[00:00:02]
[BRIEFINGS]
RECORDING.CAN WE PLEASE START OFF WITH THE ROLL CALL? GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS.
DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SCHOCK.
COMMISSIONER HERBERT, PRESENT, DISTRICT FOUR.
COMMISSIONER FORSYTH, DISTRICT FIVE.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DISTRICT SEVEN.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DISTRICT NINE COMMISSIONER.
HE, HE'S GOT A CONFERENCE CALL.
DISTRICT 10, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.
DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HERE AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBIN, I'M HERE.
TODAY IS THURSDAY, MAY 22ND, 2025, 9:10 AM WELCOME TO THE BRIEFING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
AS ALWAYS, COMMISSIONS JUST, UH, COMMISSIONERS JUST TO, UH, TIME FOR QUESTIONS TO STAFF.
WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA BEGIN WITH OUR TWO BRIEFING, UH, ITEMS. UH, BEFORE WE DO SO, JUST A QUICK NOTE THAT, UH, AFTER THOSE TWO ITEMS, WE'LL BE BRIEFING THE D SIX CASES FIRST, AND THEN ALSO AT THE, AT THE HEARING, UH, THIS AFTERNOON, AFTER WE DISPOSE OF, UH, THE CASES ON CONSENT, WE WILL HEAR ALL THE DC SIX CASES FIRST.
UH, AND WITH THAT, GOOD MORNING.
UH, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.
I AM THE AIRPORT NOISE MONITORING SPECIALIST FOR DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION.
I'M JOINED HERE BY OUR AVIATION ENVIRONMENTAL SUPERVISOR, RACHEL SIMPSON, AS WELL AS OUR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER, UM, ISAAC ELLISON.
UH, THE PURPOSE OF THIS BRIEFING, UM, IS TO PROVIDE YOU ALL SOME CONTEXT WITH, UM, HOW DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION APPROACHES, UM, ZONING CASES.
UM, THERE'S BEEN SOME INTERNAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, UH, DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION'S POSITION AND HOW WE APPROACH THIS TOPIC.
AND SO MY HOPE TODAY IS TO, UM, BRING EVERYBODY UP TO SPEED AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
UM, SO WITH THAT, HERE'S A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHAT I'LL BE SPEAKING ON.
WE'RE, I'M GONNA GO OVER THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY OF DALLAS, DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION, AS WELL AS THE, UH, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION PROVIDE A BRIEF BACKGROUND ON AIRCRAFT NOISE.
UM, AND THEN I WILL TOUCH ON FAA FORM 74 60, THEN THE VOLUNTARY NOISE PROGRAM OVERVIEW THAT WE HAVE FOR, UH, DALLAS LOVE FIELD, AND THEN END WITH SOME SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION.
SO TO BEGIN, UM, WITH THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, THE, UM, FAA FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION HAS THE SOLE AUTHORITY OVER THE NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM.
SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT AS THE AIRCRAFT NAVIGATE THROUGH AIRSPACE, UM, THEY ARE BEING GUIDED BY INSTRUCTIONS THEY RECEIVE FROM THE FAA, FROM AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL.
AND SO WE AS, UH, CITY OF DALLAS EMPLOYEES DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO INSTRUCT AIRCRAFT THAT'S SOLELY UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE FAA.
SO, WITH THAT IN MIND, IN ORDER TO BETTER RESPOND TO THE CONCERNS OF OUR NEIGHBORS, THE CITY OF DALLAS, UH, DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION HAS A VOLUNTARY NOISE PROGRAM FOR, UH, THE DALLAS AIRPORT SYSTEM.
AND WE USE THAT AS A MEANS TO, UH, MONITOR AIRCRAFT NOISE AND ALSO TO ENGAGE WITH COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND TO, UM, HEAR THEIR CONCERNS AS IT RELATES TO AIRCRAFT NOISE.
DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLYING WITH FAA REGULATIONS AND MEETING THEIR STANDARDS.
SO BASICALLY EVERYTHING ON THE GROUND AT THE AIRPORT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY.
UM, FAA REALLY ENCOURAGES JURISDICTIONS TO MAKE LOCAL PLANNING AND ZONING DECISIONS THAT PREVENT NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS EXPOSED TO SIGNIFICANT LEVELS OF AIRCRAFT NOISE.
UM, THE REASON FOR THIS IS THAT Z ZONING IS REALLY THE MOST EFFECTIVE MEANS THAT AIRPORTS HAVE OF MITIGATING, UM, COMMUNITY MEMBERS EXPOSURE TO EXCESSIVE NOISE.
UH, YOU KNOW, ONCE, ONCE COMMUNITIES ARE IN THE AREA, THEY'RE TYPICALLY THERE TO STAY.
AND SO WE WANT TO TRY TO BE, UM, A GOOD NEIGHBOR.
UM, AND IN THE INTEREST OF, YOU KNOW, LOVE FIELD SUSTAINABILITY,
[00:05:01]
UH, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE ZONING DECISIONS BEING MADE ARE, UH, ARE CONDUCIVE TO, UH, LOVE FIELD'S OPERATIONS, BUT ULTIMATELY, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS DO HAVE THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR DETERMINING THE ACCEPTABILITY OF LAND USES AT, UH, PARTICULAR NOISE LEVELS.SO, BY SUPPORTING THE COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL AVIATION INDUSTRY, THE AIRPORT PRODUCES, UH, EXTENSIVE ECONOMIC ACTIVITY FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS AND ITS RESIDENTS.
THE TOTAL ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTIONS FROM CAPITAL EXPENDITURES, OPERATIONS AND RELATED BUSINESS AND TRAVELER TRAVELER SPENDING CREATED BY DALLAS LOW FIELD IS 5.6 BILLION IN ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, LABOR AND INCOME OF 1.7 BILLION, PAID THROUGH MORE THAN 28,000 LOCAL JOBS AND TOTAL REVENUES TO THE CITY OF DALLAS, FROM TAXES, FEES FOR LICENSES AND PERMITS AND OTHER REVENUES EXCEED 47 MILLION.
SO, NEEDLESS TO SAY, DALLAS LOW FIELD IS, UM, INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO THE CITY OF DALLAS.
AND TO TOUCH BRIEFLY ON, UM, AIRCRAFT NOISE, UH, SINCE THE MID 1970S, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO AIRCRAFT NOISE IN THE US HAS DECLINED, UM, FROM ABOUT 7 MILLION TO ABOUT 400,000 TODAY, THE SINGLE MOST INFLUENTIAL FACTOR, UM, AND THAT DECREASE HAS BEEN THE TRANSITION TO QUIETER AIRCRAFT AND IMPROVED, UM, AIRCRAFT TECHNOLOGY.
SECOND MAJOR FACTOR IN DECREASING EXPOSURE TO, UH, TO AIRCRAFT NOISE HAS BEEN THE COOPERATION AMONG LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE LIVING IN AREAS NEAR AIRPORTS EXPOSED TO SIGNIFICANT LEVELS OF AIRCRAFT NOISE.
SO AGAIN, THIS COMES BACK TO OUR ROLE AS THE CITY OF DALLAS.
UM, WHAT, WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO? WE ARE ABLE TO CONTROL THE ZONING, UM, AIRCRAFT NOISE, UM, STANDARDS ARE SET BY THE FAA WHEN AIRCRAFT ARE CERTIFIED TYPE CERTIFIED FOR MANUFACTURERS.
SO BY THE TIME THE AIRCRAFT GETS PRODUCED AND GOES INTO SERVICE, UM, THEY ALREADY MEET THE FA A'S NOISE STANDARDS AT THAT POINT.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT WE, AS THE AIRPORT OPERATOR CAN DO TO, TO CHANGE THAT LEVEL OF NOISE GENERATED BY THE AIRCRAFT.
SO THE FAA USES THE DAY NIGHT AVERAGE SOUND LEVEL, DNL METRIC, UM, AT THE 65 DECIBEL THRESHOLD TO MAKE POLICY AS ASSESSMENTS.
THIS IS THE STANDARD THAT, UH, WE AS THE AIRPORT OPERATOR USE, IT'S SET BY THE FAA.
UM, THEY USE THAT STANDARD FOR THREE PRIMARY AREAS.
NUMBER ONE IS TO SET THE FA A'S NOISE GOAL FOR REDUCING THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE EXPOSED TO SIGNIFICANT NOISE AROUND US AIRPORTS.
UM, SECOND IS TO ESTABLISH THE LEVEL OF AIRCRAFT NOISE EXPOSURE BELOW WHICH RESIDENTIAL LAND USE IS COMPATIBLE AS DEFINED IN THE AVIATION SAFETY AND NOISE ABATEMENT ACT OF 1979.
AND LASTLY, IT IS TO ESTABLISH THE LEVEL OF AIRCRAFT NOISE EXPOSURE BELOW WHICH NOISE IMPACTS OF FAA ACTIONS AND RESIDENT RESIDENTIAL AREAS ARE NOT CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT.
UNDER THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969, THE AIRPORT NOISE AND CAPACITY ACT OF, UH, 1990 BASICALLY STATES THAT AIRPORT OPERATORS ARE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR AIRCRAFT NOISE, BUT DO NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS WITHOUT FAA APPROVAL.
SO THIS GOES BACK TO WHAT WE, UM, AS THE CITY, UH, AIRPORT OPERATOR ARE AND ARE NOT ABLE TO DO.
UM, WHEN IT COMES TO FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS, ALL OF THAT'S GONNA BE UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE FAA.
WE CAN'T JUST, UM, IMPOSE THAT AS WE, AS WE SEE FIT.
SO, THE FAA, UH, DOES REPLACE RESTRICTIONS ON AIRCRAFT ENGINE NOISE, WHICH I TOUGH TOUCHED ON BRIEFLY.
THIS IS WHEN AIRCRAFT ARE CERTIFICATED FOR, UH, MANUFACTURE, THERE'S FIVE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF, UH, NOISE THAT THEY FALL INTO.
CURRENTLY, ALL AIRCRAFT THAT ARE, UH, OPERATING IN THE US MEET STAGE THREE REQUIREMENTS.
SO, UH, STAGE FIVE BEING THE QUIETEST, UM, STAGE THREE IS THE STANDARD THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY HELD TO.
UM, AND LASTLY, LOCAL PLANNING AND, UH, ZONING FOR COMPATIBLE LAND USES CITY OF DALLAS'S MOST EFFECTIVE NOISE MITIGATION METHOD.
AND THIS IS REALLY THE POINT THAT I, THAT I WISH TO, UH, DRIVE HOME TODAY AND CONVEY TO YOU ALL.
UM, SO MOVING ON TO FAA FORM 74 60, THIS IS A FORM THAT,
[00:10:01]
UH, THE FAA REQUIRES APPLICANTS, UM, TO FILE FOR PROPOSED STRUCTURES BASED ON SEVERAL FACTORS, INCLUDING HEIGHT, PROXIMITY TO THE AIRPORT, LOCATION, AND FREQUENCIES EMITTED FROM THE STRUCTURE.AND THE FA A'S PRIME OBJECTIVE IS TO PROMOTE AIR SAFETY AND DEFICIENT USE OF NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM, UH, TO ACCOMPLISH THIS MISSION.
THE AERONAUTICAL STUDIES ARE CONDUCTED BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED BY, UH, PROPONENTS ON AN FAA FORM 74 60 NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION.
UM, AND FOR MORE DETAILS, YOU CAN REFERENCE C 14 CFR, PART 77.9.
SO, UH, A BRIEF BACKGROUND ON THE, UH, NOISE PROGRAM AT LOVE FIELD, UM, IN JANUARY, 1981, LOVE FIELD ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE SELECTS CONSULTANTS TO EVALUATE AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE THE VOLUNTARY NOISE ABATEMENT PROGRAM.
15 NOISE ABATEMENT ALTERNATIVES WERE RECOMMENDED, UH, BY A CONSULTANT, UH, AND REVIEWED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON DECEMBER 16TH, 1980, ONE OF THE 15 ALTERNATIVES, SEVEN WERE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL TO BE INCLUDED IN THE VOLUNTARY NOISE PROGRAM.
SO TODAY, UH, THESE ARE THE LISTED MEASURES THAT WE HAVE IN OUR VOLUNTARY NOISE PROGRAM.
UM, IT IS VOLUNTARY PER FAA REGULATIONS.
SO IT'S, IT'S NOT, UM, IT'S NOT ENFORCEABLE, UH, ALTHOUGH WE DO HAVE ONE MEASURE THAT I WILL TOUCH ON.
UM, SO FOR THE NIGHTTIME, UH, BETWEEN 9:00 PM AND 6:00 AM WE HAVE PREFERENTIAL RUNWAY FOR ALL JET AIRCRAFT AND ANY AIRCRAFT WING OVER 12,500 POUNDS.
UM, THAT'S ON RUNWAY ONE THREE, RIGHT THREE ONE LEFT, WHICH IS ON THE DENTON SIDE OF THE AIRPORT.
UM, WE ALSO HAVE A NOISE ABATEMENT DEPARTURE PROCEDURE KNOWN AS THE TRINITY DEPARTURE FOR NIGHTTIME OPERATIONS.
UM, AND THAT'S FOR ALL JET AIRCRAFT WEIGHING OVER 12,500 POUNDS.
IT'S INTENDED TO TAKE THEM OUT OVER THE TRINITY RIVER AS THEY DEPART.
UM, AND THEN WE DO HAVE A PROHIBITION ON AIRCRAFT ENGINE MAINTENANCE RUN-UPS BETWEEN THE HOURS OF MIDNIGHT AND 6:00 AM WHICH IS EXPANDED TO A, UH, VOLUNTARY MORATORIUM BETWEEN 10:00 PM AND MIDNIGHT.
UM, AND THAT PIECE IS ENFORCEABLE.
IT'S A CITY ORDINANCE BETWEEN, UH, MIDNIGHT AND 6:00 AM SO THAT'S THE ONLY ENFORCEABLE ELEMENT OF OUR VOLUNTARY NOISE PROGRAM.
AND THEN LASTLY, WE DO MAINTAIN COMMITMENTS FROM THE AIRLINES TO UTILIZE THEIR, UH, OPTIMAL TAKEOFF PROFILE, WHICH, UM, BASICALLY DICTATES THE ANGLE AND SPEED AT WHICH AIRCRAFT DEPART TO TRY TO MINIMIZE THE NOISE IMPACTS.
SO ON THIS SLIDE HERE, YOU SEE, UH, THE 65 DNL CONTOUR THAT I REFERENCED EARLIER.
THIS IS THE, THE THRESHOLD THAT THE FAA DICTATES AS, UM, EX AN AREA EXPOSED TO SIGNIFICANT AIRCRAFT NOISE.
UM, SO YOU CAN SEE ON THE 2019, UH, IMAGE THAT, UH, CONTOUR IS A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPANDED, UM, ON THE DENTON SOUTH SIDE OF, UH, LOVE FIELD.
AND THEN IN THE 2023 CONTOUR, WHICH IS OUR MOST RECENT, UH, CONTOUR REPORT, IT'S MUCH MORE EVENLY SPLIT.
BUT, UM, ONE, ONE THING THAT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT IS THAT THE CONTOUR SHAPE DOES CHANGE THROUGHOUT THE YEARS.
AND SO AS WE REVIEW AS DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION REVIEWS ZONING CHANGES, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND WHERE PERHAPS A, A PARTICULAR PROPERTY MIGHT NOT BE, UH, DIRECTLY WITHIN THE CONTOUR AT THIS MOMENT, BUT IF IT'S CLOSE ENOUGH, THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT IT COULD, UH, CHANGE IN THE FUTURE.
AND IF IT'S FOR, IF IT'S A ZONING CASE FOR, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL LAND USE OR FOR EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, UM, THINGS LIKE THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD GENERALLY BE NON-COMPATIBLE WITH HIGH LEVELS OF AIRCRAFT NOISE EXPOSURE.
UH, WE WANNA BE VERY CAREFUL WITH HOW WE APPROACH THOSE, UM, HOW WE APPROACH THOSE CASES.
THIS IS ANOTHER IMAGE OF THE SAME CONTOUR.
UM, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE COLORING.
IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE ON SOME OF THE SHADING, BUT IT ALSO SHOWS THE CONTOURS FOR THE 55 60, 65 70, AND 75 DNL CONTOURS.
AND SO WHAT THIS IS JUST SHOWING IN, IN IS AN IMAGE OF THE NOISE EXPOSURE.
UM, THE FURTHER OUT YOU GET FROM THE AIRPORT, THE, UH, LESS SIGNIFICANT THE NOISE EXPOSURE WILL BE.
UM, BUT WITHIN THAT 65, YOU KNOW, THAT IS THE, THE SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD FOR, UM, SET BY THE FAA.
SO, UM, THIS IS JUST A LITTLE BIT OF SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION HERE.
UH, TO WRAP THINGS UP, UM, I'LL SHOW YOU AN IMAGE OF THE AIRCRAFT, UM, SOUND
[00:15:01]
EXPOSURE LEVEL, AS WELL AS THE PROGRESSION OF LOVE FIELD 65 DNL CONTOUR.AND LASTLY, A MAP THAT SHOWS THE 65 DNL CONTOUR, UM, AS IT RELATES TO THE CLOSEST RESIDENTIAL AREAS NEAR THE AIRPORT.
SO THIS IS, THIS IMAGE HERE IS JUST A, UH, GRAPHIC DISPLAY OF THE SOUND PROFILE OF THE AIRCRAFT.
SO, UM, AS IT APPROACHES, IF YOU'RE LOOKING ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE IMAGE HERE, THAT'S THE AIRCRAFT APPROACHING THE RUNWAY, AND THEN THE CENTER LINE IS ON THE RUNWAY, AND THEN TO THE RIGHT IS, UM, THE AIRCRAFT DEPARTING FROM THE AIRPORT.
AND SO YOU CAN SEE BASICALLY JUST THE DIFFERENT SOUND PROFILE THAT THE AIRCRAFT ENGINES AND THE AIRCRAFT AS A WHOLE GENERATES AS IT OPERATES AT THE AIRPORT.
AND SO THAT JUST SHOWS THROUGH THE YEARS HOW MUCH, UM, AIRCRAFT TECHNOLOGY HAS IMPROVED.
AND SO, UH, BACK TO WHY THERE HAS BEEN SUCH A GREAT REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF, UH, RESIDENTS EXPOSED GENERALLY AROUND THE COUNTRY TO AIRCRAFT NOISE.
AND IT HAS TO DO WITH, UH, THIS IMAGE HERE.
THIS IMAGE IS A, UH, A SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE, THE 65 DNL CONTOURS AROUND LOVE FIELD AS IT PROGRESSES THROUGH THE YEARS.
AND SO, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST, UH, ANOTHER WAY OF SHOWING HOW MUCH, UM, HOW MUCH IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE THROUGH THE YEARS, UM, THROUGH AIRCRAFT TECHNOLOGY AND, UM, NOISE ABATEMENT PROCEDURES.
YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE EARLY YEARS, IT STARTS OUT VERY LARGE, AND AS IT PROGRESSES, IT GETS GENERALLY SMALLER.
SO, UH, THIS IS WHAT WE LIKE TO SEE AS THE AIRPORT OPERATOR.
UM, THE FEWER RESIDENTS THAT ARE EXPOSED TO SIGNIFICANT LEVELS OF AIRCRAFT NOISE, THE BETTER.
IT'S BETTER FOR THE RESIDENTS, AND IT'S ALSO BETTER FOR US AS THE AIRPORT OPERATOR, UM, BECAUSE IT HELPS US IN OUR SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS AND, AND TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR.
AND SO THIS IS THE, UH, THE LAST IMAGE HERE THAT I WANNA LEAVE YOU WITH.
UH, THIS JUST SHOWS THE CLOSEST RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT ARE, UH, SURROUNDING LOVEFIELD.
SO LOVEFIELD HAS BEEN IN THE AREA FOR QUITE A LONG TIME, BUT SO HAVE MANY OF THESE RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
AND SO, UM, THIS JUST SHOWS JUST HOW CLOSE THEY REALLY ARE.
AND ONE OF, ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT COMES UP THAT WE OFTEN HEAR AS A DEPARTMENT FROM THE COMMUNITIES IS THAT THE 65 DNL CONTOUR, BECAUSE IT'S AN AVERAGE SOUND LEVEL, MAY NOT FULLY, UM, CONVEY THE LEVEL OF ANNOYANCE THAT THEY EXPERIENCE FROM AIRCRAFT NOISE.
AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH NOT ONLY THE VOLUME, UM, OF THE, THE SOUND COMING FROM THE AIRCRAFT, BUT ALSO THE FREQUENCY.
UM, BECAUSE IT'S AN AN AVERAGE, IT'S DIFFICULT, DIFFICULT TO CONVEY WHAT IS ONE REALLY LOUD NOISE EVENT OR WHAT IS MANY FREQUENT, BUT SOMEWHAT LESS LOUD NOISE EVENTS, BECAUSE WHEN YOU AVERAGE IT OUT, THEY MAY APPEAR TO BE THE SAME, BUT THE RESIDENTS WILL OFTEN, UH, INFORM US THAT, UH, VERY OFTEN IT'S THE FREQUENCY THAT THEY, THAT THEY ALSO FIND ANNOYING IN ADDITION TO, UH, THE VOLUME.
UM, AND SO AGAIN, THIS JUST, THIS JUST GOES BACK TO HOW WE, UH, AS THE DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION APPROACH THESE ZONING CASES, UM, WE NEED TO BE MINDFUL OF THE VOLUME GENERATED, BUT ALSO, UH, THE OVER FLIGHTS OF THE AIRCRAFT.
SO EVEN IF THEY'RE NOT, EVEN IF THE PROPERTY IS NOT DIRECTLY WITHIN THE 65 DNL CONTOUR, UM, IF IT'S CLOSE ENOUGH TO THE AIRPORT, THEY'RE GONNA EXPERIENCE A SIGNIFICANT LEVEL OF NOISE FROM OVER FLIGHTS, UM, AT LOW ALTITUDES AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND SO, UH, THIS IS JUST KIND OF HOW WE, UH, APPROACH THE ISSUE.
AND, YOU KNOW, I HOPE THAT, THAT, UH, THAT CONVEYS DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION'S, UH, POSITION TO YOU.
BUT, UM, I, I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR YOU.
IF YOU, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS, BUT HAPPY TO, UM, HEAR FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AS WELL.
I GUESS FIRST I WANNA START WITH, I KNOW THE FOCUS OF THIS PRESENTATION WAS ON LOVE FIELD, BUT I KNOW THERE'S ALSO OTHER AIRPORT FACILITIES WITHIN OUR CITY.
UM, DO THEY HAVE THE SAME REVIEW AND, UM, UM, PRO NO NOISE ABATEMENT PROGRAMS THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF LOVE FIELD? SO, UH, WE, WE DO HAVE OTHER FACILITIES.
WE HAVE, UM, DALLAS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT AS WELL AS THE VERTI PORT.
UM, BECAUSE THIS IS A DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION EFFORTS, SINCE WE'RE OVER BOTH OF THOSE FACILITIES, THEY ARE INCLUDED IN THIS.
NOW, SOME OF THE MEASURES ARE SPECIFIC TO DALLAS LOW FIELD.
UH, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO CONS, YOU KNOW, UH, FOR CONSTRUCTION EFFORTS OR THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT'LL BE LOCAL TO THAT FACILITY, UH, WE TAKE THOSE KIND OF ON A, ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, BUT THEY, UM, DALLAS
[00:20:01]
EXECUTIVE AIRPORT IS INCLUDED, UM, IN OUR VOLUNTARY NOISE PROGRAM.NOW, THE 65 DNL CONTOUR, WHICH AGAIN, IS THE SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD AT DALLAS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT, IS MUCH SMALLER THAN IT IS AT LOVE FIELD.
IT'S ACTUALLY CONFINED WITHIN THE PERIMETER FENCE OF THAT AIRPORT.
UM, AND SO TECHNICALLY AS FAR AS THE FAA IS CONCERNED THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE SIGNIFICANT THRESHOLD THAT'S CONTAINED WITHIN THE AIRPORT ITSELF.
HOWEVER, WE DO STILL REGULARLY HEAR FROM RESIDENTS, UM, THAT LIVE IN THOSE AREAS, AND, AND WE VALUE THEM AS WELL.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE ALWAYS WELCOME THEIR INPUT.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE WILL HEAR FROM THEM FREQUENTLY ABOUT DIFFERENT TYPES OF AIRCRAFT THAT ARE OPERATING AT LOVE FIELD.
THEY MAY BE A DIFFERENT TYPE THAT, UM, OPERATE AT AT, UH, LOVE FIELD, BUT THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY ALSO CAUSE NOISE DISTURBANCES AT, UM, DALLAS EXECUTIVE AS WELL.
AND I'LL APOLOGIZE, I LISTENED TO THE EARLY PART OF YOUR BRIEFING, BUT I MAY HAVE MISSED THIS.
UM, HOW IS THAT EVALUATED AND REVIEWED? UH, DOES IT EVER GET ADJUSTED? IS THERE EVER AN, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERATION OF A LOWER THRESHOLD REFLECTING SOME OF THESE IMPACTS ON SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES? YES.
SO THE 65, UH, DNL IS THE STANDARD THAT THE FAA HAS USED FOR DECADES AT THIS POINT.
NOW, THERE ARE, UH, DISCUSSIONS WITHIN THE INDUSTRY, UM, AND FROM VARIOUS DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES, AIRPORTS, THEMSELVES, UM, THERE IS ONGOING DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER THAT STANDARD SPEED CHANGED, BUT AT THIS TIME IT HAS NOT.
AND SO WE STICK TO THE 65, UH, DNL AT THIS POINT.
AND IS THAT ANYTHING THAT THE CITY MONITORS? UM, AND I I, I KNOW MANY YEARS AGO, A FORMER REPRESENTATIVE OF DISTRICT 14 WAS VERY INVOLVED, UM, IN THE REVIEW OF LOVE FIELD AND ITS IMPACT ON COMMUNITIES.
I MEAN, IS THAT ANYTHING THAT THE CITY ADVOCATES FOR, UM, IN YOUR ONGOING REVIEW OF, OF THE IMPACTS AND, YOU KNOW, GOOD USE OF, OF THE AIRPORT? CLEARLY AN AMAZING ASSET FOR OUR CITY.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE, UH, ACTIVELY MONITOR.
SO AS PART OF OUR VOLUNTARY NOISE PROGRAM, UM, WE CONDUCT STUDIES TO EVALUATE HOW THAT, UH, CONTOUR SHIFTS THROUGH THE YEARS THAT CURRENTLY AT THIS TIME, UH, WE'RE CONDUCTING THOSE STUDIES EVERY TWO YEARS.
AND SO, UH, THAT WILL GIVE US AN INDICATION OF HOW THE NOISE PROFILE HAS CHANGED AND WHAT OF WHICH COMMUNITIES MAY BE, UM, MORE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY THAT.
UM, SO THIS TALKED A LOT ABOUT, UM, AIRCRAFT ARRIVAL AND, UM, TAKEOFF.
I KNOW THERE'S OTHER FACILITIES THAT OPERATE AT LOVEFIELD, SOME OF THEM IN VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY TO, UM, RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES.
COULD YOU SPEAK TO HOW THOSE ARE MONITORED BY AVIATION? I THINK WE HAD A RECENT CARE FLIGHT EXPANSION THAT WAS RIGHT ON THE PERIMETER OF THE FACILITY IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, HOW ARE THOSE EVALUATED FOR SOUND? CURRENTLY UNDER OUR VOLUNTARY NOISE PROGRAM, WE HAVE, UH, FOUR NOISE MONITORS, UM, ONE AT EACH END OF THE RUNWAYS.
AND IT'S, IT'S BASICALLY A, A MICROPHONE THAT'S SOLAR PANELED, AND IT CAPTURES THE NOISE EVENT OF EACH, UM, AIRCRAFT OPERATION, TAKEOFF AND LANDING.
AND THEN IT TAKES THAT SOUND PROFILE AND IT PAIRS IT IN OUR SOFTWARE TO THE FLIGHT DATA OF THAT PARTICULAR AIRCRAFT.
AND SO, UH, WHEN AN AIRCRAFT, UM, TAKES OFF OR LANDS, IT GETS PAIRED, AND THEN I CAN GO BACK INTO THAT SOFTWARE AND REVIEW THAT DATA TO SEE, UH, WHAT WAS THE, WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE FLIGHT AND, UH, HOW WAS IT CONDUCTED? WHAT DID THE FLIGHT PATH LOOK LIKE? UM, INFORMATION LIKE THAT.
AND THEN I WILL, I WILL TAKE THAT, UM, INFORMATION AND AS I HEAR FROM, UH, THE RESIDENTS OR ASKED QUESTIONS COME UP AND I CAN USE THAT DATA AND PROVIDE THAT TO THEM.
BUT DOES THAT CAPTURE NON AIRCRAFT EVENTS OR IS IT ONLY SPECIFIC TO AIRCRAFT? IT IS SPECIFIC TO AIRCRAFT, YES, MA'AM.
THAT MAY BE SOMETHING I'D LIKE TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ON.
AND THEN TWO, UH, FINAL QUESTIONS.
UM, AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS, THIS PROGRAM YOU MENTIONED IS VOLUNTARY.
I UNDERSTAND IT REQUIRES TO BE VOLUNTARY.
UM, HOW IS THE COMMUNITY ENGAGED IN UNDERSTANDING THIS EVALUATION? UM, I KNOW IN THE PAST, I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN MORE REGULAR OUTREACH, UM, BUT IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IF COMMUNITIES ARE INTERESTED IN HAVING YOU ATTEND ONE OF THEIR MEETINGS THAT YOU ALL ARE AVAILABLE TO DO? UH, WE DO REGULARLY HOST, UM, MEETINGS WITH THE COMMUNITY IN A FEW DIFFERENT FORMATS.
WE HAVE OUR, OUR GOOD NEIGHBOR PROGRAM, UH, WHICH
[00:25:01]
PROVIDES GENERAL, UH, UPDATES ABOUT THE AIRPORT TO THE COMMUNITY.AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE OUR NOISE, UH, STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS WHERE, UH, COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE WELCOME TO, UH, COME AND EXPRESS THEIR CONCERNS AS WELL AS TO GET UPDATES ON, UM, OUR VOLUNTARY NOISE PROGRAM.
UM, AS FAR AS ATTENDING, UH, THEIR MEETINGS, THAT'S, UH, I MEAN, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE OPEN TO.
WE HAVEN'T, UH, RECEIVED ANY REQUESTS FOR THAT RECENTLY, BUT IT IS SOMETHING WE, WE CAN DO.
YEAH, IF I COULD ASK FOR THOSE.
UM, I, I WILL SAY I'M, I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER BEEN INVITED TO A NOISE STAKEHOLDER MEETING, SO THAT'D BE GREAT TO TO KNOW WHEN THOSE ARE TAKING PLACE.
AND FINAL QUESTION, YOU TALKED A LOT ABOUT HOW YOU REVIEW REZONING REQUESTS, HOW, UM, THOSE ARE EVALUATED IN CONTEXT OF ALL THESE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS, BUT WE HAVE A LOT AREAS, WELL, WE HAVE A CASE TODAY THAT'S A REZONING CASE, I THINK IS GONNA BE WITHIN THIS AREA.
BUT, UM, MANY OF THE AREAS AROUND THE AIRPORT ARE REDEVELOPING BASED ON THEIR EXISTING ZONING ENTITLEMENTS, UM, WITH EXIST OR INCREASING THEIR DENSITY, INCREASING THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS.
CAN YOU SPEAK TO HOW THAT MIGHT NEED TO BE EVALUATED MORE BROADLY WITHIN OUR CITY? OR THERE STANDARDS THAT NEED TO BE THOUGHT ABOUT IN TERMS OF CONSTRUCTION? ARE THERE OTHER MEASURES THAT THE CITY AS A WHOLE MAY NEED TO BE CONSIDERED? AND THIS MAY BE OUTSIDE OF THE REALM OF THIS BODY, BUT JUST WANTED TO ASK THAT QUESTION GENERALLY IF THAT WAS SOMETHING YOU ALL EVALUATED.
SO CONSISTENTLY WE'VE BEEN RECEIVING FOR A YEAR, YEAR OR MORE, WE'VE BEEN RECEIVING GREAT, GREAT, UH, COMMUNICATION WITH, WITH OUR AVIATION DEPARTMENT ON, UH, THE EARLY PORTION OF REVIEW OF OUR, UH, REZONING CASES.
SO I JUST NEED TO GET IT A LITTLE CLOSER.
UM, SO WE'VE, WE'VE HAD ONGOING REVIEW OF, OF ZONING CASES IN THAT CASE.
AND SO, I MEAN, YOU ASKED, YOU ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS, AND THIS IS A, THERE'S A BIG ISSUE OF THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT PLAY INTO THIS.
SO WE'VE GOT ENTITLED LAND THAT WE HAVE IN THE AREA, WE'VE GOT REZONINGS THAT ARE ONGOING IN THE AREA.
UM, SO ONE THING THAT WE HAVE NOTED IS THAT THE RECENT COPIES OF INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE, UM, SAY THAT IN THE 65 CONTOUR, YOU HAVE TO HAVE INCREASED SOUND ATTENUATION.
YOU HAVE TO MEET CERTAIN STANDARDS INSIDE.
SO THAT WILL, THAT WILL COVER TO A DEGREE, YOU, YOU'RE ALREADY ENTITLED PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, IN, IN FUTURE ENTITLED PROPERTY AS WELL.
SO THERE IS THAT, UM, MY FRIENDS IN AVIATION WILL SAY, THAT'S NOT GOING TO COVER US FOR EVERYTHING.
IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING PERFECT AND, AND THAT IT'S A FACTOR.
IT, IT MITIGATES SOME OF THIS SO THAT WE HAVE THAT GOING ON IN JUST BY LEANING ON BUILDING CODE THAT WE HAVE ADOPTED.
UM, OTHER THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT.
SO, I MEAN, I, I, I LOOK AT SOLUTIONS.
ONE IS TO PAY VERY CLOSE MIND TO THIS.
THERE IS A G YOU KNOW, PUBLIC GIS MAP HAS THESE CONTOURS IN IT, SO ANYONE CAN VIEW THEM.
ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, ANY MEMBER OF THIS BODY, AND CERTAINLY OUR STAFF DOES IT, UM, CAN VIEW IT.
UM, SO MY SHORT TERM ACTION IS PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THESE, UM, PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THOSE CONTOURS.
UM, LIKE, LIKE WE SAY, THEY'LL UPDATE OVER TIME AS WELL.
UM, WE CAN VIEW THEM WITH NUANCE, I THINK.
AND THEN THEY, THEY SAY THAT NOT JUST BECAUSE IT'S IN THAT, IN THAT BUFFER MEANS THAT IT SHOULD BE, OR OUTSIDE OF THE BUFFER SHOULD BE APPROVED, OR BECAUSE IT'S INSIDE IT NECESSARILY SHOULD BE DENIED OR, OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
UM, I THINK WHERE STAFF IS GONNA CONTINUE TO VIEW IT WITH NUANCE, UM, AND I KNOW THIS, THIS BODY WILL AS WELL.
UM, SO SHORT TERM IS WE ALL WILL MAKE EFFORT TO APPLY WHAT WE'VE LEARNED FROM OUR, OUR FRIENDS AT AVIATION, UM, TO, TO INDIVIDUAL ZONING CASES.
UM, I WOULD SAY THAT MAYBE A MIDTERM SOLUTION IS WE COULD DO BETTER EDUCATION OF OUR, OUR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY SO THAT THEY'RE AWARE THAT IF THIS IS AN ONGOING POLICY DIRECTION THAT WE PLAN TO TAKE AS A CITY, AS A STAFF, AS A, UH, AS A COUNCIL, THEN WE, WE CAN PUT ON OUR, WE CAN DO THINGS LIKE PUT ON OUR WEBSITES, UH, THINGS THAT LEAD US TOWARDS, UH, THIS IS THE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, UM, FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, REZONINGS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, THEN HONESTLY, I MEAN, WE, WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT BACK AND FORTH APPROACHES FOR LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS, OTHER CITIES DO, IT COULD BE PUT INTO CODE THAT, FRANKLY, I, I'M NOT PROPOSING ANYTHING SPECIFIC, BUT YOU, YOU CAN SAY RESIDENTIAL'S PROHIBITED WITHIN THIS AREA.
YOU COULD, YOU COULD PUT THAT IN, UH, RETROACTIVELY FOR CODE, UH, THAT WOULD APPLY TO ALREADY ENTITLED PROPERTIES.
UM, BUT YOU COULD DO THAT, THAT CAN BE DONE THROUGH CODE OR A VERY COMMON APPROACH IS ALSO OVERLAYS, UH,
[00:30:01]
WHERE YOU, YOU LEAVE YOUR EXISTING ZONING IN PLACE, YOU DROP AN OVERLAY ON, AND IT SAYS EVERYTHING APPLIES ABOUT THIS EXISTING ZONING AND NOTHING CHANGES EXCEPT IT TAKES OUT RESIDENTIAL USES OR, OR THINGS LIKE THAT.UM, OR APPLIES ADDITIONAL BUILDING STANDARDS.
UH, I, I, I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH, UM, OVERLAYS THAT APPLY BUILDING STANDARDS IN THIS CITY, BUT IT CAN BE DONE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, UM, AND HAS BEEN DONE.
SO SOME TO SOME TO THINK ABOUT THAT'S GONNA NEED A, A BROADER, UM, POLICY APPROACH BY
BUT THAT'S MY APPLICATION OF, OF OUR, OUR TOOLS TO THIS PROBLEM.
THAT WAS A VERY BROAD ANSWER, PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT BEYOND WHAT I THINK I WAS, UM, EXPECTING TO HEAR, BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I'VE THOUGHT WE'VE, WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A WHILE,
SO THANK YOU MR. HALLS FOR THE PRESENTATION.
UM, THIS IS REALLY INTERESTING.
JUST FOR GENERAL INFORMATION, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO DISTRIBUTE THIS, UH, PRESENTATION TO, I DON'T SEE IT IN OUR DOCKET MATERIALS TODAY? THANK YOU.
MR. HAWES, IS IT, UH, COULD YOU GO TO THE SLIDE WITH THE CONTOUR MAP AND THE NEIGHBORHOODS, THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT ARE IMPACTED, UH, BY THE, UH, NOISE LEVELS? THAT ONE THERE? YES.
UH, COULD, DO YOU HAVE A CONTOUR MAP SIMILAR TO THIS FOR EXECUTIVE AIRPORT? I THINK THAT WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT.
I KNOW DARRELL WOULD PROBABLY LIKE TO SEE IT TOO, SINCE BOTH DISTRICT FOUR AND DISTRICT THREE ARE IMPACTED, OUR NEIGHBORHOODS ARE IMPACTED BY EXECUTIVE AIRPORT.
SO WE DON'T HAVE AN IMAGE EXACTLY LIKE THIS FOR, UM, DEA AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS, AGAIN, THAT THE 65 DNL CONTOUR AT, UH, DALLAS EXECUTIVE IS WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE AIRPORT, BUT WE COULD GENERATE AN IMAGE LIKE THIS THAT WOULD SHOW, UM, AT LEAST THE DISTANCE OF THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES TO THE AIRPORT, IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU'RE INTERESTED IN.
DID, DID I HEAR YOU SAY THAT? UH, THE NEIGHBORHOODS AROUND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT ARE NOT, UH, IMPACTED BY NOISE LEVELS, UH, FROM EXECUTIVE AIRPORT.
SO THEY ARE IMPACTED BY NOISE, BUT THEY'RE NOT WITHIN THE 65 DNL CONTOUR, WHICH IS THE FA A'S, UH, THRESHOLD AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.
BUT YOU, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE 'EM OUT THEN FOR, UH, DARRELL AND I, WE COULD GENERATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT FOR YOU.
ONE MAYBE FOR STAFF AND, AND ONE FOR YOU, UH, FOR STAFF.
ARE WE, ARE WE ALERTED IN OUR BRIEFS IF, IF, UH, DEVELOPMENT IS WITHIN ONE OF THESE ZONES, WE CAN ADJUST HOW THAT WORKS? BECAUSE AS I SAID, IT'S PROBABLY NOT GONNA BE BLACK OR WHITE AND IT'S NOT GONNA BE BINARY, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, A GOOD IDEA OR A BAD IDEA TO PUT RESIDENTIAL ALONG THE CONTOUR BECAUSE WE SAID IT'S KIND OF, IT SHOULDN'T BE MAYBE SEEN AS A, A HARD LINE.
UM, WE'LL BRING ATTENTION TO IT.
UH, I THINK IN PRETTY MUCH ANY, ANY BRIEF IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, MOVING FORWARD, WE'LL, WE'LL BRING ATTENTION TO IT.
UM, AND I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'LL HAVE COMPREHENSIVE MAPS FOR IT.
UM, BUT EVERY TIME WE'LL LOOK AT A CASE IN THIS AREA, WHAT WE, WE, WE REFER TO THE, UH, NOISE CONTOURS AND WE'LL, WE'LL BRING ATTENTION TO IT.
UM, AND THEN LET, WE'LL GIVE OUR ANALYSIS HOW THAT IS FILTERED THROUGH THIS LENS, UM, AND THEN HOPEFULLY PROVIDE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO HELP THIS BODY MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THOSE.
I, I THINK THAT'D BE VERY HELPFUL.
UH, DO YOU STILL HAVE MILITARY FLIGHTS, UH, COMING INTO LEFT FIELD FOR REPAIR MAINTENANCE MODIFICATION? WE DO, YES.
AND ARE, ARE THEY GOVERNED BY THE SAME RULES THAT CIVILIAN AVIATION WOULD BE? THEY'RE NOT, NO.
UH, THEY, THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO MEET, UH, THE SAME NOISE STANDARDS THAT CIVILIAN AIRCRAFT ARE.
DO YOU FIND THAT MILITARY AIRCRAFT ARE LOUDER THAN COMMERCIAL AVIATION? THEY ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LOUDER THAN, UH, COMMERCIAL AVIATION.
AND, AND CAN MILITARY, CAN THEY RUN UP, UH, MILITARY ENGINES LATE AT NIGHT OR IN THE EARLY MORNINGS OF THE HOUR, OR ARE THEY STILL BOUND BY THIS, UH, THESE RESTRICTIONS? OBJECTION.
UM, JUST TO TOUCH NOTE ON THAT, UH, WHILE WE DO HAVE MILITARY OPERATIONS AT LOVE FIELD AND ALSO EXECUTIVE, THE FREQUENCY IS MUCH LOWER THAN, UM, COMMERCIAL
[00:35:01]
AIRLINES OR ANY OF THE PRIVATE, UH, AIRCRAFT.UM, WE HAVE NOT SEEN, UM, IN HISTORY THAT WE'VE HAD MILITARY AIRCRAFT RUNNING ENGINE MAINTENANCE RUN-UPS, UM, LATE AT NIGHT OR EARLY IN THE MORNING, UM, AS WELL.
SO THEY'RE GENERALLY, UM, IN THEIR AFTERNOON OR IF THEY ARE AT NIGHT, THEY'RE KIND OF JUST COMING, TOUCHING DOWN AND THEN TAKING OFF EITHER AT THAT SAME TIME OR EARLY IN THE, NOT EARLY IN THE MORNING, BUT SOMETIME IN THE MORNING, AFTERNOON.
YEAH, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION A LOT OF MILITARY FLIGHTS CAME IN AFTER DARK
BUT, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I'M JUST CURIOUS 'CAUSE WE'VE HEARD NOISES, YOU KNOW, UH, ENGINE RUN-UPS AND THINGS IN THE PAST.
I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING IN A LONG TIME.
UM, GENERALLY JUST SPEAKING, UM, MOST OF THE COMPLAINTS THAT WE DO RECEIVE FROM MILITARY AIRCRAFT, I WOULD SAY MOST OF THE TIME ARE IN THE AFTERNOON, KIND OF LIKE MAYBE FIVE O'CLOCK EVENING, BUT, UM, MORE SO THE BIGGEST COMPLAINTS AT NIGHT OR THE COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT MORE SO, OR PRIVATE, UH, JETS OF THAT NATURE.
YEAH, JUST A BIT OF HISTORY IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS, BACK IN THE 1970S, UH, WHEN I LIVED OVER IN THAT AREA, WE LEARNED THAT WE COULD NOT SPEAK ON THE TELEPHONE WHEN A PLANE WAS TAKING OFF.
UH, YOU KNOW, SO YOU WOULD STOP YOUR CONVERSATION WHILE THE AIRCRAFT.
AND, AND THEN ONE FINE LITTLE FUN THING IS, UH, WE USED TO SIT AT THE PATIO OF DUR SCHNAPPS AND SNACKS ALONG BATMAN LAKE THERE.
YOU COULD ALMOST REACH UP AND TOUCH THE SEVEN 40 SEVENS WHEN THEY CAME IN FOR LANDING.
THANK YOU GUYS FOR AN AWESOME PRESENTATION WORKING IN STEM, YOU GUYS LIKE, THIS WAS NICE.
UM, SOME QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO, UM, THE EXECUTIVE AIRPORT.
I SEE A LOT OF STUDIES AT LOVE FIELD.
DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE LAST TIME STUDIES HAVE BEEN DONE AT THE EXECUTIVE AIRPORT? WE, WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY DONE RECENTLY.
UM, THE SAME WAY YOU IS, IS IT THE SAME MICROPHONE SET UP AT EXECUTIVE AIRPORT AS WELL? IT IS, UH, ONE MICROPHONE AT EACH END OF THE RUNWAYS.
UM, ANOTHER QUESTION THAT, UM, COMMISSIONER HALL HIT ON FOR ME.
UM, FIRST ELEVATION IN THE CITY.
MY AREA HAS A LOT OF, UM, HIGH ELEVATED AREAS AND NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, THAT ARE JUST OUTSIDE OF REDBIRD, BUT CLOSER TO THE MILITARIES AIRPORT.
UM, I GUESS THE, UM, NO, THE NATIONAL GUARD, UM, SO FREQUENTLY OVER MY HOME AND MY NEIGHBORHOOD HELICOPTERS FLY, OR THE MILITARY STYLE HELICOPTERS FLY OVER THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, AREAS WHERE THE CITY'S MORE ELEVATED CLOSER TO CEDAR HILL, THOSE AREAS OR MONITOR IS MONITORING DONE THERE OR, BECAUSE EVEN THE COMMERCIAL FLIGHTS SOMETIMES AT NIGHT ARE VERY, VERY LOUD AND IT'S LIKE, WHOA, WHAT THE HECK'S GOING ON? DO WE MONITOR THINGS AT THOSE ELEVATIONS JUST FOR KNOWLEDGE, OR DO YOU GUYS, ARE YOU GUYS AWARE OF HIGH ELEVATION AREAS IN THE CITY WHERE NOISES MAY BE OF, OF CONCERNED? SO AS FAR AS MONITORING GOES, UM, THAT, THAT JUST COMES DOWN TO THE, THE MICROPHONES THAT WE HAVE ON THE AIRPORT NOW.
UH, WHEN WE, WHEN WE GENERATE A NOISE CONTOUR REPORT THAT OUR, OUR CONSULTANT GENERATES FOR US, THAT WILL TAKE INTO ACCOUNT MANY DIFFERENT FACTORS INCLUDING LIKE, UH, YOU KNOW, LIKE ELEVATION WEATHER, UM, CLOUD COVER AIRCRAFT TYPES.
UM, AND THE, THE ALTITUDE THAT THE AIRCRAFT ARE, ARE FLYING AT NOW, THAT'S BASED ON MODELING DATA AND THAT'S WHAT WE USE FOR IN THE REPORT.
IT, IT IS ALSO EXTREMELY ACCURATE.
UM, BUT IN TERMS OF ACTIVE MONITORING, WE'RE LIMITED TO THE FOUR MICROPHONES WE HAVE AT EACH, UH, AIRPORT.
AND, AND OF COURSE, MILITARY, RIGHT? UM, NO.
YOU GUYS AREN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING THE NATIONAL GUARD AIRPORT, RIGHT? ARE YOU? OKAY.
NO, BUT THAT'S ALL FAAI WOULD ASSUME? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? EXCELLENT.
UM, UH, ARE WE READY FOR OUR SECOND BRIEFING? SHE'S NOT.
THEN WE'LL, WE'LL CIRCLE BACK TO ITEM NUMBER TWO.
DO WE NEED NUMBER THREE? BRIEFED NUMBER THREE? YEAH.
ALRIGHT, LET'S, LET'S BRIEF NUMBER THREE AND THEN WE'LL GO TO NINE AND 10.
UH, NINE WILL BE BRIEFED, 10 WILL BE BRIEFED, UH, PER REQUEST.
SO WE'LL GO WITH NUMBER THREE, THEN NINE AND 10.
[00:40:01]
CAN I ASK ABOUT CASE NUMBER FIVE? I WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO BE BRIEFED.YEAH, WELL, THE, THE GOAL IS TO GO TO THREE, THE NINE AND 10 AND THEN GO BACK IN ORDER JUST 'CAUSE WE HAVE SOME MOVING PARTS.
SO, AND THEN, UH, ABSOLUTELY WE CAN GO TO NUMBER FIVE, OF COURSE.
THE REQUEST IS FOR AN APPLICATION FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT SIX WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 6 5 5 SOUTHWEST CORNER OF POTTER HOUSE WAY AND TRUTH DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 21.54 ACRES.
SO SOUTHWEST CORNER, LIKE I SAID, ON DISTRICT THREE, THIS IS THE AERIAL AND ZONING AND LAND USE MAP USUALLY COVERED, UH, BY THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT TO THE, UH, WEST, UH, TO THE EAST, SINGLE FAMILY AND TO THE SOUTH ON DEVELOPED LAND.
SO SOME OF THE BACKGROUND FOR THIS, IT'S PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, UH, 6 5 5 WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 25TH, 2003 ON PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY SEW PD NUMBER 5 4 5.
THIS AREA REQUEST IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A PRIVATE SCHOOL ON MARCH 14TH, 2004, CITY PLAN, COMMISSION APPROVED ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ALLOWING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE EXISTING PRIVATE SCHOOL.
ON MARCH 1ST, 2007, CITY PLAN COMMISSION APPROVED A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PERMITTING TWO ADDITIONAL PARKING AREAS, ABUTTING THE MAIN SCHOOL STRUCTURE.
AND RIGHT NOW THE CURRENT REQUEST IS FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
SO FOR THIS ONE, THEY ARE ADDING PARKING AREA ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE EXISTING SCHOOL INSTEAD OF THE TWO SEPARATE PARKING AREAS THAT WERE AUTHORIZED UNDER THE PREVIOUS MINOR AMENDMENT.
SO RIGHT NOW I'M JUST SHOWING THE ORIGINAL VERSUS THE PROPOSED AND I FELT LIKE IT WAS NEEDED TO SHOW THE EXISTING FROM THE PREVIOUS MINOR TO THE PROPOSED MINOR.
AGAIN, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS APPROVAL.
ANY QUESTIONS, MR. HERBERT? JUST A COUPLE.
UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND YOUR WORK ON THIS.
UM, THE NEIGHBORS ARE HAPPY THAT THE TRAFFIC HAS MOVED OR THE PARKING LOT IS MOVED AND MOVED AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBOR, SO THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
THERE'S A, UM, INTERSECTION AT TRUTH AND GIDEON WAY WHERE CARS WILL BE, UH, INGRESS AND EGRESS.
I'VE, UM, ARE YOU AWARE, SORRY, I DID THAT.
UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT I'VE ASKED THE D UH, CONSULTANT ON THIS CASE TO CONSIDER THAT EXIT AND ENTRANCE? BECAUSE THERE ARE HOMES THAT SIT RIGHT AT THAT INTERSECTION, UM, AND GIDEON IS MUCH SMALLER THAN CAPELLA.
UM, SO ARE YOU AWARE THAT I HAD THAT CONVERSATION? I WAS NOT AWARE YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HIM.
[00:45:01]
I DID.SO THE NEXT THING IS THIS IS A PARKING LOT, UM, IN AN AREA THAT IS VERY GREEN.
UM, THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, CORRECT? YES.
SO OUR AUTHORITY IS VERY LIMITED ON CHANGES AFTER THIS BODY IS MET.
IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, IT'S, UH, AS LONG AS IT MEETS THE FOR, UH, REQUIREMENTS TO BE A MINOR, IT'S JUST A MINISTERIAL REVIEW.
UM, DO YOU HAVE THE ABILITY OR, OR YOU'RE AWARE OF THE ABILITY TO ASK FOR THE DEVELOPMENT TO INCLUDE A MORE GREEN WALKABLE, ECO-FRIENDLY PARKING LOT VERSUS JUST REGULAR CONCRETE? SO WHAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT THAT WE HAVE, UM, WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF WHAT THE ZONING IS.
AND I DON'T, TO MY UNDERSTANDING THAT'S NOT WRITTEN INTO THE PD UH, REQUIREMENTS LIKE THAT.
WE CAN, WE CAN MAKE SUGGESTIONS NOW AND AGAIN, BUT I, I DON'T THINK WE CAN REQUIRE ANYTHING MORE LIKE THAT.
UH, IF IT'S NOT BA BASED ON THE PD, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, ESPECIALLY 'CAUSE THIS IS JUST A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, NOT A LANDSCAPE PLAN.
LANDSCAPE PLAN MIGHT HAVE THOSE SORTS OF THINGS BUILT IN, BUT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, IT'S, IT'S NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO INCLUDE DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND THEY'RE JUST LIMITED TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
AS, AS, AS CONSULTANTS OR, OR PLANNERS, CAN YOU RECOMMEND THESE THINGS? SOMETIMES NOT REQUIRE THEM, BUT I WOULD SAY YES.
SO WE CAN MAKE SUGGESTIONS AND WE CAN DO THINGS THAT WE THINK ARE, ARE GOOD, GOOD PLANNING, WE CAN MAKE SUGGESTIONS AND WE CERTAINLY DO.
UM, I, I AM AWARE THAT THIS ONE ACTUALLY HAS PROPOSED PERMEABLE PAVEMENT.
ON, ON THE PLAN AS PART OF THE, UH, AS PART OF THE PARKING AREA.
JUST NOTICE OF THAT, UH, RIGHT NOW.
BUT WE, WE MAKE SUGGESTIONS AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO MAKE IT, UH, TO HELP US, UH, GET TO BETTER DESIGN, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE DO HAVE TO LOOK AT IT BASED ON THE CODE REQUIREMENTS.
SO TO MAKE YOU AWARE, I DID MAKE SOME PROPOSALS TO THEM AS WELL, SO HOPEFULLY THEY'LL KIND OF GET THERE.
UM, SO THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY AND UM, WE'LL, WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO IT THIS EVENING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO CASE NUMBER FOUR.
LET'S ACTUALLY HOP TO NUMBER NINE.
THIS IS, UH, ITEM NINE, CASE Z 2 45 DASH 180 1.
IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR ONE, AN ME ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT AND TWO DEED RESTRICTIONS ON PROPERTIES ZONE TO CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT.
IT'S ON THE NORTH LINE OF CANADA, DRIVE WEST OF NORTH HAMPTON ROAD, ABOUT 26,571 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE, UH, OVER HERE IN WEST DALLAS.
HERE'S THE AERIAL MAP SHOWING THE SITE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S CURRENTLY, UH, UNDEVELOPED.
UH, THE ZONING MAP, UH, IT'S AN INTERESTING AREA.
SO IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH IS THE TRINITY RIVER.
UH, THE LEVEE, UM, AND THE RIVER ITSELF, UH, SURROUNDING AREAS ARE CR TO THE SOUTH.
THERE'S A PD FOR A CHURCH AND A SCHOOL.
UH, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE IS R FIVE A TO THE EAST, UH, THAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY SEPARATED BY A HAMPTON ROAD AND SOME OF THOSE KIND OF SERVICE ROADS, OR IT'S NOT TECHNICALLY A SERVICE ROAD, BUT THE POINT IS IT'S PRETTY BIG, UH, SEPARATION THERE.
AND THEN THERE'S SOME CR DOWN AT THE SOUTHEAST.
SO THE SITE'S CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED, UH, THE APPLICANT WISHES TO AT THIS TIME DEVELOP A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.
UH, BUT THEY DON'T WANNA GENERATE RPS RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE ON THE ADJACENT CR ZONING.
AS SUCH, THEY'RE REQUESTING AN MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT AND ARE PROPOSING DEED RESTRICTIONS.
[00:50:01]
ARE ON SITE ON CANADA DRIVE, LOOKING NORTH, THEN THE NORTHEAST TO THE EAST.UH, THEY WERE DOING SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION ON CANADA HERE.
THAT'S THE SCHOOL THERE ON THE, IN THE BACKGROUND.
AND JUST SOME WIDER ANGLE SHOTS.
UH, THIS IS A COMPARISON TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
SO IN THIS CASE, UH, WITH MU ONE, YOUR SETBACKS ARE PRETTY MUCH, THEY'RE THE SAME AS CR, UH, YOUR FAR, IT'S GONNA BE A 0.8 FOR RESIDENTIAL USES.
UH, THE STANDARD MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN MU ONE FOR A SINGLE USE IS 80 FEET MAX.
UH, AND THE LOT COVERAGE DOES INCREASE TO 80%.
UH, NOW KEEP IN MIND THERE ARE PROPOSING DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT WOULD LIMIT THIS TO MORE OR LESS MATCH CR.
UH, SO THE PROPOSED DEED RESTRICTIONS GENERALLY ARE PROHIBITING THE ADDITIONAL USES ALLOWED BY MU ONE IN ORDER TO MATCH CR.
THEY ALSO ARE PRO PROPOSING PROHIBITING SOME CR USES SUCH AS PARAPHERNALIA SHOPS, UH, WHICH ACTUALLY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED 'CAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY OF THE SCHOOL ANYWAY.
UH, MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING STATION AND SOME OTHERS.
UM, IT DOES ALLOW FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX AND MULTIFAMILY USES AND A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 54 FEET TO MATCH THE CR DISTRICT.
UM, THERE IS AN UPDATE SINCE THE DOCKET'S PUBLICATION, THEY ARE PROPOSING SOME FURTHER DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR SINGLE FAMILY OR DUPLEX USES WOULD BE 30 FEET.
THE MAX HEIGHT FOR ALL OF THE RESIDENTIAL USES WOULD BE 36 FEET.
UH, GENERALLY THE FORWARD DALLAS PLAN DOES DESIGNATE THIS AS COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL AND THE PRIMARY USES FOR THAT ARE RESIDENTIAL USES, YOUR SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED OR DETACHED, ET CETERA.
YOUR RETAIL OFFICE AND MIXED USE ARE SECONDARY, BUT THOSE SECONDARY USES ARE GENERALLY PROMOTED NEAR MAJOR THOROUGH AFFAIRS AND COMMERCIAL NODES.
UH, THE SITE IS CLOSE TO NORTHAMPTON ROAD.
I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY CALL IT A DEVELOPED COMMERCIAL OR RETAIL NODE AT THIS TIME.
UH, IT DOES HAVE THE CR ZONING, BUT TO THE WEST OF THE SITE THERE'S WHAT APPEARS TO BE A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE AND THEN A CHURCH TO THE EAST OF THE SITE IS WHAT MAY HAVE BEEN A BUSINESS AT SOME POINT.
IT LOOKS KIND OF BOARDED UP AND ABANDONED NOW.
UM, BUT NEVERTHELESS, THE WEST DALLAS LAND USE STUDY DOES CALL FOR BOTH SINGLE FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL DEVELOPMENT ALONG CANADA GOING TOWARDS HAMPTON.
IF IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, UH, WE DO FIND, UH, THAT IT IS COMPATIBLE THERE.
AND SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL, UH, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AS BRIEFED BY STAFF.
QUESTIONS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? YES, PLEASE.
COMMISSIONER HALL, UH, MR. BATES.
SO THIS WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX AND MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
IT WOULD ALLOW FOR ALL THREE OF THOSE.
UM, I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT'S INTENTION AT THIS TIME IS TO DEVELOP IT WITH SINGLE FAMILY, UM, BUT THEY WOULD HAVE THE OPTION FOR DUPLEX OR MULTIFAMILY AS WELL.
UH, LIMITED TO THE CONSTRAINTS IN GENERAL OF MU ONE.
IT IT WOULD BE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED? YES, IT WOULD BE DETACHED.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS AND THIS CASE HAS COME OFF CONSENT.
UM, AND UH, SO LET'S GO TO NUMBER 10.
WE WILL BRIEF 10, UH, PER REQUEST.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE NUMBER 10 BRIEFED? OH, OKAY.
THEN LET'S GO BACK TO THE TOP AND WE WILL BEGIN.
PARDON ME WITH NUMBER FOUR? YES.
AND FOUR HAS ALSO COME OFF CONSENT AND WE WILL BRIEF THAT ONE TODAY.
PARDON ME, MR. CHAIR? UH, YES SIR.
DID YOU SAY NUMBER 10 IS ALSO OFF CONSENT? JUST NONE? YES.
NINE IS OFF, UH, IS OFF CONSENT, 10 IS ON CONSENT.
UH, AND SO WE'LL GO TO NUMBER FOUR AND, UH, GO DOWN IN ORDER PLEASE.
AND FOUR HAS OFF HAS COME OFF CONSENT.
UM, IT'S LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST KERN WOOD DRIVE, UM, WEST OF LOST MIRAGE DRIVE.
UM, THIS IS AN APPLICATION, UH, POOR GENERAL ZONING CHANGE FROM R DASH 7.5, A SINGLE FAMILY TO
[00:55:01]
DA DUPLEX.SO THE SITE IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED.
UM, I'LL SPEAK ON THIS MORE IN IN A MOMENT, BUT FOR DALLAS DOES SUPPORT THIS CHANGE.
THE APPLICANT IS NOT PROPOSING ANY DEMOLITION.
UM, AND SO THEREFORE COMPATIBLE INFILL DEVELOPMENT WOULD MAKE SENSE AT THIS LOCATION.
IT'S IN THE SOUTHERN, UH, REGION OF THE CITY.
HERE'S AN AERIAL MAP SHOWING THE PROPERTY.
UH, SO IT IS MAJORLY SURROUNDED BY A SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT IT IS A VACANT PROPERTY.
SO, UM, OVERWHELMINGLY IT IS A R DS 7.5 A DISTRICT.
UM, THERE IS A TOWN HOME DISTRICT JUST TO THE NORTHEAST.
UM, NORTH OF THE PROPERTY ITSELF.
THERE'S A PUBLIC PARK NORTHWEST, THERE'S A PUBLIC SCHOOL NORTHEAST, THERE IS A CHILDCARE AND CHURCH.
AND THEN TO THE WEST AND EAST AND THE SOUTH, THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
IF YOU GO A LITTLE BIT, UH, FARTHER SOUTH, THERE IS, UM, AN ADDITIONAL UNDEVELOPED PIECE OF PROPERTY.
WITH THIS, UH, GENERAL ZONING CHANGE, THERE WOULD BE A CHANGE TO THE, UM, LOT REQUIREMENTS.
UM, WITH THE DUPLEX DISTRICT, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE A LARGER, UM, REAR YARD.
THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED SIX ADDITIONAL FEET ON THE HEIGHT AND THEN THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO USE, UM, APPROXIMATELY 15% OF, UH, ADDITIONAL SPACE ON THE PROPERTY.
THIS IS THE PHOTO LOOKING, UM, WEST AT THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
SO THERE, THERE ARE SOME TREES ON THE PROPERTY, AGAIN LOOKING NORTHWEST.
JUST A A LITTLE BIT FARTHER, UH, NORTH ON LAS MIRAGE DRIVE, UH, YOU CAN SEE THERE IS A HOUSE ON THE OTHER SIDE.
SO THERE IS A CREEK, UM, THAT DOES SEPARATE THE, UM, THE TWO NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE.
AND THEN THIS IS LOOKING SOUTHWEST, UM, BACK AT THE PROPERTY NEAR THE CORNER.
AND THEN THIS IS LOOKING WEST, UM, AT THE END OF LOS MIRAGE DRIVE, UH, WEST ONTO KIRKWOOD DRIVE.
SO THE UH, PLACE TYPE FOR THIS AREA IS COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL.
UM, AND IT'S COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL.
COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL DOES, UM, SPECIFICALLY FOR, FOR THE PRIMARY USES HERE, IT WOULD BE THEIR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED OR ATTACHED.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED.
UM, SO THEY WOULD HAVE 12, UM, LOTS COMPRISED OF 24 DIFFERENT UNITS.
UM, YEAH, UH, APPROVAL OF THIS REZONING REQUEST WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE UNMET DEMAND FOR, UM, FLEXIBLE HOUSING OPTIONS.
SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
DOES THE, DOES THE PRESENCE OF THAT CREEK UH, PROPOSE ANY, UH, SUGGEST ANY DIFFICULTIES WITH THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT? I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A LAND USE QUESTION.
IT'S MORE OF A DEVELOPMENT QUESTION.
ALRIGHT, I'LL, I'LL ASK LATER.
AND THIS CASE HAS COME OFF CONSENT, SO WE, WE CAN'T ASK THE APPLICANT.
UM, ARE THERE QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER HARBERT AT LEAST, SIR, THIS, THIS ISN'T A LAND USE QUESTION EITHER, BUT YOU, I'VE NOTICED YOU USED THE WORD SOUTHERN REGION.
CAN YOU TELL ME WHY? UM, I, I, TO BE ENTIRELY HONEST WITH YOU, I THINK THAT'S JUST 'CAUSE I'M A LITTLE BIT OF A GREEN PLANNER.
UM, SO I, UM, I KNOW THERE IS A SOUTH DALLAS, UM, AREA THAT'S SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO AS SOUTH DALLAS.
AND IN THE MOMENT I DIDN'T WANNA REFER TO IT AS SOUTH DALLAS.
UM, I LIKE THAT YOU USE REGION AND NOT SECTOR 'CAUSE IT'S SO MILITARIZED, BUT THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, PLEASE, MR. CHAIR? UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
UH, UH, MR. GREGORY, IT'S A PLEASURE TO MEET YOU.
UH, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE, THE DIAGRAM WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE AREA OF VIEW OF THE, OF THE SITE? YES.
DO YOU WANT THIS ONE IN YOUR YES, THAT, THAT'LL WORK TOO.
IN THE PHOTOS THAT YOU TOOK, UH, I DID NOT SEE THE HOMES THAT ARE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM, UH, THIS PARTICULAR SITE, BUT THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES.
[01:00:01]
TRUE.ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET? YES, SIR.
AND FOR THIS ENTIRE AREA HERE, THERE AREN'T ANY SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED HOMES? UH, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
IF THE ENGINEER IS HERE, MR. IS IT NAVAREZ? I CAN SEND HIM A MESSAGE.
AND SO, UH, SO THE, THE BLUE NOTICES THAT THAT WENT OUT, DID YOU RECEIVE ANY BLUE NOTICES BACK? ME PERSONALLY? YEAH.
I, I'LL JUST SAY, SO WE, WE DON'T TYPICALLY HAVE A CHANCE 'CAUSE THEY'RE COLLECTED THE DAY BEFORE.
WE DON'T, WE DON'T TYPICALLY HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW THEM.
I THINK WHAT'S BEEN DISTRIBUTED TO Y'ALL, UM, IN EMAIL YESTERDAY IS, IS WHAT WE HAVE, BUT WE TYPICALLY DON'T HAVE A GOOD CHANCE TO, TO REVIEW THEM.
BUT DID YOU RECEIVE ANY? NOT ME PERSONALLY.
DID THE OFFICE RECEIVE ANY, I THINK ANYTHING WE'VE RECEIVED, WE DISTRIBUTED, I I CAN, I CAN LOOK THAT UP FOR YOU REALLY QUICK THOUGH.
THIS IS MY KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY JUST RECEIVED IT AT THE END OF LAST WEEK, BUT I, I DO KNOW THAT SOME HAVE TURNED THEM IN AND I'LL WAIT FOR THE ENGINEER TO, IS HE AVAILABLE? UM, I SEE CHAIR, THIS IS DAVID.
I'M SPEAKING AND I'M STEPS AWAY, BUT I CAN, I'M LISTENING IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD.
UH, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IMPACT REPORT THAT WAS SUBMITTED AS A PART OF THIS, BUT, UH, WHEN YOU REVIEWED THE SITE, UH, DID YOU, UH, THERE IS A, A DIFFERENCE IN WIDTH ON THE, THE MAIN STREET.
THERE'S THIS, THERE'S KERN WOOD AND THE, THE STREET THAT THESE HOMES WOULD BE, UH, FACING ON, UH, LOST MIRAGE.
IS THAT CORRECT? OH, THANK YOU.
UM, PLEASE, UH, YOUR QUESTION IS THE, THE, THE DIRECTION OF THE HOMES THEY'RE FACING.
SO WHEN RESIDENTS WILL COME TO THE HOME, THEY WILL EITHER COME FROM EAST OR WEST ON KERN WOOD TO GO SOUTH ON LOSS MIRAGE.
THE LOSS MIRAGE IS A OBSERVABLE OBSERVABLY SMALLER OR LESS WIDER STREET THAN KERN WOOD? UM, YES SIR.
UM, UM, THE ROAD IS CONSIDERED A LOCAL RESIDENTIAL, UM, ROAD.
AND FOR THE HOMES THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THAT ROAD, UH, THERE ARE SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS THAT, THAT PARK IN FRONT OF THEIR HOMES.
AND LOOKING AT THE REPORT, UH, DID YOU GIVE ANY CONSIDERATIONS OF CONSIDERING IN, IN THE AREA THAT SO MANY PEOPLE PARK IN FRONT OF THE HOMES, UH, WHAT IMPACT, UH, THE PARKING, UH, WOULD HAVE ALONG THAT MUCH SMALLER STREET? I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.
COMMISSIONERS DAVID NAVAREZ WITH, UH, TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPRESENTING ENGINEERING.
UM, THE LOST MIRAGE IS ACTUALLY CONSIDERED A LOCAL STREET.
HOWEVER, IT'S ABLE TO HANDLE PARKING ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREETS.
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, THE DENSITY OF THE PROPOSED, UM, DEVELOPMENT AS IS BEING PRESENTED TO YOU WOULD NOT ALLOW, WOULDN'T HAVE ADEQUATE DRIVEWAY SPACING TO PHYSICALLY, UM, BE ABLE TO HAVE VEHICLES PARKED ON THEIR SIDE OF THE STREET.
UM, THE VEHICLES WOULD BE ABLE TO PARK ACROSS THE STREET AND THAT WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT WOULD PREVENT THEM FROM, UH, BEING ABLE TO PARK ON THE STREET.
UM, AS, AS THE CONDITIONS REMAIN.
THE, IF, IF THE CONDITIONS REMAIN THE SAME, IT'S CURRENTLY ITS ZONE FOR SINGLE FAMILY, 7.5, 7.5 MM-HMM
THEORETICALLY BUILD A HOME THERE AND THE RESIDENT CAN, THE 12 RESIDENTS WITH FAMILIES CAN PARK IN, IN FRONT OF THE STREET.
SO, BUT WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED IS TO REALLY DOUBLE THAT, WHICH MEANS DOUBLE THE CARS THAT WILL BE PARKED ALONG THE MUCH NARROWER STREET AND, AND, AND REMOVE THE ABILITY FOR VEHICLES TO PARK ON THE STREET GIVEN THE PROPOSED DENSITY OF DRIVEWAYS.
UH, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS MR. ALVAREZ.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS?
[01:05:02]
THANK YOU, SIR.UH, OKAY, COMMISSIONER, SORRY TO BE JUMPING AROUND THE AGENDA, BUT WE, WE HAVE TO JUMP AHEAD AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK IN ORDER.
UH, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO NUMBER FIVE.
DID, DID YOU SAY 18 ITEM? 18 MM-HMM
I GUESS I'LL JUST USE THE PDF SLIDE.
IT'S A APPLICATION FOR A R FIVE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE, A, A AGRICULTURE DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SOUTH ST.
AUGUSTINE ROAD AND EAST OF MIDDLEFIELD STREET.
UH, THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF PHASE THREE OF A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION.
IT'S APPROXIMATELY 15 POINT, UH, 1 7 5 ACRES IS IN COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT.
HERE IS THE AREA OF THE AREA REQUEST WITHIN CITY LIMITS.
UM, THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY SUB SUBDIVISION ADJACENT TO THE AREA REQUEST, UM, IS ZONED R 10, WHICH ALLOWS FOR A MINIMALIZED SIZE OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET.
UM, THE APPLICANT REQUEST AN R SEVEN FIVE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO ALLOW A MINIMUM OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET, UM, WHICH WILL ALLOW FOR THE APPLICANT TO BUILD SMALLER HOUSES AROUND THE LAKE.
HERE IS THE AREA VIEW OF THE AREA REQUEST.
HERE IS THE ZONING MAP OF THE AREA REQUEST, UM, SHOWING NORTH.
WE HAVE RURAL, RURAL, SINGLE FAMILY UNDEVELOPED LAND.
UH, NORTHWEST WE HAVE A SUP THAT'S FOR A RADIO TOWER EAST.
WE HAVE RURAL, UH, SINGLE FAMILY AND UNDEVELOPED LAND TO THE SOUTH.
UM, WE HAVE THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS SINGLE FAMILY AND, AND A FEW UNDEVELOPED LOTS AS WELL.
THAT'S NOT DEVELOPED QUITE YET WITH SINGLE FAMILY.
UM, AND TO THE WEST WE HAVE UNDEVELOPED LAND.
HERE ARE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE PROPERTY OF AGRICULTURE.
THERE'S A FRONT YARD, A SETBACK, SETBACK, FRONT YARD, SETBACK OF 20 FEET.
UM, FOR THE PROPOSED, THERE'S, I'M SORRY, 50 FEET FOR THE PROPOSED, THERE'S 20.
UM, I DO NOT KNOW IF THE DEVELOPER IS GONNA DO PRIVATE STREETS.
UM, THERE'S NO FRONT YARD FOR THIS PROPERTY 'CAUSE IT'S LANDLOCKED.
UM, SO THERE IS NO RIGHT OF WAY ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY.
UM, AS FAR AS FOR DALLAS, IT'S IN THE SMALL TOWN, WHICH ALLOWS FOR RESIDENTIAL DETACH OR ATTACHED UNITS.
UM, AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
ANY QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER? COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN? UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.
AND THANK YOU, UM, MS. BLUEFORD FOR PUTTING THIS PRESENTATION
[01:10:01]
TOGETHER.I JUST WANNA HIGHLIGHT A, A, A COUPLE THINGS.
CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE, UH, TO THE SLIDE WHERE YOU CAN SEE, UH, THE SUBDIVISION THAT'S TO THE SOUTHWEST? NOW, THE OVERALL, UH, I GUESS IT WOULD BE A, UM, GO, GO BACK.
NOT THE ACTUAL PHOTOS, BUT THE DIAGRAM, THE AERIAL, YEAH.
SO IT'S, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING AND, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M COR SAYING THIS INCORRECTLY, UH, THE RESIDENTS WHO WILL LIVE IN THESE HOMES WILL ENTER INTO THIS SUBDIVISION OR TO THIS THIRD PHASE OF THE SUBDIVISION FROM MIDDLEFIELD STREET.
AND SO THE, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY WOULD GO THROUGH MIDDLEFIELD, UH, TO ONE OF THE, I GUESS, THE LOCAL STREETS TO GO TO THE HOMES THAT WILL BE AROUND THIS LAKE.
CORRECT? I, I, I DON'T SEE IT HERE IN THE DESIGN.
UM, BUT I BELIEVE THERE'S, THE HOMES WILL BE ALONG A CUL-DE-SAC ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE OF THE LAKE.
AND THE, UH, SOUTH, THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE LAKE.
IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING AS WELL? YES.
HE ONLY HAD A FEW THAT WAS, THAT WAS, UH, KIND OF TO THE NORTHWEST AND THEN SOME LINED UP, UH, SOUTHEAST OF THE LAKE.
UH, TOPOGRAPHY WISE, UH, AND MAYBE THIS IS A QUESTION FOR, FOR THE ENGINEER, BUT TOPOGRAPHY WISE, UH, WHAT THE HOMES SIT LOWER OR HIGHER THAN THE LAKE? SO THAT ALL DEPENDS ON THE DEVELOPER.
HE CAN GO IN AND HE CAN INFILL AND ADD MORE SAW AND DIRT AND PUT A RETAINING WALL.
AND IT CAN BE ABOVE THE LEVEL OF THE LAKE.
IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW HE WANNA DEVELOP.
AND ALL THAT WOULD BE WORKED OUT DURING THE ENGINEER REVIEW.
UM, AT PERMITTED, SO AT PERMITTING.
SO, SO THERE IS A OPTION FOR HIM TO GO IN AND BUILD UP, UM, THIS AREA.
UM, IF IT'S IN A FLOODPLAIN THAT WAY THOSE HOUSES WON'T BE AFFECTED BY THE WATER OR RAIN OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
AND KIND OF PUT IN A RETAINING WALL, WHICH I KNOW IS EXPENSIVE, BUT IT WILL BE ALL UP TO THE DEVELOPER HOW HE WANNA DEVELOP, UM, THE AREA TO PROTECT THE HOMES AND THE FOUNDATION OF THE HOMES FROM THE CONDITIONS OF FLOODING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
UH, 'CAUSE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA, THE, I HAVE NOT HEARD OF ANY, ANY FLOODING IN THE PHASE TWO OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, BUT GENERALLY IN THIS AREA, THERE'S FLOODING THAT GOES ON.
I, I KNOW THIS WILL BE A QUESTION FOR THE, UH, FOR THE DEVELOPER, UH, HIMSELF, BUT I JUST WANTED TO, TO GET ON THE RECORD THAT THE, THAT THE PLAINTIFFS ARE AWARE THAT THIS LAKE WILL BE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE, UH, TO THE HOMES AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO, UH, FLOODING IF PROPER PRECAUTIONS ISN'T TAKEN.
UM, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR ME, MR. CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER HALL, MS. BLUE, THE, THE, UH, ENTRANCE TO THIS SITE, UH, IS THROUGH THE OTHER SUBDIVISION.
IS THERE ANY PLANS IN THE FUTURE TO HAVE, UH, ANY, UH, A WAY TO GET OUT OF THIS AREA ON A DIFFERENT ROAD? OR IS THAT NOT POSSIBLE? THEY JUST DON'T EXIST OR, OR, UM, NO, WE, IT IS, IT IS ACTUALLY PHASE THREE OF THE ORIGINAL.
UM, THERE WAS PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO OF THE ORIGINAL SUBDIVISION.
SO THEY'RE JUST TAGGING INTO THE BACK OF THE SUB OF THE SUBDIVISION.
AND SO THE, THE CARS WILL HAVE TO TRAVEL THROUGH THE ORIGINAL ENTRANCE TO GET TO THEIR HOMES ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE SUBDIVISION.
UM, AND AS FAR AS PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, I'M NOT QUITE SURE IF THEY'RE ALL THE SAME PROPERTY OWNERS.
IF NOT, THEN THEY CAN ACTUALLY SET UP SOMETHING, THE AGREEMENT, UM, DURING PERMIT TO HAVE ACCESS THROUGH THOSE, UM, THROUGH THE ORIGINAL LOT TO GET TO THEIR HOMES.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S NO PLANS IN THE FUTURE TO PUT A ROAD OUT TO MIDDLEFIELD OR ANY OF THE OTHER RIGHT ARRAYS, UH, IN THIS AREA.
SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE EXISTING.
IS IS THE PHASE, PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO DEVELOPMENT? IT, DOES IT HAVE MULTIPLE ENTRIES, EXITS, OR JUST ONE? UM, RIGHT NOW IT'S SHOWING, I THINK THERE'S TWO, THERE'S ONE OFF OF MIDDLEFIELD, AND THEN THIS SIDE ROAD, THERE'S A ENTRANCE, I BELIEVE.
AND, AND THAT'S SUFFICIENT TO CODE OR TO ALLOW AMPLE INGRESS EGRESS FOR, WELL, THEY, IF THEY DEVELOP, THEY HAVE A PLA FOR IT.
SO IT WENT THROUGH THE PROPER, UH, CHANNELS OF REVIEW.
AND SO I'M QUITE SURE ENGINEER TOLD 'EM THAT TWO ACCESSES ONTO THE PROPERTY IS SUFFICIENT ENOUGH.
[01:15:01]
CATCH THIS IN THE BRIEF, BUT IS THERE A BERM OR SOMETHING AROUND THE LAKE YOU MENTIONED? UH, THE COMMISSIONER MENTIONED HOMES BEING BELOW THE LEVEL OF THE LAKE.IT WAS ALL, UH, TAPED OUT WHEN I WENT OUT THERE, SO I COULDN'T SEE, UM, WHAT'S AROUND THE LAKE.
UM, I'M GONNA VIOLATE TWO RULES WITH MY, MY QUESTIONS.
TWO, UM, I'M GETTING A LITTLE OFF OF LAND USE HERE, BUT I THINK TO, TO STATE THAT THIS AREA IS PRONE TO FLOODING MAY NOT BE A, A ACCURATE STATEMENT.
THE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THESE BODIES OF WATER IN THIS AREA THAT HAVE MANMADE SHAPES, AND TO ME, THEY LOOK LIKE GRAVEL OPERATIONS THAT HAVE COLLECTED WATER.
IS THERE ANYONE ON STAFF THAT KNOWS THAT SORT OF THE LONGER TERM HISTORY OF THIS AREA? UH, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW, UM, IF THAT'S WHAT HAS GONE ON HERE, BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT THE AERIAL PHOTOS ON GOOGLE, IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE LARGE STRETCHES OF FLOODPLAIN.
IT LOOKS LIKE MANMADE CONDITIONS.
WE HAVE AN URBAN CITY THAT IS GROWING AND EXPANDING TO RECLAIM THAT LAND DOES NOT SEEM LIKE AN UNREASONABLE THING.
SO I WAS JUST WONDERING IF STAFF HAS ANY INSIGHT INTO THIS.
I DON'T THINK ANYONE ON, ON, ON OUR, AT THIS PORTION OF THE PROCESS IS GONNA BE ABLE TO ASSESS THAT.
I, I, WHAT I DO KNOW IS THAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE THEIR PROPER ACCESS.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY'RE NOT FLOODING.
IF THEY, IF THEY ARE IN A FLOOD AREA, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY ARE MITIGATING FOR IT, UM, WHEN THEY DO GET TO, TO PERMITTING AND ENGINEERING.
BUT I, NO ONE, NO ONE I KNOW IS GONNA BE ABLE TO ASSESS THAT.
AND BECAUSE MOST OF THAT IS SORT OF BACKLOADED, THE, THE STUDIES HAPPEN AFTER THEY'RE ENTITLED AND AFTER THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S THE EXPENSIVE PART.
UH, I'M JUST LOOKING FOR MAYBE A LITTLE, A LITTLE BIT OF A, OF A BACKSTORY.
IT SEEMS LIKE MAYBE NOT NECESSARILY TODAY, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE MAYBE STAFF WOULD KIND OF TAKE A LOOK AT THIS PART OF TOWN AND BE ABLE TO GIVE US SOME, UH, BACKGROUND IN THE FUTURE.
UM, BECAUSE, UM, WE, WE'VE SEEN SOME OF THIS FACT, I THINK WE'VE GOT ANOTHER CASE WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA ADDRESS TODAY THAT'S BEEN HELD FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
THAT IS A SIMILAR KIND OF PIECE OF PROPERTY.
WE, WE CAN DO SOME, SOME BACKGROUND ON IT.
I'M, I'M AS CURIOUS AS YOU ARE, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I PLEASE ADDRESS, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, HOUSE WRIGHT.
UH, THIS PARTICULAR LAKE, UH, FROM WHAT I, I GATHER, YOU KNOW, DURING OUR COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND MEETING WITH THE ENGINEERS AND, AND PEOPLE WHO HAVE, UH, TALKED TO US, UH, UH, THIS WAS A, A FORMER MINING SPOTS.
SO THEY TOOK OUT THE SAND IN GRAVEL AND LEFT THE HOLE BEHIND, AND IT'LL JUST BACKFILL WITH, WITH WATER LATER.
AND IN THIS AREA, THERE'S A LOT OF MINING THAT GOES ON, AND THIS HAPPENS.
THEY CREATE PONDS AND AND LAKES, AND THIS IS JUST ONE OF THEM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS? UH, YES.
CAN WE JUST, CAN WE, UH, GO TO THE GIS NOW AND LOOK AT, AT THE G THE, UM, AND, AND SEE IS THIS A PULL UP PLAIN BECAUSE, UM, MEN IN THIS AREA, UM, HAVE FAMILY THAT LIVE IN THIS AREA, AND IT HAS, IT ALWAYS, IT FLOODS.
SO IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE CAN GET STAFF TO DO JUST A QUICK GIS, THE GIS DALLAS, UM, THE DALLAS ZONING GIS TO SEE IF THERE'S A FLOOD, UH, OVERLAY, FLOOD ZONE OVERLAY? NO.
SO, NO, BASED ON, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR ZONING MAPS THAT SHOW FLOODPLAINS ARE, ARE IMPERFECT AND THEY DO HAVE TO DO FURTHER RESEARCH LATER.
UH, IT'S NOT IN A, IN A TYPICAL A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN, IT'S IN WHAT, WHAT'S CALLED THE X PROTECTED BY A LEVEE.
UM, SO I THINK FURTHER WEST, THEY'RE, THEY'RE BLOCKED BY LEVY FOR, UH, FROM THE TRU RIVER MORE BROADLY, BUT THEY'RE NOT IN A MORE SPECIFIC A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN, UH, LOCALLY AT THAT SPOT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMM, SHERIFF'S COMMISSIONER FORSYTH, PLEASE.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK YOU TO CLARIFY YOUR STATEMENT.
WHAT TYPE OF FLOODPLAIN IS THIS IN THEN, IF IT'S NOT A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN? IS IT IN A FLOODPLAIN? I, YES.
SO IT'S NOT IN, IT'S NOT IN THE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN.
I DON'T THINK IT'S IN, UH, UH, WHAT'S THE OTHER ONE? 500.
[01:20:01]
IT'S IN A PROTECTED BY A LEVEE.SO WE HAVE OTHER PARTS OF TOWN THAT ARE, I, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY COULD BE IN A FLOODPLAIN IF THERE WASN'T A, A LE IF WE DIDN'T HAVE LEVEES.
BUT I MEAN, THAT'S THE CASE WITH WEST DALLAS, OTHER PARTS OF, OF OUR CITY.
SO IT'S NOT IN A, UM, A TIME-BASED FLOODPLAIN, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY IT IS.
UH, IT'S JUST DESIGNATED X LIKE I SAID, LIKE PARTS OF WEST DALLAS THAT MAYBE, MAYBE WOULD BE IN A TIME-BASED, UH, FLOODPLAIN.
UH, WE DIDN'T, IF WE DIDN'T HAVE LEVY, BUT BARRING THAT, WE DON'T, THEY'RE NOT IN A, IN A HUNDRED OR 500 YEAR PLANE.
THAT'S, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
UH, COMMISSIONERS WILL GO BACK TO NUMBER.
GO BACK IN ORDER TO NUMBER FIVE? YES.
WAIT, I THOUGHT WE WERE DOING GOOD MORNING.
I PULLED IT UP, BUT I DUNNO HOW TO PUT IN.
IT'S FOR 47 10 WADSWORTH DRIVE.
IT IS LOCATED IN R 10 ZONING AND IT IS A RENEWAL OF SUP 1336.
UM, THIS IS AN AMENDMENT WHICH I WILL GET INTO.
THE PREVIOUS SUP EXPIRED IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR AND HAD AN TIME LIMIT OF 10 YEARS.
THE APPLICANT REQUESTED TO REVISE THE BOUNDARY RATHER THAN, UH, PARTICIPATE IN THEIR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FROM 2015.
THEY WERE GIVEN AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL OF 10 YEARS.
UM, BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE REMOVING LOT SEVEN FROM THEIR APPLICATION, UH, THEY SUBMITTED THIS APPLICATION LOCATION MAP, AERIAL VIEW, RESIDENTIAL SURROUNDED NORTHEAST, SOUTH, AND WEST.
AND THESE ARE THE VIEWS ON LEDBETTER DRIVE ON LEDBETTER AND WADSWORTH.
AND THEN FACING NORTHWEST ON WADSWORTH FACING EAST FACING EAST.
THIS IS GOING SOUTH ON WADSWORTH DRIVE.
THIS IS THE EASTERN PART OF THE PROPERTY FACING NORTH NORTHWEST.
AND THEN THIS IS FACING SOUTH.
SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE BEING REMOVED, FACING SOUTHWEST IS LOCATED IN COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL FOR FORWARD DALLAS, AND THIS IS THE EXISTING SITE PLAN.
THIS SHOWS WHICH LOT WOULD BE BEING REMOVED.
THERE'S NO CHANGES REQUESTED TO THEIR CONDITIONS.
UM, THE SAME TIME LIMIT OF 10 YEARS IN ELIGIBILITY
[01:25:01]
FOR A 10 YEAR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL.AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY OF AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR AN ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR TIME PERIOD SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.
QUESTIONS COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT, PLEASE.
SO, UH, MY FIRST QUESTION IS, DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY ADULTS ARE, ARE, ARE, UH, LIVING IN THIS FACILITY? I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
UM, COULD YOU GO TO THE, UH, SLIDE THAT HAS THE SITE PLAN CONDITIONS, POSSIBLY THE SUP CONDITIONS RIGHT THERE? THAT ONE THERE, THERE YOU GO.
UM, ON ITEM NUMBER SIX, IT SAYS OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA.
A MINIMUM OF 40 SQUARE FEET OF OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA MUST BE PROVIDED FOR EACH ADULT DAYCARE ATTENDEE.
SO MY, MY QUESTION IS, IS I WANNA UNDERSTAND IF WE'RE ALLOWING THE, UH, CHRISTIAN HEIGHTS, UH, ADULT DAYCARE CENTER TO REMOVE THAT LOT TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY, UM, ARE, ARE WE NOT THEN VIOLATING THIS, UH, REQUIREMENT HERE FOR THE OUTDOOR SPACE? BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE, THE REMAINING, UH, AREA, UH, IF YOU GO BACK, IF YOU GO BACK A FEW SLIDES TO YOUR AERIAL VIEW, GO RIGHT THERE.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THIS RED AREA HERE, I MEAN, YOU'RE GETTING RID OF ALL OF THE OUTDOOR AREA BASICALLY, BECAUSE MOST OF THE OUTDOOR AREA WAS IN THE, THE, THE, THE LOT TO THE SOUTH.
SO I, I I I, IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE VIOLATING THE SUP CONDITIONS BY, BY REMOVING THAT LOT.
SO CAN YOU HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND WHY, WHAT WAS THE REASON WHY THEY WANNA REMOVE THAT, THAT SOUTHERN LOT FROM THIS SUP? THE REASON THEY'RE REMOVING THE LOT IS BECAUSE THEY SOLD THAT LOT.
SO ARE THEY NOT IN VIOLATION THEN OF THE SUP CONDITIONS? BY WHICH STATE THAT, UH, THEY, THEY SHOULD HAVE 40 SQUARE FEET OF OUTDOOR SPACE FOR EVERY ADULT IN THE DAYCARE FACILITY? I WOULD, I WOULD ADD THAT IT'S ONE THING I NOTICED ABOUT THESE CONDITIONS, THAT IT IS DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE A CONDITION LIKE THAT WHERE FOR EACH ADULT DAYCARE ATTENDEE, IT'S NOT A REGULATED THROUGH THE SCP.
THE AMOUNT OF, UM, ATTENDEES, UH, WILL PROBABLY VARY.
TO ME, THAT'S A DIFFICULT, UH, CONDITION TO ENFORCE.
UM, IT'S BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME.
THIS SU P'S BEEN THERE SINCE 97, I BELIEVE.
SO TO ME, THAT'S A DIFFICULT CONDITION TO ENFORCE.
UH, I, I DON'T THINK IT'S SUPER USEFUL FOR OUR PURPOSES TO REGULATE IT THAT WAY.
UM, IF THERE'S A MINIMUM OF OPEN SPACE THAT'S MORE OF A FLAT NUMBER, I THINK THAT'S MAYBE A BETTER WAY TO DO IT IF THAT'S WHAT'S DESIRED.
UH, LONG TERM, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD, UH, PLANNING POLICY TO REGULATE IT THROUGH THOSE MEANS, ESPECIALLY WHEN NUMBERS OF ATTENDEES CAN FLUCTUATE.
WAIT, WELL, I, I, I, I, UM, THIS CAUSES ME CONCERN THAT, UH, THAT THAT CONDITION IS REMAINING IN HERE AND WE'RE ALLOWING THEM BASICALLY TO GET RID OF THE, THE, THE, THE OUTDOOR SPACE THAT THEY HAD BEFORE.
I WOULD LIKE FOR THIS, UH, ITEM TO BE TAKEN OFF OF CONSENT.
YEAH, JUST A FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
UM, THERE, IT'S 40 PER 40 SQUARE FEET OUTDOOR SPACE FOR 40 SQUARE FEET OF OUT OUTDOOR SPACE PER RESIDENT.
THAT'S OR PERSON THAT'S NEEDING CARE.
SO IF THERE ARE 10, THAT'S ROUGHLY 400 SQUARE FEET, RIGHT? CAN Y'ALL DO SOME QUICK, I MEAN MATH, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN NOW AND THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FIGURE OUT WHETHER BASED ON THE AERIALS, WHETHER THEY HAVE 400 SQUARE FEET OF, OF OPEN SPACE ON THE SITE AND THOSE SIDE YARDS OR, OR REAR YARDS, THAT CAN BE DONE FOR SURE.
AND THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO SPEAK TO HOW MANY RESIDENTS THEY MAINTAIN AT A GIVEN TIME.
'CAUSE IT, IT, I JUST PRESUME IT FLUCTUATES.
AND THIS HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 1997, IS THAT RIGHT? UM, UNDER THE SAME SUP, YES.
ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY ISSUES WITH THIS USE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OVER THE PAST? I, I'M NOT.
UM, ONE OTHER FOLLOW-UP QUESTION.
IF THE APPLICANT HAD REQUESTED A PERMANENT SUP WITH STAFF HAD HAVE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL? YES.
[01:30:02]
I'M NOT GONNA ADMIT HOW OLD I WAS IN 1997, BUT, UM, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? WELL, I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO ASK, 'CAUSE THERE'S TWO CONDITIONS THAT ARE IN THIS SUP ONE THAT NOTES INDOOR FLOOR AREA, UM, MINIMUM PER ATTENDEE, WHICH WOULD SEEM TO GET YOU TO THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ATTENDEES.AND THEN THE OUTDOOR IS THEN TIED TO THAT SAME.
BUT I GUESS IF THERE'S, TO FOLLOW UP ON BOTH COMMENTS THAT ARE HEARD ON THIS, IF WE NEED TO REVISE THE LANGUAGE FOR THE OUTDOOR AREA THAT DEFINES A SPECIFIC AMOUNT, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SITE PLAN THAT WE ARE, UM, CONSIDERING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CONDITIONS.
AND I'M, I'M NOT SURE THAT I'M SEEING THAT EITHER.
SO IF BEFORE THE HEARING, IF WE COULD MAYBE ASK STAFF, AS WAS MENTIONED, HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT SHOULD BE.
AND, AND I WILL SAY AGAIN THAT SUP DOES NOT OFFER A DEFINITION FOR WHAT IS INDOOR OUTDOOR INDOOR RECREATION SPACE.
UH, WE CERTAINLY HAVE A LOT, THERE'S A LOT OF LANDSCAPE SPACE ON THE PLAN, BUT THE, UH, CONDITIONS DON'T OFFER ANYTHING ADDITIONAL FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA.
WELL, THE, THE INDOOR FLOOR AREA IS SIMPLY FLOOR AREA.
IT DOES NOT, IT IS NOT DEFINED AS RECREATION.
BUT THE OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA DOES NOT OFFER ANY DEFINITION.
SO WE ARE, WE ARE WORKING BACKWARDS TRYING TO INTERPRET POTENTIALLY WHAT WAS INTENDED ORIGINALLY.
UH, THERE'S SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPE SPACE, UM, ON THIS.
WE CAN DO NAPKIN MATH FOR THAT FOR SURE.
UM, BUT AGAIN, ATTENDEES IS NOT REGULATED BY THIS SUPI DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD, I ALSO DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD MECHANISM TO, UH, REGULATE ATTENDEES THROUGH THIS, THESE MEANS.
UM, SO WE'RE NOT GONNA KNOW WHAT THAT IS, BUT WE CAN SAY, HEY, HERE'S HOW MUCH LANDSCAPE AREA IS, UH, PROVIDED FOR IN THIS PLAN.
IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, PLEASE THIS, AND I, I'M NOT SAYING IT'S APPROPRIATE OR INAPPROPRIATE, I'M SIMPLY REVIEWING THE LANGUAGE, WHICH SAYS A MINIMUM OF 40 SQUARE FEET OF INDOOR FLOOR AREA MUST BE PROVIDED FOR EACH ADULT DAYCARE ATTENDEE, WHICH SEEMS TO GIVE YOU THE ATTENDEE NUMBER, WHICH THEN LEADS YOU TO THE OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA.
SO I'M JUST ASKING IF WE CAN GET SOME CLARITY IF WE NEED TO, UH, LOOK AT THOSE.
VICE CHAIR RUBEN, UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSE WRIGHT FAULT.
UM, IT WOULD SEEM TO ME WE WOULD HAVE WITHIN OUR PURVIEW JUST TO STRIKE THE, THE CONDITION ABOUT OUTDOOR SPACE.
WOULD, WOULD WE NOT HAVE, WOULD
UM, AND I THINK THAT IT MIGHT, WE MIGHT BE BETTER OFF THAT WAY IN TERMS OF CONSISTENT LAND USE REGULATION AND, AND KIND OF FAIR AND, AND REASONABLE LAND USE REGULATION.
UM, WE HAVE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS SITE.
THERE ARE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AND ARTICLE 10, THOSE APPLY HERE.
UH, SO THERE'S, THERE'S STILL THAT, THAT STILL REMAINS AS PART OF THE CODE.
AND SO THOSE DICTATE THINGS LIKE PLANTING AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UH, I THINK IT'S, IT'S A TRICKY SPOT.
SO I CERTAINLY THINK WE MAY BE BETTER OFF IF FITZ STRUCK.
AND FURTHERMORE, JUST TO MAYBE PILE ON A LITTLE BIT, IF IT'S 40 SQUARE FEET PER RESIDENT OF INTERIOR SPACE, AND LET'S JUST SAY THIS IS A 2000 SQUARE SQUARE FOOT STRUCTURE THAT'S 50 PEOPLE, THAT SEEMS A LITTLE PROBLEMATIC AS WELL.
YOU KNOW, UH, SO MAYBE WE JUST NEED TO WORK ON THE LANGUAGE OF THE
AND I DON'T THINK THAT THIS SUP IS, IS A GOOD TOOL FOR REGULATING HEALTH AND SAFETY FOR, UH, THE PEOPLE IN THE FACILITY.
I THINK THAT THE STATE REGULATIONS THAT EXIST FOR THESE FACILITIES DO DICTATE THINGS LIKE RATIOS AND SUPERVISION AND SAFETY AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE HAVE THOSE, I MEAN, THOSE EXIST.
COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT, JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION.
DID WE HAVE ANY BLUE FORMS RETURNED ON THIS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE PROPERTY, UH, OWNERS WHO WERE NOTIFIED? NO, SIR.
I DON'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
WHAT IS THE FEE THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY EACH TIME THEY RENEW THE SUP? IT'S 800 SOMETHING.
IT'S, IT'S BETWEEN HUNDRED AND 900.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
WE'LL GO TO NUMBER SIX, WHICH HAS ALSO COME OFF CONSENT.
COMMISSIONER HALL, IS THAT RIGHT? LET'S LEAVE IT.
[01:36:00]
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR.AND COMMISSIONERS, UH, AM I SHARING MY SCREEN? ANY CHANCE? NOT YET.
ARE YOU SEEING THE, OH, AM I SHARING NOW? PERFECT.
UH, THIS IS ZONING CASE, UH, Z 2 52 45 180 6.
THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1447.
SO ON PROPERTY ZONED R 75, SINGLE FAMILY.
AND THIS IS TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION AND CONTINUATION OF THE PRIVATE SCHOOL, WHICH IS OUR REDEEMER LUTHERAN SCHOOL.
THIS IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF PARK LANE AND BO DECKER STREET, AND IT'S APPROX APPROXIMATELY 9.9 ACRES.
UH, HERE'S THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION AND THE AERIAL.
AND THIS IS, UM, THE AERIAL WITH, UH, THE LAND USE MAP.
UM, OF COURSE, THE PROPERTY, SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CONSIDERED INSTITUTIONAL WITH THE CHURCH AND THE SCHOOL.
AND, UM, IT'S PRETTY MUCH SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AND THEN COMMERCIAL TO THE SOUTH WITH NORTH PARK MALL DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM PARK LANE.
LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, UM, IN 2015, UH, CITY COUNCIL DID APPROVE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE PRIVATE SCHOOL, AND THAT WAS SUBJECT TO A REVISED SITE PLAN, AMENDED CONDITIONS, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.
AND, UH, THE SUP WAS TO EXPIRE AUGUST 12TH OF THIS YEAR WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR PERIODS.
AND THE APPLICANT DID FILE THE APPLICATION BACK IN MARCH, UH, TO, UM, ALLOW SOME MODIFICATION TO THE EXISTING APPROVED SITE PLAN THAT THEY HAD.
AND I'LL GO OVER THAT IN A MINUTE.
UM, THEY'RE MAKING SOME MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO, UH, CHANGE THE FOOTPRINT.
THEY'RE SLIGHTLY LARGER PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
MUL MULTIPURPOSE BUILDING ALONG, ADDITIONAL ALONG PARK LANE, UH, THAT REMOVED.
THEY WERE MOVING PORTABLE BUILDINGS, REDUCING SOME PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, UH, EXPANSION AREA IN THE NORTHEAST AREA OF THE SITE.
UH, THEY HAVE A NEW LOCATION FOR THE PLAYGROUND IN A NORTHEAST AREA.
UH, SOME REDUCTION OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AREAS FOR EXPANSION FOR THE SANCTUARY, UH, ALONG PARK LANE, AND THEN SOME RECONFIGURATION OF PARKING SPACES.
UH, THIS IS SOME PHOTOS ON LOOKING NORTH AND NORTHWEST ACROSS PARK LANE.
UH, THE STREETS WERE UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT THE TIME OF THE PHOTOS, SO, UH, THESE ARE TAKEN FROM ACROSS THE STREET.
BUT THIS IS LOOKING INTO THE, THE CHURCH IN THE SCHOOL SITE ACROSS NORTH PARK.
THIS IS LOOKING NORTH AND NORTHEAST AT THE PROPERTY.
UM, YOU COULD SEE THE SANCTUARY BUILDING AND THEN THE ATHLETIC FIELDS SURROUNDING USES.
UM, AGAIN, THEY WERE UNDER THE STREETS, WERE UNDER CONSTRUCTION, BUT, UH, YOU COULD SEE LOOKING SOUTH DIRECTLY ACROSS PARK LANE.
YOU HAVE NORTH PARK MALL AND, UM, COMERICA BANK, LOOKING NORTHEAST ON PARK LANE, UH, YOU HAVE THE FORUM,
[01:40:01]
UM, ASSISTED LIVING AND INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO, UH, THE SCHOOL SITE ALONG BO DECKER.UM, LOOKING NORTHWEST, THIS IS INTO THE SITE, UM, SOME PARKING AREAS RIGHT NOW ALONG BO DECKER.
THIS IS WHERE SOME OF THE EXPANSION WILL TAKE PLACE OF THE MULTIPURPOSE BUILDING.
AND THEN LOOKING, UM, WHERE THE EXISTING EDUCATIONAL BUILDING IS NOW SURROUNDING USES ON BODECKER, UH, EXCUSE ME, PARDON ME.
THIS IS LOOKING SOUTHWEST AT BO DECKER AND PARK LANE.
UM, DIRECTLY ACROSS THERE IS A MUSEUM, THE BIBLICAL MUSEUM, AND THEN WE HAVE SOME RESIDENTIAL, UM, ADJACENT, UH, THIS IS LOOKING DIRECTLY ACROSS BO DECKER, UM, FROM PARK LANE.
THERE'S, UM, SOME DUPLEX USES, AGAIN, VERY MUCH SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL, UH, PERFECT FOR SCHOOLS AND INSTITUTIONAL USES.
UH, LOOKING NORTHEAST, UM, DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE SITE.
THIS IS THE EXISTING SITE PLAN BEFORE, UM, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TODAY.
AND I'VE JUST CIRCLED, UM, SOME OF THE AREAS OF, OF SLIGHT MODIFICATION TO THIS EXISTING SITE PLAN HERE.
UM, IT'S JUST, AGAIN, TO THE FOOTPRINT OF THAT MULTI-PURPOSE BUILDING AND SOME OF THE PLAYGROUND AREAS AND, AND THE PARKING ALONG NORTH PARK THAT THEY'RE ADDING.
SO THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND EN LARGE, SO YOU COULD SEE IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
I KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT TO SEE, UH, SOME OF THE PROPOSED CON SUP CONDITIONS.
UM, WE ARE RECOMMENDING, UH, THAT THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT HAVE NO EXPIRATION DATE.
THIS WOULD BE PERMANENT, UH, LANDSCAPING.
JUST CHANGING THAT TO SAY THAT THEY WILL, IT'S GONNA MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 10 AS AMENDED ABOUT TO BE SIGNED OUT.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S WANTING TO RE THIS COMPUTER'S WANTING TO RESTART VERY SOON.
UM, AND I CAN'T, LET'S SEE, CAN MOVE THIS OUTTA WAY.
UM, REMOVING THE PARKING, YOU KNOW, THE PARKING'S JUST GONNA BE THE ADDRESS THROUGH THE, EXCUSE ME, THROUGH THE, THE CODE, UH, FENCES.
UH, THIS IS THE TYPICAL LANGUAGE WE'RE PUTTING IN FOR FENCES THAT WOULD BE LOCATED ALONG THE STREET.
MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX FEET WITH MAKING SURE THEY HAVE 50% OPEN SURFACES AND WHATNOT.
UH, PUT IN INGRESS AND EGRESS WOULD BE SHOWN.
UM, NO INGRESS EGRESS OTHER THAN THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, JUST SOME MINOR MODIFICATIONS, MAINLY WITH THE DATES.
UM, AND, UH, PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES, THIS IS VERY STANDARD, AS, AS Y'ALL ARE, UM, VERY USED TO SEEING NOW FOR SCHOOLS.
UM, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE SIDEWALKS.
UM, THERE'S A TRANSIT STOP, UM, ACROSS, UH, NORTH, UH, PARK LANE, EXCUSE ME, AND, UH, CONNECTION OF A SIDEWALK FOR THE FORUMS TO THE WEST.
SO, UH, WE'RE ASKING FOR THE PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES AND THE SIDEWALK, SIDEWALK AND PEDESTRIAN PATH.
MINIMUM SIX FOOT UNOBSTRUCTED SIDEWALK WITH THE FIVE FOOT BUFFER.
UM, SIGNS I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, UM, THERE WAS A TYPO IN THE REPORT.
UM, SO SIGNS FOR A, AND IT'S SIGNS FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL MUST COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS.
UM, THIS IS, I'M SORRY, I'VE GOTTA GET THIS OUT OF THE WAY.
SO, UM, ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UH, FOR DALLAS 2.0, IT'S REGIONAL MIXED USE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT THAT IS, UM, UH, A USE, UH, SECONDARY USES FOR INSTITUTIONAL SUCH AS SCHOOLS,
[01:45:01]
CHURCHES AGAIN.OKAY, SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO REVISED SITE PLAN, AMENDED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND AMENDED CONDITIONS.
BUT THAT'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, AND HOPEFULLY THIS WON'T RESTART.
COMMISSIONER HALL? UH, THANK YOU, MS. LEVY.
THIS IS, THIS HAS TURNED OUT TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A CHALLENGING CASE.
UM, THE LANGUAGE IN THE PROPOSED SUP REFERS TO SIDEWALKS, UH, BUT I THINK WE'VE, WE'VE REALIZED NOW THAT, UH, THAT LANGUAGE MAY NOT BE NEEDED BECAUSE THEY ARE ALREADY SUBJECT TO EXISTING DALLAS CODES.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO SIDEWALKS, UH, SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS.
UM, THEY REPLANTED AND YOU'RE REQUIRED TO PUT IN SIDEWALKS IF YOU'RE, EXCUSE ME, WITHIN A, ON A CORNER LOT AND WITHIN A QUARTER MILE, BELIEVE IT IS OF A SCHOOL, UM, TRANSIT STOPS AND, UH, I THINK PUBLIC FACILITIES.
AND SO THAT WOULD, UM, REQUIRE SIDEWALKS FOR THE SITE.
UM, WHAT WE HAVE IN THE SUP IS STANDARD LANGUAGE.
WE, WE REALLY PREFER TO SEE SIX FOOT WIDE SIDEWALKS WITH THE FIVE FOOT BUFFER.
AND THEN OF COURSE, WE HAVE THE PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES THAT WE, WE ARE GETTING STANDARD FOR SCHOOLS AS WELL.
UM, SO THAT, THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE AS FAR AS THE CONDITIONS.
THERE, THERE'S A SIDEWALK REQUIREMENT, UH, ONCE THEY GO TO, WHAT IS THE SIDEWALK ENGINEERING, WHEN THEY GO TO ENGINEERING, I GUESS IT'LL BE POINTED OUT THERE'S SIDEWALKS, SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS PER SECTION 43 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, I'M SORRY, I'M HAVING, I I DIDN'T REALLY HEAR.
I, I THINK I HEARD, ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS THAT WOULD, THEY WOULD BE UNDER, WELL, I GUESS WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THEY'RE GOING TO BE SUBJECT TO SECTION 43 OF THE DALLAS CODES, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE SIDEWALKS UNDER, UNDER SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.
UH, AND SO THE PUTTING SIDEWALKS AGAIN, INTO THE SUP IS A BIT REDUNDANT, PERHAPS.
WELL, IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
UM, IN, IN THE SUP WE CAN'T, OF COURSE, WE CAN'T REDUCE REQUIREMENTS FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? BUT WE CAN, HE CAN ALWAYS ASK FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UM, AND THAT, THAT IS BASICALLY WHAT WE, WE ARE, HAVE BEEN DOING FOR THE SCHOOLS.
AGAIN, WE, WE REALLY LIKE TO GET THE SIX FOOT SIDEWALK WITH THE FIVE FOOT BUFFER.
BUT I DO HAVE, UM, MR. NAVAREZ HERE, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT THAT DIFFERENCE WOULD BE WITH THE SIDEWALK.
I WILL JUST SAY SUPERVISING A LOT OF CASES, WHAT WE TRY AND DO, WE TRY AND HAVE CONS, NOT ONLY CONSISTENT REGULATION FOR SIDEWALKS, BUT CONSISTENT OUTCOMES FOR SIDEWALKS ON, ON ALL OF OUR SCHOOL PROJECTS.
AND WHILE IT MAY SEEM, UH, REDUNDANT, THERE ARE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES FOR, UH, SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS ON, UM, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT THE ZONING SPEAKING TO IT.
SO WE LIKE TO SPECIFY IN THE ZONING SO THAT WE GET MORE HIGHER QUALITY SIDEWALKS, MORE CONSISTENT SIDEWALKS, BECAUSE THERE ARE, UM, THERE ARE MECHANISMS, UM, IN THE BASE CODE THAT, UH, FALL SHORT OF THE URBAN DESIGN AND, AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY GOALS THAT WE HAVE AS A DEPARTMENT.
AND WE THINK WE CAN DEFINITELY FURTHER THEM BASED ON, ON OUR ZONING.
WE DO IT PRETTY, PRETTY COMMONLY HERE.
SO, UM, I AM HESITANT TO, TO FALL BACK ON, ON STREET DESIGN MANUAL FOR, FOR PURPOSES OF SIDEWALK.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK IT, IT HITS ALL OF THE POINTS.
WE TRY TO, WHEN WE HIT, UH, WHEN WE WERE LOOKING FOR URBAN DESIGN, UM, THAT GOES FOR SCHOOLS.
THIS IS A VERY CONSISTENT CONDITION THAT WE DO HAVE FOR SCHOOLS.
BUT I DO THINK IT APPLIES TO MOST PROJECTS WHEN WE HAVE A LITTLE ABILITY TO FLEX, UM, POWER, YOU KNOW, THE, THE POWERS THAT WE DO HAVE, UM, UPON SIDEWALKS.
IT'S, TO ME THE MOST IMPORTANT THING WE CAN DO FOR URBAN DESIGN, PRETTY MUCH, OR WALKABILITY, PRETTY MUCH.
SO, AM I HEARING YOU SAY THAT INCLUDING THESE PROVISIONS IN THE SUP IS NOT REDUNDANT, BUT IN, IN MOST, IN MANY CASES, THE SIDEWALKS THAT WE WRITE STANDARD INTO OUR SCHOOLS OR OUR MIXED USE PDS EXCEED THE STANDARDS THAT ARE CALLED FOR BY THE STREET DESIGN MANUAL.
AND WE SEE THAT AS A, A PRIORITY FOR OUR
[01:50:01]
DEPARTMENT.SO THEY, THE REGULATIONS EXIST, BUT TYPICALLY THIS REGULATIONS THAT WE PUT INTO ZONING SUPERSEDE THOSE, UH, WITH GOOD REASON.
I BELIEVE MR. NAVAREZ WANTS TO CHIME IN, IF I MAY.
COMMISSIONERS CHAIR, I MEAN, UM, WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR THE INTENTION, UM, OF INTRODUCING CONDITIONS IN AN SUP.
UH, WE CERTAINLY WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THEY'RE NOT ARBITRARY OR, UM, UM, DISCRIMINATORY.
THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR ALL SCHOOLS, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY'RE PRIVATE, PUBLIC OR, UH, CHARTER UP UNTIL TODAY.
UM, OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE THE OPTION OF LEAVING IT UP TO CITY STAFF TO DETERMINE, UH, INTERPRETATION OF SIDEWALK WIDTHS.
UM, IN MY OPINION, THIS IS A MIXED USE AREA, UH, GIVEN THE RELATIVE LOCATION COMPARED TO A RETAIL MALL AND PROXIMITY TO HOUSING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
UM, AND THEREFORE, MY INTERPRETATION IS THAT BASED ON THE STREET DESIGN MANUAL, THE SIDEWALK REQUIREMENT FOR THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE SIX FEET IN WIDTH AND A SIX FOOT BUFFER.
THE STREET DESIGN MANUAL ISN'T BLACK AND WHITE, UNFORTUNATELY.
UM, AND, UM, THERE ARE CERTAIN DEVIATIONS, THERE'S A, THE WORD PREFERRED AND MINIMUM LISTED IN THE STREET DESIGN MANUAL, AND THEREFORE CITY STAFF WILL ADVOCATE FOR THE PREFERRED DIMENSIONS IF YOU CHOOSE TO LEAVE IT UP TO, UH, THE DISCRETION OF C OF, OF ONE PERSON CITY STAFF AT PERMITTING TO DETERMINE THREE DIMENSIONS OF A, UM, SIDEWALK AT THIS LOCATION, OR, OR, UH, I THINK I FIND IT WITHIN, UM, THE REASONABLE BOUNDS OF THE ZONING CONDITIONS TO GIVE US CLEAR GUIDANCE AT PERMITTING OF TO WHAT, EVEN IF IT'S A, YOU KNOW, OH NO, YOU SAID WE CAN'T REMOVE THE SIDEWALK REQUIREMENT, WHICH IS PLOTTING REGULATION.
CAN I BUILD ON YOUR ANSWER MAYBE BY ASKING YOU A QUESTION
UM, SO WE, WE ESTABLISH THAT BASED ON THE, THE LAND USE CONTEXT, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE MAYBE CONSIDERED MIXED USE.
UM, BUT IF THIS SCHOOL WAS TOUCHED DEEPER BACK INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO, TO THE WEST AND, AND NOT IN ON PARK LANE NEXT TO BUCA DEPO, WOULD, WOULD THE, WOULD THE SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS BE DIFFERENT? YES, SIR.
WE MOVED DOWN TO A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY AND WE'D BE LOOKING FOR A PREFERRED FIVE FOOT AND WIDTH AND MINIMUM OF FOUR.
UM, WE WOULD NOT ACCEPT A MINIMUM OF FOUR 'CAUSE IT WOULDN'T COMPLY WITH A DA UNLESS THERE IS A PASSING ZONE.
BUT WE MOVE DOWN TO A FIVE FOOT DIMENSION.
SO CLEARLY, UH, IT WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL FOR CITY STAFF TO HAVE SOME VERY SPECIFIC GUIDANCE FOR SCHOOLS LIKE WE'VE BEEN DOING AT OTHER LOCATIONS.
UM, THERE'S THE WAIVER ALSO, UM, PROCESS THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP TO YOUR ATTENTION.
THIS IS A PLATTED PROP, RECENTLY PLATTED PROPERTY.
UH, THAT WAS NOT A, I WAS NOT AWARE OF THAT, AND I MAY HAVE MISLED THE APPLICANT THROUGH CONVERSATIONS.
UH, IT WAS UNTIL LATER THAT I REALIZED THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS RECENTLY PLOTTED THROUGH YOUR COMMISSION IN NOVEMBER.
UM, THEREFORE, ALL PLATTING REGULATIONS APPLY, INCLUDING THE WAIVING, UH, PROCESS OF SIDEWALKS.
UH, SIDEWALK WAIVERS, UM, HAVE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.
ONE OF THEM IS, UH, THE PROPERTY CANNOT BE LOCATED WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF A SERIES OF LAND USES, INCLUDING SCHOOLS.
OBVIOUSLY THIS WOULDN'T QUALIFY.
UM, THERE'S ALSO, UH, A REQUIREMENT FOR, UM, THE SITE NOT TO BE WITHIN THE SAME BLOCK AS OTHER MID BLOCK PROPERTIES THAT HAVE SIDEWALKS, MEANING WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S CONTINUITY.
SO BECAUSE OF THAT, I, I'M OF THE OPINION THAT WHEN WE RECEIVE A SIDEWALK WAIVER REQUEST, WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO APPROVE THE WAIVER ALONG PARK LANE, THERE BEING A CONTINUITY OF THAT SIDEWALK, UH, TO THE EAST.
UM, HOWEVER, UH, IT WOULD BE VERY PRACTICAL TO ASSUME THAT THE SIDEWALK WOULD BE WAIVED OR THE WAIVER REQUEST WOULD BE APPROVED FOR THE SIDEWALK ALONG BOW DECKER.
NOTICE THAT I USED THE WORD ASSUMED IN PRACTICAL, UNLESS YOU GIVE US VERY CLEAR GUIDANCE.
THAT'S THE PROCESS THAT WE'LL TAKE WHEN WE RECEIVE A FULL ENGINEERING SET
[01:55:01]
OF PLANS FOR THIS PROJECT.AND I APOLOGIZE IF I COME ACROSS BEING DENSE HERE, BUT, SO I'M UNDER THE WAY, WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAYING IS THAT, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS A SCHOOL AND GIVEN ITS LOCATION ON PARK LANE, UH, AND THE PRESENCE OF NORTH PARK MALL, ET CETERA, JUST ACROSS THE STREET, THAT SIX FEET SIDEWALKS ARE GOING, ARE PRETTY MUCH GOING TO BE REQUIRED ALONG THE PARK LANE, AND THAT THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY, UH, WE HAVE TO PUT IT IN THE SUP BECAUSE THAT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE THE CASE IF WE STAFF WOULD VERY CERTAINLY RECOMMEND THAT IT BE LISTED ON THE SUP, JUST LIKE WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR ALL THE OTHER SCHOOLS.
AND THE DALLAS CODE SECTION 43 OR WHATEVER WOULD NOT BE SUFFICIENT TO, TO ACCOMMODATE THAT IS CORRECT.
BUT THAT, BECAUSE, UH, ALONG BO IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT'S NOT ACROSS THE STREET FROM NORTH PARK.
UH, UM, IF I MAY INTERJECT THERE, BECAUSE THERE'S NO CONTINUITY TO THE NORTH AND THERE'S PHYSICALLY NO SPACE TO CONTINUE CONSTRUCTING SIDEWALKS IN THE C AND THERE, THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS ALONG THE BO DECK ANYHOW.
UM, JUST CURIOUS, THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS AROUND NORTH PARK MALL EITHER.
ARE, ARE, ARE, ARE THEY EVER GOING TO BE SUBJECT TO A SIDEWALK REQUIREMENT? UM, WELL, I'M A LITTLE OFF TOPIC.
WELL, I, I KNOW NOR NOR NORTH PARK HAS BEEN COMING BACK AND FORTH WITH DIFFERENT PLANS FOR, FOR, UM, UM, UPGRADES TO THEIR, THEIR MALL.
UH, WE'VE NEVER SEEN THEM PHYSICALLY GO THROUGH ANY OF THOSE EXERCISES.
UM, AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN THROUGH ENGINEERING REVIEW FOR DECADES, SO UNFORTUNATELY THERE HASN'T BEEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO REQUIRE THE, THE SIDEWALKS ALONG PARK LANE.
YEAH, WELL IT IS NORTH PARK MALLS, SO
BUT YES, THE PLANNER TERM IS DESIRE PATH.
THAT BRINGS A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY TO THIS, TO THIS ISSUE.
DAVID, DAVID, DAVID, COME BACK.
SO AM I UNDERSTANDING YOU TO SAY THAT YOU WOULD, THAT UNLESS THE SUP CONDITIONS REQUIRE IT, THERE WOULD BE NO REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE ANY KINDA SIDEWALK ON BO DECKER? NO, MA'AM.
UM, I THINK THAT UNLESS THE SUP HAS VERY SPECIFIC DIMENSIONS FOR SIDEWALK, YOU'RE, YOU'RE TRUSTING CITY STAFF THAT WILL DO OUR BEST TO COLLABORATE WITH THE APPLICANT AND FIGURE OUT THE DIMENSIONS THAT BEST FIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UM, AND, AND WITH CONTEXT, I'M GIVING YOU MY INTERPRETATION OF THE CITY OF THE STREET DESIGN MANUAL.
UM, SO, SO KEEPING IN MIND VISION ZERO MM-HMM
AND THE STREET DESIGN MANUAL, WHAT IS YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR BOTH A SIDEWALK AND A BUFFER ALONG BOW DECKER? WE, WE WOULDN'T HAVE A, A RECOMMENDATION MA'AM.
WE WOULD FOLLOW THE STREET DESIGN MANUAL, WHICH CALLS FOR A MINIMUM AND PREFERRED BOTH.
OUR SIX FEET OF SIDEWALK ALONG PARK LANE.
AND A MINIMUM SIX FEET PREFERRED EIGHT FOOT, UM, BUFFER OR FURNISHING ZONE ALONG PARK LANE MINIMUM AND PREFERRED.
WE'LL START WITH A PREFERRED AND THEN WE'LL LET THEIR ENGINEERS TELL US.
DAVID, YOU'RE NOW, YOU'RE MAKING US CREATE AN EASEMENT.
WELL, WE DON'T WANT THAT EITHER, SO WE WOULD HAVE TO FIND A COMPROMISE.
THAT'S A CONVERSATION THAT WE'LL NEED TO HAVE AT PERMITTING, BUT WE CAN, WE CAN SHORTCUT THAT BY PUTTING CONDITIONS IN THE SUP.
AND WOULD YOU BE COMFORTABLE WITH A SIX FOOT BUFFER AND A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK ALONG PARK LANE MEETING THE GOALS OF VISION ZERO? ABSOLUTELY.
WHAT MINIMUM BUFFER AND MINIMUM SIDEWALK WIDTH DO YOU THINK MEETS THE GOALS OF VISION? ZERO.
THANK YOU FOR, UH, ALLOWING ME TO PROVIDE AN OPINION.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE STANDARDS FOR, FOR BODECKER.
THERE ARE DIMENSIONS THAT ARE, THERE'S A RANGE OF DIMENSIONS THAT ARE LISTED IN THE STREET DESIGN
[02:00:01]
MANUAL, MINIMUM OF FOUR FEET.AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S NO CONTINUITY.
WE DON'T WANT PEDESTRIANS TO FOLLOW A PATH AND END UP IN A DEAD END CONDITION WHERE POTENTIALLY SOMEONE MAY HAVE TO EVEN COME BACK IF THEY'RE ON A WHEELCHAIR.
UM, I'M CERTAIN THAT UNLESS YOU HAVE SOME CONDITIONS IN THE SUP UH, CITY STAFF, THE DIRECTOR WOULD BE ABLE TO, UM, ALLOW A WAIVER OF THE SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION.
BUT IF WE DON'T BUILD SIDEWALKS, WE'RE NEVER GONNA HAVE SIDEWALKS, AND ESPECIALLY IF WE DON'T BUILD SIDEWALK SIDE CORNER LOTS.
UM, AND THIS IS A SCHOOL AND THIS IS A SCHOOL.
SO MY ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS IF WE REQUIRE A SIDEWALK ON BOW DECKER, WHAT BUFFER AND SIDEWALK DO YOU THINK GETS US TO COMPLIANCE WITH VISION? ZERO, FIVE AND FIVE IS WHAT WE USE AS A TEMPLATE THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
IF I MAY CLARIFY CHAIR FIVE, MINIMUM WIDTH AND FIVE FEET BUFFER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, UH, 1110.
LET'S TAKE WITH JUST A VERY BRIEF FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
UH, WE'LL COME BACK AND PICK UP THE SECOND BRIEFING FOR THE TEMPORARY INCLEMENT WEATHER SHELTERS.
AND THEN BACK TO CASE NUMBER SEVEN FI FIVE MINUTE BREAK.
COMMISSIONER 1115, WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON THE RECORD.
UH, CHRISTINE CROSLEY, OFFICE OF HOMELESS SOLUTIONS DIRECTOR JUST HERE TO, UM, DO AN ANNUAL OR A, THE UPDATE ON THE, UH, INCLEMENT WEATHER SHELTER ALTERATION OF THE CITY CODE.
UM, WE WERE ASKED TO COME BACK, UH, THE NEXT YEAR TO SAY IF ANY ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY INCLEMENT WEATHER SHELTERS HAD POPPED UP WITHIN THE AREA BECAUSE OF THIS ALTERATION AND THEY HAVE NOT.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? NO, NO QUESTIONS.
AND THAT WAS A BRIEF BRIEFING COMMISSIONERS, SO WE'LL GO BACK TO OUR DOCKET CASE NUMBER SEVEN, I BELIEVE.
DO WE, WE LIKE IT BRIEFED? YES.
ALSO THAT, THAT COME OFF CONSENT.
UH, JUST A BRIEF THING FOR GEORGE, THE LAPTOP HERE SAYS IT'S GOING TO RESTART WITHIN AN HOUR AND I CAN'T SNOOZE IT.
WE MIGHT WANT TO REBOOT IT DURING, SORRY,
OH, WE'LL REBOOT IT DURING LUNCH OR SOMETHING.
LAPTOP WANTS TO GO TO LUNCH OUTTA THE, ALL RIGHT.
UH, ITEM SEVEN IS CASE Z 2 4 5 1 6 2.
IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO, A MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES OWNED IN IR INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF KIMSEY DRIVE NORTH OF ORION.
PLACE ABOUT 7,400 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE, UH, LOCATED IN THE KIND OF SIMMONS CORRIDOR, UH, MEDICAL DISTRICT AREA.
HERE'S AN AERIAL MAP SHOWING THE SUBJECT SITE AND THE ZONING AROUND THE AREA.
AS YOU SEE, IT IS A MIX OF A VARIETY OF, UH, DISTRICTS.
THERE'S MF TWO, THERE'S A PD THAT, UH, IS A SINGLE FAMILY DIS OR SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT MORE MF TWO.
THERE'S A LOT OF WR THREE, THE WALKABLE RESIDENTIAL FORM BASED DISTRICT AS WELL AS, UH, PD 1123.
UH, ONE OF THE SHORTEST AND SMALLEST PDS I'VE SEEN.
UH, AND THEN AGAIN, THIS LARGE IR DISTRICT, SO CURRENTLY DEVELOPED IT WITH A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.
THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO BUILD MULTIFAMILY AND THEY'RE REQUESTING THE MF TWO A DISTRICT HERE WE ARE IN KINSEY, LOOKING SOUTHEAST AT THE SITE.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
IT'S VERY, UH, EMBLEMATIC OF JUST WHAT'S KIND OF DEVELOPED ALONG KIMSEY DRIVE OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.
[02:05:08]
THEN JUST SOME WIDER ANGLE SHOTS.UH, THIS IS A COMPARISON OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, UM, MF TWO VERSUS IR.
I ALSO INCLUDED THE, UH, WR THREE APARTMENT TYPE.
JUST AS A SORT OF POINT OF COMPARISON.
UH, JUST THAT WE DO HAVE WR THREE ALONG THIS STREET IN GENERAL AS WELL AS MF TWO.
THERE IS AN UPDATE SINCE THE DOCKET PUBLICATION.
THE APPLICANT DOES WISH TO VOLUNTEER SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UH, THEY WOULD REQUIRE SIDEWALKS ALONG KIMSEY DRIVE TO BE AT LEAST FIVE FEET WIDE.
DOLLING UNITS OF BUDDING KIMSEY MUST HAVE AN ENTRANCE STORE THAT FACES KIMSEY WITH THE SIDEWALK CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK.
AND PEDESTRIAN SCALE LIGHTING WOULD BE REQUIRED ALONG KIMSEY.
THIS DOES MIRROR SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE IN EFFECT ON THE ADJACENT MF TWO TO THE SOUTHWEST.
AND IT'S SORT OF A WAY OF ACHIEVING SOME OF THE BENEFITS OR THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE WR THREE DISTRICT.
WITHOUT HAVING WR THREE, WE FIND THAT IT IS GENERALLY APPROPRIATE FOR MF TWO A.
THIS AREA IS IDENTIFIED IN FORWARD DALLAS AS COMMUNITY MIXED USE AND DEPARTMENTS ARE PRIMARY LAND USE THERE.
THE AREA IS ALSO IDENTIFIED IN OUR STEM AS CORRIDOR PLAN.
IS IT URBAN RESIDENTIAL? UH, THE PROPOSED D RESTRICTIONS DO PROVIDE CONSISTENCY WITH THE NEARBY PD, THE WR THREE, UM, A PARCEL WITH D RESTRICTIONS.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE APPROVAL OF AN MF TWO, A MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT, AND THE VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS AS BRIEFED.
QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND MR. BAY.
I THINK YOU JUST COVERED THIS, BUT THE, UM, APPLICANT DID SUBMIT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THEY'RE NOT IN OUR DOCKET 'CAUSE YOU RECEIVED THEM AFTER OUR, UM, AFTER THIS WAS POSTED.
BUT STAFF IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THOSE VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND THEN IT'S REALLY JUST MIRRORING THAT STREET SCAPE ALONG THE LENGTH OF KIMSEY AS ALL OF THE VARIOUS CASES HAVE COME ALONG, EXISTING IR, EXISTING RESIDENTIAL USES.
UM, IT JUST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IN THE AREA.
AND JUST TO ADDRESS, SINCE WE HAD A BRIEFING ON AVIATION THIS MORNING, IS IT CORRECT THAT STAFF REVIEWED THE, UM, DNA SITE MAP AS A PART OF THIS REQUEST AND DETERMINED THAT IT WAS APPROPRIATE? THAT IS CORRECT.
WE DID REVIEW THE, THE NOISE CONTOURS WITHIN THE 60 DECIBEL ZONE, NOT THE 65.
THE 65 IS SOMEWHAT, I THINK IT'S RELATIVE TERM, BUT CLOSE IT IS WITHIN THE 60 DECIBEL ZONE, HOWEVER.
MR. BATES, HOW ARE YOU DOING? UM, QUESTION, QUESTION.
THE DEVELOPMENT AND, UM, THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU MENTIONED ALL HAD GARAGES FACING ONE ANOTHER.
UM, I WAS TAUGHT EARLY IN MY CPC CAREER SIX MONTHS AGO, UM, THAT THESE DEVELOPMENTS WERE BEING DEVELOPED LIKE THIS 'CAUSE THE PARKING CODE AND SOME OTHER THINGS.
UM, IS THERE ANY, UM, RELEVANCE TO THAT AND ARE WE LOOKING AT TRANSITIONING FROM THE DRIVEWAYS FACING EACH OTHER INTO MORE OF A HOMES, FACING EACH OTHER COURTYARD TYPE EXPERIENCE FOR OUR DEVELOPMENT? UH, I THINK IT'S HARD TO SAY IN REGARDS TO THIS PARTICULAR SITE.
UH, THE APPLICANT DID SHARE A CONCEPTUAL DRAWING OF WHAT THEY'RE INTENDING TO BUILD.
GIVEN THE DIMENSIONS OF THIS SITE, IT IS GOING TO BE JUST A STRAIGHTAWAY, UH, DRIVEWAY HERE, UNITS HERE.
UH, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ENOUGH SPACE TO HAVE TWO SETS OF UNITS THAT ARE FACING EACH OTHER WITH, UH, WITH DRIVEWAY, WITH GARAGES AS IT WERE.
UM, I CERTAINLY THINK THAT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A TREND OF MAKING SURE THAT YOU HAVE HOUSES FACING EACH OTHER RATHER THAN GARAGES.
IT IS ALWAYS GONNA BE A DIFFICULT THING TO DO ON SOME OF THESE SITES THAT ARE JUST, THEY'RE NARROWER AND YOU'RE PROBABLY NOT EVEN GONNA GET, AGAIN, TWO SETS OF HOUSING UNITS.
UM, THE, KIND OF ON THAT NOTE AS WELL, I KNOW WITH THE PARKING CODE AMENDMENT THAT WAS RECENTLY PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, UH, THIS SITE WOULD QUALIFY UNDER THE NEW PAR PARKING CODE BEING IF IT'S SET UP AS MULTIFAMILY, WHICH TO REFRESH EVERYONE'S MEMORY, MULTIFAMILY IN OUR CODE IS MULTIPLE MORE THAN TWO DWELLING UNITS ON A SINGLE LOT.
SO IF IT'S PLANTED AS ONE LOT MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, IT'S CONSIDERED MULTIFAMILY, EVEN IF IT IS ALL, YOU KNOW, FOR SALE BY, YOU KNOW, TO BE OWNED.
UM, THAT WOULD BE, THERE'S NO PARKING MINIMUM.
HOWEVER, AGAIN, THE, THE DESIGNS THAT THEY'VE SHOWN ME SUGGEST THEY WOULD HAVE GARAGES FOR EACH UNIT.
UH, AND I THINK THAT'S KIND OF ALMOST TO BE EXPECTED, I THINK IN GENERAL WITH THE TYPE OF, UH, DEVELOPMENT THAT'S OCCURRING HERE AND AT THESE PRICE POINTS.
UM, IT CHAIR, THIS IS ON CONSENT? CORRECT.
NO, IT, IT'S MS, MR. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE.
MR. THANK YOU AND THANK YOU MR. BATE FOR THE REMINDER.
UM, THE APPLICANT DID SHARE A CONCEPT PLAN THAT WAS CIRCULATED TO THE COMMISSION, IS THAT CORRECT? UH, YES.
THE APPLICANTS DID SEND OVER THEIR, UH, CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS.
UH, I KNOW THAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO ATTEND.
[02:10:01]
GIVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION DURING THE, UH, CONSENT PORTION, UH, TO SHOW IT.WELL, AND AGAIN, I'M JUST ASKING, THEY'VE SHARED IT, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE IS IS CURRENTLY BEING DEVELOPED IN THE AREA.
THERE'S NO CHANGE IN THEIR CURRENT THINKING THAT WE'RE AWARE OF.
YEAH, I WOULD SAY IT'S VERY, FROM WHAT I SAW, IT'S CONSISTENT IN GENERAL WITH WHAT'S, WHAT'S GONE UP THERE SO FAR.
AND, UM, AS THIS IS STRAIGHT ZONING, IT'S NOT TIED TO THAT PLAN.
SO IF THEY DID WISH TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE A DIFFERENT DESIGN STANDARD THAT'S WITHIN THEIR PURVIEW TO DO, DO THAT IS CORRECT? CORRECT.
IS THAT CORRECT? UM, AND THEN WE DID RECEIVE ONE, UM, RESPONSE AND OPPOSITION, UM, TO THIS REQUEST, JUST NOTING THE OVERALL INTENSITY, UM, OF WHAT'S HAPPENING ALONG THE STREET.
UM, IS THAT, IS STAFF EVALUATED THIS? I THINK IF I READ IN THE CASE REPORT, IT SAID THAT THERE'S NOT, UM, IN, IN STAFF'S REVIEW A IMPACT, UM, THAT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC FLOW.
IS THAT CORRECT? UH, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND CAN YOU JUST VERY BRIEFLY, UM, HOW IS THAT ADDRESSED ON AN ONGOING BASIS? BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING I CONSISTENTLY HEAR.
THIS IS A DEAD END STREET, IT'S GOT A DART LINE AT THE END OF IT.
IT HAS EXPERIENCED A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION, A LOT OF, UM, INCREASE IN DENSITY.
HOW DOES STAFF EVALUATE THAT ON AN ONGOING BASIS? IN OTHER WORDS, IF THERE DOES BECOME AN OBSTRUCTION ON THE STREET, HOW, HOW, HOW DOES THE COMMUNITY MOVE FORWARD WITH ASKING STAFF TO LOOK AT THAT? THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF MR. NAVARRO IS HERE TO HELP, UH, SPEAK A LITTLE MORE ON THE, UH, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING SIDE OF THINGS.
UH, I DO KNOW THAT GENERALLY WHEN IT GOES TO THE PERMITTING STAGE, THAT'S OFTEN WHERE ENGINEERING WILL TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT THE INGRESS AND EGRESS OF VEHICLES ON A SITE.
UM, THAT WOULD BE WHERE THEY MIGHT MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON WHERE INGRESS EGRESS OCCURS.
IT'S ALWAYS GONNA BE A LITTLE DIFFICULT ON A CORRIDOR LIKE THIS WHERE YOUR LOTS, JUST THE WAY THAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY CONFIGURED, CURRENTLY PLANTED, CURRENTLY OWNED, THERE'S ONLY SO MANY PLACES YOU CAN PUT A CURB CUT.
UH, THAT BEING SAID, THE SCALE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, AT THE VERY LEAST, IT DIDN'T TRIGGER ANY REQUIREMENTS FOR, UH, TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
UH, JUST DUE TO THE, DUE TO THE SIZE OF IT, IT WOULD BE, I THINK FOUR OR FIVE UNITS.
YOU CAN VENTURE TO GUESS MAYBE TWO, TWO INDIVIDUALS PER UNIT, TWO CARS, 10 TRIPS IN THE MORNING, IF THAT, UH, 10 TRIPS IN THE AFTERNOON WHEN THEY COME BACK FROM WORK AT MOST.
UM, BUT IN TERMS OF THE KIND OF THE ONGOING REVIEW, UH, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GENERALLY IT WOULD BE HANDLED MORE AT THE PERMITTING STAGE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, WE'LL KEEP GOING.
UH, CASE NUMBER EIGHT, UH, ALSO COME OFF CONSENT, BUT WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT.
IT TAKES US TO NUMBER, UH, TO WHAT DATE COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN.
NUMBER EIGHT TO WHAT DATE? UNTIL, UH, JUNE 12TH.
WE WILL BRIEF IT THEN TAKES IT TO CASE NUMBER 11.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE NUMBER 11 BRIEFED? OKAY.
ANYBODY LIKE TO HAVE 12 BRIEFED? OKAY.
13 ALSO COME OFF CONSENT WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO WHAT DATE? AUGUST THE SEVENTH.
WE'LL BRIEF IT THEN TAKES, IT TAKES US TO 14.
UH, ALSO HOLDING THAT ONE UNDER ADVISEMENT TO JUNE 26.
HAS THAT BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE? LET'S BRIEF IT.
UH, YES, THERE'S STILL SOME ANALYSIS THAT'S GOING ON.
I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH, WITH STAFF AND WE HAVE TO HAVE A SUBSEQUENT MEETING TO THAT.
WE KNOW WHAT KIND OF ANALYSIS.
UH, THERE'S A WATER ANALYSIS THAT'S ON THE, THE CURRENT LAKE AND WITH THE CONTAMINANTS IN IT.
SO THERE'VE BEEN, UH, TESTING ON THAT LAKE AND ANALYSIS THAT'S BEEN SHARED WITH, WITH STAFF AND THEY'RE GO OUT, UH, TO THE COMMUNITY AGAIN, UH, WITH THE RESULTS.
I'LL JUST ADD IN THAT WE RECEIVED THE TESTING ANALYSIS, WE GOT IT TO OUR ENVIRONMENTAL AND, AND DWU DEPARTMENTS.
THEY ONLY JUST YESTERDAY GOT US COMMENTS ON THOSE.
SO I'M GETTING THOSE TO YOU JUST SO YOU CAN HAVE THE INTERPRETATION ON IT.
UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S A FINAL CONCLUSION,
[02:15:01]
BUT, UM, I WANT YOU TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT I WOULDN'T EXPECT YOU TO MAKE A DETERMINATION BASED ON THAT FROM YESTERDAY.IT IS AN APPLICATION FOR ONE A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT AND TWO DEED RESTRICTIONS ON PROPERTY ZONE IN MC FOUR, MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DATA DRIVE AND EXECUTIVE DRIVE.
NORTHEAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY, ABOUT 41,000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE.
UH, HERE IN THE NORTHEASTERN SECTION OF THE CITY.
AERIAL MAPS SHOWING THE SUBJECT SITE, UH, THE ZONING MAP, UH, THIS IS ON AN MC FOUR MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
THERE'S MF ONE TO THE NORTH, UH, OUR REGIONAL RETAIL TO THE SOUTH AND WEST, CS TO THE EAST, AND THEN MU ONE AND CS AS WELL TO THE NORTHEAST.
UH, THERE'S A MIX OF USES HERE.
AGAIN, YOU HAVE MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTH, THE MC FOUR SITE.
IT'S UH, THERE'S OFFICE, THERE'S A VEHICLE ENGINE REPAIR, THERE'S RESTAURANT, VARIOUS RETAIL NEARBY.
SO THE SITE IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH THE SURFACE PARKING THAT'S SERVING AN ADJACENT OFFICE AND THE APPLICANT WISHES TO BUILD A WAREHOUSE ON THE SITE.
AS SUCH, THEY ARE REQUESTING TO CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT AND THEY HAVE VOLUNTEERED DEED RESTRICTIONS TO LIMIT THE USES.
UM, AS A REMINDER, THIS CASE HAD COME BEFORE THE BODY RECENTLY.
UH, THE MAIN STICKING POINT WAS JUST SOME OF THE USES THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED UNDER CS DISTRICT AND THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS AIM TO LIMIT SOME OF THOSE USES.
UH, THESE ARE THE PHOTOS FROM THE SITE.
UH, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S PRETTY WELL BUFFERED WITH, UH, WITH SCREENING HERE IN A WALL AND SOME FENCING.
HERE'S WHAT THE SURROUNDING AREAS LOOK LIKE.
UH, SO THE PROPOSED DISTRICT IS, UM, CS.
THERE'S NO MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK THERE.
UH, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS ACTUALLY LOWER THAN THE MC FOUR DISTRICT AND THEY, IT'S STILL SUBJECT TO RPS THAT'S GENERATED BY MF ONE IN THE NORTH.
SO THE AREA, IT IS PROMINENTLY CS AND RR WITH THE MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTH, UH, THE INTENDED USE WOULD BE A VERY LOW IMPACT TO THE SURROUNDING AREAS AND USES, UH, WE DO FIND THAT THE PROPOSED DEED RESTRICTIONS GREATLY LIMIT THE ADDITIONAL USES SO IT MIRRORS THE EXISTING MC FOUR USES.
PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WERE THIS TO BE ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.
UM, IT WOULD BE A CS DISTRICT WITH THE CS YARD LOT AND SPACE STANDARDS AND ALLOWING A WAREHOUSE AND THAT'S IT.
IT WOULD BE MC FOUR, BUT WITH CS YARD LOT SIZE STANDARDS AND WITH A WAREHOUSE ALLOWED.
AS SUCH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF THE CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT AND APPLICANT'S VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS.
WAS THERE ANY, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION? UH, WE'VE NOT RECEIVED ANY, UH, AS FAR AS I, UH, NO.
UM, BUT I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY PHONE CALLS OR EMAILS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, WE'RE GO TO NUMBER, UH, 16.
DO ANYONE NEED NUMBER 16 BRIEFED? OKAY.
UH, 17 WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO JULY 10TH.
THAT TAKES US TO, UH, WELL WE DID 18, WE DID A, UH, YES, WE BRIEFED 1819 WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, SO IT TAKES US TO 20.
UH, JUST A QUICK NOTE THAT ON THE SUBDIVISION DOCKET CONSENT AGENDA, ITEMS 21 THROUGH 2036, NUMBER 25 HAS COME OFF CONSENT DUE TO A CONFLICT.
[02:21:03]
ALL RIGHT.UH, MY NAME IS JALEN POCHE, SENIOR PLANNER WITH THE AUTHORIZED HEARING TEAM.
UM, TODAY I'LL BE PRESENTING THE POSTPONEMENT CODE AMENDMENTS, UH, WHICH IS DCA 2 4 5 DASH 0 0 6.
THIS REQUEST IS A CONSIDERATION OF ELIMINATING SECTION 51 A DASH 4.701 E POSTPONEMENTS TO SHIFT THE DETERMINATION OF THE REQUEST FOR A POSTPONEMENT OF A HEARING FOR ZONING CASE FROM A NON-DISCRETIONARY ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION TO THAT OF THE CITY PLAN, COMMISSION, AND OR CITY COUNCIL AS APPLICABLE, UH, IF GRANTED, CPC AND CITY COUNCIL WOULD ALSO ESTABLISH A NEW DATE, CERTAIN PUBLIC HEARING DATE.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS, UH, PROPOSAL CODE AMENDMENT PROPOSAL IS TO PROMOTE A MORE EQUITABLE AND TRANSPARENT PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS BY, UH, RE REMOVING THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND AUTOMATIC GRANTING OF POSTPONEMENTS.
UH, TO REDUCE DUPLICATIVE EXPENSES ON THE CITY CAUSED BY THE REIFICATION COSTS THAT OFTEN FAR EXCEED THE $150 POSTPONEMENT FEE, UM, TO RES STORE DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY TO GOVERNING BODIES, UH, ALLOWING YOU ALL TO EVALUATE THE MERITS OF THE POSTPONEMENT REQUESTS, UM, TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY IN PROCESSING ZONING CASES AND REDUCE DELAYS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF AREA PLANS, UH, AND TO ALSO ADDRESS THE GROWING COSTS OF COMPLICATIONS RESULTING FROM, UH, RECENT STATE LEGISLATIONS, SEB 9 29 AS AN EXAMPLE, UH, WHICH REQUIRE ADDITIONAL NOTIFICATIONS.
SO THE IMPETUS FOR THIS CODE AMENDMENT, UM, OUR PROCESSING TIMES FOR OUR ZONING CASES IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT, UH, FOR QUITE A WHILE, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN GETTING A LOT OF, UM, BAD PRESS FOR, UH, ACROSS THE CITY.
AND SO WE ARE AIMING TO, UM, REDUCE SOME OF OUR PROCESSING TIMES FOR OUR CASES.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ASPIRE TO, YOU KNOW, REVIEW ALL ASPECTS OF THE ZONING PROCESS TO DETERMINE WHAT AREAS WE CAN IMPROVE ON, UM, AND HOPEFULLY DECREASE SOME OF THOSE PROCESSING TIMES.
UH, ADDITIONALLY WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT SOME OF THE FINANCIAL IMPACTS, UH, AND FINANCIAL ASSESSMENTS OF OUR DEPARTMENT OVERALL.
UM, AND WITH THE RISING COSTS, UH, TO SEND MAIL OUTS AND THE DUPLICATION OF NOTICING, IT POTENTIALLY LEAVES A THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO RE-NOTICE SOME OF OUR CASES, OUR LARGER CASES, SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED HEARINGS.
AND ALSO WE AIM TO INCREASE TRANSPARENCY AND FAIRNESS.
UM, CURRENTLY THE POSTPONEMENT PROCESSES OF NON-DISCRETIONARY ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION.
UH, AND WE'RE PROPOSING TO SWITCH IT TO A PUBLIC PROCESS, WHICH CAN BE DETERMINED BY, UH, YOU ALL AND PEOPLE AT THE C THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, UM, AS YOU DETERMINE IF IT'S NECESSARY OR NOT TO HOLD CASES.
SO, UH, THE EXISTING CODE OVERVIEW, UM, SO FOR SECTION 51, A DASH 4.701 E, UM, THE APPLICANT AND THE OPPOSITION WITHIN THE AREA OF NOTIFICATION MAY REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT OF A SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING BY PAYING A FEE OF $150 AND SUBMITTING A FORMAL LETTER OF REQUEST TO THE DIRECTOR, UH, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
UM, AND THAT SETS FORTH THE GROUNDS FOR POSTPONEMENT, AND WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY GRANT IT FOR THAT $150.
UM, WE ACCEPT THEM WITH THE RECEIPT OF THE FEE AND THE LETTER.
UM, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO POSTPONE ONCE BEFORE CPC AND ONCE BEFORE CITY COUNCIL, UH, AND THE REQUEST CAN BE FOR FOUR WEEKS OR MORE IN THE FUTURE.
UM, AND THEN THE, THE REQUESTS ARE TYPICALLY RECEIVED AFTER, UH, NOTICES ARE SENT, AND THEY MUST BE SUBMITTED NO LATER THAN 5:00 PM ON THE MONDAY PROCEEDING THE WEEK OF THE HEARING.
AND IT WOULD, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, IT WILL TRIGGER THE REQUIREMENT FOR ANOTHER NEWSPAPER NOTICE AND A SECOND MAIL OUT TO ANNOUNCE THE POSTPONEMENT, AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL 9 29 NOTICES
[02:25:01]
AS WELL.SO, UH, ON THIS SLIDE, I, I PROVIDED A, A, A QUICK COST BREAKDOWN OF THE MATERIALS, UM, AND THEN THE COST TO, UH, COMPILE THE INFORMATION AND MAIL IT OUT.
THIS IS FOR THE POSTPONEMENT, NOT THE ORIGINAL REQUEST.
AND SO, UM, IT, IT'LL, IT'LL COST APPROXIMATELY, UH, A DOLLAR AND 3 CENTS PER MAILING, UM, NOT INCLUDING THE NEWSPAPER NOTICE OR NOT ALSO INCLUDING THE SB 9 29 NOTICE AS WELL IN THE NEWSPAPER NOTICE TO RE-NOTICE IT CAN RANGE FROM 400 TO $800.
SO SOME, UH, EXISTING CODE IMPACTS BY THE NUMBERS.
UM, SO FROM FOR INDIVIDUAL ZONING CASES, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO POSTPONE.
AND FROM 2021 TO 2025, THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 25 CASES THAT WERE WITHHELD, UM, EXCUSE ME, THAT WERE POSTPONED, UM, RANGING FROM WEATHER ISSUES, OPPOSITION, OR THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THE POSTPONEMENT, UM, FROM STAFF OR THE COMMISSION MEMBER AT THE TIME.
UM, FOR AUTHORIZED HEARINGS, FOUR OF THE LAST SIX AUTHORIZED HEARINGS HAVE BEEN POSTPONED BY A PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN THE AREA OF REQUESTS.
UM, THESE INCLUDE HAMPTON CLARATIN, WHICH YOU ALL JUST HEARD RECENTLY.
UM, DOWNTOWN ELMWOOD, FLOOR FARMS, ELM THICKET.
UH, AND, AND THE LIST GOES ON.
UM, AS I MENTIONED, UM, OF THE RECENT AUTHORIZED HEARINGS, UM, FOUR OF WHICH HAVE BEEN POSTPONED FOR MAJORITY OF THEM HAVE BEEN POSTPONED TWICE.
UM, AND THOSE COSTS DO TEND TO ADD UP.
AND SO, UM, IT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF HAS DONE IN OUR ANALYSIS.
WE BEGAN TO DETERMINE THAT THE FEE THAT WE WERE CHARGING ISN'T THE RETURN, ISN'T THERE, AND WE'RE ACTUALLY SPENDING MORE MONEY, UH, THAN THE ACTUAL COST OF REQUESTING THAT POSTPONEMENT.
SO, UM, SOME OF THE BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSAL, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, GREATER TRANSPARENCY.
UM, WE WE'RE AIMING TO, YOU KNOW, BE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE WITH THE CITY'S RESOURCES AND STAFF'S TIME, UM, AND THEN OF COURSE, IMPROVE OUR PROCESSING TIMES FOR A LOT OF OUR CASES.
SO, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE PROPOSAL IS TO STRIKE THAT SECTION FROM THE CODE AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS, UH, TO SECTION 51 A DASH 4.701 E.
UM, AND IN ADDITIONALLY, WE PRESENTED THIS TO ZAC A FEW WEEKS AGO AND THEY ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.
QUESTIONS MR. RUBIN? YEAH, JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, UNDER THE CURRENT POSTPONEMENT PROCEDURE, ANY INDIVIDUAL OR PROPERTY THAT ARE A SINGLE INDIVIDUAL CAN SUBMIT THE $150 FEE AND GET IT POSTPONED, RIGHT? AS LONG AS THEY'RE WITHIN THE, UH, AREA OF REQUEST, UM, OR WITHIN THE BUFFER AREA FOR, UH, THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S A, LIKE A 20% THRESHOLD THAT HAS TO BE MET BEFORE A CASE PUTS ON ITS ONE PROPERTY OWNER? CORRECT.
CAN, I WANTED TO DIG IN A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THE COST PIECE OF IT.
WHAT ARE THE COSTS THAT ARE INCURRED BY THE CITY? CAN YOU BREAK THEM DOWN INTO WHAT, WHAT THE VARIOUS, YOU KNOW, ITEMS ARE? SO, UM, I DID PROVIDE, UH, JUST A, A OKAY.
A GENERAL, SORRY, I MISSED THAT.
YEAH, I DID PROVIDE A GENERAL COST BREAKDOWN, UM, BUT A SPECIFIC INSTANCE, UM, I I CAN USE, UH, EITHER THE FLOOR FARMS OR, OR HAMPTON CLARATON, UM, 'CAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE THE MOST RECENT, BUT, UM, WITH 814 PROPERTIES, UM, JUST THE COST TO RE-NOTICE THOSE AND TO DO IT TWICE, THEY WILL EXCEED THE $150 THAT THE APPLICANT PAYS.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF ROLLING OVER THE COST TO THE APPLICANT STAFF THOUGHT IT WOULD BE MUCH MORE EQUITABLE TO JUST ALLOW THEM TO REQUEST IT FOR FREE AT THE HORSESHOE OR THROUGH EMAIL, WHICH A LOT OF PEOPLE ALREADY DO ANYWAY.
UM, AND SO, UM, THAT WAY YOU'RE ABLE TO HOLD IT TO A DATE CERTAIN AND STAFF ISN'T, THE CITY ISN'T REQUIRED TO PAY THE COST OF RE NOTICING.
AND WE DO HAVE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS WITH, UM, WELL OVER 10,000 PROPERTIES IN OUR QUEUE, UH, AND THE POTENTIAL COSTS TO THOSE, UH, WELL EXCEED THE, THE $150, UH, APPLICATION FEE.
UH, THAT WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION.
SO, UM, LET ME JUST MAKE SURE A FEW FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS THERE.
WHAT ARE THOSE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS WITH OVER 10,000 PROPERTIES THAT NEED TO BE NOTICED? SO IN OUR QUEUE, UM, WE HAVE, UH, PD 5 95 WITH A LITTLE OVER A LITTLE UNDER 11,000.
WE HAVE, UM, AREAS LIKE BRYAN AREA, WHICH HAS 1300.
WE HAVE AREAS LIKE WEST KLEBERG WITH A LITTLE OVER 4,000.
[02:30:01]
UM, WE HAVE EAST KLEBERG WITH A LITTLE UNDER A THOUSAND, AND THE LIST ADDS UP.WE HAVE SPECIFICALLY FOR OUR AUTHORIZED HEARING, WE DO LARGE AREA REZONING REQUESTS.
AND, UM, THE COST CAN ADD UP SUBSTANTIALLY IF SOMEONE WERE TO, TO DECIDE TO REQUEST POSTPONEMENT.
UM, AND WE NEVER RECOUP THOSE COSTS.
AND DOES THE POSTPONEMENT APPLY TO ANY TYPE OF, OF ZONING CASE THAT THAT IS BEING CONSIDERED BY THIS COMMISSION AND LATER COUNSEL? YES.
SO WOULD THAT INCLUDE THINGS LIKE THE ADDITION OF A NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION OVERLAY? YES.
SO SOMEONE COULD PAY THE $150 FEE AND POSTPONE IT BY EIGHT WEEKS? YES, SIR.
WOULD IT INCLUDE THINGS LIKE IMPLEMENTING A NEW CONSERVATION DISTRICT OR EXPANDING IT? YES.
AND IMPLEMENTING A NEW HISTORIC DISTRICT OR EXPANDING ONE? YES, SIR.
UM, AND I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR NOW.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, FOLLOW UP.
I WANNA DELVE IN INTO YOUR STATISTICS A LITTLE MORE.
I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTOOD THE COST ANALYSIS.
Y YOU HAVE TO PAY TO DO THE INITIAL ROUND OF NOTICES ANYWAY, RIGHT? YEP.
SO I DON'T WANT TO INCLUDE THAT INITIAL ROUND IN THE COST.
YEAH, I JUST WANNA TALK ABOUT THE RENO.
SO ON AN AVERAGE ZONING CASE, DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH IT COSTS TO RENO A ZONING CASE IF SOMEONE FILES FOR A POSTPONEMENT? UH, ON THE AVERAGE, YEAH.
UH, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THE AVERAGE NUMBER FOR THOSE RANGE.
IT DEPENDS ON THE SIZE AND AREA OF REQUEST.
DO YOU HAVE A RANGE ON OUR SMALLER AUTHORIZED HEARINGS? IT COULD BE MAYBE $150.
ON A LARGER ONES, IT COULD BE WELL OVER $15,000.
AND HOW DO YOU COME UP WITH THAT $15,000 NUMBER? WELL, IT IS BASED ON THE COST OF THE MATERIALS, THE COST TO ACTUALLY MAIL THEM WITH, UM, THE POST OFFICE, UM, THE COST OF, OF THE, UH, THE COST OF PRINT, THE COST OF MAIL, AND THE PRICE OF THE MATERIALS.
AND THEN OF COURSE, THE NEWSPAPER NOTICE ALSO COSTS MONEY.
SO ON A LARGER CASE, THE CITY IS SPENDING $15,000 TO DO THE FIRST ROUND.
AND WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC COMPONENTS OF THAT? UH, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WELL, HOW DO YOU COME UP WITH THAT 15,000? BREAK IT DOWN FOR ME.
SO THE NUMBER IS BASED, UH, LARGELY ON, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE, THE COST TO PRINT THE MATERIALS.
AND SO WE, WE HAVE TO FACTOR IN THE COST OF THE INK, THE PAPER, UM, THE ENVELOPES.
AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE TO COST HOW MUCH THE POST OFFICE IS GONNA CHARGE US TO MAIL EACH INDIVIDUAL LETTER, UH, AS WELL AS THE NEWSPAPER NOTICE.
UH, UH, COULD YOU GIMME MORE SPECIFIC DETAILS ON WHAT YOUR UH, WELL, YEAH, WHAT YOUR QUESTION IS.
I MEAN, PART OF THE REASON YOU WANNA GET RID OF THIS, UM, PROVISION IS COST, AND YOUR COST IMPACT SHEET REALLY DOESN'T TELL ME ANYTHING.
SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT COSTS WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT HERE.
AND I'M, I'M HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME BELIEVING THAT THE CITY IS EATING A $15,000 COST FOR SOMETHING THAT WE ARE NOT PASSING ON TO AN APPLICANT.
UM, I DO KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, IF THERE'S A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SIGNATURES THAT THE CITY MIGHT EAT A COST, BUT ON ZONING CASES, FOR EXAMPLE, ARE YOU TELLING ME THAT THE CITY PAYS FOR THE NOTIFICATION, UM, FOR ZONING CASES AND THE APPLICANT DOESN'T? YES, COMMISSIONER.
SO HOW MUCH IS THAT? SO IT, IT VARIES.
SO FOR AUTHORIZED HEARINGS, ARE CITY INITIATED REZONING? SO THERE IS NO APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT IS A CITY, BUT I ASKED FOR ZONING CASES, YES, I'M STARTING WITH ZONING CASES.
I DON'T HAVE NUMBERS TOP OF MY HEAD.
UH, IT DEPENDS ON THE AREA REQUEST AND THEN IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE PDS ARE NOTIFIED 500 FEET.
SO IT'S MORE LETTERS, RIGHT? UH, NO, WE DON'T CHARGE THE APPLICANT FOR THE COST OF NOTIFICATION THAT FALLS WITH THE CITY.
UM, AND IF I AM TO, AGAIN, I DIDN'T DO IT AND I WILL CAUTION US TO DO, TO MAKE AN INTERPRETATION THAT WE'RE PROPOSING THIS BECAUSE SOLELY OF COST, WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING THIS BECAUSE IT'S OF LACK OF TRANSPARENCY.
SO, UM, I WOULD SAY THAT, UM, WE GOT THE MOST CONTROVERSIAL CASES, PEPPER SQUARE, THE ONE ON, UH, GARLAND ROAD.
ANY KIND OF CONTROVERSIAL CASE YOU HEARD WAS CAME WITH A POSTPONEMENT.
AND THAT THAT COST, IF WE ARE TO DO A COST BENEFIT BETWEEN THE FEES FOR THE ZONING CASES AND WHAT WE PAY FOR, UH, NOTIFICATION, IT DOESN'T ADD UP BECAUSE IT'S STAFF TIME, IT'S YOURS TIMES AND ALL OF THAT.
WE DON'T PASS THOSE COSTS TO ANYBODY.
[02:35:01]
I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT IT'S NOT JUST COST, BUT COST IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE RELYING ON.IS IT, SO YOU HAVE A, A RE A REPOSTING FEE WITH THE, WITH THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER, AND SO THAT'S FOUR TO $800, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND SO THERE'S PRINTING COSTS.
DO YOU HAVE A COST PER SHEET ANALYSIS? YES.
IT'S, IT'S ON YOUR SCREEN RIGHT NOW, SO THAT'S WHAT 10 CENTS YOUR, THAT'S YOU'RE ALL IN.
UH, SO YEAH, THAT'S FOR JUST THE SHEETS, NOT TO PRINT IT AND NOT THE ENVELOPES, JUST THE, JUST THE SHEETS, THE WHITE PAPERS, THE ENVELOPES, UM, THAT WERE REQUIRED TO GO INTO THAT PACKAGE.
YES, WE HAVE THAT RIGHT THERE.
SO COMMISSIONER, UH, OUR ESTIMATE IS BASED ON THE TOTAL COST OF THE THINGS THAT HE SAID, BUT IT COSTS ON AVERAGE A DOLLAR AND 6 CENTS ON AVERAGE TO DO ONE MAIL OUT, ONE PROPERTY OWNER.
SO YOU CAN MULTIPLY THAT BY THE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT ARE WITHIN AN AUTHORIZED HEARING, AND THEN WE DO THE NOTIFICATION BUFFER.
SO IT JUST DEPENDS ON HOW BIG THE ERROR IS, BUT IT COSTS ON AVERAGE A HUNDRED, UH, $1 AND 6 CENTS TO DO REIFICATION FOR POSTPONEMENT.
SO DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF, ON AVERAGE HOW MUCH FOR ZONING CASES IT COSTS TO RE-NOTICE IF SOMEONE PAYS TO POSTPONE? NO, IT CAN BE 20 PROPERTIES, IT CAN BE A HUNDRED, IT CAN BE 500.
IT REALLY DEPENDS ON, SORRY, THAT'S WHY I ASKED FOR AN AVERAGE.
IT DEPENDS ON THE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT I GET THAT I ASKED FOR AN AVERAGE, DO YOU HAVE A NUMBER FOR AN AVERAGE IF YOU GIVE ME A FEW HOURS? I KNOW I DID A LITTLE BIT OF CALCULATION ON THIS, SO LET ME CHECK MY EMAILS AND I'LL COME BACK WITH AN ANSWER.
NOW, ON THE ZONING CASES, YOU SAID 25 AND FIVE YEARS OUTTA HOW MANY ZONING CASES OVER THAT SAME PERIOD OF TIME? WHAT PERCENTAGE IS 25 OUT OF THE NUMBER ZONING CASES? NO.
SO APPROXIMATELY 25, SHE'S ASKING WHAT'S THE TOTAL NUMBER WITHIN THAT? OH, OH, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LIKE TWO TO 300 ZONING CASES PER YEAR.
SO IS THERE A WAY YOU COULD GET THAT? I WOULD SAY, I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NUMBERS AND I UNDERSTAND THIS YEAR FOR A ZONING CASE, IT WAS JUST PEPPER SQUARE.
THERE WAS, UH, TWO YEARS AGO IT WAS THE ONE SHORELINE ON GARLAND ROAD.
IT'S NOT AS MANY WITH THE ZONING CASES, BUT IT'S STILL A TOOL AND IT'S STILL LESS TRANSPARENCY.
I THINK IT HURTS MORE THE PROCESS WHEN IT, AND OUR BUDGET WHEN IT COMES TO AUTHORIZED HEARINGS.
SO IN RECENT TIMES, IT'S REALLY BEEN ONE OUT OF HOWEVER MANY, SO LESS THAN 1% PROBABLY FOR ZONING CASES, YES.
SO IT'S REALLY, UH, MORE IMPACTFUL IN THE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO YOU COULD TAKE AN APPROACH FOR AUTHORIZED HEARINGS AND TREAT IT DIFFERENTLY THAN ZONING CASES IF THE BODY WISHES TO DO THAT FOR SURE.
AND YOU COULD INCREASE THE FEE TO HELP COVER THE COSTS, BUT IF THE BODY WISHES THAT, SURE.
EXPLAIN TO ME YOUR TRANSPARENCY ARGUMENT.
'CAUSE I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THAT.
SO, UH, WHEN WE HAVE, WHEN WE RECEIVE A POSTPONEMENT, WE DO SEND NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS AND WE DO PLACE IT IN THE NEWSPAPER.
HOWEVER, UM, THE APPLICANT OR THE COMMUNITY HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME IN FRONT OF THE BODY AND ASK PUBLICLY FOR THE SAME THING AND ACHIEVE THE SAME THING.
I THINK THAT'S THE TRANSPARENCY ARGUMENT WHEN IT COMES TO AN AUTHORIZED HEARING.
SAME, YOU, YOU PUBLISH SOME DATES, YOU HAVE SOME EXPECTATIONS, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, OH, YOU RECEIVED THAT SECOND ROUND OF LETTERS, BUT USE THE PREVIOUS REPLY FORM, IT BECOMES VERY MESSY AND VERY CONFUSING.
AND I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD WAY OF BEING TRANSPARENT, STREAMLINED AND ACTUALLY CLEAR WITH YOUR DATES.
UM, AND SAME LIKE WHEN IT COMES WITH THE ZONING CASE AND EVEN UNAUTHORIZED HEARING, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE PROPERTY OWNER THAT CAN DO THAT BY PAYING A, A FEE PROBABLY.
THERE AGAIN, A LOT OF PEOPLE MAY RELY ON THE FACT, YEAH, IT COMES TO CPC, LET'S HEAR IT IN A PUBLIC FORUM.
WHY DO YOU WANT THIS TO BE THE, UH, UH, TO BE POSTPONED AND THE ENTIRE BODY CAN DECIDE? I THINK TO ADD ON THAT TOO IS SOMETIMES WE HAVE PEOPLE WALK IN WITH A FORM THAT IS ALREADY SIGNED AND THEY GO TO THE FRONT DESK PERSON AND SAY, I WANT POSTPONEMENT.
THERE'S NO WAY FOR US TO VERIFY THAT INFORMATION OTHER THAN DESIGN AND ATTACH TO AN ADDRESS THAT EXISTS WITHIN THE, THE AUTHORIZED HEARING AREA.
SO WHEN THEY COME BEFORE THIS BODY, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO ASK.
AND THEN THERE ARE ALSO OTHER RESIDENTS THAT ARE IN ALL THE AUDIENCE THAT CAN VERIFY IF THEY ACTUALLY COME FROM
[02:40:01]
THE AUTHORIZED HEARING AREA.SO THERE'S THAT ADDED, UH, ACCOUNTABILITY THAT COMES WITH THEM BEING ABLE TO STAND BEFORE THIS BODY IN THE PRESENCE OF COMMUNITY RESIDENT AND PROPERTY OWNER AND SAY, I LEAVE THIS AREA THERE, THE REQUEST THAT WE'VE QUESTIONED WHETHER THEY ACTUALLY LIVE IN THE AREA, BUT BECAUSE THE FORM THAT THEY PRESENT BEFORE THE STAFF IS SIGNED AND ATTACHED TO AN ADDRESS THAT IS WITHIN THE AREA, THERE'S NO WAY FOR US TO VERIFY THAT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
I HAD QUESTIONS SIMILAR TO, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON REGARDING IF THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE IN THE STAFF ANALYSIS BETWEEN A ZONING CASE FILED BY AN APPLICANT VERSUS AN AUTHORIZED HEARING.
UM, I'VE ACTUALLY STOOD BEFORE THIS BODY ASKING FOR POSTPONES, UM, MYSELF, UM, WITH APPLICANT TEAMS THAT HAVE BEEN FOR VERY LONG DURATIONS ON COMPLEX AND, UM, SOMETIMES CONTROVERSIAL CASES.
SO I WAS TRYING TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD.
YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WHAT HAPPENS IS SOMETHING WILL GET NOTICED FOR A HEARING AND FOLKS WHO'VE BEEN WORKING ON A CASE FOR, YOU KNOW, YEARS SOMETIMES AREN'T AVAILABLE TO ATTEND.
AND, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY IT RELIES THEN ON THE COMMISSIONER AND THIS BODY TO HOLD THAT UNDER ADVISEMENT TO ALLOW FOR ALL THOSE FOLKS WHO'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE CASE TO BE ABLE TO BE PRESENT.
BUT THAT'S, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THE, THE PERSON MAY NOT BE ABLE TO BE HERE TO MAKE THAT CASE.
SO HOW DOES THIS, UM, PROPOSAL MAYBE ADDRESSED? AND AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO, WE'VE GOT ONE CIRCUMSTANCE OUT OF, YOU KNOW, EVERY FIVE YEARS.
I DON'T THINK IT'S A REGULAR OCCURRENCE, BUT IT DOESN'T THAT ALSO SPEAK TO THE TRANSPARENCY ARGUMENT.
UM, SO THE PROPOSAL IS TO CONTINUE TO ALLOW THOSE SCENARIOS TO PLAY OUT WHERE IF THERE'S A LAST MINUTE NEED TO HOLD AN ITEM OR, UM, YEAH, HOLD AN ITEM TO A SPECIFIC DATE, CERTAIN IF THE APPLICANT IS UNAVAILABLE, OR IF STAFF FEELS THAT THEY NEED MORE TIME, THEN WE CAN COME DIRECTLY TO THE COMMISSION ON THE RECORD AND ASK FOR A CERTAIN ITEM TO BE HELD TO GIVE ALL PARTIES MORE TIME TO PROCESS THAT INFORMATION OR TO BE AVAILABLE.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS.
UM, AND AS IT PERTAINS SPECIFICALLY TO THE TRANSPARENCY ASPECT OF THAT, BY ALLOWING THAT TO BE VERBALLY STATED AT A PUBLIC HEARING AND PUT ON THE RECORD, IT INFORMS THE COMMUNITY OF WHY SOMETHING IS BEING HELD OR, UH, TO A SPECIFIC TIME, WHICH ISN'T THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF A POSTPONEMENT.
CURRENTLY, THE COMMUNITY, UM, UN UNLESS SOMEONE CALLS AND ACTS THE COMMUNITY IS NONE THE WISER FOR WHY AN ITEM IS POSTPONED UNDER OUR CURRENT, UH, PROCEDURES WHEN IT COMES TO APPLICANTS.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE YOU WERE GOING WITH THIS COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
UM, I WOULD SAY THAT IN MY MEMORY IN THE PAST FOUR YEARS, PROBABLY WE HAD ONE TIME WHEN AN APPLICANT ONCE, UH, PAID FOR A POSTPONEMENT OR TWICE, TWICE AT CITY COUNCIL.
UM, I WOULD SAY THAT WE AS PLANNERS, CASE MANAGERS, WORK VERY CLOSE WITH APPLICANTS AND WE DO LET THEM KNOW ABOUT THE DATES THAT, UH, THEY ARE TRACKING.
THAT'S IN OUR OUTGOING, UH, INTAKE EMAIL ACTUALLY.
AND WE ARE TRYING TO BE AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE WITH THEM.
IF THEY ASK US, WE, WE CAN NOT NOTICE IT AND PUT IT ON THE DATE THAT IT'S CONVENIENT FOR THEM.
UM, SO THIS WOULD BASICALLY, AGAIN, IF IT'S FOR THE APPLICANT, THEN YOU WOULD THINK THAT IT'S STILL OKAY FOR AN APPLICANT TO CHANGE THEIR MIND AFTER THEY GAVE, GAVE US THE GO TO NOTICE IT.
THEY CAN ALWAYS, AGAIN, REACH OUT, SEND AN EMAIL TO THE ENTIRE BODY AND TELL THEM, YES, WE'RE NOT AVAILABLE, CAN YOU PLEASE HOLD US FOR TWO WEEKS? AND, AND I THINK THAT SPEAKS TO THE APPLICANT SIDE.
AND I GUESS I'M TRYING TO PUT MY, YOU KNOW, COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER HAT ON AS WELL, WHICH IS I HEAR YOU GUYS SAYING IS PART OF WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS.
THEY DON'T ALWAYS GET THAT SAME NOTIFICATION.
UM, BECAUSE AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT TEAMS, BUT IF YOU'VE GOT STAKEHOLDERS WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN CASES WHO YOU KNOW ARE ACTIVELY INVOLVED, WHO MAY, YOU KNOW, WE ALL, EVERYONE HERE AND ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS, YOU KNOW, CAN'T ALWAYS MAKE THOSE MEETINGS TO APPEAR TO ASK FOR THOSE DELAYS.
AND JUST I'M WONDERING IF WE'RE, I, I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT, BUT I THINK IT'S ALSO IN SOME WAYS SHIFTING THAT, UM, OBLIGATION AND JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THE POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS HERE.
COMMISSIONER CHERNO, UH, I HAVE A QUESTION.
THIS APPLIES FOR CPC AND CITY COUNCIL.
UH, AND SO IF SOMEBODY HELD THE CASE AT CPC, DO YOU SEE A TREND WHERE THEY SOMETIMES HOLD IT OR AT COUNCIL AS WELL OR
[02:45:01]
NO CORRELATION OR FOR AUTHORIZED HEARINGS? YES.YEAH, FOR, FOR, UM, WHEN IT'S, WHEN A ZONING CASE HAS A LOT OF OPPOSITION, OF COURSE THEY DO IT FOR BOTH CPC AND COUNCIL.
AND THEN REGARDING THE COMMENTS, UM, IN QUESTIONS, UH, FROM COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, THAT SAME RATIONALE THOUGH COULD BE APPLIED TO THE DATE THAT THIS IS BEING MOVED TO? YES, SIR.
SO ALL THOSE TALKING POINTS ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO MAKE A HEARING DATE, SHOULD IT BE MOVED OUT INTO THE FUTURE? AM I UNDERSTANDING THAT CORRECTLY AS WELL? YES, YES.
SO THOSE TALKING POINTS COULD APPLY.
UM, GO BACK TO SOMEONE ELSE AND I'LL COME BACK.
UH, IN YOUR RESEARCH, HOW MANY OTHER AREA CITIES HAVE A SIMILAR PROCEDURE? AND IF THEY DO, WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE COMPARED TO OURS? SO WE LOOKED AT 12 DIFFERENT CITIES.
UM, IT, IT APPEARS THAT US, WE ARE ONE OF THE ONLY CITIES.
I COULDN'T REALLY FIND ANY OTHER CITY THAT DO POSTPONEMENTS THE WAY WE DO 'EM, UH, WITH THE AUTOMATIC GRANTING.
UM, ALL THE CITIES THAT WE LOOKED AT REQUIRE, UH, APPROVAL FROM THE CPC OR, UH, COMMISSION OR THE COUNCIL TO, UM, GRANT THE POSTPONEMENTS OR A HOLDING OF AN ITEM, OR THEY RECOUP THE FULL COST.
AND BECAUSE WE HAVE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS THAT ARE SO LARGE, STAFF JUST DIDN'T THINK IT WAS EQUITABLE TO ASK THE COMMUNITY TO FOOT THE BILL TO RE-NOTICE SOMETHING FOR SOME OF OUR LARGER AREAS, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S A LEGITIMATE REASON THAT AN ITEM SHOULD BE HELD OR POSTPONED.
AND CAN YOU JUST, IF YOU RECALL, WHAT ARE THE AREAS, CITIES THAT ALSO HAVE POSTPONEMENT PROCEDURES THAT AREN'T, YOU KNOW, EXACTLY LIKE OURS, BUT HAVE SOME DIFFERENT FEATURES? SO THE CITY OF AUSTIN, UM, THEY RECOUP THE COSTS.
AND SO YOU'RE ABLE TO, IF, IF THE NOTE, IF YOU REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT AFTER AN ITEM HAS BEEN NOTICED, UH, AND MAILED, THEN YOU'RE, YOU HAVE TO FOOT THE BILL FOR RECOUPING THE MAILING COSTS TO RE NOTIFY THE PUBLIC.
UM, AND THEN, UM, YOU ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST ON THE RECORD TO HAVE AN ITEM HELD SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
AND SO IT, IT KIND OF WORKS BOTH WAYS.
UM, THEY HAVE KIND OF A MIX OF, OF BOTH.
UM, IN OTHER CITIES THAT WE LOOKED AT, LIKE GARLAND, UM, ARLINGTON, THEY ALL HAVE SOME SORT OF, UM, REQUESTED AT THE CPC OR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND IT'LL EITHER BE GRANTED OR NOT.
BUT ALL 12 OF THE CITIES IS A MIX OF ONE OF THOSE TWO OPTIONS.
DALLAS IS PRETTY UNIQUE IN THE WAY WE DO POSTPONEMENTS.
AND JUST GOING BACK, I KNOW THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MATH EARLIER.
UM, SO FOR IF SOMEONE WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, POSTPONE PD FIVE 90 FIVES AUTHORIZED HEARING THE COST OF THE CITY WOULD BE THE NEWSPAPER NOTICE BETWEEN FOUR AND EIGHT PLUS SOMEWHERE ABOVE $11,000 IF THE COST FOR NEW NOTICE IS CORRECT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD ONE OF THE RESPONSES TO THE REQUEST.
THE, THE PROPOSAL BEFORE US IS JUST STRIKE THIS SECTION ALTOGETHER.
SO THE MEANS FOR A POSTPONEMENT WOULD BE EITHER COMMUNITY APPLICANT COMING TO THE BODY ON THE DATE OF THE HEARING REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT, OR, OR THEY COULD COMMUNICATE TO YOU BEFORE THE MEETING SIMILAR TO THE WAY IT IS NOW.
I BELIEVE THE HAMPTON CLATON IS A, IS A GREAT EXAMPLE.
THAT WAS A INITIALLY HELD AT THE HORSESHOE AFTER AN EMAIL WAS SENT TO ONE OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS ASKING, HEY, WE NEED MORE TIME TO PROCESS THIS.
AND SO THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO PHYSICALLY BE HERE, BUT THE, THE IDEA IS TO GIVE DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL BACK TO THE LEGISLATIVE BODY.
BUT DID I ALSO HEAR YOU SAY THAT THERE'S OTHER MUNICIPALITIES WHERE YOU COULD STILL FORMALLY REQUEST THE POSTPONEMENT, BUT THE DECISION IS MADE BY WHETHER IT BE A PLAN COMMISSION OR BY COUNCIL BODY, BUT THAT'S ANOTHER MECHANISM.
AND THOSE CITIES WHERE YOU CAN REFORM REQUEST THE POSTPONEMENT, YOU HAVE TO PAY THE COST TO RE-NOTICE.
AND IT, IT WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE GRANTED, BUT YOU DO HAVE TO PAY THE COST TO RE-NOTICE, SO YOU HAVE TO FOOT THE BILL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
UH, BEFORE WE TAKE OUR LUNCH BREAK, UH, UH, JUST A QUICK NOTE NUMBER, ITEM NUMBER 46 WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT.
UH, I DON'T REMEMBER THE DATE OF THIS
[02:50:03]
12TH, JUNE 12TH.UH, I BELIEVE NUMBER 46, LAST CASE.
COMMISSION CITY PLAN, COMMISSION FOR ALLOWING ME THIS MOMENT OF PRIVILEGE.
I JUST WANTED TO OFFICIALLY LET YOU KNOW, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW THAT THE PARKING REFORM WAS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL LAST WEEK IN A VOTE OF 14 TO ONE.
I WANTED TO PERSONALLY OFFICIALLY FROM THE BOTTOM OF MY HEART AND FROM OUR DEPARTMENT AND ALL THE COMMUNITY THAT WAS INVOLVED FOR AND AGAINST, THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE NUANCED APPROACH THAT YOU SENT TO CITY COUNCIL.
CITY COUNCIL WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MADE FEW CHANGES, MADE IT EVEN MORE THOUGHTFUL OR MADE IT MORE FLEXIBLE IN SOME AREAS.
BUT I REALLY, REALLY WANTED TO THANK YOU BECAUSE THE HARD WORK THAT YOU DID TO PUT IN FRONT OF COUNCIL, A VERY THOUGHTFUL APPROACH, WENT A LONG WAY WITH THEM.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU SOME STATS.
FOR INSTANCE, C CITY PLAN COMM ZAG MET 25 TIMES TO TALK ABOUT THE PARKING REFORM.
CITY PLAN COMMISSION MET SIX TIMES, YOU MADE 55 MOTIONS, WHICH IS A GOOD INDICATOR OF THE HARD WORK THAT YOU PUT IN.
UM, AND I THINK I ONLY COUNTED THE REAL MOTIONS, NOT THE ONE THAT FAILED AND NOT THE ONE THAT WERE AMENDING MOTIONS.
SO IT WAS WAY MORE WORK THAN THAT.
THERE WERE ALL WELL ABOVE A HUNDRED SPEAKERS THAT CAME IN FRONT OF YOU.
UM, AND AS I SAID THIS, THE PARKING REFORM WAS VERY WELL RECEIVED BY CITY COUNCIL.
UH, BUT PLEASE, PLEASE UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH AND HOW GRATEFUL WE ARE FOR THE PARTNERSHIP WE HAVE WITH YOU.
UM, I WILL, I'M WORKING ON A SUMMARY.
I WANNA SEND ONE TO EVERYBODY.
IT, IT WILL TAKE ME A LITTLE BIT.
AT THE END OF THIS WEEK, I'M GONNA, WE'RE GONNA PUBLISH A FRIDAY MEMO.
WE'RE GONNA SEND IT TO YOU SO YOU KNOW WHAT PASSED.
AND WE'RE IN THE FINAL PAINS OF WRITING THE ORDINANCE.
IT'S A VERY LONG ORDINANCE, 300 PAGES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UM, AND ONCE IT'S DONE, WE ARE GONNA SEND THAT TO YOU.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, IF THE COMMUNITY, THE APPLICANTS EVER HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE DO SEND THEM TO US.
'CAUSE WE'RE STILL LIKE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, UM, NOT TO FIGURE OUT TO LIKE PUT THE FINAL TOUCHES.
AND ONE IMPORTANT, VERY IMPORTANT NOTE TO, TO MAKE, CITY COUNCIL DID A WONDERFUL THING.
THEY ASKED US TO COME BACK IN JANUARY, 2027 TO GIVE THEM A BRIEFING OF THE RESULTS OF THE PARKING REFORM.
AND THEY ASKED US TO COME BACK EVERY TWO YEARS WITH DATA.
SO I'M VERY EXCITED THAT THIS WILL BE A CODE AMENDMENT OR A CODE THAT WE ARE GONNA START TRACKING MOVING FORWARD.
AND WE ARE GONNA COME THE SAME AS CHRISTINE CAME TODAY IN FRONT OF YOU TO TELL YOU HOW MANY PROJECTS DELIVER ZERO PARKING AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS.
UH, ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL ACKNOWLEDGED YOUR HARD WORK AND THEY THANK YOU ALSO.
UH, MR. RUBIN, REALLY QUICKLY, WHAT'S THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PARKING REFORM? IS IT IN PLACE NOW? IT IS IN PLACE NOW.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS, UH, LOT WE COULD SAY ABOUT THIS? WE WOULD JUST SAY THANK YOU.
UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE.
UH, I CAN'T GET TO, UH, UH, DID THIS COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT? OKAY.
WE'LL SEE YOU AT THE HEARING AT 1237.
[CALL TO ORDER]
I START OFF WITH A ROLL CALL, PLEASE.OKAY, WE'LL START OFF WITH THE ROLL CALL.
DISTRICT ONE COMMISSIONER SCHOCK, DISTRICT TWO, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
[02:55:01]
DISTRICT FOUR.COMMISSIONER FORSYTH, DISTRICT FIVE.
CHAIR SHAAD PRESENT DISTRICT SIX.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DISTRICT SEVEN.
DISTRICT EIGHT, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN PRESENT, DISTRICT NINE.
DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBIN, I'M HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
TODAY IS THURSDAY, MAY 22ND, 2020 5, 12 43.
UH, WELCOME TO THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
COUPLE OF QUICK ANNOUNCEMENTS BEFORE WE GET STARTED.
OUR SPEAKER GUIDELINES, EACH SPEAKER WILL RECEIVE THREE MINUTES, UH, PER OUR RULES ON ON CASES THAT WE HAVE OPPOSITION, THE APPLICANT WILL RECEIVE A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
I'LL PLEASE ASK ALL SPEAKERS TO BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS A HYBRID MEETING.
WE'LL HAVE SOME SPEAKERS ONLINE.
UH, I'LL REMIND ALL THE SPEAKERS ONLINE THAT STATE LAW REQUIRES US TO SEE YOU IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM YOU.
MAKE SURE THAT YOUR CAMERA IS ON AND WORKING, UH, SO WE CAN HEAR YOUR COMMENTS.
UH, ALSO, WE HAVE THESE LITTLE YELLOW CARDS DOWN HERE WHERE PATRICK IS, UH, AT SOME POINT, IF YOU PLEASE COME DOWN AND GRAB ONE OF THESE AND FILL IT OUT, YOU CAN LEAVE IT RIGHT THERE ON THE TABLE.
WE'D LOVE TO HAVE A RECORD OF YOUR VISIT WITH US HERE TODAY.
UH, AND WITH THAT WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED WITH THE AGENDA.
THERE ARE SOME AGENDAS DOWN HERE AT THE BOTTOM, IF YOU WOULD LIKE ONE.
WE'LL BEGIN WITH ITEM NUMBER THREE.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
MR. CHAIR? YES, SIR.UH, DO WE WANNA APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM LET'S PLEASE.
UH, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION'S MEETING OF MAY 8TH, 2025.
SECOND COMMISSIONER HALL AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIMS FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT.
[3. 25-1738A An application for a minor amendment to the existing development plan for property zoned Subdistrict 6 within Planned Development District No. 655, on the southwest corner of Potters House Way and Truth Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Michael Woods - Clay Academy, Inc. Representative: Claudio Segovia - Johnson Volk Consulting, Inc. Planner: Sheila Alcantara Segovia Council District: 3 M245-011(SAS)]
ITEM NUMBER THREE, CASE M 2 45 DASH 0 1 1.AN APPLICATION FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY ZONE SUB DISTRICT SIX WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 6 5 5 ON SOUTHWEST CORNER OF POTTER HOUSE WAY AND TRUTH DRIVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE.
JORGE, WE HAVE ONE, ONE REGISTERED SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM IS THE LINE OKAY, MR. SEGOVIA? GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR.
ARE YOU ABLE TO HEAR ME AND SEE ME? WE CAN, YOU MIGHT WANT TO SPEAK UP JUST A TAD BIT.
HOW'S THIS? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN.
UH, I'M CLARA SEGOVIA, CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, WITH JOHNSON WOLF CONSULTING, 7 0 4 CENTRAL PARKWAY EAST IN PLANO, TEXAS.
UM, THIS IS A KIND OF A FOLLOW UP, UH, TO SOME OF SOME PRIOR CASES THAT HAVE, UH, BEEN COMING UP WITH THIS, UH, PROJECT OR WITH THIS PARTICULAR SITE.
THE FIRST OF WHICH WAS A PRELIMINARY PLAT, UH, FILE NUMBER S 2 3 4 1 8 3.
UM, AND THIS IS KIND OF IN PREPARATION FOR A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, UH, THAT'S BEING PLANNED, UH, TO BE DEVELOPED BEHIND THE EXISTING CLAY ACADEMY.
UH, THE FIRST STEP TO THAT WAS A MINOR ZONING CLEANUP FOR SUBDISTRICT ALIGNMENT WITH THE PROPERTY LINE FOR, FOR THIS SITE.
AND THEN THE SECOND PIECE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TODAY, IS A MINOR AMENDMENT TO SOME OF THE FUTURE PHASE PARKING OF THE EXISTING CLAY ACADEMY.
WE'RE JUST PROPOSING TO SHIFT, UH, PARKING OVER TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF EXISTING CLAY ACADEMY IN ORDER TO, UH, MAKE THE WAY AND MAKE ROOM FOR A FUTURE CONNECTION AND A FUTURE UPCOMING DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT, UH, THAT'S BEING PLANNED BEHIND THE CLAY ACADEMY.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS? YES.
COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? YES, SIR.
COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER HERBERT.
UM, THANK YOU JONATHAN FOR, UM, UH, YOUR,
[03:00:01]
I MEAN, CLAUDIA FOR YOUR WORK HERE, UM, AND, AND ENGAGING WITH ME AND, AND TAKING ALL OF MY CALLS AND MESSAGES.UM, BUT, UH, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY AND PUT IT OUT ON THE TABLE THAT, UM, MEAN YOU HAVE DISCUSSED, UM, MAKING THE PARKING LOT AS GREEN AND WALKABLE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS POSSIBLE.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, I HAVE SHARED, UH, THE LISTING POINTS YOU PROVIDED FOR THIS, UH, PROPOSED PARKING OVER TO THE POTTER'S HOUSE, UH, WHICH THEY'RE THE ONES, UH, CONTROLLING THE EXISTING CLAY ACADEMY AND WHAT WILL HAPPEN THERE.
UM, SO THEY, THEY HAVE THAT FEEDBACK.
UM, I THINK, UH, THEY'RE GONNA BE CONSIDERING THAT IN THEIR ACTUAL PLAN APPROVAL OR THEIR ACTUAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
UM, BUT YEAH, THIS, THIS, UH, AT THIS POINT THE MINOR UPDATE IS JUST TO SHIFT THE PARKING TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE.
UM, BUT YES, I DID SHARE THAT, THAT WITH THEM, CORRECT.
I WAS JUST MAKING SURE ALL OF MY BOSSES KNOW THAT I DID MY WORK.
MY BOSSES ARE THE NEIGHBORS, SO THANK YOU.
UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HARBERT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? I DO.
IN THE MINOR AMENDMENT CASE M 2 4 5 0 1 1, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, APPROVE THE, UH, GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPROVAL.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER HERBERT AND FOR YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT.
UH, ANY DISCUSSION REALLY QUICKLY, PLEASE? UM, THIS IS, THIS IS A ANOTHER BEGINNING PIECE OF A HUGE PROJECT THAT'S COMING TO THIS AREA.
UM, IF I FALL OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH TOMORROW, IF I'M HERE TOMORROW, I NEED EVERY ONE OF MY COUNTERPARTS TO BE LOOKING AT THIS WITH A FINE TOOTH COMB.
UM, MAINLY BECAUSE THIS WILL BE MONUMENTAL FOR THE SOUTH, THE SOUTHERN AREA OF THE CITY, UM, AND FOR US AS A BODY.
UM, SO PLEASE PUT ON YOUR BINOCULARS AND, AND WORK WITH ME ON THESE PROJECTS.
IT'S GONNA BE A BUNCH OF THEM COMING, SO THANK Y'ALL.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS? NONE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[Zoning Cases - Consent]
IT? UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN ARE NOW MOVED TO OUR ZONING CASES.ARE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS CONSISTING OF CASES FOUR THROUGH 13 AT THIS POINT.
UH, CASES 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, AND 13 HAVE ALL COME OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE VOTED ON INDIVIDUALLY THAT THESE CASES SEVEN, 10, AND 11 AS PART OF THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE DISPOSED OF IN ONE MOTION UNLESS THERE IS SOMEONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE THREE CASES, SEVEN, 10 OR 11, SIR, ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE CASES? AND, UH, JUST AS, UH, AN FYI AFTER DISPOSING OF THOSE, WE WILL MOVE TO DISPOSE OF THE UH, CASE NUMBER NINE.
UH, SO ANYONE HERE WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON SEVEN, 10 OR 11.
OKAY, WE'LL GET THOSE READY IN PLEASE.
ITEM SEVEN IS CASE Z 2 45 DASH 1 62.
AN APPLICATION FOR AN MF TWO, A MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE IN IR INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF KIMSEY DRIVE NORTH OF ORION PLACE.
STATUS RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF AN MF TWO DISTRICT AND DEED RESTRICTIONS AS BRIEFED.
ITEM 10 IS CASE Z 2 45 DASH 180 2.
AN APPLICATION FOR AN R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE, THE CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON THE EAST LINE OF DARIEN STREET, SOUTH OF CANADA.
DRIVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
ITEM 11 IS CASE Z 2 45 DASH 180 3.
AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 9 1 7 ON THE NORTHWEST LINE OF MANOR WAY BETWEEN MAPLE AVENUE AND DENTON DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THOSE THREE ITEMS? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, ITEM SEVEN, 10, AND 11, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, PER THE DOCKET OR IS BRIEFED.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.
[9. 25-1744A An application for 1) an MU-1 Mixed Use District and 2) deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant on property zoned a CR Community Retail District, on the north line of Canada Drive, west of North Hampton Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant. Applicant: Joseph Loomis Representative: Audra Buckley Planner: Martin Bate Council District: 6 Z245-181(MB)]
UH, LET'S GO TO CASE NUMBER NINE.ITEM NINE IS CASE Z 2 45 DASH 180 1.
AN APPLICATION FOR ONE AND MU ONE MIXED USE DISTRICT AND TWO DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON PROPERTY ZONE TO CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF CANADA DRIVE WEST OF NORTHAMPTON
[03:05:01]
ROAD.RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AS BRIEFED BY STAFF.
I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, AUDRA BUCKLEY.
1414 BELLEVUE STREET, SUITE ONE 50, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 5.
HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND TO ALSO OFFER UP AN ADDITIONAL DEED THAT CAME IN LAST NIGHT.
UH, WE'RE GONNA BE ADDING THE PROHIBITION OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AS BRIEFED BY STAFF THIS MORNING.
UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MS. BUCKLEY? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, IN THE MATTER OF CASE Z 2 45 DASH 180 1, MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DE RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AS BRIEFED AND AS AMENDED AT THE PODIUM.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION.
AND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
[4. 25-1739A An application for a D(A) Duplex District on property zoned an R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the southwest corner of East Kirnwood Drive, west of Lost Mirage Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Vincent Walker Planner: Jordan Gregory Council District: 8 Z245-149(JG)]
WE'LL GO BACK TO, UH, CASE NUMBER FOUR.I ITEM FOUR IS CASE Z 2 45 DASH 1 49.
AN APPLICATION FOR A DA DUPLEX DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE IN R SEVEN FIVE.
A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EAST KERN WOOD DRIVE, WEST OF LOS MIRAGE DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM BEFORE WE GO TO OUR SPEAKERS ONLINE? ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? THIS IS ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
MY NAME IS BERNARD WALKER, UM, PROPERTY LOCATED AT 77 15 MILLSTREAM.
SO I'M THE INDIVIDUAL THAT SUBMITTED THE ZONING REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR DUPLEXES FROM 12 HOMES TO 24.
UH, JUST TO SHARE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MYSELF, I COME FROM A LONG LINE OF BUILDERS.
UH, MY FATHER, MY GRANDPARENTS, MY UNCLES, YOU MAY HAVE EVEN BEEN IN, BEEN TO AN EVENT AT, UH, THE HAMPTONS EVENT CENTER IN RED OAK, UH, THAT'S OWNED AND BUILT BY ONE OF MY UNCLES.
UH, MY BUSINESS PARTNER OWNS WHISKEYS, A BAR IN SOUTH DALLAS.
SO WE'RE INVESTED IN THIS COMMUNITY.
SO I'M PROPOSING HOME OWNERSHIP, UH, AND I WANT TO INCREASE THE DENSITY AND THIS 2.87 ACRES, UM, THERE'LL STILL BE JUST 12 BUILDINGS, BUT WE WANT TO INCREASE THE UNIT SIZE AND BY INCREASING THEY'LL BRING TAXABLE INCOME TO THE CITY, APPROXIMATELY $9 MILLION AND JUST A COUPLE OF MINUTES AWAY, THEY PLAN TO BUILD AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH OVER 700 UNITS.
WE'RE OFFERING THREE BEDROOM, TWO AND A HALF BATHS, QUALITY RESIDENCES.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT NOT EVERYONE SUPPORTS THIS CHANGE, BUT HERE'S WHAT MANY DON'T SEE.
OF THE SEVEN HOMES THAT ARE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF AND ADJACENT TO MY PROPERTY, SIX OF THOSE SEVEN ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT.
SO THAT'S REAL DIRECT NEIGHBOR SUPPORT FROM THE PEOPLE THAT WILL BE MOST IMPACTED.
UM, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, THE CITY OF DALLAS ADOPTED THE FORD DALLAS 2.0 TO PROMOTE THOUGHTFUL GROWTH.
THIS PROJECT ALIGNS WITH THAT VISION CITYWIDE.
I MEAN, YOU'VE SEEN WHAT REVITALIZATION HAS DONE FOR OLD EAST DALLAS.
WEST DALLAS NEAR TRINITY GROVES.
I NEVER WENT THERE WHEN I WAS YOUNG.
BISHOP ARTS DISTRICT, THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE FLOURISHED WHEN DENSITY AND DESIGN WERE EMBRACED.
SO LET DISTRICT EIGHT SHARE IN THAT SAME OPPORTUNITY.
LET IT RISE WITH THE REST OF THE CITY.
YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THE ROLE OF LEADERSHIP MEANS DOING WHAT PEOPLE NEED EVEN WHEN THEY CAN'T SEE IT.
MY COMMISSIONER HAS TO DO WHAT HE HAS TO DO AND I UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT LET'S NOT LET ELECTION SEASON SWAY SOUND JUDGMENT.
IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN A CARETAKER, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO DO WHAT'S BEST FOR THE INDIVIDUAL THAT YOU LOVE, EVEN WHEN THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND IT.
YOU'RE CARETAKERS OF NEIGHBORHOODS, OF COMMUNITIES, FUTURES.
UH, YESTERDAY I SPOKE WITH BOTH CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR THE DISTRICT EIGHT COUNCIL SEAT.
THEY'VE CHOSEN TO REMAIN NEUTRAL, WHICH I UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT.
[03:10:01]
AWARE OF THIS PROJECT, BUT BOTH ASKED FOR MORE INFORMATION, PICTURES.AND ONE OF THOSE, WHEN ONE OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS GOT THE PICTURES, THEY SAID, I LOVE IT.
THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION? WE'LL GO TO OUR SPEAKERS ONLINE.
OR ARE THEY ALL THREE ONLINE? OKAY.
WE'LL BEGIN WITH, UM, AN ANITHA SHEFFIELD.
I LIVE AT 1438 MIRAGE CANYON, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 3 2.
I AM I AM ONE OF THE HOMES DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE FIELD, UH, THAT MR. WALKER'S TRYING TO DEVELOP.
YES, THERE CAN BE POSITIVE ABOUT A MULTI-FAMILY, UH, COMMUNITY, BUT THIS IS NOT IN ONE OF THE CASES.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS IN OPPOSITION OF THIS.
UH, THE MAIN REASON IS THAT WHERE HE IS TRYING TO BUILD IS ON A SNAKE OR A SCUR.
AND THAT IS THE WAY THAT EMS VEHICLES ENTER THAT PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT IS LOCATED AT HAMPTON AND, UH, KERN WOOD, THEY COME DOWN KERN WOOD MAKE A RIGHT ONTO A LOST MIRAGE.
IF YOU HAVE CARS PARKED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET, THEY CAN'T GET THROUGH AND THAT WILL BE A MAJOR ISSUE.
WE ARE ALREADY A FULLY ESTABLISHED SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
WE DO NOT WANT TO GO TO A MULTI-FAMILY HOME.
UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO STAY SINGLE FAMILY.
IF HE WANTS TO BUILD SIX OR SEVEN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, WE ARE HAPPY.
THAT IS THE SAME NUMBER APPROXIMATELY.
THAT IS ACROSS FROM THE FIELD THAT HE IS TRYING TO BUILD ON.
WE HAVE SIGNED A PETITION OF APPROXIMATELY 50 NEIGHBORS AND HAVE GIVEN IT TO COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN AND WE DON'T WANT IT.
UH, WE'LL GO WITH UH, MS. COLBERT.
HI, MY NAME IS CAROL COLBERT AND I LIVE AT 1435 ALDEN WOOD.
AND IT'S ADJACENT TO THIS, UM, UH, PROPERTY THAT IS, UH, WANTING TO PUT THE, THE TWO STORY, UH, UH, DUPLEXES.
UH, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS, WE, WE WE'RE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT'S WHY I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.
I WANTED TO BE IN A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO I AM NOT IN OPPOSED TO HIM PUTTING SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTIES OVER THERE.
BUT DUPLEXES IS JUST NOT FEASIBLE.
PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO PARK ON THE STREET ALREADY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE NOT USING THEIR DRIVEWAYS.
AND TO PUT THAT OVER THERE WOULD BRING IN EVEN MORE CARS.
'CAUSE IF, IF YOU HAVE A DUPLEX, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TWO TO FOUR PEOPLE IN THAT DUPLEX AND THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TWO TO FOUR CARDS.
SO WE ARE JUST NOT, WE ARE JUST NOT SET UP FOR THAT.
SOME OF US HAVE BEEN HERE FOREVER.
I'VE BEEN HERE FOR 40 YEARS AND I'M JUST NOT READY TO, UM, BE IN ALL OF THAT TRAFFIC AND CAN'T GET OUTTA MY, UH, UH, THE, UH, ALLEY.
AND I KNOW THAT THAT'S GONNA BRING IN EVEN MORE PEOPLE.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE'RE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
[03:15:01]
JUBILANT DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS.UM, YES, THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT AND I COME FROM EXPERIENCE BEING A FORMER PLANNING COMMISSIONER AND A FORMER CITY COUNCIL MEMBER.
UM, THIS IS IN ESSENCE, UH, AND THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR, THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UH, IN THIS COMMUNITY.
AND THIS WOULD, THIS WOULD BE A ISOLATED, AN UNWELCOME ITEM IN THE ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY.
WHILE YES, LISTENING TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THERE ARE ESTABLISHED, UH, TOWN HOMES NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY.
UM, BUT THE CURRENT LEADERSHIP SOUGHT TO ALLOW THEM TO COME.
WE'RE ASKING THAT THE PLAN COMMISSION RECONSIDER THEIR DECISION TO APPROVE THESE, UH, BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT FIT WITHIN THE ESTABLISHED, UH, NATURE OF THE COMMUNITY.
UH, IT DOES NOT FLOW WITH THE CURRENT STYLE OF HOMES.
AND WE ASK THAT, UM, THAT YOU WOULD RECONSIDER THE DRIVING OR THE, UH, TRAFFIC STUDY.
UH, I TODAY SAT THERE FOR AN HOUR, UH, ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET WHERE A CAR WAS PARKED.
AND IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR VANS TO GET THROUGH, UH, WITHOUT COMING WITHIN A COUPLE OF FEET OR A HALF A FOOT BETWEEN MY CAR AND ANOTHER VEHICLE.
THE IDEA THAT THIS IS GOING TO BRING MORE TRAFFIC AND MORE, UH, UH, TRAFFIC TO THE AREA IS TRUE.
UH, WE WELCOME THE IDEA OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THIS AREA, UH, AS WE WANT TO CONTINUE THAT THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY.
UM, BUT, UH, MULTIFAMILY, THERE ARE AREAS THAT ARE BETTER SUITED FOR THIS STYLE AND WE WOULD HOPE THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD CONSIDER THAT, UM, IN HIS CHOICE AND UNDERSTAND AND THANK HIM FOR HIS, HIS GREAT WORK.
BUT, UH, THIS IS NOT THE PLACE, UH, FOR THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
UH, THE COMMUNITY HAS SPOKEN AND THROUGHOUT THIS AREA THE IDEA AND THE PUSH FOR IS FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO REMAIN, UH, IN THE AREA.
UH, MR. WALKER, YOU HAVE A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL, SIR.
I'M COMPLETELY BAMBOOZLED BY MR. WILSON BECAUSE I JUST SPOKE TO HIM YESTERDAY AND HE SAID HE WASN'T AWARE OF THE PROJECT AND HE SAID HE WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT IT FRIDAY DAY.
BUT I HAVE SEVERAL, EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE A FEW THAT ARE AGAINST, I HAVE SEVERAL AS WELL THAT ARE FOR THE PROJECT.
UM, MANY SIGNED AND ALL OF THESE WITHIN THE EXCEPTION OF TWO, ARE WITHIN 300 FEET OF MY PROJECT.
UH, ALL OF THOSE OTHER ONES ARE PAST 300 FEET.
UM, THE OPPOSITION, MOST OF THE OPPOSITION ONLY WITHIN THE OPPOSITION WITHIN 300 FEET IS ABOUT THREE OR FOUR PEOPLE.
BUT THOSE THAT ARE PROOF OF THESE 22, UH, 20 OF THEM, WELL INCLUDING ME, 21, UH, IS FOR THE PROJECT.
SO I'M ASKING SOMEONE TO, UM, LET THE PROJECT CONTINUE.
'CAUSE THE CITY COUNCIL, WELL ONE SAYS THAT THEY WILL BE THE FUTURE CITY COUNCIL AND THEY SAID THAT I LOVE THAT DESIGN THAT I SHOWED THEM.
UM, AND THAT DESIGN IS RIGHT HERE.
THAT'S ONE THAT I, THAT I SHOWED THEM AND THAT'S THE OTHER THAT I SHOWED THEM.
SO YES, THE, THE PROPERTY THERE IS SINGLE FAMILY, BUT YOU ALL WELL HAVE SEEN WHERE, UM, GENTRIFIED NEIGHBORHOODS, HOW IT, HOW IT INCREASES THE VALUE, IT INCREASES THE CITY TAX MONEY AND IT INCREASES THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY GET OLD AND THEY DIE OUT.
AND EVERYONE INHERITS THE INHERITS THEIR HOUSES AND THE, AND THE, AND THE CRIME INCREASES.
THIS IS WHAT IS GOING TO IMPROVE A NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT LETTING IT DIE OUT.
COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
MR. WILSON, UH, THERE'S A, A WALKER, I'M SORRY, MR. WALKER, THERE'S A, UH, CREEK THAT FLOWS THROUGH THIS AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ALWAYS GOT WATER OR WHAT, BUT DOES THAT POSE ANY PROBLEM TO YOUR DEVELOPMENT? IS THERE ANY POTENTIAL ISSUE WITH IT, EROSION, FLOODING, ET CETERA? NO, OUR PLANS HAVE ALREADY BEEN PASSED.
UM, WELL THROUGH, I ASSUME CPC FOR THE SINGLE
[03:20:01]
FAMILY, SUBDIVIDING THE LOTS BECAUSE IT'S ATTRACTIVE LAND.SO THE CITY OF DALLAS ACTUALLY DID A STUDY FOR THE FLOOD REVIEW AND IT CAME BACK POSITIVE ABOUT A MONTH, A MONTH AGO.
SO THERE'S NO FLOOD ISSUE PROBLEMS. UH, EVERYTHING IS WAITING UPON THIS, THE ZONING, BUT THE CREEK DOESN'T POSE A PROBLEM TO US BUILDING.
I CAN SHOW YOU ALL OF OUR ENGINEERING FILES.
WE'RE JUST WAITING, WAITING ON THIS.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
I'LL FOLLOW YOU AND THANK YOU MR. WALKER.
I, I JUST HAD ONE FOLLOW UP AND I THINK THE, UM, YOUR ENGINEERING REVIEW MAY PLAY INTO THIS.
IF YOU JUST DO A QUICK EVALUATION OF THE AREA OF REQUEST AND THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, IT LEADS TO A GREATER NUMBER OF UNITS THAN WHAT IS STATED IN OUR CASE REPORT, WHICH IS 12 UNITS.
IS THAT DUE TO THE ENGINEERING REVIEW AND THE RESTRICTIONS ON THE AREA THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED? SO OUR LOT SIZE, WE CURRENTLY MADE THE LOTS AT 75,000 SQUARE FEET.
WE CAN'T GO LOWER, WE CAN'T GO LOWER THAN THAT.
SO SOME OF THOSE LOTS ARE LARGER, LIKE 85,000 SQUARE FEET BECAUSE THERE'S A CREEK.
UM, WHAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CITY IS AT LEAST 6,000 SQUARE FEET FOR DUPLEXES.
SO WE'RE WELL ABOVE THE LOT SIZE WHEN IT COMES TO THAT.
AND SO, AND THE REQUEST BEFORE IS A STRAIGHT ZONING REQUEST.
SO IT'S THAT MINIMUM SIZE THAT WE ARE EVALUATING.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOUR PROPOSAL IS TO DO A LARGER SIZE THAN WOULD BE THE MINIMUM.
WE, WE'VE ALREADY DESIGNED A LARGER SIZE THAN THE MINIMUM.
UM, IT'S ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED AND EVERYTHING ACTUALLY HAS BEEN PASSED, UH, THROUGH THE CITY.
SO IS THAT ANYTHING THAT WAS EITHER REVIEWED WITH STAFF, UM, TO HELP CODIFY THAT BECAUSE YOUR PLANS COULD CHANGE.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE APPROVE THIS TODAY AS IT'S SUBMITTED, IT WOULD ONLY BE 6,000 REQUIRED.
NOT WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING TO DO.
AND I'M JUST, I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND, UM, KIND OF WHERE YOUR PROPOSAL IS VERSUS WHAT'S ALLOWED UNDER THE BASE CODE.
SO LIKE YOU SAID, WHAT'S ALLOWED IS 6,000, HOWEVER, WE'RE NOT GONNA GO BACK THROUGH THE WHOLE THING AND CHANGE OUR CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANS.
UM, WE CAN BUILD 12 UNITS FROM THE CURRENT CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANS THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THUS FAR.
SO WE'RE NOT GONNA GO BACK AND CHANGE IT.
'CAUSE THEN IT'LL TAKE LIKE ANOTHER YEAR JUST FOR 12 PROPERTIES.
UM, AND AGAIN, I THINK THAT THAT MAYBE THE DIFFERENCE THERE IS THAT, UM, WE CERTAINLY HEAR YOU.
I, YOU KNOW, I HAVE NO REASON TO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE INTENDING TO DEVELOP THIS, BUT THINGS CAN CHANGE.
AND SO THAT ESSENTIALLY THERE'S A DELTA BETWEEN WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED AND WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
UM, SECOND QUESTION IS, UM, I BELIEVE YOU ARE WHO CIRCULATED AND YOU SHOWED US THOSE IMAGES OF THE TYPE OF PROPERTIES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
THEY'RE TWO DIFFERENT, UM, APPROACHES.
ONE OF WHICH HAS FRONT DOORS THAT ARE FACING THE STREET MM-HMM
WHICH ARE MORE PROMINENT IN FACING THE STREET.
ARE YOU INTENDING TO DEVELOP A MIX OF BOTH OF THOSE? OR IS THERE ONE OF THOSE THAT IS YOUR, YOUR PRIMARY, UM, INTENT? BOTH ON THE, ON THE CORNERS, ON THE EDGES, WE INTENDED TO PUT THOSE THAT HAVE THE, THE ENTRY, JUST THE WALK UP ENTRY AND THE GARAGES WILL BE ON THE REAR.
AND FOR THE FRONT ENTRY, UH, THE WAY THE LOT IS SITUATED, WE HAVE TO HAVE FRONT ENTRY GARAGES FOR THOSE.
SO, AND I, I THINK AGAIN, IT HAS TO DO WITH HOW YOU NEED TO ACCESS THE YES SITES AND YOUR PLATS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE AN ALLEYWAY IN THE REAR.
AND SO, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS IN OUR CASE REPORT THAT WE HAVE FROM STAFF TALKS ABOUT COMPATIBILITY.
UM, AND, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE LOOK AT, UM, IN TERMS OF SCALE, IN TERMS OF ORIENTATION.
UM, COULD YOU SPEAK TO HOW YOU'RE RELATING TO THE SURROUNDING, UM, SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS IN TERMS OF HEIGHTS? UM, I THINK UNDERSTAND HOW YOUR PLAN IS GONNA LAY OUT, BUT FOR INSTANCE, A DUPLEX WOULD ALLOW YOU TO GO UP TO 36 FEET WHERE THE R SEVEN FIVE ZONING IS A 30 FOOT MAXIMUM.
WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION OF, OF FOLLOWING THOSE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE UM, TYPICAL OF THE AREA? YEAH, WE DO REALIZE THAT A THREE STORY BUILDING WOULD NOT SIT WELL AND IT PROBABLY WOULDN'T SELL IN THAT AREA.
SO TWO STORIES WOULD BE MAX, UH, FOR THAT AREA.
AND, AND IS THAT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE ALREADY? THERE ARE.
MOST NEIGHBORS ARE ONE STORY, BUT THERE ARE SOME TWO STORY IN THE AREA.
COMMISSIONER, CAN YOU STATE FOLLOWED UP MR. RUBIN? I JUST HAD A QUESTION AND MAYBE I MISSED THIS.
UM, ONE OF THE CONCERNS I HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY WAS EXCESS OR OVERFLOW PARKING
[03:25:01]
ON THE STREET.HOW MANY PARKING SPOTS DO YOU ANTICIPATE PROVIDING PER UNIT? SO OF COURSE EACH UNIT WILL HAVE A TWO CAR GARAGE, UM, AND THEN THEY'LL HAVE THE DRIVEWAY TO PARK IN AS WELL.
SO ONE OF THE SORT OF, YOU KNOW, CRITICISMS THAT WE SOMETIMES HEAR ABOUT NEW DEVELOPMENT IS THAT THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER THAN THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.
AND I HAVEN'T UNFORTUNATELY BEEN TO THIS AREA.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S CONCERN ABOUT, I GUESS TALL BUILDINGS LOOMING OVER SHORTER BUILDINGS.
CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE AREA AND WHERE THIS IS SITUATED RELATIVE TO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND SORT OF TERMS OF HEIGHT? SO MY BUILDINGS, IF Y'ALL ALLOW IT WON'T TOWER OVER ANY OF THE OTHER HOUSES BECAUSE WE SIT DOWN TOWARD THE BOTTOM BY THE CREEK.
SO WE ARE THE LOWEST ELEVATION IN THE AREA.
UH, THE OTHER HOUSES ARE UP ON A HILL AND THEY'LL ALL BE HIGHER THAN WHERE MY PROPERTY IS.
UH, I DO HAVE THE TOPOGRAPHY MAPS SOMEWHERE IN THESE FILES.
UM, DON'T, DON'T WORRY ABOUT THAT.
NOW, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT MY UNDERSTANDING THE TOPOGRAPHY WAS ALIGNED WITH WHAT'S WE'RE WE'RE LOW.
WE'RE LOW, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE HIGHER THAN EVERYONE ELSE.
AND RIGHT NOW, ARE PEOPLE ABLE TO PARK ON BOTH SIDES OF LOST MIRAGE? PEOPLE DO PARK ON BOTH SIDES.
AND I GUESS IF THESE ARE BUILT, IT'LL MAKE PARKING ON THE WEST SIDE MORE CHALLENGING AND MAKE EX MAKE VEHICULAR TRAFFIC FLOW THROUGH POTENTIALLY MORE EASILY, PERHAPS.
BUT THEY ALREADY PARK ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE MUCH OF THE CHANGE.
AND THIS HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH, UH, THE CITY ENGINEER, I BELIEVE HIS NAME IS DAVID NAVAREZ.
I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN SAY THAT HERE, BUT IT GOT PASSED, UH, THROUGH HIM.
I HAVE AN EMAIL FROM HIM STATING THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY TRAFFIC OR TRANSPORTATION CONCERNS.
UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, MR. WALKER.
IF, IF THIS WAS, IF YOU WERE TO DEVELOP THIS SITE, DO YOU HAVE ANY PLANS FOR THE CREEK OR UNDERSTAND YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO THAT CREEK? AS FAR AS PLANS FOR THE CREEK, WE WANTED TO LEAVE THE CREEK AS IT IS.
WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY PLANS TO CHANGE ANY OF THE DEVELOPMENT WITH THE CREEK.
UH, OUR ENGINEER GREW UP A RETAINING WALL THAT WE DO HAVE TO PUT UP.
UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, WE WEREN'T GONNA, WE WEREN'T GONNA TOUCH THE CREEK.
'CAUSE SOMETIMES THERE'S A, A FEAR OF THE CREEK NOT BEING CARED FOR BY THE RECIPIENTS WHO ARE BUILDING ON IT.
SO I WANT YOU TO KEEP THAT IN MIND AS YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH, WITH YEAH.
IF THAT CREEK GETS DAMNED OR, YOU KNOW, NATURALLY SOMETHING OCCURS, THAT IT'S KIND OF YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO GET IT DONE.
SO JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
COMMISSIONER FORESITE STATEMENT.
YOUR, YOUR MICROPHONE COMMISSIONER, YOUR MICROPHONE.
IN YOUR STATEMENT, YOU MENTIONED THAT THE PROPERTY SIZES WERE 75,000 SQUARE FEET.
DID YOU MEAN 7,500? I'M SORRY.
YEAH, I MISS A BIG DIFFERENCE.
UH, SO MR. WALKER, WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF DOING A LITTLE BIT OF, UM, BACK OF THE ENVELOPE CALCULATIONS HERE.
SO I'M, I'M SURE YOU'VE ALREADY DONE IT UNDER BASE ZONING.
NOW, DID YOU EVER, YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT HOW MANY LOTS YOU GET NOW BY RIGHT.
DID YOU EVER DO THAT ANALYSIS? HOW MANY LOTS.
HOW MANY LOTS YOU GET NOW BY RIGHT.
IF YOU WERE TO BUILD IT BY RIGHT NOW, SINGLE FAMILY, WE HAVE 12.
WE COULD HAVE DONE A PD AND GOT MORE ACCORDING TO MY ENGINEER.
BUT WE HAVE 12 PLOTTED OUT NOW, WHICH HAS BEEN PASSED ALREADY.
AND THOSE LOTS ARE OVER 7,500 SQUARE FEET.
SOME ARE MORE LIKE 8,500 SQUARE FEET.
AND, AND, AND, UH, ONE OTHER QUESTION.
WHAT IS THE, THE, THE, THE SEPARATION, THE, THE NUMBER OF FEET BETWEEN EACH, UH, EACH PROPERTY, EACH UNIT BEING FEET? YEAH.
I BELIEVE THE REQUIREMENT IS, IS FIVE FEET OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO THERE'LL BE AT LEAST 10 FEET, UH, SEPARATE FROM EACH OTHER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? YEAH, MR. CHAIR.
WELL, YOU HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO BE HERE TODAY, MR. WALKER, BUT THANKS, UH, FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE.
UH, WE'VE HAD, UH, TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS, UH, REGARDING, UH, THIS PROPOSED ZONING CHANGED.
UH, CAN YOU TELL, UH, THE COMMISSION,
[03:30:01]
UH, WHAT THE CONCERNS WERE AND HOW YOU PLAN TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS? SOME OF THE CONCERNS WERE PARKING, AS MENTIONED.UH, WE STARTED OFF WITH A ONE CAR GARAGE, BUT WE CHANGED TO A TWO CAR GARAGE.
UM, SOME OF THE CONCERNS WERE CRIME.
WELL, A LOT OF THINGS HAPPEN ON, ON THAT LOT.
UM, FOR SOME REASON YOU GO OVER THERE ONE DAY AND THEN THE NEXT DAY YOU SEE TONS OF BEER BOTTLES AND ALL KINDS OF STUFF ON THE PROPERTY.
SO IT NEEDS TO BE, IT NEEDS TO BE BUILT ON AND DEVELOPED SO THAT THAT WILL HELP WITH SOME OF THE CRIME.
UM, THE NEIGHBORS SAY WE HEAR GUNSHOTS EVERY NIGHT, UM, SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS.
THAT WAS A CONCERN WITH CRIME.
AND I THINK PUTTING NEW PEOPLE IN THERE, FAMILIES WILL HELP.
UM, MORE EYES, MORE LIGHTS WILL HELP QUAIL SOME OF THE CRIME.
UM, THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT, UM, FIREMEN AS WELL AS AMBULANCES DRIVING DOWN THE STREET.
BUT OUR PLANS AREN'T GOING TO INTERFERE WITH THE, THE EXISTING THINGS THAT, THAT HAVE TO TAKE PLACE WITH REGARD TO THAT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS? UH, COMMISSIONER FORESITE? I HAD A QUESTION FOR ONE OF THE SPEAKERS.