT 2201 MAIN STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS.
UH, AS YOU KNOW, ON AUGUST 8TH, 2024, THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE ZONING REQUEST.
UM, THIS DEMAND PROCESS HAS BEEN A COSTLY DELAY OF OVER FIVE MONTHS, AND I APP I APPRECIATE YOUR DETERMINATION SO THAT THIS CASE CAN MOVE FORWARD TO THE DALLAS CITY COUNCIL FOR A FINAL DETERMINATION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
[03:30:07]
SORRY, MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONERS VICTORIA MORRIS WITH JACKSON WALKER, 2323 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 600.THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
WE WERE BEFORE YOU LAST, UH, DECEMBER 5TH, 2024.
AND THAT HEARING WAS CONTINUED TO THIS CERTAIN DATE, JANUARY 23RD, 2025, SO THAT WE COULD ILLUSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 51 A DASH 1.106 OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SECTION ONE, UH, 51 A 1.106 E TWO STATES THAT IF A HEARING IS PO POSTPONED FOR THIS RE FOR THIS REASON, THE REQUIRED NOTIFICATION SIGNS MUST BE POSTED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER THE CASE IS POSTPONED THAT NIGHT.
I PERSONALLY VISITED THE PROPERTY AND TOOK THESE PHOTOS AS YOU'LL SEE ON YOUR SCREEN, CONFIRMING THAT THE FIVE REQUIRED ZONING SIGNS WERE POSTED ON THE PROPERTY.
THESE PHOTOS ARE TIMESTAMPED DATED THURSDAY, DECEMBER 5TH, 2024.
THE FIRST PHOTO, UM, 10:36 PM THE FIFTH PHOTO, 10:42 PM UM, SINCE THEN, THE JACKSON WALKER TEAM WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF WILL GARRIN OVER THERE, UM, VISITED THE PROPERTY DAILY TO DOCUMENT UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT THE ZONING SIGNS HAVE BEEN POSTED.
IN INSTANCES WHEN A ZONING SIGN WENT MISSING OR HAD BEEN WEATHERED, WE PROMPTLY REPLACE THE SIGN.
I WILL FLIP THROUGH THESE PHOTOS AS QUICKLY AS I CAN, BUT WOULD LIKE TO ENTER THESE ALL INTO THE RECORD.
WE HAVE DECEMBER 6TH, FIVE SIGNS.
DECEMBER 7TH, FIVE SIGNS EIGHTH, FIVE SIGNS NINTH, FIVE SIGNS 10TH, FIVE SIGNS.
WE REPLACED A SIGN VOLUNTARILY BECAUSE IT WAS WEATHERED.
FIVE SIGNS 12TH, FIVE SIGNS 13 FIVE SIGN FIVE SIGNS, 14, FIVE SIGNS, 15 FIVE SIGNS.
ONE WAS REPLACED, UH, BECAUSE IT WENT MISSING BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 8:18 PM AND 1:45 PM IT WAS REPOSTED AT 5:13 PM THE 16TH.
FIVE SIGNS THE 17TH, FIVE SIGNS 18TH, FIVE SIGNS 19TH, FIVE SIGNS 20TH, 21ST, FIVE SIGNS, 22ND, FIVE SIGNS.
23RD, FIVE 24TH, FIVE 25TH CHRISTMAS DAY, WE GOT SOME SIGNS WITH A CHRISTMAS HAT ON IT FOR THE HOLIDAY.
UH, THE 26TH, FIVE SIGNS, 27TH, FIVE SIGNS 28TH, FIVE SIGNS, 29TH, FIVE SIGNS.
20, UH, 30TH, FIVE SIGNS, 31ST FIVE SIGNS, FIRST FIVE SIGNS, SECOND FIVE SIGNS.
JANUARY 8TH, THERE WAS A SIGN MISSING.
SO YOU ALL KNOW WE HAVE AFFIXED THESE SIGNS TO POSTS, UM, ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE OR WHEREVER IS CONVENIENT SO THAT THEY CAN BE EASILY ACCESSIBLE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? THERE IS ONLINE.
MR. JENSEN, ARE YOU ONLINE? SIR? IF, UH, IF YOU'D LIKE, MAY I HAVE A QUICK COURT? OH, PLEASE SIR, I'M SORRY.
I'M GREG MILLER WITH HENRYS MILLER COMPANY AND THANK YOU FOR, FOR YOUR, YOUR CONSIDERATION ON THIS.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, WE'RE EXPENDING A LOT OF ATTORNEY'S FEES ON THIS MATTER.
AND EVERY, EVERY DAY OF DELAY IS A HUGE ECONOMIC INJURY TO THIS PROPERTY.
WE'RE UNABLE TO MAKE ANY SIGNIFICANT NEW LONG-TERM LEASES BECAUSE WE'RE PENDING THIS REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY.
AND, AND EVERY DAY, EVERY DELAY IS DELAYING THIS, THIS REDEVELOPMENT BECOMING A REALITY.
SO WE REALLY WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR COOPERATION.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE ELSE IN SUPPORT THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE MATTER BEFORE WE GO TO OUR, OUR SPEAKER ONLINE? NO.
IS MR. UH, JENSEN ONLINE?
[03:35:01]
UM, SEAN JENSEN, 1 5 5 3 6 BAY POINT DRIVE, JENSEN, JUST, JUST ONE SECOND, SIR.DOES, IS YOUR CAMERA ON? WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU.
CAN YOU PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT ON YOUR CAMERA IS ON AND WORKING STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU? CAN YOU SEE ME? UH, NOT YET.
YOU MIGHT HAVE TO KEEP TALKING THOUGH BECAUSE, UH, THAT'S THE WAY THE CAMERA SYSTEM WORKS, SO, YEAH.
THE, THE RED CAMERA IS NOT UNREAD.
UH, LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU CAN SEE ME IF YOU CAN.
JORGE, CAN YOU SEE HIM ON YOUR SYSTEM, SIR? NO.
WELL, WHILE YOU GO THROUGH THAT, UH, WE WILL COME BACK TO YOU.
UH, MAYBE WE CAN GET YOUR CAMERA GOING.
ANYONE ELSE HERE ON, UH, IN SUPPORT BEFORE WE GO TO OUR FOLKS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY.
LET'S GO TO OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.
TODAY I LIVE AT 1 5 7 4 6 COVID CIRCLE.
I AM OPPOSED TO HEN MILLER'S CURRENT REZONING PROPOSAL FOR PEPPER SQUARE.
HOWEVER, I'M FULLY IN SUPPORT OF THE IDEA OF A REVITALIZED PEPPER SQUARE THAT ALIGNS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S VISION.
AS A COMMUNITY, WE ALL WANNA SEE PEPPER SQUARE TRANSFORMED INTO A VIBRANT, THRIVING SHOPPING CENTER.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOES NOT ADEQUATELY ADDRESS CRITICAL CONCERNS RELATED TO DENSITY, BUILDING HEIGHT, GREEN SPACE, AND PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THROUGH NUMEROUS NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS AND SURVEYS CONDUCTED OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS, A CLEAR VISION HAS EMERGED.
THIS VISION INCLUDES A COMMUNITY RETAIL SITE FEATURING INDOOR AND OUTDOOR RESTAURANTS, DIVERSE RETAIL OPTIONS, AND OWNER-OCCUPIED DWELLINGS THAT OFFER MISSING MIDDLE OPPORTUNITIES.
THE QUESTION REMAINS, IS IT IMPOSSIBLE TO FIND A SOLUTION THAT BALANCES THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S VISION WITH MILLER'S FINANCIAL GOALS? AND I BELIEVE A COMPROMISE IS ACHIEVABLE, BUT REACHING IT REQUIRES DIRECT COMMUNICATION.
GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATIONS ARE ALL SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT OCCURRED TO DATE.
WE'VE HAD MANY TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT MEETINGS FROM MILLER, BUT NO REAL NEGOTIATION AND NEGOTIATION ONLY HAPPENS WHEN IT'S NECESSARY.
AND MILLER HAS NOT BEEN FORCED TO NEGOTIATE BECAUSE FROM THE OUTSET, THEY'VE BEEN ASSURED OF DISTRICT 12 DISTRICT ELEVEN'S, COUNCIL MEMBERS SUPPORT.
SO THIS LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY HAS STALLED PROGRESS LEAVING US HERE THREE YEARS LATER, NO RESOLUTION, NO CLOSER TO A MUTUALLY ACCEPTABLE PLAN THAN WHEN MILLER FIRST INTRODUCED HIS PROPOSAL IN MAY, 2022.
BUT YOU, THE MEMBERS OF THE CPC OF THE POWER TO CHANGE THIS, I URGE YOU TO DEFER THIS PROJECT AND REQUIRE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN MILLER SIT DOWN AND ENGAGE IN GENUINE COLLABORATIVE NEGOTIATIONS TO FIND A SOLUTION THAT WORKS FOR BOTH OF US.
IT'S NO SECRET THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S FIRST PREFERENCE IS AN ALL RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER, BUT WE'VE COME TO ACCEPT THAT A COMPROMISE WOULD INCLUDE SOME RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AND WE STRONGLY OPPOSE A 12 STORY HIGH RISE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT WE'RE OPEN TO THE IDEA OF MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS AS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
AGAIN, I URGE YOU TO DENY THE CURRENT ZONING REQUEST AND THEREBY CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MILLER TO COLLABORATE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON A PROPOSAL THAT ENSURES HIS PROFITABILITY, WHILE ENSURING THE LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF PEPPER SQUARE AND PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF OUR COMMUNITY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO DALLAS AND CONSIDERING THIS MATTER.
MY NAME IS MIKE QUINT AND I LIVE AT 6 0 1 5 HIGH COURT PLACE.
I'M THE PRESIDENT OF REGENCY PLACE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, AND OUR COMMUNITY IS APPROXIMATELY
[03:40:01]
ONE HALF MILE SOUTH OF PEPPER SQUARE.WE BELIEVE IT IS THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENTS LIVING IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND PEPPER SQUARE THAT THEIR VOICES ARE NOT BEING LISTENED TO IN THEIR OPPOSITION OF PEPPER SQUARE'S CURRENT DESIGN.
THE CURRENT PEPPER SQUARE DESIGN DOES NOT COMPORT WITH THE CITY'S RECENTLY PASSED FORWARD.
THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES AS FAR EXCEED THE PRESCRIBED DALLAS FORWARDS NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE PLACE TYPE DEFINITION, A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF RETAIL IE, THE HOBBY LOBBY TRADER JOE'S AMONG OTHER STRUCTURES, AND THE CURRENT DESIGN WILL REMAIN IN PLACE IN THEIR 40-YEAR-OLD PLUS STATE WITH NO PLAN TO UPDATE THEM.
THE PROPOSED PARK, WHICH IS A BUNNING, ONE OF THE BUSIEST ROADS IN DALLAS, WILL LIKELY ONLY SERVE AS A DOG PARK TO THE RESIDENTS OF PEPPER SQUARE.
HAD THE DEVELOPER TRULY COLLABORATED WITH RESIDENTS SURROUNDING PEPPER SQUARE IN THE DESIGN OF THIS PROJECT AND TAKEN THEIR INPUT TO HEART, THEY WOULD'VE FOUND A SUPPORTIVE AND ENTHUSIASTIC POPULATION LOOKING FORWARD TO A REIMAGINED PEPPER SQUARE.
THIS PROCESS HAS, HAS BEEN AND CONTINUES TO BE CONTENTIOUS BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN NO COLLABORATION AND MANY FEEL THEIR VOICES HAVE NOT BEEN HEARD.
THIS PROJECT, AS CURRENTLY DESIGNED, DOES NOT FIT INTO THE LANDSCAPE OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
I, ON BEHALF OF MY CONSTITUENCY, WHAT SHU DO NOT APPROVE THE PEPPER SQUARE SITE PLAN AS IT IS TODAY, AND ASKED AS PEPPER SQUARE DEVELOPER TO SIT DOWN WITH A SMALL GROUP OF NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS TO RE REWORK THE PEPPER SQUARE PROJECT TO BE THE PREMIER NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT IT CAN BE IN NORTH DALLAS.
JANET MARKHAM, 7 7 1 4 MAPLE CREST DRIVE, DALLAS 7 5 2 5 4.
I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE NORTHWOOD HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
UM, IT'S ABOUT 2000 OR MORE PEOPLE, UM, NEARBY TO PEPPER SQUARE.
I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION BECAUSE IT HAS YET TO REFLECT OR RESPECT THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY'S WISHES.
LET ME GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THIS PROCESS COULD HAVE PLAYED OUT.
IN 2020, A ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION WAS FILED FOR THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ALPHA ROAD AND HILLCREST ROAD IN DISTRICT 11, ADJACENT TO MY NORTHWOOD HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE APPLICANT THERE ORIGINALLY REQUESTED A CLUSTERED HOUSING ZONING WITH 30 PLUS DWELLING UNITS ON A SMALL THREE ACRE LOT THAT CONTAINED AN ABANDONED CHURCH AND A PARKING LOT SURROUNDING THE SITE ALREADY WERE TOWN HOMES, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, AND OTHER PLACES OF WORSHIP.
INITIALLY NEARBY RESIDENTS WERE ALARMED AT WHAT SEEMED LIKE A REQUEST FOR A DRASTIC CHANGE IN ZONING AND ABNORMALLY DENSE HOUSING FOR THE AREA.
OUR CITY PLAN COMMISSIONER AT THE TIME, JANIE SCHULTZ, TOLD THE PROPERTY REPRESENTATIVE THAT QUOTE, THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST WOULD HAVE VERY LITTLE CHANCE OF SUCCESS WITHOUT NEIGHBORHOOD COOPERATION THAT HAD POWER AND IT FORCED THE APPLICANT TO PUT IN THE WORK.
OVER THE NEXT YEAR OR SO, COLLABORATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS WERE HELD, PD CONDITIONS WERE DISCUSSED AND AGREED UPON, AND THE REQUEST MORPHED INTO A BETTER PLAN, A TOWNHOUSE ZONING, ALLOWING 17 OWNER OCCUPIED TOWNHOUSES ON THE SITE.
ULTIMATELY, THE ZONING CHANGE WAS APPROVED WITH LITTLE OPPOSITION AT CPC OR COUNCIL.
THANKS TO A REASONABLE DEVELOPER AND CONSULTANT, A PLAN COMMISSIONER ON THE SIDE OF HER CONSTITUENTS AND PRODUCTIVE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS.
THE APPLICATION THAT STARTED AS A DUD TURNED INTO A WINNER.
A DERELICT SITE BECAME AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE HOUSING WITHOUT DISRUPTING THE CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE CASE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY COULD HAVE FOLLOWED THE SAME PATH, BUT MOST OF THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS WERE LACKING WITHOUT OUR APPOINTED OR ELECTED D 11 REPRESENTATIVE IN OUR CORNER.
AND WITHOUT A DEVELOPER OR CONSULTANT FEELING LIKE THEY NEEDED TO MAKE MEANINGFUL CHANGES IN ORDER TO BE SUCCESSFUL, WE'VE HAD TO CARRY THE BURDEN OF SHOWING UP AT EVERY STEP, ASKING TO BE HEARD, ASKING TO BE RESPECTED, AND ASKING TO LEGITIMATELY BE A PART
[03:45:01]
OF THE DECISION.YOU HAVE THE CHANCE TO SEND THIS BACK SO THAT THE PROCESS CAN PLAY OUT HOW IT SHOULD AND HOW IT'S INTENDED WITH TRUE NEIGHBORHOOD INVOLVEMENT AND MUTUAL RESPECT.
MARK LOMBARDI, 67 28 PRIOR COVE COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR, YOUR TIME.
AS YOU KNOW, I AND MANY OTHERS ARE OPPOSED TO THE REZONING PROPOSAL AS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE REASONS FOR THAT ARE COMPELLING AND HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO YOU ALL BEFORE.
SO INSTEAD OF REIT REITERATING THOSE AT THIS TIME, I FEEL IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND THE DISMAY.
MANY FEEL ABOUT THIS CASE IN THE PUBLIC PROCESS.
CONSIDER FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE ON AUGUST EIGHT, THIS ROOM WAS PACKED WITH ENGAGED CITIZENS.
WE WANTED YOU NOT JUST TO HEAR US, BUT TO LISTEN TO US AND REALIZE THIS IS VITALLY IMPORTANT TO US.
I WONDER, IN YOUR 10 YEARS HAD YOU EVER SEEN SUCH AN EN AN EFFORT ON A SINGLE CASE.
THERE WERE MORE LIVE OPPONENTS TO THIS, TO THAT VOTE THAN IT SEEMS WERE PRESENT IN TOTAL AT MANY CRITICAL MEETINGS FOR FORWARD DALLAS 2.0.
AND OF THOSE WHO SPOKE ON PEPPER SQUARE, I RECALL ONLY TWO INVI INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL, ONE OF WHICH THAT DOES NOT RESIDE IN D 11 SHOWING UP SHOULD MATTER.
THERE WERE ALSO THOUSANDS OF EMAILS AND INDIVID INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS HELD WITH THE VAST MAJORITY OF CPC MEMBERS.
THOSE MEETINGS WERE DATA DRIVEN, THOUGHTFUL AND RESPECTFUL.
THERE WAS GREAT UNDERSTANDING AND FEEDBACK FROM ALL OF YOU.
BUT WHERE WAS THAT LEVEL OF ENTHUSIASM AND SCRUTINY DURING THE PUBLIC FORUM ON AUGUST 8TH? WE DIDN'T SEE IT.
WE KNOW THERE WAS MOVEMENT ON THE CASE AND APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS, BUT WE VIEW THESE CONCESSIONS AS OVERSTATED TO US.
IT WAS CLEAR THE INITIAL REQUEST FOR 2000 PLUS AND SUBSEQUENTLY 1500 PLUS UNITS WERE CLEARLY NEGOTIATING TACTICS TO ANCHOR TO AN UNREALISTIC NUMBER.
PLEASE UNDERSTAND, THIS PROPERTY IS ZONED RETAIL FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, THE CHANGE IN ZONING CLASSIFICATION IN THE FIRST INSTANCE IS THE MORE SIGNIFICANT CONCESSION.
AND SO WHEN IT SEEMED FOR MOST OF US, THAT FOR WHEN IT SEEMED TO US THAT FOR MOST OF YOU, BUT NOT ALL OF YOU, THE VOTE WAS PREDETERMINED AND THERE WERE PREPARED SPEECHES TO EXPLAIN TO US WHY YOU WERE GOING TO VOTE THIS WAY.
WE ASKED, WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE? IT FELT VERY PATRONIZING.
THERE WAS NOTHING MORE THE COMMUNITY COULD HAVE DONE.
AND I AGAIN, WONDER HOW MANY OTHER GROUPS HAVE COME CLOSE TO THAT EFFORT.
FOR THOSE THAT VOTED TO APPROVE ON AUGUST 8TH, PLEASE RECONSIDER.
FINALLY, I DO WANT TO ASK AGAIN, WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE? THE DALLAS CITY CODE STATES THAT BEFORE THE COMMISSION HOLDS THE PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICT, THE DIRECTOR SHALL GIVE NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER OF THE CITY AT LEAST 10 DAYS BEFORE THE HEARING, WHILE THE CITY DID POST A NOTICE IN THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS ON JANUARY 13TH.
AND WHILE IT REFERENCES MANY, MANY CASES, IT DOES NOT MENTION THIS CASE.
ARE WE TO UNDERSTAND THIS HEARING OR BOTH THE APPLICANT AND OPPONENTS ARE MAKING THEIR CASE PUBLICLY IS NOT ACTUALLY THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PEPPER SQUARE REZONING CASE? ARE WE SAYING THE LAW IS DEVOID OF MEANING? WE DO NOT ACCEPT THAT, BUT ARE HERE TODAY TO ENSURE WE ARE HEARD IN CASE WE DO NOT GET ANOTHER CHANCE AND NOT AS AN ADMISSION OF THE VALIDITY OF THIS HEARING.
PLEASE DO CONSIDER YOUR DUTY TO UPHOLD THE CODE AND CONSIDERING THIS CASE TODAY.
EDWARD STONE, 67 18 ROLLING VISTA DRIVE IN DALLAS.
IN 19 75, 50 YEARS AGO, MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED A NEW HOME, VERY CLOSE TO PEPPER SQUARE, WHICH AT THE TIME WAS THE MCCUTCHEN FARM.
WHEN THE SHOPPING CENTER WAS DEVELOPED, IT PROVIDED EXCELLENT SERVICES TO THE COMMUNITY, INCLUDING A TOM THUMB STORE.
BUT SOME YEARS LATER, TOM THUMB RELOCATED ACROSS PRESTON ROAD AND TO A NEW COMPLEX.
AND AT THAT TIME, THE PEPPER SQUARE DEVELOPMENT BEGAN TO CLIMB AND THE NEIGHBOR, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, CONTINUED TO FLOURISH.
EVEN WITH ANCHORS LIKE HOBBY LOBBY AND TRADER JOE'S PEPPER SQUARE CONTINUED TO ERODE.
I AM 100% IN FAVOR OF REDEVELOPMENT, RENO RENOVATION AND MODERNIZATION, AND 100% AGAINST THE PLAN AS IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED.
WHEN WE APPEARED BEFORE THE COMMISSION LAST SUMMER, WE WERE OVER 50 PEOPLE OPPOSED TO IN FAVOR, ONE OF WHICH WAS THE DEVELOPER.
WE SUBMITTED INFORMATION FROM A SURVEY OF OVER A THOUSAND PEOPLE IN THE AREA, RESIDENTS, 92% OPPOSED.
SO THE COMMISSION FORWARDED THE PROPOSAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL, AND FURTHER ACTION WAS DELAYED BY A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER.
[03:50:02]
I ASK, DO YOUR JOBS REPRESENT YOUR CONSTITUENTS? REPRESENT YOUR RESIDENTS, REPRESENT THE PEOPLE WHO MATTER.I SPENT A WHOLE CAREER IN BUSINESS.
I FULLY UNDERSTAND HENRY S. MILLER NEEDS TO GENERATE INVESTMENTS THAT WILL GENERATE PROFIT, POSITIVE CASH FLOW IN THOSE THINGS, BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE NEIGHBORS AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE COMMUNITIES THAT WILL PAY FOR IT.
SANDY GRAYSON, 72 38, HEATHER MOORE DRIVE, DALLAS 7 5 2 4 8.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE AREN'T A HUNDRED PEOPLE HERE TODAY LIKE THERE WERE IN AUGUST WHEN YOU FIRST HEARD THIS CASE.
THAT DOESN'T INDICATE A LACK OF INTEREST OR A CHANGE OF HEART FOR ANY OF THOSE FOLKS.
WE DIDN'T ASK THEM TO COME FEELING THAT NOTHING WAS GOING TO CHANGE TODAY, BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE WRONG ABOUT THAT AND SEE THIS CASE CHANGE FOR THE BETTER.
THERE ARE STILL A THOUSAND PEOPLE WHO OPPOSE THE ZONING REQUEST.
WE CAN SUM UP OUR OPPOSITION IN LESS THAN 10 WORDS.
IT'S TOO HIGH, TOO DENSE, AND IN THE WRONG PLACE.
IT'S BEEN TRUE FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS AND IT'S STILL TRUE TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO US.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, WE HAVE OUR REBUTTAL TIME.
ONCE AGAIN, LEE KLEIMAN MASTER PLAN.
UM, AS YOU SAW FROM THE STAFF REPORT, UH, H HENRY S. MILLER AND ITS REPRESENTATIVES HAVE MET WITH THIS COMMUNITY OVER 10 TIMES.
UM, AND THEY EVEN HELD A SMALL GROUP PLANNING SESSION WITH THE THREE CLOSEST NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, ADJACENT TO PEPPER SQUARE.
INCIDENTALLY, NONE OF THE SPEAKERS TODAY EVEN LIVE WITHIN THE NOTIFICATION AREA, AND WE DID WORK WITH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE CLOSEST.
THE ONLY POSITION TAKEN BY THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WAS TO KEEP A MASSIVE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT THAT QUITE FRANKLY, IS NOT LEASEABLE IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT.
UM, THAT WAS THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD SUPPORT.
WE CONTINUE TO MAKE CON CONCESSIONS, INCLUDING REDUCING THE NUMBER OF UNITS REQUESTED BY HALF.
THE ANSWER WAS KEEP IT RETAIL, REDUCING THE HEIGHT BY HALF, KEEP IT RETAIL, UM, REDUCING THE ACTUAL AREA OF, UH, IMPACT OR THE, THE AREA TO BE REZONED BY ABOUT 25%.
SO IN IN, IN THAT ARENA, WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A CHARETTE WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOODS DID HELP SELECT, UH, AND INFORM US ON SOME OF THE THINGS THEY WANTED TO SEE, SUCH AS WIDE SIDEWALKS, TRAIL CONNECTIVITY, UH, UH, TWO ACRE PARK, UH, MORE AMENITIES AT THE GROUND LEVEL FOR RESTAURANTS AND OUTDOOR DINING, UM, WIDER, UM, UH, STREET INTERIOR STREETS, UH, AND LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS.
MANY, MANY THINGS THAT REQUEST ALONG THE WAY THAT WE CONCEDED.
AND YET AGAIN, THE ANSWER IS ALWAYS KEEP IT RETAIL.
SO, UM, THAT'S OUR POSITION ON IT.
WE ARE HAPPY TO HEAR YOUR RESULTS, BUT WE WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE YOU MOVING FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL SO THEY CAN MAKE A FINAL DETERMINATION.
QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, I'LL START OFF WITH MS. MORRIS.
CAN YOU JUST PLEASE FOR THE RECORD, PUT THE, THE LAST FEW DATES THERE FOR THE SIGNS? HAPPILY, MR. CHAIR VICTORIA MORRIS JACKSON WALKER, 2323 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 600.
I STOPPED JANUARY 8TH, UH, WHERE A ZONING SIGN WENT MISSING.
UH, I WAS GOING INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT HOW THESE SIGNS ARE AFFIXED.
THEY'RE AFFIXED WITH ZIP TIES.
UM, AND THIS IS WHAT WE FOUND ON THE GROUND LAYING BESIDE WHERE THE SIGN ONCE STOOD.
SO, UM, NO PLASTIC ENGINEER, BUT THIS LOOKS TO BE AN INTENTIONAL ACT TO ME.
SO THAT IS WHEN WE REPLACED THE SIGN.
JANUARY 9TH, FIVE SIGNS 10TH, FIVE SIGNS 11TH, FIVE SIGNS 12TH, FIVE SIGNS 13TH, FIVE SIGNS 14TH, FIVE SIGNS 15TH, FIVE
[03:55:01]
SIGNS 16TH, FIVE SIGNS 17TH, FIVE SIGNS, 18TH.ANOTHER ZONING SIGN WENT, UH, WAS REPOSTED BECAUSE IT WAS WEATHERED.
UM, 19TH, FIVE SIGNS 20TH, FIVE SIGNS, 21ST FIVE SIGNS, 22ND, FIVE SIGNS.
AND IT LEADS US TO THIS MORNING WHEN WE VISITED THE PROPERTY JUST BEFORE THIS HEARING, A ZONING SIGN WAS CUT IN HALF.
UM, CLEARLY AN INTENTIONAL ACT, BUT I HAVE UTMOST FAITH IN OUR TEAM.
AND ANOTHER ZONING SIGN WAS POSTED TO THE PROPERTY AND REMAINS THERE TO MY KNOWLEDGE RIGHT NOW.
SO SECTION 51 A DASH 1 1 0 6 D FOUR REQUIRES THAT AN APPLICANT MAKE A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO KEEP THE ZONING SIGNS POSTED.
IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, AS AN ATTORNEY WHO FOCUSES EXCLUSIVELY ON LAND USE MATTERS, THIS DOCUMENTATION FAR EXCEEDS BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS A GOOD FAITH EFFORT.
AND WE DO HOPE YOU AGREE, WE WOULD HOPE THAT THIS CASE COULD BE MOVED FORWARD TODAY.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT QUESTIONS FOR ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, I'M SEEING NONE.
VICE CHAIR RUBIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? SURE.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 12 3 58, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL FEBRUARY 6TH, 2025.
YOU VICE FAVOR RU FOR YOUR MOTION AND COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[14. 25-326A An 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. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Thomas M. Gaubert Representative: Steven Uetrecht Planner: Michael V. Pepe U/A From: September 19, 2024, October 10, 2024, October 24, 2024, and November 21, 2024. Council District: 3 Z223-220(MP)]
GO TO NUMBER 14.ADAM 14 IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO, A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN NSA NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE DISTRICT WITH THE RESTRICTIONS Z 8 89 DASH 180 7, TRACK TWO, AND AN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF WEST CAMPUS AND ROAD BETWEEN CLARK ROAD AND ROYAL CEDAR WAY STAFF.
IS THE, I SEE THE APPLICANT'S COMING DOWN.
ARE YOU TRYING TO FIND YOUR POWERPOINT? COULD YOU SCROLL UP TO APPLICANT? APPLICANT? THERE'S A LITTLE BUTTON DOWN THERE AT THE BOTTOM.
11 TH UH, 1130 NORTHWEST MORELAND ROAD, DESOTO, TEXAS.
UM, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE COMMISSION, UH, FOR THEIR TIME TODAY TO, UM, AGAIN, PRESENT CREEKSIDE AT RIDGE CANYON, SORRY.
TO PRESENT, UH, CREEKSIDE AT CLARK RIDGE CANYON.
UM, WE, UH, LAST MET IN SEPTEMBER.
UH, WE DID GET SOME GOOD FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY AS WELL AS FOR THE COMMISSION.
I'D LIKE TO, UH, SPEND SOME TIME, UH, GOING THROUGH THOSE ITEMS, UH, AS WELL.
UM, ALSO NOTE THAT, UH, THIS WAS POSTPONED IN THE LAST MEETING DUE TO A, A SIGNAGE REQUIREMENT.
WE DO HAVE DOCUMENTATION, UH, DAILY, UH, FOR THE LAST 60 DAYS OF, OF THOSE SIGNS BEING, UH, UP AND, UH, THEY, THAT, UH, HAS BEEN CIRCULATED TO THE COMMISSION TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
[04:00:01]
THIS, THIS IS A, UM, UPSCALE, UH, MARKET RATE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY WITH A TARGET MARKET FOR, UH, YOUNG PROFESSIONALS AND SENIORS.UM, WE'RE LOOKING FOR A, UM, MINIMAL FOOTPRINT ON THE 4.8 ACRES.
UH, JUST ONE MAIN BUILDING, UH, 223 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AS WELL AS 21 TOWN HOMES.
UH, UM, ADDRESSING SOME OF THE COMMUNITY CONCERNS AS WELL AS CONCERNS BROUGHT, UH, BY THE COMMISSION.
AT OUR, UM, LAST MEETING IN SEPTEMBER, UH, WE ARE, UH, GOING TO HAVE A DEED RESTRICTION TO CREATE A BUFFER ALONG ARTISAN CREEK, ARTESIAN CREEK, UH, WHICH DEVOIDS DISTURBING ARTESIAN CREEK AND RELIEVES A NATURAL BARRIER, UH, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, TO THE ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY COMMUNITY.
UM, WE'VE ALSO HAD SOME ENGINEERING ANALYSIS DONE ON THE CONCERNS, UH, BETWEEN THE, UM, ADJACENT MULTIFAMILY COMMUNITY TO THE WEST.
UH, WE HAD INDEPENDENT DRONE VERIFICATION, UH, THAT THE, UH, HEIGHT OF THIS BUILDING WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SEE INTO THE BACKYARDS OF THE SINGLE FAMILY COMMUNITY TO THE EAST.
AS WELL AS, UH, PUT FORWARD A, UH, DRAFT OF A GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT, WHICH WOULD ALLOW ALL OF THE COMMUNITY, THE COMMUNITY OF THE EAST, AS WELL AS THE, UH, MULTIFAMILY COMMUNITY TO THE WEST.
UM, ACCESS TO THE 27, UH, ACRE NATURE PRESERVE, UH, THAT WOULD BE MAINTAINED, UH, BY WILDWOOD, UM, AFTER ITS COMPLETION.
SO, UH, AS FAR AS THE BUFFER, THIS IS GOING TO BE, UM, A DEED RESTRICTION, WHICH, UH, DOES NOT ALLOW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 55 FEET OF THE CENTER LINE OF THIS CREEK.
UH, IT'S THE AREA IN BLUE HERE, UH, IN THE POWERPOINT.
UH, SO A DEVELOPMENT, THE DEED RESTRICTION ITSELF IS DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN 55 FEET, UH, FROM THE CENTER LINE OF ARTESIAN CREEK, WHICH AGAIN, WOULD AVOID DISTURBING THE CREEK ITSELF AS WELL AS THE, UH, TREES AND NATURAL VEGETATION THAT EXISTS TODAY.
UM, AS FAR AS THE, THE DRAINAGE CONCERNS, THERE WERE SOME DRAINAGE CONCERNS RELATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE COMMUN ON THE EAST, ON THE, I'M SORRY, ON THE WEST SIDE.
UH, THAT, UM, UH, WOULD BE ADDRESSED BY, UH, PUTTING IN AN EIGHT FOOT CONCRETE LINE DRAINAGE CHANNEL, UM, AND ULTIMATELY NOT, UH, CREATE ANY SORT OF OFFSITE, UH, ISSUES OR ISSUES WITH THE ADJACENT COMMUNITY.
UM, SO UN UH, SIR, AS YOUR THREE MINUTES SIR.
I LIVE AT 37 48 VINE CREST DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS.
UH, AS MATTHEW WAS UH, MENTIONING, WE HAVE TAKEN THE FEEDBACK WE'VE GOTTEN NOT ONLY FROM THIS COMMISSION, BUT FROM THE, UH, AREA NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE, UH, DECIDED WE WOULD DO THE DRONE FOOTAGE.
AND WHAT YOU SEE HERE IN FRONT OF YOU IS A PICTURE AT 57 FEET ABOVE GRADE.
THAT PICTURE IS AN INDICATION OF THE PRIVACY THAT THE CANOPY AND NATURAL BUFFER THAT IS CREATED BY THE DEED RESTRICTION THAT WILL MAINTAIN THIS NATURAL BUFFER TO GIVE THE PRIVACY TO OUR RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY, AS WELL AS ALL OF THE RESIDENTS ON ON ROLLING CREEK AND THAT ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE ARE SEVERAL EXAMPLES, UM, FROM THE SAME ELEVATION, BUT FROM DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW THROUGHOUT THAT EAST SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
YOU'LL SEE ANOTHER OF YOU HERE.
AND THIS IS PICTURE TWO, PICTURE THREE, PICTURE FOUR, AND PICTURE FIVE.
THEY ALL REPRESENT THE PRIVACY THAT, THAT, UH, NATURAL BUFFER ENTRY CANOPY WILL PROVIDE FOR THE COMMUNITY AS WELL AS OUR RESIDENTS.
UM, AS WE, UH, HAVE TAKEN, UM, SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMISSION, WE'VE DRAFTED A GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT.
THIS SIMPLY MEMORIALIZES WHAT WE HAD ALWAYS INTENDED TO DO, WHICH WAS CREATE, DONATE, MAINTAIN A TREE, PRESERVE, PARK, DOG, PARK, PLAY AREA, SOMETHING THAT OUR COMMUNITY, THE CURRENT COMMUNITY AND FUTURE COMMUNITIES CAN ALL BENEFIT FROM.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WAS OUR INTENTION FROM INCEPTION.
AND THIS SIMPLY MEMORIALIZES THOSE INTENTIONS.
AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS IS AN OVERVIEW, WHAT THAT TREE PRESERVE I WILL LOOK LIKE, UM, WHEN IT IS FINISHED.
UH, THIS PROJECT ALLOWS US TO GET IN THERE AND TO CREATE THOSE TRAILS, CREATE THAT, THAT SPACE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO ENJOY.
AS MENTIONED, THIS WILL BE 27 ACRES, ALL TOTAL, UH, TO BE DESIGNED AND MAINTAINED BY OUR FOUNDATION.
UH, THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF, OF THIS TREE PRESERVE, WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN ENVIRONMENTALLY FOCUSED AT WILDWOOD.
YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO PRESERVE OUR AREA, WE WANT TO BEAUTIFY
[04:05:01]
IT, PRIMARILY MAINTAINING THE CREEK, KEEPING THE CREEK IN ITS NATURAL BEAUTY AND ALLOWING THAT TO BE A BENEFIT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE.UM, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH EXTENSIVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
THIS PROJECT DATES BACK SIGNIFICANT, UH, TIME, UH, BACK TO 2019, BUT YOU KNOW, YOU'VE HEARD SOME OF THIS FROM US BEFORE, SO WE'VE TAKEN THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
I APPRECIATE YOUR INTEREST AND THANK YOU.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM? ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION? GOOD AFTERNOON.
ELLEN TAF, 79 24 GLEN WAY DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS.
THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES HAVE CONCERNS AND WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS THEM.
WE'VE TOLD YOU MANY TIMES ALREADY, BUT WE'RE GOING TO EXPRESS THEM AGAIN.
THE SITE PLAN THAT WILDWOOD SUBMITTED IMPLIES THAT THEY OWN THE WHOLE FIVE ACRE SITE, BUT CURRENTLY ONE AND A HALF ACRES OF THAT SITE IS ZONED A DRAINAGE EASEMENT AND WILDWOOD DOES NOT HAVE CITY PERMISSION TO BUILD ON IT.
A LARGE FEE IS CHARGED FOR EACH EXEMPTION TO COVER THE COST FOR CITY STAFF TO SPEND WEEKS CALCULATING.
IF THE DALLAS WATER UTILITY, THE ENGINEERING DIVISION OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND THE STORM WATER DEPARTMENT CAN RELEASE THE ONE AND A HALF ACRES TO BE BUILT ON THIS DRAINAGE.
EASEMENT, COVERS OR CARRIES 700 FEET OF SANITARY SEWER LINES AND CULVERTS AND ALL OF THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE MOVED BEFORE IT CAN BE BUILT ON.
ON THE MAP YOU RECEIVED YESTERDAY, WE MARKED THE ONE AND A HALF ACRES IN DRAINAGE AND BLUE INK.
THERE ARE ALSO MUNICIPALITY RESTRICTIONS ON THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO BUILD.
WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING WILL REQUIRE DIGGING OUT AND REMOVING THE WHOLE THREE ACRES.
BUILDING AN UNDERGROUND TWO STORY GARAGE, BUILDING A 40 FOOT TALL STONEWALL AROUND THE ENTIRE THREE ACRES BACK FILLING THE WHOLE THING TO BRING IT ALL UP TO STREET LEVEL.
AND THEN BUILDING THE FIVE STORY BUILDING.
AN EXEMPTION WILL BE NEEDED TO BUILD THE 21 TOWN HOMES ON THE NORTH SIDE.
BECAUSE TOWN HOMES ARE NOT LISTED IN MF TWO, AN EXEMPTION WILL BE NEEDED TO BUILD IN THE FLOOD ZONE.
WILDWOOD PUT IN RIDING THEIR ZONE REQUEST THAT A DEVELOPMENT PROHIBITED WITHIN 55 FEET FROM THE CENTER LINE OF THE CREEK THAT ALSO REMOVES MORE OF THEIR THREE ACRES.
AN EXEMPTION WILL BE NEEDED TO CHANGE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS BECAUSE IT NOW ONLY ALLOWS FOR TWO STORY TALL BUILDINGS AND EXEMPTION WILL BE NEEDED FOR WILDWOOD EGRESS AND INGRESS DRIVEWAYS BECAUSE THEY DON'T OWN THAT LAND CURRENTLY, THEY'LL HAVE TO GET AN EXEMPTION.
IT BELONGS TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.
AN EXEMPTION WILL BE NEEDED FOR THE BLOCK FACE SETBACK.
THE MULTI-FAMILY COMPLEX ADJACENT TO THIS SITE, JUST TO THE WEST, HAS THAT 50 FOOT SETBACK.
AN EXEMPTION WILL BE NEEDED FROM THE PROXIMITY SLOPE TO BUILD A FIVE STORY HIGH BUILDING, WHICH IF ALLOWED, WILL IMPACT THE HOUSES TO THE EAST.
REMEMBER THAT MR. PEPE SAID BACK IN MARCH THAT ZONING CASES CANNOT ELIMINATE OR MODIFY EASEMENT LINES.
THE 12 OR 12 OF THE IMMEDIATE HOMEOWNERS TO THE SITE RETURNED LETTERS OF OPPOSITION OUTTA THANK YOU MUCH 34 THAT WERE VOTED.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO US AND THANK YOU.
HELLO, MY NAME IS DEAN BOWMAN.
I LIVE AT 69 31 ROLLING CREEK LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS.
UM, I'M AN ARCHITECT HERE IN DALLAS AND I'VE BEEN ONE FOR 30 YEARS.
AND WE HAVE A TERM CALLED CONTEXTUALISM.
Y'ALL PROBABLY KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
IT'S LIKE BEING SENSITIVE TO THE CONTEXT OF THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT.
THIS IS THE ANTITHESIS OF CONTEXTUALISM.
UH, AS SHE JUST SAID, THIS IS GONNA BE A 40 FOOT FROM THE CREEK.
THERE'S GONNA BE A 40 FOOT RETAINER BALL, PROBABLY 65 FEET OR MORE.
[04:10:01]
THE EXISTING GRADE RIGHT DOWN BY THE CREEK.NOW THESE PICTURES THEY JUST SHOWED OF THIS DRONE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THERE WAS, THERE'S NO REFERENCE TO WHERE THEY WERE, BUT IF SOMETHING LIKE THAT'S GONNA BE BACK THERE, WE'RE GONNA SEE IT.
AND IT'S NOT THAT FAR FROM THE CREEK AND THE HOUSES AREN'T THAT FAR FROM THE CREEK.
WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR SENSIBLE GROWTH IN THIS AREA.
WE ARE ALREADY, UH, OVERSATURATED WITH APARTMENTS.
NOW, THIS IS A ONE STORY RESIDENTIAL, UH, COMMUNITY, UM, OF HOUSES, JUST FAMILIES AND JUST EVERYWHERE.
IT'S JUST LIKE I SAID, OVERSATURATE, OVERSATURATE, UH, UH, SATURATION OF APARTMENTS EVERYWHERE.
THIS PROJECT DOES NOT BELONG HERE WITH ALL THE EXEMPTIONS SHE JUST TALKED ABOUT THAT SHOULD BE SAYING THAT THIS DOES NOT BELONG HERE.
I MEAN, THEY NEED EXEMPTION AFTER EXEMPTION AFTER EXEMPTION.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ARE, BUT THERE IS A LOT OF EXEMPTIONS THAT NEED TO TAKE PLACE FOR THEM TO DO THIS.
AND THAT JUST SAYS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE RULES.
WHY DO WE HAVE RULES IF WE'RE GONNA KEEP EXEMPTING THEM AND EXEMPTING THEM AND EXEMPTING THEM.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? UH, YOU GENTLEMEN HAVE A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
SO AS I WAS MENTIONING, AS FAR AS THE, UH, THE ENGAGEMENT, UH, WE HAVE, UH, ATTEMPTED TO TAKE THE CONCERNS OF NOT ONLY THE COMMISSION, BUT THE COMMUNITY.
AND WE WANT TO PROVIDE A PROJECT THAT, UH, IS GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO ANYTHING TO ANYBODY.
WE'RE TRYING TO, UH, PRESENT SOMETHING THAT THAT WORKS FOR EVERYONE.
AND WE'RE HOPING THAT THE GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT, THE DEED RESTRICTION, DOES PROMOTE THAT.
YOU KNOW, WE WERE, UH, LONG AND TIRELESS AS FAR AS OUR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.
AND, AND NOW I'M PROUD TO SAY THAT I HAVE, YOU KNOW, THREE LETTERS OF, OF PERSONAL ENDORSEMENT AND, AND, AND APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT, YOU KNOW, ON THAT STREET ROLLING CREEK LANE.
SO WE HAVE, UH, REACHED OUT TO COMMUNITY AND THEY UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WOULD, UM, PROTECT THEM FROM FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AS THE 27 ACRES BEHIND THEIR HOME.
IT'S GONNA BE A TREE PRESERVE AND IT WILL AVOID ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THERE.
UH, I APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERN.
I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND I APPRECIATE YOUR INTEREST.
UH, COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? I HAD A QUESTION FOR THAT.
PLEASE, WOULD YOU MIND RESPONDING TO THE CONCERNS THAT THE, UH, THAT ALLEN HAD BROUGHT UP ABOUT ALL THE EXEMPTIONS? UH, AT, UH, THAT ISSUE HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT UP BY THE, UM, TO MY KNOWLEDGE BY THE CITY OR BY OUR CIVIL ENGINEER.
I MEAN, THESE QUESTIONS HAVEN'T BEEN RAISED BY ANYBODY.
UM, AND ULTIMATELY, UM, AS FAR AS WHERE THESE EXEMPTIONS ARE SPECIFICALLY, I, I'M NOT A CIVIL ENGINEER.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO SPECIFICALLY WHERE THEY ARE, BUT ULTIMATELY, UM, AGAIN, I I I CAN'T, UM, STATE, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT ANY OF THOSE ARE APPLICABLE.
I MEAN, ULTIMATELY, UH, SHE DID MENTION THAT, UH, SHE BELIEVES THAT THE, UM, THE OPPOSITION BELIEVES THAT, UH, POTENTIALLY THE, UM, UH, RESTRICTION ON HEIGHT, UH, THAT IS SPECIFIC IN THE DEED RESTRICTION TO COMMERCIAL, UH, WOULD SOMEHOW APPLY TO THE NEW MULTI-FAMILY ZONING.
UH, WHICH ACCORDING TO MR. PEPE, UH, THIS MORNING, UH, DURING THE WORK SESSION, UH, DID MENTION THAT YES, IT WOULD ALWAYS BE APPLICABLE TO COMMERCIAL, BUT UH, WOULD NOT NECESSARILY, WOULD NOT BE, UH, APPLICABLE, UH, IN THE EVENT THAT THIS WAS ZONED, UM, MF TWO.
SO ULTIMATELY, UH, THIS IS, UH, A, AN ISSUE OF, UM, MAKING STATEMENTS WITH WITHOUT ANY PRIOR NOTICE.
I CAN'T SPEAK, UH, TO, TO THE APPLICABILITY OF ANYTHING.
UH, UNFORTUNATELY THAT WAS WAS SAID.
AND, AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE AS, AS FAR AS THE, THE, THE LIST OF EXEMPTIONS, I'M, I'M NOT AWARE, UH, ACCORDING TO OUR CIVIL ENGINEERS, THE NEED TO ANY OF THOSE EXEMPTIONS.
UH, BASED ON THE CURRENT SITE PLAN, WILL ANY OF THE, UH, THE BUILDING, UH, DEVELOPMENT, UH, FOR THE PARKING, UH, BE, UH, INTO THE CREEK AREA? OR WILL THE CREEK AREA BE COMPLETELY LEFT, UH, WITHOUT ANY DEVELOPMENT? YES, THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT AROUND THE CREEK.
THAT WAS THE, UH, CONSIDERATION, UM, THAT, UH, THAT, THAT WE MADE, UH, ON BEHALF OF, UH, THE COMMUNITY AND THE PROJECT AS WELL TO BASICALLY FROM THE CENTER LINE OF THAT CREEK WEST 55 FEET.
NOW THE CREEK ITSELF'S ABOUT 20 FEET WIDE, SO IT'S ABOUT 30 FEET AWAY FROM THE CREEK WHERE THAT WALL IS GOING TO BE.
UH, AND THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT.
THERE'S A, A, UM, ACCESS ROAD OFF OF, UH, OF CAMP WISDOM
[04:15:01]
ROAD ON THE EAST SIDE.THERE'S NO, UH, HOMES THAT ARE GOING TO BE BUILT RIGHT NEXT TO THE CREEK THAT THE WALL WOULD BE HOLDING UP THE, UH, DRIVE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT.
UH, IT WOULD NOT BE, UH, ADJACENT TO, UM, THE, THE BUILDING ITSELF.
THERE WOULD BE THE, THE STREET BETWEEN THAT AND THE BUILDING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR OUR SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OR IN OPPOSITION POSITION? I DO HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, I BELIEVE, UM, MS. TATE BROUGHT UP THE EXEMPTIONS.
IF, AND TO YOUR POINT, I KNOW YOU UNDERSTAND, YOU SAID THAT YOU, YOU ARE UNAWARE OF THOSE EXEMPTIONS, BUT IF THOSE EXEMPTIONS ARE INDEED VALID, HOW HAVE THEY IMPACT THE DEVELOPMENT AND HOW YOU ALL PROCEED GOING FORWARD? WELL, AND AS FAR AS I, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE EXEMPTION PROCESS, UM, OR, OR WHAT EXEMPTIONS WE, WE MAY OR MAY NOT NEED.
AND, AND, AND, UH, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT WAS, WAS BROUGHT THAT HAD NOT BEEN BROUGHT UP BY OUR CIVIL, OUR ARCHITECT OR THE CITY AT THIS POINT.
SO I'D LOVE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
I JUST DON'T HAVE A, A FRAME OF REFERENCE, UH, WITH, WITH EXEMPTIONS THAT, UH, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW THEY APPLY TO THE DEVELOPMENT ITSELF.
LEMME ASK THE QUESTION JUST A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY IF THE EXEMPTIONS ARE INDEED VALID WITH THAT INHIBIT ABILITY TO PROCEED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT.
I, I, I CAN'T STATE, I, I, IT WOULD DEPEND ON WHAT THAT EXEMPTION WAS, UH, HOW EXTENSIVE THAT EXEMPTION WOULD BE.
UH, BUT, UH, UNDERSTAND WE'VE, WE'VE DEVELOPED, OR I MEAN WE'VE DEVELOPED, UH, AGAIN, THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST OF HERE.
UM, THE 248 UNIT, UH, APARTMENT COMPLEX WE BUILT, WE ZONED AND BUILT, UM, JUST FOUR YEARS AGO.
UH, SO WE KNOW THIS PROPERTY AND WE'VE OWNED THIS PROPERTY A LONG TIME.
WE HAVEN'T HAD AN ISSUE, UH, IN WITH ESCARPMENT, WITH ANY OTHER ISSUE WITH, WITH ANY OF THE, THE SINGLE FAMILY WE'VE DONE, THE MULTIFAMILY WE'VE DONE IN THIS AREA.
UM, AND WE'VE HAD THE SAME ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS ON THIS AND, AND THEY HAVE NOT RAISED ANY ISSUE.
SO AT THIS TIME, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE IS ANY EXEMPTION THAT WOULD PRECLUDE US FROM MOVING FORWARD WITH DEVELOPMENT.
VICE CHAIR, RUBEN, JUST, JUST A QUICK FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
SO I KNOW THAT, THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING IS RIGHT NOW THAT YOU MAY NOT NEED TO SEEK ANY EXEMPTIONS TO THE CITY, BUT YOU WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH PERMITTING, CORRECT.
BEFORE YOU, YOU DO ANY BUILDING ON THE SITE? THAT'S CORRECT.
I MEAN, EVERYTHING THAT, THAT WE, THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED HAS GOTTA GO THROUGH ENGINEERING FIRST.
UM, DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS, RETENTION REQUIREMENTS, AS WELL AS, UM, YOU KNOW, BUILDING AND PROXIMITY, SLOPE ISSUES, POTENTIAL, ANY ISSUES WHICH WE DON'T BELIEVE ARE, UH, BUT WAS RAISED AGAIN BY OPPOSITION.
UM, BUT ALL OF THAT WOULD STILL BE SUBJECT TO PERMITTING DEPARTMENT.
IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO ENGINEERING.
UM, SO AT, UH, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THOSE ISSUES WILL HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED, UM, UH, AGAIN BY OUR CIVIL ENGINEERS, OUR ARCHITECTS, AND ULTIMATELY BY THE CITY AND ITS VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS, UM, MOVING THIS PROJECT FORWARD.
AND JUST LIKE ANYONE WHO COMES IN FOR A ZONING CHANGE IN THE CITY, CITY, AFTER YOU GET THE ZONING CHANGE MM-HMM
YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU HOPE THAT ALL THE ENGINEERING WILL WORK OUT.
SOMETIMES IT, IT DOES AND THAT'S WHAT YOU HOPE HAPPENS.
BUT SOMETIMES PEOPLE RUN INTO SIGNIFICANT ENGINEERING SNAGS THAT, THAT MAKE IT ULTIMATELY NOT FEASIBLE.
AND THAT'S THE RISK THAT YOU TAKE LIKE ANY OTHER DEVELOPER, RIGHT? YES, SIR.
AND, AND AGAIN, WE, WE'VE OWNED THIS SITE A LONG TIME AND WE'VE DEVELOPED MULTIFAMILY ON THIS SITE, LITERALLY, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET FROM WHERE WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING ZONED.
SO, UM, IT'S A, IT'S A RISK WE UNDERSTAND AND IT'S RISK WE TAKE.
UM, AND, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, PUTTING FORWARD A, A PRODUCT THAT WE BELIEVE WILL WORK BUT ALSO IS SUBJECT TO, UM, VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS AND, AND VARIOUS CHANGES THAT, UH, COULD, UH, COULD, UH, CREATE ISSUES AND, AND, AND ISSUES WE MAY NEED TO ADDRESS.
BUT, UH, AT THIS TIME I'M NOT AWARE OF, OF ANYTHING OR ANY EXEMPTION THAT I NEED IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD.
SO I HAD SIMILAR QUESTION TO, UH, VICE CHAIR RUBIN, IN THAT IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL SETBACKS, EASEMENTS ACCESS, THAT WILL ALL BE THINGS THAT COME THROUGH IN THE PERMITTING AND ENGINEERING REVIEW YOU WOULD INCORPORATE INTO THOSE PLANS.
IT MAY MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU HAVE CONCEPTUALLY SHOWN TO US BASED ZONING CASE.
SO THAT'S JUST AN IDEA OF WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO DEVELOP.
IT WILL NOT, IN FACT MAY BE SIMILAR, IT MAY BE DIFFERENT.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND PART OF OUR DOCKET, YOU HAVE A VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTION THAT YOU WOULD PROACTIVELY PUT ON THE PROPERTY, UM, THAT ADDRESSES THE DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO ARTESIAN CREEK.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND THAT YOU'RE VOLUNTEERING TO DO THAT NOT PART OF WHAT WE CONSIDER BEFORE IS BECAUSE THE CITY IS NOT A PARTY TO THAT.
IS THAT ALSO CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
WE HAVE NOT BEEN ASKED BY ENGINEERING TO DO SO, WE ARE SIMPLY DOING IT AS A GOOD FAITH EFFORT TO ADDRESS THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS.
[04:20:01]
YOU, I THINK, OUTLINED IN YOUR PRESENTATION, THE GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT, IS THAT GONNA BE ON FILE WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S OFFICE SO THAT IF THE COMMUNITY HAD A QUESTION, THEY HAVE AN ABILITY TO VISIT WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER, BE IN TOUCH WITH YOU ALL AND ENSURE THAT THOSE, UM, CONCEPTS ARE AVAILABLE AS, AS PRESENTED TO THIS BODY? YES, WE DO.A QUICK QUESTION, JUST TO ENSURE, SO I UNDERSTAND AS PART OF THIS, YOU WOULD ALSO BE CREATING A NATURE PRESERVE OR A TREE PRESERVE ALONG WITH THAT? UH, YES.
UH, SO WHAT WE HAVE, UM, SINCE WE, WE OWN, UM, THE ADJACENT 27 ACRES, UM, BUT, UH, FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS, INCLUDING TERRAIN, UM, UH, JUST, UH, ACCESSIBILITY.
IT DOESN'T, UM, WORK AS A DEVELOPABLE SITE.
IT'S, I BELIEVE INDUSTRIAL, ZONED INDUSTRIAL RIGHT NOW.
SO WE'RE NOT CHANGING, IT'S NOT PART OF THE ZONING CASE, PER SE, UH, BUT WE WANTED TO SHOW THE COMMUNITY THAT WE WANTED TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT 27 ACRES.
UH, THE PROBLEM YOU HAVE, UM, WITH ANY SORT OF LARGE OPEN SPACE, UM, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S A CREEK, IS THAT, UH, FLOODING CAN BE A CONCERN IF THE, IF THE CREEK ISN'T MAINTAINED AS WELL AS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE UNDERBRUSH BECOME A FIRE HAZARD.
UH, SO ULTIMATELY WE WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT, NOT JUST FOR OUR COMMUNITY, BUT THE COMMUNITY, THE SINGLE FAMILY TO THE EAST, AS WELL AS THE, UH, MULTIFAMILY TO THE WEST.
UM, AND THOSE, UH, THERE'S ACCESS POINTS OF LAND THAT'S CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS, BUT WE WOULD OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO COME FOR, FOR SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT WITH DALLAS IN, IN THE EVENT.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE, UH, AGAIN, WE WOULD LIKE TO, TO DO SO, AND IF THIS SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AGREES TO, UH, ALLOW THAT TO ACCESS THE COMMUNITY, THE EAST, SO THEY'D HAVE ACCESS TO THIS NATURE, PRESERVE THE WALKING TRAILS AND AMENITIES THAT IT HAS.
SO IT'S, IT'S AS MUCH A SELLING POINT, UH, FOR US IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MULTIFAMILY AS IT IS A BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY, UM, BECAUSE WE WANT IT TO BE ACCESSIBLE BY THE COMMUNITY AND NOT JUST FOR OUR DEVELOPMENT.
I HAVE A FOLLOW UP TO, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S QUESTION.
WHO ARE THE PARTIES TO THAT AGREEMENT? THAT, UM, THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN, UM, WAS, UH, WOULD BE WILDWOOD, UM, DEVELOPMENT, UH, WILDWOOD FOUNDATION, WHO WOULD BE MAINTAINING IT? WILDWOOD DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE THE DEVELOPER WHO WOULD DO THE WORK INITIALLY TO PUT IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
WILDWOOD FOUNDATION WOULD BE THE, UM, ENTITY THAT WOULD, UH, BE MAINTAINING THAT LONG TERM.
UH, SO IT WOULDN'T FALL ON THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION OR A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
UM, AND THEN THE COMMUNITY, THE, UH, CLARK RIDGE CANYON APARTMENTS TO THE WEST, AND THEN THE, UM, COMMUNITY TO THE EAST.
IF, IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE IN, IN THE, UM, IN THAT, UH, AMENITY, IN THE, UH, IN THE NATURE PRESERVE AS WELL, IF THEY'D LIKE TO ACCESS AT ACCESS THAT, THAT PROPERTY.
I HAVEN'T GOTTEN FEEDBACK AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD, UH, WOULD AGREE TO, UH, TO WANT TO ACCESS THE PROPERTY.
SO THE NEIGHBORING OR ADJACENT COMMUNITIES WOULD BE THE OTHER PARTY TO THE AGREEMENT? YES, THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.
AND, AND THOSE WOULD BE THE PARTIES THAT WOULD ENFORCE IF YOU FALL SHORT OF WHAT YOU'VE OBLIGATED YOURSELF TO COMMITTING TO IN THE AGREEMENT, WHAT WE WOULD COMMIT TO IN, IN, UH, WHEN THAT'S DEVELOPED TO ALLOWING THEM ACCESS TO IT.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY A, AN AGREEMENT THAT ALLOWS THEM ACCESS TO THE AMENITIES, UM, THAT IT'S ESSENTIALLY GIVING THEM AND THE RESIDENTS THE RIGHT TO DO SO.
UH, IT'S NOT BURDENING THEM WITH THE COST OF IT OR, OR THE IMPROVEMENT ITSELF.
JUST SIMPLY ACCESS TO THE, TO THAT AS, AS YOU KNOW, ANY, YOU KNOW, NON-PRIVATE, UH, COMMUNITY PARK WOULD BE.
WHAT, I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO IS IF, IF THIS COMMUNITY CHANGED HANDS, THE HOA DECIDE TO, UH, NOT FULFILL THE DUTIES OF THAT AGREEMENT OR WHAT THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES HAVE LEGAL RECOURSE IN ORDER TO ACCESS THE PRESERVE, FOR EXAMPLE.
I DON'T KNOW EXACT AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT A LAWYER.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT LEGAL RIGHT.
UH, BUT AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S, IT WOULD BE A, A DOCUMENT THAT WE PUT FORWARD, UH, IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN THAT, UH, THAT, UH, MEMORIALIZES THE INTENT TO HAVE THE COMMUNITY HAVE ACCESS TO THIS, THIS, UH, 27 ACRE NA UH, 27 ACRE, UH, NATURE PRESERVE.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR, UH, ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS, EITHER IN SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION? COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT? UM, ELLEN, COULD YOU, UH, RESPOND REGARDING THE, UH, THIS, YOUR UNDERSTANDING REGARDING THIS, UH, TREE PRESERVE AND THIS GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT THAT THE DEVELOPERS SPOKEN ABOUT? PLEASE.
[04:25:03]
THANK YOU.ELLEN TAFT, THE GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.
IT IS NOT BINDING TO THE CITY.
IT'S MERELY A VERBAL, IT IS IN WRITING.
IT'S MERELY AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT THAT WE CAN, AS NEIGHBORS.
WE HAVE THE SAME AGREEMENT WITH THEM FROM NINE YEARS AGO WHEN THEY BUILT THE OTHER MULTIFAMILY UNIT, THAT THEY WOULD MAKE PARKS AND TRAILS AND CUT DOWN THE DEAD WOOD.
THEY HAVE DONE NONE OF THAT IN NINE YEARS.
AND NOW THIS, AGAIN, IS THE SAME KIND OF AGREEMENT.
IT'S MERELY A NICE AGREEMENT, AND THAT'S ALL.
THERE'S NO WAY FOR THEM TO ENFORCE IT.
THERE'S NO WAY FOR THE HOMEOWNERS NEXT DOOR TO ENFORCE IT.
IT'S NOT EVEN THE ONE THEY GAVE US IS NOT EVEN SIGNED BY THEM.
IT WAS BUYING BY ONE OF THEIR SECRETARIES.
IT'S NOT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY WAY TO MAKE THEM, TO HOLD THEM TO THAT AGREEMENT.
SO, HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND THOUGH, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE EAST ARE, ARE THEY A PARTY TO THIS AGREEMENT? I, I, I, UNDER, I HEARD MARK, I BELIEVE YOUR NAME IS MARK.
IS THAT RIGHT? MATT? MATT, I, I, IT SEEMS LIKE I HEARD YOU SAY THAT IT WAS OPTIONAL AS TO WHETHER THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE EAST WOULD BE PART OF THIS AGREEMENT.
UM, THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO THE EAST, THE 248 MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENTS HAVE A SIMILAR AGREEMENT WITH US AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD FROM NINE YEARS AGO THAT SAID THAT THEY WOULD MAKE TRAILS, BUT WHEN THEY BUILT THE APARTMENTS, THEY DIDN'T PUT A SINGLE ACCESS POINT.
THERE IS NO WAY FOR A HUMAN TO WALK DOWN FROM THE 248 EXISTING APARTMENTS TO GET TO THE 27 ACRES.
AND THOSE 27 ACRES ARE NOT LEGALLY BOUND IN ANY WAY.
THERE'S NO LEGAL DOCUMENT THAT SAYS IT'S A NATURE PRESERVE IT.
THEY SAY THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO.
BUT THERE'S NO LEGAL DOCUMENT THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS THAT SAYS IT WILL BE A NATURE PRESERVE.
IT IS OWNED BY WILDWOOD, BUT THERE'S NO DOCUMENT THAT SAYS IT WILL BE A PRESERVE.
SO WE JUST AS NEIGHBORS ARE CONCERNED BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AGREEMENT FROM NINE YEARS AGO, AND IT WASN'T ENFORCED.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE HERE WITH THAT SAME OPTION.
WE HAVE NO WAY TO ENFORCE IT, AND THEY HAVE NO WAY TO STAND UP AGAIN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, FOR ANY OF OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER FORESITE? COULD, UH, MATT, COULD YOU RESPOND TO THAT? SURE.
WHAT IS YOUR ENGAGEMENT WITH THE COMMUNITY AND, AND, AND, AND, AND WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WILL BE THE AGREEMENT TO ENSURE THAT THE COMMUNITY CAN PARTICIPATE IN THIS? YEAH.
UM, A AGAIN, THE GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT CAME OUT OF A, UM, OUT OF, UM, A DISCUSSION AT THIS, UH, COMMISSION.
I BELIEVE MISS, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, UM, RE UM, UH, MENTIONED IT.
UM, AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, THE LEGAL APPLICABILITY, THIS WAS A, AN AGREEMENT THAT WE WERE MEMORIALIZING WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO FOR THE COMMUNITY.
THIS ACREAGE, UM, DOESN'T FALL WITHIN THE, THESE ZONING.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR THIS TO BE REZONED, THE 27 ACRES NOT PART OF THE ZONING CASE, BUT WE WANTED TO SHOW SOMETHING, UM, THAT, THAT WE WERE GOING TO, UM, BASICALLY DO SOMETHING FOR THE COMMUNITY FOR THE IMPROVEMENT AND, AND FOR THE, UH, MARKETABILITY OF THE, UM, PROPERTY THAT, UH, WE ARE, UH, DEVELOPING OR THAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE WITH, WITH CREEKSIDE AT CLARK RIDGE CANYON.
UM, SO ULTIMATELY IT WAS PUT FORWARD AND, AND I WAS, UH, PROVIDED A KIND OF A, A TEMPLATE TO WORK OFF OF WHICH I DID.
UM, ULTIMATELY, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I THOUGHT I DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY FEEDBACK FROM, UH, MS. TAFT, UM, UNDERSTANDS.
I MEAN, THIS WAS, UH, PROVIDED WELL OVER A MONTH AGO AND NEVER RECEIVED ANY SORT OF FEEDBACK AS TO WHETHER OR NOT SHE FELT THAT THIS WAS APPROPRIATE OR NOT.
UM, SHE MENTIONED THAT IT WASN'T SIGNED BY ANYBODY.
OF NOTE, I'VE GOT THE AGREEMENT HERE SIGNED BY, UH, TOM GOBERT, THE CHAIRMAN OF WILDWOOD FOUNDATION, AND MYSELF, UH, AS CEO OF WILDWOOD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY.
UM, ULTIMATELY, UH, THIS, UH, 27 ACRES, SHE SPEAKS OF A, A, A, A GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT FROM NINE YEARS AGO.
I APOLOGIZE, I WASN'T AROUND WITH WILDWOOD NINE YEARS AGO.
UH, BUT, UH, I KNOW OF NO AGREEMENT, NOR DO I, UH, UH, HAVE I RECEIVED NOTICE OF ONE.
UH, ULTIMATELY, UH, AGAIN, I'M, I, I, I WANT THE ADJACENT COMMUNITY TO KNOW THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE SERIOUS ABOUT, THAT WE WANT TO DO.
AND I, I WANNA MEMORIALIZE IT WHAT I,
[04:30:01]
AS, AS WELL AS I CAN.UM, BUT ULTIMATELY, I DON'T HAVE ANY IMPROVEMENTS BUILT.
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING DONE TO, TO LEGALLY, YOU KNOW, GIVE RIGHT TO, UM, I'VE, GOD IS BASICALLY A RAW PIECE OF LAND AT THIS POINT.
SO, UM, I WISH I COULD GIVE YOU A BETTER ANSWER.
UM, BUT, UH, AGAIN, I, I THOUGHT WE WERE, WE'RE DOING RIGHT BY THE COMMUNITY AND, AND, UH, TAKING THE ADVICE OF, OF THIS COMMISSION ON TRYING TO PUT FORWARD SOMETHING THAT, UH, MOVE THE BALL FORWARD AND ULTIMATELY SHOWED THEM THAT, UH, WE DO, UM, INTEND AND, AND WE WILL, UM, PUT FORWARD A, A NATURE PRESERVE THAT, UH, IS A BENEFIT TO THE ENTIRE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR ANY MR. CHAIR? YES, PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, IT'S MY TURN.
THANK YOU GUYS FOR ALL THE QUESTIONS.
UM, IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION, OH, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU DID, UH, THIS BASE ZONING VERSUS PUTTING THIS IN A PD, UM, AND INCLUDING, UH, THESE OTHER PROPERTIES INSIDE THAT PLAN DEVELOPMENT? UH, YES.
AS, AS FAR AS, AS FAR AS A, UH, BASE ZONING VERSUS A PD COMMISSIONER? YES.
UH, THE ISSUE THERE, AND, AND THIS WAS A, IT, IT WAS A LONG DISCUSSION WITH OUR, UM, CIVIL ENGINEERS AS WELL AS OUR ARCHITECT, UM, IN THE COMPLEXITY OF THE SITE.
AND, AND ULTIMATELY IT'S ONLY 4.8 ACRES.
UM, A LOT HAS BEEN MADE ABOUT THE, UM, ISSUES, UM, WITH THE, UH, BELOW GRADE ASPECTS, HOW FAR BELOW GRADE IT IS FROM CAMP WISDOM ROAD, UH, THE DRAINAGE ISSUES MOVING AROUND, UH, TO ADJACENT COMMUNITIES.
AND, UH, IN, IN, IN GETTING TOO TECHNICAL WITH A PD AND LAYING OUT TOO MUCH, IT JUST PUT US IN A POSITION WHERE WE MAY GET A PD APPROVED WITH SOMETHING THAT CANNOT BE BUILT.
THEY'RE JUST THE, THE, THE, THE TECHNICALITIES, THE DIFFICULTY OF THIS SITE WAS JUST SO MUCH THAT WE COULDN'T PUT TOGETHER A PD, UH, THAT WE FELT WE COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH.
UM, AGAIN, WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY.
UM, MICHAEL PEPE SPOKE TO THIS, I BELIEVE, AT A PRIOR MEETING AS TO THE, THE REASONS WHY.
BUT IT'S JUST THE COMPLEXITY OF THE SITE, UH, THAT DICTATED NEEDING, UH, A BASE MF TWO ZONING VERSUS A, UM, A PD.
AND THIS SITE, WHEN YOU, YOU SAY THIS SITE, RIGHT, THE, THE ACREAGES THAT ARE PRE-TREAT PRESERVES AND, AND OTHER THINGS, UM, ARE NICE TO HAVE AND SOUND GOOD, BUT ARE THEY A PART OF THE ZONING CASE? NO, THE, NO, SIR, THE, UH, 27 ACRES IS NOT PART OF THE ZONING CASE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE MOTION, SIR? OH, SORRY.
UM, UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF, IF I MAY, UM, MS. MORRISON ON GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENTS AS WE WERE DISCUSSING THEM, IS THAT A TOOL THAT THIS BODY HAS UTILIZED? UM, THAT CAN BE, UM, A WAY TO MEMORIALIZE DISCUSSIONS THAT COME OUT OF COMMITMENTS THAT ARE MADE TO THIS BODY THAT ARE SIMPLY FILED WITH GENERALLY THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S OFFICE, SIMPLY TO GIVE A MECHANISM TO THE COMMUNITY FOR COMMITMENTS THAT ARE MADE TO THIS BODY THAT AREN'T PART OF LAND USE, THAT AREN'T PART OF ZONING? UH, THAT'S CORRECT.
A GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT IS NOT PART OF A ZONING CASE.
IT OFTEN REFLECTS AGREEMENTS THAT, UM, AN APPLICANT WILL MAKE WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS THAT WE CAN'T PUT, UM, AS A CONDITION IN A ZONING CASE.
BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS WORKED OUT PRIVATELY BETWEEN THE PARTIES AND THE CITY IS NOT A PARTY, SO THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE.
BUT YES, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, SOMETIMES THOSE ARE FILED, UM, IN THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S OFFICE, JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS IS WHAT WAS AGREED TO, BUT THE CITY IS NOT A PARTY.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, ACTUALLY.
I FAILED TO GO TO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
SO WE ARE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF NOW.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES.
COMMISSIONER WITH IT ABOUT THE MICROPHONE.
I KNOW THERE'S A BUNCH OF TALK ABOUT, UM, I GUESS THE PRESERVE, THE, THE, THEY, UH, WHAT THEY, UM, THE 27 AC, 27 ACRES 27, UM, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT BACKS INTO CEDAR RIDGE PARK ALREADY.
UM, SO WOULD WE TAKE THAT INTO NOTATION, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A, UM, BECAUSE THE, THE MAIN PARK DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TRAILS PARTS, SO WE DO, BUT NOT ALL OF IT.
STAFF IS NOT EVALUATING THE PRESERVE
[04:35:01]
AS PART OF THIS REQUEST.IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE ZONING, AND THERE'S NOT A TOOL TIED TO THIS ZONING CASE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER CNN? COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? I DO.
AND IF I CAN GET THE WORD AFTER OR A SECOND, I'LL HAVE COMMENTS.
I'M IN THE SPIRIT OF THE GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT.
I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ZONING CHANGES AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF WITH THE INCLUDING OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR MOTION.
AND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
UM, WHERE DO I START? UM, I, I WILL SAY THERE WAS A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS, UM, AND THIS GROUP.
UM, I BELIEVE THIS GROUP HAS INTENTIONS TO BUILD SOMETHING, UM, AND THE INTENT OF SERVING A SENIOR COMMITTEE, A SENIOR, A SENIOR CITIZEN COMMUNITY, UM, AND YOUNG ADULTS.
UM, AND THAT IS A MISSING PROPONENT IN, IN MY DISTRICT AND IS IN THE VISION OF MY COUNCIL MEMBER.
UM, IS THIS A GOOD USE OF ZONE OF LAND? I, EVEN IF A BUILDING FOR A NATURE PRESERVE WAS GOING TO BE PUT HERE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A LOT OF THE SAME EXEMPTION PROCESSES AS THE APPLICANT.
UM, I TOOK THAT IN CONSIDERATION.
I THOUGHT LONG AND HARD ABOUT IT, UH, ABOUT WHAT WHAT WILL EVER GO HERE, IF ANYTHING, AND HOW, HOW, HOW WE CAN KEEP IT, UM, AS PRESERVED AS POSSIBLE WITHOUT IT BECOMING EVENTUALLY A VAGRANT SITE, UM, FOR HOMELESSNESS OR, UM, OTHER VAGRANT ACTIVITIES AS OTHER SPACES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO THESE IN MY DISTRICT ARE BEING USED TODAY.
UM, WITH THAT BEING SAID, I AM NOT GOING TO HAVE, UM, HAPPY RESIDENCE ON MY SIDE ON THIS, BUT I TRUST THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, AND THE RULES THAT HAVE BEEN PUT INTO PLACE, IF THE APPLICANT FLIPS THIS PROPERTY, UM, IT'S, IT, IT SECURES THEM, UM, IT SECURES, UH, THEIR SITE, IT SECURES THE CREEK.
UM, THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERNS HERE FROM ENGINEERING, UM, TO THE POLLUTION OF THE CREEK, UM, THE NATURAL, UH, PRESERVATION OF THE CREEK THAT EXISTS TODAY.
UM, BUT WE'VE HELD THIS CASE, UH, LONG AND HARD.
UM, AND I THINK SEVERAL OF MY COMPOSITES AROUND THE, UM, PAR YOU HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE COMMUNITY, UM, SEVERAL HAVE VISITED THE SITE, UM, THEY'VE TALKED TO THE APPLICANT, UM, AND THEY MAY AGREE, UM, THAT MY, MY HANDS ARE TIED WHEN IT COMES TO THE ENGINEERING AND OTHER, UM, EXEMPTIONS THAT THIS, THIS PROJECT WILL NEED.
SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, UH, THAT'S MY MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HALL? YEAH, THANK YOU.
UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, I, UM, I GOT A LOT MORE INVOLVED IN THIS CASE THAN I REALLY LIKED TO, OR
IT'S NOT MY DISTRICT, BUT BECAUSE IT WAS ALONG A CREEK AND IT WAS A NA A NATURAL AREA, IT REALLY INTERESTED ME BECAUSE OF MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY CENTER UP IN RICHARDSON ALONG SPRING CREEK.
SO I, I PERSONALLY DON'T THINK THE SITE'S A GREAT SITE FOR WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTS TO DO, BUT THAT'S NOT MY CALL.
AND SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION, UH, BECAUSE I TRUST STAFF.
BUT IN THE LONG RUN, I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS WILL EVER ACTUALLY HAPPEN BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SO MANY HURDLES FOR IT TO GO TO, BUT THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO IMPACT HOW I VOTE ON THIS THING.
SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION COMMISSIONER.
OH, MAY, MAY I ADD ONE MORE THING I WANNA SHOUT OUT TO MRS. TAF.
SHE IS A NEIGHBORHOOD VOLUNTEER EXTRAORDINAIRE.
SHE HAS REALLY GONE ALL THE WAY TO FIGHT THIS THING, AND WE DO APPRECIATE THAT.
UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER.
I DO WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND THEIR CONCERNS ON THIS.
UM, I WILL SAY WHAT CAUGHT MY ATTENTION INITIALLY WITH THIS CASE WERE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND I, I DO THINK THAT THEY WERE INTENDED TO BE APPLICABLE TO THIS SITE.
I THINK THE REASON THAT THEY DID NOT REFERENCE RESIDENTIAL USES IS SIMPLY THE FACT THAT IT WASN'T ZONE RESIDENTIAL.
THAT BEING SAID, WE'RE VERY MANY YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, AND I SUPPORT COMMISSIONER HALL'S COMMENTS.
I THINK THIS SITE IS GONNA BE A SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGE TO DEVELOP.
I THINK YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT OF ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS, AND YOU VERY WELL MAY FIND THAT MANY OF THE ITEMS THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS, UM, BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION ARE GONNA TAKE SOME SIGNIFICANT ADJUSTMENTS AND ABLE TO RESOLVE WITH ANY PLAN THAT MOVES FORWARD.
UM, I DO THINK THAT IN THEIR EFFORTS, AND I APPRECIATE THE GOOD NEIGHBOR AGREEMENT,
[04:40:01]
IT DOES NOT GIVE A LING BINDING REQUIREMENT, BUT THERE WERE REPRESENTATIONS MADE AT THIS BODY, AND IT IS SIMPLY A WAY TO MEMORIALIZE THOSE AND TO GIVE THE COMMUNITY SOME ABILITY.I HAVE USED THEM IN MY DISTRICT AND, YOU KNOW, IT, IT IS SIMPLY ANOTHER METHODOLOGY TO FORMALIZE COMMITMENTS THAT ARE MADE HERE.
AND I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT THIS TEAM WILL HONOR THOSE COMMITMENTS AS THEY MOVE FORWARD WITH WHATEVER PROJECT IN WHATEVER FORM IT MAY BE.
UM, I'M GONNA SUPPORT THIS, UM, THIS ITEM BECAUSE WE DO KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN A, A LOT OF WORK, UM, AND ENGAGEMENT SURROUNDING IT.
I KNOW IT MIGHT NOT BE PERFECT, BUT I WOULD, UM, ASK THE SUGGESTION THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, HOLD TRUE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD A AGREEMENT.
I AM ONE WHO FREQUENTS PRIOR MOUNTAIN, UM, WHICH IS IN THIS, UH, RESERVE AREA, AND IT CAN ONLY ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF THE, OF LIFE OF THOSE WHO LIVE IN BOTH, UH, COMPLEXES, PROPERTIES THAT YOU ALL OWN.
UM, AND IT'S HEAVILY TRAVELED.
FIRST WEEKEND OF THE YEAR, I WAS ACCIDENTALLY TWO HOURS IN THE CENTER OF PRAYER MOUNTAIN LOST BECK AND COULDN'T FIND MY WAY OUT, BUT I WAS AT PEACE.
BUT IT ONLY ENHANCE, I'VE NEVER, THIS, THIS PLACE IS THE 27 ACRES.
UH, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT, UM, IF IT'S A PART OF THAT AGREEMENT, PUTTING TRAILS IN, FIND SOMEONE THAT THAT CAN HELP YOU.
BUT IT IS, IT WOULD ONLY ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF THE PEOPLE AROUND THIS, THIS, THIS AREA.
AND IT IS BEAUTIFUL BACK THERE.
COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT? OKAY.
UM, WELL, UM, I'M GLAD WE'RE HERE.
I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS CASE.
UH, FROM A A LAND USE STANDPOINT, UM, I, I DO BELIEVE THERE WILL BE SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES GOING THROUGH PERMITTING AND, UH, THAT THAT'S FINE.
AND, UH, IF THE PROJECT DOESN'T MAKE, UH, FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S FINE.
BUT, UM, UH, I, I DON'T WANNA SIT AT THIS HORSESHOE AND SECOND GUESS, ENGINEERING AND PERMITTING.
UM, SO, UH, WANNA THANK, UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR HIS WORK AND, UH, THANK THE APPLICANT FOR THEIR PATIENCE WITH OUR PROCESS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS, REALLY QUICK? UM, PLEASE GO AHEAD, I'LL FOLLOW YOU.
WANTED TO, UM, YEAH, JUST, UM, UH, I DO THANK YOU GUYS FOR THANKING LADY TAF AND THE RESIDENTS.
UM, THEY WERE, THIS HAS BEEN VERY EMOTIONAL CASE.
UM, THEY'VE BEEN SOME VERY HIGH EMOTIONAL MEETINGS, UM, SO I REALLY APPRECIATED THEM.
UM, MR. GOLDBERG AND THEIR TEAM HAVE BEEN IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR A LONG TIME.
UM, THEY'VE MADE CONSIDERABLE, UM, UM, INVESTMENTS IN THE COMMUNITY, UM, AND, AND MOST OF THOSE INVESTMENTS HAVE PAID OFF FOR OUR COMMUNITY, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, I DO TRUST THAT THEY'RE GONNA HOLD TRUE TO THIS.
I HOPE THAT THEY PARTNER WITH THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA, WHO MR. GOLDBERG IS A PROPONENT OF, AND, UM, SHARE THIS CREEK, UM, TO MAKE THIS PRESERVE, UM, A PART OF THE, THE SCOUTS, UM, WORK.
UM, THERE'S SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES THERE.
IF YOU GUYS, UM, NEED HELP WITH THAT, PLEASE REACH OUT.
THANK YOU GUYS, UM, FOR, FOR, FOR DOING THIS.
AND THANK YOU FOR THE KIND WORDS BY MY, UM, THANK YOU.
UM, JUST WANNA SAY QUICKLY, YOU KNOW, GREAT WORK TO, UM, COMMISSIONER HERBERT.
I AGREE WITH A LOT OF MY COLLEAGUES COMMENTS ABOUT THERE MAY BE SIGNIFICANT ENGINEERING CHALLENGES TO THE SITE.
UM, ONE THING JUST TO THINK ABOUT FOR FUTURE CASES, IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY QUARTER OR SIX MONTHS WE GET A CASE WHERE THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT ENGINEERING CHALLENGES THAT REALLY ARE NOT WITHIN OUR PURVIEW.
SO IS THERE A WAY THAT THE CITY CAN BETTER COMMUNICATE TO APPLICANTS, TO THE PUBLIC, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, ABOUT WHAT FALLS UNDER, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR UMBRELLA AND LAND USE AND ZONING AND WHAT FALLS IN, IN, UNDER OTHER PARTS OF THE PROCESS AND HOW PEOPLE CAN REMAIN INFORMED AND ENGAGED AS THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS CONTINUES ONCE A CASE LEAVES OUR, OUR BODY AND GETS PASSED BY COUNSEL.
UH, LASTLY, I AGREE WITH ALL OTHER COMMENTS, UH, STATED AS MY COLLEAGUES.
UH, IN TERMS OF THE ENGINEERING PIECE, UH, I THINK I HAVE SAID BEFORE, SPEAKING, UH, FOR MYSELF, I DON'T HAVE THE TRAINING, UH, OR THE EXPERIENCE, UH, TO WORK AND THINK THROUGH THOSE CASES, SO TO THAT ASPECT OF IT THROUGH THE ENGINEERING ASPECT OF THESE KINDS OF CASES.
SO I WILL STICK TO MY LANE, I'LL STICK TO THE ZONING LANE, UH, IN THIS CASE AND IN ALL THE OTHERS.
UH, AND IN TERMS OF, UH, COMMISSIONER
[04:45:01]
HERBERT, I WANTED TO, TO THANK YOU THIS, THIS WAS A VERY DIFFICULT CASE.YOU TOOK YOUR TIME AND I THINK YOU, YOU DID WHAT YOU ALWAYS DO, WHICH IS, UH, THINK IT THROUGH VERY THOROUGHLY.
SO I APPRECIATE YOUR WORK ON THIS, SIR.
UM, AND WITH THAT, COMMISSIONERS WE WILL TAKE A VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY THE OPPOSED ONE AND OPPOSITION? UH, MOTION PASSES.
COMMISSIONERS, LET TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK AT 3 37.
ALL RIGHT, IT IS 3:49 PM AND I CALLED THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
[15. 25-327A An application for a new Planned Development Subdistrict on property zoned Subdistrict 1A within Planned Development District No. 714, the West Commerce Street/Fort Worth Avenue Special Purpose District, an area bound by West Commerce Street, Haslett Street, Yorktown Street, and Pittman Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions. Applicant: TW Commerce Management, LLC Representative: Rob Baldwin, Baldwin Associates Planner: Martin Bate U/A From: December 5, 2024. Council District: 6 Z234-291(MB)]
WE ARE ON CASE NUMBER 15, WHICH IS MR. BATES.ITEM 15 IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 91.
AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT ONE A WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 7 1 4, THE WEST COMMERCE STREET SLASH FORT WORTH AVENUE SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT, AN AREA BOUND BY WEST COMMERCE STREET, HASLET STREET, YORKTOWN STREET, AND PITTMAN STREET.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
UM, MR. BALDWIN ARE JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
UM, ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON CASE NUMBER 15 Z 2 34 2 91? NO, NO ONE ONLINE.
ALRIGHT, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NOPE.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES.
THANK YOU MR. BUCH CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 34 DASH 2 91.
I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.
51 P 7 14 1 0 8 A NINE RESIDENTIAL USES MULTIFAMILY.
SHOULD READ MULTIFAMILY PERENS ONLY AS A COMPONENT OF A MIXED USE PROJECT.
ADD THE SENTENCE IN SUB AREA ONE F.
THE MULTIFAMILY USE AND NON-RESIDENTIAL USE CAN BE ON SEPARATE LOTS, BUT THE NON-RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE MIXED USE PROJECT MUST BE AT LEAST 1.079 ACRES.
ADD 51 P 7 14 1 0 8 GG PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES AND SUBDISTRICT ONE F BEFORE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY CAN BE ISSUED FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL USES IN SUBDISTRICT ONE F PEDESTRIAN SCALE LIGHTING THAT PROVIDES A MINIMUM MAINTAINED AVERAGE ILLUMINATION LEVEL OF 1.5 FOOT CANDLES MUST BE PROVIDED ALONG PUBLIC SIDEWALKS AND ADJACENT TO PUBLIC STREETS.
THE DESIGN AND PLACEMENT OF BOTH THE STANDARDS AND FIXTURES MUST BE APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION UNLESS OTHERWISE PROVIDED THE PROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF INSTALLATION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE LIGHTING.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION.
UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT, SEEING NOW WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT TO APPROVE SUBJECT CONDITIONS WITH, WAS THAT A REQUIREMENT? NO.
SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS WITH AMENDMENTS MADE HERE AT THE HORSESHOE.
[16. 25-328A An application 1) a Planned Development District for MU-1 Mixed Use District uses; and 2) the termination of deed restrictions [Z834-123] on property zoned an RR Regional Retail District with deed restrictions [Z834-123] with consideration for an MU-1 Mixed Use District, on the northeast line of West Camp Wisdom Road, northwest of the intersection of West Camp Wisdom Road and Clark Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval of 1) an MU-1 Mixed Use District in lieu of a planned development district and 2) termination of deed restrictions [DR Z834-123]. Applicant: NRP Holdings LLC Representative: Daniel Box, Winstead PC Planner: Michael V. Pepe Council District: 3 Z223-304(MP)]
ALRIGHT, NUMBER, UM, 16 Z 2 23 3 0 4.IT'S AN APPLICATION ONE FOR A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT USES.
AND TWO, THE TERMINATION OF D RESTRICTION Z 8 3 4 1 12 3 ON THE PROPERTY ZONE IN RR REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT WITH D RESTRICTIONS Z 8 3 4 1 12 3 WITH A CONSIDERATION OF AN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF WEST CAMPUS AND ROAD NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION WEST CAMPUS STEM ROAD IN CLARK ROAD.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF ONE, A MIXED USE DISTRICT IN LIEU OF A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND TWO, A TERMINATION OF DE RESTRICTIONS DRZ 8 34 DASH 1 23.
UH, MR. MANN, TOMMY MANN 500 WINSTEAD BUILDING, UH, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT IN THIS REQUEST.
UM, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ON A SITE LOCATED AT, UH, CAMP WISDOM AND CLARK.
HERE YOU CAN SEE THE SITE AND FROM A HIGHER LEVEL PERSPECTIVE, IT'S ZONED REGIONAL RETAIL.
TODAY, THE WAY THE AREA'S DEVELOPED WITH A LOT OF HOUSING, WE DON'T THINK BIG BOX RETAIL IS THE RIGHT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT HERE.
WE THINK HOUSING MAKES SENSE LEAVING THE CORNERS ON EITHER SIDE FOR MORE COMMUNITY SERVING TYPE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT GOING FORWARD.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND I WANNA PAUSE HERE AND GO OVER, TRY TO HIT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP.
UH, WE ARE REQUESTING A PD PRIMARILY BECAUSE IT'S CONSISTENT
[04:50:01]
WITH THE COMMUNITY COMMUNITY MEETINGS WE'VE HAD.HONESTLY, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A STRAIGHT ME ONE AND OUR PD IS NOT SIGNIFICANT.
BUT WHEN WE GO WITH OUR PD, WE DO DEFAULT TO THE MIH DB DESIGN STANDARDS WITH THREE RELATIVELY MINIMAL EXCEPTIONS, BUT IMPORTANT EXCEPTIONS FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE.
FIRST, I WANNA BE CLEAR THAT THOSE STANDARDS REQUIRE A MINIMUM 10% OPEN SPACE.
THE PLAN THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS AT CLOSER TO 20.
IF YOU DON'T COUNT THE POND, IF YOU COUNT THE POND, IT'S 28.
SO WE DO HAVE AN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT IN THERE.
UM, THE OTHER ITEMS IN THOSE M-I-H-D-B STANDARDS THAT WE NEED TO DEVIATE SLIGHTLY FROM OUR FENCE HEIGHT IN THE FRONT YARD, WE ARE ASKING FOR SIX FEET INSTEAD OF FOUR.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO BUILD A FORTRESS.
IT WILL BE OPEN STYLE FENCING, BUT SECURING THE PROPERTY WE THINK IS GONNA BE IMPORTANT FOR THE PRIVACY AND EXPERIENCE OF OUR RESIDENTS.
AND WE WILL CONNECT THE GROUND LEVEL UNITS TO THE SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS AROUND THE PERIMETER.
HOWEVER, WE WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THOSE AREAS COULD BE GATED AND THAT THE CONNECTIONS INTERIOR TO THE PROPERTY TO THOSE SIDEWALKS WILL BE PRIVATE.
THE SIDEWALKS OF COURSE, WILL BE PUBLIC SO SOMEONE CAN WALK ALONG THE PUBLIC SIDEWALKS OF THE PERIMETER OF OUR SITE TO CONNECT TO ANYWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THEY CAN'T CUT THROUGH, UH, THE RESIDENTS AREA.
SO WE STARTED THIS PROJECT A LONG TIME AGO IN OUR INITIAL COMMUNITY MEETING, WE WERE PROPOSING TO PURSUE A PFC STRUCTURE, WHICH FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE I KNOW IS NO DIFFERENT TO YOU ALL.
BUT WHEN WE RECEIVED FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED IN A PFC PROJECT HERE, IT WAS A BIG PAUSE FOR US TO GO BACK TO THE UNDERWRITING TABLE AND FIGURE OUT IF WE COULD MAKE A MARKET VALUE, MARKET RATE PROJECT WORK.
AND SO THAT'S A BIG REASON WHY THE DELAY HAS HAPPENED IN THIS CASE.
WE TOOK THAT BACK TO THE COMMUNITY, WE GLEANED ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK.
THAT FEEDBACK WAS FIRST, THANK YOU FOR FINDING A WAY TO DO A MARKET RATE PROJECT.
SECOND, COULD YOU BEEF UP THE LANDSCAPING AND CAN YOU WORK ON, UM, SOME OF THE AESTHETIC ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT? NOT GONNA READ THIS WHOLE SLIDE TO YOU, BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE DIFFERENCES.
WE'VE ESSENTIALLY DOUBLED SOME OF THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 10 WITH RESPECT TO LANDSCAPING TO ENSURE THAT THE SITE WILL HAVE MORE TREES, MORE SHOVES, AND HAVE A MORE BLUSH APPEARANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED IN THOSE MEETINGS.
ON THIS SLIDE, I'M COMPARING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PD AND THE MU ONE.
THE DIFFERENCES THAT I'VE HIGHLIGHTED IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE THERE, WE'RE ACTUALLY ASKING COMMAND LESS DENSITY.
I JUST WANNA GET THAT ON THE RECORD.
I'M ASKING FOR LESS DENSITY THAN THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING.
AND OF COURSE WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, MR. COMMAND.
SO OUR CLIENT, WE'LL COME UP FROM HERE.
HI, MY NAME IS ELENA RA AND I'M THE DEVELOPER FOR THIS PROJECT.
I LIVE AT 200 WEST COMMERCE STREET HERE IN DALLAS.
UH, AT THE NRP GROUP, WE'RE A NATIONAL MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPER, BUILDER AND MANAGER, AND WE HAVE OVER, UH, 22 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE HERE IN TEXAS.
WE'RE ALSO THE DEVELOPER FOR THE ASCENT AT MOUNTAIN CREEK.
UM, THIS IS OUR LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN.
UM, ONE THING THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO US WAS TO MAINTAIN THAT QUALITY OF MORE OF THAT LUSH, UM, LANDSCAPED FEEL.
SO WE, UM, MADE SURE TO INCLUDE TREES AROUND THE WHOLE PROPERTY, MAKING SURE WE'RE TRYING TO SCREEN THE DETENTION POND AND ADD ADEQUATE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING PLANTS, TREES, UM, AT THE ENTRANCES, UH, THIS IS A VIEW FROM OUR LEASING ENTRANCE ON CLARK ROAD.
AND THEN THIS WILL BE A VIEW FROM CAMP WISDOM.
UM, FOR OUR PROJECT AMENITIES, WE'LL BE INCLUDING A RESORT STYLE POOL, GRILLING STATIONS, FITNESS CENTER, RESIDENT LOUNGE, RESIDENT BUSINESS CENTER, AND DOG PARK.
WE'LL ALSO BE INCLUDING GRANITE COUNTERTOPS IN ALL OF OUR KITCHENS AND BATHROOMS, WASHER AND DRYER, WALK-IN CLOSETS AND STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCES IN EVERY UNIT.
AND WE'LL ALSO BE INCLUDING VALET TRASH SERVICES FOR EVERY UNIT AS WELL.
UH, THIS IS A VIEW OF OUR POOL COURTYARD.
UM, WE'VE GOT LOTS OF GREENERY, UM, CABANA SPACE GAMES, SEATING AREA, GRILLING STATIONS AND MORE.
AND THEN THIS IS ANOTHER VIEW OF OUR POOL AREA AND THIS IS A VIEW OF OUR, UM, RESIDENT LOUNGE.
AND THEN THIS IS A VIEW OF OUR CO-WORKING SPACE.
UM, WITH THE INCREASE OF WORK FROM HOME TRENDS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR RESIDENTS CAN ADEQUATELY AND SUCCESSFULLY WORK FROM HOME.
AND THEN WE'LL ALSO HAVE A FITNESS CENTER THAT'S, UM, COMPLETE WITH CARDIO EQUIPMENT AND STRENGTH, UM, STRENGTH TRAINING EQUIPMENT FOR UNIT SIZES.
UM, WE DID NOT INCLUDE STUDIOS OR THREE BEDS.
WE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT THERE WAS ADEQUATE SPACE FOR RESIDENTS AND ALSO MITIGATE THE IMPACT ON THE SCHOOLS.
AND SO WE WILL HAVE, UM, A SERIES OF ONE AND TWO BED UNITS THAT AVERAGE OUT TO 970 SQUARE FEET.
AND THEN FINALLY, UM, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF OUR UNIT DESIGN.
WE'LL HAVE SPACIOUS KITCHENS, UM, WALK-IN CLOSETS, UM, BATHROOMS AND MORE.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM?
[04:55:07]
YOU GOT A TWO FOR ONE TODAY, MS. TAFTUM, ELLEN TAFT, 79 24 GLEN WAY DRIVE DALLAS.
AND I'M SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THIS POSITION OR THIS CASE.
UM, I MET WITH THEM SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND POINTED OUT TO THEM AND I ACTUALLY WENT AND APPLIED FOR AN APARTMENT IN ALL THE SURROUNDING COMPLEXES SO THAT I COULD BRING BACK TO THEM THAT MARKET RATE WOULD GO AND WOULD BE FILLED WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY.
AND THAT'S WHEN THEY WENT BACK AND CHANGED THEIR POSITION.
SO I'M EVER SO GRATEFUL FOR THAT.
THE NEIGHBORS ARE EVER SO GRATEFUL FOR THAT.
THEY ALSO HAVE BEEN VERY GREAT AND THEY'VE MADE CONCESSIONS FOR US IN THE LANDSCAPING.
AND THE FACT THAT WE WERE GOING TO NEED, RIGHT NOW, CAMP WISDOM IS A TWO LANE ROAD.
IT'S GOING TO BECOME A 4 8 4 LANE ROAD AT SOME POINT.
IT'S A THOROUGHFARE ZONE, BUT THEY PUT THAT IN NOW FOR US EVEN THOUGH IT'S ONLY TWO LANE.
SO WHEN IT DOES BECOME FOUR LANE, IT'LL BE IN OUR FAVOR, WELL IN THE RESIDENT'S FAVOR.
THEY'VE CHANGED THEIR COLOR SCHEME, WHICH I KNOW DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A BIG DEAL COMPARED TO MANY OTHER THINGS, BUT THEY'VE BEEN VERY OPEN AND GAVE US A MUCH MORE COM COMPLIMENTARY LOOK TO WHAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS CURRENTLY.
WE DO HAVE, AS MY MAP SHOWED YOU FROM THE PREVIOUS CASE, THAT WE ALREADY HAVE 3,283 HOME APARTMENT UNITS AVAILABLE, BUT WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE NRP IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY'RE VERY GOOD AT WHAT THEY DO IN THEIR VERY WELL-BUILT APARTMENTS AND THEY WILL REAR END QUICKLY.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE.
DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? MS ONE, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? YES.
UM, MR. MANN, DID YOU FINISH GOING THROUGH THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MU ONE AND THE PD YES.
THAT YOU WANTED TO EXPLAIN TO US? YES.
UM, I HEARD THE LANDSCAPING DESCRIBED AS LUSH.
DID YOU GUYS GIVE ANY THOUGHT TO USING MORE SUSTAINABLE LANDSCAPING ON THIS PROJECT? STUFF THAT IS NATIVE TO NORTH TEXAS AND LOW WATER CONSUMPTION? WHAT? ELENA ANSWERED THAT ONE.
AND I WILL ANSWER YOUR FIRST ONE ON THIS SLIDE.
SO, UH, THE RIGHT SIDE IS THE PD, THE LEFT SIDE IS WHAT STRAIGHT MU ONE WOULD ALLOW.
THE FIRST THING IS THE LEVEL OF, WE'RE STILL INCLUDING A MIXED INCOME COMPONENT, WHICH IS THE SAME MIXED INCOME COMPONENT THAT WE WOULD BE, HAVE TO USE UNDER U ONE IN ORDER TO DEVELOP ADDITIONAL DENSITY.
SO THERE'S NO CHANGE IN THE MIXED INCOME COMPONENT FOR THIS AREA.
OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH ME ONE WOULD NOT REQUIRE THE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING PROVISIONS.
ME ONE WOULD DEFAULT TO ARTICLE 10.
AND THEN THOSE ALTERATIONS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
THE ONE THAT I DIDN'T GET TO IS THERE'S A PROHIBITION IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF HAVING PARKING BETWEEN A BUILDING AND THE STREET.
WE HAVE, AS YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HERE, WE HAVE PULLED THE BUILDINGS TO THE STREET AS MUCH AS WE CAN AROUND THE PERIMETER, BUT WE HAVE A COUPLE OF LOCATIONS WHERE THERE IS SOME PARKING BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE STREET.
SO WE'VE MADE A SMALL ALLOWANCE FOR THAT, BUT THOSE ARE THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCES.
EL ELENA, DO YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING MATERIALS, WATER USAGE AND SUSTAINABILITY? I FEEL LIKE THAT'S MORE YOUR WHEELHOUSE, UM, FOR LANDSCAPING.
UM, WE HAVE A LANDSCAPE, UM, ARCHITECT THAT WORKS ON THAT AND THEY ARE USING, UM, WHAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, LOCAL FOR WHAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE HERE.
UM, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING WE CAN, YOU KNOW, DO MORE, UM, RESEARCH ON, ON THE SUSTAINABILITY.
UM, I DON'T HAVE ALL THE DETAILS RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M HAPPY TO DO RESEARCH AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S, UM, UM, IMPLEMENTED ON THIS PROJECT.
MR. MANN, PERHAPS YOU COULD TALK TO HER ABOUT OUR HABITAT LANDSCAPING STANDARDS.
I DO, I WILL SHARE THOSE WITH HER.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT? DID I SEE THAT YOU HAD A QUESTION? YOU, YOU DID, YES.
UH, A YOUNG LADY SPOKE ABOUT, I'M SORRY, HER NAME SLIPPED.
ELENA, UM, SPOKE ABOUT THE PRESSURE ON SCHOOLS, UM, SINCE WE HAVE SOME NEW COMMISSIONERS HERE, UM, COULD YOU SPEAK ON THAT? BECAUSE I FOUND THAT INTERESTING IN OUR CONVERSATION AND I THINK IT, IT IT'S A GOOD, UH, THING TO BRING FORWARD.
YEAH, YOU CAN ANSWER THAT ONE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU, YOU NEED A SLIDE, BUT YOU HAVE A SLIDE.
SO WHEN WE LOOK AT, UM, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS, UM, ONE AND TWO BEDROOM UNITS DON'T TYPICALLY SEE, UM, CHILDREN LIVING IN THOSE UNITS.
NOW OBVIOUSLY THERE'S EXCEPTIONS, BUT TRADITIONALLY THAT'S NOT WHAT WE SEE.
WHEN WE START TO IMPLEMENT THREE BEDROOM, UM, APARTMENTS IN OUR COMMUNITIES, THEN WE START TO SEE MORE FAMILIES LIVING IN OUR COMMUNITIES.
[05:00:01]
BY KEEPING OUR COMMUNITY LIMITED TO ONE AND TWO BEDROOM UNITS, UM, WE ARE MITIGATING, UM, THE ADDITIONAL STUDENTS THAT WOULD BE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN ALSO BE GOING TO THE SCHOOLS IN THIS DISTRICT.AND THAT WAS ALSO WHY THERE WASN'T A PLAYGROUND WHEN I ASKED FOR ONE, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO THE AMENITIES ARE MORE GEARED TOWARDS, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, YOUNG, UM, AND MATURE, UH, PROFESSIONAL, UM, YOU KNOW, PROFESSIONALS.
SO WORKING FROM HOME SPACE, DOG PARKS AND ALL OF THAT.
SO WE DID OPT OUT OF THE, UM, OF THE PLAYGROUND AMENITY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? UM, I JUST HAVE ONE QUICK ONE, MR. MANN.
UNDER MU ONE VERSUS THE PD, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS TO USING THE PD TO COMMIT TO THAT ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN MU ONE.
WHAT ABOUT MU ONE? JUST, JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.
COULD YOU NOT DO UNDER STRAIGHT MU ONE THAT YOU NEED THE RELIEF FROM THE PD FOUR? SO YEAH, IT'S NOT ACTUALLY MU ONE, IT'S THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE M-I-H-D-B PROGRAM THAT ACCOMPANY DEVELOPING UNDER STRAIGHT ZONING.
SO PROVIDING THE UNITS IS OBVIOUSLY NOT THE PROBLEM.
BUT IF WE USED MU ONE AND UTILIZED THE PROGRAM, THE DESIGN STANDARDS WOULD BECOME APPLICABLE.
THE DESIGN STANDARDS LIMIT FRONT YARD FENCES TO FOUR FEET, WE NEED SIX.
THEY DON'T ALLOW PARKING BETWEEN A BUILDING AND THE STREET.
WE HAVE A LITTLE, AND WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO GATE OUR PEDESTRIAN PATH CONNECTIONS TO THE SIDEWALK.
IT'S RELATIVELY MINIMAL STUFF, BUT IT KIND OF GOES TO THE CORE OF SECURITY FOR THE RESIDENTS.
AND, AND I'M NOT A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT EXPERT BY ANY OF MEANS, BUT ARE, ARE THOSE THINGS THAT YOU COULD SEEK RELIEF FROM BDA FROM NO, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT IN MU ONE.
THEY'RE ONLY IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF M-I-H-D-B.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE.
UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, I DO.
UM, IF YOU GIVE ME A SECOND JUST TO FORMULATE MORE THOUGHTS I, MY THOUGHT, BUT MY WORD YES IN THE CASE.
UM, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE ZONING.
I MEAN, I'M SORRY, I CLOSE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, AND DENY STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND GO WITH THE P PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AS RECOMME.
I MEAN, NOT RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AS PRESENTED BY THE, UM, WELL ATTORNEYS, IF I MESSED THAT UP, MY APOLOGIES ARE, ARE YOU ALSO INTENDING TO TERMINATE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS HERE I AM TERMINATING THE DEED RESTRICTIONS? THAT'S CORRECT.
I SEE MR. PEPE NODDING HIS HEAD THAT, THAT WE HAVE A MOTION THAT WORKS.
AND WE HAVE YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER HERBERT, UH, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
UM, I, I I ALWAYS SAY SOMETIMES IN THESE PROJECTS, UM, THAT ARE SO SIGNIFICANT TO OUR NEIGHBORS, UM, PDS ARE THE WAY TO PROTECT US IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR.
UM, THIS TIME I THINK IT, IT MATTERS EVEN MORE SO, UM, IN GETTING SOME, UM, STANDARDS AND ASKS FROM THE COMMUNITY OVER THE YEARS.
UM, THERE'S A LOT OF PROPONENTS TO, UM, UH, MULTIFAMILY IN THIS AREA THAT AREN'T HERE TODAY BECAUSE THEY'VE WORKED THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS, UM, CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. MANN, UM, AND, AND OTHERS IN HIS, IN HIS COMPANY.
UM, AND HAVE, UH, COME TO THIS REALIZATION THAT THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WAS THE BEST CHOICE AND WHY I SUPPORT IT.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THEM FOR COMING FORTH, UM, WAY BEFORE EVEN FILING HIS ZONING CASE, UH, AND REALLY DIGGING DOWN DEEP INTO WHAT THE NEIGHBORS HAD.
WE HAD AN EXAMPLE WITH, UH, THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT ACCENT, ACCENT AT MOUNTAIN CREEK.
UM, THEY PRESENTED A CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND THE SITE LOOKS JUST LIKE THE PICTURE DID.
UM, SO I, I RESPECT THAT AND I THINK THE LANDSCAPE THERE IS VERY, UH, POLLINATOR LIKE, AND VERY, UM, STREAMLINED TO, UH, WHAT, WHAT WE PLANT HERE IN TEXAS.
SO, UM, IF YOU GUYS GET A CHANCE TO SEE THAT DEVELOPMENT, UM, AS MORE OF THESE WILL BE COMING IN OUR AREA, UM, THEY, THEY STOOD THAT UP.
I APPRECIATE ANY SUPPORT I CAN GET AROUND THE CHAMBER AND LOOK FORWARD TO THE CONVERSATION.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? JUST WANNA BRIEFLY THANK COMMISSIONER HERBERT AS ALWAYS FOR HIS, UM, WORK ON HIS CASES IN HIS DISTRICT.
I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.
[05:05:01]
BUT I ALSO WANNA DO ACKNOWLEDGE MS. TAFT FOR STAYING WITH US.AND I THINK IT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT THAT AS MUCH AS WE SEE MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS ADVOCATING AND NOT ALWAYS SUPPORTING, BUT WHEN WE DO HAVE THEM DOWN AND SUPPORTING REQUESTS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AS WELL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UM, I WILL COMMENT JUST BRIEFLY, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, EXCELLENT WORK COMMISSIONER HERBERT.
UM, AND, AND THANK YOU TO THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM AS WELL FOR, FOR WORKING HARD WITH THE COMMUNITY THROUGH A LONG PROCESS ON THIS ONE.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFICS ABOUT THE, THE DETAILS OF THIS CASE AND THE, THE SITUATION REGARDING OUR, OUR SCHOOLS.
SO I DON'T WANT TO COMMENT SPECIFICALLY AS TO THIS ONE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE IS A REAL SHORTAGE OF OF THREE BEDROOM APARTMENTS FOR FAMILIES TO MOVE INTO IN THE CITY THAT, THAT WE, WE'VE SEEN ADDRESS THROUGH OTHER CASES.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT'S THE RIGHT CALL OR THE WRONG CALL HERE, BUT, UM, HOPEFULLY WE THINK VERY HARD ABOUT THREE BEDROOM APARTMENTS WHEN, WHEN WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY MOVING FORWARD.
STILL HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE MOTION.
IT COULD BE THAT THAT IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT CALL UNDER THIS CASE AND NOT A REASON TO HOLD IT UP.
UM, AND LOOK FORWARD TO SUPPORTING IT.
AND, UH, CO-CHAIR, UH, VICE CHAIR TO MENTION.
UM, A LOT OF US SHARE SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITH DUNCANVILLE, UM, AND IT'S AN EXTREME PROBLEM FOR SOME OF US AND, AND GETTING OUR KIDS TO SCHOOLS ON THIS SOUTHERN SECTOR, RIGHT? SO JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT.
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.
IT WAS A HUGE CONTENTION POINT FOR ME, UM, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THE SAME WAY.
SO, UH, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.
UM, WE HAVE SOME SCHOOL DISTRICT ISSUES THAT PROBABLY SHOULD BE LOOKED AT, BUT YEAH.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HERBERT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO NOT FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, BUT TO APPROVE THE PD FOR, UM, ME MIXED ONE DISTRICTS AND TERMINATE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
[17. 25-329A An application for a Planned Development Subdistrict for HC Heavy Commercial Subdistrict uses on property zoned an HC Heavy Commercial Subdistrict within Planned Development District No. 193, the Oak Lawn Special Purpose District, bound by Cedar Springs Road, Maple Avenue, North Pearl Street, and McKinney Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a conceptual plan, development plan, Subarea A landscape plan, Subarea B landscape plan, and staff’s recommended conditions. Applicant: GPIF TC Owner LLC Representative: Victoria Morris Planner: Martin Bate Council District: 14 Z234-243(MB)]
ALL RIGHT, NUMBER 17, ITEM 17 IS CASE Z 2 34 DASH 2 43.AN APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR HC HEAVY COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ZONE IN HC HEAVY COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 1 9 3, THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT BOUND BY CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD, MAPLE AVENUE, NORTH PEARL STREET, AND MCKINNEY AVENUE.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A CONCEPTUAL PLAN, DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SUB AREA, A LANDSCAPE PLAN SUB AREA B, LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
AS THE APPLICANT HERE WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, IS THERE ANYONE HERE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 34 DASH 2 43.
I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS CASE UNTIL FEBRUARY 6TH.
AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I HAVE A BRIEF COMMENT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? YEAH, THANK YOU.
I DON'T LIKE TO HOLD CASES, UM, BUT WE ARE WORKING ON SOME EXCITING NEW, UH, ASPECTS TO THIS CASE THAT IF WITH ANY LUCK WE WILL BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT IN FUTURE CASES.
AND I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT'S, UH, WILLINGNESS TO, UM, TO BE CREATIVE AND WORK ON THOSE THINGS.
AND I HOPE THAT YOU WILL LIKE WHAT WE COME UP WITH IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
UH, WE WILL SKIP NUMBER 18 FOR THE MOMENT AND, UH, 19 AND 20 DON'T NEED AN ACTION.
SO WE WILL GO TO, UH, NUMBER 21 9.
UH, YES COMMISSIONERS MAY SOME OF YOU ARE NOT HERE.
NUMBER 19 AND 20, UH, WILL NEED TO BE RENO.
THERE WAS A NOTICING ERROR, SO THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY NOT ON OUR AGENDA.
SO WE WE WILL TABLE NUMBER 18 FOR JUST A MOMENT.
[21. 25-333A An application to create a new subdistrict, Lawyers Building, within the West End Historic Sign District on a property zoned CA-1(A) Central Area District with Historic Overlay No 2., on the southwest corner of Main Street and South Austin Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Special Sign District Advisory Committee Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions. Applicant: Big Outdoor Texas, LLC Representative: Jackson Walker LLP / Suzane Kedron & Victoria Morris Planner: Oscar Aguilera Council District: 14 SPSD234-003(OA)]
A FEW MINUTES.AND, UH, SO LET'S GO TO 21 AND LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS A CONFLICT ON THAT ONE AND IS STEPPING OUT OF THE CHAMBER.
[05:10:10]
HOW YOU DOING? UH, UH, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION.OSCAR AGUILERA PLANNING DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, UH, BY THE WAY, HAPPY, UH, NEW YEAR.
UM, ITEM, UH, 21 IS AN APPLICATION TO CREATE A NEW SUB-DISTRICT, THE LAWYERS BUILDING WITH WITHIN THE WEST, UH, END, UH, HISTORIC SIGN DISTRICT ON A PROPERTY ZONE, CENTRAL AREA DISTRICT WITH A HISTORIC OVERLAY NUMBER TWO ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MAIN STREET AND, UH, SOUTH AUSTIN STREET, THE SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.
COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME.
VICTORIA MORRIS WITH JACKSON WALKER, 2323 ROSS AVENUE, SUITE 600.
WE WERE BEFORE YOU LAST ON NOVEMBER 21ST AND THE CASE WAS HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT SO THAT WE COULD CONTINUE ASSISTING OUR NEIGHBORS EFFORTS, GAINING ACCESS TO A PARKING AREA THAT'S ADJACENT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OF THIS REQUEST.
AND OUR NEIGHBORS, WE ACTUALLY REACHED OUT TO OUR NEIGHBORS, UH, REPRESENTATIVE MR. PHILIP KINGSTON ON NOVEMBER 13TH.
BEFORE THE CASE WAS POSTPONED ON NOVEMBER 14TH, WE SPOKE WITH MR. KINGSTON AND EXPLAINED THAT WHILE WE DO NOT OWN THE PARKING AREA, IT'S AN UNRELATED THIRD PARTY, WE WILL HAPPILY, UH, ASSIST TO HELP THEM FACILITATE COMMUNICATIONS WITH THAT PROPERTY OWNER.
UM, ON NOVEMBER 20TH, WE MADE CONTACT WITH THE PARKING LOT OWNER'S MANAGEMENT COMPANY TO CONTINUE THOSE EFFORTS.
UM, AND THEN SINCE THE POSTPONEMENT ON NOVEMBER 21ST, WE HAVE HAD EIGHT TO 10 ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATIONS WITH MR. KINGSTON AND WITH THE PROPERTY MANAGER OF THE PARKING LOT, AND WE CONTINUE TO FACILITATE THOSE EFFORTS.
WE FOLLOWED UP AGAIN YESTERDAY AND THE PROPERTY MANAGER HAS INDICATED THAT THEY ARE AWAITING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM ONE ANOTHER.
AND SO WE HAVE DONE OUR VERY BEST TO HELP FACILITATE THESE CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN THE THIRD PARTIES, UM, ALL IN THE SPIRIT OF BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND WE WOULD RESPECT RESPECTFULLY, ASK FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER? OH, YES SIR.
WE DID, WE SKIPPED 18 FOR A MOMENT, SIR, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA COME RIGHT BACK TO IT.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? IT IS YOU, RIGHT? OKAY.
IN THE MATTER OF SPSD 2 3 4 DASH ZERO THREE, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND NOT FELLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT THE LINE TO REQUEST WITHOUT, UM, PREJUDICE.
AND I HAVE COMMENTS IF I HAVE A SECOND.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WE DO NOT HAVE A SECOND.
DO WE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION? OKAY, I THINK THAT TELLS ME WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW FROM THE BODY.
OKAY,
UM, IN THE MATTER OF SPD SD 2 34 DASH ZERO THREE, I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE THE REQUEST AND I HAVE COMMENTS IF I HAVE A SECOND.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION ADVISE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
UM, ACTUALLY I, IF I MAY AMEND THAT AND COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT MAY WITH THE WITHDRAWAL A SECOND.
I WOULD LIKE TO PUT A SUNSET CLAUSE ON THIS, UM, FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS AND YOU CAN MAKE YOUR DECISION TO MAKE MY COMMENT.
IF VICE CHAIR RUBIN, I'LL, MAY I GIVE MY RATIONALE FOR IT? AND I KNOW THAT'S A LITTLE OUT OF ORDER.
I'M NOT GONNA RAISE A POINT OF ORDER.
FOUR DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A LOT IN THE SCALE OF THE DISTRICT, BUT THESE ARE DIRECTLY NEXT TO EACH OTHER.
AND IT IS HARD FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND HOW ALLOWING TWO PAINTED APPLIED SIGNS IN DIRECT PROXIMITY TO EACH OTHER IS FURTHERING THE SPIRIT OF THE HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT.
CERTAINLY THEY ARE OF THE PERIOD OF THE DISTRICT, THERE'S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT, BUT WE'RE TALKING
[05:15:01]
ABOUT A SIGNIFICANT SIZE OF AN UNLIMITED DURATION THAT WERE IN MANY CASES ORIGINALLY PROPOSED TO HELP WITH BUILDING RESTORATION WORK THAT WAS ONGOING FOR BUILDINGS THAT WERE EITHER CHALLENGED IN TERMS OF THEIR LEASING OR OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS ARE NOT PART OF OUR LAND USE RATIONALE.BUT THESE ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO HOW OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS FUNCTION AND HOW THEIR BUILDINGS TRY TO REMAIN IN USE AND TRANSITION FROM THEIR HISTORIC USES.
I DON'T KNOW ANOTHER WORD TO USE THERE.
HAVING THIS WITHOUT A SUNSET CLAUSE TO ME DOES NOT FURTHER THE SPIRIT OF THE DISTRICT.
AGAIN, IF, IF THEY WEREN'T DIRECTLY NEXT TO EACH OTHER, I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW.
BUT IT IS JUST HARD FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS IS APPROPRIATE IN THIS CASE.
I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT MY COMMISSIONERS MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW, BUT THAT IS MY CONSIDERATIONS AS I EVALUATED THIS.
AND I WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE CLEAR, I THINK WE SHOULD ACTUALLY TAKE A VOTE ON THIS AMENDMENT RATHER THAN ACCEPTING IT.
SO IT WOULD CAN I CAN'T AMEND MY OWN MOTION THOUGH, CAN I? NO.
PERHAPS ONE OF OUR COLLEAGUES WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT, I THINK, I THINK MS. MORRIS IS SAYING IF THE, IF THE SECOND AGREES TO, FOR THE AMENDMENT OF, OF HER MOTION THEN, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE NOT, YOU WANT LET'S JUST VOTE ON THE FIRST MOTION WITHOUT THE, UH, SUNSET PIECE.
PERHAPS ONE OF OUR COLLEAGUES MIGHT WANNA MAKE THAT MOTION TO AMEND IT.
WE PUT SOME TIME, THIS IS THE FIRST I'M HEARING ABOUT SUNSET PART OF THE, SO OH, OKAY.
WE MIGHT HAVE, IT'S THE PROVISION THAT OCCURS IN THE ANTIOCH CHURCH, SUBDISTRICT WEST END.
THAT'S ONE OF THE OTHER DIRECTLY RELATED.
CAN WE, YES, AND I'M HAPPY TO VISIT WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
UH, COMMISSIONER HERBERT WHILE, UH, SORRY, WE'RE, UH, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS, IS LOOKING INTO THAT.
SO WE JUST TOOK A QUICK PAUSE, SIR.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UH, COULD I ASK COMMISSIONER HAMPTON IF SHE, UM, INTENDS TO INCLUDE THE SS DACS, UM, CONDITION THAT STRUCTURE TIES MUST BE ATTACHED VIA THE MORTAR JOINTS TO PROTECT THE MASONRY OF THE BUILDING? I DO.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I CAN'T BELIEVE IT'S NECESSARY, BUT
WHAT'S THAT? DO WE HAVE TO WAIT TO COMMENT? UH, IT'S OKAY.
IF YOU WANT, IF YOU WANT TO NOW WE'LL WAIT FOR THE CITY OF ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
I JUST THINK THAT IT'S, UM, UNFAIR ON THIS APPLICANT.
IIII BELIEVE HIS BODY HAS BEEN USED AS A CIVIL, A CIVIL, UM, COURT.
UM, WE SHOULDN'T EVEN HAVE TO REVISIT THIS, UM, BECAUSE OF, OF, UNRELATED TO THE ACTUAL CASE ITSELF.
THIS, THE REASON WE HELD THIS WAS NOT UNRELATED TO THE CASE THAT WAS FILED, UH, UH, WHETHER ACROSS THE STREET NEXT DOOR DIDN'T GET ACCESS BECAUSE THEY GOT APPROVED FOR A SIGN AND THEM HAVING TO COME BACK.
AND THEN NOW WE ARE ADDING EXTRA, UM, EXTRA THINGS TO THEM.
WE DIDN'T DO IT TO THE LAST ONE THAT CAME AND WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING BECAUSE TECHNICALLY WE HAVE BEEN ACTING AS A CIVIL COURT ON THIS CASE.
I WASN'T, I WAS AGAINST IT WHEN WE, WE HELD IT AND I'M, I'M TOTALLY AGAINST ANYTHING THAT THE LAST APPLICANT, UM, WHO USED THIS BODY AND KNOWINGLY AS A EX-CO MEMBER SHOULD HAVE NEVER REQUESTED US TO DO SUCH BECAUSE OF A, A PROPERTY THAT IS NOT OWNED BY THEM WOULDN'T GIVE ACCESS.
AND NOW WE'RE ADDING STIPULATIONS THAT WE DIDN'T ADD TO THAT BODY AND IT COULD SEEM AS IF WE ARE PAYING FAVORITISMS. OH NO, UH, WE'LL JUST TAKE YOUR TIME OR NOT.
BUT, BUT, UH, BUT IT IS NOT ON THE TABLE THOUGH, RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT.
IT'S STILL JUST A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
WELL, LET'S, LET'S TAKE THAT MOTION UP FIRST.
WE HAVE A, WELL, I I HAVE A SECOND.
WELL, I, I THINK I HAVE TO BECAUSE OUR SECOND DOES NOT SUPPORT THAT.
SO I WILL WITHDRAW MY MOTION IF ANOTHER COMMISSIONER WOULD PREFER
[05:20:01]
TO MAKE AN ALTERNATE MOTION.I THOUGHT YOU WERE WITHDRAWING YOUR ADJUSTMENT TO YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION.
CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, IN THE MATTER OF SPSD 2 34 0 0 3, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW THE S-S-D-A-C RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VICE CHAIR EVERYONE FOR YOUR MOTION.
AND COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION AMENDMENT PLEASE, COMMISSIONER HEAD? OH, WELL, UM, MAY I? NO.
THANK YOU MR. VICE CHAIR, BUT I DO WANNA RESTATE WHAT I STATED ON MY, UM, PRIOR MOTION IN THAT I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS IN THE SPIRIT OF THE DISTRICT TO HAVE TWO SIGNS IN SUCH CLOSE PROXIMITY, BUT WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING THE WISDOM OF THE BODY.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER HALL, DOES THIS MOTION INCLUDE THE SUNSET CLAUSE? NO.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS? NONE THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? ONE IN OPPOSITION.
[22. 25-334A An application to create the 23 Spring Subdistrict within the Uptown Special Provision Sign District on a property zoned Planned Development District 193 Subdistrict 146, on the southwest corner of Cedar Springs Road, at Maple Avenue and Bookhout Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Special Sign District Advisory Committee Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: 23 Springs, LP. Representative: Chris Bauer, FocusEGD Planner: Oscar Aguilera Council District: 14 SPSD234-004(OA)]
OKAY, WE'LL MOVE TO 22.UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON CAN COME BACK INTO THE CHAMBER.
AND ON 22, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND HOUSEWRIGHT HAVE A, UM, CONFLICT AND WE'LL GO TO 18 AFTER 22.
ITEM, UH, 22 IS AN APPLICATION TO CREATE THE 23RD, UH, SPRING SUBDISTRICT WITHIN THE UPTOWN SPECIAL PROVISION SIGN DISTRICT ON A PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 180 3 SUB-DISTRICT 1 46 ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CEDAR SPRINGS ROAD AT MAPLE AVENUE AND, UH, BOOK HOOD STREET.
UH, STAFF UH, RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THE SPECIAL, UH, SIGNED DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS NUMBER 22.
I AM THE MANAGING PRINCIPAL OF FOCUS, EGDA COMPANY HERE IN DALLAS, TEXAS, DESIGNING SCIENCE SYSTEMS FOR OUR CLIENTS.
IN THIS PROJECT, WE HELP TO AUTHOR THE NEW LANGUAGE FOR THE SUB-DISTRICT.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
IS THERE, UH, ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF SP SD 2 3 4 DASH 0 0 4? MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL?
ALL THOSE, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT.
[18. 25-330A An application for a Specific Use Permit for a commercial amusement (inside) on property zoned Subdistrict 1 within Planned Development District No. 534, the C.F. Hawn Special Purpose District No. 2, on the northeast line of C.F. Hawn Freeway, west of Pleasant Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a five-year period, subject to a site plan and staff’s recommended conditions. Applicant: Brandon C. Rogeness Planner: Wilson Kerr Council District: 5 Z234-315(WK)]
ALRIGHT, WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO NUMBER 18 RIGHT NOW, DR.UM, UH, ITEM NUMBER 18 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE ON PROPERTIES ZONE SUBDISTRICT ONE WITH PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 34, THE CF HORN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT NUMBER TWO, UH, ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF SEA OF H FREEWAY, WEST OF PLEASANT DRIVE.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD, SUBJECT TO A SIP PLAN, AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS IS BRIEFED.
AND THE Z CASE NUMBER IS Z 2 3 4 3 15.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON CASE NUMBER 18? UH, C TWO THREE.
I'M HERE FOR THE, UH, ITEM Z 2 34 DASH 1 35.
UM, IT'S MY HOPE THIS AFTERNOON THAT YOU ACCEPT MY REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM PERSONAL SERVICES TO COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT INSIDE.
UH, I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS OVER THE LAST 14 MONTHS TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUESTS THAT THEY'VE BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION.
UM, I'VE HAD AN INCREDIBLE SUPPORT, BOTH FROM THEM AND, UH, SEVERAL OF THE TENANTS AND RESIDENTS IN THE AREA.
UH, I INTEND TO BE MINDFUL OF MY NEIGHBORS AND I FEEL LIKE
[05:25:01]
I'VE HAD A POSITIVE IMPACT ON OUR COMMUNITY, ALTHOUGH I DO SEE SOME, UH, SOME OF THE TENANTS HERE, UH, IN OPPOSITION.I DO BELIEVE THE GENERAL CONSENSUS HAS BEEN FAIRLY SUPPORTIVE AND I'VE MADE ATTEMPTS TO COMMUNICATE WITH, UH, THIS PERSON IN OPPOSITION WHO'S BEEN UNRESPONSIVE.
AND I FEEL LIKE I'M STILL WILLING TO KEEP OPEN CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATION.
BUT, UH, MOST HAVE BEEN VERY SUPPORTIVE IN THE AREA.
AND I WOULD LOVE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? ANYONE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? SIR, COME ON DOWN.
UH, MY NAME'S SEAN STOVALL, 31 0 1 BOVIE ETTE.
I OWN THE PLACE NEXT DOOR TO HIM.
AND, UH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS PERMIT HE'S, HE'S APPLYING FOR.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY GOT RIGHT NOW, BUT, UH, IT'S SPILLING OUT ON ME.
ALL THE PARKING, THEY, THEY GOT A HECK OF A DRAW.
THEY GET A HUNDRED CARS, 30 MOTORCYCLES.
IT JUST, AND IT'S SPILLING OVER INTO, I'VE TOLD 'EM, I DIDN'T, ONE OF 'EM PARKING ON MY PROPERTY WHEN I LEAVE, WHEN WE LEAVE AT SIX O'CLOCK, WE WANT TO GO HOME.
AND THEY GOT CARS PARKED THERE ALL NIGHT LONG ON MY PROPERTY.
UH, IT'S, IF THEY WEREN'T ON MY PROPERTY, I WOULD'VE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH WHATEVER THEY WANTED TO DO.
I, I REALLY, I'VE NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE IN MY LIFE, YOU KNOW, COMPLAIN OR SOMEBODY WANTS TO OPEN UP A CAR LOT OR WHATEVER.
I NEVER, I NEVER, THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
AND YOU OWN THE PROPERTY, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO IT.
BUT IT, UH, IT'S SPINNING OUT ON US, YOU KNOW, AND, UH, THEY'VE COME DOWN AND TRIED TO OFFER ME MONEY TO PARK ON A DEAL, BUT IT'S A, IT'S A BAD NEIGHBORHOOD OVER THERE AND WE LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PATROL IT, YOU KNOW, SEE WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND, UH, THEY DON'T HAVE NO PARKING IN FRONT OF HIS PLACE.
THAT'S WHY THE RENT'S CHEAP OVER THERE, YOU KNOW, OR I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S CHEAP, BUT IT AIN'T, THEY NEED A, THEY, THEY GOT A HECK OF A DRAW.
THEY, THEY PULL 'EM IN, THEY COVER UP THE WHOLE STREET, THE NEIGHBORHOODS RAMPS.
IT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR A WHILE, FOR TWO YEARS.
AND, UH, LIKE I SAY, I TOLD 'EM I DIDN'T WANT 'EM PARKING ON MY PROPERTY, BUT IT HASN'T HAD ANY EFFECT WHATSOEVER.
AND I, I CAN FENCE MY PROPERTY, BUT THEN I WON'T BE ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT WITHOUT A BIG HASSLE.
YOU KNOW, I OWN A MOTORCYCLE SHOP.
IT'S ACTUALLY, IT'S BEEN THERE SINCE 1962.
MY DAD BUILT THAT PLACE IN 62.
SO THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAD TO SAY.
IF YOU'RE GONNA OPEN UP A PLACE, YOU OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A PLACE TO PARK YOUR CUSTOMERS.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S MY SIDE OF IT.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? UH, MR. RNI, YOU GET A, YOU GET A MR. RNI, YOU GET A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
UM, I, I RENTED THAT SPACE IN NOVEMBER OF 23.
UH, I WAS OPEN FOR ROUGHLY THREE MONTHS, FOUR MONTHS, UM, WITH LIMITED APPROVAL FROM THE CITY BECAUSE I HAD NOT, UH, GOTTEN, UH, THE CHANGE OF, OF, UH, ZONING.
SO ONCE MARCH OR APRIL OF 24 CAME AROUND, I WAS TOLD TO STOP ALL BUSINESS, WHICH I DID.
I HAVE BEEN UP THERE ALMOST THREE OR FOUR DAYS A WEEK SPENDING MY PERSONAL MONEY UPDATING THAT PROPERTY.
UM, I'VE PUT PROBABLY 30 OR $40,000 OF MY MONEY, UM, JUST TO BEAUTIFY THE AREA.
I HAVE SPENT $5,000 A MONTH SINCE APRIL, JUST TO KEEP THAT PLACE AVAILABLE TO GET THIS PROCESS
[05:30:01]
COMPLETE ON THE EAST SIDE OF ME, DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO ME AS A BOXING ACADEMY.EVERY NIGHT THEY HAVE PROBABLY 20 TO 30 CARS, WHICH HAVE BEEN SPILLING OVER INTO THIS GENTLEMAN'S PROPERTY.
I'VE SEEN THAT HAPPENING, UM, AS WELL.
UM, NEXT TO THEM GOING FURTHER EAST.
UM, THERE'S A, I GUESS A MOTORCYCLE CLUB THAT, THAT GETS TOGETHER ON THE WEEKENDS.
THEY HAVE ALSO BEEN DOING, UH, GET TOGETHERS ON THE WEEKENDS, WHICH OVERFLOW INTO HIS PROPERTY.
AND I RECOGNIZE THAT HE'S FRUSTRATED.
SO I WENT TO TRY AND TALK WITH HIM AND SAID, YOU KNOW, LOOK, I SEE THAT THERE'S PEOPLE PARKING IN YOUR SPACES.
I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO WORK OUT SOME KIND OF CONTRACT WHERE I CAN PAY YOU TO ACTUALLY HAVE WHAT'S HAPPENING.
UM, I, I BROUGHT THAT UP TO HIM.
THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. ROCKNESS.
UM, SOME PEOPLE MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS? COMMISSIONER WHEELER.
SO YOU WENT TO THE CITY, APPLIED FOR A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
THE OC CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THAT YOU APPLIED FOR DID NOT FIT THE USE THAT YOU WERE DOING.
THEY GAVE YOU A TIME PERIOD TO DO SO, AND YOU WENT PAST THE TIME PERIOD AND ESSENTIALLY THEY CLOSED YOU DOWN.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? I'M SAYING THAT THEY TOLD ME WHEN I FIRST APPLIED THAT, UH, THE ONLY PERMIT THAT I COULD APPLY FOR WAS PERSONAL SERVICES, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT WAS ZONED FOR.
THEY SAID, I NEED TO BE WORKING ON GETTING THAT CHANGED TO, UH, COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT INSIDE.
UM, I DIDN'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO GET THAT PROCESS STARTED.
UM, BUT AT SOME POINT, PROBABLY THREE MONTHS IN, THEY JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE BEEN DOING LIMITED STUFF THERE WITH 30 OR 40 PEOPLE THAT'S PUSHING CLOSE TO ASSEMBLY REQUIREMENTS.
AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THOSE NUMBERS, YOU NEED TO JUST START THE PROCESS.
UH, IT'S BEEN SEVERAL MONTHS WITH NO RESPONSE.
AND THEN AROUND NOVEMBER OF 24, I GOT A NOTICE THAT, UM, THEY WERE READY TO START, UH, INFORMING, UH, YOU AND, UM, THE PEOPLE IN MY COMMUNITY ABOUT THE ZONING CHANGE THAT WAS COMING.
AND I THOUGHT, AWESOME, YOU KNOW, I CAN FINALLY PUT THIS BEHIND ME.
BUT IT'S STILL BEEN, YOU KNOW, THREE OR FOUR MONTHS WAITING AND WAITING AND I'M JUST HEMORRHAGING MONEY.
I'M A FIRST TIME BUSINESS OWNER.
I'VE BEEN AN ELECTRICIAN FOR 30 YEARS.
THIS IS KIND OF A PASSION PROJECT FOR ME.
AND I JUST, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE I CAN DO.
I I, I TRIED TO ACCOMMODATE ALL OF MY NEIGHBORS.
UM, I CAN, CAN, CAN, CAN GIMME A SECOND.
SO THE PERSONAL, WHAT WAS THE PERSONAL SERVICE? THE PERSONAL SERVICE, I GUESS THE, THE TENANT BEFORE I MOVED THERE WAS, UH, I THINK A, A FASHION PLACE OR THEY DID SOME TYPE OF RETAIL.
SO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TOLD YOU TO OPEN UP ANOTHER PERSONAL SERVICE WHILE YOU WERE DOING ANOTHER USE THAT NO, THEY TOLD ME TO DO MY BUSINESS MODEL AS PERSONAL SERVICES WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT I WOULD BE CHANGING THAT.
SO THEY SAID INSTEAD OF WAITING A YEAR TO GET THIS PROCESS COMPLETE, PERHAPS I COULD GENERATE SOME REVENUE UNDER THE PERSONAL SERVICES CO TO TRY AND PAY MY BILLS.
I, I'M SO CONFUSED 'CAUSE I'VE NEVER HEARD HIM SAY THAT, BUT THAT HE NEITHER HEARD NOR ARE.
ARE YOU AWARE THAT, UM, THAT THERE THEY ARE, HE'S, UH, THAT THE, THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES IS UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO ALLOW FOR YOU ALL TO PARK? ABSOLUTELY.
AND IF SO, IF THEY WERE THAT YOU STILL WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH PROPER PROTOCOL WITH SUBMITTING A SH A SHARED A PARKING AGREEMENT THAT GOES THROUGH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE? YES.
AND THIS IS THE STRIP THAT THE BOXING GYM IS ON THE END, A HOTEL QUITE, QUITE CLOSE TO IT, AM I CORRECT? CORRECT, YES.
AND THE WHAT KIND OF COM COMMERCIAL, UH, AMUSEMENT INSIDE IS THIS? UM, I'M WANTING TO OPEN LIKE A MIXED USE, UH, ART AND MUSIC
[05:35:01]
WITH, UH, LIKE, UH, PROJECTION TYPE, UH, UM, AV ART GOING ON.JUST BASICALLY A MIXED USE, UM, ART SPACE.
AND, UH, I, I JUST WANT IT TO BE PRIVATE MEMBERSHIP.
UM, MY, ALL OF THE PATRONS THAT I DID HAVE IN THE FIRST MONTH OR TWO THAT I WAS OPEN, I DID TELL THEM BE VERY MINDFUL OF, OF MY NEIGHBOR BECAUSE HE WAS NOT OKAY WITH US PARKING THERE.
AND MY TENANTS HAVE NOT DONE, OR MY, UH, UH, MY CUSTOMERS HAD, AS FAR AS I KNOW, NOT BEEN PARKING IN HIS SPACE.
YOU, YOU ARE AWARE THAT, THAT THAT HAS NEVER HAD PARKING.
HAVE, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THAT'S NEVER HAD SUFFICE ENOUGH PARKING FOR ANY OTHER SUITES? UM, IT'S, IT'S ALWAYS HAD A LIMITED AMOUNT OF PARKING.
UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER TOLD ME THAT THERE WERE 18 AVAILABLE SPACES FOR THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS ONE HANDICAP SPACE, UM, FOR THE WHOLE PROPERTY.
IS THIS, THIS SOME FOR HIS, FOR HIS PERSONAL PROPERTY THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE HIS FIVE OR 10 OR WHATEVER HE HAS OR THE, BUT IT'S A MULTI SUITE PLACE, AM I CORRECT? IT'S MULTIPLE SUITES.
THERE'S A MULTI SUITE IN THE PROPERTY THAT I RENT FROM AS WELL AS TWO MULTI MULTI SUITES ON EITHER SIDE OR I GUESS HIS IS A SINGLE ON, ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF OURS.
AND THERE'S ANOTHER PROPERTY TO THE EAST THAT'S NOT A PART OF.
AND HOW MANY SQUARE FEET IS YOUR BUILDING? UH, THE ENTIRE PROPERTY OR MY SPACE? NO, JUST YOUR, YOUR SPACE.
MY SPACE IS 2200, I BELIEVE IT'S 75 BY 29 FEET.
AND SO, YOU KNOW THAT JUST ON COMMERCIAL ALONG, JUST ON, UM, PERSONAL SERVICE, IT'S A ONE SPACE FOR EVERY 200 AND THAT YOU ALREADY ARE OVER, IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL SUITES, ONE SPACE PER 200 FEET MM-HMM
SO THAT I NEED 10 SPACES AND THERE'S 18 AVAILABLE AND YOU HAVE OTHER SUITES THAT PROBABLY HAVE THE SAME.
AND SO YOU WOULDN'T EVEN FIT JUST FOR THAT.
I MEAN, I, I, I HAVE A SIGNED AFFIDAVIT FROM THE BOXING ACADEMY NEXT TO ME, AS WELL AS THE, THE TENANT THAT'S NEXT DOOR TO HIM, UM, SAYING THAT THEY'RE COMPLETELY OKAY WITH MY USAGE.
THEY, WE'VE NEVER HAD WITH ACTUAL TENANTS OF THAT PROPERTY, I'VE NEVER HAD ISSUES WITH PARKING OR OVERFLOW.
UM, I THINK THIS GENTLEMAN IS, IS GENUINELY CONCERNED AND HE HAS A RIGHT TO BE, IT'S, IT'S HIS PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN IN HIS FAMILY FOR GENERATIONS.
AND HE JUST, YOU KNOW, SEES PEOPLE PARKING OUT IN HIS, IN HIS PROPERTY, WHICH HAS GOTTA BE FRUSTRATING.
COULD YOU CLARIFY AGAIN, UH, MR. ROGERS, HOW MANY MONTHS HAVE YOU BEEN, UH, OPERATING NOW WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO ACTUALLY CONDUCT YOUR BUSINESS BECAUSE OF THIS ISSUE? I'VE BEEN PAYING THE BILLS SINCE APRIL OF 24 WITH NO BUSINESS HAPPENING.
JUST, JUST A QUICK FOLLOW UP TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.
JUST, UH, COMMISSIONER FORESITE ASKED YOU THE, A QUESTION, I'M NOT SURE YOU ANSWERED HIS QUESTION.
YOU, YOU OPENED AND THEN YOU CLOSED YOUR BUSINESS, CORRECT? YES, YES, YES, SIR.
I, I, I OPENED WITH THE, THE SUPPORT OF THE CITY IN, I WANNA SAY NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER OF 23.
UM, IN APRIL, I BELIEVE OF 24, THE FIRE MARSHAL CAME AND SAID THAT HE WOULD PREFER FOR ME TO GO THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS AT THAT TIME.
SO I SHUT THE DOORS AND I STARTED THE PROCESS AT THAT TIME.
UM, YOU, YOU DID SEND ME, UH, SOME LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM YOUR NEIGHBORS THERE, SIR.
AND I THINK I FORWARDED 'EM ALL, ALL OF OUR COLLEAGUES, IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT, YOU KNOW, TO PUT IT UP ON THE POWERPOINT.
AND, UH, I BELIEVE THAT THEY WERE, UH, FORWARDED THIS MORNING LAST NIGHT.
SO ALL OF US, ALL OF US DO HAVE A COPY OF THAT.
BUT YOU DID PUT THAT TOGETHER.
ACTUALLY, COMMISSIONER WHEELER ASKED ALL MY QUESTIONS.
SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANT? I GOT COMMENT.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN? YES, MR. VICE CHAIR.
UH, UH, WHEN YOUR BUSINESS WAS OPERATIONAL, UH, WHAT WAS THE MAX, UH, PATRON THAT YOU HAD AT, AT ANY ONE TIME? UM, I PROBABLY HAD 40,
[05:40:01]
MAYBE 50 PEOPLE IN, IN THE PROPERTY AT ONE TIME.UM, IT, IT WAS, UH, LIKE AN EVENT THAT WAS JUST LIKE A VIEWING FROM, YOU KNOW, NOON TILL MIDNIGHT.
SO THERE WAS PROBABLY 80 OR A HUNDRED PEOPLE THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE EVENT.
BUT, UM, AT ONE TIME THERE WAS PROBABLY 40, MAYBE 45 PEOPLE.
AND WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY THAT YOU CAN ACCOMMODATE? I WAS NOT GIVEN AN OCCUPANCY UNTIL THIS PROCESS WAS COMPLETED.
I HAVE TO GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR THAT PURPOSE TO DETERMINE THE OCCUPANCY LOAD OR THAT'S WHAT I WAS TOLD.
UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A FOLLOW UP? I, I DO.
I, I REALLY, I REALLY WA WELL TO WORK WITH YOU, BUT, UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT YOU'RE PRESENTING TO THE BODY THAT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TOLD YOU TO OPEN A PERSONAL SERVICE BUSINESS AND, AND THEN APPLY FOR WHAT YOU REALLY WANT? AND, AND THEN WHAT YOU AND, AND THERE'S ONLY 18 SPOTS.
SO FOR EVERY 200 SQUARE FEET, UNLESS THERE'S A, A GRANDFATHER CLAUSE OR A, UM, OR IT'S, WELL DELTA CREDITS, THAT WOULD BE 11 SPACES FOR TWO, FOR 200 PERSONAL SERVICES.
A GRANT, YOU WERE, IT WAS A PREVIOUS USE.
AND THEY CLOSED YOU, DID THEY REVOKE YOUR CO THEY DID NOT, NO, I JUST CHOSE TO CLOSE THE DOORS.
SO THEY DID NOT REVOKE YOUR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.
DID THEY ISSUE YOU ANY TICKETS FOR, FOR THEY DID NOT ILLEGAL LAND USE? THEY, THEY, THEY TOLD ME THAT I WOULD BE SUBJECT TO TICKETING AND FINES IF I DIDN'T BRING THE BUILDING UP TO COMPLIANCE BECAUSE THE BUILDING, I BELIEVE WAS UNDER, UH, IT WAS, IT WAS ACCEPTABLE BY CODE FOR PERSONAL SERVICES.
BUT WHEN I DECIDED TO MAKE THE CHANGE TO COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT, THE BUILDING ITSELF HAS TO BE DIFFERENT.
SO I HAD TO, UM, FOR EXAMPLE, MAKE THE DOORS THAT WERE, UH, EXTERIOR DOORS WERE SWINGING INTO THE PROPERTY, THEY HAVE TO, UH, SWING OUT OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, SO I HAD TO MAKE UPDATES LIKE, LIKE THAT.
UM, ONE OF THE DOORS THAT SWUNG IN HAD BEEN RECESSED DOWN BELOW THE GRADE OF THE OUTSIDE.
SO THERE WAS PROBABLY A FOOT AND A HALF OF DIRT WHEN YOU OPEN THE DOOR.
I HAD TO, UH, BASICALLY RAISE THE DOOR AND, UH, BUILD A RAMP.
UM, THE FIRE, THE FIRE MARSHAL CAME BACK AND LOOKED AT THOSE UPDATES.
I HAD TO ADD SEVERAL BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE OF USE.
UM, SO THEY GAVE ME SEVERAL, UM, ISSUES THAT THEY WANTED TO SEE CHANGED AND RESOLVED.
AND I DID EVERYTHING THAT THEY'VE ASKED.
I'VE TRIED TO GO ABOVE THAT AND, YOU KNOW, DO THINGS THAT I FEEL ARE GONNA HELP MY, UH, MY PATRONS.
I, I ADDED A WHEELCHAIR ACCESSIBLE RAMP, UM, THAT WASN'T THERE JUST BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE I WANT THAT TO BE THERE.
UM, I'VE PAINTED THE ENTIRE CANOPY OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY AS A TENANT, BUT THE CITY WANTED TO SEE THAT.
I PAID FOR LANDSCAPERS TO COME AND, AND KEEP MY LANDSCAPING DOWN BECAUSE THE PROPERTY OWNER DIDN'T CARE TO DO THAT.
I HAVE, UH, STRIPED THE PARKING LOT.
I'VE GOT ASPHALT PUT IN SO THAT YOU CAN, MR. RNI, WE MAY BE GETTING BEYOND THE PURVIEW OF THE INDIVIDUAL ZONING CASE WITH THESE OKAY.
UM, YOU KNOW, CODE COMPLIANCE ISSUES.
DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. NUS? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, SIR.
SO YOUR, UM, PROPOSED USE IS TAKING UP ABOUT A THIRD OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THIS BUILDING.
IS THAT CORRECT? ROUGHLY? 'CAUSE YOU'RE TWO ISH, ROUGHLY, AND IT'S ABOUT 6,000.
UM, BUT YOUR USE ALONE WOULD REQUIRE MORE PARKING THAN THIS ENTIRE BUILDING HAS.
'CAUSE THAT ACCORDING TO THIS, THERE ARE 18 PARKING SPACES ON THE SITE AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE AT ONE PER 100, YOU WOULD NEED MORE THAN 20 PARKING SPACES.
AND I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU DON'T GET CUSTOMERS ARRIVING, UM, ALL BY
[05:45:01]
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ANY.THERE IS PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND WALKING DISTANCE, SIR.
UM, BUT ARE, ARE, WHAT ARE THE HOURS THAT YOUR, YOUR BUSINESS ARE, ARE YOU NIGHTTIME? ARE YOU DAY AND NIGHT? ARE YOU WEEKENDS? I, I WANT TO BE, UH, PRIVATE, PRIVATE MEMBERSHIPS SO THAT WE REALLY WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR WHATEVER HOURS WE DETERMINE WE NEED.
I MEAN, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK MEAN FOR PRIVATE EVENTS.
Y YES, IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE AN ART SHOW AND, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TIME, UH, OR WHAT DAY THOSE ARE GOING TO HAPPEN.
I JUST LIKE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE OUR PRIVATE MEMBERS COME UP.
UM, I MEAN, IF IT'S TWO IN THE AFTERNOON OR 10 AT NIGHT, I, I DON'T KNOW.
I JUST DON'T WANT TO SET HOURS.
SO I, I THINK I TOLD TONY OR, OR, UM, DR.
UDAY LIKE 24 HOURS, SEVEN DAYS.
IF I HAVE TO PUT TIME DOWN, IT WOULD JUST BE ANY TIME.
BUT ARE, ARE THE OTHER BUSINESSES IN THIS BUILDING OPERATING NIGHTS AND WEEKENDS AS WELL? UH, THE, THE GYM THAT'S NEXT DOOR IS OPEN THREE HOURS A DAY FOR FOUR OR FIVE DAYS A WEEK.
HE'S TOLD ME JUST LIKE, AS LONG AS HE DOESN'T HAVE, UH, UH, ISSUES WITH HIS GYM, UH, UH, PATRONS, HE'S NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
I DON'T THINK THAT THE OVERLAP IS GONNA BE REALLY AN ISSUE.
UM, THIS GENTLEMAN IS, IS GONE BY SIX AND, UM, BUT HIS PARKING LOT'S, NOT MOST EVERYBODY IS GONE BY THREE OR FOUR IN THE AFTERNOON.
BUT WHEN YOU WERE HAVING EVENTS, DID YOUR, DID YOUR CLIENTS FILL UP THIS PARKING SPACE? UM, FILL UP THE PARKING LOT? UM, THEY, I THINK THAT, I DON'T THINK THAT MY CUSTOMERS HAVE EVER FILLED IT UP.
I, I'D LIKE TO THINK THAT THEY WOULD AT SOME POINT THAT I'M THAT SUCCESSFUL.
BUT, UH, MY HOPE IS TO WORK OUT A CONTRACT.
OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT GONNA WORK WITH HIM, BUT THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER TENANTS IN THE AREA THAT, UH, I COULD WORK OUT PARKING.
UH, SO YOU THINK THERE'S A REALISTIC CHANCE YOU COULD GET A SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT WITH SOME? ABSOLUTELY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. NUS? QUESTIONS FOR THE GENTLEMAN IN OPPOSITION? I, I JUST HAVE ONE QUICK ONE, MR. STOVALL, IF YOU WANNA COME DOWN.
SO I'VE, I'VE PULLED UP THE SORT OF AERIAL AND ALSO THE STREET VIEW.
OH, THE PICTURES JUST ON MY OWN LAPTOP.
I HAVE, I'M NOT SHARING IT ON A, ON A SCREEN.
SO YOUR BUILDING CONNECTS TO THE BUILDING THAT, THAT HOUSES MRS. WHO WENT TO THE WEST TO TO THE WEST YOU WERE LOOKING AT? TO THE LEFT.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT THERE'S NOT A BARRIER BETWEEN YOUR PARKING LOT AND THE PARKING LOT FOR THAT OTHER.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU DON'T WANNA PUT UP A FENCE BECAUSE IT COST HASSLE, ALL ALL THAT, CORRECT? WELL, THERE'S A CELL PHONE TIRE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF MY PROPERTY.
IT'S USED TO BELONG TO MY DAD, BUT WE SOLD IT, WE SOLD THE RIGHTS TO IT AND THEY GOT AN EASEMENT THAT GOES THROUGH THERE.
ALL, ALL I'M ASKING YOU ABOUT, THERE'S NO BARRIER OR FENCE BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT? NO, NO FENCE.
HAVE YOU TRIED PUTTING UP NO PARKING SIGNS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT TO DETER HIS TENANTS? NO.
I JUST TOLD 'EM I DIDN'T WANT PARKING THERE.
I'VE NEVER HAD TO PUT UP A SIGN TO TELL SOME.
YOU KNOW, USUALLY YOU GO TELL SOMEBODY, I DON'T LIKE YOU PARKING HERE.
I MEAN, DO YOU THINK PEOPLE MIGHT GET CONFUSED THAT THE PARKING LOT BELONGS TO THE ENTIRE, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND BUILDING, PEOPLE THINK IT'S A PARKING LOT.
WE CAN ALL PARK THERE, BUT THEY KNOW.
BUT THERE'S NOTHING OUT THERE COMMUNICATING THAT TO, TO THEY PEOPLE.
THEY KEEP TRYING TO GIMME MONEY.
THANK YOU MR. MR. STOVALL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR, OUR SPEAKERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALRIGHT.
SEEING NONE, CHAIR SHA DID YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
IN A MATTER OF Z 2 3 4 315, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS, AS WELL AS THE FOLLOWING TWO, UH, MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA FOR THE COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE
[05:50:01]
IS 2,200 SQUARE FEET AND MIN AND A MINIMUM OF SEVEN OFF STREET PARKING SPACES MUST BE PROVIDED IN THE LOCATION SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.I HAVE A QUICK COMMENT IF I GET A SECOND THANK YOU CHAIR FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND, YOUR COMMENT? YES, SIR.
UH, WELL, I WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT, MR. STOVALL, FOR COMING DOWN.
UH, AND I GUESS I'LL START OUT BY, YOU KNOW, I, I APPRECIATE THAT THIS CONVERSATION STARTED OUT WITH A HANDSHAKE.
UH, YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE WHEN WE HAVE ISSUES WITH, UH, WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO I APPRECIATE THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE THINGS THAT WE CAN, THAT WE DISAGREE ON.
UH, THIS PROPERTY DOES HAVE A BIT OF A HISTORY AND THEY HAVE NOT ALWAYS HAD, UH, THE, THE KINDS OF TENANTS THAT, UH, I THINK PULL PERMITS.
UH, AND IN FACT, WHEN THE APPLICANT REACHED OUT TO ME, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE, YOU KNOW, WENT AROUND AND WITH THE A HUNDRED QUESTIONS TO KIND SEE EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE.
AND, YOU KNOW, FIRST TIME BUSINESS OWNER AND, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU DID GET ENSNARED IN THE PROCESS A LITTLE BIT.
NOT, NOT ALL OF OUR APPLICANTS CAN AFFORD TO HIRE A CONSULTANT.
AND SO FOR, FOR THIS PART OF TOWN, UNFORTUNATELY, UH, IT HAPPENS, UH, THAT WE HEAR FROM FOLKS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PROCESS, IT GETS A LITTLE STICKY, UH, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW IT WORKS ALL THE TIME.
AND SO WE FOLLOW WHAT SOMEONE SAYS AND WE START THE PATH AND WE SIGN A, A LEASE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU KNOW, SIX MONTHS LATER AND YOU'RE ALMOST HAVING TO START OVER.
UH, SO YOU KNOW, MR. STOVALL, THIS IS A, IT'S A TEMPORARY PERMIT FOR A, A CERTAIN TIME.
UH, IT DOESN'T GO ON IN PERPETUITY.
AND USUALLY WE USE THESE KINDS OF PERMITS TO KIND OF KEEP TRACK OF, OF, UH, OF AN OPERATOR TO MAKE SURE THAT UH, THEY ARE A GOOD NEIGHBOR.
AND I BELIEVE THAT YOUR NEIGHBOR WILL BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, BUT IN ANY CASE, HE'LL BE BACK AT SOME POINT AND WE CAN, UH, REMEASURE AT THAT AT THAT TIME.
BUT I'M SUPPORTED AT THIS TIME.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION BY THE CHAIR.
UH, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT TO APPROVE FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND STATUS, RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS WITH CHANGES TO THE FLOOR AREA AND REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING.
HOW MANY NO'S IS THAT? IT'S TWO.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UH, THE MOTION CARRIED.
UM, ARE WE THROUGH THE ZONING CASES? I THINK THAT WAS IT.
[SUBDIVISION DOCKET - Consent Items]
OKAY.WE'RE AT THE, UH, SUBDIVISION DOCUMENT, CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, COMMISSIONER'S CONSISTENT OF ITEMS 23 THROUGH 40.
ITEMS 35 AND 36 HAVE COME OFF CONSENT.
UH, SO LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THAT THAT LEAVES CASES 23 THROUGH 40, 20, 35 AND 36 WILL BE DISPOSED OF INDIVIDUALLY.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE, UH, THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE OTHER CASES? WE'LL PULL 'EM OFF.
ANY OF THE OTHER CASES? 23 THROUGH 40.
UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, I'LL NOTE THAT I WAS CONTACTED ABOUT CASE 24 AND 25, NOT SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE REPL, BUT QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR PUTTING THAT ON THE RECORD.
UM, UM, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PLEASE.
YES, I WAS CONTACTED ABOUT CASE NUMBER 31.
OH MY, JUST ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON AT THAT PARTICULAR SITE ALSO.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR PUTTING THAT ON THE RECORD.
UH, ANY OTHER DISCLOSURES, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN? ANYONE WANNA SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE CASES? 23 THROUGH 40, 35 AND 36 WILL BE DISPOSED OF INDIVIDUALLY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER.
THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF 16 ITEMS. NOW WILL THAT BE 16, RIGHT? 35 AND 36 ARE COMING OFF.
ITEM 23 S 2 45 DASH 0 4 5, ITEM 24 S 2 45 DASH 0 4 7.
[05:55:01]
ITEM 33 S 2 4 5 DASH 0 58.ITEM 34 S 2 4 5 DASH 0 59, ITEM 37 S 2 45 DASH 0 62, ITEM 38 S 2 45 DASH 0 63, ITEM 39 S 2 45 DASH 0 65, ITEM 40 S 2 45 DASH 0 67.
ALL CASES HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR A HEARING AT THIS TIME.
AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
ANY QUESTIONS ON CASES? UH, 23 THROUGH 34 AND 37 THROUGH 40.
UH, MR. SHAR ON ITEM NUMBER 28.
IS IT CORRECT THAT THAT, UM, LOT IS ALSO WITHIN THE PEAKS EDITION, PEAK SUBURBAN EDITION, HISTORIC DISTRICT ITEM 28? YES MA'AM.
CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION PLEASE? UM, THE, WELL, IT HAS THREE ZONING DISTRICTS, BUT IT'S NOTED AS BEING WITHIN PD 2 98, SUBAR NINE.
IS IT ALSO WITHIN THE PEAKS EDITION? PEAK SUBURBAN EDITION HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND WHAT THE QUESTION IS, IS IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE COMPLIANCE OF THE HISTORIC OVERLAY AS WELL AS THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM, I DIDN'T SEE THAT ON THAT.
IT WAS PD 2298, SUB AREA NINE MF TWO A DISTRICT? CORRECT.
BUT IF IT ALSO HAS A HISTORIC OVERLAY, THE PLAT WOULD BE SUBJECT, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE HISTORIC OVERLAY CONDITIONS AS WELL? IT SHOULD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
MR. CHAIR, IN THE MATTER OF THE SUBDIVISION DOCKET CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASES 23 THROUGH 34 AND 37 THROUGH 40 FOLLOWING STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
AND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[35. 25-348A An application to create one 0.894-acre lot from a tract of land in City Block 6979 and to dedicate right-of-way, on property located on Spruce Valley Lane, south of Pentagon Parkway. Applicant/Owner: Richard Stauffer, City of Dallas Surveyor: Lim & Associates, Inc. Application Filed: December 26, 2024 Zoning: R-7.5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 3 S245-060]
HAVE IT.ITEM 35, AN APPLICATION TO CREATE 1 0 8 9 4 ACRE LOT FROM A TRACK OF LAND IN CITY BLOCK 6 9 7 9.
AND TO DEDICATE A RIGHT OF WAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON SPRUCE VALLEY LANE, SOUTH OF PENTA AND PARKWAY.
STAFF RECOMMEND ALL CONDITIONS HAS BEEN LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND ARE AS AMENDED THE HEARING STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER HERBERT? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, SIR? YES.
UM, I KNOW WE'RE LIMITED ON WHAT WE CAN AND WHAT WE CAN'T DO HERE.
UM, AND I HAD COULDN'T RESEARCH, BUT I NOTICED THAT THESE WERE CITY OWNED PROPERTIES AND WANTED TO KNOW IF WE HAD ANY INSIGHT ON WHY THEY WERE BEING, UM, CONVERTED TO RESIDENTIAL PLA WE COULDN'T HEAR HIM.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, CAN YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION, SIR? WE COULDN'T QUITE HEAR YOU.
UM, THE, THE RESIDENTIAL, THE, THE PLANS BEFORE US, I'M SORRY, ARE, UM, WHAT I THOUGHT WAS CITY ON PROPERTY.
UM, AND I WAS WONDERING IF WE HAD ANY IDEAS ON WHY THESE PROPERTIES, ONE BEING THE BASEBALL FIELD AND IT'S THE NEXT CASE AND WE CAN HOLD THAT.
BUT, UM, WHY THEY'RE BEING, UM, COM UH, REPL THIS TIME STILL STILL NOT THERE? NO, NO.
THE REPRESENTATIVE IS THE CITY OF DALLAS, RIGHT? YES, THAT'S RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT ONE MORE TIME.
DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THEY'RE DOING HERE? OH, THAT, THAT'S A CITY PARK.
IT'LL AND WHY THEY'RE PLANNING IT, WHY THEY'RE PLATING.
UH, IT'S A TRACK OF LAND OR THEY'RE PLANNING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT THERE.
THEY'RE GONNA ADD IT TO THE PARK.
YEAH, MAYBE THAT'S WHAT HE WANTS TO KNOW.
UH, THEY DIDN'T MENTION THAT, BUT THE USE WAS PARKED FOR THAT TRUCK.
MAYBE WE'RE GETTING THE SWIMMING POOL.
UM, THERE'S NO NEED TO DISCUSS THE NEXT CASE.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER, IS IT 'CAUSE THEY NEED FOR RIGHT AWAY.
IS IT, WHAT IS IT? 'CAUSE THEY NEED IT FOR A RIGHT OF AWAY.
[06:00:01]
IT SAYS FOR DEDICATED, IT'S TO BE DEDICATED TO A RIGHT OF WAY OR PROPERLY LOCATED ON SPRUCE VALLEY.SOME PORTION IS GOING TO A RIGHT OF WAY.
SO IS IT AN EXISTING PARK OR ARE THEY PLANNING TO PUT A PARK? IT'S A NEW PARK, BUT THE QUESTION, UH, IS ARE THEY ADDING TO THE EXISTING PARK? WE DIDN'T ASK THAT ONE 'CAUSE IT WAS A TRACK OF LAND.
SO THEY MENTIONED THEY'RE CREATING A PARK ON THAT PORTION OF A LOT.
I'LL REACH OUT TO MY PARK BOARD MEMBER TO SEE WHAT THE VISION IS THERE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER STAFF? SEEING NONE? COMMISSIONER HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? YES.
IN THE SUBDIVISION DOCKET NUMBER 35.
I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND GO WITH STAFF'S APPROVAL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR MOTION.
UH, ANY COMMENTS? SEEING NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[36. 25-349A An application to create one 0.274-acre lot from a tract of land in City Block 8605, on property located on Wheatland Road, east of Mountain Creek Parkway. Applicant/Owner: Richard Stauffer, City of Dallas Surveyor: Lim & Associates, Inc. Application Filed: December 26, 2024 Zoning: R-7.5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 3 S245-061]
ITEM 36.AN APPLICATION TO CREATE ONE 1.338 ACRE LOT.
AN APPLICATION TO CREATE ONE 0.274 ACRE LOT FROM A TRACK OF LAND IN CITY BLOCK 8 6 0 5 ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON WHEATLAND ROAD EAST OF MOUNTAIN CREEK PARKWAY.
ALL THE COMMENTS HAVE BEEN POSTED IN THE HEARING AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? ON THIS ITEM NUMBER 36 COMMISSIONERS.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER HARBERT? UM, AGAIN, YEAH, AGAIN, THIS IS, UH, IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS A PREVIOUS BASEBALL FIELD.
I, I'M NOT SURE WHAT WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING THERE, BUT I'LL, I'LL FIND OUT, I'LL ASK OTHER QUESTIONS TO OTHER DIVISIONS.
THAT WAS ALSO USED REQUESTED FOR THE PARK FROM CITY OF DALLAS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? SHERIFFS? SEEING NONE? DO WE HAVE A MOTION ITEM 41 S TWO FOUR.
WELL, WE, WE DIDN'T HAVE A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, YOU'RE I WAS TALKING DOWN.
IN THE CASE OF NUMBER 36, I MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING IN APPROVE THE, UH, AS, UH, APPROVED AS THE CONDITIONS ARE IN THE DOCUMENT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HARBERT FOR YOUR MOTION.
AND COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[41. 25-354A An application to replat a 0.4596-acre tract of land containing all of Lots 21 and 22 and portion of Lot 20 in City Block F/4815 to create one lot, on property located on Bob O Link Drive, east of Hillside Drive. Applicant/Owner: Jason York & Sarah York Surveyor: RLG Inc. Application Filed: December 27, 2024 Zoning: R-7.5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 9 S245-051]
ITEM 41 S 2 45 DASH 0 51.AN APPLICATION TOLAT A 0.4596 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOTS 21 AND 22 AND A PORTION OF LOT 20 IN CITY BLOCK F OVER 4 81 5 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY.
LOCATED ON BOB OLIN DRIVE EAST OF HILLSIDE DRIVE.
24 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON NOVEMBER 4TH, 2024.
WE HAVE RECEIVED TWO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? 40 41.
ARE WE OH, IS THAT 40 OR 41? THAT'S 41.
UH, COMMISSIONER SLEEPER, DO WE HAVE A QUESTION? COMMISSIONER HAS, RIGHT? YEAH.
I'M JUST WONDERING ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL WHEN WE'RE, WE'RE COMBINING TWO LOTS, IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH.
TWO LOTS AND A PORTION OF A LOT.
AND YOUR EXHIBIT IS TRYING TO SHOW US THAT THAT'S CONSISTENT.
UM, NOT TO ME FOR THE LOG PATTERN.
WELL, YOU IN YOUR, UM, YEAH, ON PAGE 41 OF YOUR REPORT.
[06:05:02]
OKAY.SO YOU'RE GONNA BE OVER 20,000 FEET IF IT'S HALF AN ACRE.
AND SO YOUR, YOUR POINT IS THAT THERE'S A 23 ACROSS THE STREET AND THERE'S A 24 DOWN THE STREET AND A 27 ACROSS THE STREET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MY APOLOGIES NOW.
COMMISSIONER SLEEPER, SIR? YES.
AND UH, THE CASE, UH, S 2 45 DASH OH 51.
UH, I MOVE THAT WE FOLLOW THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER ZEER FOR YOUR MOTION.
ANY DISCUSSION? CNN, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[42. 25-355A An application to replat a 3.015-acre tract of land containing all of Lot 1 in City Block A/5664 and a tract of land in City Block 5579 to create one lot, on property located on Northwest Highway/State Highway Loop No. 12, west of Devonshire Drive. Applicants/Owners: The Compass School of Texas Surveyor: Global Land Surveying, Inc. Application Filed: December 27, 2024 Zoning: PD 1120 Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 13 S245-054]
GO.AN APPLICATION TO REPLIED A 3.015 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT ONE IN CITY BLOCK A OVER 5 6 6 4, AND A TRACK OF LAND IN CITY BLOCK 5 7 5 5 7 9 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON NORTHWEST HIGHWAY THAT IS STATE HIGHWAY LOOP NUMBER 12, WEST OF DEVON SIDE DRIVE.
13 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON NOVEMBER 4TH, 2024.
WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER HALL, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
MR. CHAIR IN THE, IN THE CASE OF S 2 45 0 54, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THIS ITEM SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR, UH, MOTION AND VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.
[43. 25-356A An application to replat a 4.773-acre tract of land containing all of Lot 6A in City Block A/6041 to create one 2.238-acre lot and one 2.536-acre lot, on property located on Ledbetter Drive/State Highway Loop No. 12, east of Boulder Drive. Applicant/Owner: HVP Dallas, LLC Surveyor: Burns Surveying, LLC Application Filed: December 27, 2024 Zoning: R-10(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 3 S245-064]
43 ITEM 43 S 2 45 DASH 0 64.AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT, A 4.773 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT SIX A IN CITY BLOCK.
A OVER 6 0 4 1 TO CREATE ONE 2.238 ACRE LOT AND ONE 2.536 ACRE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON LEDBETTER DRIVE STATE HIGHWAY LOOP NUMBER 1212 EAST OF BOULDER DRIVE.
NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON NOVEMBER 4TH, 2024.
WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND REPLY.
ONE REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER HERBERT IN THE HOT SEAT? ONE MORE MOTION FROM YOU, SIR.
AND
AND THE CASE OF NUMBER, UH, 43.
I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE PLOT AS, UH, RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY COMMENTS OR DISCUSSIONS? SEE NONE.
[44. 25-357A An application to replat a 0.634-acre tract of land containing all of Lot 14A in City Block B/6185 to create two 0.317-acre lot, on property located on Lolita Drive, north of Bruton Road. Applicant/Owner: Marco DeLaCruz, Gloria DeLaCruz Surveyor: CBG Surveying Texas, LLC Application Filed: December 27, 2024 Zoning: R-7.5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 5 S245-066]
ALRIGHT, NUMBER 44, MS. S SHERMA.AND APPLICATION TO REPLY, THE 0.634 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING OLIVE LOT 14 A IN CITY BLOCK B OVER 6, 180 5 TO CREATE TWO 0.317 ACRE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON LTA DRIVE NORTH OF ROAD ROAD.
22 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON DECEMBER 4TH, 2024.
WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE REPLY IN FAVOR AND YOUR REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET ARE AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YOUR MIC IS ON.
DID YOU HAVE A COMMISSIONER SLEEPER? DID YOU? OH, PERFECT.
NO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF CHAIR SHIFT.
IN THE MATTER OF S 2 45 0 66, I MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING FILE STAFF
[06:10:01]
RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.UH, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
[45. 25-358A An application to replat a 15.817-acre tract of land containing all of Lots 1 and 2 in City Block 2/5696 to create one 4.925-acre lot and one 10.892-acre lot and to remove 15-feet platted building line along Lemmon Avenue and Atwell Street and to remove 30-feet building line between Atwell Street and Inwood Road, on property located on Atwell Street at Lemmon Avenue, southeast corner. Applicant/Owner: Jeff Lam, Asbury Dallas POR, LLC Surveyor: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Application Filed: December 26, 2024 Zoning: IR/CS Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 13 S2450-046]
ITEM 45 S 2 4 5 DASH 0 46.AN APPLICATION TOLAT A 15.817 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOTS ONE AND TWO IN CITY BLOCK TWO OVER 5 6 9 6 TO CREATE ONE 4.925 ACRE LOT AND ONE 10.892 ACRE LOT.
AND TO REMOVE 15 FEET PLOTTED BUILDING, LYING ALONG LEMAN AVENUE AND ATWELL STREET.
AND TO REMOVE 30 FEET PLOTTED BUILDING LINE BETWEEN ATWELL STREET AND INWOOD ROAD ON PROPERTY, LOCATED ON ATWELL STREET AT LEHMAN AVENUE SOUTHWEST CORNER.
THIS REQUEST REQUIRES TWO MOTION BECAUSE IT IS TO RELA AND IT INVOLVES THE REMOVAL OF THE PLATTED BUILDING LINE.
THE FIRST MOTION IS TO CARRY, TO APPROVE OR DENY REMOVING 15 FEET PLATTED BUILDING LINE ALONG LAYMAN AVENUE AND ATWELL STREET AND REMOVING 30 FEET BUILDING LINE BETWEEN ATWELL STREET AND INWOOD ROAD.
AND SECOND MOTION IS TO APPROVE OR DENY THE PLAT STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR THE BUILDING LINE AND STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR THE PLAT APPROVAL OF THE PLAT.
ALL DEPENDS ON SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I ONE HERE COMMISSIONER'S.
COMMISSIONER HALL, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
UH, IN THE CASE NUMBER S 2 45 0 46, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST TO REMOVE THE EXISTING 15 FOOT PLATTED BUILDING LINE ALONG LEMON AVENUE AND ATWELL STREET AND TO REMOVE THE EXISTING 30 FOOT BUILDING LINE BETWEEN ATWELL STREET AND INWOOD ROAD.
WITH THE FINDING OF FACT THAT REDUCTION OF THE BUILDING LINE WILL NOT ONE REQUIRE MINIMUM FRONT SIDE OR REAR YARD SET BACK LINE LESS THAN REQUIRED BY THE ZONING REGULATION.
TWO, BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, THREE, ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OR FOUR ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PLAN FOR THE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBDIVISION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR MOTION AND VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE, PLEASE.
IN THE CASE NUMBER S 2 45 0 4 6, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THIS ITEM SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOFF FOR YOUR MOTION.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIRMAN.
COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE WE PICK UP THE, UH, GO TO THE SIDES, LET'S PICK UP THE AUTHORIZED HEARING.
[48. 25-335A A City Plan Commission authorized hearing to determine the proper zoning on property zoned Subarea II in Conservation District No. 8, the North Cliff Conservation District with consideration to be given to appropriate zoning for the area to include but not limited to use, development standards, and other appropriate regulations, generally located along both sides of Pierce Street from Catherine Street on the south to the alley north of Gladstone Drive on the north and containing approximately 5.15 acres. Staff Recommendation: Approval of amendments to Subarea II in Conservation District No. 8, the North Cliff Conservation District. Planner: Megan Wimer, AICP, CBO Council District: 1 Z189-127(MW)]
YOU READY? YES, SIR.AND HEARING ITEM, UH, NUMBER 48, A CITY PLAN COMMISSION, UH, AUTHORIZED HEARING TO DETERMINE THE PROPERTY ZONING ON PROPERTIES ON SUB AREA TWO AND CONSERVATION DISTRICT NUMBER EIGHT, THE NORTH CLIFF CONSERVATION DISTRICT WITH CONSIDERATION TO BE GIVEN TO APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THE AREA TO INCLUDE, BUT NOT LIMITED TO USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND OTHER APPROPRIATE REGULATIONS GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG BOTH SIDES OF PIERCE STREET.
FROM CATHERINE STREET TO THE SOUTH TO THE ALLEY NORTH OF GLADSTONE, DRIVE ON THE NORTH AND CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 5.15 ACRES.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO SUB AREA TWO AND CONSERVATION DISTRICT NUMBER EIGHT, THE NORTH CLIFF CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z 180 9 DASH 1 27.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I ONE HERE COMMISSIONERS.
COMMISSIONER TURNER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
IN THE MATTER OF Z 180 9 DASH 1 27, I MOVE TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGE, SINGLE FAMILY USES ARE PERMITTED ALONG WITH THE NON-RESIDENTIAL USES THAT ARE PART OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON NORTHERN PART PORTION OF CITY BLOCK ONE DASH 3 8 7 8, WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IS CURRENTLY LOCATED.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SHERLOCK FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HARA FOR YOUR SECOND DISCUSSION.
[06:15:01]
I'M EXCITED THAT THIS IS, THIS IS FINALLY HERE.THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME IN THE MAKING.
UH, MOST OF THE PLAN COMMISSIONERS KNOW THAT WE, THIS IS OUR THIRD OF FIVE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS FOR OUR DISTRICT.
BUT I'LL JUST QUICKLY SPEAK ON THAT TO OUR TWO NEW PLAN COMMISSIONERS.
UM, THE DISTRICT PAST, UH, PRECLUDING THE FIVE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS.
THE DISTRICT PASSED OCAP, WHICH IS THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN, UH, WITH THE INTENT THAT THESE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS WOULD FOLLOW THE VISION THAT THE COMMUNITY SET OUT IN THE WEST OAK CLIFF AREA PLAN.
THIS IS THE THIRD THAT WE'VE SEEN.
UM, THE, THIS PARTICULAR, UM, AREA IS GOING TO SEE A, A BUNCH OF NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS.
IT'S GOING TO TAKE 15 HOMES AND RECOGNIZE THEM AS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WHERE CURRENT BEFORE THIS THEY, OR CURRENTLY THEY ARE ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.
THIS SOLVES SOME PARKING CHALLENGES FOR THE SMALL COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THAT ARE THERE.
THOSE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN VACANT FOR DECADES.
AND, UM, THERE ARE SEVERAL CHALLENGES THAT THEY FACE.
PARKING IS, IS ONE OF THE, UH, MAJOR ONES.
UH, THIS IS ALSO ADDING ADUS, WHICH IS EXCITING.
THIS IS THE THIRD, OR EXCUSE, EXCUSE ME, THE SECOND, UM, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WILL NOW HAVE ADUS.
UM, AND IT ALSO REMOVES SOME UNWANTED USES LIKE BATCH PLANTS AND FUELING STATIONS AND ADDS SOME USES THAT ARE NEEDED, LIKE RESTAURANTS, FOOD STORE ART GALLERIES.
UM, I'VE MADE A SLIGHT CHANGE FROM THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE THERE IS ONE PARTICULAR LOT THAT IS, GOT SOME COMPLEXITY AND IT CURRENTLY HAS RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE ON IT.
AND IF WE FOLLOWED STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WE WOULD BE TAKING THE COMMERCIAL RIGHTS AWAY FROM THAT PARTICULAR LOT, WHICH WOULD POTENTIALLY CREATE AN ISSUE FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE SUCH THAT AN, AN APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO DO A ZONING CHANGE BACK TO THE COMMERCIAL.
AND ON THAT PARTICULAR LOT, WE HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE, PROPERTY BOUNDARIES, PLAT BOUNDARIES THAT ALL DO NOT LINE UP.
AND HAD WE PASSED IT WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WE WOULD THEN HAVE ZONING BOUNDARIES THAT DIDN'T LINE UP.
SO ALL I DID WAS TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL.
UM, YEAH, I, I JUST THINK THERE'S A LOT TO LIKE HERE AND COMMEND, UM, COMMISSIONER TURNOCK AND OTHERS FOR THE HARD WORK ON THIS.
UM, YOU KNOW, PRESERVING THE EXISTING FABRIC OF THAT DISTRICT, UH, REVITALIZING COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, UH, PARKING RELIEF, UH, WHICH IS, UH, UH, GETS AT WHAT WE WERE WORKING ON A WEEK AGO TODAY.
AND, UM, THEN THE EMBRACING ADUS FOR WHAT THEY CAN DO TO STABILIZE THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO A LOT, A LOT OF GOOD THINGS THERE.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[Items 46 & 47]
COMMISSIONERS, UH, DO WE HAVE A REQUEST TO BRIEF, UH, EITHER OF THESE TWO CASES? DOES ANYBODY WANT REQUEST A BRIEFING? ABSOLUTELY.WE GOT, UH, NUMBER 4 6 2 5 3 5 9 A.
AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY JOSEPHINE GONZALEZ OF PATTERSON SIGN ID FOR AN 82.2 SQUARE FOOT.
LED ILLUMINATED MIDDLE LEVEL, FLAT ATTACHED SIGN AT SEVEN 50 NORTH ST.
PAUL STREET, NORTHWEST ELEVATION.
THE CA NUMBER FOR THIS IS 2 4 1 0 2 8 0 0 1 9.
AND WE HAVE NUMBER 47, WHICH IS 2 5 3 6 0 A.
AN APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY JOSEPHINE GONZALEZ OF PATTISON.
SIGN ID FOR A 107.3 SQUARE FOOT.
LED ILLUMINATED UPPER LEVEL, FLAT ATTACHED CHANNEL LETTER SIGN AT 2100 ROSS AVENUE,
[06:20:01]
SUITE 1900 NORTHWEST ELEVATION.CA NUMBER IS 2 4 1 0 2 9 0 1 1.
IS IS, UH, MR. BROWN ONLINE? JORGE, RICHARD, RICHARD BROWN, NOT ONLINE.
SO, UH, SO HE WAS A REGISTERED SPEAKER FOR BOTH OF THESE.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS ON 46 OR 47? SCENE NONE.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A IN MATTERS? 2 4 1 0 2 8 0 0 9 AND MATTER 2 4 1 0 2 9 0 0 1 1.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KING FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
COURT K ARE THE, UH, THE LANDMARK APPEAL FOLKS, ONLINE COMMISSIONERS? WE, WE DO HAVE PIZZA IN THE BACK.
YOU WANT, YOU GUYS WANT TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTE, GO GET IT AND START ON THE LANDMARK? OR YOU WANT TO POWER THROUGH? WE HAVE VOTES TO POWER THROUGH, SO WE WILL POWER THROUGH.
JORGE, WHO, WHO ELSE HAS LEFT ONLINE? WE HAVE THE, IS UH, DID YOU SAY MR. HOWARD IS ALL ONLINE? YES.
UH, IS ANYONE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ONLINE? OKAY, LOOKS LIKE WE ARE GONNA TAKE THAT FIVE MINUTE PIZZA BREAK.
LET'S TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK AND GO GET OUR PIZZA AND WE'LL COME RIGHT BACK.
COMMISSIONERS, UH, 5:46 PM WE'RE READY TO GET BACK ON THE RECORD.
DO WE NEED TO READ THAT INTO THE RECORD PLEASE?
[49. 25-361A An appeal of the Landmark Commission’s decision of denial without prejudice to install wood fence in front yard. Staff Recommendation: Deny without prejudice. Landmark Commission Recommendation: Deny without prejudice. Planner: Christina Paress Council District: 7 Location: 718 Glendale St. CA245-008(CP)]
ITEM 49 IS AN APPEAL OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION OF DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO INSTALL A WOOD FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD.STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, DECISION WAS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
THIS IS AN APPEAL OF THE APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OR APPROPRIATENESS, WHICH WAS DENIED BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AT ITS HEARING ON OCTOBER 7TH, 2024.
THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS REFLECTED IN ITS OFFICIAL MINUTES, WHICH ARE PART OF THE RECORD FOR THIS APPEAL.
THE APPELLANT IS REPRESENTED BY MR. HOWARD, UH, AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT, UH, CITY ATTORNEY RYAN CROCKER.
UH, AT THIS TIME WE'LL SWEAR IN THE SPEAKERS.
IF YOU COULD STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
UH, DO YOU SWEAR AND AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THE COMMISSION? PLEASE ANSWER.
ANY COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MEMBERS PENDING THIS APPEAL HAVE BEEN COLLECTED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SECRETARY AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PARTIES FOR INSPECTION.
IF ANY PLAN COMMISSIONER HAS RECEIVED ANY COMMUNICATION ON THIS MATTER, PLEASE DISCLOSE IT FOR THE RECORD NOW.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION HAS RECEIVED AND REVIEWED THE RECORD OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND EACH PARTY'S BRIEF ON THE APPEAL.
[06:25:02]
IF THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY HEAR NEW TESTIMONY AND CONSIDER NEW EVIDENCE ONLY TO DETERMINE IF THAT TESTIMONY OR EVIDENCE WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.DOES EITHER PARTY HAVE ANY NEW EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY TO SUBMIT TO THE COMMISSION TODAY? NO, I DON'T, I DON'T BELIEVE, BUT I HAVE IS COUNTS NEW EVIDENCE.
UH, I, BASED ON THE BRIEFING THAT I REVIEWED IN PREPARATION FOR THIS HEARING, I THINK THAT THERE WAS SOME NEW, UH, WAS GONNA BE SOME NEW ARGUMENTS OR NEW TESTIMONY BY THE HOMEOWNERS WITH RESPECT TO THE REASON FOR THE PROPOSED WORK, BUT I COULD BE MISTAKEN.
LET'S
UH, SO YEAH, MAY, MAYBE THAT DOES COUNT AS NEW TESTIMONY.
I DON'T, I'VE TRIED TO LEARN AS MUCH ABOUT THIS PROCEDURE AS I COULD OVER THE PAST WEEK.
SO ONE, ANY, ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE THE PARTIES WISH TO PROVIDE TODAY SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SECRETARY.
IF ANY NEW TESTIMONY IS TO BE PRESENTED THIS, THE WITNESS, UH, THE WITNESSES MUST BE SWORN IN BEFORE TESTIFYING, WHICH WE'VE ALREADY DONE.
IF THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION DETERMINES THAT NEW TESTIMONY OR NEW EVIDENCE EXISTS THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE, AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SHALL REMAND THE CASE BACK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
PLEASE TELL THE COMMISSION THE NATURE OF THE EVIDENCE YOU WISH TO ADMIT AND EXPLAIN WHY IT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING.
UM, SO, WELL, THE ISSUE WAS THAT, UM, WHEN WE SUBMITTED THE, THE REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL, UM, WE WERE WORKING WITH OUR, UH, ARCHITECT AND BASICALLY HER COUNSEL TO US WAS, HER ADVICE TO US WAS LIKE, WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS REALLY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
UM, IT, IT, IT, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT.
SO WE LET HER GO IN OUR STEAD.
SO THERE WERE SEVERAL QUESTIONS IN THE TRANSCRIPT THAT I SAW THAT, THAT SHE WAS ASK, THAT SHE WAS NOT ABLE TO ANSWER.
'CAUSE SHE DIDN'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO, UM, SHE DID NOT KNOW A LOT OF OUR REASONING BEHIND WHY WE WANTED CERTAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF THIS STENT EXTENDED, UH, AND WAS NOT ABLE TO SPEAK TO THOSE AT THE TIME.
SO THAT IS, THAT IS THE REASON WHY THAT, THAT THAT EVIDENCE WASN'T THERE.
IT'S, UM, AND SO, SO MR. HOWARD, AT, AT THIS POINT, UH, THIS BODY HAS TO DETERMINE IF THE EVIDENCE, UH, OR THE, OR THE TESTIMONY WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING.
AND, UH, AND SO WE HAVE TO HEAR FROM YOU A, I GUESS, A COMPELLING CASE OF WHY THAT IS OR THAT IT IS NOT.
UH, DO YOU NEED TO HEAR A CASE OF WHY THE TESTIMONY WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING? THAT'S CORRECT.
AND, AND BY THE WAY, YOU MAY, YOU COULD SAY THAT THERE WAS NOT, AND THAT'S, THAT MAY NOT BE THE BASIS OF WHAT YOU WANT TO DISCUSS HERE TODAY, BUT AT THIS POINT OF OUR PROCESS, THAT'S, THAT'S THE, THAT'S HOW WE BEGIN IS, YOU KNOW, BY ASKING ARE, IS THERE ANY NEW EVIDENCE, UH, THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THAT TIME? OKAY.
YEAH, I, I, I APOLOGIZE FOR, UH, MY LACK OF KNOWING WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
UM, I, UH, I HAVE A STATEMENT THAT I'VE WORKED ON THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE.
[06:30:01]
QUALIFIES AS NEW EVIDENCE OR NOT? UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING PARTICULARLY NOVEL EXCEPT JUST KIND OF COMPARED TO WHAT I READ IN THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HEARING.THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED OF OUR REPRESENTATIVE THAT SHE WAS NOT ABLE TO ANSWER.
SO IF MY, MY ANSWERS OR IF WHAT I SAY WERE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS THAT WASN'T, THEN THAT WOULD COUNT AS NEW TESTIMONY.
SO I JUST, I JUST WANT TO, I DON'T WANNA, I DON'T WANNA SAY THE WRONG THING AND GET MYSELF INTO TROUBLE.
I JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO MAKE MY CASE HERE.
UM, AND SO I'M REALLY, I REALLY SORRY FOR THE WAY THIS IS ALREADY GOING.
UM, I, I JUST TELL YOU, COMMISSIONER HEMP, THIS MAY BE A CLARIFICATION QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.
IN READING THE TRANSCRIPT, AS NOTED, THERE WERE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED BY LANDMARK COMMISSIONERS TO THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE THAT I BELIEVE THE, UM, MR. HOWARD WANTS TO INCLUDE IF THEY ARE INCLUDED IN THE TRANSCRIPT THAT WAS PROVI OR THE RECORD THAT THE, THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO US, DOES THAT STILL CONSTITUTE NEW TESTIMONY? THE NEW TESTIMONY ISN'T ALLOWED DURING THESE PROCEEDINGS.
ONLY AT THIS POINT CAN HE EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT NEW EVIDENCE HE MIGHT HAVE, BUT HE HAS TO SHOW YOU TO YOUR SATISFACTION THAT THAT EVIDENCE WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO HIM RIGHT AT THE TIME OF THE LANDMARK HEARING.
AND SO RIGHT NOW IS THE TIME TO MAKE THAT DECISION OF WHETHER THIS BODY THINKS IT WAS NOT AVAILABLE.
SO THEN YOU REMAND TO LANDMARK.
BUT IF YOU THINK IT WAS AVAILABLE, BUT IT WAS JUST AN ARGUMENT THAT WASN'T MADE THE DAY OF THE LANDMARK HEARING, THEN WE GO AHEAD AND PROCEED AND WITH THE INSTRUCTION THAT THAT TESTIMONY CAN'T BE HEARD TODAY.
AND I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE MR. HOWARD MAYBE A LITTLE MORE CONTEXT 'CAUSE I THINK HE'S TRYING TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
UH, VICE CHAIR RUBIN, IT LOOKS LIKE MR. HOWARD MAY HAVE SOME INPUT ON WHETHER THAT INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE TO HIM AT THE TIME OF THE LANDMARK HEARING, ALTHOUGH IT DIDN'T MAKE IT INTO THE RECORD.
SO IF HE MAY WANNA FILL US IN ON HIS THOUGHTS THERE.
SO THANK, THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
UH, SOME OF THIS CLARIFICATION, SADLY, ALL OF THIS INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE TO ME.
I WAS JUST NOT AVAILABLE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO PROVIDE IT.
SO IF IT WAS AVAILABLE TO ME AT THE TIME, THEN I GUESS IT DOESN'T COUNT.
UM, MR. CHAIR, I THINK I'M, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION ABLE TO MAKE A OKAY.
A MOTION THAT THE CPC IN THIS INSTANCE SHOULD NOT CONSIDER NEW EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT WAS AVAILABLE TO THE APPLICANT AT THE TIME OF THE LANDMARK.
THANK YOU, MR. TRUVIN, FOR YOUR MOTION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND, UH, ANY DISCUSSION? SEE, NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT.
UH, BOTH SIDES HAVE PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED A COPY OF THE PROCEDURE, SO WE WILL FOLLOW TODAY.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION WILL NOW HEAR AND CONSIDER TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE CONCERNING THE PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIONS OF THE CITY STAFF AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND ITS TASK FORCE.
EACH SIDE WILL BE ALLOWED 20 MINUTES FOR ITS PRESENTATION, AND THE APPELLANT WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL PRESENTATIONS WILL BE MADE BY THE APPELLANT AND COUNSEL FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION ONLY.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY ASK QUESTIONS AFTER THE PRESENTATIONS.
TIME TAKING TAKEN BY THE QUESTIONS WILL NOT BE DEDUCTED FROM THE TIME ALLOTTED.
EACH COMMISSIONER WILL BE ALLOWED FIVE MINUTES TO ASK QUESTIONS DURING THE FIRST ROUND.
BE AWARE THAT THOSE FIVE MINUTES INCLUDE ANSWERS, THREE MINUTES WILL BE ALLOTTED FOR A SECOND ROUND IF NEEDED.
THESE ALSO INCLUDE THE ANSWERS.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION SECRETARY WILL KEEP TRACK OF THE TIME.
IF A PARTY REQUIRES ADDITIONAL TIME TO PRESENT ITS CASE, THE PARTY SHALL REQUEST THAT ADDITIONAL TIME BE GRANTED BY THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
IF THE COMMISSION GRANTS ONE PARTY ADDITIONAL TIME, THE OPPOSING PARTY SHALL ALSO BE GRANTED AN EQUAL TIME EXTENSION.
DO THE PARTIES HAVE PRE PRELIMINARY MATTERS TO RAISE AT THIS TIME? OKAY, THEN WE WILL, UH, IF NOT, THEN WE WILL NOW HEAR THE APPELLANT'S CASE FOR UP TO 20 MINUTES.
[06:35:03]
OKAY.SO I AM, I'M HERE TO APPEAL THIS, UH, THE RECOMMENDATION OR THE DECISION TO DENY WITH WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
THE CERTIFICATE OF OF APPROPRIATENESS.
THIS WAS A REQUEST TO EXTEND MY FENCE, UH, SHOWN HERE, THE BLUE LINE IS THE FENCE AS WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED.
THE RED LINES IS ARE AS WHAT'S IN THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REQUEST.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE LITTLE BIT THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
UM, I'M REQUESTING THIS NOT BECAUSE I LOVE FENCES, NOT BECAUSE I REALLY, I DON'T WANNA LIVE INSIDE OF A FORTRESS.
THAT'S, UM, WHAT I DO WANT IS TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM JUST WANDERING INTO MY BACKYARD AND SNOOPING AROUND MY DETACHED GARAGE, WHICH HAS HAPPENED.
I WANT TO PREVENT, I WANT TO HAVE A WALL OF SEPARATION BETWEEN MY HOUSE, THIS, UH, MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE NEXT DOOR, WHICH IS A RENTAL PROPERTY CURRENTLY VACANT.
BUT, UH, THE LAST TENANT I HAD TO CALL THE POLICE ON 'CAUSE THEY CAME OUT OF THE HOUSE AND WERE SCREAMING AND THROWING THINGS AND NAKED.
UM, SO I NEED THAT SECURITY FOR MY FAMILY.
WHEN IT WAS TIME TO BUILD THE FENCE, UH, THE APPROVAL LINE WAS RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THESE WINDOWS.
I WENT AHEAD AND BUILT IT TO COVER THE WINDOWS OVER, UM, HOPING THAT I COULD GET THIS APPROVED RETROSPECTIVELY, RETROACTIVELY.
UM, THE REASON I KNOWING THIS IS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, WILL APPROVE FENCES THAT ARE BEHIND THE FIVE, UH, THAT ARE FIVE FEET BEHIND THE FRONT PORCH OF THE HOUSE.
AND THAT WOULD BE THE ORANGE LINE ON THIS.
UH, MY, MY FENCE IS MUCH FURTHER BACK THAN, THAN THE HOUSE.
UM, SO HERE ALSO YOU CAN SEE THAT FIVE FOOT LINE, UM, AND THEN THE ORIGINAL FENCE THERE.
UM, IF FOR SOME REASON WE MEASURE FROM THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR, IT'S THE SAME.
UM, ON THE OTHER SIDE, WE HAVE THE ORIGINAL FENCE STILL IN PLACE.
I WANNA TEAR THE ORIGINAL FENCE OUT AND JUST REPLACED THAT SECTION THAT IS, UH, HIGHLIGHTED IN RED.
UM, THAT IS ALSO UP TO ABOUT THE FIVE FOOT LINE.
IT COVERS THESE BEDROOM WINDOWS AND MY NEIGHBOR'S, UH, SAME SIZE LIVING ROOM WINDOWS.
I THINK THE OTHER, THE OTHER BIT OF THE CODE THAT TALKS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS SHOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OF THE OVERLAY.
UM, THIS IS WHAT THE HOUSE LOOKS LIKE NOW.
UH, YOU CAN'T SEE THE FENCE, UH, FROM THE STREET.
NOBODY NOTICES THAT IT'S THERE UNLESS YOU GET REAL CLOSE AND GO LOOKING FOR IT.
UM, IN TERMS OF THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THIS WAS ALL IN THE ORIGINAL LANDMARK PRESENTATION.
UM, HERE'S MY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.
THEY HAVE A FENCE THAT GOES RIGHT UP TO THE FRONT.
UM, HERE'S THEIR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR.
THAT FENCE GOES RIGHT UP TO THE FRONT.
HERE'S THIS HOUSE, UH, THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR TO THEM.
THAT FENCE IS UP AT THE FRONT.
UM, THIS ONE WAS RELATIVELY NEW FROM A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, I BELIEVE.
SO, UM, I PREPARED THIS THINKING THAT I HAD THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK INSTEAD OF 20
SO, UH, ALL I'M ASKING IS WHAT I BELIEVE IS THE BARE MINIMUM TO PROVIDE A SAFE HOME FOR MY FAMILY TO TAKE CARE OF THE CHARACTER OF THE HOME AS IT IS.
UM, AND I BELIEVE WHAT I'M ASKING FOR FITS WITHIN THE JUNIOR HEIGHTS PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
SO MY REQUEST IS THAT YOU OVERTURN LANDMARK'S.
DENIAL OF MY CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS WITH A REMINDER THAT EACH COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS WITH THE ANSWERS ARE LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
UM, I WERE YOU, WELL, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE GENIUS HEIGHTS ORDINANCE LIMITS THE SIDE YARD FRONTS FENCES TO THE 50% OF THE HOUSE THAT'S AT ORANGE LINE THAT YOU SHOWED ESSENTIALLY MID WINDOW AND, AND NOT OBSCURING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES? IS IT CORRECT.
I I THINK I READ THIS IN THE TRANSCRIPT THAT THAT WAS YOUR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE APPROVAL THAT YOU HAD GOTTEN FROM STAFF.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT ORIGINAL APPROVAL UP TO THE 15% LINE WAS PART OF ANOTHER CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS THAT WE HAD RECEIVED EARLIER FOR A LOT OF OTHER WORK, INCLUDING REBUILDING THE GARAGE IN THE BACK AND SOME BACKYARD LANDSCAPING WORK, AND ALSO REPLACING THE BACKYARD FENCE.
AND SO THEN WHEN YOU, THE, THE CURRENT REQUEST THAT IS BEFORE US IS, IS REALLY JUST THE, FROM THE 50% LINE TO WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT YOU PRESENTED TO LANDMARK WAS FIVE FEET BEHIND THE FRONT PORCH? YES.
BUT THAT'S A, THAT WOULD, THAT, UM, WAS NOT APPROVED BY LANDMARK COMMISSION.
[06:40:01]
WHILE IT MAY HAVE BEEN IN OTHER CASES, THAT IS NOT WITHIN THE LANGUAGE OF THE ORDINANCE, IS THAT CORRECT? THE LANGUAGE, THE ORDINANCE DOES ACTUALLY SAY THAT LANDMARK CAN APPROVE, UM, UH, UP TO, UH, IF FOR, FOR MORE SECURITY AND PRIVACY UP TO FIVE FEET BEHIND THE OPEN FRONT PORCH OF THE HOUSE MAKING THE REQUEST THAT'S IN THE ORDINANCE.I, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IN THIS CASE, AS IT WAS SUBMITTED, THEY DID NOT APPROVE THAT, THAT VARIANCE.
WELL, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE POINTING OUT THAT THERE'S AN ALLOWED EXCEPTION WHERE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION MAY APPLY A VARIANCE.
HOWEVER, THEY DID NOT DO THAT IN THIS CASE.
AND I BELIEVE ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS ACTUALLY IN THEIR COMMENTS, WHICH YOU MAY HAVE SEEN, SUGGESTED THAT YOU MIGHT REVISE YOUR APPLICATION AND RETURN TO LANDMARK COMMISSION.
IS THAT CORRECT? I'M, I'M SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT, TRYING TO GET A PAGE NUMBER FOR YOU.
I THINK IT WAS PAGE, UH, 15 IN THE TRANSCRIPT TOWARDS THE VERY END OF THE MEETING.
I HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, BUT THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, I DON'T KNOW WHO TO ASK THIS OF, BUT WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT OF LANDMARK'S RECOMMENDATION TO COME BACK? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS SERVED BY THAT'D BE STAFF QUESTION.
WHY, WHY WOULD LANDMARK ASK THEM TO COME BACK WHEN THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DEAL WITH THE CASE RIGHT THEN? OKAY.
I'M C BEING ADVISED, UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.
THAT, THAT WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR THAT.
BUT PLEASE HOLD YOUR QUESTION AND HOLD YOUR ANSWER.
WE, WE DO HAVE TO GET TO THAT, UH, UH, QUESTIONS FOR, UH, THE APPELLANT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, PLEASE BOTH SIDES OF YOUR REQUEST.
THE FENCE WOULD BE AT LEAST FIVE FEET BEHIND WHERE THE PORCH STARTS.
NOT, NOT THE FRONT OF THE PORCH.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPELLATE COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER HAUSER, PLEASE.
CAN I JUST MAKE A COMPLIMENT TO WHAT A BEAUTIFUL HOME, WHAT A WONDERFUL JOB.
THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT IN OUR CITY.
I'M REALLY IMPRESSED WITH THE PHOTOGRAPHS.
COULD YOU PUT YOUR PRESENTATION BACK UP? BECAUSE I THINK ONE OF YOUR PHOTOS THAT YOU HAD WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS ON THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE THAT WAS PART OF LANDMARK'S CONSIDERATION.
AND IT'S WHERE THERE'S, THE FENCE IS SHOWN WITH THE BRACKET AT YOUR DRIVEWAY, I BELIEVE THIS ONE HERE, UH, IT'S THE ONE THAT ACTUALLY SHOWS THE FENCE CLOSED.
THE FENCE IS ESSENTIALLY IN CONFLICT WITH THE BRACKET.
THAT'S PART OF THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OF THE HOUSE WHERE YOU COULD SEE IT IF YOU ZOOM IN BACK THERE.
THE, THE, THE ONE WITH THE YEAH, THE, WITH THE CORBEL, UM, ON IT.
SO, AND THAT WAS, THAT WAS PART OF LANDMARK'S, I THINK, UM, COMMENTS AS THEY WERE REVIEWING IT WITH YOUR ARCHITECT, IS THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE FENCE WAS CONFLICTING WITH ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OF THE HOUSE, BECAUSE YOU COULD SEE A FENCE BEHIND THE CORD WALL INSTEAD OF BELOW THE CORD WALL.
I MEAN, AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO INTERPRET LANDMARK COMMISSION, BUT THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD, THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT SURE.
AND I THINK WHAT I HAD READ IN THE DISCUSSION WAS PERHAPS A LOWER HEIGHT OR OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, UM, MIGHT BE SOMETHING.
AND I THINK YOU HAVE A SECOND YELLOW ORANGE LINE.
COULD YOU TELL ME WHAT THAT LINE REPRESENTS? UM, DOWN ON THE GROUND, NOT THE ONE IN FRONT, THE ONE THAT'S ESSENTIALLY A LOWER FENCE HEIGHT IS WHAT IT APPEARS TO BE.
IS THAT WHAT THAT WAS REPRESENTING? YOU KNOW, UM, I'M NOT SURE.
THIS WAS, THIS WAS, THIS WAS THE PACKET OF PHOTOS THAT, THAT MY ARCHITECT PRESENTED TO LANDMARK.
SO I SUPPOSE, UM, THAT, THAT WAS OKAY.
I'LL, I'LL FOLLOW UP WITH STAFF ON THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. HOWARD? OKAY.
UH, WE'LL NOW HEAR FROM THE LANDMARK COMMISSIONS CASE.
IT'S RYAN CROCKER ON BEHALF OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
AND JUST BEFORE I GET STARTED, I WANTED TO REM REMEMBER TO ADDRESS THIS, UM, ACTUALLY ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE DIAGRAM THAT HE PUT UP ON THE SCREEN A MINUTE AGO, UH,
[06:45:01]
IT WOULD'VE BEEN THE SOUTHEAST SIDE OF THE HOUSE, THE OPEN DRIVEWAY SIDE.UH, THAT FENCE PROPOSED FENCE WOULD EXTEND INTO THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK THAT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON ASKED ABOUT, UH, SLIGHTLY, I THINK IT'S COMES IN ABOUT A HALF A FOOT OR A FOOT INTO THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK BEHIND THE BACK OF THE PORCH OF THE HOUSE REQUESTING THE FENCE.
SO, UM, BASICALLY JUST IN A NUTSHELL, I'M, UH, HERE TO ASK FOR THE COMMISSION TO AFFIRM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WHICH GIVES THE HOMEOWNER AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE ANY NEW ARGUMENTS AND REASONS HE MAY HAVE FOR THE PROPOSED WORK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IT MAY MAKE SENSE FOR HIM TO GO BACK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
UM, SO NOTHING'S PREVENTING HIM IF YOU, IF THIS BODY WERE TO AFFIRM NOTHING WOULD PREVENT HIM FROM GOING BACK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND MAKING THOSE NEW ARGUMENTS.
UM, BUT AS IT STANDS, AND BASED ON THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, THERE'S MORE THAN SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD TO SUPPORT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION HERE, BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE PRESERVATION CRITERIA IN THE JUNIOR HEIGHTS OVERLAY DISTRICT ORDINANCE, THE ENABLING ORDINANCE THAT CREATED THE DISTRICT, UH, ONE OF THE PRESERVATION CRITERIA IS BASICALLY THAT IT CAN'T CONFLICT WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES.
YOU'VE HEARD, UH, CONCERNS FROM, I THINK COMMISSIONER MONTGOMERY HAD CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THE FENCE THAT WAS BUILT WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THAT L-SHAPED FENCE THAT CLOSES IN ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING, CLOSES IN THE DINING ROOM, THAT THAT INTERACTS AWKWARDLY WITH THE BRACKET.
AND YOU'VE SEEN THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS, UH, THAT WAS VOICED IN THE HEARING BY THE COMMISSIONERS.
THE OTHER ASPECT IS THAT THE, THE, UH, PRESERVATION CRITERIA SAYS THAT THERE CAN'T BE A FENCE IN THE FRONT HALF OF THE SIDE YARD.
AND A FENCE IN AN INTERIOR SIDE YARD CAN'T BE FURTHER THAN, UH, 50%.
SO IT CAN'T BE IN THE FRONT HALF OF THE SIDE YARD.
AND UNLESS, UNLESS THE COMMISSION APPROVES IT AS A VARIANCE, THEY HAVE DISCRETION TO DO THAT, BUT ONLY UP TO FIVE FEET BEHIND THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, BASICALLY.
SO THIS CASE, WE HAVE NOT ONLY A FENCE PROPOSED IN THE FRONT HALF OF THE SIDE YARD, BUT ALSO IN THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK.
THE WAY I READ IT, UH, THIS IS PRESERVATION CRITERIA IS 3.6 A TWO.
SO IT SAYS, FENCES AND INTERIOR SIDE YARDS MUST BE LOCATED IN THE REAR 50% OF THE SIDE YARD AND BEHIND THE OPEN FRONT PORCH OF AN ADJACENT HOUSE.
IF MORE SCREENINGS REQUIRED FOR ADDITIONAL SECURITY OR PRIVACY, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION MAY, IN ITS DISCRETION, ALLOW THE FENCE, UH, TO EXIST TO COME FORWARD OF THAT 50% MARK, AS LONG AS IT'S BEHIND THE PORCH, FIVE FEET BEHIND THE PORCH OF THE HOUSE REQUESTING THE FENCE.
SO THAT THAT ONE'S NON-NEGOTIABLE.
THE FIVE FEET SETBACK BEHIND THE THING IS NON-NEGOTIABLE.
SO THAT'S, UH, THAT PRE THOSE, THOSE TWO PRESERVATION CRITERIA IN THE JUNIOR SITES ORDINANCE ARE, UH, NOT MET.
THIS, THIS PROPOSED WORK'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THOSE.
AND AS, AS THE, THIS COMMISSION'S AWARE, THIS, THE STANDARD OF REVIEW IN THIS PARTICULAR APPEAL IS HIGHLY DEFERENTIAL TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
YOU KNOW, PRESUMABLY BECAUSE THEY'RE THE EXPERTS ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND THEY'RE TASKED WITH, THEY HAVE BROAD DISCRETION TO MAKE THOSE DETERMINATIONS.
AND SO THIS IS A SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE APPEAL.
SO, UH, ANY EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, YOU KNOW, BEYOND AM MESILLA, AND WE CAN DEFINE MESILLA, BUT YOU GUYS PROBABLY KNOW MESILLA, BUT THAT ANYTHING BEYOND
AND AGAIN, IT'S A, IT'S AN AFFIRM, IT'S AN AFFIRMANCE OF A DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO THEY CAN GO BACK AND DO THAT.
UM, AT THIS TIME, I DON'T REALLY HAVE 20 MINUTES OF PRESENTATION, BUT I WOULD TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WAY WE CAN SORT OF GUIDE IT THAT WAY.
WERE YOU ALL READY FOR QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT? SO, I'M SORRY I DIDN'T CATCH YOUR NAME AT THE BEGINNING.
UM, MR. CROCKER, I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND THE RECOMMENDATION TO SUGGEST THAT OUR APPLICANT SPEND MORE TIME AND MORE MONEY TO COME BACK WITH EXACTLY THE SAME REQUEST ON EXACTLY THE SAME RESIDENCE.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME? I THINK THEY WERE TRYING TO TEASE OUT SOME OF
[06:50:01]
THE REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED WORK.AND THEY UNDERSTOOD, I THINK FROM READING BETWEEN THE LINES BASED ON, UH, LESLIE NET VIEW'S RESPONSES TO THEIR QUESTIONS, THAT SHE REALLY DIDN'T FULLY UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE BACKSTORY AND ALL THE SECURITY AND PRIVACY CONCERNS THAT THE HOMEOWNERS HAD.
'CAUSE AS THE HOMEOWNER SAID, NOT, NOT TO ADVOCATE ON THE HOMEOWNER'S, BUT AS THE HOMEOWNER SAID, HE SENT THE ARCHITECT, UH, AND SHE WASN'T ABLE TO ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS.
I THINK THE COMMISSION UNDERSTOOD THAT, AND THAT'S WHY THEY MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION.
MY NEXT QUESTION IS, UM, THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION HIGHLIGHTED THE JUS ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS AN EXCEPTION IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE.
YEAH, AND THAT WAS THE WAY I READ IT.
FIRST TIME I'VE EVER READ THE JUS ORDINANCE.
THAT WAS, TO ME, THE PLAIN NORMAL MEANING.
DO YOU AGREE WITH ME? AND DO YOU AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT THAT THE COMMISSION DID HAVE YES.
WITHIN THE ORDINANCE, THE DISCRETION TO APPROVE THE CASE? IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH.
TECHNICALLY THEY WOULD HAVE THE, THEY HAVE THE WELL THEN YES AND NO.
WELL, BECAUSE TECHNICALLY THEY WOULD HAVE THE DISCRETION ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
LET'S TALK ABOUT, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE NORTH SIDE, THE WHOLE ENCHILADA.
NO, LET'S THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE THING? NO, BECAUSE THERE'S PART OF IT THAT EXTENDS INTO THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK.
BUT I SAY ON THE, ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE, I UNDERSTAND, IS IT NORMAL FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO BE HELPFUL IN HEARINGS, OR IS THAT AN EXCEPTION FOR THEM TO BE HELPFUL? IN OTHER WORDS, I WOULD HOPE TO ALLOW THE, THE, TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT TO SUGGEST THAT MR. APPLICANT, IF YOU TRIM YOUR FENCE BACK A HALF FOOT, A TWO INCHES ON THE RIGHT.
UM, THEN IN MR. APPLICANT, IF YOU LOWERED THE HEIGHT OF YOUR FENCE AS IT APPROACHED THAT BRACKET, THEN WE COULD ALL GET THIS PROCESS TODAY AND, AND GO ON ABOUT OUR BUSINESSES.
IS THAT, IS THAT OUT OF THE ORDINARY FOR THAT COMMISSION? I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE OUT OF THE ORDINARY.
AND I THINK THEY, THAT WOULD BE PERFECTLY REASONABLE APPROACH FOR THE, BUT THE RECORD WOULD INDICATE THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
WELL, PART OF WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT DID NOT HAPPEN.
CORRECT? I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T AGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE, WELL, I READ THE RECORD, I DIDN'T SEE THAT HAPPENING.
WELL, THEY DID RECOMMEND, THEY SAID, HEY, THIS IS A, THIS IS A DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE, YOU CAN COME BACK AND TWEAK YOUR DESIGN.
THEY SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, THAT IS, THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH IN THIS CITY, RIGHT? IS THE PROCESSING OF REASONABLE APPLICATIONS.
SO MY FINAL QUESTION IS, MR. CROCKER, WOULD YOU FEEL THAT IN THIS, THAT, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD? I THINK THE ORDINANCE COULD BE A LITTLE, COULD GIVE A LITTLE MORE DISCRETION TOO, TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
UM, WELL, I SEE A LOT OF DISCRETION IN THE ORDINANCE.
AND SO I GUESS MY FINAL QUESTION IS, DO YOU FEEL LIKE THE COMMISSION FROM TIME TO TIME IS, UH, ARBITRARY, WHIMSICAL, AND CAPRICIOUS AND PUNITIVE? WHAT WAS THE LAST PART? PUNITIVE.
I'M NOT, I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO ANSWER THAT ONE.
WELL, IT WOULD APPEAR TO ME THAT THERE'S PLENTY OF DISCRETION AVAILABLE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND TO TELL US THAT WE HAVE TO DEFER TO THEM WHEN THERE'S CLEAR LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE THAT IF THEY HAD WANTED TO, FURTHERMORE, THE EXISTING FENCES IN THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE FAR IN FRONT OF THE FENCES OF THE APPLICANT.
SO I, I REALLY STRUGGLED TO UNDERSTAND THIS IN, FRANKLY, I'VE SEEN THIS ON MULTIPLE APPEALS, NOW IT'S BECOMING A PATTERN WITH THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
CAN I RESPOND? I CAN RESPOND TO THE, UH, THE OLD FENCE.
THE REASON THAT WAS THERE, AND IT WAS IN FRONT OF THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK EVEN, IS BECAUSE IT WAS GRANDFATHERED IN, UM, AND IT WAS THERE BEFORE THE JUNIORS HEIGHTS HISTORIC OVERLAY WAS CREATED.
SO THAT'S THE REASON THAT'S THERE WHEN THEY TEAR IT DOWN AND THEY TRY TO PUT UP AN IDENTICAL FENCE, BUT IT'S BRAND NEW, THAT'S, THEY LOSE THE GRANDFATHERING.
THAT'S JUST THE WAY THE SYSTEM, THAT'S THE WAY THE PROCESS WORKS.
BUT THOSE, THOSE ARE GOOD POINTS WELL TAKEN.
I MEAN, ALL YOUR POINTS ARE WELL TAKEN.
COMM COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, FOLLOWED BY VICE RUBIN.
AND THIS MAY BE A, A QUESTION FOR STAFF, BUT I'LL ASK IF YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW, UM, IS THERE A FILING FEE RELATED TO A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REQUEST? YES.
WELL, AND AGAIN, I CAN WAIT FOR THE APPROPRIATE TIME FOR THAT.
UM, WITHIN THE RECORD, UM, THERE'S A REFERENCE THAT THE 50% LINE WAS APPROVED BY ROUTINE CA AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS OR MR. HOWARD STATED THIS, THAT HE BUILT A FENCE BEYOND WHAT WAS APPROVED.
SO PART OF WHAT WAS REVIEWED BY LANDMARK COMMISSION WAS
[06:55:01]
BUILT WITHOUT APPROVAL? THAT'S CORRECT.AND SO WITHIN THE ORDINANCE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE, THERE'S A SECONDARY HEIGHT REQUIREMENT THAT IF YOU ARE IN FRONT OF THE 50% LINE, THAT THERE'S A LOWER HEIGHT REQUIREMENT.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT I WOULD, I'M NOT AWARE OF, BUT WELL, I'M HAPPY TO CITE THE REFERENCE.
SO IT'S TO BE, AS COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT WAS OBSERVING, AND I'LL JUST STATE IT.
SO ALL THE COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU'RE IN THE REAR 50%, IT'S A MAXIMUM OF NINE FEET.
IF YOU ARE IN FRONT OF THAT, IT'S A MAXIMUM OF EIGHT FEET.
AND AGAIN, THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, BUT ARE YOU AWARE IF IT IS, UM, TYPICAL THAT AS THEY ARE EVALUATING THAT MAXIMUM, THAT IT IS SOMETIMES APPROVED AT A LOWER HEIGHT TO RELATE TO OTHER ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT? I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT, BUT THAT DID SEEM TO BE THE THRUST OF MRS. UH, COMMISSIONER MONTGOMERY'S QUESTIONS FOR LESLIE NETVIEW IN THE HEARING.
WITH RESPECT TO HOW THAT, THAT PARTICULAR FENCE HEIGHT INTERACTED WITH THE, UH, OKAY.
MR. CROCKER, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND, UM, YOUR EXCHANGE WITH, WITH COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT.
EARLIER, SO YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAVING DISCRETION, RIGHT? YEAH.
SO THEORETICALLY THEY, AND IT'S YOUR POSITION THAT THEY COULD HAVE APPROVED AT LEAST PART OF THIS, BUT, BUT CHOSE NOT TO IN, IN EXERCISING DISCRETION.
SO IS OUR ROLE AS THE PLAN COMMISSION TO ALSO JUST LOOK AT IT WITH FRESH EYES AND EXERCISE OUR OWN DISCRETION? OR WHAT IS OUR ROLE? NO, AND YEAH, THIS IS A HIGHLY DEFERENTIAL REVIEW.
I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE FRUSTRATION THAT MR. HOUSEWRIGHT WAS, OR PROFESS, EXCUSE ME.
UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT WAS VOICING EARLIER.
BUT YEAH, THE, THE, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION HAS DISCRETION UP TO A POINT THAT THE PRESERVATION CRITERIA SORT OF LIMIT THAT TOO, IN EACH, IN EACH HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT.
BUT ONCE IT'S APPEALED, THE STANDARD OF REVIEW IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
AND SO IF THERE'S ANY REASONABLE BASIS FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION, THEN THIS BODY MUST APPROVE, MUST AFFIRM THAT DECISION.
UM, AND CLEARLY BASED ON THE RECORD, THERE'S MORE THAN SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO, UH, PROVIDE THAT REASONABLE BASIS.
AND, AND, AND ONE OF THE THING I WOULD SAY, WITH RESPECT TO THE DISCRETION THAT THEY EXERCISED AT THE TIME, THEY, THEY WERE GOING ON, THE INFORMATION THEY HAD, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY HAD A GENERIC CONCERN ABOUT PRIVACY AND SECURITY, NO SPECIFICS REALLY TO FLESH THAT OUT.
AND THEY ASKED, YOU KNOW, DID THE HOMEOWNER CONSIDER LANDSCAPING? DID THE HOMEOWNER CONSIDER BLINDS FOR PRIVACY? AND, YOU KNOW, THE ANSWER WAS NO.
I HAVEN'T TALKED TO THE HOMEOWNER ABOUT THOSE ISSUES.
AND SO, BASED ON THAT EVIDENCE, I THINK THE COMMISSIONERS DIDN'T FEEL THAT THERE WAS ENOUGH OF A REASON TO WARRANT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE VARIANCE OR APPROVING THE REQUEST.
THANKS THAT, THAT CAME THROUGH PRETTY WELL IN YOUR BRIEF, SO THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CHERNOCK.
I LIKE TO CIRCLE BACK ON, UH, QUESTION THAT COMMISSIONER HOUSER ASKED YOU, UH, WITH REGARDS TO IS IT SORT OF BEST PRACTICES FOR THE COMMISSION TO BE FULLY HELPFUL? AND YOUR RESPONSE WAS THAT THEY, THEY COULDN'T BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION.
UM, THE, THE SPEAKER, THE ARCHITECT, AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF I'LL PRONOUNCE HER NAME, IF YOU CAN TELL ME HER NAME AGAIN, I THINK IT'S LESLIE NUE.
SO MS. NUE, SHE WAS, UM, SPEAKING, SHE COULDN'T GIVE THEM SPECIFIC ANSWERS BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION.
THUS, THEY COULDN'T BE FULLY HELPFUL TO HER.
AND SO IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE LEARNED NEW THINGS TODAY FROM THE HOMEOWNER THAT THERE'S NEW INFORMATION, WHICH YEAH.
SO EARLIER WE WERE TRYING TO DO, TO WORK THROUGH WHETHER WE HAD NEW INFORMATION TODAY THAT WAS NOT AT THAT, THAT HEARING.
AND I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IF WE HAVE NEW INFORMATION, DOES THAT INFLUENCE THE WAY THAT WE CAN INTERPRET THIS? YOU STILL HAVE TO SEND IT BACK TO, EVEN IF THE NEW INFORMATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING, YOU'D HAVE TO SEND IT BACK TO LANDMARK COMMISSION TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION SO YOU COULD REMAND IT.
BUT I MEAN, UM, IF THE NEW INFORMATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME, YOU, YOU MUST REMAND.
[07:00:01]
IF IT WAS AVAILABLE, BUT JUST NOT PRESENTED, WHICH IS WHAT THE HOMEOWNER, UH, TESTIFIED TO TODAY, THEN YOU HAVE TO AFFIRM AND LET HIM BRING THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AGAIN.HE CAN BRING IT BEFORE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AGAIN AND BRING THOSE ARGUMENTS.
AND THERE'S, I THINK THERE'S NO FEE TO, TO BRING THE THING.
SO HE CAN BRING THE THING WITH NO FEE AND JUST MAKE THE NEW ARGUMENTS.
AND MAYBE IT CHANGES THE OUTCOME.
THAT'S IF WE SEND IT BACK, YOU, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN SEND IT BACK.
UM, WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE DISCRETION TO SEND IT BACK.
YOU DON'T HAVE TO SEND IT BACK.
UH, THEY ABSOLUTELY CAN COME BACK ANYTIME.
THAT'S WHY WE GAVE THEM A DENIAL.
CAN YOU PLEASE STAND UP? SURE.
AND IT'S NOT, UH, TIME FOR STAFF, BUT IF YOU DA, DA DA, DO YOU SWEAR AND AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY OF THE COMMISSION? I DO.
UH, WE'RE NOT QUITE THE STAFF YET.
WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA HEAR THE REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT.
UH, BUT NOW WE'RE STILL WITH COMMISSIONER CHER.
YOU, YOU WERE GETTING READY TO, TO RESPOND AND WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T GO THERE YET.
THE NEXT STEP AFTER THE RETAL.
UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, PLEASE.
REGARDING THE FENCE ALONG THIS DRIVEWAY, HE COULD REPAIR IT ALL DAY LONG.
HE COULD REPAIR IT WITHIN AN INCH OF ITS LIFE, RIGHT?
SORT OF THE FICTION WE DO AROUND HERE, RIGHT? UH, I DON'T KNOW HOW ALL THAT, HOW YOU DECIDE WHAT'S NEW AND WHAT'S JUST REPAIRED OR WHAT, AND, BUT THE APPLICANT CAN'T AMEND HIS REQUEST HERE BEFORE US TO REDUCE THE LOCATION NO.
THAT'S ALL STUFF THAT WOULD LANDMARK WOULD HAVE TO GET FIRST BITE AT, RIGHT? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONERS PLEASE.
IJI JUST WANNA RESTATE ONE THING IS THAT WHILE IT SAYS LANDMARK MAY, THAT THAT'S WHAT GIVES THEM THE DISCRETION, BUT THEN THEY STILL HAVE TO WORK WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF THE ORDINANCE WHEN CONSIDERING THAT, AND BASED ON THE EVIDENCE BEFORE US, THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS BEFORE THEM, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
IT WASN'T FULLY COMPLIANT WITH THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED? THAT'S CORRECT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE WE HAVE THE REBUTTAL? OKAY.
UH, WE'LL NOW HEAR THE REBUTTAL AND OR CLOSING BY THE APPELL BY THE APPELLANT FOR UP TO FIVE MINUTES, MR. HOWARD.
UM, I'M FRUSTRATED, UH, BY EVERYTHING THAT I'VE HEARD TONIGHT.
UM, I, I AM GONNA HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT MY OWN STUFF.
I DON'T BELIEVE I RECEIVED A RECORD OF THE TRANSCRIPT OF THIS MEETING UNTIL AFTER I HAD FILED FOR THIS APPEAL AND PAID THE FEE FOR THIS APPEAL.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS APPEAL WASN'T EVEN THE RIGHT THING TO DO, THAT IT SHOULD HAVE GONE BACK TO LANDMARK.
BUT I DIDN'T KNOW THAT I COULD GO BACK TO LANDMARK BECAUSE THE THING THAT I GOT WAS THE DENIAL THAT SAID YOU CAN APPEAL TO THE PLAN COMMISSION, BUT HERE I AM.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, I STUMBLED MY WAY THROUGH THIS ENTIRE PROCESS TONIGHT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M DOING HERE.
UM, AND, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE POINT OF THIS WAS.
IF YOUR OPTIONS ARE TO EITHER, UH, JUST AFFIRM WHAT THEY DID OR TO SEND IT BACK TO THEM WITH AFFIRMATIONS, LIKE, AND I'M, I'M SORRY.
I'M, I'M FRUSTRATED BY THIS PROCESS, WHICH I THINK IS JUST WASTED ALL OF OUR TIME.
UM, I STILL THINK WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS REASONABLE.
I STILL THINK WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS MEET THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND MEETS THE CRITERIA.
IF IT'S JUST A MATTER OF SHORTEN ONE FENCE BY A FEW INCHES IN LENGTH AND SHORTEN THE OTHER FENCE BY A FEW INCHES IN HEIGHT, I WISH THEY WOULD'VE JUST TOLD ME THAT AND I WOULD'VE DONE IT.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE THE POWER TO DO OR NOT.
UM, IT WOULD THRILL ME TO DEATH IF YOU HAD THE POWER TO, AND WERE WILLING TO JUST LET ME DO, LET ME BUILD THIS, OR MAKE THE AMENDMENTS AND LET ME BUILD WHAT I NEED TO BUILD TO, TO SATISFY IT.
BUT IF I HAVE TO CONTINUE GOING THROUGH THESE PROCESSES AND DO ALL THIS AGAIN, I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'LL DO.
I, I CHOSE TO LIVE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
I KNEW IT WAS A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN I DID THAT.
I LOVE THE FEEL OF BEING IN A, IN A PLACE THAT'S CONNECTED TO HISTORY, THINKING ABOUT THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT HAVE LIVED HERE AND BEEN HERE BEFORE.
I WANT TO DO MY PART FOR THIS.
I'M NOT TRYING TO GET AROUND THE RULES OR TO RUIN THINGS OR MESS ANYTHING UP.
UM, I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS HAS BEEN SUCH, THE HEADACHE THAT IT HAS BEEN.
UM, AND I REALIZE THAT I'M JUST RANTING AT YOU RIGHT NOW, AND THIS IS THE LAST THING ON YOUR VERY LONG MEETING AGENDA.
[07:05:01]
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.UH, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER CHANO, DO YOU WANNA GO AHEAD AND JUST FULLY EXPLAIN? SURE.
I FIRST OF ALL WANNA SAY THAT I APOLOGIZED TO HIM FOR HIS FRUSTRATION, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN MISCOMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE ARCHITECT WHO ATTENDED LANDMARK, WHO WAS ADVISED THEY COULD COME BACK TO COMMISSION WITH REVISIONS AND MORE ANSWERS WITHOUT COMING TO APPEAL.
IT'S NOT DIRECTLY WRITTEN ON OUR LETTER BECAUSE WE GIVE THEM ALL THE INFORMATION OF THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY WANT TO APPEAL.
BUT IN MANY CASES, IT'S THE HOMEOWNERS THAT ATTEND THE MEETINGS.
SO THEY'RE ABLE TO HAVE A ONE-ON-ONE DIALOGUE WITH COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF.
SO HE MIGHT HAVE KNOWN THAT HE COULD JUST REAPPLY.
ALSO, I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM FOR MONTHS.
SO I WAS THE ONE WHO APPROVED THE FIRST FENCE AS A ROUTINE, WHICH WAS SHOWN ON THERE AS UNAUTHORIZED WORK BECAUSE IT WAS ONLY AUTHORIZED TO BE PUT UP BEHIND THE BUMP OUT.
SO TECHNICALLY IF HE CAME BACK, WE'D HAVE TO CHARGE HIM THE $600 UNAUTHORIZED FEE BECAUSE THEY WENT AGAINST THE CA.
UH, AS OF THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF, TECHNICALLY THAT'S WHAT CHAIR WAS MENTIONING, LIKE, WELL, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU PUT UP THE FENCE AND IT DOES NOT MATCH THE ROUTINE THAT WAS APPROVED.
BECAUSE IF WE HAD EVERYBODY JUST SAY, OH, WELL I'M JUST GONNA DO IT FIVE FEET FURTHER THAN WHAT THE CA IS, IT'LL BE FINE.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT? RIGHT? SO THAT'S THE FIRST POINT.
THAT'S WHY THEY NOTICED THAT IT COMPETED WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL, UH, THAT THE, THE, THE BRACKET, BECAUSE IT WASN'T APPROVED TO GO THERE, IT WAS APPROVED TO GO BACK.
SECOND PART IS, YES, THEY CAN FIX THAT FENCE AND REPAIR IT ALL THEY WANT.
THAT FENCE IS GRANDFATHERED IN.
THAT'S WHY IT SITS WHERE IT SITS.
SO YES, IF THEY COMPLETELY TOOK IT OUT, IT WILL NOW HAVE TO GO PER ORDINANCE, PER SETBACK BASED ON HOW IT'S WRITTEN.
NOW, HOWEVER, IF THEY JUST NEEDED TO FIX SOME PICKETS AND THAT KIND OF THING, IT CAN STAY AS IT IS.
BUT BEING THAT ALSO THEY SHOWED THAT PICTURE, THE, THE ARCHITECT SHOWED THE PICTURE OF THE UNAUTHORIZED WORK, IT'S NOW PUBLIC.
SO WE HAVE TO SEND A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OUT THERE TO SAY, HEY, YOUR FENCE IS OUTSIDE OF THE CA.
YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? SO THAT IS IT IN A NUTSHELL.
AND WHEN THEY CAME TO ME FOR THE ROUTINE, HE DIDN'T SHOW YOU THE SITE PLAN THAT HE HAS, BUT I HAVE TALKED TO LESLIE BACK AND FORTH AN EMAIL ABOUT ALL THE RESTRICTIONS WHERE IT CAN GO, WHY? NO, NO, THEY WANNA PUSH, THEY WANNA PUSH.
I SAID, WHERE YOU WANT, IT'S PROBABLY GONNA GET DENIED BECAUSE OF THE SETBACKS AND THE HEIGHT AND THAT KIND OF SITUATION.
BUT THEY WANTED TO KEEP GOING.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE THEY WERE NOT ADVISED ON EVERYTHING.
I THINK THE MISCOMMUNICATION HAPPENED BETWEEN APPLICANT SLASH ARCHITECT AND HOMEOWNER, BUT THEY WERE FULLY ADVISED ON WHERE EVERYTHING SHOULD GO EVEN PRIOR TO PUTTING THAT FENCE UP.
UM, WHAT OTHER QUESTIONS DID YOU HAVE? THE LANDMARK COMMISSIONERS DID SPEAK WITH LESLIE NOVO NAVU, AND SHE JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE ANSWERS.
SO BOTTOM LINE IS WHAT THEY PUT IN THEIR BRIEF.
WE DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS.
WHAT WE WERE TOLD IS THEY DON'T WANNA HAVE TO SEE THEIR NEIGHBORS WHILE THEY EAT DINNER.
SO THEN WE SUGGESTED SHRUBS, YOU KNOW, SOME KIND OF SOFT SCAPING PLANTS, CURTAINS AND ARCHITECTS SAID I, WELL, I DON'T KNOW.
I HAVEN'T DISCUSSED THAT WITH THE HOMEOWNER.
THOSE WERE THE ANSWERS WE WERE GIVEN.
DID YOU, SO IS THAT, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? COMMISSIONER CHER? THANK, COULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? SURE.
PER MS. PER, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER? YES, MA'AM.
UM, COULD THIS CASE HAVE BEEN HELD, HELD MEANING, UM, ARE ARE THAT, OR IS THAT LIKE WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION? NO.
UM, SO LANDMARK CANNOT, I BELIEVE THEY CANNOT HOLD CASES LIKE WE HOLD CASES.
NO, THEY WOULD HAVE TO WITHDRAW, BUT THEY HAD ALL THE NECESSARY INFORMATION TO MAKE IT A COMPLETE PACKET.
IT JUST, IT WAS OUTSIDE OF THE ORDINANCE.
WE CAN'T TELL 'EM, NO, YOU CAN'T.
AND THEN DENY THEM LANDMARK HEARING.
SO WE HAVE TO LET THEM COME THROUGH, EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW IT'S OUTSIDE.
[07:10:01]
HAMDEN, I JUST TO HAVE IT ON THE RECORD, IS IT CORRECT THAT IF THE COMMISSION DOES NOT HAVE, IF LANDMARK COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS, IF THEY APPROVE SOMETHING THINKING THAT THEY'RE DOING, TRYING TO HELP MOVE THE PROCESS ALONG, BUT THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY PUT ON THE APPROVAL ARE NOT WHAT THE HOMEOWNER NEEDS, THEY ARE EFFECTIVELY BACK IN HAVING TO START THE PROCESS OVER.SO IF THEY HAD TRIED TO SAY XX HEIGHTS THIS LOCATION, AND THAT IN FACT DIDN'T WORK WITH THE SITE FOR SOME REASON, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO REFILE THE REQUEST.
WELL, THAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DON'T LIKE TO PUT LIKE AN APP.
WE, WE DON'T MIND DOING APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, BUT WE DON'T WANNA DO APPROVAL WITH 10 CONDITIONS, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO GO OUT AND SAY, OKAY, THEY DID IT PER CONDITION 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
WE DON'T, SO WE, WE ONLY LIKE ONE OR TWO CONDITIONS.
WE DON'T LIKE ALL THOSE STIPULATIONS.
BUT AGAIN, WITHOUT HAVING DIRECT ANSWERS TO ALL THE DISCUSSION ITEMS, IT COULD INADVERTENTLY PUT A LARGER BURDEN.
AND SO IS DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE MEANS BY WHICH LANDMARK COMMISSION ALLOWS THE HOMEOWNER, THE APPLICANT TO REFILE, THEY CAN REFILE THAT AFTERNOON? YES.
FOR THE NEXT MONTH WITHOUT, WITHOUT A FEE.
AND THEN I ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, SO I'M GOING TO ASK 'CAUSE I KNOW MANY TIMES WE CAN.
IS THERE ANY PROVISION THAT WOULD ALLOW LANDMARK TO WAIVE THE FEE? THE FEES ARE VERY NEW TO US, AND THERE IS, THEY HAVE TO GO BEFORE, BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW IF IT CAN BE FOR AN UNAUTHORIZED WORK FEE VERSUS LIKE A NEW BUILD OR A DEMOLITION, WHICH WOULD BE AN INITIAL FEE.
UNAUTHORIZED WORK IS THEY BLATANTLY DID THE WORK WITHOUT A CA OR WITHOUT APPROVAL OR AGAINST THE CA.
AND I, I'M NOT SURE, AND I KNOW THAT THEY ARE NEW FEES.
I HAVE NOT HAD ANY WITH THOSE TODAY.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY CHOOSE TO DEBATE AND DECIDE THIS MATTER TODAY OR MAY HEAR THE PRESENTATIONS AND DELAY THE DEBATE OR THE VOTE ON THE MATTER IF ADDITIONAL TIME IS REQUIRED TO PROPERLY DECIDE THE CASE, A MOTION TO UPHOLD OR OVERTURN THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REQUIRES A MAJORITY VOTE.
WHEN THE CITY PLANE COMMISSION MAKES ITS DECISION ON THIS APPEAL, A RESOLUTION UPHOLDING OR OVERTURNING THE LANDMARK COMMISSION WILL BE ENTERED INTO THE MINUTES AS PART OF THE RECORD.
NOW THAT WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, WE MUST MAKE A DECISION.
THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY REVERSE OR AFFIRM IN WHOLE OR IN PART, OR MODIFY THE DECISION OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OR THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION MAY REMAND A CASE BACK TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
THE CITY PLAIN COMMISSION MUST GIVE DEFERENCE TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION AND MAY NOT SUBSTITUTE ITS JUDGMENT FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S JUDGMENT.
THE CITY PLAIN COMMISSION MUST AFFIRM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION UNLESS IT FINDS THAT IT ONE VIOLATES A STATUTORY OR ORDINANCE PROVISION TWO EXCEEDS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY OR WAS NOT REASONABLY SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD.
AND REMEMBER THAT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE REFERS TO EVIDENCE THAT A REASONABLE MIND COULD ACCEPT AS ADEQUATE TO SUPPORT A CONCLUSION SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS MORE THAN ONE MERE ILLA.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, PLEASE.
IN THE MATTER CA 2 45 DASH ZERO EIGHT, I VOTE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND AFFIRM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I HAVE COMMENTS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR COMMENTS, FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS.
UM, WHILE I AM VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THE HOMEOWNER, AND I KNOW THAT DEALING WITH OUR CITY PROCESSES ARE DIFFICULT, FROM EVERYTHING I'VE HEARD, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOUR FRUSTRATION IS PROBABLY AIMED BETTER AT YOUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF THAN OUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF.
UM, AND GIVEN THAT AND THE LEGAL BUR THE LEGAL STANDARD THAT WE'RE OBLIGATED TO FOLLOW, I JUST DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE OVERTURNING THE LANDMARK COMMISSION ON THIS.
UM, I WISH YOU WELL WITH YOUR PROJECT, BUT I THINK THIS IS ONE WHERE WE SHOULD STAND BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, AND I HOPE, UM, THAT THE REST OF YOU WOULD AGREE GIVEN WHAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.
UM, I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S COMMENTS.
I WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION, BUT I STAND
[07:15:01]
ON MY PREVIOUS COMMENTS ABOUT THESE APPEALS THAT WE GET REGULARLY FROM LANDMARK COMMISSION.UH, I UNDERSTAND THE LEGAL STANDARD.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, I DON'T HAVE APPARENTLY A LEG TO STAND ON HERE, BUT THE NOTION OF GIVING DEFERENCE TO AND, UH, NOT SUBSTITUTING MY JUDGMENT FOR, UH, A CONSISTENT PATTERN OF CASES WHERE THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, UM, IS REALLY TRYING TO CREATE A MUSEUM RATHER THAN A COMMUNITY WHEN THEY, UM, I USED THE WORDS, UH, ARBITRARY CAPRICIOUS, UH, EARLIER.
AND, AND I THINK SOME OF IT, MUCH OF IT IS, UM, OF THESE LANDMARK APPEALS.
UH, AND THEY'RE ALWAYS DIFFICULT.
UH, I WOULD, I WOULD CONFIDENTLY SAY MORE THAN HALF OF THEM, I DISAGREE WITH STRONGLY, UH, THE COMMISSION'S FINDINGS.
AND SO IT'S JUST AS A, AS A COMMISSIONER THAT'S BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION FOR ABOUT EIGHT YEARS, IT'S JUST, UM, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO SIT THROUGH THESE WHEN, UM, YOU READ THE RECORD.
READING THE RECORD, FRANKLY, DID NOT NOT GIVE ME CONFIDENCE IN THE PROCESS AT ALL.
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, FOLLOWED BY VICE CHAIR RUBIN.
I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THE HOMEOWNER AS WELL, AND I DO THINK THAT IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THE, UM, COMMUNICATION WAS NOT CLEAR TO HIM THAT HE COULD HAVE IMMEDIATELY FILED, PROVIDED THE INFORMATION THAT HE SHARED WITH US TODAY, AND LIKELY HAVE GOTTEN A DIFFERENT RESULT AND LIKELY ALREADY BEEN MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS FENCE.
UM, I DO HOPE, AND I THINK WE HAVE SAID THIS BEFORE, THIS BODY BEFORE, BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN SEEING A, WHAT SEEMS TO BE A A A GREATER NUMBER OF LANDMARK APPEALS THAN I RECALL, UM, IS THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND HOW TO PERHAPS PROVIDE MORE CLARITY IN THE INFORMATION THAT IS PROVIDED TO HOMEOWNERS IN THAT WHILE THE APPEAL IS AN OPTION FOR THEM, THAT IT IS PERHAPS MORE EXPLICITLY DEFINED WHAT THE LIMITATIONS OF LANDMARK AND WHAT OTHER AVENUES ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM TO FIND A RESOLUTION.
UM, BUT I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
YEAH, LIKE THE REST OF MY COLLEAGUES, I FEEL COMPELLED TO, UM, SUPPORT THE MOTION TO AFFIRM, BUT IT, IT BRINGS ME, UM, REALLY NO JOY AND FRUSTRATES ME, UM, SIGNIFICANTLY THAT THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE TO LAND.
UM, I MAY PART WAYS WITH SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES AND HOW I VIEW THIS ONE, I WONDER, YOU KNOW, LIKE COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, WHETHER SOME OF OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCES AND PROCEDURES ARE REALLY BEST SERVING THE CITY AND, AND OUR RESIDENTS WHEN THEY ARE SO STRICT THAT THAT, YOU KNOW, MINOR ALTERATIONS LIKE THIS MAY NOT, UM, YOU KNOW, MAKE IT MAKE THEIR WAY THROUGH THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
I'M, I'M CERTAINLY NOT IN A POSITION TO SUBSTITUTE MY JUDGMENT FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OR SERVE ON IT, BUT I DO WONDER IF, IF SOME OF OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCES DO OVERREACH AND LEAD TO, UH, UNFORTUNATE RESULTS LIKE THIS.
THE OTHER THING THAT I, I DID WANNA FLAG IS, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WENT ON WITH THE STAFF AND THE, THE APPLICANT'S ARCHITECT, BUT YOU KNOW, EVEN THEN, YOU KNOW, AN ARCHITECT IS NOT A LAWYER.
AND THAT, AND, AND THESE VARIOUS OPTIONS ARE NOT NECESSARILY MADE ALL THAT CLEAR.
I KNOW IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT CITY STAFF SPOKE WITH THE ARCHITECT AFTER THE, THE HEARING, WHICH IS GREAT.
BUT I, I WOULD ENCOURAGE CITY STAFF PARTICULARLY TO, TO SEE WHAT ELSE WE CAN DO TO BETTER INFORM APPLICANTS IN THESE SITUATIONS.
THAT CONVERSATION IS, IS GREAT AND I, AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR THAT, BUT THINKING TO THE CITY'S FOCUS ON BEING CUSTOMER CENTRIC AND, AND HAVING A GOOD CUSTOMER SERVICE APPROACH, FINDING A WAY IN, YOU KNOW, EVERY COMMUNICATION THAT WE HAVE WITH SOMEONE ABOUT AFTER AN UNSUCCESSFUL CASE AT LANDMARK, INCLUDING THAT LETTER AND, YOU KNOW, INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT THE, THE RIGHT TO APPEAL, THAT THERE MAY BE OTHER AVENUES IN HOW HIGH OF A BAR THAT THAT SET SO APPLICANTS DON'T WASTE THEIR TIME AND RESOURCES ON APPEALS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY UNFORTUNATELY DEAD ON ARRIVAL BECAUSE OF CON CONFUSION ABOUT THE PROCEDURES.
UM, SO AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST THAT ANYONE HAS DONE ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, IN INTENTIONALLY WRONG HERE, BUT I THINK THAT THERE MAY BE WAYS TO DO BETTER WITH THESE PROCESSES, UH, THAT ULTIMATELY SERVE THE CITY, OUR RESIDENTS AND, AND BODIES LIKE THIS AND LAND MARK MARK COMMISSION MUCH BETTER IN THE LONG RUN.
[07:20:01]
EVERYONE CAN TAKE A FRESH LOOK AND COME UP WITH SOLUTIONS STICK AROUND.COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, THANK YOU.
YEAH, I, I JUST WANTED TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER RUBEN AND COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, THAT HAVING LIVED IN OVER A HUNDRED YEAR OLD HOME FOR 20 YEARS NOW AND LIVED IN A CONSERVATION DISTRICT, I UNDERSTAND THE VALUE OF THESE PRESERVATION ORDINANCES, BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND HOW ENFORCING THEM TO THE NTH OF THE LAW CREATES SO MUCH CONFLICT IN COMMUNITIES THAT WHAT YOU TRY TO DO WITH THE ORDINANCE IN THE FIRST PLACE, YOU'VE UNDERMINED BY PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST THEIR NEIGHBORS AND AGAINST THE CITY.
AND THAT IS SORT OF WHAT I AM SEEING OUT OF LANDMARK COMMISSION WITH AN ULTRA ENFORCEMENT MINDSET.
AND MAYBE PART OF THAT IS COMMUNICATION, UM, AND SETTING EXPECTATIONS.
BUT TIME AND AGAIN, PEOPLE COME DOWN HERE TO APPEAL THESE DECISIONS TO US WHEN IN ALL LIKELIHOOD THEY'RE NOT GONNA GET WHAT THEY WANT.
THERE'S GOT TO BE A PROCESS CHANGE HERE BECAUSE IT IS, THERE'S NO REASON FOR THIS GUY TO HAVE SPENT ALL THIS TIME AND ENERGY ON THIS PROCESS WHEN OUR STANDARD OF REVIEW IS WHAT IT IS.
I MEAN, IF I COULD SUBSTITUTE MY JUDGMENT FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, AND I DON'T REALLY WANT TO, BUT IF I COULD, I'D LET HIM HAVE THE FENCE AND GO ON.
AND I THINK I'M PROBABLY NOT THE ONLY ONE SITTING HERE THINKING THAT.
SO IT WOULD BE REALLY GREAT IF THERE COULD BE SOME SORT OF MECHANISM FOR SENDING THIS MESSAGE BACK TO THE FOLKS WHO WORK WITH LANDMARK.
AND I DON'T WANNA BE TOO CRITICAL OF THE VOLUNTEERS OF LANDMARK COMMISSION.
I DON'T WANNA BE HEARD TO SAY THAT I KNOW THAT THEY'RE VOLUNTEERS AND THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO THE BEST JOB THEY CAN DO, BUT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEING MISSED HERE BECAUSE WE'RE SEEING TOO MUCH OF THIS.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS, BUT IT WOULD BE GREAT IF LEADERSHIP COULD REALLY TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND EVALUATE IT, BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS IT WASTING AN HOUR OF OUR TIME EVERY TIME THAT WE DO THIS, BUT MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY AND MUCH MORE DAMAGING IS WHAT IT'S DOING TO THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT PARTICIPATE IN THIS.
I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO ADD OTHER THAN YES, THERE ARE LOTS OF FOLKS THINKING THAT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON OR SHOE.
UH, AND, UH, JUST TO GO A LITTLE BIT BACKWARDS, I THINK ALMOST EVERY TIME WE HAVE ONE OF THESE APPEALS, WE HAVE SOMEONE THAT SAYS EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID, THAT WE NEED TO REVISIT THE, THE PROCESS.
AND IN FACT, I THINK MAYBE EVEN AFTER THE LAST ONE THAT WE HAD, OR THE ONE BEFORE, UH, SOMEONE ASKED TO SEE THE LETTER THAT, UH, TALENT RECEIVES TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE FOLKS THAT COME DOWN HERE AND APPEAL THESE CASES KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE TO THREAD THE NEEDLE SO WELL TO GET IT PAST THIS BODY.
AND REALLY WE JUST DON'T HAVE ANY FLEXIBILITY AT ALL.
UH, AND I THINK IF THAT WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE APPLICANT, SOME, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS GENTLEMAN WOULD'VE SPENT THE LAST HOUR AND A HALF HERE WITH US, UH, AND HE WOULD'VE SOLVED HIS ISSUE IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
BUT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT, UH, THAT BE REVISITED IN A WAY THAT, UH, IS FAIR FOR EVERYONE.
UH, BUT WITH THAT COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON TO CLOSE THE HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF AND LANDMARK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[50. 25-362A FY 2023-24 City Plan Commission Annual Report]
COMMISSIONERS.WE DO HAVE TO, UH, HAVE A VOTE ON THE, UH, CITY PLAN COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT.
I THINK THIS IS THE SAME, IS THE SAME REPORT THAT WAS, UH, SENT TO US A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.
VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
AND, UH, COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR SECOND.
UH, ANY DISCUSSIONS? YOU NONE.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN MINUTES? OH, THANK YOU.MR. CHAIR, CAN I MOVE TO APPROVE OUR DECEMBER 5TH, 2024 AND JANUARY 16TH, 2025 MINUTES? THANK YOU.
AND WITH THE REVISION TO THE, UM, WE HAVE A REVISION TO THE THURSDAY, DECEMBER TO THE DECEMBER 5TH.
WE HAVE A REVISION TO THE DECEMBER 5TH MINUTES AS TO, HOLD ON.
LET ME PULL MY, TO REFLECT THAT.
UM, CLARIFY TO, TO CLARIFY AS TO ITEM Z 2, 3, 4 1, 7, 7 Z, 3, 3, 4, 1, 9, 8, AND Z 2 3 4 1 7.
[07:25:01]
THE SINGLE MOTION THAT FAILED AS TO C TWO THREE.4 1, 7 OH ALSO COVERED 2, 3, 4, 1, 7 7 AND 2, 3, 4, 1, 9, 8.
THANK YOU MR. RUBIN FOR YOUR MOTION.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MINUTES? SEE NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
I DID HEAR A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
IT IS 6:49 PM 49 CASES AND WE MADE IT OUT BEFORE EIGHT.