* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [00:00:02]
          WE'RE 
          [BRIEFINGS]
RECORDING. 
          WE ARE RECORDING. 
          OKAY. 
          CAN WE PLEASE START OFF WITH THE ROLL CALL? GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SCHOCK. 
          PRESENT, DISTRICT TWO. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          DISTRICT THREE. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT, PRESENT, DISTRICT FOUR. 
          COMMISSIONER FORSYTH, DISTRICT FIVE. 
          CHAIR SHAD. 
          PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT SIX. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DISTRICT SEVEN. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELIE. 
          REAGAN PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DISTRICT NINE COMMISSIONER. 
          HE, HE'S GOT A CONFERENCE CALL. 
          SORRY, GO AHEAD. 
          DISTRICT 10, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. 
          PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT 11. 
          COMMISSIONER. 
          COMMISSIONER SIMS HERE. 
          DISTRICT 12. 
          COMMISSIONER HAWK. 
          DISTRICT 13. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL HERE. 
          DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HERE AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBIN, I'M HERE. 
          YOU HAVE QUORUM, SIR. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          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. 
          GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          UH, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. 
          MY NAME IS SETH HAWES. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR. 
          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. 
          AND YES, THEY ARE INCLUDED. 
          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, 65 IS THE THRESHOLD. 
          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. 
          UM, THAT HAS NOT CHANGED. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          GOOD MORNING, MR. PEPE. 
          HEY THERE. 
          I CAN ALSO WEIGH IN AS WELL. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          EVERY SINGLE ONE, I THINK. 
          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. 
          OUR SHORT TERM. 
          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. 
          IT WOULD DISENTITLE THEM. 
          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 , BY THIS BODY AND OTHER, OTHER STAKEHOLDERS. 
          BUT THAT'S MY APPLICATION OF, OF OUR, OUR TOOLS TO THIS PROBLEM. 
          THANK YOU, MR. HARVEY. 
          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. 
          NO WORRIES. 
          I'VE THOUGHT WE'VE, WE'VE, WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A WHILE, , AND, AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY, UM, OR CERTAINLY IN MY MIND, AND I DON'T THINK ANY SENSE FROM THE COMMUNITIES THAT, UM, I THINK THEY WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IN MORE NUANCE HOW THIS IS EVALUATED, WHAT TOOLS ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM, UM, NOT THAT WE'RE SEEKING TO CHANGE, UM, THE DIRECTION OF A LOT OF THOSE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED OVER MANY, MANY YEARS. 
          SO THANK YOU MR. HALLS FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          I APPRECIATE IT. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSER. 
          FOLLOW COMMISSIONER FORSYTH. 
          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. 
          COMMISSIONER FORSYTH. 
          FOLLOW COMMISSIONER HALL. 
          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. 
          YEAH. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT YOU, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE 'EM OUT THEN FOR, UH, DARRELL AND I, WE COULD GENERATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT FOR YOU. 
          YES, SIR. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          APPRECIATE THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. 
          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. 
          IT'S A, A GRAY AREA. 
          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. 
          YEAH. 
          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. 
          YES, SIR. 
          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. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          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. 
          MM-HMM . 
          YEAH, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION A LOT OF MILITARY FLIGHTS CAME IN AFTER DARK  AND LEFT BEFORE SUNUP. 
          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. 
          YEAH. 
          YES, SIR. 
          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. 
          IT WAS REALLY COOL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT. 
          THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU GUYS FOR AN AWESOME PRESENTATION WORKING IN STEM, YOU GUYS LIKE, THIS WAS NICE. 
          THIS WAS FUN. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          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. 
          GOTCHA. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          GOTCHA. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YOU'RE WELCOME. 
          MM-HMM . 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? EXCELLENT. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, UH, ARE WE READY FOR OUR SECOND BRIEFING? SHE'S NOT. 
          OKAY. 
          THEN WE'LL, WE'LL CIRCLE BACK TO ITEM NUMBER TWO. 
          COMMISSIONERS. 
          DO WE NEED NUMBER THREE? BRIEFED NUMBER THREE? YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          CHAIRMAN SHAIDE? YES, SIR. 
          UH, 
          [00:40:01]
CAN I ASK ABOUT CASE NUMBER FIVE? I WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO BE BRIEFED. 
          PERFECT. 
          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. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY. 
          GIMME ONE SECOND. 
          I'M SHARING THIS RIGHT NOW. 
          ALL RIGHTY. 
          THIS IS M 2 45 DASH 0 1 1. 
          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. 
          RIGHT. 
          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. 
          UM, ONE QUESTION. 
          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. 
          I MEAN POTTER'S HOUSE WAY. 
          UM, SO ARE YOU AWARE THAT I HAD THAT CONVERSATION? I WAS NOT AWARE YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HIM. 
          PERFECT. 
          UM, 
          [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. 
          GOTCHA. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          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. 
          MM-HMM . 
          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. 
          GOTCHA. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, THANK YOU COLLEAGUES. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO CASE NUMBER FOUR. 
          GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          LET'S ACTUALLY HOP TO NUMBER NINE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          . 
          THERE WAS SOME . 
          OKAY, COFFEE HASN'T HIT YET. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          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. 
          UH, HERE WE 
          [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. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          THIS IS KC 2 45, 1 49. 
          IT'S A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE. 
          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. 
          UM, LOOKING NORTH, UH, WEST. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU SIR. 
          QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER HALT. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          IT'S MORE OF A DEVELOPMENT QUESTION. 
          ALRIGHT, I'LL, I'LL ASK LATER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          I'M NEW. 
          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. 
          NO. 
          GOOD JOB. 
          UM, I LIKE THAT YOU USE REGION AND NOT SECTOR 'CAUSE IT'S SO MILITARIZED, BUT THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM . 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, PLEASE, MR. CHAIR? UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          UH, UH, MR. GREGORY, IT'S A PLEASURE TO MEET YOU. 
          YES, SIR. 
          AND, AND WELCOME. 
          THANK 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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          THAT'S 
          [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. 
          OKAY. 
          I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. 
          IF THE ENGINEER IS HERE, MR. IS IT NAVAREZ? I CAN SEND HIM A MESSAGE. 
          UH, HE SHOULD BE WATCHING. 
          UM, BUT IT MAY TAKE A SECOND. 
          OKAY. 
          AND SO, UH, SO THE, THE BLUE NOTICES THAT THAT WENT OUT, DID YOU RECEIVE ANY BLUE NOTICES BACK? ME PERSONALLY? YEAH. 
          NO WORRIES. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT DID YOU RECEIVE ANY? NOT ME PERSONALLY. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          INTEREST OF TIME. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          GOOD, GOOD MORNING. 
          GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          UM, PLEASE, UH, YOUR QUESTION IS THE, THE, THE DIRECTION OF THE HOMES THEY'RE FACING. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          CORRECT. 
          THE LOSS MIRAGE IS A OBSERVABLE OBSERVABLY SMALLER OR LESS WIDER STREET THAN KERN WOOD? UM, YES SIR. 
          IT, IT, I THAT IS CORRECT. 
          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. 
          YES, SIR. 
          I AGREE WITH THAT. 
          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. 
          THERE ARE NO RESTRICTIONS. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS MR. ALVAREZ. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          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. 
          WE HAVE TO PICK UP NUMBER 18. 
          UH, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO NUMBER FIVE. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          DID, DID YOU SAY 18 ITEM? 18 MM-HMM . 
          OKAY. 
          GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. 
          I GUESS I'LL JUST USE THE PDF SLIDE. 
          MM-HMM . 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          THIS IS Z 2 45 DASH 1 22. 
          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 SOME SITE PHOTOS. 
          I'LL JUST GO THROUGH THESE. 
          HERE'S THE ZONING SIGN. 
          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 RIGHT OF WAY. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          GO BACK. 
          NOT THE ACTUAL PHOTOS, BUT THE DIAGRAM, THE AERIAL, YEAH. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          CORRECT. 
          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. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          YES, SIR. 
          UM, NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR ME, MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          AND ONE FINAL QUESTION. 
          I, I DIDN'T 
          [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. 
          UM, I'M NOT FAMILIAR. 
          IT WAS ALL, UH, TAPED OUT WHEN I WENT OUT THERE, SO I COULDN'T SEE, UM, WHAT'S AROUND THE LAKE. 
          I, I HAVE NO IDEA. 
          HMM. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM . 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSE. 
          RIGHT. 
          UM, I'M GONNA VIOLATE TWO RULES WITH MY, MY QUESTIONS. 
          ONE, I'M NOT AN ENGINEER. 
          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. 
          I, I COMPLETELY AGREE. 
          I SUPPORT THAT ANSWER. 
          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. 
          SO NO, THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          WE, WE CAN DO SOME, SOME BACKGROUND ON IT. 
          TRY AND GET AN ANSWER. 
          HONESTLY. 
          I'M, I'M AS CURIOUS AS YOU ARE, MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          I PLEASE ADDRESS, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, HOUSE WRIGHT. 
          UH, YOU, YOU'RE CORRECT. 
          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. 
          THANKS FOR THE CONTEXT. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS? UH, YES. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          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. 
          IT FLOODS QUITE OFTEN. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          SO HOPE THAT HELPS. 
          THAT'S, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS WILL GO BACK TO NUMBER. 
          GO BACK IN ORDER TO NUMBER FIVE? YES. 
          NUMBER FIVE. 
          WAIT, I THOUGHT WE WERE DOING GOOD MORNING. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          MM. 
          HEY. 
          HEY, GEORGE. 
          OH, THERE WE GO. 
          THANKS. 
          I PULLED IT UP, BUT I DUNNO HOW TO PUT IN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM . 
          OKAY. 
          GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. 
          UM, THIS IS Z 2 4 5 1 77. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I WOULD LIKE FOR THIS, UH, ITEM TO BE TAKEN OFF OF CONSENT. 
          YES. 
          WE'VE TAKEN THAT ONE. 
          OR WE'LL TAKE THAT OFF. 
          CONSENT VICE CHAIR . 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          I WAS, I WAS 10 IN IN 1997. 
          SO 27 YEARS. 
          NO, I'M NOT AWARE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, ONE OTHER FOLLOW-UP QUESTION. 
          IF THE APPLICANT HAD REQUESTED A PERMANENT SUP WITH STAFF HAD HAVE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          [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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          YES, THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          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. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YES, THAT'S RIGHT. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANKS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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  JUST KEEP IT SIMPLE? I, I CERTAINLY THINK THAT'S IT. 
          THAT'S ONE APPROACH. 
          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. 
          JUST RANK IT. 
          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  OF THE SUA LITTLE BIT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND NOT THE SITE PLAN. 
          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. 
          UH, YEAH. 
          I, I CONCUR. 
          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. 
          SECOND ROUND BY SURE. 
          JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DEPENDS ON A COUPLE THINGS. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. 
          WE'LL GO TO NUMBER SIX, WHICH HAS ALSO COME OFF CONSENT. 
          WE'LL BRIEF THAT TODAY. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL, IS THAT RIGHT? LET'S LEAVE IT. 
          [01:36:00]
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          AND COMMISSIONERS, UH, AM I SHARING MY SCREEN? ANY CHANCE? NOT YET. 
          ARE YOU SEEING THE, OH, AM I SHARING NOW? PERFECT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          UH, THIS IS LOOKING EAST. 
          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. 
          UM, THERE'S AN ALLEY. 
          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. 
          AGAIN, THERE'S RESIDENTIAL. 
          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 . 
          UM, LEMME TRY TO HURRY UP. 
          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. 
          SORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          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. 
          AND, UM, THAT'S IT. 
          UM, THIS IS, I'M SORRY, I'VE GOTTA GET THIS OUT OF THE WAY. 
          , I CAN'T, I CAN'T, IT'S GONNA RESTART. 
          LEMME OKAY. 
          UH, CONSISTENCY REVIEW. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          QUESTIONS. 
          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. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? YES. 
          YES. 
          THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          SO, THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          UM, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          RECOMMENDATION. 
          YES, SIR. 
          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. 
          CORRECT. 
          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  AND, AND IF I MAY THERE, BUT, BUT IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THERE ARE COW PATHS ALONG, ALONG PARK LANE, WHICH I WAS CORRECT BECAUSE I WAS CALLING THEM GOAT PATH. 
          BUT YES, THE PLANNER TERM IS DESIRE PATH. 
          DESIRE PATH. 
          THINK EVEN BETTER. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT, THANKS. 
          THAT BRINGS A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY TO THIS, TO THIS ISSUE. 
          OH, THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSTON. 
          DON'T GO ANYWHERE. 
          DAVID, DAVID, DAVID, COME BACK. 
          DAVID. 
          DAVID. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          OUR SIX FEET OF SIDEWALK ALONG PARK LANE. 
          MM-HMM . 
          AND A MINIMUM SIX FEET PREFERRED EIGHT FOOT, UM, BUFFER OR FURNISHING ZONE ALONG PARK LANE MINIMUM AND PREFERRED. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          YES, MA'AM. 
          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. 
          YES MA'AM. 
          NOW MOVING TO BO DECKER. 
          YES MA'AM. 
          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. 
          MM-HMM . 
          PREFERRED FIVE 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. 
          YES MA'AM. 
          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. 
          FIVE AND FIVE. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IF I MAY CLARIFY CHAIR FIVE, MINIMUM WIDTH AND FIVE FEET BUFFER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANKS FOR THAT. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER 1115, WE'RE GONNA GET BACK ON THE RECORD. 
          MS. CROSSLEY. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          MY, UH, GOOD MORNING. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S IT. 
          THAT'S IT. 
          ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? NO, NO QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU, . 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR COMING. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          ALSO THAT, THAT COME OFF CONSENT. 
          YES SIR. 
          CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED. 
          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. 
          SO JUST FYI. 
          WE MIGHT WANT TO REBOOT IT DURING, SORRY, . 
          YEAH. 
          OH, WE'LL REBOOT IT DURING LUNCH OR SOMETHING. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          IF YOU'LL RECALL. 
          WE RECENTLY HAD THAT CASE. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          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. 
          WE ARE IN AGREEMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT. 
          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. 
          IT'S JUST GONNA BE ONE SET. 
          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. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          NO, IT, IT'S MS, MR. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE. 
          SECRETARY. 
          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. 
          THEY'D BE HAPPY TO 
          [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. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          WE WILL BRIEF IT THEN TAKES IT TO CASE NUMBER 11. 
          DO WE NEED 11 BRIEFED? NO. 
          WOULD ANYONE LIKE NUMBER 11 BRIEFED? OKAY. 
          TAKES US TO NUMBER 12. 
          THAT'S ALSO COME OFF CONSENT. 
          WE NEED IT BRIEFED. 
          ANYBODY LIKE TO HAVE 12 BRIEFED? OKAY. 
          13 ALSO COME OFF CONSENT WILL BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO WHAT DATE? AUGUST THE SEVENTH. 
          AUGUST 7TH. 
          OKAY. 
          WE'LL BRIEF IT THEN TAKES, IT TAKES US TO 14. 
          UH, ALSO HOLDING THAT ONE UNDER ADVISEMENT TO JUNE 26. 
          JUNE 26. 
          UH, NUMBER 15. 
          HAS THAT BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE? LET'S BRIEF IT. 
          LET'S BRIEF NUMBER 15. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSE. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY, THAT'S BRIEF NUMBER 50. 
          LINE 15 IS KZ 2 3 4 2 9 7. 
          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. 
          THE FAR DOES ADJUST. 
          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. 
          OR SORRY, LEMME RESTATE THAT. 
          IT WOULD BE MC FOUR, BUT WITH CS YARD LOT SIZE STANDARDS AND WITH A WAREHOUSE ALLOWED. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE IT. 
          AS SUCH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF THE CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT AND APPLICANT'S VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          QUESTIONS. 
          COMMISSIONER SLEEPER, PLEASE. 
          WAS THERE ANY, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION? UH, WE'VE NOT RECEIVED ANY, UH, AS FAR AS I, UH, NO. 
          I'LL, I'LL DOUBLE CHECK NOW. 
          UM, BUT I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY PHONE CALLS OR EMAILS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          AND, UH, WE HAVE A MOMENT. 
          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. 
          SO WE WILL PULL THAT ONE OFF. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          [02:21:03]
ALL RIGHT. 
          GOOD MORNING. 
          SORRY ABOUT THAT. 
          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, POSTPONEMENTS. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          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. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, THAT WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND IT WAS VERY HELPFUL. 
          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. 
          IT, IT COULD, YES. 
          OKAY. 
          SO SOMEONE COULD PAY THE $150 FEE AND POSTPONE IT BY EIGHT WEEKS? YES, SIR. 
          AND INCREASE THE COST. 
          WOULD IT INCLUDE THINGS LIKE IMPLEMENTING A NEW CONSERVATION DISTRICT OR EXPANDING IT? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          AND IMPLEMENTING A NEW HISTORIC DISTRICT OR EXPANDING ONE? YES, SIR. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, AND I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR NOW. 
          I MAY HAVE SOME FOLLOW UPS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, FOLLOW UP. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I DON'T WANT TO INCLUDE THAT INITIAL ROUND IN THE COST. 
          YEAH, I JUST WANNA TALK ABOUT THE RENO. 
          YEP. 
          COST. 
          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. 
          RANGE. 
          IT DEPENDS ON THE SIZE AND AREA OF REQUEST. 
          MAKES SENSE. 
          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. 
          YEAH. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          YEAH. 
          I DON'T HAVE NUMBERS TOP OF MY HEAD. 
          IT DEPENDS. 
          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. 
          AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. 
          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. 
          YEP. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          YEAH, IT'S HARD. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          YEAH. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IN RECENT TIMES, IT'S REALLY BEEN ONE OUT OF HOWEVER MANY, SO LESS THAN 1% PROBABLY FOR ZONING CASES, YES. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          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. 
          SO THE YES, IT DOES. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER CHERNO, UH, I HAVE A QUESTION. 
          THIS APPLIES FOR CPC AND CITY COUNCIL. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          RIGHT. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I BELIEVE THAT WAS IT. 
          SECOND ROUND. 
          MR. RUBIN, PLEASE. 
          I JUST PULLED A BLANK. 
          UM, GO BACK TO SOMEONE ELSE AND I'LL COME BACK. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          . 
          I, YES, SIR. 
          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. 
          UM, YEAH, IT JUST VARIES. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          UNDERSTOOD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM . 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          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. 
          JUNE 12TH. 
          UH, I BELIEVE NUMBER 46, LAST CASE. 
          DR. 
          ER, THANK YOU SO MUCH, CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          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. 
          IT WAS REFINED. 
          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. 
          THERE ARE SO MANY NUANCES. 
          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. 
          BUT THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          FIVE 14. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS, UH, LOT WE COULD SAY ABOUT THIS? WE WOULD JUST SAY THANK YOU. 
          THANK, THANK YOU TO THE BODY. 
          THANK YOU TO STAFF. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE. 
          UH, I CAN'T GET TO, UH, UH, DID THIS COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT? OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UH, COMMISSION'S 1208. 
          ENJOY YOUR LUNCH. 
          WE'LL SEE YOU AT THE HEARING AT 1237. 
          OKAY. 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
I START OFF WITH A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. 
          OKAY, WE'LL START OFF WITH THE ROLL CALL. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. 
          DISTRICT ONE COMMISSIONER SCHOCK, DISTRICT TWO, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          PRESENT, DISTRICT THREE. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT PRESENT, 
          [02:55:01]
DISTRICT FOUR. 
          COMMISSIONER FORSYTH, DISTRICT FIVE. 
          CHAIR SHAAD PRESENT DISTRICT SIX. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DISTRICT SEVEN. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER, REAGAN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN PRESENT, DISTRICT NINE. 
          COMMISSIONER SLEEPER. 
          HERE. 
          DISTRICT 10. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. 
          PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT 11. 
          COMMISSIONER SIMS. HERE. 
          DISTRICT 12 COMMISSIONER HOG. 
          DISTRICT 13. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL HERE. 
          DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND PLACE 15 VICE CHAIR RUBIN, I'M HERE. 
          YOU HAVE QUORUM, SIR. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER. 
          OKAY. 
          , DO YOU HAVE A MOTION FOR THE MINUTES? I DO. 
          MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION'S MEETING OF MAY 8TH, 2025. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          SECOND COMMISSIONER HALL AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIMS FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          A AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          [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. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? THIS IS ITEM NUMBER THREE. 
          THE FIRST PAGE OF THE AGENDA. 
          JORGE, WE HAVE ONE, ONE REGISTERED SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM IS THE LINE OKAY, MR. SEGOVIA? GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          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. 
          EXCELLENT. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I WAS JUST MAKING SURE ALL OF MY BOSSES KNOW THAT I DID MY WORK. 
          MY BOSSES ARE THE NEIGHBORS, SO THANK YOU. 
          I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          YES, ALWAYS. 
          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. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IT'S GONNA BE A BUNCH OF THEM COMING, SO THANK Y'ALL. 
          THANK YOU SIR. 
          WE LOOK FORWARD TO THAT. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS? NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          ANY IMPOSED AYES HAVE 
          [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. 
          THANK. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          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. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          AYE. 
          OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. 
          [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. 
          STAFF'S. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AS BRIEFED BY STAFF. 
          I THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          DEED RESTRICTION. 
          UH, WE'RE GONNA BE ADDING THE PROHIBITION OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AS BRIEFED BY STAFF THIS MORNING. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. 
          [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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          YES, SIR. 
          HELLO, GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          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. 
          SO WE HAVE A SMALL IMPACT. 
          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. 
          THEY'RE IN FAVOR OF IT. 
          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. 
          LOOK HOW IT'S GROWING. 
          WEST DALLAS NEAR TRINITY GROVES. 
          I NEVER WENT THERE WHEN I WAS YOUNG. 
          I DO NOW. 
          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. 
          THIS IS NO DIFFERENT. 
          YOU'RE CARETAKERS OF NEIGHBORHOODS, OF COMMUNITIES, FUTURES. 
          WE NEED YOU. 
          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. 
          UM, ONE WAS NOT 
          [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. 
          AND THAT INDIVIDUAL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S YOUR TIME. 
          THAT'S MY TIME. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          PLEASE STAND BY. 
          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. 
          HELLO. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          YES, WE CAN SEE YOU. 
          AFTERNOON. 
          MY NAME IS TANIKA SHEFIELD. 
          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. 
          ALSO, THE DENSITY. 
          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. 
          BUT NO MULTI-FAMILY HOMES. 
          WE HAVE SIGNED A PETITION OF APPROXIMATELY 50 NEIGHBORS AND HAVE GIVEN IT TO COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN AND WE DON'T WANT IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          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. 
          UH, WE HAVE A LOT OF TRAFFIC. 
          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. 
          IT'S A QUIET COMMUNITY. 
          WE LOVE OUR COMMUNITY. 
          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. 
          IT'S JUST GONNA BE A MESS. 
          AND I KNOW THAT THAT'S GONNA BRING IN EVEN MORE PEOPLE. 
          AND IT'S QUIET HERE. 
          WE WANNA KEEP IT THAT WAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          MR. WILSON. 
          HELLO? YES SIR. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE'RE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS. 
          YES, WE CAN. 
          YES. 
          HI, ERIC WILSON, 79 42 
          [03:15:01]
JUBILANT DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS. 
          UH, 2 3 7 7 5 2 3 7. 
          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. 
          THOSE TWO WERE OPPOSED. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          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. 
          THAT BLEW ME OFF. 
          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. 
          LET THE PROJECT CONTINUE. 
          THANK YOU SIR. 
          '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. 
          THEY LOVED IT. 
          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. 
          OTHERWISE, NEIGHBORHOODS DIE. 
          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. 
          THAT'S IT. 
          THANK YOU SIR. 
          COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL, PLEASE. 
          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. 
          OUR ENGINEER HAS DESIGNS. 
          I CAN SHOW YOU ALL OF OUR ENGINEERING FILES. 
          IT'S, IT'S COMPLETE. 
          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. 
          UM, THAT'S THE RESTRICTION. 
          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. 
          OUR PROPERTY LINE VARIES. 
          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. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          THAT'S KIND OF SET. 
          UM, WE CAN BUILD 12 UNITS FROM THE CURRENT CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANS THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THUS FAR. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE'RE NOT GONNA GO BACK AND CHANGE IT. 
          'CAUSE THEN IT'LL TAKE LIKE ANOTHER YEAR JUST FOR 12 PROPERTIES. 
          OKAY. 
          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  ONE OF WHICH HAVE GARAGES. 
          YES. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU MR. WALKER. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S TRUE. 
          SURE. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          WE'RE LOW, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE HIGHER THAN EVERYONE ELSE. 
          OKAY. 
          AT TWO STORIES. 
          AND RIGHT NOW, ARE PEOPLE ABLE TO PARK ON BOTH SIDES OF LOST MIRAGE? PEOPLE DO PARK ON BOTH SIDES. 
          OKAY. 
          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. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH, SIR. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          '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. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          YES, YOU'RE CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          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. 
          WE HAVE 12 LOTS. 
          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. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT WE HAVE 12 PLOTTED OUT NOW, WHICH HAS BEEN PASSED ALREADY. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          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. 
          UM, UH, THANKS FOR COMING. 
          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. 
          SO IT'S ONE TO HELP. 
          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. 
          YES. 
          WE'LL GO TO SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION NOW. 
          COMMISSIONER FORESITE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MR. WALKER. 
          THE, UH, ONE OF THE LADIES AND I, I FORGET HER NAME, MAYBE COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN CAN HELP ME, ALLUDED TO A PETITION THAT WAS SIGNED AND SENT TO US WITH 50 SIGNATURES ON IT. 
          SO APPROXIMATELY YES. 
          I CIRCULATED THAT AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS. 
          OKAY. 
          AND IT WAS IN OPPOSITION. 
          AND IT'S BECAUSE THERE HAS NOT REALLY BEEN A TRAFFIC STUDY ON HOW EMS WILL BE ABLE TO GET IN WITH TWO CARS PARKED ON BOTH SIDES OR CAR PARKED ON EITHER SIDE OF THE STREET. 
          BECAUSE CURRENT, IF THERE'S ONE CAR PARKED, YOU HAVE TO STOP, WAIT FOR THE OTHER PERSON TO COME THROUGH, THEN GO THROUGH. 
          SO IF YOU HAVE TWO CARS PARKED, YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET AN MS VEHICLE THROUGH. 
          AND THE DEVELOPMENT IS IN THE DEAD HEART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          SO YOU ARE MAKING THEM HAVE TO GO AROUND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, COME BACK INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT COULD KILL SOMEBODY. 
          NEXT. 
          MR. WALKER PAINTS US AS A DYING NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WE JUST RECENTLY, IN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF HAD ABOUT EIGHT NEW HOMES, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES BUILT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          I HAVE A NEW NEIGHBOR THAT JUST MOVED IN ABOUT THREE TO FOUR MONTHS AGO. 
          WE ARE NOT A DYING NEIGHBORHOOD BY ANY CHANCE. 
          AND WE REALLY RESENT BEING CALLED A DYING NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          JUST BECAUSE SOME OF US HAVE ELDERLY PARENTS DO NOT MEAN THAT WE'RE DYING. 
          IT JUST MEANS THAT WE'RE RESPECTFUL TO OUR ELDERS AND ARE TAKING CARE OF THEM. 
          AND THAT CAUSES MUCH CONCERN ABOUT EMS VEHICLES BEING ABLE TO GET TO THEM. 
          AND NO, THERE IS NOT A LOT OF CRIME OVER IN THE FIELD. 
          WHAT IT IS, IS AFTER IT WAS SOLD, NOBODY IS THEN TAKING CARE OF THE FIELD. 
          WHEN THE CITY OF DALLAS OWNED IT, Y'ALL KEPT IT. 
          MOW, Y'ALL TOOK CARE OF IT. 
          NOW, SINCE MR. WALKER'S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY HAS OWNED IT, WE HAVE TO CONTINUOUSLY COMPLAIN ABOUT GETTING IT MOWED, ABOUT TAKING CARE OF IT. 
          AND YES, THE CREEK DOES STILL TO WATER. 
          WE HAVE, WE HAVE ASKED FOR A CIVIL ENGINEERS REPORT AND WE HAVE STILL YET TO GET A CIVIL ENGINEER'S REPORT ON THE CREEK. 
          AND AS AN ENGINEER, I KNOW THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS MUST BE DONE WHEN YOU BUILD ON A PROPERTY WITH THE CREEK BEHIND IT. 
          AND WE HAVE YET TO BE TOLD WHAT HE'S GOING TO DO. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER FRAGA, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. SHEFFIELD. 
          UH, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO THE COMMISSION THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS, UH, OF THE STREET COMING FROM KE WOODS TO, UH, LAS MIRAGE? SO THE STREET HAS A S OR A SNAKE SHAPE, SO NO ONE PARKED ON THE SIDE OF THE FIELD. 
          'CAUSE WE ALL KNOW IF YOU PARK 
          [03:35:01]
ON THAT SIDE, IT WOULD RESTRAINT TRAFFIC FLOW. 
          SO WHEN HOMEOWNERS HAVE GUESTS, THEY YES, MAY PARK OUT IN FRONT, BUT ALL THE HOMEOWNERS, WHICH IS ONLY FOUR HOMES DIRECTLY ACROSS THAT FACE, THE FIELD PARK IN THEIR DRIVEWAY. 
          I'M THE FIFTH HOME THAT'S ACROSS FROM THE FIELD, BUT I FACE, UH, THE HOMES THAT FACE THE FIELD. 
          MY HOUSE IS ACTUALLY ON MIRAGE CANYON. 
          MS. COLBERT, WHO IS ALSO ON HERE TODAY OPPOSING, SHE IS ADJACENT, SHE IS ACROSS THE ALLEY, WHICH MAKES HER ADJACENT TO THE FIELD. 
          BUT THAT WHOLE LITTLE AREA FROM FERNWOOD WOOD TO OUR ALLEY IS AN SCUR OR A SNAKE, WHICH MAKES IT NOT A GOOD PLACE TO HAVE STREET PARKING ON BOTH SIDES. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR OUR SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION. 
          I NOTICE FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM MS. SHEFFIELD. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKERS AND OPPOSITION? COMMISSIONERS? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, PLEASE? COMMISSIONER HERBERT? UM, IF STAFF CAN ANSWER THIS ON THESE, ON THIS SMALL CURVED STREET, UM, WOULD THE CITY, OR IS THERE A CURVE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR STREETS LIKE THIS? AND IN THAT PLAN DO THEY CAN INCLUDE NO PARKING SIGNS FOR ONE SIDE OF THE STREET? ONE MOMENT. 
          LET ME SEE IF OUR FRIENDS IN TRANSPORTATION ARE ONLINE. 
          DAVID, ARE YOU THERE? I KNOW YOU'RE LISTENING. 
          . 
          HI YA. 
          IF I MAY ADDRESS THE BODY, UH, VIA CAMERA, IF THAT'S OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONERS. 
          IT'S A SHORT ANSWER. 
          YES SIR. 
          THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. 
          THE ANSWER IS THE, THERE IS NO CURVE MANAGEMENT SPECIFICALLY, UH, GUIDING STAFF TO LIMIT OR RESTRICT PARKING ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS. 
          IN FACT, I WOULD SAY IT'S EVEN ENCOURAGED INSTEAD. 
          THEREFORE, THERE ARE NO MECHANISMS THAT GIVE, GIVE STAFF THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE PARKING ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS EXCEPT FOR THE ABILITY FOR NEIGHBORS TO PETITION RPOS RESIDENT PARKING ONLY, UM, WHICH IS A PERMIT OF ITS OWN. 
          THERE'S AN APPLICATION AND, UM, THERE'S AN ENFORCEMENT ASPECT TO IT. 
          BUT, UH, RESIDENTS, ALL RESIDENTS IN DALLAS CAN REQUEST A RESIDENT PARKING ONLY AN RPO AND, AND THAT GIVES THEM ACCESS TO, UM, CAR, UH, DECALS THAT THEY CAN, THAT THEY CAN USE ON THEIR VEHICLES TO ALLOW THEM TO CAR TO, TO PARK THERE. 
          AND NO ONE ELSE. 
          THIS IS, FRANKLY, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD NECESSARILY QUALIFY. 
          THERE'S NO PROXIMITY TO, UH, COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. 
          UM, SHORT ANSWER, ALL STREETS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO PARK. 
          THERE ARE NO SITE DISTANCE VISIBILITY OR, UM, OTHER ISSUES THAT WE'RE AWARE OF. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          AND I'M NOT SURE WHICH STAFF THIS IS FOR, BUT I, LOOKING AT THE AERIAL AND LOOKING AT THE SITE DEVELOPMENT, THE PROPERTIES IN THIS AREA GENERALLY APPEAR TO BE REAR ACCESS GARAGE AND JUST SOUTH LOST, UM, MIRAGE DRIVE PROVIDES THAT REAR ACCESS. 
          IS THERE SOMETHING UNIQUE ABOUT THIS SITE THAT DIDN'T ALLOW FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN TO CONTINUE? OR WAS THAT JUST A DESIGN DECISION BY THE APPLICANT? THE APPLICANT CAN MENTION SOME OF WHAT THEY EXPERIENCED AS THEY WENT THROUGH ENGINEERING. 
          I WOULD VENTURE TO BET THAT IT, IT IS PARTIALLY MADE DIFFICULT BECAUSE OF THE, THE CREEK BACK THERE. 
          SO IF YOU WANT TO STICK ADDITIONAL, UH, PAVING AND ALL OF THAT STUFF, THE CREEK BEING IN THE BACKSIDE IS WHERE YOU'RE GONNA EXPERIENCE THE MOST TROUBLE. 
          SO I WOULD IMAGINE THAT WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO DIFFICULTY IN THAT AND THE APPLICANT SPEAK TO FURTHER WHAT THEY'VE GONE THROUGH WHILE ENGINEERING. 
          WELL, AND I GUESS THAT'S PROBABLY WHY I REFERENCED THE, UM, DEVELOPMENT DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH BECAUSE THAT'S, THE CREEK CONTINUES THAT DIRECTION. 
          SO AGAIN, IT WOULD JUST SEEM TO SPEAK TO FOLLOWING THAT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. 
          SO IT WAS JUST A QUESTION IF THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE THAT WAS PART OF THAT REVIEW AND UN UNDERSTOOD. 
          I I WOULD SAY ONE DIFFERENCE IS THAT IT'S CHANNELIZED 
          [03:40:01]
TO THE SOUTH, WHEREAS IT'S KIND OF FREE FLOW IN THE, IN THE NORTHERN PART. 
          COMMISSIONERS, AGAIN, DAVID NEVAREZ REPRESENTING ENGINEERING, UH, DIVISION OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT. 
          FRANKLY, I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION BECAUSE ABSOLUTELY, ANYTIME THAT WE HAVE HIGH DENSITY TOWN HOME STYLE PROPERTIES, WE WOULD LOVE TO SEE THEM REAR ENDED. 
          WE REAR ACCESS FROM THE, FROM THE BACK, NOT REAR ENDED. 
          THAT'S NOT, UM, UH, WHAT HAPPENS IS THE DENSITY OF DRIVEWAYS SIMPLY JUST WIDENS, EFFECTIVELY WIDENS THE ROAD BECAUSE NOW NO ONE PARKS ON ONE SIDE AND NOW WE HAVE HIGHER SPEEDS, FOR EXAMPLE. 
          BUT, UH, IN THIS CASE SPECIFICALLY, UH, THE ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTIES WOULD HAVE TO BE THEN FROM CURRENT KERN KERN WOOD, NO, SORRY, THE, THE PROPERTY ON THE STREET ON THE NORTH, KERN, KERN, KERN WOOD, THAT'S KERN WOOD. 
          KERN WOOD, AND YES, OF COURSE KERN WOOD. 
          AND, AND, AND WE WOULD, I WOULD ASK THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE, THE, THE SPACING BETWEEN THE CREEK, THE BRIDGE AND THE CORNER. 
          YES. 
          UH, IT'S VERY LIMITED, SO UNFORTUNATELY IT DOES APPEAR NARROWER AND CERTAINLY IT NECKS DOWN AT ONE POINT. 
          YES. 
          SO, SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION. 
          WE ALWAYS RECOMMEND, UH, HIGH DENSITY PROPERTIES TO BE ACCESSED FROM THE BACKSIDE, ALLOWING A CURB TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, FRONT OF BEAUTIFUL FRONT YARDS AND NO, NO CURB CUTS. 
          IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY TO THE CREEK, UH, IT WOULD MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD HAVE TO WEIGH IN THE PROXIMITY TO THE CREEK ON CURB. 
          AND I'M ONLY GONNA ASK, 'CAUSE WE DID RECEIVE PLANS THAT APPEAR TO HAVE A SHARED ACCESS DRIVE BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE UNITS ARE ORIENTED. 
          AND IT SEEMED LIKE THAT MIGHT AGAIN, PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALLOW FOR THE FRONT ACCESS, BUT NOT HAVE THE DRIVES ORIENTED TOWARDS THE STREET. 
          AGAIN, THAT'S A DESIGN CONSIDERATION BY THE DEVELOPER, BUT WAS THAT ANYTHING THAT WAS REVIEWED WITH THEM? AND IF, IF IT WEREN'T, IF IT WERE AN OPTION, AS IF IT WAS FEASIBLE, I'M HEARING IT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE SUBORDINATED. 
          THANK YOU MR. PEPE. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, MR. NOVAR, I HAS ONE, ONE QUICK LITTLE FOLLOW UP FOR YOU, SIR. 
          DAVID. 
           YOU'VE MADE ONE LITTLE COMMENT THERE WHEN YOU WERE ON, ON THE PHONE THERE, AND I THINK I CAUGHT IT, BUT I WANT, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I, I HEARD RIGHT ABOUT, UH, ENCOURAGING PARKING ON THE STREET. 
          I WONDERING IF YOU COULD DIG INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, ABS IT, IT'S A RESIDENTIAL STREET. 
          UH, WE, WE WANT VEHICLES PARKED ON THE STREET IN GENERAL. 
          IN FACT, MOST OF THE TIME THE COMPLAINTS WE RECEIVE FROM RESIDENTS REGARDING SPEEDING HAS TO DO WITH, UM, LACK OF VEHICLES PARKED ON THE STREET AND WIDER ROADS THAT, UM, JUST ENCOURAGE MOTORISTS TO OR DISCOURAGE THEM TO DRIVE SLOWER. 
          I GUESS THAT'S A BETTER WAY OF LOOKING AT IT. 
          UM, IN GENERAL, WE SUPPORT THE ABILITY OF VEHICLES TO PARK ON STANDARD ROAD 36 WIDE PAVEMENT. 
          MAKES PERFECT SENSE. 
          SENSE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP FOR YOU THEN, MR. WALKER. 
          UH, SO FROM WHAT I HEARD BEFORE, ONE OF THE CONCESSIONS THAT YOU, YOU GAVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UH, AND, AND THE, THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, YOU STARTED OUT WITH A ONE CAR GARAGE, YOU WENT TO A TWO CAR GARAGE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND HOW WERE YOU PLANNING ON, UM, MEMORIALIZING THAT, YOU KNOW, HOW, HOW ARE YOU GONNA HARD CODE THAT IN LIKE BUILDING A TWO CAR GARAGE VERSUS ONE CAR GARAGE? YES. 
          WELL, TWO CAR GARAGE IS APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET WIDE, AND TWO OF THEM IS APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET. 
          LET, LET ME REFINE MY QUESTION. 
          UH, HOW ARE WE GONNA SEE THAT LANGUAGE HERE? HOW ARE YOU GONNA SEE THAT LANGUAGE? YES. 
          RIGHT. 
          YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR US, WE, WE PASS WHAT'S, WHAT'S WRITTEN IN OKAY. 
          HERE. 
          AND CAN YOU ALL REQUIRE A TWO CAR GARAGE? THAT'S WHAT I'M, WE CAN'T REQUIRE, BUT YOU COULD VOLUNTEER IT. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, I VOLUNTEER IT IF IT'S A DUPLEX, I VOLUNTEERED THAT IT BE MADE WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THAT, THAT WOULD BE A VOLUNTEER. 
          I'M SORRY, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS. 
          NO, I KNOW. 
          AND THAT'S, I CAN'T REQUIRE YOU TO VOLUNTEER A DEED RESTRICTION AND I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO, TO DO IT, BUT I, I KNOW THAT'S WHAT YOU MENTIONED BEFORE AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED, UH, STAFF IF THAT WAS A, A VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTION. 
          YES. 
          AND IT WAS NOT YET. 
          SO, UM, YES, WE CAN, WE CAN VOLUN, I CAN VOLUNTEER THAT AS A DEED RESTRICTION AS LONG AS IT'S A DUPLEX. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR COMMISSIONER HOUSER, PLEASE IF I MIGHT ASK MR. DEVAR? UH, ANOTHER QUESTION, 
          [03:45:01]
I'M SORRY TO ASK YOU TO COME BACK UP HERE. 
          SHOULD HAVE BEEN QUICKER A MOMENT AGO. 
          UH, WE, WE'VE HEARD SOME STATEMENTS THAT LEAD US TO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S SOMETHING UNUSUAL ABOUT THIS STREET, THAT IT'S UNUSUALLY NARROW OR CONSTRICTED OR WHATEVER. 
          BUT CAN, CAN YOU DESCRIBE, I DON'T IF THAT'S THE CASE. 
          I MEAN, IF THERE'S A CAR PARKED ON EACH CURB, CAN AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE STILL GO DOWN THE MIDDLE, ET CETERA? UM, UH, LET ME CLARIFY FIRST THAT WE'VE BEEN REVIEWING A DIFFERENT DESIGN THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED BY WRIGHT AT THIS LOCATION. 
          WE'VE GONE THROUGH TWO ROUND I'M NOT TALKING, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE DESIGN, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE STREET. 
          UH, YES SIR. 
          AND SO, IS THERE ANYTHING UNUSUAL ABOUT NO, SIR. 
          THIS STREET, SIR, I WANNA LET YOU KNOW THAT WE, THAT CONFORMS WITH CITY STANDARDS, THERE IS NOTHING UNUSUAL. 
          WE ALREADY COMPLETED TWO ROUNDS OF REVIEWS. 
          WE FOUND NO INDICATION, NO RECORD IN ON 3 1 1 SERVICE OR ANYTHING THAT LED US TO, SO YOU WOULD DISAGREE WITH STATEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE ABOUT THIS CASE? THAT THE STREET IS UNUSUAL, THAT IT'S, UH, SOMEHOW SUBSTANDARD. 
          YOU WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT? UH, WE DON'T FIND ANYTHING UNUSUAL ABOUT THE DESIGN OF AND OPERATIONS OF LOST MIRAGE, AND WE ALSO FOUND NO RECORD OF ANY COMPLAINTS, CONCERNS, OR ACCIDENTS ON THIS ROAD. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE. 
          UM, MR. NARVAREZ, CAN YOU COME BACK UP PLEASE? WE'RE LISTENING NOW. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          YES. 
          WOULD YOU SAY THAT THERE ARE STREETS SUCH AS THESE IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, EVEN THOUGH YOU ALL HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY COMPLAINTS, COULD BE CONSIDERED? I MEAN, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT THE, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS ARE SAYING THAT IF ONE CAR IS ON THE STREET, AND THEN IF ANOTHER CAR IS PARKED DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET AT ANOTHER HOUSE, THAT IT COULD BE A POSSIBILITY THAT SERVICE, UH, EMERGENCY SERVICES COULD HAVE A HARD TIME COMING DOWN THE STREET. 
          MA'AM, WE, WE N NONE OF OUR STAFF WHO'S RE RE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT LIFTS NEAR THE SITES. 
          ABSOLUTELY. 
          I WOULD DEFINITELY LET THE COMMISSION KNOW. 
          IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CONSIDER THE COMMENTS FROM RESIDENTS. 
          UM, OUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION IS THAT WE FOUND NO CONCERNS OR RECORD OF ANY OF THE, UM, CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP TO, UM, YOUR ATTENTION. 
          OKAY. 
          SO COULD, COULD, COULD THERE BE A POSSIBLE THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A TRAFFIC STUDY AND THE WIDTH OTHER STREET? BECAUSE I, I HAVE THOSE TYPE OF STREETS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I DENY THAT WE, THAT I, THAT I REQUESTED A DENIAL FOR, FOR A DUPLEX FOR THE SAME EXACT REASON. 
          AND BECAUSE THE STREET WAS TOO NARROW. 
          AND IT MIGHT NOT BE NARROW IN A SENSE THAT, THAT SOME MIGHT THINK, BUT THERE ARE STREETS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WE ALL KNOW THAT IF A CAR IS PARKED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREETS, YOU CAN BARELY GET DOWN THE STREET. 
          AND YES. 
          AND MAYBE IT HAS NOT BEEN ANY COMPLAINTS. 
          COULD YOU? AND THAT'S A MAJOR CONSIDERATION. 
          AM I CORRECT MA'AM? I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION, BUT I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO TRAFFIC STUDY CONDUCTED BY EITHER THE APPLICANT OR THE CITY. 
          UM, WE ALSO FOUND NO REASON TO REQUIRE ONE THROUGH OUR ENGINEERING REVIEW, GIVEN THE PROPOSED SIZE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, OR THE LACK OF ANY EVIDENCE OF SPEEDING OR LACK OF ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, CAN, LEMME, CAN I SPEAK WITH THE DEVELOPER? THE DEVELOPER? THANK YOU. 
          UH, THANK YOU SIR. 
          THE DEVELOPER, PLEASE. 
          UM, OH, AGAIN, WE CAN'T ASK YOU TO PUT THE RESTRICTIONS IN, BUT IS THERE A CONSIDERATION TO HAVE REAR LOADING GARAGES INSTEAD OF, UH, STREET LOADING GARAGES THAT COULD POSSIBLY MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD? BECAUSE THE CONCERN, IT SEEMS AS A CONCERN WITH THE NEIGHBORS, BECAUSE OF THE CREEK IN THE BACK, THERE'S NOT ROOM FOR REAR ENTRY GARAGES. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          UH, ONLY ON THE, ONLY ON THE TWO EDGES, EXCUSE ME. 
          ONLY ON THE TWO EDGES ON KERN WOOD AND BY, UM, AND BY THE ALLEYWAY. 
          ONLY THOSE TWO LOTS OUT OF THE 12. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT. 
          SO I PUT MY URBAN PLANNING HAT ON LIKE THAT MICHAEL, UM, UH, IN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT I'VE SEEN, INCLUDING THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, LOST MIRAGE GOES DOWN, UM, AND THEN HOUSES PICK UP AGAIN AS PASTOR LOT. 
          RIGHT. 
          [03:50:01]
I NOTICED ON THE SIDE WHERE YOU'RE BUILDING THEIR HOMES, LIKE THE YOUNG LADY WHO WAS SPEAKING HER HOME IS ON THAT ALLEY. 
          WELL, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET, THE DEVELOPMENT IS SHORTER. 
          THERE ARE NO HOMES FACING IT. 
          HOW LONG WILL YOUR DRIVEWAYS BE TO YOUR HOUSE? DO YOU HAVE ROOM TO MAKE LONGER DRIVEWAYS? I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH MAYBE WITH I'M NOT. 
          I BELIEVE THE RE THE REQUIREMENT IS 25 FEET OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE. 
          UNDERSTOOD, UNDERSTOOD. 
          TO MY UNDERSTANDING. 
          UM, SO MY QUESTION WAS IF THERE WAS EVEN ROOM TO MAKE FOR LONGER, LONGER DRIVEWAYS? YEAH, SOME OF THOSE LOTS ARE OVER 200 FEET TO THE REAR. 
          GOTCHA. 
          SOME, SOME ARE SHORTER BECAUSE OF THE CREEK. 
          MM-HMM . 
          THE PROPERTY LINE VARIES. 
          IT WAVY IT WAVES. 
          SO SOME OF 'EM ARE 150 FEET. 
          SOME OF 'EM ARE OVER 200. 
          GOTCHA. 
          AND 50 FEET. 
          SO, SO WHAT I'VE SEEN IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS IN URBAN DESIGN WHEN THEY'RE, WHEN THEY'RE HOMES FACING WITH BACK GARAGES FACING A SMALL STREET, THE HOMES ON THE OTHER SIDE USUALLY HAVE LONGER DRIVEWAYS FOR PEOPLE TO PULL THEIR CARS OFF OF THE STREET. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO THINK ABOUT THAT DESIGN STANDARD AS YOU MOVE FORWARD. 
          UM, BECAUSE THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD KIND OF MEETS THAT DESIGN STANDARD WHEN THE HOMES PICK UP, DEVELOPMENT STOPS ON THE OTHER SIDE, OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS I'VE SEEN, THE HOMES DON'T STOP, BUT THE, THERE ARE LONG DRIVEWAYS ON THE OTHER SIDE. 
          THEY DON'T HAVE BACK GARAGES ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET. 
          THEY HAVE THE LONGER DRIVEWAYS FOR CARS TO PULL OFF OF THE STREET. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT THERE. 
          I'M NOT SURE IF YOU CONSIDER IT OR NOT, BUT THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER FORESITE, PLEASE. 
          SO FIRST OF ALL, I WANTED TO CLARIFY YOUR, YOU QUESTION ABOUT THE TWO CAR GARAGES. 
          IS THAT A TWO CAR GARAGE PER UNIT OR TWO CAR GARAGE? FOR, FOR BOTH. 
          BOTH OF THE DUPLEX, BOTH UNITS IN THE DUPLEX. 
          EACH DUPLEX. 
          THAT WOULD BE FOR EACH DUPLEX. 
          FOR EACH DUPLEX, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          SO IF YOU COULD CLARIFY THAT IN YOUR, UH, DEED RESTRICTION AS WELL. 
          THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD IS, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE, UH, THE, THE MAP, UH, THE AERIAL VIEW ON PAGE 15 OF THE CASE REPORT AND THE HOMES TO THE SOUTH OF YOUR DEVELOPMENT. 
          THERE ARE LOOKS LIKE ABOUT SEVEN HOMES. 
          ALL OF THESE HOMES HAVE A REAR, UH, ACCESS GARAGE, UH, ALLEYWAY. 
          UH, AND, AND THEY'RE ALONG THAT CREEK TOO. 
          SO I I I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY, UH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO CONTINUE THAT ALLEYWAY. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT THEY HAVE WITH THESE OTHER UNITS, THESE, THESE PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH, THE CREEK CHANGES. 
          IT DOESN'T GO IN THE STRAIGHT LINE. 
          SO IT MOVES FURTHER EAST OR FURTHER UP. 
          AND SO THERE'S NO ROOM TO PUT IN AN ALLEYWAY. 
          WE DID EXPLORE THAT, BUT IT JUST, IT, IT WON'T WORK. 
          AND ALSO, UH, PART OF THAT, I'M NOT, I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE NEW FLOOD MAP, BUT PART OF THAT IS FLOODPLAIN BECAUSE OF THE CREEK. 
          AND WE CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING WITHIN THAT AREA. 
          I, I, I WOULD JUST ADD THAT THE SOUTHERN PART SOUTH OF THIS LOT, THE, THE CREEK HAS BEEN CHANNELIZED, UH, EITHER BY THE CITY OR WHOMEVER. 
          BUT IN THIS, THIS PART, IT'S MORE OF A NATURAL CREEK. 
          AND GENERALLY, I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANNA SEE MORE CREEK CHANNELIZATION IN, IN LITTLE CONCRETE DISHES. 
          UM, BUT THAT'S WHY THERE'S A BIT OF A DIFFERENCE IN THE SPREAD OF THE, THE WET AREA VERSUS THE DRY AREA THERE. 
          SO I WOULD SAY THAT MAY BE A FACTOR IN HOW MUCH SPACE IS AVAILABLE, UH, FOR SUCH DRIVEWAYS AND ALLEYS. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO, UH, IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 34. 
          UH, ONE FOUR, GIMME ONE SECOND. 
          OKAY. 
          2, 4, 5. 
          OKAY, I GOT IT. 
          1 4 9. 
          SO I GOT IT. 
          SO IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 4 5 DASH 1 49, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DENY THE ZONING CHANGE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 
          IF I GET A SECOND, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. 
          YOU DO HAVE A SECOND. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANK? YES. 
          UH, UH, MR. WALKER, UH, THANK YOU FOR, FOR ALL THE, THE HARD WORK, UH, THAT YOU PUT INTO THIS. 
          UH, WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHERE I FELT LIKE I HAD TO ESCORT YOU, UH, OUT OF IT, BUT YOU, UH, HANDLED IT, UH, WITH GRACE AND, AND TO THE BEST THAT YOU COULD, UH, ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMUNITY'S, UH, CONCERNS. 
          SOME OF THE, I'VE CIRCULATED AMONG THE COMMISSION, UH, THE 20, THE 20 PLUS, 
          [03:55:02]
UH, PEOPLE WHO SUPPORTED, UH, UH, THIS DEVELOPMENT, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. 
          BUT THERE ARE ALSO, UM, ABOUT 50 PEOPLE WHO HAVE OPPOSED THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND SOME OF IT, THE REASON IT'S CONSISTENT TO SOME OF THE, THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED AROUND THIS HORSESHOE BEFORE, YOU KNOW, SETTING ASIDE THE, IT'S SOMEWHAT INCONSISTENT TO THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT THAT'S AROUND. 
          I MEAN, THERE IS ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UH, I WOULD SAY 98, 90 9% OF THEM OR, OR ONE STORY HOMES. 
          AND THE WAY THAT THIS IS SITUATED, IT'S A SMALL PIECE TO A LARGER NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THE STREET THAT'S IN CONTROVERSY, AND I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT THERE IS MERIT TO SOME, TO SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS NOW. 
          THEY WOULD LIKE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THERE. 
          THEY'RE RECOGNIZED THAT HAVING HOMES THERE ARE A GOOD USE OF LAND. 
          BUT THE QUESTION COMES IN AT WHY DUPLEXES AND WHAT THE ADDITIONAL DENSITY FOR THIS PARTICULAR PART OF THE STREET WILL THIS CREATE ISSUES. 
          WE HAVE NOT DONE A, THERE HAS NOT BEEN A, A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, AND I HAVE NOT HEARD, UH, WITH ANY REASONABLE CERTAINTY THAT THIS WILL NOT CAUSE ISSUE FOR THIS PORTION, UH, OF THE STREET. 
          UH, SO WITH THAT, I, I THINK THIS IS A, A GOOD AREA TO DEVELOP HOMES, AND I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE THAT DOOR OPEN, UH, FOR YOU. 
          UH, BUT AT THIS TIME, I, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT FOR THOSE REASONS. 
          THAT'S MY MOTION. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, UM, I'LL NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          UM, I THINK THIS IS AN EXCELLENT CASE. 
          I THINK IT'S AN EXCELLENT USE OF LAND. 
          I THINK IT'S CONSISTENT WITH FORWARD DALLAS. 
          UM, THIS IS NOT MULTIFAMILY. 
          THIS IS SINGLE FAMILY. 
          UM, TO OPPOSE IT ON THE GROUNDS OF DENSITY, I THINK IS, IS, IS UNREASONABLE. 
          THIS IS A EXTREMELY MODEST, UH, DENSITY ABOUT FOUR UNITS PER ACRE, WHICH IS EXTRAORDINARILY LOW. 
          UM, I THINK IT'S A VERY THOUGHTFUL, VERY HIGH QUALITY DESIGN. 
          WE HAVE A NUMBER OF CASES DOWN HERE WHERE DUPLEXES ARE CRITICIZED FOR BEING BOXY, FOR LOOKING LIKE DOCTOR'S OFFICES, FOR HAVING FLAT ROOFS. 
          IT ET FOR NOT HAVING ANY FACADE ARTICULATION. 
          UM, THIS DESIGN THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED, UH, IS TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM THAT, UM, AND WOULD SOLVE MANY, MANY PROBLEMS IN MANY OF OUR OTHER DUPLEX CASES. 
          UM, THERE IS NOTHING PARTICULARLY UNIQUE ABOUT THIS STREET. 
          I THINK WE ESTABLISHED THAT EARLIER. 
          UH, ON THE SUBJECT OF TWO STORIES. 
          UH, ANY OF THE HOMEOWNERS, UH, OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD CAN BUILD TWO STORIES BY RIGHT TODAY WITHOUT COMING DOWN HERE. 
          SO THERE'S NOTHING, UH, EXTRAORDINARY OR ARE PARTICULARLY LIBERAL ABOUT ALLOWING, UH, THIS GENTLEMAN TO BUILD TWO STORY DUPLEXES. 
          IT'S ALLOWED IN THIS ZONING CATEGORY. 
          UM, THE QUESTION OF WHERE THE DRIVEWAYS ARE IS NOT ADDRESSED IN R 75 ZONING. 
          IT'S NOT, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH ZONING. 
          UM, SHOULD HAD OUR APPLICANT PUT AN ALLEY BEHIND THESE DUPLEXES, THEN HE WOULD'VE BEEN, HE WOULD'VE SUCCUMBED TO CRITICISM FOR, UH, DAMAGING THE CREEK. 
          AND SO WE HAVE CERTAIN APPLICANTS THAT, UM, UH, CAN'T, YOU KNOW, JUST, UH, NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED IN A SENSE, UM, WHEN, WHEN THEY COME DOWN HERE. 
          SO I, I APPLAUD YOUR, UM, YOUR PRESERVATION OF THE CREEK AND, UH, AM MORE THAN WILLING TO ACCEPT DRIVEWAYS AS A, UH, UH, PRICE OF THAT. 
          UM, THE FACT THIS, UH, THIS APPLICANT HAS ALREADY, UH, APPARENTLY BEEN THROUGH QUITE A BIT OF ZONING REVIEW WITH THE CITY AND, UH, PASSED WITH FLYING COLORS. 
          AND SO AGAIN, UH, THAT, THAT WOULD INDICATE TO ME THAT, UH, THERE IS NOTHING, UH, UH, DAMAGING ABOUT THIS CASE, UH, WHATSOEVER. 
          SO, UM, I, UH, WOULD JUST LIKE TO OFFER, UH, MY SUPPORT FOR THE CASE AND, UH, WE WILL, UH, JUST REITERATE THAT I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HEMPTON. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          UM, I DO SUPPORT, UM, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN'S, UM, MOTION. 
          I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT HOLDING IT UNDER ADVISEMENT. 
          I DO THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT IN THIS CASE, THAT THIS APPLICANT HAS GOTTEN RIGHT AND RESPONDS 
          [04:00:01]
TO MANY OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALK ABOUT. 
          I THINK MY PRIMARY CONCERN IS WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED TO US AS YOUR INTENT IS NOT WHAT IS THE CASE BEFORE US. 
          AND THAT GIVES ME REALLY SIGNIFICANT PAUSE IN THAT THE THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN OFFERED TO TRY TO ADDRESS COMMUNITY CONCERNS. 
          I THINK THAT YOU PROBABLY COULD, UM, REVIEW HOW YOU'RE ORIENTING SOME OF THESE THINGS. 
          I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. 
          I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING INHERENTLY, YOU KNOW, UNUSUAL ABOUT THE STREET, BUT I THINK THE GEOMETRY OF IT MAY BE CON CONTRIBUTING TO THE CONCERNS THAT ARE BEING RAISED BY THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND I THINK THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT COULD ABSOLUTELY BE ACCOMMODATED, UM, AS YOU ARE THINKING ABOUT YOUR DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TO THE EXTENT OF PUTTING ALLEYS IN THE BACK OR CHANNELIZING CREEKS OR MAKING ANY DRASTIC CHANGES. 
          BUT JUST, UM, AND IT'S SOMETHING I IT SOUNDS LIKE STAFF WOULD BE WILLING TO SUPPORT WORKING WITH YOU ON. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I DO THINK THAT WE'RE VERY CLOSE. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN WOULD CONSIDER THAT AS A, YOU KNOW, ALTERNATE MOTION IF THAT NEEDED TO BE THE CASE. 
          BUT I'LL, YOU KNOW, LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING COMMENTS FROM MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS. 
          UH, YES, I, I HAVE CONSIDERED THAT AND I'VE TALKED TO THE APPLICANT. 
          AND I'LL ASK YOU RIGHT NOW, UH, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO HOLD THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL WE GET THINGS WORKED OUT? I WOULD LIKE FOR THE DECISION TO BE MADE TODAY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO. 
          WELL, THAT THE MOTION STILL STANDS. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, FOLLOWED BY VICE CHAIR RUBIN. 
          WELL, I WAS GONNA ECHO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S SUGGESTION THAT THIS CASE COULD PROBABLY USE A LITTLE MORE TIME, BECAUSE I THINK THAT A LOT OF THE DETAILS THAT THE APPLICANT IS OFFERING ARE NOT REFLECTED IN WHAT'S BEFORE US. 
          UM, I UNDERSTAND AS A DEVELOPER WHY YOU DO NOT WANT THIS TO LINGER. 
          AND I USUALLY PREFER NOT TO HOLD CASES. 
          I UNDERSTAND THE FINANCIAL REASONS FOR THAT. 
          UM, AND I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE A LOT OF HEARTBURN WITH WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING. 
          HOWEVER, WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED TO US AT THE HEARING IS NOT WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED TO US ON PAPER. 
          AND THAT GIVES ME A LOT OF CONCERN BECAUSE ONCE, IF WE WERE TO PASS THIS, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE A LOT OF LEEWAY TO DO SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO THE COMMUNITY AND WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IN THIS HEARING. 
          UM, AND IF THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT WERE TIGHTENED UP IN WRITING, THAT WOULD GIMME A LOT MORE COMFORT BECAUSE THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT, AS I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO DO, I THINK FITS IN VERY NICELY WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY COMMUNITY. 
          I THINK THAT PRESERVATION OF THE CREEK IN LIEU OF AN ALLEY IS A VERY SMART DESIGN FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. 
          I THINK THAT PROVIDING THE TWO CAR GARAGE HELPS MITIGATE CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC. 
          I DON'T SEE A NEED FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY ON THIS. 
          I THINK THAT'S PREPOSTEROUS. 
          UM, THERE'S NO WAY THAT 14, OR I'M SORRY, 24 UNITS IS GOING TO CREATE THE KIND OF TRAFFIC THAT ANYBODY COULD POSSIBLY BE CONCERNED ABOUT. 
          UM, AND I THINK TWO STORIES IN ANY KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD IS JUST THE WORLD WE LIVE IN. 
          WE LIVE IN A CITY. 
          UH, THERE'S NO GUARANTEE IN ANY KIND OF SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY WILL REMAIN ONE STORY UNLESS YOU'VE TAKEN SOME SORT OF EFFORT TO DO AN OVERLAY OR, UH, SOME OTHER SORT OF PRESERVATION TOOL THAT WOULD CAP IT AT ONE STORY. 
          AND FRANKLY, I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE VERY DIFFICULT TO PASS IN OUR CURRENT ENVIRONMENT. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, ABSENT SOME GREATER PROTECTIONS IN WRITING THAT REFLECT WHAT THE APPLICANT SAYS HE WANTS TO DO, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO GET BEHIND THIS PROPOSAL GIVEN WHAT COULD HAPPEN WITH JUST THE BASE ZONING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT'S TRUE. 
          YES. 
          I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO, UM, SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          UM, THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT REALLY ARE TOP OF MIND FOR ME, IS, ONE, I SEE THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AS BEING EXACTLY IN LINE WITH WHAT, UM, WE HAVE SAID IN OUR RECENTLY PASSED FORWARD DALLAS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT TALKS ABOUT CHANGES TO COMMUNITY, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE THIS ONE. 
          AND IT SAYS THAT IT SHOULD ADD HOUSING IN A WAY THAT'S GENTLE, EQUITABLE, INCREMENTAL, AND SENSITIVE TO THE EXISTING CONTEXT WHILE DOING SO IN A MANNER THAT STRENGTHENS THESE NEIGHBORHOODS AND INCORPORATES INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORTS. 
          [04:05:01]
AND IT TALKS ABOUT NOT, IT TALKS ABOUT LOCATING THE INCOMPATIBLE MULTIPLEX, TOWNHOME, DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE. 
          AND WHAT I SEE HERE, PARTICULARLY WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY AND HOW THIS, YOU KNOW, AREA IS LAID OUT, IS THAT THIS AREA IS AT SORT OF THE BOTTOM OF A VALLEY FOR, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, WHERE THESE HOUSES WON'T LOOM OVER THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST BASED ON THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA, AND THAT THIS REALLY IS SENSITIVE TO WHAT IS, UM, NEARBY. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I, I HAVE HEARD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT DRIVE APPROACHES AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, I HESITATE TO USE THAT AS A REASON TO JUSTIFY DENIAL OR EVEN POSTPONEMENT BECAUSE WE CAN FINE TUNE EVERY DETAIL HERE AT THE HORSESHOE, OR WE CAN SORT OF LOOK AT THE PRACTICAL REALITIES OF WHERE THIS APPLICANT IS IN HIS OWN PROCESS AND THE ENGINEERING WORK THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. 
          AND I THINK THE UNLIKELY, I THINK THE, THE LIKELIHOOD OF GETTING A PRODUCT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S BEEN SHOWN TO US TODAY BY THE APPLICANT IS PRETTY LOW. 
          I THINK, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF WE DIDN'T HARD CODE THINGS INTO A PD OR DEED RESTRICTIONS, I THINK THE ODDS ARE VERY HIGH THAT WE WILL GET WHAT WE'VE BEEN SHOWN. 
          UM, SO BASED ON SORT OF THE PARTICULARS OF THE SITUATION, I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE MOVING THIS FORWARD TO COUNSEL AS IS, AND I WON'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TO DENY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT? UH, YEAH, THIS IS, THIS IS A TOUGH ONE. 
          UM, PART OF, PART OF THE ISSUE I THINK WE HAVE IS REFERRING TO DUPLEXES AS MULTIFAMILY. 
          IT, IT, IT'S A SCARE TACTIC. 
          UM, IT, IT, THEY'RE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          I GREW UP IN THEM. 
          UM, I LIVED IN THE CITY THAT DWELLED WITH THEM. 
          THE LANDLORD LIVED IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET. 
          HER DAUGHTER WAS IN A DUPLEX NEXT DOOR TO US. 
          UM, IT, IT WAS A WAY OF LIFE. 
          IT'S A WAY OF LIFE FOR MILLIONS OF PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY. 
          UM, BUT THERE'S A STREET MILL CREEK ROAD IN, IN LANCASTER THAT'S SET UP VERY SIMILAR TO THIS. 
          THAT SETUP IS HOW I MENTIONED IT, SIDE GARAGES ON ONE SIDE WHERE A CREEK IS. 
          AND ON THE OTHER SIDE, LONG DRIVEWAYS, I HOPE. 
          UM, MY HOPE IS THAT THAT DESIGN, UM, IS, IS STILL IMPLEMENTED. 
          I DO FEEL LIKE FRONT LOADED GARAGES ACROSS THE STREET FROM FRONT FACING HOMES WITH BACK LOADING GARAGES WILL BE A SAFER PRACTICE FOR THAT STREET AND THE MOTION. 
          SO I THINK THAT THIS DESIGN IS HERE. 
          IT, IT IS WHAT WHAT'S DESIGNED GETS US THERE. 
          MAKING THE DRIVEWAY A LITTLE LONGER GETS US THERE EVEN CLOSER. 
          SO I'M, I'M AT HOLDING OUR APPROVAL. 
          UM, I, I JUST CAN'T SEE ME SUPPORTING A DENIAL ON THIS CASE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HERBERT. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT, FOLLOW BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          I'D LIKE TO, UH, REFER, UH, I, I WOULD, FIRST OF ALL, I, I SUPPORT, UH, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN'S, UH, MOTION. 
          AND I WOULD LIKE TO REFER US TO THE FOR DALLAS PLAN THAT WAS PASSED, YOU KNOW, BY THE CPC AND THE CITY COUNCIL LAST YEAR. 
          IT SPEAKS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. 
          AND IT SAYS, I QUOTE, CHANGES TO AREAS WITHIN COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS MUST PRIORITIZE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. 
          THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SHOULD BE INITIATED EARLY IN THE PROCESS, UH, THAT IS BRINGING ABOUT THE CHANGE. 
          AND IT SHOULD BE GIVEN SIGNIFICANT WEIGHT IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS THAT OCCURS. 
          AND IT, IT'S CLEAR THAT THE MAJORITY OF RESIDENTS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSE THIS DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND SO I FEEL THAT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT HAS BEEN DONE, AND I FEEL THAT WE'D BE DERELICT BY IGNORING, YOU KNOW, THE WISHES OF THE COMMUNITY. 
          I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT, UH, IN THE, UH, FOR DALLAS PLAN, UNDER COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL, IT STATES A LOCATIONAL STRATEGY WHEN DEVELOPMENT OF DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPES IS PROPOSED. 
          LOCATION SHOULD BE AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION ALONG WITH COMMUNITY FEEDBACK SURROUNDING CONTEXT AND EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE AND AMENITIES. 
          INCOMPATIBLE REZONING OF INDIVIDUAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, ESPECIALLY MIDBLOCK IS CONSIDERED IS GENERALLY DISCOURAGED. 
          YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS, UH, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND IS A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD WITH EVERYONE THAT HAS, UH, ALLEYS AND IN, IN, IN REAR LOADING, YOU KNOW, UH, GARAGES. 
          AND HERE WE'RE CHANGING THIS COMPLETELY, UH, TO A SITUATION NOW WHERE IT'S DUPLEXES 
          [04:10:01]
WITH FRONT LOADING, YOU KNOW, UH, ACCESS AS OPPOSED TO THE REAR LOADING ACCESS THAT IS COMMON IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND, UM, I LOOKED AT THE, UH, STYLES AND I WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCEPT THIS CHANGE IF THE STYLES WERE THE SECOND STYLE WHERE YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE GARAGES JUTTING OUT IN THE FRONT. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT SECOND STYLE HAD, IT LOOKED LIKE A, A, A HOME THAT IS SIMILAR TO THE HOMES THAT ARE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND I WOULD ACCEPT THIS PROPOSAL AND PLAN IF, IF ALL THE HOMES WERE THAT STYLE, BUT NOT, NOT, NOT WITH THE HOMES. 
          UH, MANY OF THE HOMES BEING WITH THAT STYLE, WITH THE TWO GARAGES IN THE FRONT THAT ARE, THAT ARE FACING OUT, JETTING OUT, UH, UH, IN FRONT OF THE DOOR, UH, THAT, THAT THIS LOOKED TOO MUCH LIKE A DUPLEX. 
          SO FOR ALL THESE REASONS, I, I WILL OPPOSE THIS MOTION, BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE BODY TO PUT THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT, REALLY, UH, SO THAT WE CAN WORK THESE ISSUES OUT. 
          I I, I'M LOATHED TO MAKE THIS ZONING CHANGE, BUT I'M WILLING TO MAKE THE ZONING CHANGE IF SOME CONSIDERATIONS ARE ADDRESSED. 
          COMMISSIONER WETHER, UM, THIS WAS ONE OF THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE I, I, I WANTED, UH, THAT, THAT HOLDING UP ON THE ADVISEMENT, BUT IF THE APPLICANT IS SAYING THAT HE'S, THAT HE WANTS A DECISION TODAY, SO HE KNOW WHICH WAY HE WOULD WANT TO MOVE, UM, I HAVE BEEN, I I I, I'VE HAD CASES LIKE THIS WHERE THE STREET, UM, WHEN THAT, THAT NOT EVEN HAVING TO TALK TO THE NEIGHBORS, KNOWING THAT THE STREET, THE POSSIBILITY OF ON STREET PARKING AND, AND THIS AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL WHERE THEY WOULD'VE PROBABLY, UM, ONLY GOT SIX ADDITIONAL HOUSES, THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING 12 ADDITIONAL HOUSES, WHICH WOULD, WHICH COULD POSSIBLY BE 24 ADDITIONAL VEHICLES PER SE. 
          AND, AND THEY'RE SAYING, HEY, WE'RE ALREADY, WE ALREADY HAVE THIS ISSUE. 
          I CAN'T, I WANNA SU, I'M GONNA SUPPORT COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN. 
          UM, ONLY BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS SAYING WE'RE MOVING FORWARD. 
          UM, IT COULD HAVE POSSIBLY BEEN, UM, A WAY THAT WE COULD HAVE, UM, MOVED. 
          I MEAN, UM, HELD THIS, UM, IF HIS, SOME OF HIS LIVES BY HIS OWN A MISSION, SOME OF HIS LIVES IS 200 FEET DEEP, THERE ARE 200 FEET DEEP. 
          UH, MY LOT IS 135 FEET DEEP IN SOUTH DALLAS. 
          AND I HAVE A WAY TO AT LEAST EITHER PULL TO THE BACK OR HAVE A, A A, A DEEPER DRIVEWAY. 
          UM, WE'RE HAVING THE SAME ISSUE WHERE THERE'S SHORTER DRIVEWAYS. 
          PEOPLE ARE ONLY, DEVELOPERS ARE ONLY HITTING THE 25 FEET MARK. 
          UM, SO I'M, THE COMMUNITY HAS SPOKEN AND ALSO THAT WE WANNA ALSO, UM, KEEP THE INTEGRITY OF COMMUNITIES WHEN THESE, WHEN NEED, WHEN THERE'S BEEN MEETINGS LIKE THIS AND THERE'S BEEN, UM, INPUT AS STRONG AS IT HAS BEEN ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE, US IGNORING THE COMMUNITY IS US SAYING THAT IT DOESN'T MATTER. 
          YES, WE NEED ADDITIONAL HOUSING. 
          YES, WE NEED ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS, UM, TO SUPPORT, UH, TO CLOSE THE GAP ON, ON THE SHORTAGE OF HOUSING. 
          BUT WHEN A COMMUNITY COMES UP, IF THIS SAME COMMUNITY WOULD'VE BEEN, UH, ON THE OTHER SIDE, THEY, ON ON THE OTHER SIDE OF 30, OR IN MORE, UH, UM, AFFLUENT NEIGHBORHOOD, WE WOULDN'T EVEN BE QUESTIONING THIS. 
          WE, WE, WE HAVE TO GO WHAT OUR COMMUNITIES WANT, EVEN THOUGH WHATEVER OUR PERSONAL, UM, FEELINGS MIGHT BE AS IT RELATES TO THE, UH, TO HOUSING, UM, I, I, I WOULD, I WANNA SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY FIRST, UM, BEFORE ANYTHING. 
          I HOPE THE DEVELOPER COULD GO BACK AND THE TWO STORY HOUSING, THAT DOESN'T BOTHER ME BECAUSE IF HE CAN BUILD IT BY RIGHT, HE'S GONNA BUILD IT BY RIGHT. 
          EITHER IF THERE'S A DUPLEX OR A, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. 
          UM, BUT YEAH, WE MIGHT DON'T NEED A TRAFFIC STUDY. 
          BUT WE ALSO KNOW, AND THIS IS PART OF THE REASON, WHEN WE ARE ONLY LOOKING AT GOOGLE, EASY TO DETERMINE WHETHER COMMUNITY, WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS TRUE FOR WHO'S MERIT, WHEN WE'RE ONLY LOOKING AT GOOGLE TO IDENTIFY THESE PROPERTIES. 
          BUT WHEN YOU DRIVING THROUGH NEIGHBORHOODS AND YOU UNDERSTAND AND LOOKING AT THESE LOTS, YOU GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING FROM WHAT THEY'RE SAYING. 
          AND, AND WE DON'T DO THAT AROUND THIS HORSESHOE ANYMORE. 
          MY UNDERSTANDING, WE USED TO GO OUT TO SITES. 
          AND SO WHENEVER I HEARD, WE LOOKED AT GOOGLE AND WE LOOKED AT THIS AND WE DIDN'T GO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT CAUSES CO CONCERN ALSO. 
          'CAUSE WE'RE MAKING A JUDGMENT BASED OFF OF WHAT WE THINK WE SEE IN THE SKY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, SO THE DISADVANTAGE OF, OF SPEAKING LAST IS IT'S ALL BEEN SAID. 
          SO 
          [04:15:01]
I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I, I WILL RESPECTFULLY NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION, UH, FOR ALL THE REASONS. 
          THE STATE ABOUT COMMISSIONER HOUSER, VICE CHAIR RUBIN, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND COMMISSIONER HERBERT. 
          UH, AND JUST IN ADDITION, YOU KNOW, LOOKING, LOOKING AT THE SITE, THIS IS KIND OF A, AN END CAP SITE, IF YOU WILL. 
          IT'S A DIFFICULT SITE. 
          AND IT, YOU KNOW, IT TELLS YOU A LOT ABOUT, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT IN OUR CITY HERE TODAY AND THE LACK OF HOUSING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. 
          YOU KNOW, PROPERTIES LIKE THIS WITH THAT HAVE A CREEK IN THEM, UH, TO FIND PLACES TO, TO DEVELOP THE MUCH NEEDED HOUSING. 
          I THINK THE CREEK IN, IN FACT, IN THIS CASE, IS GONNA BE, UH, AN AMAZING AMENITY. 
          I THINK IT'S GONNA BE, UH, POTENTIALLY SOMETHING NICE, UH, TO BE A PART OF AND TO HAVE AS PART OF AN AMENITY FOR THE FOLKS LIVING HERE. 
          UM, AND SO I, I AGREE IT COULD BE A LITTLE BIT BETTER. 
          UH, BUT, UH, AT THIS POINT I WOULD BE, UH, COMFORTABLE MOVING IT ON TO COUNCIL. 
          UH, AND WITH THAT, LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE. 
          DISTRICT ONE? NO, CAN, CAN I ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION REALLY QUICK? IS IT, IS THE MOTION FOR DENIAL WITHOUT OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE? YES. 
          LET ME REREAD THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YES. 
          YES. 
          THE MOTION ON THE TABLE MADE BY COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON IS TO DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 
          AND THAT'S, THAT'S OUR COMMENTS WERE BASED ON THAT MOTION. 
          UH, EITHER IN SUPPORT OR IN OPPOSITION. 
          DISTRICT ONE? NO. 
          DISTRICT TWO? YES. 
          DISTRICT THREE? NO. 
          DISTRICT FOUR? YES. 
          DISTRICT FIVE? NO. 
          DISTRICT SIX. 
          DISTRICT SEVEN? YES. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT? YES. 
          DISTRICT NINE. 
          DISTRICT NINE? NO. 
          DISTRICT 10? NO. 
          DISTRICT 11? NO. 
          DISTRICT 12 ABSENT. 
          DISTRICT 13, NO. 
          DISTRICT 14. 
          YES. 
          AND PLACE 15. 
          NO. 
          MOTION FAILS. 
          UH, DO WE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION? OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSE WRIGHT? YES. 
          UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR IN, UH, THE MATTER OF Z 2 45 DASH 1 49. 
          I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. 
          DOES THAT, YEAH. 
          DOES THAT INCLUDE THE VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTION? UH, UH, UH, BY THE APPLICANT AT THE PODIUM? IT DOES INCLUDE THE VOLUNTARY DEED RESTRICTION BY THE APPLICANT AT THE PODIUM. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          AND COMMISSIONER SIMS FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS. 
          OKAY, LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE ON THAT, PLEASE. 
          I HAVE A COMMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          PLEASE, COMMISSIONER, THIS TYPE OF INCIDENT IS EXACTLY WHY THOSE WHO WERE AGAINST FORWARD DALLAS CAME UP. 
          'CAUSE THE COMMUNITIES WOULD NOT BE HEARD. 
          THIS COMMUNITY HAS HAD, WE'VE HEARD OUR COMMISSION, THE COMMISSIONER FOR THIS DISTRICT SAID THAT HE'S HAD, THAT THEY'VE HAD MULTIPLE COMMUNITY MEETINGS. 
          WE NOT, NOT ONLY, ESPECIALLY IN THE SOUTHERN SECTOR, VERY SELDOM DO WE GET THIS MANY INPUT OVER, OVER 50 PEOPLE COMING IN SAYING WE ARE IN OPPOSITION. 
          THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN IN OUR DISTRICT. 
          IT'S HARD ENOUGH FOR US TO COME SPEAK ON THE BEHALF OR EVEN SHOW UP BECAUSE OF THIS. 
          BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW IS A KICK IN THE FACE TO THIS COMMUNITY. 
          AND I CAN PROMISE YOU THIS WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN. 
          THIS WOULD NOT BE HAPPENING. 
          IT EITHER TO, TO EVEN VOTE TO NOT TO AT LEAST HOLD IT AND JUST PASS IT TO COUNCIL IS, IS BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT GOOGLE AND NOT GOING AND LISTEN TO THESE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          THIS IS ABSURD. 
          LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE. 
          OH, COMMISSIONER DR. 
          AS WELL. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN. 
          FELLOW COMMISSIONER HARBERT. 
          UH, UH, JUST TO, UH, TO DITTO WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER JUST SAID, THE COMMUNITY SPOKEN, AND NOT ONLY, UH, JUST A FEW PEOPLE, BUT I MEAN, OVERWHELMINGLY, UH, SPOKEN ABOUT THIS. 
          AND, UH, THIS IS A, A KICK IN THE FACE, A KICK IN THE GUT. 
          WE'VE HAD THESE SIMILAR CONVERSATIONS IN DIFFERENT CASES BEFORE WHERE SOMETHING'S BEING BUILT OUTSIDE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND THIS COMMISSION HAS VOTED A DIFFERENT WAY. 
          THERE'S ONLY ONE DIFFERENCE, REALLY, AND THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S ABOVE 30. 
          AND SO, UH, THIS LEAVES THE COMMUNITY, UH, FEELING LIKE THEY ARE NOT HEARD. 
          UH, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE SOMETHING LIKE SO PASSIONATE, UH, AS THE COMMUNITY HAS, HAS COME OUT IN OPPOSITION INTO THIS. 
          AND SO, UH, REALLY THEY FEEL LIKE THEY, THEY'VE BEEN DISREGARDED AND THERE'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE BUILT THERE. 
          BUT IF, IF THIS COMMISSION CHOOSE, CONTINUE TO CHOOSE WHERE DENSITY IS ALLOWED AND AND NOT ALLOWED BASED ON GEOGRAPHY, 
          [04:20:01]
I THINK THAT IS VERY SAD. 
          COMMENTARY. 
          NO FURTHER COMMENTS. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YES. 
          SO PART OF OUR JOB AS COMMISSIONERS IS EDUCATION. 
          IT'S, IT'S NOT TO RAISE FLAGS, IT'S NOT TO USE SCARE TACTICS, IT'S NOT TO BE POLITICAL WHEN WE MAKE DECISIONS, IT'S ABOUT THE LAND USE. 
          WHAT I HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY WERE VERY DISTINCT CONCERNS. 
          MY LIVED EXPERIENCES, MY EXPERIENCES AROUND THIS BODY IS SAYING THAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE LEGITIMATE AND THAT THIS DESIGN ADDRESSES THEIR CONCERNS. 
          IF YOU BUILD HOUSES THAT ARE JUST LIKE THEIRS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THEM, THERE WILL BE ON THE STREET PARKING AT IT. 
          THERE, IT'S ALREADY EVIDENT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          IF YOU GIVE PEOPLE A DRIVEWAY TO PULL OFF OF THE STREET, MORE OF THEM WILL. 
          AND THAT'S WHY I SUPPORTED THIS. 
          I WOULD'VE LIKED TO HOLD IT, BUT THIS IS WHY I SUPPORTED IT, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE'VE DONE A GREAT ENOUGH JOB EDUCATING THE NEIGHBORS, SHOWING THEM HOW WRONG THIS CAN GO IN AS A SINGLE DE SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AS IT IS TODAY. 
          UM, AND CONCERNS AROUND WHAT I HEARD WAS CONCERNS AROUND CRIME, CONCERNS AROUND THE ADDED DENSITY AND WHAT THAT WILL BRING. 
          WE CANNOT CRIMINALIZE RENTERS, CRIMINALIZE PEOPLE MOVING INTO DUPLEXES OR EVEN CONSIDER THEM BEING BAD PEOPLE. 
          I HEARD THAT WE NEED TO EDUCATE OUR PEOPLE BETTER ON THAT, UM, AND, AND DO A BETTER JOB AT MAKING DECISIONS AROUND IT. 
          I DO SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORS. 
          I UNDERSTAND THE NEIGHBORS. 
          I JUST FEEL LIKE THERE'S AN EDUCATION PIECE THAT THE NEIGHBORS NEED, UM, FOR THIS SPECIFIC LOT. 
          IT'S EVIDENT ALREADY THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WHEN TWO HOMES WITH BACK FACING GARAGES FACE EACH OTHER MORE PEOPLE PARK ON THE STREET. 
          THAT WON'T CHANGE TOMORROW. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENT THAT COMMISSIONER HOUSER FA BY, UH, VICE RUBIN? UH, I'D LIKE TO THANK COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR HIS, HIS REMARKS. 
          UH, JUST NOW, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT I THINK GENERALIZATIONS ABOUT WHAT GOES ON ABOVE AND BELOW INTERSTATE 30 IS REALLY NOT HELPFUL HERE AT THIS HORSESHOE. 
          AND THEN I, I WOULD FINALLY ADD THAT, UM, ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE DOW DOORS DOWN FROM MY SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS A VACANT LOT THAT HAS BEEN VACANT SINCE THE SUBDIVISION WAS BUILT. 
          SO IT'S ABOUT 40 YEARS, 50 YEARS, AND I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO, UH, ENTERTAIN OUR APPLICANT TO COME AND BUILD A DUPLEX ON THAT LOT. 
          AND THIS WOULD FOR THE RECORD NORTH OF 30. 
          THAT'S TRUE. 
          AND YEAH, UM, I HAVE A COUPLE THINGS THAT ARE TOP OF MIND FOR ME. 
          UM, FIRST OFF, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS OPPOSITION IN THE COMMUNITY AND THERE ARE PROBABLY MORE PEOPLE IN OPPOSITION THERE THAN THERE ARE IN SUPPORT. 
          BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN ABLE TO DRUM UP A MEANINGFUL AMOUNT OF SUPPORT FOR THIS CASE. 
          IN PARTICULAR, THE PEOPLE CLOSEST TO THE PROPERTY, UM, ACROSS THE STREET. 
          AND I THINK THAT IS AN IMPORTANT CRITERION TO CONSIDER. 
          UM, I, I THINK IT IS, UNLIKE COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, I, I DO THINK CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS NORTH AND SOUTH OF 30 ARE IMPORTANT HERE. 
          UM, AND WHILE THE CITY HAS HAD A SORTED HISTORY OF INJUSTICE BENEATH OR SOUTH OF OF I 30, I HAVE SEEN SOME HOPEFUL SIGNS WHEN IT COMES TO ADDING DENSITY THROUGH SHARED ACCESS AND TOWN HOME DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE MORE DENSE THAN THIS IN, IN RECENT YEARS. 
          UM, AT THIS COMMISSION OVER COMMUNITY OPPOSITION, I THINK OF EXAMPLES LIKE ON A FIRMER CHURCH SITE AND COMMISSIONER KINGSTON'S DISTRICT JUST SOUTH OF MOCKINGBIRD LANE OFF OF, I THINK IT WAS MCMILLAN, I THINK OF EXAMPLES OF SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENTS WITH SMALLER LOTS IN THIS, UM, IN COMMISSIONER HOUSE RIGHTS DISTRICT OFF OF GREENVALE AND IN LAKE HIGHLANDS. 
          SO I UNDERSTAND WE NEED TO BE VERY SENSITIVE TO MAKING SURE THERE IS PARODY AND EQUITY TO WHAT IS GOING ON NORTH AND SOUTH OF 30. 
          BUT I DON'T WANNA SELL THIS BODY IN COUNCIL'S EFFORTS SHORT IN RECENT YEARS TO ACCOMMODATE GREATER DENSITY NORTH OF 30. 
          YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO BE SENSITIVE AND HAVE GOOD DIALOGUE. 
          AND AS COMMISSIONER HERBERT SAID, YOU KNOW, BE GOOD STEWARDS AND, AND EDUCATE COMMUNITIES 
          [04:25:01]
WHEN REQUESTS LIKE THIS COME IN. 
          BUT WHAT I'M SEEING RIGHT HERE IS, IS CONSISTENT WITH SOME DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HAVE APPROVED, IF NOT LESSER DENSITY, THAN SOME DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HAVE APPROVED IN, IN RECENT YEARS IN VERY SIMILAR CONTEXT, NORTH OF I 30 IN, IN EAST DALLAS AND LAKE HIGHLANDS. 
          SO I AM COMFORTABLE, UM, SUPPORTING THIS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, LET'S TAKE A REC, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER SECOND ROUND. 
          THE, THE, THE APPLICANT TOOK IT OUT OF OUR HANDS WHEN HE SAID HE WANTED A DECISION TODAY, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN WAS WILLING TO TAKE THE, THE, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT THAT COMMISSIONER HAMPTON HAD HAD PUT THAT, THAT SHE WAS, UM, OFFERING. 
          AND THE, AND THE APPLICANT SAID NO, THAT HE WANTS TO KNOW TODAY. 
          AND, AND, AND AGAIN, ALL THOSE THAT WERE, EVERYTHING THAT WAS CONSIDERED, IT WAS CONSIDER ALL THOSE THINGS THAT WERE CONSIDERED IN LAKE HIGHLAND, GREENVILLE, THOSE STILL ARE, ARE NORTH OF 30, 20 PEOPLE VERSUS THE 50 PEOPLE. 
          AND THAT'S PROBABLY NOT INCLUDING WHO ALL COULD. 
          THE CONSIDERATION TO HOLD WOULD BE BETTER THAN THE CONSIDERATION TO PASS BECAUSE WE AS A BODY HA HAVE NOT WENT TO THE LOCATION. 
          WE DON'T KNOW WE HAVE. 
          PEOPLE ARE SAYING THIS IS WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT WE CAN GET THERE, HAVING LONGER DRIVEWAYS MAKE A DIFFERENCE. 
          I'M TELLING YOU THAT 'CAUSE I SIT IN MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THE DRIVEWAYS ARE AS SHORT AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE POSSIBLY 'CAUSE IT COST THE CONCRETE, RIGHT? AND BUILDING IT FURTHER BACK CAUSES MORE MONEY, WHATEVER THE CASE MIGHT BE. 
          THESE TYPE OF STREETS ARE, ARE MAYBE, UH, TWO STREETS OVER. 
          WE SEEN IT IN MY OWN DISTRICT WHERE ON IN THE SAME DAY, ONE STREET WAS CONSIDERABLY LIKE THIS PARTICULAR STREET THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          AND THE VERY NEXT STREET OVER. 
          I WAS LIKE, NOW WE, I I, I CAN'T, I CAN SUPPORT A DUPLEX IN THIS DISTRICT ON THIS STREET BECAUSE IT'S WIDER. 
          THESE THINGS ALL ACCOUNT FOR ACCOUNT FOR SOMETHING. 
          BUT THE, THE APPLICANT KIND OF TOOK IT OUT OF OUR HANDS TO EVEN GIVE CONSIDERATION TO TRY TO GET THERE BECAUSE THEY DON'T, BECAUSE HE DIDN'T WANNA WAIT. 
          IT COULD HAVE BEEN ONE MEETING OR TWO MEETING JUST TO GET HIM TO WHERE HE NEEDS TO GET TO WITH THE COMMUNITY. 
          ALRIGHT, LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE. 
          DISTRICT ONE. 
          PARDON ME, I'M SORRY. 
          LET ME JUST STATE THE, THE MOTION JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE. 
          WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOUSE RIGHTS SECOND BY COMMISSIONER SIMS TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH THE DEED RESTRICTION AS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AT THE PODIUM. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DISTRICT ONE? YES. 
          DISTRICT TWO? NO. 
          DISTRICT THREE? YES. 
          DISTRICT FOUR? NO. 
          DISTRICT FIVE? YES. 
          DISTRICT SIX. 
          DISTRICT SEVEN? NO. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT? NO. 
          DISTRICT NINE? YES. 
          DISTRICT 10? YES. 
          DISTRICT 11? YES. 
          DISTRICT DISTRICT 13? YES. 
          DISTRICT 14? YES. 
          AND PLACE 15? YES. 
          MOTION PASSES, UH, WITH FOREIGN OPPOSITION. 
          2, 4, 7 AND EIGHT. 
          IT IS TWO 15. 
          LET'S TAKE A 15 MINUTE BREAK. 
          COMMISSIONERS. 
          SEVEN. 
          WE DO HAVE A QUORUM COMMISSION. 
          2 33. 
          WE'RE BACK ON THE RECORD. 
          MOVING ON TO CASE NUMBER EIGHT. 
          NO, SORRY. 
          FIVE. 
          [5. 25-1740A An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 1336 for an  adult day care facility on property zoned an R-10(A) Single Family  District, on the northeast line of Wadsworth Drive and north of East  Ledbetter Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a ten-year period, with eligibility for  automatic renewals for additional ten-year periods, subject to a site plan  and conditions. Applicant: Larry J. Greer  Planner: Cherrell Caldwell  Council District: 4 Z245-177(CC)]
FIVE. 
          OH MY GOODNESS. 
          SEE . 
          GOSH. 
           CASE NUMBER FIVE. 
          UM, ALRIGHT, ITEM FIVE IS A Z TWO FOUR. 
          577. 
          IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1, 3 3 6 FOR AN ADULT DAYCARE FACILITY ON PROPERTY ZONED AND R 10, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF WADSWORTH DRIVE NORTHEAST OF EAST LEDBETTER DRIVE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IS THE APPLICANT HERE WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD? IS THERE ANYONE IN SUPPORT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM NUMBER FIVE. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I UNDERSTOOD THE APPLICANT MAY NOT MAKE IT. 
          UH, OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONERS, 
          [04:30:01]
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? THAT'S TRUE. 
          UM, THIS MAY BE FOR, I'M NOT SURE WHO THIS IS FOR. 
          THIS MAY BE FOR MS. MORRISON. 
          THIS MAY BE FOR MR. PEP. 
          I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT THINKING OF THIS EARLY, EARLIER, BUT FOR AN ADULT DAYCARE THAT IS REGULATED IN ADDITION TO THE CITY BY THE STATE, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          AND ARE THERE OUTDOOR SPACE REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY THE STATE? I'M NOT AWARE OF THE ADULT, UH, DAYCARE FACILITIES HAVE OUTDOOR REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATE. 
          I'M TYPICALLY THE CHILD CARE FACILITIES DO, I'M NOT AWARE OF. 
          OKAY. 
          THE ADULT CARE LICENSES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THESE ARE HEAVILY RE REGULATED BY THE STATE. 
          MOST, MOST DEFINITELY. 
          UM, SO THEY, THEY HAVE ONGOING LICENSES THAT HAVE ALMOST ALWAYS STRICTER REQUIREMENTS FOR HEALTH AND SAFETY THAN DO CITY REQUIREMENTS. 
          AND, UM, YOU KNOW, ANDREA BROUGHT UP AN A POINT EARLIER, WE SEE SOME OF THESE, UM, KIND OF INTERESTING REQUIREMENTS IN THE SUV CONDITIONS THAT MAYBE SPEAKS TO THE FACT THAT THIS IS FROM 1997. 
          IT'S BEEN AROUND FOR HOWEVER MANY YEARS. 
          WE SAID EARLIER AT THAT, UM, SOME OF THOSE CONDITIONS MAY HAVE BEEN ADDED IN BECAUSE THEY, IT WAS A DIFFERENT TIME FOR STATE REGULATION AND THAT NOT ALL OF THAT WAS COVERED BY STATE REGULATION, BUT I WOULD CERTAINLY SAY IT'S, IT'S QUITE RESTRICTIVE NOW. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE. 
          COMMISSIONER FORESIGHT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES. 
          UH, UH, CHAIRMAN SHADI IN THE MATTER OF KC 2 4 5 DASH SEVEN, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL THE NEXT CPC MEETING ON JUNE 12TH. 
          AND I'D LIKE TO, UH, IF I GET A SECOND, I'D LIKE TO, UH, HAVE A MOMENT TO MAKE, EXPLAIN MY REASONING. 
          YOU DO HAVE A SECOND. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND PLEASE. 
          COMMISSIONER FORSYTH. 
          THE REASON WHY I ASKED TO PUT THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT IS THAT I WAS JUST MADE AWARE OF THIS, THIS CASE THIS WEEK, AND, UH, WHENEVER IT WAS PUT ON THE AGENDA, I HAD NOT HEARD ANYTHING AT ALL FROM THE APPLICANT ON THIS CASE. 
          UH, AND, AND, AND IF THIS WERE JUST AN SUP RENEWAL ITSELF, I WOULD, UH, MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS. 
          BUT SINCE THERE'S AN AMENDMENT TO THE SUP AND THE AMENDMENT INVOLVES, UH, UH, TAKING AWAY HALF THE PROPERTY, UH, AND, AND, AND, AND IN THE SUP CONDITIONS, THERE IS A STATEMENT THAT SAYS THAT THE, UH, YOU KNOW, ADULT DAYCARE CENTER MUST PROVIDE, UH, 40 SQUARE FEET OF OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL SPACE, UH, FOR EVERY, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, ADULT WHO'S SERVED BY SERVICE BY THE FACILITY. 
          AND, AND SO I NEED TO UNDERSTAND AND HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE APPLICANT TO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, AND TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT CONDITION STILL APPLIES AND THAT IT'S STILL BEING FULFILLED. 
          UH, OR, AND, AND IF, IF WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THIS, TO REMOVE IT, I WANNA MAKE SURE HE'S AWARE OF THAT AS WELL. 
          SO, I, I, I JUST ASKED FOR A COUPLE MORE WEEKS SO THAT I CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING BY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SERVICED BY THAT FACILITY, YOU KNOW, IN ADDITION TO THE COMMUNITY ITSELF. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          UM, JUST CLARIFICATION WITH STAFF. 
          UM, WOULD IT BE FAIR, I THINK AS, UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, FORSYTH IS REVIEWING THIS WITH THE APPLICANT TEAM, IF THERE WERE PROPOSED REVISIONS TO SOME OF THE CONDITIONS, I THINK WE HAD TALKED ABOUT HOW THE OCCUPANCY IS IN HERE, THE RECREATION SPACES IN HERE, IF THOSE WANTED TO BE AMENDED, THOSE COULD BE PART OF A, A MOTION WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? THERE'D BE NO OTHER CHANGE THAT, THAT'S CERTAINLY THE CASE. 
          OKAY. 
          CON CONDITIONS LIKE THAT CAN BE STRUCK, UH, VIA MOTION. 
          AND I'LL, I'LL SAY FLAT OUT THAT I THINK THAT THEY'RE DIFFICULT TO ENFORCE LONG TERM. 
          NO, UN UNDERSTOOD. 
          AND, AND I THINK WHAT I HEAR IN COMMISSIONER FORSYTH'S COMMENTS IS THE INTENT TO, INSTEAD OF US MAKING AN ASSUMPTION, TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT WITH THE APPLICANT, THE TEAM WHO AREN'T HERE, FOR US, TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE, UH, FOR THEM AND FOR THEIR USES. 
          AND WOULD CERTAINLY HOPE THAT'S PART OF WHAT COMES BACK BEFORE US, UH, ON THE 12TH. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU, MR. BAN. 
          YEAH, I, UH, UNFORTUNATELY AM NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          UM, I LOOK AT THIS USE AND I SEE IT AS VERY BENIGN. 
          WE'RE NOT, WE HAVE NOT BEEN MADE AWARE OF, OF ANY ISSUES THAT THIS ADULT DAYCARE HAS HAD IN THIS COMMUNITY, UM, SINCE IT'S, THE SUP WAS INITIALLY GRANTED IN 1997, WHICH WAS 27, 28 YEARS AGO. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, ANY OF THE CHANGES THAT HAPPEN HERE DON'T SEEM TO BE PARTICULARLY DETRIMENTAL IN ANY WAY, UM, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING HOW HEAVILY REGULATED THESE ADULT DAYCARE FACILITIES ARE BY THE STATE. 
          UM, SO I REALLY WOULD LIKE, YOU KNOW, 
          [04:35:01]
I'VE ALWAYS BEEN A STRONG SUPPORTER OF NOT IMPOSING ADDITIONAL BURDENS ON OUR, UM, DAYCARE FACILITIES, WHETHER THEY ARE FOR ADULTS OR CHILDREN. 
          AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN THE LIMITED AREAS WHERE WE CONTINUE TO REQUIRES FOR ADULT OR CHILD DAYCARES, UM, THESE THINGS SHOULD, IN MY VIEW, SAIL THROUGH WITH, YOU KNOW, VERY LITTLE, YOU KNOW, FANFARE AND, YOU KNOW, EVEN PROBABLY FOR PERMANENT TIME PERIODS. 
          AND IF THERE IS A PROBLEM FACILITY, WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND CALL AN AUTHORIZED HEARING TO CONSIDER REVOKING THE SUP. 
          UM, SO WITH THAT SAID, I WON'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION TO HOLD. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSER, I FOLLOW COMMISSIONER HERBERT. 
          UM, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          UM, I, I'M IN THE SAME BOAT AS, UH, COMMISSIONER RUBIN. 
          I WON'T REPEAT HIS REMARKS. 
          UH, I COULD SUPPORT A MOTION THAT, UM, TAKES OUT SOME OF THESE PROBLEMATIC, UH, ISSUES AND, UH, UH, AND THEN THEREFORE RELY SOLELY ON STATE REGULATION. 
          I'LL ALSO ADD, I'VE, I'VE BEEN TOLD RECENTLY THAT WE ARE THE, PERHAPS THE ONLY CITY IN NORTH TEXAS, OR ONE OF VERY, VERY FEW CITIES IN NORTH TEXAS THAT ALLOW THE, THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO HOLD CASES. 
          UH, WE HOLD CASES, I THINK FOR WHOLLY INADEQUATE REASONS, TIME AND TIME AGAIN CREATES FRICTION IN OUR, UH, DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES HERE IN THE CITY. 
          AND, UM, I THINK WE REALLY SHOULD, UH, UM, EXAMINE OURSELVES, UH, ABOUT, UH, HOW EASILY WE HOLD CASES. 
          'CAUSE I DON'T THINK IT SERVES US WELL OR OUR CITY. 
          WELL, COMMISSIONER HERBERT, I GUESS OUR HONEYMOON'S OVER DR. 
          NO, I'M JUST KIDDING. 
          UM, SO I, I WILL SUPPORT YOUR MOTION. 
          UM, BUT I ALSO WANT TO THANK, UH, UM, COMMISSIONER RUBIN, 'CAUSE HE'S BOUGHT ME A LONG WAY WHEN IT COMES TO DAYCARES FROM MY LAST CASE TO NOW. 
          UM, THIS CASE IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE THERE'S A LAND USE THING GOING ON, RIGHT? THERE'S A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT HAS EITHER BEEN CHANGED OR CHANGED OVER BEING REMOVED. 
          THERE'S SOME RULES THAT NEED TO BE ADJUSTED, UM, IN, IN LANGUAGE, IN THE, IN THE TEXT. 
          I THINK HOLDING IT ONE MEETING WON'T HURT THIS CASE, UM, BECAUSE OF THE VULNERABLE, UM, POPULATION THAT THIS BODY'S, THIS, UH, CASE IS SERVING. 
          UM, HAVING THE EYES EARLY NOW, UM, CAN PREVENT A DAMAGING, UM, UH, UH, ELDERLY PERSON'S, UM, FUTURE. 
          SO I WILL SUPPORT THE HOLD, UM, UM, FOR THAT REASON, UM, ALONE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS, COMMISSIONER WHEELER IN THIS CASE? I, I, I DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY, UM, NEED TO HOLD IT. 
          WE NEED TO PROBABLY PUT A, UM, BECAUSE IT'S A NEW SUP FOR A DAY, FOR A ADULT DAYCARE TO PUT A TIME, TIME, UM, LIMIT ON BEFORE THEY HAVE TO COME BACK, UH, THIS FIRST TIME AROUND. 
          BUT WE ARE, WE, WE NEED OUR ELDERLY NEED PLACES TO GO TO GET THEM OUT THE HOUSE TO BE ABLE TO SOCIALIZE WITH OTHER PEOPLE. 
          UH, WE HAVE QUITE A BIT OF OUR ELDERLY POPULATION THAT ARE AGING IN PLACE AND DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE ANYTHING THAT'S CATERED TOWARD THEM. 
          AND SO I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD HOLD IT, BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD DON'T, THIS FIRST TIME AROUND, THAT'S PUT A TIME LIMIT ON IT. 
          UM, I MEAN, NOT A TIME LIMIT, BUT, UM, HAVE THEM COME BACK WITH IT NOT BEING ON AUTOMATICALLY LOGGED. 
          SO, SECOND ROUND VICE CHAIR, RUBEN, JUST ONE ITEM TO CLARIFY. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER, UH, WHEELER, AND I PROBABLY WASN'T VERY ARTICULATE WHEN I WHEN I SAID IT EARLIER, BUT THIS HAS BEEN OPERATING WITH AN SGP SINCE 1997. 
          SO THIS IS, THIS IS JUST A RENEWAL AND THERE SEEMED TO BE NO PROBLEMS HERE. 
          SO THAT, THAT IS PART OF WHY I FEEL LIKE THIS BODY SHOULD MOVE IT ON. 
          OH, OH, OKAY. 
          WELL, 100%. 
          I, I, WELL, CAN I GET A POINT OF CLARITY? 'CAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WAS AN, THE AMENDMENT WAS REDUCING THE PROPERTY SIZE, IS THAT NOT RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          IT AMENDS THE SITE PLAN AND THE BOUNDARY OF THE SUP. 
          SO IT REMOVES, UH, WHAT I UNDERSTAND, IT'S A BUILDING THAT IS, IS NOT PART OF THE PRIMARY USE ANYMORE. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THAT, THAT, THAT DEFINITELY IS BETTER UNDERSTANDING. 
          OH, I MEAN, IS THE, MAYBE I DON'T, I DIDN'T HEAR THE MOTION. 
          IS THE MOTION TO MAKE THIS A PERMANENT SUP IF IT'S BEEN IN EFFECT CLOSE TO 20 YEARS? MY, CAN I SPEAK IN CLARIFICATION? YES, PLEASE. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER FORT'S GONNA CLARIFY HIS MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER, MY MOTION IS SIMPLY TO PUT THE CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT FOR TWO WEEKS TO THE NEXT MEETING, AND I, THAT WILL GIVE ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH THE APPLICANT. 
          MR. GREER, I'VE MADE AN EFFORT, UH, I'VE SENT AN EMAIL 
          [04:40:01]
TO HIS ORGANIZATION. 
          I PLACED A CALL. 
          I'VE NOT, UH, GOTTEN A RESPONSE BACK, AND I, AND I SIMPLY WANT TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK WITH HIM TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT THE, UH, ORIGINAL CON SUP CONDITIONS STILL CAN BE FULFILLED WITH THIS AMENDMENT. 
          THIS AMENDMENT REMOVES HALF THE PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ADULT DAYCARE CENTER. 
          AND, AND THAT OTHER HALF OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S BEING REMOVED HAD ALL OF THE, UH, OPEN LAND WHERE THE, UH, UH, ADULTS WHO ARE SERVICED BY THIS CENTER COULD GO OUT TO, TO ENJOY THE OUTSIDE. 
          AND, AND NOW WITH, WITH THE NEW SUP, YOU, YOU JUST BASICALLY HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE, THE U-TURN IN THE FRONT ENTRANCE AND THE PARKING LOT. 
          AND I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY MOST OF THE SPACE. 
          ALL THE REST OF THE SPACE IS JUST THE, UH, AREA ALONG THE SIDE AND THE BACK, AND IT'S JUST THE TWO STRIPS OF LAND. 
          SO I JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ORIGINAL SUP CONDITIONS CAN BE MAINTAINED WITH THIS AMENDMENT, THIS CHANGE. 
          OH, THAT'S ALL. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I, WHEN I AMEND WHAT I SAID, I, I SUPPORT COMMISSIONER, UM, UH, OF FORSIGHT BECAUSE IF HE, IF IT'S ONLY SO THAT HE'S TRYING TO GET IN TOUCH WITH THE APPLICANT WHO HAS NOT CONTACTED HIM, I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE REASON TO HOLD IT. 
          SO I WILL SUPPORT HIS MOTION FIRST ROUND. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, I, I'M NOT GONNA GET IN THE WEEDS ON THE CASE, BUT WHAT I HEARD COMMISSIONER FORSETH SAY IS THAT HE FIRST FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS CASE WHEN HE SAW THE DOCKET. 
          I KNOW STAFF'S TRYING TO MAKE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO GET US INFORMATION ABOUT CASES BEFORE WE SEE THEM FOR THE FIRST TIME ON THE DOCKET. 
          AND, AND THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. 
          APPLICANTS SHOULD ALSO REACH OUT TO THEIR COMMISSIONERS WHEN THEY FILE SOMETHING SO THAT WE ARE NOT SURPRISED TO SEE A CASE ON THE DOCKET, BECAUSE I THINK MOST OF US ARE INCLINED TO HOLD A CASE IF THE FIRST TIME WE SEE IT IS LESS THAN A WEEK BEFORE WE'RE GONNA CONSIDER IT. 
          UM, THAT PUTS US AT A DISADVANTAGE. 
          SO I'M GONNA SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS BEFORE WE TAKE A RECORD VOTE. 
          VICE CHAIR. 
          LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE. 
          UH, AND THIS IS A MOTION TO HOLD UNDER ADVISEMENT. 
          DISTRICT ONE? NO. 
          DISTRICT TWO? YES. 
          DISTRICT THREE? YES. 
          DISTRICT FOUR? YES. 
          DISTRICT FIVE? NO. 
          DISTRICT SIX. 
          DISTRICT SEVEN? YES. 
          DISTRICT DATE? YES. 
          DISTRICT NINE. 
          DISTRICT 10? NO. 
          DISTRICT 11? YES. 
          DISTRICT 12, DISTRICT 13? YES. 
          DISTRICT 14? YES. 
          AND PLACE 15. 
          NO. 
          MOTION PASSES. 
          WE'LL 
          [6. 25-1741A An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 1447 for a  private school use on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on  the northeast corner of Park Lane and Boedeker Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to an amended site plan,  amended traffic management plan, and amended conditions. Applicant: Our Redeemer Evangelical Lutheran Church  Representative: Rob Baldwin - Baldwin Associates  Planner: Lori Levy  Council District: 13 Z245-186(LL)]
GO TO CASE NUMBER SIX. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR. 
          COMMISSIONERS. 
          ITEM NUMBER SIX IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE. 
          PERMIT NUMBER 1447. 
          THIS IS FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL USE ON PROPERTY ZONED R SEVEN 50, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF PARK LANE AND BODECKER STREET. 
          AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, EXCUSE ME, IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED SITE PLAN, AMENDED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND AMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          I SEE THE APPLICANT IS HERE. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          CHAIR SHAD AND COMMISSIONERS. 
          MY NAME IS MARGOT MURPHY. 
          I'M WITH BALDWIN ASSOCIATES AT 39 0 4 ELM STREET, SWEET BEE, DALLAS, TEXAS. 
          I HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION, AND IF YOU'LL POP IT UP, I WILL BEGIN MY COMMENTS LIKE MAGIC, PLEASE, GEORGE. 
          I GOT IT. 
          OH, LITTLE DID I KNOW. 
          180 3, RIGHT? YEAH. 
          180 6, NOT THERE. 
          SORRY. 
          THAT'S MY FAULT. 
          [04:45:01]
CAN Y'ALL SEE THAT, YOUR HONOR? IT'S THERE. 
          THANK YOU, UH, ROB. 
          AND APOLOGIES FOR NOT BEING QUICKER ABOUT THAT. 
          SO IT'S A REQUEST TO AMEND SUP 1447, I THINK, UM, THAT SUP WAS FIRST APPROVED IN 2001. 
          UM, I'M GONNA BREEZE THROUGH THESE MAPS BECAUSE, UH, LORI LEVY DID A GREAT JOB DESCRIBING IT. 
          UH, AND IT'S NOT CATCHING UP WITH ME. 
          SO HERE'S WHAT I'M GONNA TELL YOU. 
          HOPEFULLY IT WILL. 
          BOY, WE'RE STUCK. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, I'LL TELL YOU ABOUT IT. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO BE, UH, ASSISTED BY THE, THE SLIDE. 
          I THINK YOU HAVE TO USE THE ARROWS. 
          WE ARE, IT'S KEEP TALKING. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, LET ME TELL YOU, THE SCHOOL WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1961. 
          UH, IT DATES BACK TO 2001. 
          UM, CURRENTLY IT HAS 88 STUDENTS. 
          IT DOESN'T PLAN TO GROW. 
          IT'S BEEN AT AROUND THAT, AROUND THAT NUMBER FOR YEARS. 
          UM, THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN DOES HAVE A NUMBER OF TWO, UH, 120, BECAUSE IF THEY EVER COULD OUTTA SEVENTH AND EIGHTH GRADE, THEY, THEY MIGHT, BUT THAT'S NOT IN THE PLANS RIGHT NOW. 
          YOU SHOULD ALSO KNOW THAT THERE IS A DAYCARE ON SITE. 
          THAT DAYCARE HAS PLUS OR MINUS 140 STUDENTS. 
          OH, THERE'S THE SITE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, PLUS OR MINUS 140 STUDENTS. 
          THE SUP USED TO COVER THE DAYCARE, BUT AS WE ALL KNOW, THE ORDINANCE CHANGED. 
          SO WE'VE DRAWN, PULLED OUT THE DAYCARE NUMBERS FROM THERE. 
          THERE'S A FEW PICTURES OF THE SCHOOL. 
          IT'S A SWEET SCHOOL. 
          LIKE I SAID, IT'S BEEN AROUND FOR A VERY LONG TIME. 
          THE DAYCARE, UM, IS THERE, THE SCHOOL IS THERE. 
          OH, THE SCHOOL AGAIN. 
          KINDERGARTEN THROUGH SIXTH GRADE. 
          SO WHAT'S THE CURRENT ZONING? IT'S A 9.9 ACRE SITE. 
          IT'S, IT'S A PRIVATE SCHOOL. 
          IT MUST CONFORM TO THE SIDE PLAN. 
          IT'S GOT ATM P, YOU KNOW WHAT THE ZONING IS AROUND IT. 
          WELL, WHAT IS OUR REQUEST? AND THAT'S REALLY THE QUESTION. 
          THE REQUEST IS THIS TO SLIGHTLY ALTER THE SUP. 
          WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE, AND I'M GONNA SHOW YOU THIS ON THIS SITE PLAN. 
          THERE ARE SEVERAL EXPANSION AREAS, AND THERE'S THE CURSOR THERE, IF YOU CAN SEE IT. 
          THERE'S ONE EXPANSION AREA THERE, ANOTHER ON THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT, A COUPLE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE SANCTUARY. 
          THOSE EXPANSION AREAS ALLOW, UM, BUILDING THERE, BUT NO MORE THAN A TOTAL OF 19,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          SO WHAT HAS HAPPENED NOW IS OUR CLIENT HAS PUT PENCIL TO THE PAPER AND THEY'VE DECIDED WHERE IT IS THAT THEY WANT TO BUILD. 
          SO THEY WANNA COME BACK TO THE COMMUNITY AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE WANNA REMOVE THE EXPANSION AREAS. 
          WE DON'T WANT 'EM ON THE EAST SIDE ANYMORE. 
          WE DON'T WANT THE PORTABLES THAT ARE THE DARK GRAY AREAS THERE. 
          WE DON'T NEED THE EXPANSION ON EITHER SIDE OF THE SANCTUARY. 
          SO WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE US ON THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT? SO, UM, THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. 
          UM, AND WHERE MY CURSOR IS HERE IS THE EXPANSION AREA THAT REMAINS, IT'S SLIGHTLY CHANGED IN SHAPE, BUT THAT'S IT. 
          AGAIN, LIMITED TO 19,000 SQUARE FEET AND ONE STORY. 
          THAT'S ALL THEY WANNA BUILD IS ONE STORY HERE. 
          IT IS ENLARGED. 
          UM, THE OTHER THING I WILL SHOW YOU IS THAT THERE ARE TWO PLAYGROUNDS. 
          THE PLAYGROUNDS EXISTED IN THE ORIGINAL SUP. 
          I'M GONNA SAY THAT THIS PLAYGROUND, UM, UP NORTH WAS RECENTLY, UM, INSTALLED. 
          IT COULD HAVE BEEN INSTALLED A LITTLE BIT FURTHER NORTH, BUT THEY INSTALLED IT A LITTLE BIT AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. 
          UH, INSTALLATION WAS A LITTLE IMPERFECT, SO IT DOES BLEED A LITTLE BIT EAST THAN SHOULD. 
          THE NEW PLAYGROUND IS IN THE PROPER LOCATION. 
          THE OTHER PLAYGROUND THAT YOU SEE IN THE L-SHAPE THERE HAS BEEN THERE FOR 25 YEARS. 
          SO WHAT THIS MAP SHOWS YOU IS THEY'VE REMOVED THE PORTABLE BUILDINGS, THEY'VE REMOVED THE EXPANSION AREA THERE EAST OF THE PROPERTY. 
          UM, THEY'VE RECONFIGURED PARKING ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER. 
          UH, THIS IS WHERE MR. DARK. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. 
          HI, ROB BALDWIN, 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B ELS. 
          FOLLOW UP WHERE MARGO LEFT OFF. 
          THE OTHER CHANGES, UH, THE, THE FIELD HERE IS AN EXISTING FIELD GOT MOVED UP A LITTLE BIT SO WE CAN INCORPORATE MORE PARKING, UH, ALONG, UH, PARK LANE. 
          UH, BUT THAT'S NOT, THAT'S FOR THE CHURCH, NOT FOR THE SCHOOL. 
          WE, WE CAN, WE HAVE ENOUGH PARKING FOR THE SCHOOL, BUT IT, IT SHOWS UP IN THE SITE PLAN. 
          SO WE CHANGED IT. 
          SO THAT, THAT'S THE GIST OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. 
          UM, AND WE THINK THAT IT'S A, IT'S A BETTER DESIGN. 
          UH, WE'RE BASICALLY STAYING WITHIN OUR EXISTING EXPANSION AREA TO THE NORTHWEST, REMOVING THE PORTABLES, REMOVING THE EXPANSION AREA TO THE EAST. 
          UH, AND WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          [04:50:07]
ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM OR ANYONE NOT POSITION? YES, SIR. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. 
          MY NAME'S ROBERT WEINBERG. 
          I LIVE, UH, JUST NORTH OF THE CHURCH. 
          AND, UM, I LOVE THE SOUND OF KIDS. 
          IT'S GREAT. 
          WHEN I GET UP IN THE MORNING HERE, I'M PLAYING ON THE PLAYGROUND. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, UH, AS COMMISSIONER KINGSTON POINTED OUT, PLANS HAVE A WAY OF MORPHING AND THE PLANS NEED TO MATCH WHAT IS ACCURATELY GOING TO BE DONE WITH THE PROPERTY ITSELF. 
          TWO WEEKS AGO, WE WERE AT A COMMUNITY MEETING WHERE WE WERE PRESENTED SOME OF THE PLANS THAT YOU JUST SAW, AND THEY WERE NOT ACCURATE. 
          IN FACT, THE PROPOSED, THE, THE PLAYGROUND WAS MENTIONED AS A PROPOSED PLAYGROUND AREA. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, THAT PLAYGROUND HAD ALREADY BEEN BUILT, AND THAT IS DIRECTLY BEHIND MY HOME. 
          AGAIN, I LOVE THE SOUND OF KIDS, BUT THE, THE CHALLENGE COMES IN WITH A TRUST FACTOR. 
          WE'RE TOLD THINGS FROM THE, THE FOLKS WHO ARE REPRESENTING THE CHURCH, AND THEY TURN OUT NOT TO BE ACCURATE. 
          SO THERE IS A TRUST ISSUE THAT IS GOING ON WITH ALL OF THESE PLANS. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER FORSYTH, YOU HAD MENTIONED EARLIER, ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY THAT IS RIGHT THERE WITH YOU. 
          GLEN LAKES HAS BEEN THERE SINCE 1980. 
          UM, THE FOLKS FROM BALDWIN DID NOT ENGAGE WITH US IN ANY MEASURE OTHER THAN A JOHNNY COME LATELY, UH, COMMUNITY MEETING, WHICH AGAIN PRESENTED US WITH INACCURATE, INCOMPLETE INFORMATION. 
          UM, AND BASICALLY WE'RE JUST ASKED TO TRUST, UH, THE PLAN AND COMMISSION AND OR THE CHURCH THAT THEY'RE GONNA DO WHAT THE PLANS SAY. 
          BUT THE CHALLENGE IS WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY PLAN THAT IS A HUNDRED PERCENT ACCURATE AS OF THIS POINT. 
          WE ALSO KNOW THAT OUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS HAS YET TO BE CONTACTED BY THE CHURCH OR BY BALDWIN PLANNING TO DISCUSS ALL OF THESE PLANS. 
          AND AGAIN, THAT'S JUST COMMON COURTESY TO ENGAGE WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS. 
          AS I SAID, WE'VE BEEN THERE SINCE 1980 AND, UH, WHILE OTHER GROUPS HAVE BEEN ENGAGED WITH THAT ARE IN THE GENERAL VICINITY, WE ARE IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE PROPERTY AND HAVE YET TO HAVE ANY KIND OF MEANINGFUL CONVERSATION WITH THE CHURCH EXACTLY WHAT THEIR PLANS ARE GONNA BE GOING FORWARD. 
          I'M JUST CHECKING MY TIME HERE THAT I'VE GOT, UM, I THINK ONE THING I WOULD LISTEN TO THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY'RE USING. 
          UH, ROB HAD JUST MENTIONED THAT WE'RE GONNA MOVE THIS FIELD UP JUST A LITTLE BIT. 
          AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW HOW A LITTLE BIT CONFERS TO FEET, INCHES, YARDS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT AT ALL, BUT I'D LIKE SOMETHING REALLY SPECIFIC. 
          IT WOULD BE REALLY NICE IF WE HAD A SPECIFIC PLAN THAT THEY COULD ENGAGE GLEN LAKES WITH, UH, TO DISCUSS THIS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          THERE ARE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, WE GOT OUR REBUTTAL TIME. 
          WELL, I WANNA THANK MR. WEINBERGER FOR COMING AND ALSO FOR ATTENDING OUR COMMUNITY MEETING. 
          AND ALSO A SHOUT OUT TO COMMISSIONER HALL AND COUNCIL WILLIS, COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS. 
          THEY ALSO ATTENDED THE COMMUNITY MEETING. 
          UH, JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, IT'S ALWAYS OUR PRACTICE TO HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING TO SEND A LETTER OF INFORMATION THAT INCLUDES, UH, DETAILS ABOUT THE PROJECT AS WELL AS AN INVITATION TO A COMMUNITY MEETING. 
          IT WAS SENT TO EVERYONE IN THE NOTICE AREA, IF YOU WILL LOOK AT YOUR PACKET. 
          UM, UH, IT DOES INCLUDE NOTICE TO THE GLEN LAKES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. 
          IN ADDITION, WE REACHED OUT TO COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIS'S OFFICE TO GET CONTACT INFORMATION. 
          SHE GAVE US THE CONTACT INFORMATION. 
          WE HAD, UM, I HAD A PERSONAL CONVERSATION WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE WINDSOR PARK, HOA, WHO REACHED OUT IN RESPONSE TO MY LETTER. 
          SO WE DO OUR BEST TO COMMUNICATE, AND OF COURSE, WE CAN ALWAYS DO BETTER. 
          UH, NEXT, UM, I, I HAVE SPOKEN TODAY TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE GLEN LAKES, HOA AND WE WILL BE MEETING WITH HIM, UM, WEEK AFTER NEXT. 
          SO THERE'S NOT, WE JUST ENGAGE IN ROBUST, UH, COMMUNITY OUTREACH TO THE EXTENT WE CAN. 
          AS FOR THE SITE PLAN, UM, FROM THE TIME OF THE COMMUNITY MEETING TO NOW, THERE WAS ONLY ONE THING CHANGED. 
          AND THAT'S, TO HIS POINT, UH, THAT THAT PLAYGROUND WAS INSTALLED WITHIN 
          [04:55:01]
THE LAST YEAR. 
          UH, HONESTLY, I MISSED IT. 
          THE ARCHITECT MISSED IT. 
          THE AERIALS DIDN'T SHOW IT. 
          THE SURVEY WAS DONE BEFORE THAT. 
          SO WE, WE, WE TOOK OWNERSHIP OF THAT. 
          UM, AND THAT'S WHY IT IS IN THE EXACT PLACE IT IS NOW. 
          UH, GENERALLY SPEAKING, AGAIN, IF, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, IT SHOWS IT FURTHER NORTH, BUT IT WAS INSTALLED AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          AND IF IT ENCROACHES ANYTHING, IT'S EASTWARD INTO THE GREEN SPACE AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          SO WE BELIEVE THAT, UM, AS FAR AS WE HAVE A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE SITE PLAN GOVERNS, THE SITE PLAN IS PRETTY CLEAR AS TO WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT MAY GO. 
          AND, UH, WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S A WIN-WIN FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ESPECIALLY NOW THAT THEY, THEY HAVE SOME CERTAINTY AS TO WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO OCCUR. 
          AND, UM, IN BACK OF MR. WEINBERGER'S PROPERTY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE PORTABLES. 
          THERE'S NOT GONNA BE A BUILDING STRUCTURE, AND THERE'S CERTAINTY AS TO WHERE THAT PLAYGROUND IS INSTALLED, AND AGAIN, AWAY FROM HIS PROPERTY. 
          UM, WE HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS PROJECT AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER'S. 
          QUESTIONS. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT? YES, MS. MURPHY. 
          UM, ON THE PREVIOUS PLAN THAT YOU'RE AMENDING, DID THE, THERE WERE MULTIPLE AREAS FOR EXPANSION, POTENTIAL EXPANSION ON THE PREVIOUS PLAN, CORRECT. 
          DID, DID THOSE EXCEED 19,000 SQUARE FEET? IN OTHER WORDS, THERE WAS OPTIONS. 
          YOU, YOU, THAT'S, YOU COULD GO MULTIPLE PLACES AS LONG AS YOU DIDN'T EXCEED 19. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. 
          AND SO THE PLAN WE'RE REVIEWING TODAY, IT'S ALL IN ONE PLACE AND IT'S 19. 
          CORRECT. 
          GOT IT. 
          THANKS. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, I'M NOT SURE WHO'S BEST TO ADDRESS THIS, BUT THERE WERE SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE SIDEWALKS AND THE, UM, BUFFER ZONES FOR THE SIDEWALKS. 
          MAYBE YOU'VE REACHED A DEAL WITH COMMISSIONER HALL ON THIS. 
          IS THERE ADEQUATE SPACE TO DO SIX FOOT BUFFER ZONES AND SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS ALONG PARK LANE AND FIVE FOOT BUFFER ZONES AND FIVE FOOT SIDEWALKS ALONG BOW DECKER? AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU ARE PREPARED TO COMMIT TO COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION. 
          I SPENT A LOT OF TIME OUT THERE, UM, WITHIN THE LAST FEW WEEKS WITH A MEASURING TAPE TO DO THAT VERY, UM, ANALYSIS. 
          AND THE ANSWER IS, IN SOME PLACES IT WORKS AND IN SOME PLACES NOT SO WELL, WHY NOT? AND I'LL TELL YOU, LEMME TELL YOU WHERE I THINK IT WORKS. 
          IT WORKS FROM THE INGRESS EGRESS POINT ALONG PARK LANE EAST TO THE PANERA AND THE FORM ADJACENT TO THEIR FENCE. 
          THERE'S ROOM, THERE'S OPEN GREEN SPACE, THERE'S NO UTILITIES. 
          IF YOU LOOK ON PARK LANE FROM THE ING INGRESS EGRESS THAT GOES RIGHT UP TO THE CHURCH, I SHOULD SAY, THE SANCTUARY THERE TO THE CORNER, THERE'S A HUGE UTILITY BOX. 
          UH, THERE'S UTILITY POLES, THERE'S A SIGN. 
          DIFFICULT, BUT COULD WE DO IT THERE? I MEAN, IF WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO. 
          BOW DECKER IS HARDER. 
          BOW DECKER ALONG, UH, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO WALNUT HILL, AND ESPECIALLY ALONG GLEN LAKES, THERE IS, UM, THERE ARE QUITE A NUMBER OF TREES, 50 60 OR SO, UH, MATURE LIVE OAKS. 
          WE COULD PUT A SIDEWALK IF WE ABSOLUTELY HAD TO. 
          UH, BUT IT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO GO ALONG THE CURB BECAUSE, UH, BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU WOULD REMOVE THESE VERY MATURE TREES THAT IN ORDER THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY, WE, WE WOULDN'T WANNA DO THAT. 
          WE DO SUPPORT, UH, MR. NEVAREZ STATEMENT THAT HE DOES. 
          HE DOESN'T THINK THAT, UM, ALONG BOW DECKER, UH, SIDEWALKS WOULD NECESSARILY BE WARRANTED. 
          UH, THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD COME TO A PRETTY, UH, QUICK DEAD END, RIGHT WHERE THE PROPERTY MEETS THE GLEN LAKES DEVELOPMENT THAT MR. WEINBERGER REPRESENTS HERE. 
          AND SO THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT. 
          UM, BUT ALONG PARK LANE, UH, THERE, THERE, THERE'S SOME ROOM TO DO 'EM, UH, AGAIN, FROM THE INGRESS, EGRESS POINT EAST, IT'S HARDER FROM THE INGRESS EGRESS POINT TO THE HARD CORNER AT PARK AND BO DECKER. 
          AND I THINK, UM, OUR CLIENT HAS, UH, REMARKED SEVERAL TIMES THAT THAT SIDEWALK'S GONNA GO NOWHERE. 
          I THINK MS. LEVY SHOWED YOU IN THE PRESENTATION, THERE WAS A PICTURE OF THE ALLEY, AND AGAIN, OUR SIDEWALK WOULD END AND IT WOULD CROSS BO DECKER AND GO WHERE? AND THEN ACROSS, UH, PARK LANE, AS, AS WAS NOTED, THERE'S NOTHING ON THE NORTH PARK SIDE. 
          UM, AND COINCIDENTALLY, I DID GO TO NORTH PARK JUST FOR THE VERY PURPOSE OF SAYING, WELL, WHAT IF THEY HAD TO HAVE SIDEWALKS? OH BOY. 
          THE MATURE LANDSCAPING AND TREES ALONG THAT AREA. 
          UM, I, I WON'T SPEAK TO IT, BUT I JUST, I DID NOTICE THAT. 
          DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? WELL, I MEAN, SORT OF, I MEAN, WHAT I'M HEARING IS Y'ALL DON'T REALLY WANT TO, 
          [05:00:01]
IS THAT ACCURATE? IT'S EXPENSIVE. 
          THEY'RE A SMALL SCHOOL. 
          THEY HAVE 88 STUDENTS. 
          UM, MOST PEOPLE DRIVE TO THEIR, UM, LITURGIES. 
          UM, THE DAYCARE PARENTS ALL DRIVE THE TMP SHOWS 100% CARS. 
          NOW I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S NOT OUR GOAL IN DALLAS AND THAT WE WANT WALKABILITY. 
          UM, SO, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S, IF, IF THERE CAN BE SOME COMPROMISE, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HEALTHY. 
          BUT, UM, PUTTING IN SIDEWALKS FOR THE, UH, EXERCISE OF PUTTING IN SIDEWALKS IS, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES FUTILE. 
          I UNDERSTAND WE WANT 'EM ALL TO CONNECT, BUT IN THIS CASE, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A CHALLENGE. 
          ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE CITY OF DALLAS IS THE MOST DANGEROUS LARGE CITY IN TEXAS FOR PEDESTRIANS IN TERMS OF DEATH AND SERIOUS INJURY? THAT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME. 
          OKAY. 
          ARE YOU AWARE THAT WE ARE ONE OF THE LARGE, WE ARE ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES FOR DEATH AND SERIOUS INJURY? NO, I'M NOT. 
          UM, ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE STUDIES SHOW THAT IT IS IN LARGE PART BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE DESIGN OUR STREETS AND LACK OF, UM, PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE? IT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME. 
          AND TO YOUR POINT, AND THEN THIS DEVELOPMENT DATES TO THE SIXTIES, AS DOES NORTH PARK, AND THEY DIDN'T GIVE IT ANY THOUGHT NOW. 
          SO NOW TO RETROFIT IT, THERE ARE CHALLENGES AND THERE ARE VERY REAL CHALLENGES. 
          AND, AND THAT'S WHY OUR CLIENT IS WILLING TO, TO DO WHAT THEY CAN TO MAKE IT WORK WHERE IT MAKES SENSE. 
          AND WE BELIEVE ALONG PARK LANE MAKES SENSE ALONG BOW DECKER. 
          IT'S JUST A, IT'S A TOUGHER SELL. 
          HEARD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR OUR FOLKS IN OPPOSITION? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HALL, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? I DO. 
          I DO. 
          MR. CHAIR. 
          AND IF I GET A SECOND, I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS TO MAKE IN THE MATTER OF ITEM SIX, CASE NUMBER Z 2 45 180 6. 
          I, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THIS ITEM, SUBJECT TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES TO PROPOSED SUP 1 4, 4 7 AMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          ITEM 10 SIGNS, CHANGE THE PHRASE AND OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL TO A PRIVATE SCHOOL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HOFF FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS. 
          COMMISSIONER ROLL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YEAH, THIS, UH, THIS SIDEWALK THING WAS, UH, HAS BEEN A, A BIT OF A CHALLENGE. 
          UM, BUT THEY, I'M, I'M SURE THEY UNDERSTAND THAT SIDEWALKS ARE GONNA GO ALONG PARK LANE NOW. 
          UM, I LIVE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          I DRIVE BY THIS SITE SEVERAL TIMES. 
          EVERY DAY WE WALK WE WALK SOMETIMES OVER IN THIS AREA, THERE IS A ABSENCE OF SIDEWALKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UH, ANY SIDEWALK PUT ALONG THE SCHOOL'S PROPERTY ON PARK LANE IS NOT GONNA SEE A LOT OF TRAFFIC. 
          UH, THE CITY RECENTLY INSTALLED SIDEWALKS BETWEEN NORTHWEST HIGHWAY AND PARK LANE ON HILLCREST. 
          UH, BUT IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, VERY MUCH LIKE YOU SEE AROUND THIS SCHOOL, THERE IS VERY LITTLE SPACE TO PUT THOSE SIDEWALKS IN BECAUSE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE SURROUNDED BY, UH, BRICK WALLS,  FENCES AND THINGS. 
          SO THERE'S NO BUFFERS. 
          UH, AND THE, THE SIDEWALKS HAVE TO MEANDER AROUND UTILITIES AND POLES, ET CETERA. 
          SO BO DECKER'S GONNA BE A CHALLENGE. 
          I DON'T THINK THE PARK LANE WILL, BUT, UH, THEY'LL JUST HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. 
          SO, UH, I THINK THAT'S, UH, I, I, I THINK THE ADDITIONS ARE GOOD. 
          I THINK IT'S GONNA BENEFIT THE SCHOOL AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UH, THEY'VE BEEN IN BUSINESS FOR A LONG TIME AND I HOPE WE CAN SUPPORT THIS MOTION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION, BUT I CAN'T, UM, I DON'T THINK THE CITY TAKES, GENERALLY SPEAKING, I DON'T THINK THE CITY HAS A HISTORY OF TAKING, UM, ITS POLICIES SERIOUSLY. 
          I THINK THE CITY OFTEN PASSES POLICIES AND THEN SAYS, WELL, OKAY, WE'VE PASSED IT, PUT THAT ON THE SHELF. 
          AND I THINK VISION ZERO IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THAT. 
          UM, WE PASSED THAT POLICY YEARS AGO, YET WE REMAIN THE MOST DANGEROUS CITY IN THE STATE, UM, BY A GOOD MEASURE FOR VEHICULAR DEATHS AND SERIOUS INJURIES. 
          UM, IT IMPACTS NOT ONLY DRIVERS, PEDESTRIANS 
          [05:05:01]
AND MULTIMODAL USERS. 
          AND UNTIL WE GET SERIOUS ABOUT REQUIRING BUFFER ZONES, SIDEWALKS, UM, REDUCTION OF IMPEDIMENTS IN SIDEWALKS, UM, ACCESSIBILITY RAMPS THAT ACTUALLY ARE WHERE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE IN SIDEWALKS, ET CETERA, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE THAT CITY. 
          SO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO HAVE AT LEAST ON PARK LANE AN APPLICANT, PUT THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IN. 
          AND WE'RE NOT GONNA MAKE THAT CHANGE OVERNIGHT. 
          WE MAY HAVE TO DO THAT BLOCK BY BLOCK UNTIL WE GET THERE. 
          AND IT MAY TAKE 10 YEARS, 20 YEARS TO GET THE CITY TO BE MORE WALKABLE. 
          BUT IF EVERY TIME WE GET THE OPPORTUNITY, WE SAY, UH, WELL IT'S NOT GONNA MAKE A DIFFERENCE HERE. 
          UH, WELL, IT'S NOT GONNA MAKE A DIFFERENCE THERE, THEN WE'RE NEVER GONNA DO IT. 
          WE'RE NEVER GONNA GET THERE. 
          SO UNTIL WE DECIDE THAT WE WANNA BE BETTER, WE'RE JUST NOT. 
          AND I'M NOT GONNA CONTINUE TO VOTE FOR PROJECTS WHERE WE JUST WASH OUR HANDS OF IT. 
          IT'S NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DO THAT. 
          SO I AM GOING TO REQUIRE PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT, AND I HAVE REQUIRED PEOPLE IN MY DISTRICT, BUT PUT IN THOSE BUFFER ZONES TO THINK ABOUT PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, TO THINK ABOUT THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IN TERMS OF PEDESTRIANS AND HOW VALET OPERATIONS WORK AND HOW DROP OFFS WORK AND HOW, UH, DRIVEWAYS WORK AND HOW ALL OF THESE THINGS COME TOGETHER. 
          AND I THINK THAT IT SHOULD GO BEYOND THE CORE OF THE CITY. 
          IT SHOULD GO TO EVERY DEVELOPMENT WE DO, HOW THESE THINGS WORK, AND HOW IT IMPACTS THE SAFETY OF THE, OF THE NON-DRIVERS IN OUR CITY, PARTICULARLY WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A SCHOOL CAMPUS, A YOUNG CHILDREN'S SCHOOL CAMPUS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. 
          WE HAVE A MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER HALL, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HERBERT TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL RECORD. 
          WE CAN DO A RECORD VOTE SUBJECT TO AMENDED SITE PLAN, AMENDED, UH, TMP AND AMENDED CONDITIONS, AS WELL AS THE CHANGES MADE AS WRITTEN INTO THE RECORD. 
          AND, UH, IN REGARDS TO THE SIGNS THE RECORD VOTE, PLEASE. 
          EXCUSE ME. 
          YES. 
          I THINK REALLY WE WANTED TO BE ABSOLUTELY SURE WHAT CONDITIONS WERE OR WHAT CONDITIONS WERE BEING CHANGED. 
          I THINK THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION ON, ON OUR END WHEN WE WERE LISTENING TO IT, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE CAUGHT EACH OF THOSE CHANGES. 
          CONDITIONS ON, ON NUMBER 10, TYPO. 
          I THINK IT WAS JUST TO CORRECT THE TYPO. 
          I BELIEVE JUST THE TYPO SOUNDS GOOD. 
          YES. 
          IN, IN, IN THE ORIGINAL SUP PROPOSED CONDITIONS, IT SAID CHART OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL, BUT THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE A, A PRIVATE SCHOOL. 
          SO WE JUST WANT TO CHANGE THAT, THAT PHRASE TO PRIVATE SCHOOL. 
          SOUNDS GOOD. 
          AND THEN THE REST OF THE CONDITIONS REMAIN AS POSTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          EXACTLY. 
          THE COMMISSIONS IN THE DOCKET REFER TO SIDEWALK DESIGN AND SIDEWALK AMENITIES. 
          AND, UH, SO SIDEWALKS WILL BE BUILT AT LEAST ON PARK LANE, UH, AND THEN THEY CAN, UH, THEY'RE PROBABLY ARE GONNA HAVE TO ARGUE WITH ENGINEERING ABOUT A SIDEWALK ON BO DECKER, BUT RIGHT NOW THEY WOULD, THAT WOULD BE IN THE PLANS. 
          MM-HMM . 
          SO WE, JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, WE CAN'T WAIVE ANY REQUIREMENTS FOR SIDEWALKS THROUGH THE SUP? NO, AND THAT'S, THAT'S NOT MY INTENT. 
          OKAY. 
          THE SUP IS CLEAR THAT SIDEWALKS ARE REQUIRED. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          I'M JUST POINTING OUT THAT WHEN THEY GET TO ENGINEERING, THERE MIGHT BE DISCUSSIONS. 
          AND, AND THAT, SORRY, WE WERE SAYING THAT'S ON THE, THE SUP HAS IT WRITTEN ON BOTH FRONTAGES THE SIDEWALKS, CORRECT. 
          THAT REQUIRED, CORRECT. 
          CORRECT. 
          YES. 
          I MEAN, I'M, WHATEVER THE SUP , EXACTLY WHAT THEY SAY. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          RECORD VOTE. 
          HAS IT BEEN REQUESTED? WE'LL TAKE A RECORD ROAD PLEASE. 
          DISTRICT ONE? YES. 
          DISTRICT TWO? YES. 
          DISTRICT THREE? YES. 
          DISTRICT FOUR? YES. 
          DISTRICT FIVE? YES. 
          DISTRICT SIX, DISTRICT SEVEN. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT? NO. 
          DISTRICT NINE? YES. 
          DISTRICT? IT WAS WHEELER. 
          THAT'S SEVEN. 
          DISTRICT SEVEN. 
          DISTRICT 10? YES. 
          DISTRICT 11? YES. 
          DISTRICT 13? YES. 
          DISTRICT 14? NO. 
          AND PLACE 15? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          MOTION PASSES. 
          WE'LL 
          [8. 25-1743A An application for a WMU-5 Walkable Mixed-Use District on property  zoned an R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the north line of East  Wheatland Road, east of University Hills Boulevard. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Robert Pitre [R.K.C.J. LLC]  Representative: Jasmond Anderson  Planner: Martin Bate  Council District: 8 Z245-176(MB)]
GO TO CASE NUMBER EIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          [05:10:08]
AUTOMATE IS CASE Z 2 45 DASH 1 76. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR WM U FIVE, WALKABLE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN R SEVEN FIVE. 
          A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF EAST WHEATLAND ROAD, EAST OF UNIVERSITY HILLS BOULEVARD. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          MY NAME IS ROBERT PETRI, OWNER OF SKYLINE RANCH. 
          WE PURCHASED A PROPERTY 31 YEARS, SIX MONTHS, FIVE DAYS. 
          UH, WHEN WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, IT WAS NOTHING THERE. 
          UNT WAS NOT THERE, IT WAS NOTHING THERE. 
          UH, THEY DUMPED TRASH AND EVERYTHING IN FRONT OF WHEATLAND ON WHEATLAND ROAD. 
          AND, UH, I HAD TO RUN A WATER LINE A MILE TO HAVE WATER. 
          AND NOW IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROPERTY NOW, WE HAVE A EVENT CENTER, FOUR LANES, BICYCLE LANES. 
          AND WHEN, UH, SENATOR WEST WAS ABLE TO GET THE STATE OF TEXAS TO COMMIT TO A UNIVERSITY, UH, THE LAND SEARCH COMMITTEE CAME TO ME AND ASKED ME WHERE WOULD BE A GOOD LOCATION FOR THE UNIVERSITY. 
          THAT WAS 264 ACRES ADJACENT TO SKYLINE RANCH. 
          AND THEY ASKED ME, AND I TOLD 'EM THAT WOULD BE A PERFECT LOCATION FOR THE UNIVERSITY. 
          UH, THERE WAS A THOROUGH FA THAT'S SUPPOSED TO GO THROUGH THE UNIVERSITY PROPERTY. 
          STATE OF TEXAS. 
          DIDN'T WANT THE, THE THIRD FA TO GO THROUGH. 
          I WAS AT THE MEETING, I WAS ABLE TO SAY TO DART AND THE, UH, UNIVERSITY, LET'S MOVE THE DART RAIL LINE BETWEEN SKYLINE RANCH AND THE UNIVERSITY PROPERTY UNIVERSITY. 
          YOU DONATE THE EASEMENT. 
          AND THEY DID. 
          DART SPENT $104 MILLION, UH, TO BRING THE BLUE LINE TO SKYLINE RANCH BACK TO, IT'S ABOUT FROM HERE TO THE TRAIN IS FROM HERE TO HALF FOR THIS CARPET. 
          UH, RIGHT NOW WE ARE IN PRO WILLIE. 
          THE UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT WOULD'VE BEEN HERE TODAY, BUT, UH, WE KNEW IT WAS ON A CONSENT AGENDA. 
          UH, PEOPLE THAT'S, UH, AROUND THE PROPERTY, UH, UNT LANDOWNERS ASSOCIATION. 
          SO WE JUST SAID IT WAS GONNA BE ON A CONSENT AGENDA. 
          SO NOW WE, WE DID TALK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PERSON. 
          THERE IS SOME LIGHT COMMERCIAL ZONING IN THE, UH, MIXED USE FIVE, WHICH WE DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, WE WILLING TO TAKE THAT OUT. 
          UH, THE UNIVERSITY NEEDS ABOUT 400, UH, BEDS, UH, AND TO, TO CONTINUE TO GROW. 
          SO BY US BEING SO CLOSE, WE WANT TO BUILD APARTMENTS, CONDOMINIUMS, AND RETAIL. 
          UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN A, IT'S BEEN A, A JOURNEY FOR ME. 
          IT'S BEEN VERY DIFFICULT. 
          BUT, UH, WE HERE NOW IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND, UH, WE WOULD LIKE A UNANIMOUS VOTE FOR WHAT WE HAVE DONE AND WHAT WE ARE GETTING READY TO DO. 
          SO, OKAY. 
          I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU WOULD. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? UH, HE'S ON THE WAY, BUT I THINK I COULD ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU NEED. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, COMMISSION'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN? YES. 
          YOU, I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO EXPAND ON WHAT YOU ENVISION, UH, FOR THIS AREA TO INCLUDE. 
          YOU'VE MENTIONED MULTIFAMILY, UM, CONDOS IN, IN RETAIL, RIGHT? UM, SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE VERY NEEDED IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA. 
          UH, WHAT ELSE DO YOU ENVISION? WELL, I ENVISION, YOU KNOW, THE UNIVERSITY GROWING TO 30,000 STUDENTS. 
          UH, THAT WHOLE AREA CHANGING. 
          UH, WE HAD HAD A PROBLEM WITH, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT NOW EVERY LANDOWNER NOW HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          'CAUSE WE WERE ALL ON SEPTIC TANK SYSTEMS. SO, UH, RIGHT NOW, THE, THE, THE AREA IS READY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND IT, IT NEEDS TO BE DEVELOPMENT, DEVELOP. 
          UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? COMMISSIONERS, 
          [05:15:03]
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE, NONE. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? UH, I DID HAVE A, PLEASE. 
          I DID HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR HIM. 
          OKAY. 
          PLEASE. 
          I'M, BECAUSE YOU DID MENTION THAT. 
          UM, I'M QUICKLY APOLOGIES. 
          OH, I'M SORRY. 
          UM, SO WHAT'S, YOU'RE CURRENTLY, UH, UH, BEING ZONED FOUR, THIS IS WM U FIVE WALKABLE MIXED USE. 
          YES. 
          AND YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT THERE WERE SEVERAL USES THAT, UH, GO UNDERNEATH THAT, THAT REQUEST THAT YOU DON'T NEED. 
          SO IT, IT IS MU MUCH BROADER THAN WHAT YOU NEED. 
          RIGHT. 
          IN OUR CONVERSATION, UH, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY, BUT YOU ARE WILLING TO, TO HAVE DE RESTRICTIONS TO REMOVE SOME OF THE USES THAT YOU WILL NOT ACQUIRE? YES, BECAUSE WE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF, YOU KNOW, STORAGE AND, UH, INDUSTRIAL. 
          I MEAN, WE ARE LOOKING TO DEVELOP THAT AREA, HELP DEVELOP THAT AREA, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY TO ENHANCE THE GROWTH OF UNT. 
          AND, AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE LIGHT MANUFACTURING? NO, WE DON'T NEED LIGHT MANUFACTURING. 
          SO YOU WOULD INCLUDE THAT IN VOLUNTARY RESTRICTION? WE DON'T, WE DON'T NEED THAT. 
          UH, YOU WON'T NEED, UH, MANY WAREHOUSES. 
          YOU VOLUNTEERING? NO, NO. 
          REMOVING THAT FROM NO NEED, NO NEED AT ALL. 
          UH, MY APOLOGIES. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, I DIDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION, SIR. 
          I WAS ASKING, WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE VOLUNTARY RESTRICT DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT HE WAS OFFERING. 
          WE HAD THE DISCUSSION. 
          UM, THERE WON'T BE ANY VEHICLE SERVICES. 
          NO. 
          THAT YOU, SO YOU WERE, YOU ARE VOLUNTEERING DE RESTRICTING. 
          OH, YES, YES, YES. 
          AND, UM, MACHINE MACHINERY, HEAVY EQUIPMENT, TRUCK SALES AND SERVICES WOULD NOT BE RIGHT. 
          YOU CAN TAKE ALL THAT OUT. 
          I HAVE A QUESTION WHEN YOU'RE, WHEN YOU'RE READY. 
          I HAVE A QUESTION. 
          YES, PLEASE. 
          OKAY. 
          SO SIR, YES. 
          JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE, WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE. 
          ARE YOU VOLUNTEERING DE RESTRICTIONS? YES. 
          YES. 
          DO YOU HAVE, I MEAN, I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW IT WAS IN THERE, SO NO, WE, YEAH, WE, WE NEED TO HAVE A LIST OF THOSE AND YOU NEED TO READ THEM INTO THE RECORD. 
          DO YOU HAVE A, DO YOU HAVE A LIST OF THOSE THAT YOU CAN READ INTO YOUR RECORD? NO, BUT, UH, I THINK I COULD REMEMBER. 
          UH, LET'S, WHY DON'T, WHY DON'T WE, UH, LET'S, LET'S TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK AND YOU CAN GET THOSE OUT. 
          AND IF YOU WANT ON TIER DEED RESTRICTIONS, I SURE WOULD PREFER YOU READ THEM IN IT'S, UH, 3 22. 
          LET'S TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONERS, IT'S 3 33. 
          UH, WE ARE BACK ON THE RECORD. 
          WE ARE, UH, WE ARE ON CASE NUMBER EIGHT, MR. PETRI. 
          MR. PETRI, ARE WE READY FOR YOU? SIR? WOULD YOU LIKE TO VOLUNTEER SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS? YES. 
          UH, I'D LIKE TO PRO PROHIBIT THE FOLLOWING. 
          USES SELF-SERVICE STORAGE, LIGHT MANUFACTURING VEHICLE SERVICES. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALRIGHT, SIR. 
          EVERYBODY, FORMER COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, IS HE NOT WITH US? PARDON ME? IS IS FORMER COMMISSIONER ANDERSON? IS HE, DID HE HAVE TO TAKE OFF? HE HAD TO PICK UP HIS, UH OH, OKAY. 
          I WANTED TO GIVE HIM A, A HARD TIME SINCE IT WAS HIS FIRST ZONING CASE BACK BEFORE US AS A REP. 
          . 
          OKAY. 
          THERE HE IS. 
          WE, WE HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE YOU SINCE IT'S YOUR FIRST TIME BACK. 
          SO WELL PER PROTOCOL, WE HAVE TO WELCOME YOU BACK. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          I KNOW YOU'RE HAVING A BUNCH OF FLASHBACKS AND THAT'S WHY YOU RAN OUT THAT DOOR WAS QUICK. 
          AS YOU CUT , YOU GUYS KNOW WE ALL WENT THROUGH IT TOGETHER. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S REALLY GOOD. 
          IT IS REALLY GOOD TO BE BACK. 
          OKAY, WELL, WELCOME BACK. 
          OKAY, UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING, SEEING NONE? COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES. 
          SO IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 4 5 1 7 6, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND IMPROVE THE ZONING, UH, WITH THE FOLLOWING VOLUNTEER 
          [05:20:01]
DEED RESTRICTIONS OF, UH, OF LIGHT MANUFACTURING, VEHICLE SERVICES AND SELF, SELF, UH, SELF STORAGE SERVICES. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          AND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          A ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. 
          THANK YOU GENTLEMEN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, WE'LL 
          [12. 25-1747A An application for an amendment to SUP No. 1912 for a late hours  establishment on property zoned Planned Development District No. 842,  the Lower Greenville Avenue Special Provision District, with SUP No.  1289 and SUP No. 1912, on the west line of Greenville Avenue, south of  Sears Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a five-year period, subject to  amended conditions. Applicant: Brian Hankins [Old Crow] Representative: Audra Buckley Planner: Martin Bate Council District: 14 Z245-187(MB)]
NOW MOVE TO CASE NUMBER 12. 
          ITEM 12 IS CASE Z 2 45 DASH 180 7. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SEP NUMBER 1 9 1 2 FOR A LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENT ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT. 
          DISTRICT NUMBER 8 4 2 LOWER GREENVILLE AVENUE, SPECIAL PROVISION DISTRICT WITH SEP NUMBER 1, 2, 8, 9 AND SEP NUMBER 1 9 1 2 ON THE WEST LINE OF GREENVILLE AVENUE, SOUTH OF SEARS STREET. 
          STATUS RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU'LL SEAT THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          YES, I AM AUDRA BUCKLEY. 
          1414 BELLEVUE STREET, SUITE ONE 50, DALLAS, TEXAS, 7 5 2 1 5. 
          HERE REPRESENTING ONE OF THE LONGEST TERM OPERATORS IN LOIS GREENVILLE. 
          UH, OLD CROW'S BEEN THERE SINCE 1996, AND THE REASON HE'S BEEN THERE SINCE 1996 IS HE ALWAYS DOES WHAT HE'S ASKED TO DO, WHETHER IT'S BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR BY THE CITY. 
          SO WITH THAT, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M AVAILABLE. 
          UM, THERE WAS A COMMENT THAT, UH, CAME TO MY ATTENTION. 
          UH, APPARENTLY HE HAD SOME UGLY, UGLY, UGLY BLACK CURTAINS HANGING UP AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS VERY OFFENDED BY THESE UGLY, UGLY CURTAINS HANGING UP. 
          SO THOSE WERE REMOVED THIS MORNING, SO HE WON'T BE USING THOSE ANYMORE. 
          JUST FYI YOU SAID CURTAINS? MM-HMM . 
          OKAY. 
          WE'RE NEVER SURPRISED WHAT WE HEAR AROUND THIS WALL STREET. 
          COMMISSIONER SIMS, YOU WILL HEAR EVERYTHING IN AND EVERYTHING. 
          ALWAYS, UH, . 
          IS THERE ANYONE ELSE I'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT AND THE CURTAINS? YEAH, MY STORY. 
          CAN IT BE A DIVE BAR WITHOUT SOME UGLY DECOR? HE COULD GET MORE CREATIVE. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER? SEEING NONE. 
          UH, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER KINGSON? UH, I DO, I HAVE A MOTION AND I I HAVE A SECOND. 
          I HAVE A COUPLE COMMENTS IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 45 DASH 180 7. 
          I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE, UH, THE APPLICATION FIVE YEAR PERIOD. 
          FIVE YEARS, YEAH. 
          FIVE YEAR PERIOD. 
          ALRIGHT, UH, COM SUBJECT TO THE AMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          OKAY, COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONERS. 
          WE HAVE A MOTION BY ME ABOUT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          UH, COMMENTS COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? I DO, UM, NUMBER ONE, UM, I'D LIKE TO THANK STAFF FOR INCLUDING IN THE CASE REPORT THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE SUP STANDARDS FOR THIS PD, WHICH IS, UM, SOME NEW INFORMATION THAT WE HAVEN'T ALWAYS HAD. 
          I THINK THAT'S HELPFUL. 
          UM, NUMBER TWO, UH, THIS APPLICANT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST, WAS IN THE FIRST ROUND OF APPLICANTS WHO GOT A LATE NIGHT SUP AFTER THIS PD WAS ADOPTED. 
          THEY'VE BEEN A LATE NIGHT SUP APPLICANT HOLDER SINCE FOR 14 YEARS. 
          UM, THEY STARTED WITH TWO YEARS, THEN WENT TO THREE YEARS, AND THEY'VE HAD THREE YEARS SUCCESSFULLY FOR A FEW ROUNDS, AND NOW THEY'VE ASKED FOR FIVE. 
          UM, I'VE RECEIVED NO COMPLAINTS FROM THE COMMUNITY. 
          UM, COUNCILMAN RIDLEY'S OFFICE WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY EITHER. 
          I ASKED AROUND BEFORE THIS, CAME BACK BEFORE US, AND NOBODY HAD ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT THIS APPLICANT. 
          I FEEL COMFORTABLE GIVING HIM FIVE YEARS. 
          I KNOW THAT THERE ARE A FEW CRIME, UM, MATTERS IN THE REPORT. 
          I DID A LITTLE RESEARCH ON THAT. 
          I I COULDN'T FIND ANY EVIDENCE THAT THOSE ARE ACTUALLY TIED TO THIS OPERATION. 
          I KNOW THAT A FEW YEARS AGO THEY, UM, BEEFED UP THEIR SECURITY ALONG WITH SOME OF THE OTHER OPERATORS ON THE STREET. 
          UM, WE HAVE HAD AN, A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS ON GREENVILLE AVENUE AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND, UH, OPERATORS ARE WORKING WITH HOMELESS SOLUTIONS ON SOME EFFORTS TO, UM, FACILITATE SERVICES ALONG THERE. 
          AND I THINK SOME OF THOSE, UM, CRIME STATISTICS ARE PROBABLY RELATED TO SOME OF THAT. 
          UM, AND JUST GENERAL INCREASE IN SOME OF THE TYPES OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY WE SEE IN DISTRICTS LIKE THIS. 
          UM, AND I ALSO LOOKED, AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANY TABC UH, VIOLATIONS, LET ALONE CITATIONS. 
          SO I THINK THAT FIVE YEARS IS APPROPRIATE HERE. 
          UH, AS FOR THE UGLY CURTAINS, 
          [05:25:02]
I DID RECEIVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY WOULD APPRECIATE, UM, A LITTLE BIT OF ING OF THE FACILITY, AND WHEN I LOOKED AT THEM, I WAS, UM, COULD SEE THEIR POINT. 
          AND SO I WANNA THANK THE APPLICANT FOR WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY ON THAT. 
          GREENVILLE IS, YOU KNOW, CHANGING A LITTLE BIT IN THAT REGARD. 
          AND SO I, I WANNA THANK THEM FOR TAKING DOWN THE, UM, TARPS THAT THEY WERE USING AS CURTAINS AND, AND COMING UP WITH SOMETHING MORE CREATIVE FOR THAT. 
          UM, WITH THAT, I HOPE THAT YOU ALL WILL SUPPORT THIS APPLICANT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSMAN FOR YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? VICE CHAIR RUBEN. 
          NO ONE SAID TARPS BEFORE AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. 
          . 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? I 
          [13. 25-1748A An application for a new subdistrict within Planned Development District  (PDD) No. 598 on property zoned PDD No. 598 Tracts 2, 2A, and 3, on  the south line of West Wheatland Road, between South Polk Street and  South Hampton Road, north of LBJ Freeway. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to amended conditions. Applicant: Miller Sylvan [JPI Real Estate Acquisition, LLC] Representative: Jesse Copeland, Winstead Planner: Martin Bate Council District: 8 Z245-210(MB)]
HAVE IT. 
          UH, LET'S GO TO 13 PLEASE. 
          ITEM 13 IS CASE Z 2 45 DASH 2010. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 5 9 8 ON PROPERTY ZONE PD NUMBER 5 9 8, TRACK TWO, TWO WAY AND THREE ON THE SOUTH LINE OF WEST WHEATLAND ROAD BETWEEN SOUTH POLK STREET AND SOUTH HAMPTON ROAD NORTH OF LBJ FREEWAY STAFF'S. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS AND IN AMENDED EXHIBIT A AS CIRCULATED TO THE PLAN COMMISSION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, IS THE APPLICANT HERE AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE HEARD? YES, SIR. 
          JESSE COPELAND, UH, 27 28 NORTH HARWOOD STREET, UM, DALLAS, TEXAS. 
          WE'RE HERE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          I BELIEVE THE BRIEFING, UH, THAT THIS CASE WAS GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT. 
          SO THAT'S IT. 
          WE'LL WAIT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. 
          IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT NEXT JUROR RUBEN? YEAH, I, I, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE SUGGESTION IS TO HOLD THE, SINCE OUR FIRST AUGUST MEETING, WHAT'S GOING ON BETWEEN NOW AND AUGUST, THE, UH, APPLICANT IS FIGURING OUT SOME OTHER, UH, VARIABLES THAT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THIS CASE. 
          AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THOSE VARIABLES IN PLACE PRIOR TO ZONING. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          IS THERE ANY MORE INFORMATION YOU CAN GIVE? THAT WAS, THAT WAS PRETTY, I UNDERSTAND THAT INFORMATION, MAN. 
          COME ON. 
          NOT BE SURE PUBLIC AT THIS POINT, BUT, BUT CAN YOU SHARE? YEAH, IT'S, IT'S RELATED TO THE FINANCING OF THE PROJECT. 
          SO THIS IS APPLICANT REQUESTED THE, THE DELAY OF YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? YES, SIR. 
          YEAH, I, I DO HAVE A, A MOTION AND IF YOU CAN JUST GIVE IN, INDULGE ME FOR A FEW SECONDS AFTER I, IF I CAN GET A SECOND JUST TO MAKE A COMMENT. 
          SO IN THE MATTER OF YES, SO IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 4 5 2 10, I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL AUGUST 7TH, 2025. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          I WILL SECOND IT. 
          COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN? UH, YES, UH, WE DID HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING, UH, FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT. 
          IT WAS WELL RECEIVED, UH, THE DEVELOPERS, BUT THEY DO A GREAT JOB OF SEEING THAT WORK BEFORE AND, YOU KNOW, HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR THESE OTHER FACTORS, UH, WOULD'VE WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORTED IT AND APPROVED IT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS, AMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          BUT, UM, I HOPE THIS CAN GET WORKED OUT BECAUSE THIS WILL BE GREAT, UH, FOR THAT AREA. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER? CNN? OH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, PLEASE. 
          UH, CAN I OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ON THE DATE THAT'S THREE MONTHS AWAY? DOES IT TAKE, IS IT GONNA TAKE THREE MONTHS? UM, IT CAN'T BE, IT CAN'T BE MOVED AT LEAST TO THE END OF JUNE OR THE ONLY MEETING WE'RE HAVING IN JULY SINCE WE'RE GOING TO BE OUT THE, UH, WE'RE ONLY HAVING ONE MEETING IN JULY. 
          I BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT CHOSE THE DATE, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT, YEAH. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN? YEAH, THE, THE APPLICANT. 
          UH, THIS WAS THE, THE DATE WAS A REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? CNN. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          [14. 25-1749A An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 798 for a  Mining of Sand and Gravel use on property zoned an A(A) Agricultural  District, on the southwest line of Kleberg Road, between US 175 Frontage Road and Jordan Valley Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to an amended site plan and  conditions. Applicant: Mesquite Landfill TX, LP Representative: Weaver Consultants Group, LLC Planner: Michael Pepe U/A From: February 6, 2025, March 6, 2025, and April 10, 2025. Council District:  Z212-131(MP)]
WE'LL GO TO 14. 
          [05:30:13]
ITEM 14, COMMONLY KNOWN AS Z 2 1 2 1 3 1. 
          IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 7 98 FOR A MINING OF SAND AND GRAVEL USE ON PROPERTY ZONED IN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHWEST LINE CLEAVER ROAD BETWEEN US 1 75 FRONTAGE ROAD AND JORDAN VALLEY ROAD. 
          STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, IT'S ALL YOU TODAY. 
          SEEMS LIKE IT, UH, IN THE MATTER OF Z TWO 12 DASH 1 31, I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JUNE 26TH, 2025. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          I WILL SECOND IT. 
          ANY DISCUSSIONS? SEE NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          OPPOSED? AYES HAVE 
          [15. 25-1750A An application for 1) a CS Commercial Service District and 2) deed  restrictions on property zoned an MC-4 Multiple Commercial District, on  the southwest corner of Data Drive and Executive Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Reyes Gamino Planner: Martin Bate U/A From: April 10, 2025. Council District: 9 Z234-297(MB)]
IT. 
          GO TO NUMBER 15 PLEASE. 
          15, RIGHT? YEP. 
          ON 15 IS CASE Z. 
          2 34 DASH 2 97 AN APPLICATION FOR ONE A CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT AND TWO DEED RESTRICTIONS ON PROPERTY ZONE. 
          THAT MC FOUR MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DATA DRIVING EXECUTIVE DRIVE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF THE CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT AND THE VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          EMILY RODRIGUEZ JUST HERE ON THE BEHALF OF THE OWNER. 
          UM, IF I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HERE TO ANSWER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR, UH, THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UH, SEEING NONE. 
          COMMISSIONER SLEEPER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? YES, THE MATTER OF, UH, Z 2 34 DASH 2 97. 
          UH, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL RULE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SLEEPER FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYE. 
          HAVE IT. 
          [16. 25-1751A An application for the renewal of Specific Use Permit No. 1954 for  commercial amusement (inside), limited to a Class A dance hall on  property zoned a CR Community Retail District, at the northwest corner  of Singleton Boulevard and Peoria Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a three-year period with eligibility  for automatic renewals for additional three-year periods. Representative: David Flores Planner: Cherrell Caldwell U/A From: April 10, 2025. Council District: 6 Z245-134(CC)]
CREDIT NUMBER, UH, 16. 
          ITEM 16 IS Z TWO Z 2 4 5 1 3 4. 
          IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR THE RENEWAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1 9 5 4 FOR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE LIMITED TO A CLASS A DANCE HALL ON PROPERTY ZONED A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON THIS NORTHWEST CORNER SINGLE BOULEVARD AND PEORIA AVENUE STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A THREE YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL THREE YEAR PERIODS. 
          IS THE APPLICANT HERE ON THIS ITEM? WILL ANYONE WANT TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? THANK YOU. 
          IN THE MATTER OF CASES Z 2 45 DASH 1 34, I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOWED THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, BUT FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH NO ELIGIBILITY OR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS THAT THE FOLLOWING CHANGE ON SUP CONDITION SIX SHOULD LEAD HOURS OF OPERATION THE COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE LIMITED TO A CLASS A DANCE HALL MAY ONLY OPERATE BETWEEN 8:00 AM AND 10:00 PM SUNDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND BETWEEN 8:00 AM AND 1:00 AM THE NEXT DAY, FRIDAY AND SATURDAY. 
          AND I HAVE A FEW COMMENTS. 
          , YOU DO HAVE A SECOND. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THE CHANGE THAT IS BEING MADE IS ADDING LIMITED HOURS ON SUNDAY, WHICH THEY HAD REQUESTED. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS. 
          WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON THAT THE CLOSEUP PUBLIC HEARING FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH NO AUTOMATIC RENEWALS AS WELL AS THE SUP CONDITIONS, AS READ INTO THE RECORD BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. 
          ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEE NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYE. 
          THE AYES HAVE IT. 
          [17. 25-1752A An application for a CR Community Retail District with Deed Restrictions  volunteered by the applicant on property zoned a R-10(A) Single Family  District, on the Northeast corner of Webb Chapel Road and Royal Lane. Staff Recommendation: Denial. Applicant: Stacy Family Capital, LLC Planner: LeQuan Clinton U/A From: April 10, 2025. Council District: 13 Z245-143(LC)]
OKAY, 17. 
          UP NEXT IS, UM, 
          [05:35:01]
A CASE OF LAQUA. 
          I'LL LET HIM READ IT INTO THE RECORD, BUT I DID WANNA RECOGNIZE HIM. 
          HE'S, THIS IS GONNA BE HIS LAST CPC WITH US, I JUST REALIZED TODAY. 
          UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO RECOGNIZE HIM AND GIVE HIM CREDIT, UM, AND THAT WE'LL MISS HIM AND HIS, HIS, UH, CREATIVITY AND, AND GOOD ATTITUDE AND, AND NO NONSENSE APPROACH. 
          SO COME ON UP. 
          DON'T GO FAR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          UM, ITEM NUMBER 17 IS KZ 2 45 DASH 1 43. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON PROPERTIES OWNED IN R 10, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF WEBB CHAPEL ROAD AND ROYAL LANE. 
          STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          SEE, THE APPLICANT IS HERE. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, CARL CROWLEY. 
          33 33 WELBURN, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 9. 
          I I GOT THE ZIP CODE RIGHT THIS TIME. 
          ACTUALLY, MS. CARPENTER TEXTED ME  LAST TIME AND TELL ME WHAT IT WAS. 
          SHE LOOKED IT UP FOR ME. 
          UM, I BELIEVE IT CAME IN THE BRIEFING. 
          Y'ALL WERE GONNA ASK THAT YOU HOLD THIS TO JULY 10TH. 
          UM, WE HAD A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING AND IF YOU'VE READ A CERTAIN COLUMN IN THE PAPER, I WAS QUOTED PROBABLY NOT MEANING THAT TO BE QUOTED THAT WAY, BUT I, I, THE ME I, I THINK THE MEETING WENT WELL. 
          IT MAY NOT, IT STARTED ROCKY, BUT AT THE END IT GOT, UM, NEUTRAL ISH . 
          UM, UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE ANOTHER MEETING. 
          I THINK WE'VE, UH, AND IF SOMEONE'S LISTENING, WE'VE SET THE DATE FOR JULY 25TH AT THE SAME LOCATION. 
          I'M GONNA SEND OUT NOTICES TO EVERYBODY. 
          UM, WE'VE, UH, PRETTY MUCH TOLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THAT WE'RE GONNA CHANGE THE REQUEST TO AN NS DISTRICT, UM, AND OFFER SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          BUT WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA OPEN IT UP AND SEE MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT'S IT'S APPROPRIATE THERE. 
          UM, WE'RE SORT OF GONNA START OVER FROM SCRATCH AND STUFF. 
          UH, THE OWNER WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY. 
          HE ACTUALLY WORKS IN CHINA AND HE SORT OF COMMUTES BACK AND FORTH IF YOU CAN DO THAT FROM CHINA, WHICH IS NOT TOO EASY, BUT HE'LL BE IN TOWN AND THAT'S WHY WE PICKED THAT DATE. 
          UM, I CAN'T GUARANTEE ON JULY 10TH. 
          WE MAY HOLD IT AGAIN, BUT, BUT IF WE'RE STILL WORKING TOWARDS SOMETHING, I THINK, I THINK THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS AND, AND ONE OF OUR NEIGHBORS IS HERE. 
          UM, I, I THINK THEY WANT A SOLUTION TO THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS YET. 
          BUT, UH, WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT, UH, EVERYONE CAN, UH, OKAY. 
          A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN BE HAPPY. 
          YOU KNOW, YOU SEE THIS EVERY DAY. 
          NOT EVERYONE'S GONNA BE HAPPY, BUT, UM, THAT'S WHAT CHANGE IS SOMETIMES. 
          NOT EVERYONE IS HAPPY. 
          SO, SO I THINK WE'RE GETTING CLOSER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, LET'S SEE. 
          WE DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER IN SUPPORT. 
          ARE, ARE YOU IN OPPOSITION, MA'AM? OR IN SUPPORT? UM, I'M IN OPPOSITION. 
          OPPOSITION, OKAY. 
          JUST ONE MINUTE. 
          IS OUR SPEAKER IN SUPPORT ONLINE? BJ DRILLING? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          WE'RE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE. 
          UM, MY NAME IS LAUREN HENDRICKS. 
          MY ADDRESS IS 32 20 DOTHAN LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 2 9. 
          THANK YOU FOR HEARING FROM THE COMMUNITY TODAY. 
          MY NAME IS LAUREN HENDRICKS AND I LIVE AT DOTHAN LANE. 
          JUST 0.2 MILES FROM 32 0 1 ROYAL LANE. 
          MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE LIVED HERE FOR FOUR YEARS AND WE DEEPLY CARE ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          I ASK YOU TO DENY THE REZONING REQUEST FOR THIS PROPERTY. 
          CITY PLANNING STAFF HAVE ALREADY RECOMMENDED DENIAL DUE TO CONCERNS ABOUT INCREASED TRAFFIC, NOISE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DISRUPTION. 
          ALTHOUGH THE REQUEST HAS BEEN UPDATED TO PROPOSE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES OR WILL, UM, ZONING THIS, THESE SAME ISSUES REMAIN FOR THOSE REASONS. 
          NA ZONING WOULD ALSO BE AN INAPPROPRIATE FIT FOR OUR COMMUNITY. 
          OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS ALREADY GRAPPLING WITH MANY OF THE SAME ISSUES, DANGEROUS SPEEDING, DISRUPTIVE NOISE IN HEADLIGHTS, DETERIORATING SIDEWALKS AND ROADS, TRANSIENT VISITORS WHO MAY BE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OR EXPERIENCING MENTAL HEALTH CRISES AND STRAIN CITY SERVICES. 
          WE SIMPLY CANNOT AFFORD TO COMPOUND THESE CHALLENGES WITHOUT A CLEAR, MEASURABLE BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          WE UNDERSTAND THAT CITIES GROW AND EVOLVE, BUT ZONING IS MEANT TO GUIDE THAT GROWTH RESPONSIBLY, ADDING LONG-TERM VALUE WHILE PROTECTING THOSE WHO ALREADY LIVE HERE. 
          OURS IS A TRUE COMMUNITY. 
          WE'RE FRIENDS. 
          WE HOST BLOCK PARTIES. 
          WE HELP EACH OTHER WITH CHILDCARE, AND WE LOOK OUT FOR ONE ANOTHER'S SAFETY. 
          THAT KIND OF TRUST ISN'T MANUFACTURED. 
          IT'S BUILT OVER YEARS OF SOCIAL AND FINANCIAL INVESTMENT. 
          MR. STACEY CLAIMS THAT REZONING WOULD BENEFIT THE BOTH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CITY, BUT HE HAS MADE SEVERAL MISLEADING STATEMENTS THAT UNDERMINE COMMUNITY TRUST. 
          HE DESCRIBED THE PROJECT AS A RENOVATION GONE WRONG. 
          YET IN THE DALLAS WARNING NEWS, HE'S QUOTED AS SAYING HE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY ON A WHIM. 
          HE ALSO PRESENTED HIMSELF AS A NEIGHBOR. 
          THOUGH HE ONLY SPENDS HALF, HALF HIS TIME IN THE STATES, THESE CONTRADICTIONS, ALONG WITH LONG DELAYED AND POORLY FACILITATED COMMUNITY MEETING HAVE RAISED SERIOUS CONCERNS. 
          STARTING WITH AN 
          [05:40:01]
AGGRESSIVE REZONING REQUEST AND ONLY SCALING BACK AFTER COMMUNITY PUSHBACK DOES NOT REFLECT A COLLABORATIVE OR TRUSTWORTHY APPROACH TO COMMUNITY BUILDING. 
          GIVEN THIS DYNAMIC, ANY PROPOSED CHANGE SHOULD BE APPROACHED WITH EXTREME CAUTION. 
          IF THE CITY DOES MOVE FORWARD WITH REZONING, I HOPE WE CAN WORK TOGETHER WITH MR. STACY AND CITY STAFF TO ENSURE ANY DEVELOPMENT TRULY REFLECTS THE NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITY AND ALIGNS WITH THE CITY'S VISION. 
          I'M PREPARED TO TAKE ACT AN ACTIVE ROLE BY ORGANIZING NEIGHBORS, CREATING A WEBSITE TO SHARE UPDATES, FOSTER DIALOGUE, AND EXPLORE SOLUTIONS THAT BENEFIT EVERYONE, RESIDENTS, MR. STACY, AND THE CITY ALIKE. 
          IDEALLY, WE COULD BEGIN BY CONSIDERING REZONING OR CONSIDERING RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND BUILDING FROM THERE, RATHER THAN STARTING WITH A BROAD AND ILL-FITTING REZONING REQUEST AND NEGOTIATING DOWN. 
          AND IF REZONING IS INEVITABLE, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE LOCAL HIGH QUALITY BUSINESSES LIKE LDU COFFEE OR EMPIRE BAKERY. 
          THEY REFLECT, UH, THAT REFLECT THE CHARACTER AND VALUE VALUES OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          I ALSO FEEL STRONGLY THAT ROBUST DEED RESTRICTIONS MUST BE A PART OF ANY PLAN. 
          THESE SHOULD BE CLEARLY DEFINED, FILED BEFORE REZONING APPROVAL, AND WRITTEN TO RUN WITH THE LAND, NOT JUST THE OWNER, TO ENSURE LONG-TERM TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. 
          WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO CHANGE. 
          WE JUST WANT PROGRESS THAT FITS. 
          AND THIS ISN'T IT. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          DO I PUT THIS OVER HERE? LET'S SEE. 
          ARE ANY OF THE TWO SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM ONLINE? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          YES, MS. WARD. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, MS. WARD. 
          WHOA. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THESE TWO ARE OKAY. 
          TRUTH. 
          OKAY. 
          MS. UH, MS. CHU? HI. 
          THAT'S ME. 
          YES, WE'RE READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          HI, MY NAME IS RACHEL CHUDY AND I LIVE AT 3 2 1 0 GOEN LANE, WHICH IS VERY, VERY CLOSE TO THE PROPOSED LOT. 
          AND I JUST WANTED TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO THE CURRENT REZONING. 
          I HAVE A TODDLER. 
          WE'RE EXPECTING ANOTHER BABY IN SEPTEMBER. 
          THE THREE STREETS THAT ARE VERY CLOSE TO THE REZONE HAVE ABOUT 50 KIDS, AND PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS UP WALKING. 
          UM, I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY TIMES I'VE HAD TO PULL OVER MY STROLLER BECAUSE OF SPEEDING VEHICLES DOWN DAMON, WHICH IS KIND OF PERPENDICULAR TO THE OTHER STREETS. 
          IT'S, IT'S PER IT'S PARALLEL TO WEB CHAPEL, BUT PERPENDICULAR TO OTHER RESIDENTIAL STREETS, UM, BECAUSE IT'S FEEDING DRIVERS. 
          AND I AM PARTICULAR AM VERY CONCERNED THAT ANY NEW BUSINESS ON THIS CORNER, IF NOT VERY CAREFULLY THOUGHT THROUGH, WILL END UP TWO PEOPLE COMING SOUTH ON WEB, CUTTING THROUGH DAMON AT HIGH RATES OF SPEED TO BE ABLE TO GET THE ROYALS AND TURN RIGHT TO BE ABLE TO GET TO THE BUSINESS. 
          THIS HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED AT ALL. 
          UM, IN FACT, I THINK AS LAUREN INDICATED, NEIGHBORS WHO ARE VERY CLOSE KNIT, UM, ARE PRETTY UPSET THAT MR. STACY HAS SAID THAT HE'S A RESIDENT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND CARES A LOT ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN THAT SIMPLY DOES NOT SEEM TO BE THE CASE. 
          HE LIVES SOUTH OF ROYAL AND DOESN'T EVEN LIVE IN THE UNITED STATES. 
          UM, I BELIEVE HE OWNS A HOUSE WITH SPARKMAN, BUT IS SELLING IT SO THE NEIGHBORS FEEL PRETTY, UM, BETRAYED AND FEEL LIKE THE DEVELOPER DOESN'T HAVE OUR BEST INTEREST AT HEARTS. 
          UM, DESPITE, UM, THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL FALSEHOODS THAT WE FEEL ARE SHOWN IN LITERATURE THAT'S BEEN, UH, DISTRIBUTED BY MR. STACY. 
          UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE JUST DON'T FEEL THAT THERE'S BEEN ENOUGH ATTENTION PAID TO TRAFFIC OR TO WHAT MIGHT GO INTO THE LOT. 
          AND AS LAUREN SAID, WE REALLY DON'T WANNA HAVE AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC. 
          UM, IF YOU GO EVEN A MILE, HALF A MILE WEST ON ROYAL, YOU FIND BUSINESSES THAT ARE JUST NOT SAFE PLACES FOR PEOPLE WITH CHILDREN. 
          AND WE DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE THAT, UM, IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          SO WE WOULD JUST LIKE THERE TO BE A LOT MORE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS LOT. 
          UM, WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT'LL PROBABLY, UH, NOT BE A GREAT PLACE FOR RESIDENTIAL PLACE, BUT WE JUST REALLY WOULD LIKE MORE THOUGHT BEFORE A BUSINESS GOES IN THERE, GIVEN ALL THE FAMILIES WHO LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ARE MOVING IN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          IT'S MS. WARD ONLINE. 
          BLESS YOU. 
          IS MS. WARD ONLINE? HI. 
          YES. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU. 
          WE CAN'T SEE YOU YET. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I'M NOT SURE IF MY, UM, IF MY CAMERA IS GONNA BE WORKING. 
          I 
          [05:45:03]
IT, YES. 
          IT IT MUST BE WORKING. 
          WE CAN'T HEAR YOU UNLESS WE CAN SEE YOU STATE LAW. 
          OKAY. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, WE CAN. 
          I MEAN, CAN YOU SEE ME NOW? SORRY. 
          NOT YET. 
          OKAY. 
          I JUST PUSHED THROUGH THE APPROVAL FOR VIDEO. 
          SO IT SAYS THAT I'M ON VIDEO. 
          CAN Y'ALL SEE ME? WE CANNOT. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK WE SEE YOU. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          PERFECT. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, YES, MY NAME IS KATRINA WARD. 
          I LIVE AT 3 2 3 8 LEAHY DRIVE. 
          UM, I AM ABOUT FIVE HOUSES DOWN FROM THIS PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, UM, ZONING. 
          AND I LIKE, UM, LAUREN AND RACHEL, UM, ALSO OPPOSE THE, UH, THE REZONING TO COMMERCIAL. 
          UM, AT, UM, AS, UH, LAUREN STATED, WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO CHANGE. 
          WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE CHANGE IS SAFE FOR OUR CHILDREN AND OUR FAMILIES AND OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UM, WE DO HAVE A STREET AND AN IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH UPWARDS OF 50 CHILDREN. 
          UM, A LOT OF WHICH WALK, A LOT OF STROLLERS, A LOT OF BICYCLES, A LOT OF ROLLER SKATING. 
          UM, WE DO CURRENTLY HAVE A LARGE INCREASE OF ROAD TRAFFIC, SPECIFICALLY ON OUR RESIDENTIAL STREET OF INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE TRYING TO BYPASS THE, THE LIGHT AT WEB CHAPEL AND ROYAL INTERSECTION. 
          SO WE FEEL THAT THE, UM, THE COMMERCIAL CHANGE AND, UH, WOULD CAUSE AN INFLUX OF TRAFFIC OF ALL, ALL TYPES THROUGHOUT THE DAY NIGHT. 
          UM, WE ALREADY HAVE AN ISSUE ON ROYAL WITH, UM, WITH DRAG RACING, UM, ALL TIMES OF THE DAY, AND WE DO NOT WANT THAT TO INCREASE AS WELL. 
          UM, WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE, UM, INCREASED DRUG USAGE, THAT TYPE OF THING, UM, AROUND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, BECAUSE OF THE COMMERCIAL LOTS THAT ARE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF WEB CHAPEL, UM, THE, WE DO HAVE A SCHOOL, A CHARTER SCHOOL. 
          MA'AM, I'M SORRY. 
          WE, WE, WE CAN NO LONGER SEE YOU. 
          YES. 
          CAMERA. 
          CAMERA WENT OUT. 
          SECONDS. 
          OKAY. 
          CAN Y'ALL HEAR ME? WE CAN HEAR YOU. 
          WE CAN'T SEE YOU ANYMORE. 
          OH, GOODNESS. 
          OKAY. 
          THE, THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT THIS ITEM IS GONNA BE HELD UNDER ADVISEMENT, SO YOU, YOU HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. 
          UH, OKAY. 
          SO, UH, WE WILL SEE YOU ON, UH, JULY 10TH. 
          UH, HAVE A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE IT? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NOPE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEE NONE. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION, SIR? I DO. 
          MR. CHAIR. 
          AND IF I GET A SECOND, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A FEW COMMENTS, UM, IN THE MATTER OF CASE NUMBER Z 2 45 1 43, I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JULY 10, 2 0 25. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENTS. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL? YEAH. 
          YES, THANK YOU. 
          AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSION EARLIER ABOUT PLACING THINGS UNDER ADVISEMENT. 
          UH, I DON'T LIKE HAVING TO PLACE THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT AGAIN, BUT I I'M DOING SO AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE. 
          UH, A LIMITING FACTOR IS THAT THE APPLICANT, UH, IS AN EXPATRIATE WORKING IN CHINA. 
          HE'LL, HE'LL BE HOME IN JUNE AND THAT WILL BE HIS OPPORTUNITY FOR ANOTHER COMMUNITY MEETING. 
          SO HENCE THE DELAY. 
          UH, WE DID HOLD A COMMUNITY MEETING ON THIS CASE LAST WEEK, WHICH WAS WELL ATTENDED BY NEIGHBORS OF THE SITE. 
          I HOPE YOU ALL READ THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS OP-ED PIECE A FEW DAYS AGO. 
          ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS IS, UH, A, UH, UH, JOURNALIST FOR THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS AND HE WROTE A VERY, I THOUGHT, A VERY GOOD PIECE. 
          [05:50:01]
THERE WERE MANY COMMENTS MADE AND QUESTIONS ASKED THAT LED THE APPLICANT TO WANT TO HOLD AN ADDITIONAL MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY AND WORK ON THE BEST USE POSSIBLE FOR THIS SITE. 
          UH, THIS DELAY WILL GIVE THE APPLICANT AND HIS REPRESENTATIVE TIME TO WORK ON DETAILS AND DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT WILL EASE MANY OTHER CONCERNS OF THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          AYE. 
          THE OPPOSED THE AYES HAVE IT. 
          THANK YOU MR. CLINTON. 
          [18. 25-1753A An application for an R-5(A) Single Family District on property zoned an  A(A) Agricultural District, on the south line of South St. Augustine Road,  east of Middlefield Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Lakeview Homes, LLP. Representative: Luke Spicer, P.E., CCM Engineering Planner: Teaseia Blue, MBA U/A From: February 20, 2025, April 10, 2025, and May 8, 2025. Council District: 8 Z245-122(TB)]
NEXT UP IS ITEM 18, AND THAT'S Z 2 45 1 22. 
          THAT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN R FIVE, SINGLE R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONED IN AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SOUTH, SOUTH SAN AUGUSTINE ROAD, EAST OF MIDDLEFIELD ROAD. 
          STAFF RECOGNITION IS APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IS THERE APPLICANT HERE WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? IT'S NUMBER 18. 
          ANYONE LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. 
          ONE MORE TIME. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, THIS IS NOT MY LAST TIME TODAY, IS IT? OR IS IT? UM, I DO HAVE A, A QUICK COMMENT AFTER I MAKE THE MOTION AND GET A SECOND. 
          SO IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 4 5 1, 2 2, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE, AND TO APPROVE THE ZONING WITH THE FOLLOWING. 
          CHANGE THAT THESE WILL BE RR 75, SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          I'LL, I'LL SECOND IT. 
          COMMENT. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN? UH, YES, WE DID HAVE A, A, A COMMUNITY MEETING REGARDING THIS DEVELOPMENT. 
          THE CLAYBROOK RALEIGH AREA. 
          THEY'RE NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT AT ALL, IT'S JUST THE ISSUE OF THE FLOODING THAT OCCURS IN THE AREA. 
          AND THEY, THEY SEND OUT AN EMAIL TO EVERYONE TO INVITE YOU ALL OUT TO, UH, TO MEET WITH THEM, UH, TO DO A TOUR OF THE AREA SO YOU CAN SEE, UH, WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          UM, SO I JUST WANNA PUT THAT PLUG IN FOR HIM. 
          AND THAT'S IT. 
          WRAP IT UP. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? YOU KNOW, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          OPPOSED THE I I SECOND IT? YEP. 
          THE AYES HAVE, IT'LL NOW, UH, WE'LL SKIP SINCE 
          [46. 25-1780A A  City Plan Commission authorized hearing to determine the proper  zoning on property zoned Planned Development District No. 842 with  Specific Use Permit No. 1879 for a late-hours establishment on the east  line of Greenville Avenue, north of La Vista Road, south of Oram Road  and with consideration to be given to evaluating whether Specific Use  Permit No. 1879 is compatible with adjacent property and consistent with  the character of the neighborhood. Staff Recommendation: Repeal Specific Use Permit No. 1879 for a  late-hours establishment limited to an alcoholic beverage establishment  operated as a bar, lounge, or tavern. Applicant: City Plan Commission, City of Dallas Representative: City Plan Commission, City of Dallas Planner: Teaseia Blue, MBA Council District: 14 Z234-289(TB)]
WE'RE HOLDING IT, WE'LL SKIP THE NUMBER. 
          46. 
          ITEM 46 IS A Z 2 3 4 2 89. 
          IT'S A CITY PLAN COMMISSION AUTHORIZED HEARING TO DETERMINE THE PROPERTY ZONING ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 8 42 WITH SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1879 FOR A LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENT ON THE EAST LINE IN GREENVILLE AVENUE, NORTH LA VISTA ROAD, SOUTH OF ORM ROAD. 
          AND WITH CONSIDERATION TO BE GIVEN, EVALUATING WHETHER SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 1879 IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS A REPEAL SPECIFIC USE PERMIT NUMBER 1879 FOR A LATE HOURS ESTABLISHMENT LIMITED TO AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT OPERATED AS A BAR LOUNGER TAVERN. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY QUESTIONS? WELL, WE IS OUR SPEAKER ONLINE, JORGE, ON THIS ONE? NOPE. 
          COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 3 4 2 8 9? I MOVE THAT WE HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN, UH, TO JUNE 12TH 25 AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, I HAVE A BRIEF COMMENT. 
          YOU DO HAVE A SECOND. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND COMMENT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, ORDINARILY THIS IS NOT ONE THAT I WOULD HOLD OPEN, BUT THE LAWYER REPRESENTING THE OPERATOR SPECIFICALLY ASKED ME IF I WOULD AGREE TO POSTPONE IT BECAUSE HE IS OUT OF TOWN, UM, ON VACATION THIS WEEK AND UNABLE TO ATTEND THE HEARING, AND I AGREED TO DO THAT AS A PROFESSIONAL COURTESY. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. 
          WE'LL GO TO 
          [19. 25-1754A Consideration of amending Chapters 51 and 51A of the Dallas  Development Code, Section 51A-1.105(a)(4) and 51A-4.511 (e)(2)(iii) to  provide an application fee for neighborhood forest overlays and include  Front and Corner Side Yard regulations. Staff Recommendation: Hold under advisement to June 12, 2025. Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee Recommendation: Approval. Planner: Jacob Rojo Council District: Citywide  DCA245-001(JR)]
19. 
          ITEM 19 IS DCA 2 4 5, 
          [05:55:01]
UH, DASH 0 0 1 AND IT'S CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDING CHAPTERS 51 AND 51 A OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 51 A DASH 1.15 A FOUR AND 51, A 4.511 E TWO, UH, THREE TO, TO PROVIDE AN APPLICATION FEE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD FOREST TO OVERLAYS AND TO INCLUDE FRONT AND CORNER SIDE YARD REGULATIONS. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO HOLD UNDER ADVISEMENT TO JUNE 12TH, 2025. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES. 
          19. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT. 
          DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO. 
          MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, IN THE MATTER OF DCA 2 45 DASH 0 0 1, I MOVE THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JUNE 12TH, 2025. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYES 
          [20. 25-1755A Consideration of removing Section 51A-4.701(e) “Postponements” to  eliminate the postponement process for zoning amendments. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee Recommendation: Approval. Planner: Jalyn Porchay  Council District: Citywide  DCA245-006(JP)]
HAVE IT. 
          LET'S GO 20. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          ALRIGHT, UH, NEXT UP WE HAVE CASE, UH, ITEM NUMBER 20, UM, WHICH IS CONSIDERATION OF REMOVING SECTION 51 A DASH 4.701 SUBSECTION E THE POSTPONEMENTS TO ELIMINATE THE POSTPONEMENT PROCESS FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS. 
          UM, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          THE ZONING ORDINANCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          AND I AM JALEN POCHE, SENIOR PLANNER, UH, WHO PRESENTED ON THE CASE. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSER, DO YOU HAVE MOTION, SIR? YES. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF DCA 2 45 DASH 0 0 6, MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOLLOW STAFF AND ZAC RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSER FOR YOUR MOTION AND VICE CHAIR RUBEN FOR YOUR SECOND DISCUSSION. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSTON. 
          UM, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE SOME POLICY REASONS BEHIND THIS, I'M NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          I THINK I COULD GET BEHIND SUPPORTING THE MOTION IF IT ONLY APPLIED TO AUTHORIZED HEARINGS. 
          I HAVE SOME PROBLEMS SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS IT APPLIES TO REGULAR ZONING CASES. 
          I SEE A REAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO. 
          NUMBER ONE, IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO ME THAT IT IS BEING USED ALL THAT OFTEN WHEN IT COMES TO REGULAR ZONING CASES. 
          IF STAFF HAD ACTUALLY PROVIDED US THE FULL GAMUT OF DATA INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING 25 IN FIVE YEARS AND THEN DRILLING DOWN TO FIND IT'S ONLY BEEN TWO IN THE LAST TWO YEARS, IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE UP EASIER FOR US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DEALING WITH. 
          UM, THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE, BUT, UM, WE HEAR HUNDREDS OF ZONING CASES A YEAR, AND IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A HANDFUL OF THOSE BEING POSTPONED, THEN I DON'T SEE A REASON WHY THE PUBLIC CAN'T PAY A FEE IN ORDER TO DO THAT. 
          IN MY EXPERIENCE, TYPICALLY IT'S A SITUATION WHERE THE PUBLIC FINDS OUT ABOUT A ZONING CASE FAIRLY LATE AND THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO GET ENOUGH TIME IN ORDER TO, UM, LEARN MORE ABOUT IT AND GET ORGANIZED IN ADVANCE OF IT GOING TO CPC OR COUNCIL. 
          I SEE REAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN THAT AND AUTHORIZED HEARINGS WHERE THOSE TYPICALLY ARE ON THE BOOKS FOR AT LEAST A COUPLE YEARS. 
          THERE'S A SERIES OF PUBLIC MEETINGS AND IF SOMEONE DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT THEM, THEY PROBABLY DIDN'T BOTHER TO LEARN OR GET ENGAGED ENOUGH TO KNOW ABOUT THEM. 
          UM, SO I CAN'T SUPPORT THE MOTION THE WAY THAT IT IS IF THERE'S A, AN EFFORT TO DIVIDE THE TWO INTO TWO DIFFERENT CONSIDERATIONS. 
          AS FOR THE COST, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S AN EFFORT TO INCREASE THE COST OF THE FEE SO THAT IT IS MORE IN LINE WITH WHAT IT ACTUALLY COSTS TO RE-NOTICE IT, THAT MIGHT ALSO BE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. 
          I DIDN'T HEAR STAFF, UM, BEING ABLE TO ACTUALLY PUT REAL DOLLARS TO WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF SOME OF THESE THINGS. 
          THERE WERE BROAD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT COST, BUT I COULDN'T GET MY HANDS AROUND 
          [06:00:01]
WHAT WE WERE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT TO MAKE AN EDUCATED DECISION ON THAT EITHER. 
          UM, BUT FOR THOSE REASONS, I CAN'T SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU MR. RUBIN. 
          YEAH, I'M, WE WILL BE GLAD TO SUPPORT THIS IN ITS ENTIRETY. 
          UM, AND DO WANT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT COMMISSIONER KINGSTON SAID. 
          I THINK IT IS PROFOUNDLY ANTI-DEMOCRATIC THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL WITHIN A NOT NOTIFICATION AREA BY PAYING A FEE OF ANY AMOUNT, CAN CHOOSE TO DELAY A ZONING CASE TWICE FOR A TOTAL OF EIGHT WEEKS. 
          I, I THINK IF THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, A LEGITIMATE NEED FOR DELAY, THE RIGHT WAY TO DO THAT IS HAVING A MAJORITY OF ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES ON THIS BODY OR ON THE CITY COUNCIL MAKE THAT DECISION CONSIDERING THE BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS IN A PUBLIC FORUM LIKE THIS. 
          I CAN SPEAK TO MY THREE EXPERIENCES WITH CASES WHERE, UH, INDIVIDUALS HAVE, UM, FILED, UM, DELAY, UM, REQUEST, UM, AT CPC TWO OR PEPPER SQUARE AND SHORELINE. 
          AND THOSE WERE CASES WHERE THE COMMUNITY HAD AMPLE INPUT, YOU KNOW, NOTICE MULTIPLE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND DISCUSSION. 
          AND IT WAS OPPONENTS WHO DISLIKED THE PROJECT AND WANTED TO THROW, UM, YOU KNOW, A WRENCH IN THE WHEELS AND, AND SLOW DOWN OUR PROCESSES AT THE CITY. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, THEY HAD COMPLAINTS AND THEY HAD DISAGREEMENTS. 
          UM, BUT I THINK THE BEST WAY FOR THOSE DISAGREEMENTS TO BE HASHED OUT IS HERE THROUGH THESE PUBLIC PROCESSES AND NOT BY, UM, ALLOWING SOMEONE TO PAY A FEE OF $150 OR ANY AMOUNT TO DELAY THE PROCESS. 
          AND THE THE THIRD CASE WAS ACTUALLY ONE THAT I WORKED IN A DISTRICT WHEN THERE WAS A VACANCY AND I, I WAS TRYING TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE APPLICANT OR, UH, WITH THE OPPOSITION AND THEY CAME IN, I, I THINK I SPOKE TO THEM ON A FRIDAY AFTERNOON AND SAID, LET'S DISCUSS THIS AND HAVE A REAL CONVERSATION WITH ME, YOU AND THE APPLICANT BECAUSE YOU HAVE CONCERNS. 
          AND RATHER THAN DO THAT, THEY RAN DOWN ON MONDAY AND PAID THE, UM, $150 FEE AND KICKED IT DOWN THE ROAD BY A MONTH. 
          AND I THOUGHT IT WAS ACTUALLY REALLY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE THAT I WASN'T ABLE TO CONVENE THE APPLICANT IN THE OPPOSITION, YOU KNOW, PROMPTLY AND TRY TO, YOU KNOW, GET SOMETHING DISCUSSED. 
          RATHER IT JUST TURNED INTO THIS SITUATION WHERE THERE WAS KIND OF A LOT OF ILL WILL AND, AND MISTRUST IN GENDERED BY THE PROCESS. 
          SO I DIDN'T FIND THE DELAY PARTICULARLY HELPFUL, UM, TO ME AND IN WORKING A CASE, THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE I WOULD'VE DELAYED IT IF THERE WAS STILL OUTSTANDING STUFF THAT PEOPLE WORKED OUT. 
          UH, BUT I, I HAVE NOT SEEN THE DELAY, UM, THE POSTPONEMENT PROCEDURE EVER USED TO HELPFUL EFFECT ON ANY ZONING CASE IN MY ALMOST SIX YEARS ON THE HORSESHOE. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? YEAH, STICK AROUND. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSTON. 
          UH, YOU KNOW, I DON'T FEEL THAT STRONGLY ABOUT THIS. 
          I THINK PART OF MY REACTION IS WHEN THIS WAS BRIEFED TO US, THE DATA PROVIDED WAS INCOMPLETE. 
          AND I SEE A PATTERN WITH STAFF ON THIS. 
          IT'S SOMETHING THAT IF SOMETHING STAFF WANTS OR SOMETHING STAFF DOESN'T WANT, WE GET IMPARTIAL, WE GET INCOMPLETE DATA AND IT, IT'S SKEWED TO SUPPORT WHATEVER IT IS STAFF WANTS INSTEAD OF GIVING US ALL OF THE DATA SO THAT WE CAN MAKE AN EDUCATED DECISION. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S DONE ON PURPOSE, AND I THINK THAT'S DISHONEST AND IT IRRITATES ME INSTEAD OF SAYING WE HAD X NUMBER OF ZONING CASES AND OF THOSE X NUMBER 25 OF THEM USE THIS PROCESS SO THAT WE COULD EVALUATE WHAT PERCENTAGE OF CASES USE THE PROCESS WE WERE TOLD 25 OUT OF FIVE YEARS. 
          THAT'S NOT REALLY VERY HELPFUL INFORMATION WITHOUT KNOWING HOW MANY 25 IS OUT OF THE FULL GAMUT OF CASES. 
          SAME FOR THE AUTHORIZED HEARINGS, AND SAME FOR SAYING IT COSTS US A DOLLAR A PAGE OR A DOLLAR PER, YOU KNOW, SENDING FOR EVERY PERSON WE HAVE TO SEND IT TO WITHOUT KNOWING REALLY WHAT'S THE COST, MEDIAN COST, AVERAGE COST, TOTAL COST, SOME KIND OF WAY TO PUT IT 
          [06:05:01]
INTO CONTEXT SO THAT WE CAN MAKE EDUCATED DECISIONS. 
          AND THIS IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF WHEN WE GET INFORMATION, WE'RE NOT GIVEN ALL THE INFORMATION WE'RE, WE'RE INFORMATION'S CHERRY PICKED TO US. 
          AND THAT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO MAKE DECISIONS BASED ON DATA TO REPRESENT THE CITY TO MAKE GOOD BUSINESS DECISIONS FOR THE CITY, TO REPRESENT OUR CONSTITUENTS FAIRLY WITH ACCURATE INFORMATION. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF WHY I'M HAVING A HARD TIME BUYING OFF ON THIS BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE'S PROBABLY SOMETHING OUT THERE THAT I'M NOT BEING TOLD I'M BEING HOODWINKED AND IT'S JUST A PATTERN IN PRACTICE THAT I DON'T APPRECIATE. 
          AND IF THERE ARE CHANGES IN OUR PROCESSES THAT YOU WANT US TO BUY OFF ON, IT'D BE A LOT EASIER IF YOU WANNA SELL THIS AS A TRANSPARENCY MEASURE, IF YOU STARTED OFF BY BEING MORE TRANSPARENT WITH US IN THE INFORMATION YOU PRESENTED TO US IN ORDER TO HAVE US CONSIDER CHANGES IN THE PROCESS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HEMP TO FILE BY COMMISSIONER FORESITE. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          UM, I'M NOT GONNA ECHO THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID. 
          I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT I SEE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN AUTHORIZED HEARINGS AND REGULAR ZONING CASES. 
          UM, I DO THINK THAT EITHER ADJUSTMENT OF THE FEE ADJUSTMENT OF THE PROCESS IN A TYPICAL ZONING CASE MAY BE A WAY TO BALANCE ALLOWING FOR THAT FLEXIBILITY WHERE IT MAY BE NEEDED BECAUSE IT'S RARELY USED. 
          I THINK IN TERMS OF TYPICAL ZONING CASES, WE'VE HELD A NUMBER OF CASES TODAY, MANY THAT WERE AT APPLICANT'S REQUEST, VARIETY OF FACTORS. 
          AND YES, THIS BODY STILL RETAINS THAT ABILITY, BUT I DO THINK THAT THERE ARE OTHER TIMES WHEN HAVING THE, BEING A STAKEHOLDER THAT NEEDS THAT FLEXIBILITY FOR WHATEVER MAY BE DRIVING IT, JUST HAVING THAT TOOL IS SOMETHING THAT I'M NOT SURE I'M FULLY READY TO SIMPLY REMOVE. 
          UM, THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT? FOLLOWED COMMISSIONER. 
          WELL, I THINK COMMISSIONER FORSIGHT WAS VERY FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER HOUSE, RIGHT? I WOULD JUST LIKE TO STATE THAT I, UH, I I WILL ALSO OPPOSE THIS MOTION. 
          I FEEL THAT, UH, THERE ARE IS ANOTHER SOLUTION HERE AND THAT SOLUTION IS TO, IF WE'RE LOSING, UH, BIG TIME ON SOME OF THESE, UH, REIFICATION CASES THAT THE CITY SHOULD BE CHARGING, YOU KNOW, OUR COST, UH, AND PASSING THAT BACK TO THE PERSON WHO HAS SUBMITTED THE REQUEST FOR THE POSTPONEMENT. 
          UH, BUT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE GETTING RID OF THE, UH, THE RIGHT FOR CITIZENS WHO ARE STAKEHOLDERS IN THESE CASES TO BE ABLE TO ASK FOR A POSTPONEMENT. 
          BUT, BUT THERE SHOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THE FEE REALISTIC SO THAT THE CITY IS NOT IN A CASE LIKE THIS, YOU MENTIONED WHERE THERE'S $15,000 BEING SPENT ON A REIFICATION, YOU KNOW, THE PERSON WHO'S MAKING THAT REQUEST, THEY SHOULD BE AWARE THAT IT'S GONNA COST $15,000 AND, AND LET THEM THEN MAKE THE DECISION IF THEY WANT TO DO THE ASK FOR THE PROPOSAL. 
          POSTPONEMENT COMMISSIONER. 
          THAT'S RIGHT. 
          YOU KNOW, SETTING THE WHOLE COST ISSUE ASIDE, EVEN IF THE, UH, THE PERSON DESIRING TO HOLD THE CASE WERE TO PAY $15,000, SAY OUR CITY SHOULD NOT HAVE A PRACTICE OF A PROCESS EVEN ON 1% OF THE CASES IN FIVE YEARS, THAT HAS THE APPEARANCE OF BEING, UH, BEHIND THE SCENES OR SOMEHOW NOT ON THE RECORD AND NOT, UM, TRANSPARENT. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. 
          SO LET'S JUST SET THE COST SIDE, UH, UH, SIDE OF THIS, UH, AWAY, UH, TO THE SIDE. 
          UH, THIS IS ABOUT, UM, A MORE EQUITABLE AND MORE TRANSPARENT PROCESS, WHICH SEEMS LIKE WE SHOULD ALL BE FOR IT REDUCES, UH, ARBITRARY AND, UH, FRANKLY SORT OF PUNITIVE DELAYS. 
          AND IT WOULD ELIMINATE A VERY CONFUSING SECOND MAILING ON CASES WHEN THESE CASES ARE HELD AND THE PUBLIC IS EVEN MORE CONFUSED THAN THEY ARE THE FIRST TIME AROUND. 
          UM, HAVING SAID THAT, I WOULD JUST, UH, NOTE THAT YOU PROBABLY SAW IN THE BRIEFING MATERIALS THAT THIS PAST ZAC UNANIMOUSLY, ONCE AGAIN, COMMISSIONER HOUSER STOLE MY THUNDER. 
          SO , I WAS GONNA POINT OUT EXACTLY THE SAME THING. 
          I THINK THIS IS A, A SMART ADJUSTMENT, IMPROVES OUR PROCESS AND, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST THE IRONY OF IT, THAT, UH, I BELIEVE THAT IN, I THINK IN ALL THE CASES WHERE SOMEONE HAS PAID FOR THE TODAY ARE THE EXACT CASES WHERE THERE HAS BEEN THE MOST COMMUNITY OUTREACH, UH, WHERE 
          [06:10:01]
THE THE CASES ARE ARE NOT A STRANGER TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND IN FACT, MOST OF 'EM THERE HAS HAVE BEEN, UH, ARTICLES IN THE PAPER. 
          UH, AND SO I, I THINK THIS IS JUST A SMART MOVE HERE, UH, NOW AND I'M VERY HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT. 
          UH, SECOND ROUND VICE TRU, BUT I JUST WANNA BE VERY CLEAR, PUT ME DOWN TO SPEAK IF YOU CAN. 
          OH, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          FIRST ROUND. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT, PLEASE. 
          YEAH, I JUST COMM THIS. 
          I'LL SAY THE COMMON THING, RIGHT? IT, IT'S HARD FOR MY GROUP ON IN DISTRICT FOUR ON WIL HURT AVENUE TO EVEN COLLECT ENOUGH MONEY TO STOP A CASE LIKE THIS EVEN IF WE WANTED TO, RIGHT? SO THIS REMOVES THAT LEVEL OF EQUITY, UM, OR ADDS A LEVEL OF EQUITY IN AN EQUAL PLAYING FIELD. 
          UM, IT BRINGS EVERYBODY TO THE TABLE AND GIVES EVERYBODY A CHANCE TO, TO SPEAK THEIR PIECE. 
          THERE'VE BEEN TIMES WHERE PEOPLE JUST WORKED, YOU KNOW, HAD A THANKSGIVING BREAK, CAME BACK, HAD TO GO BACK TO WORK, DIDN'T KNOW THE CASE WAS THERE AND WE NEEDED A HOLD AS A NEIGHBORHOOD AND COULDN'T AFFORD THAT HOLD. 
          UM, SO I THINK THIS IS, UM, A GREAT STEP FORWARD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          SECOND AROUND LAST CHAIR RUBEN, COMMISSIONER HERBERT KIND OF STOLE WHAT I SAID. 
          I JUST WANNA PUT SOME NUMBERS OUT ON THE RECORD. 
          IF WE WERE TO RIGHTSIZE IT TO ALLOW THE CITY TO RECOUP COSTS ON, ON NOTIFICATION, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A FLOOR OF FOUR TO $500 AND A CEILING OF NO, NO CEILING. 
          SO IF SOMEONE WANTED TO, UM, PAY TO DELAY, YOU KNOW, PD 5 95 UNDER THIS, IF, IF WE WERE TO, YOU KNOW, TURN IT TO AN ACTUAL COST TO POSTPONE, THEN ONLY THE VERY WEALTHY WOULD BE ABLE TO CUT A CHECK FOR $11,000. 
          SO FROM AN EQUITY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THIS MAKES SENSE TOO. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONERS? LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE. 
          DISTRICT ONE? YES. 
          DISTRICT TWO? NO. 
          DISTRICT THREE? YES. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          WAS THAT A YES? I THINK YOU SAID YES. 
          WAS THAT A YES. 
          COMMISSIONER HERBERT? YES. 
          YES. 
          SORRY. 
          THANK YOU SIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DISTRICT FOUR? NO. 
          DISTRICT FIVE? YES. 
          DISTRICT SIX? DISTRICT SEVEN, YOUR HONOR? YES. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT? NO. 
          DISTRICT NINE? YES. 
          DISTRICT 10? YES. 
          DISTRICT 11? YES. 
          DISTRICT DISTRICT 13? YES. 
          DISTRICT 14 AND PLACE 15. 
          MOTION PASSES? YES. 
          PARDON ME? PARDON ME? PARDON ME? I DID MOTION PASSES. 
          LET'S, UH, 
          [SUBDIVISION DOCKET]
GO ON TO, UH, OUR SUBDIVISION DOCUMENT, CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS CONSISTING OF CASES 21 THROUGH 36 WITH NUMBER 25, UH, COMING OFF DUE TO A CONFLICT. 
          UH, SO IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEMS 21 THROUGH 24 OR 26 THROUGH 36? WE'LL VOTE ON NUMBER 25 INDIVIDUALLY. 
          ANYONE HERE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THOSE ITEMS? UH, ARE YOU GUYS HERE FOR A, A, A PLAT? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT, SO YOU'RE OKAY, NOT, NOT SPEAKING, YOU DON'T HAVE TO, UH, OKAY, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE DIDN'T DISPOSE OF YOUR CASE ALREADY. 
          OKAY. 
          SAME. 
          I'M JUST HEARING CASE. 
          GOT . 
          GOTCHA. 
          SMART. 
          UH, OKAY, LET'S GET, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. 
          THE CONSENT NDA CONSISTS OF 16 ITEMS. ITEM 21 S TWO, 12 DASH TWO 14 R, ITEM 22 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 49. 
          I AM SORRY, I HAVE TO REPEATS 2 1 4, I'M SORRY. 
          OH, OKAY. 
           ITEM 21 S TWO 12 DASH TWO 14 R, ITEM 22 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 49. 
          ITEM 23 S 2 4 5 DASH ONE 50. 
          ITEM 24 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 53. 
          ITEM 26 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 55. 
          ITEM 27 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 57. 
          ITEM 28 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 58. 
          [06:15:02]
ITEM 29 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 59, ITEM 30 S 2 4 5 DASH ONE 60. 
          ITEM 31 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 61. 
          ITEM 32 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 62. 
          ITEM 33 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 63. 
          ITEM 34 S 2 45 DASH 1 64, ITEM 35 S 2 45 DASH 1 65, ITEM 36 S 2 4 5 DASH ONE 70. 
          ITEM 36, CORRECTION ON STAFF REPORT APPLICATION AND OWNER NAME TO READ AS CCC M, ENGINEERING SLASH NEXT STOP LLC. 
          ALL CASES HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR HEARING AT THIS TIME. 
          AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE  LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS? OKAY, SEE NONE. 
          COMM FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION FOR ITEMS 21? HOLD ON, HOLD ON, HOLD ON. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          THE ONE I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT IS ONE OF THOSE IS NOT THE SAME. 
          PHILIP ONE IS IT? I'M PULLING BACK ON MY SCREEN. 
          WE, WE DIDN'T CATCH YOUR QUESTION. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER, I'M HAVING TO RESIGN IN. 
          IS ANYONE KNOW THE, UH, ST. 
          PHILLIPS CASE? YES. 
          YES. 
          25 WAS PULLED. 
          WE'RE WE'RE NOT VOTING ON 25 YET. 
          WE'LL VOTE ON THAT NEXT. 
          NOT 25. 
          THE ST. 
          PHILLIPS CASE ALSO. 
          PHILLIPS COMMISSIONER WHEELER, WE, WE DIDN'T GET THE LAST COMMENT. 
          MY APOLOGIES. 
          I'M TRYING TO PUT, IT'S ANOTHER ONE ON HER, THE, THE APPLICANT IN ST. 
          PHILIP'S. 
          I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT ONE IS NOT ON THERE. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER TO, UH, I THINK WE, WE DIDN'T PULL ANY CASES OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          ONLY THE ONE WHERE YOU HAVE A CONFLICT. 
          OKAY, I'M TRYING TO FIND ONE MORE. 
          IT'S THE ONE THAT'S ON THE, THAT, THAT THE ST. 
          PHILIP'S. 
          SO I'M LOOKING TO SEE WHICH IS THAT ONE A PART OF THESE. 
          SO HOLD ON. 
          YEAH, ST. 
          PHILIP'S, ST. 
          PHILIPS IS NUMBER 35. 
          SO THAT ONE STAYED ON CONSENT. 
          THEY NEEDS TO COME OFF. 
          DID YOU NEED TO PULL 35 OFF CON? I I DO. 
          I NEED TO PULL 35 OFF. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          I GOTCHA. 
          YEAH. 
          DO YOU HAVE A CONFLICT ON THAT ONE? DON'T HAVE A CONFLICT, BUT I DO HAVE ANISHA. 
          GOTCHA. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT, PERFECT. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. 
          SO, WE'LL, WE'LL PULL 25 AND 35 OFF CONSENT. 
          20 AND THERE'S ANOTHER ST. 
          PHILIP'S, BUT EL CONSENT? YEAH. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          IT'S STAND BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          THERE MAY BE A SECOND ONE. 
          35, 31, 31. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          SO CASES 31 AND 35 OR ST. 
          PHILIP'S. 
          YOU WANT TO TAKE A QUICK PEEK AT THOSE TO SEE WHICH ONE DO YOU WANT TO GET PULLED OFF? 
          [06:20:09]
31 OR 35 OR BOTH? I ONLY WANNA PULL 35 OFF BECAUSE I HAVE QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY, SO WE'LL LEAVE 31 ON CONSENT. 
          OKAY, SO, AND 35 IS THE ONE THAT'S THE APPLICANT, PHILLIPS, AM I CORRECT? OKAY. 
          SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN? SO THE, THE MOTION WOULD BE 21 THROUGH 24, 26 THROUGH 34 AND 36. 
          OKAY, SO 25 AND 35 PULLED OKAY IN THE MATTER OF THE SUBDIVISION CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 21 THROUGH 24 AND 26 THROUGH 34 36. 
          I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. 
          [25. 25-1760A An application to replat a 0.344-acre tract of land containing all of Lots 15 and 16 in City Block A/1207 to create one lot on property located on  Metropolitan Avenue, northeast of Botham Jean Boulevard. Applicant/Owner: Bruce Kaminski, Kaminski Custom Builders LLC Surveyor: CBG Surveying Texas, LLC Application Filed: April 23, 2025 Zoning: PD 595 (MF-2(A)) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the  conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 7 S245-154]
I WILL GO TO NUMBER 25 AND LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER WHEELER HAS UH, A CONFLICT ON THIS ITEM AND IS GONNA LOG OFF FOR JUST A MOMENT. 
          ITEM 25 S 2 45 DASH 1 54, AN APPLICATION TO RELET, A 0.344 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOTS 15 AND 16 IN CITY BLOCK A OVER 1 2 0 7 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON METROPOLITAN AVENUE NORTHEAST OF BO HAMIN BOULEVARD. 
          ALL CASES HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR HEARING AND AT THIS TIME STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET ARE AS APPROVED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, VICE TRUMAN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF S 2 4 5 1 54? I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED ON THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          VICE CHAIR RUBIN AND COMMISSIONER HAN FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYE. 
          YOU OPPOSED? I HAVE IT. 
          [35. 25-1770A An application to replat a 5.551-acre tract of land containing all of Lots 6A,  10, 17 through 22 in City Blocks 11/1156; portion of Lots1, 2 and 7 in City  Block 11/1157 and to abandon portions of Peabody Avenue, Colonial  Avenue and an alley to create one lot on property located on Pennsylvania  Avenue at Julius Schepps Freeway/Interstate Highway No. 45, northwest  corner. Applicant/Owner: Julie Saqueton, St. Philips School and Community  Center Surveyor: KFM Engineering and Design LLC Application Filed: April 25, 2025 Zoning: PD 597, PD 595 Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the  conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 7 S245-165]
WE'LL GO TO 35 AND LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT COMMISSIONER WHEELER HAS JOINED US AGAIN. 
          IT'S ABOUT TO JOIN US. 
          LET'S JUST PAUSE FOR A MOMENT. 
          WE'RE GONNA PAUSE FOR A SECOND. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER, WHILE YOU, IF YOU CAN HEAR ME, WE WILL, WE'LL WAIT FOR YOU TO GET BACK ONLINE. 
          OKAY, LET ME KNOW. 
          YEP. 
          READY? OKAY, SHE'S GONNA LOG BACK ON. 
          OKAY. 
          LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER IS BACK ON AND, UH, WE WILL HEAR NUMBER, UH, 35 ITEM 35, AN APPLICATION TO RELA A 5.551 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOTS. 
          SIX A 10 17, 2 22 IN CITY BLOCKS. 
          11 OVER 1, 1 56 PORTION OF LOTS, ONE, TWO, AND SEVEN 
          [06:25:01]
IN CITY BLOCK 11 OVER 1 1 5 7. 
          AND TO ABANDON PORTIONS OF PEABODY AVENUE, COLONIAL AVENUE, AND AN ALLEY TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY. 
          LOCATED ON PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AT JULIUS S SIPS FREEWAY, INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 45 NORTHWEST CORNER. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? AH, OKAY. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER CITY STAFF, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO DALLAS. 
          I, UH, HAVE THE PLEASURE OF SERVING AS THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR ST. 
          PHILLIPS. 
          I'VE WORKED THERE ALMOST 20 YEARS NOW, AND, UM, IT WAS ABOUT 2015 WHEN TXDOT UM, UH, MADE THE DECISION TO MAKE CHANGES TO HIGHWAY 45 AND SM RIGHT FREEWAY. 
          AND, UM, THERE WAS A BIG PUBLIC MEETING THAT SENATOR ROYCE WEST CHAIRED AND THIS PEOPLE, IT WAS, THIS ONE WAS HOSTED AT ST. 
          PHILIP'S AND THERE WERE PEOPLE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT TXDOT CHANGES AND THEY WERE NOT GONNA HAVE AN EXIT AT MLK BOULEVARD OR AL LIPSKI AT THE TIME. 
          IT WAS GRAND AVENUE. 
          AND THERE IT WAS A LOT OF NEGATIVE FEEDBACK. 
          AND TXDOT WENT BACK AND THEY REVISED THE PLANS AND THEY CAME BACK A COUPLE YEARS LATER WITH NEW PLANS THAT SHOWED UP AN EXIT OFF OF MLK ONTO MLK BOULEVARD. 
          UM, AND THEY HAD THIS MEETING AT THE TOWN NORTH, I'M SORRY, NOT TOWN NORTH, THAT'S WHERE I GO, THE PARK SOUTH YMCA. 
          AND THEY HAD THE PLANS OUT AND IT BECAME CLEAR THAT THEY, PART OF THE, THIS WAS GONNA SHUT DOWN COLONIAL AVENUE, WHICH WAS A ROAD THAT CONNECTS MARTIN LUTHER KING BOULEVARD TO PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE AMONG OTHER STREETS THAT WERE BEING SHUT DOWN. 
          AND THEY INVITED, YOU KNOW, FEEDBACK. 
          SO, UM, I WENT WITH OUR, UM, BOARD COMMITTEE CHAIR TO TDOT AND UM, TOLD THEM ABOUT OUR CONCERN ABOUT SHUTTING DOWN COLONIAL. 
          IT, IT'S, UM, IT WAS GONNA DEAD END RIGHT AT OUR, WHAT WAS A THOROUGHFARE TO THE FREEWAY WAS GONNA DEAD END RIGHT AT OUR CAMPUS, BUT ALSO IN OUR PARKING LOT. 
          AND PEOPLE WERE GONNA KIND OF GET STUCK AND, AND IT WAS ALSO A PASS THROUGH FOR A BUS. 
          AND, UM, WE WERE TOLD THAT WITH THE MLK BOULEVARD EXIT THAT, AND WE KNEW THIS 'CAUSE WE SEE IT, BUT COLONIAL BOULEVARD AND THE FREEWAY OFF RAMP COME TOGETHER VERY CLOSE TOGETHER ON PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. 
          AND THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY AND THEY SAID, UH, THERE THEY HAD TO SHUT COLONIAL DOWN. 
          AND SO WE WENT BACK AND ASKED THEM IF THERE WAS ANY POSSIBILITY OF CHANGES. 
          THEY SAID WE'RE COLONIAL AVENUE CANNOT INTERSECT MLK AT THE SAME APPROXIMATE PLACE THAT THE FREEWAY IS. 
          AND SO WE GOT THEM TO MAKE A MODIFICATION. 
          SO INSTEAD OF ENDING RIGHT IN OUR PARKING LOT, BASICALLY THEY MAKE IT SO THAT OUT OUTBOUND TRAFFIC GOES TO PEABODY AND GETS BACK ON THE ACCESS ROAD. 
          IF YOU WERE COMING DOWN, VE I'M SORRY, THIS IS DIFFICULT. 
          I DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS GONNA COME OFF. 
          AND SO I, ANYWAY, WE HAVE PLANS NOW. 
          THEY'VE JUST, IT'S JUST DIRT RIGHT NOW. 
          THEY'VE SHUT IT DOWN. 
          THE CITY OWNS THE, THE STREET, THEY'VE SHUT IT DOWN. 
          IT'S JUST DIRT. 
          WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THE BEST CASE OUT OF IT AND HAVE PLANS FOR A PARK. 
          THIS IS A PRE PLAT. 
          IT'S DEPENDENT ON THE CONDITION THAT THE THOROUGHFARE COMMITTEE AGREE TO TAKING THAT ROAD OFF OF THE THOROUGHFARE. 
          RIGHT NOW IT'S, IT'S ON THE THOROUGHFARE MAP, UM, AND IT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED. 
          AND WE, THIS PLA EVEN THOUGH THE PRELIMINARY, IF YOU PASSED IT TODAY, THERE'S A CONDITION THAT SAYS THAT'S YOUR TIME. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IT CAN'T, CAN'T GO FORWARD UNTIL THAT IS REMOVED AND THAT'S HER CONCERN. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I'M HERE FOR QUESTIONS. 
          UM, BET THERE'S GONNA BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. 
          UH, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? COMMISSIONER WHEELER, I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. 
          OKAY, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? NO QUESTIONS. 
          QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER WHEELER? UM, I, I DON'T KNOW WHICH STEP MEMBER I NEED TO SPEAK TO BECAUSE THE QUESTION IS THIS, THIS PLAN IS MOVING FORWARD BEFORE THE THIRD PART COMMITTEE. 
          IT, WHY IS THIS, WHY, UH, HOW COULD THIS PLAN BE MOVING FORWARD WHEN THE THIRD PART COMMITTEE HAS PUT PLACE, THIS PARTICULAR, UM, THIRD FAR ON HOLD PENDING A TRAFFIC STUDY FROM BOTH TDO AND THE CITY OF DALLAS. 
          AND, UM, TDOT HAD ME, UM, THE THIRD FAR THE REPRESENTATIVE IN, UM, TRANSPORTATION WAS JUST NOT JUST NOTIFIED ME YESTERDAY THAT, UM, THEY WON'T EVEN BE ABLE TO PERFORM THAT TRAFFIC STUDY UNTIL NORMAL CONDITIONS RESUME WHEN ALL THE EXITS IS UP. 
          UM, THE COMMUNITY THERE, THE COMMUNITY MAYBE WHAT WAS WAS, WAS THEY MADE AWARE THAT THE COMMUNITY I HA IS IS IS TOTALLY AGAINST THE THOROUGH FAR BEING, UM, AT 
          [06:30:01]
THIS POINT UNTIL AS TRAFFIC STUDIES DONE EVEN BEING, UM, UH, VACATED. 
          I, I WAS TOTALLY SURPRISED TO SEE THIS COMING BEFORE THE THIRD FOR, UM, WAS APPROVED. 
          SO THE PLAT IS IN PRELIMINARY PHASES, SO IT'LL BE ROUTED TO TRANSPORTATION ALL THE DEPARTMENT. 
          SO WE'LL GET THE, UH, ALL THESE CONDITIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THEM. 
          THAT'S HOW WE PROCEEDED WITH THE PLAT. 
          AND IT'LL BE ROUTED TO REAL ESTATE TOO TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS RIGHT. 
          WELL, SO, SO LET ME, LET ME, LET ME, LET ME BRING FOR FORTH WITH THAT. 
          I, I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT PLATS FOR THE MOST PART. 
          UM, WELL, WE JUST TOLD IS THAT PLA PRETTY MUCH HAVE TO GO FORWARD. 
          UM, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I, I, I'M HIGHLY CONFUSED EVEN HOW IT, BECAUSE WE WE'RE ALREADY FIVE MONTHS IN WAITING ON, ON ALL THE INFORMATION TO COME BACK JUST AS IT RESUMES THE THIRD FOR THE MEETING, FOR THIS PARTICULAR THIRD FOR HAPPENING 26, NONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, NONE OF THE COMMUNITY IT HAD HAD WAS A AWARE THAT IT WAS BEING RE UH, REMOVED. 
          UM, THE MEETING COULD THE MEETING, WHATEVER MEETING HAPPENED IN 2016, UM, THE COMMUNITY IS BAFFLED THAT THIS IS, THAT THE, THAT IT WAS ALREADY TAKEN OUT WITHOUT FULL CONSENT. 
          AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN SOUTH DALLAS AS IT RELATES TO TDOT THE MEETINGS, THEY DON'T FOLLOW THROUGH WELL WITH THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND DISD ACTUALLY ALSO ASKED FOR A REVIEW, A TRAFFIC STUDY BECAUSE AS, AS ONE SIDE OF THE FREEWAY IS GETTING RELIEF, THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FREEWAY IS NOT GETTING RELIEF. 
          AND THE, AND DISD SCHOOL, MLK IS HAVING BACKUPS AND IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE BECAUSE IN THE MORNING TIME, 45 EXIT IS RIGHT ON THE SIDE OF THEIR SCHOOL. 
          AND SO HARWOOD AND COLONIAL WAS VACATED AT THE SAME TIME. 
          THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS HARWOOD  CAME, CAME IN TIME, UM, CAME BEFORE US IN TIME. 
          SO I, I'M, I'M, I'M REALLY CONFUSED AND IF I, AND I'M LOOKING AT THE FLAT, AM I, AM I LOOKING AT PART OF THE, THE, AND MAYBE I'M LOOKING AT IT WRONG AGAIN, THAT THE PROPERTY THAT IS NOT OWNED BY ST. 
          PHILLIPS YET THAT IS STILL OWNED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS. 
          PART OF THIS IN THE PROPOSED FOR, UH, FACTION OF IT, I COULDN'T GET THE LAST PART IS THE PORTION OF THE THIRD FIRM THAT IS STILL OWNED BY, WELL IT'S NOT EVEN OWNED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS, IT'S OWNED BY TDOT. 
          IS THAT A PART OF THE, UH, THE PROPOSAL ALSO THAT ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I PULLED IT ALSO BECAUSE MAYBE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING. 
          SO THE PROPOSAL IS COMBINED, UH, SEVERAL LOTS AND THERE ARE SOME OF THE ABANDONMENT ALREADY DONE, WHICH IS SHOWN IN THE PLAT WITH THE INSTRUMENT NUMBER AND SOME OF THEM ARE PROPOSED. 
          SO WHEN THEY COME PER PLATTING WITH THE REQUEST, WE, WE HAVE TO ACCEPT THE PLAT. 
          UM, IF ALL OF THE CRITERIA OF PLANNING MEANS MEETS, AND THEN WE'LL ROUTE TO THE SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS TO REVIEW THOSE. 
          IF THEY MEET, THEY CAN, UH, EVEN VACATE OR ABANDON THOSE OR NOT. 
          SO THOSE CONDITIONS COMES FROM, UH, ALL THE DEPARTMENT INCLUDING TRANSPORTATION. 
          SO WE CAME HERE WITH THE TRANSPORTATION COMMENTS. 
          OKAY, SO, SO, SO IT'S HARD FOR ME TO SUPPORT SOMETHING WHEN, WHEN, BECAUSE I'M, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING HOW TRANSPORTATION CAME UP WITH ANY OF THE COMMENTS WHEN TRANSPORTATION, WHICH IS KIARA, UM, I HAD KIARA'S LAST NAME, BUT SHE'S OVER THE PARTICULAR THOROUGH FUR, THE ABATEMENT OF THE THIRD FUR FOR THIS PARTICULAR AREA, FOR THIS PARTICULAR, UH, PORTION OF COLONIAL. 
          AND WE'RE IN, WE'RE AT A HALT BECAUSE THAT THERE IS, THERE IS THERE, IS THERE DANGEROUS TRAFFIC ISSUES GOING ON RIGHT NOW? AND, AND IT'S, AND EVERY, EVEN THOUGH THE TDOT CUT IT OUT, THEY DID NOT ABANDON THE THIRD FUR PRO. 
          THEY DIDN'T GO THROUGH THE PROPER PROCEDURES TO ABANDON THE THIRD FIRE BEFORE ABANDONING THE THIRD FIRM. 
          AND SOME OF THESE PRO A PORTION OF THIS PROPERTY LOOKING IN IN HERE IS STILL OWNED BY A TDOT, PARTICULARLY THE PD WHERE IT SAYS PD 5 97, UM, SEE CO CONCEPTIONAL PLAT TWO TRACKS, SO AND SO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE METHOD IS ON. 
          I COULDN'T IN GOOD FAITH APPROVE THIS, UH, AS FOR APPROVAL IF WE, UNTIL THE THIRD FIRM IS APPROVED. 
          OKAY, I CAN, I I CAN READ THE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS NUMBER 19 FOR THIS PLAT, WHICH SAYS COLONIAL AVENUE IS DESIGNATED IN THE CITY OF DALLAS THOROUGH OF AIR PLAN AMENDMENT 
          [06:35:01]
IS REQUIRED TO REMOVE COLONIAL BEFORE ABANDONMENT AND PLAT CAN PROCEED. 
          AMENDMENT IS CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS. 
          IT IS CURRENTLY PROGRESS, BUT THE REASON THAT IT'S ON HOLD IS BECAUSE DISD, THE COMMUNITY HAS ASKED FOR, HAS ASKED TRANSPORTATION, BOTH OF THE CITY TRANSPORTATION AND TDOT TO OBTAIN, TO CREATE A TRAFFIC STUDY ON YESTERDAY. 
          KIARA NOT KNOWING THIS WAS EVEN ON, ON THE AGENDA, KIARA GOT BACK WITH ME AND SAID THAT THAT, UM, MATTER OF FACT, LEMME PULL THE COMMENTS THAT THEY COULD NOT PERFORM THE TRAFFIC STUDY UNTIL NORMAL CONDITIONS RESUME, WHICH MEANS THE EXITS, UM, FINISHING UP SM RIGHT AND THE, AND THE EXITS RELATED TO GOOD LADDER. 
          AND SO WE WON'T EVEN BE PUTTING THIS BACK ON THIRD FLOOR COMMITTEE UNTIL THAT, AND THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE WHEN SCHOOL COMES, WHEN SCHOOL SCHOOL STARTS AGAIN. 
          CAN I CALL THE QUESTION DAMNIT? SO WE CAME HERE WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLAT CONDITIONS FOR TODAY. 
          SO THERE, UH, THERE IS, I ALREADY READ THE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS THAT HAS TO BE MET WHEN THE FLAT IS RECORDED. 
          OKAY. 
          HOLD, HOLD ON. 
          LET ME, LET ME, LET ME, CAN I SPEAK, UM, SHERRY, SHERRY, IS THERE A POSSIBLE THAT I CAN, THAT I CAN, UM, UM, AND, AND GIVE YOU KIARA SENDING ME, THIS WAS NOT IN RELATION TO THE PLAT BECAUSE I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THE PLAT WAS, THIS WAS ON, ON TODAY'S AGENDA UNTIL THE YESTERDAY MORNING. 
          IS THERE ANY WAY THAT I CAN SEND TO, TO, TO, UM, OUT SO THAT EVERYONE CAN READ WHAT TRANSPORTATION IS SAYING AS IT RELATES TO THIS PUBLIC SEAT FURTHER PLAT, MR. CHAIR, PLEASE, MS. MORRIS. 
          CAN, CAN I ADD SOMETHING HERE? UM, YES. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS MIGHT HELP, UM, BUT THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND IT IS CONDITIONED ON WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING ON ABOUT THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN AMENDMENT. 
          SO APPROVAL OF THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT IS IN ORDER TODAY BEFORE APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN. 
          UM, IT'S JUST THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN SITUATION WILL HAVE TO BE FIGURED OUT BEFORE THE FINAL PLAT IS APPROVED. 
          SO APPROVING THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT TODAY IS IN ORDER. 
          AND JUST TO, JUST TO ADD TO THAT, UH, THAT THE CONDITION NUMBER 19, YES. 
          YES. 
          IF THAT IS NOT MET, THEN THE PLANT WON'T BE RECORDED. 
          SO IT'S A CONDITION LIKE THE OTHERS, IT HAS TO BE MET AND THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS PENDING. 
          AND IF IT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN IT CANNOT BE RECORDED. 
          ALSO, I CAN DO THE PROCESS HOW IT GOES. 
          WHEN WE TAKE PRELIMINARY PLAT, IF, IF THE PLATING GUIDELINES MEET, WE TAKE THE PLAT AND WE'LL ROUTE IT TO SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS, AND ONE OF THEM IS PAVING AND DRAINAGE TRANSPORTATION. 
          SO WHEN THEY PROVIDE US CONDITIONS, WE COME HERE WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT CONDITIONS. 
          WHEN WE GO BACK, THEN WE'LL SEND THESE LETTERS TO THE, ALL THESE, UH, ALL THE SURVEY APPLICANTS AND ALL, AND THEY HAVE TO MEET ALL THE CONDITIONS BEFORE THEY RECORD THE PLA. 
          SO IT'S ALL, UH, ALWAYS WE COME HERE WITH THE PRELIMINARY PHASES, WHICH MEANS IT IS NOTHING UNTIL THEY COMPLETE ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. 
          IS THAT HELPFUL COMMISSIONER? I I MEAN, IN THIS ESSENCE IT SEEMS THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT, AGAIN, WE DON'T HAVE TO PRETTY MUCH TALK TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          I, THAT'S KIARA STANDING THERE. 
          SO I I MAYBE SHE CAN GIVE SOME INSIGHT ON, ON WHAT I'M, 'CAUSE I'M, I'M, I'M TOTALLY CONFUSED ON WHY ST. 
          PHILIP'S DIDN'T WAIT UNTIL THIS WAS DONE. 
          AND SO IF, IF IT'S A, IF IT'S THAT, I HAVE TO SAY YESTERDAY I, I'LL SAY YES WITH THE CONTENTION OF MAKING SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY KNOWS THAT THIS SOMETHING HAPPENED. 
          I MEAN THAT THIS HAPPENED WITH THEM. 
          WELL, KNOWING THAT THERE WAS ISSUES RELATED TO THIS PARTICULAR THERAPIST AND THE COMMUNITY HAD REQUESTED THAT THIS BE WEIGHED ON AND THEY DID NOT DO THAT. 
          SO IF I HAVE TO PASS, I HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE, BUT I DID CONTRI, I DID SEND TO LEON. 
          LILIANA WHAT, UM, KIARA SENT ME YESTERDAY. 
          OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? SCENE NINE, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? 
          [06:40:01]
YEAH, UM, HOLD ON, LET ME PULL THE AGENDA BACK UP. 
          HOLD ON. 
          IN THE MATTER OF, UM, 35, GIMME A FEW SECONDS. 
          UM, IN THE MATTER OF S 2 4 5 DASH 1 65 I, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPROVAL SERVICE TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION AND COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? SEEING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYES HAVE IT. 
          [37. 25-1772A An application to replat a 0.287-acre (12,492-square foot) tract of land  containing all of Lot 18 in City Block 23/6890 to create one 0.143-acre  (6,243-square foot) lot and one 0.144-acre (6,249-square foot), on property  located on Kemrock Drive, west of Tracy Road. Applicant/Owner: Brablio Sifuentes Surveyor: Keeton Surveying Company Application Filed: April 23, 2025 Zoning: R-5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the  conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 8 S245-151]
WE'LL NOW MOVE TO UH, NUMBER 37, ITEM 37 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 51 AN APPLICATION TOLAT A 0.287 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 2,492 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING OLIVE LOT 18 IN CITY BLOCK 23 6 8 9 0 TO CREATE ONE 0.143 ACRE LOT AND ONE 0.144 ACRE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON CROCK DRIVE WEST OF TRACY ROAD. 
          23 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON MAY 7TH, 2025. 
          WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE COGNITION LISTED, STATED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES SIR. 
          MY NAME IS ROB FUENTES AND I APPLIED FOR THIS, UH, PROPERTY, UH, REPLANT. 
          THIS IS MY FIRST TIME DOING THIS, SO PLEASE EXCUSE MY NERVOUSNESS. 
          UH, THIS IS A HUNDRED FEET WIDE, UH, PROPERTY THAT WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO DIVIDE INTO TWO LOTS OF, UH, 50 EACH CONSIDERING THE NEIGHBORS BEING AT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE FRONT ONES 52, UH, SOME OF 'EM ARE 50. 
          UH, HOPEFULLY, UM, YOU KNOW, GET AN APPROVAL TODAY FOR THAT REPL. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          GREAT JOB. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY QUESTIONS FOR OUR SPEAKER? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SCENE NONE. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF S 2 4 5 DASH 1 0 5 1, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSIONS? NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. 
          [38. 25-1773A An application to replat a 0.459-acre (19,984 square feet) tract of land  containing all of Lot 49 in City Block E/7588 to create two 0.2295-acre  (9,992-square foot) lots on property located on Beckleycrest Avenue, north  of Danieldale Road. Applicants/Owners: Roma Custom Homes LLC Surveyor: Texas Heritage Surveying, LLC Application Filed: April 23, 2025 Zoning: R-7.5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the  conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 8 S245-152]
ITEM 38 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 52. 
          AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT, A 0.459 ACRE THAT IS 19,984 SQUARE FEET TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING OLIVE LOT 49 IN CITY BLOCK E OVER 7 7 5 8 8 TO CREATE TWO 0.2295 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 9,992 SQUARE FOOT LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON BECKEL CREST AVENUE NORTH OF DANIEL DALE ROAD 19. 
          NOTICES WERE SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON MAY 7TH, 2025. 
          WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES, GO ON DOWN. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. 
          MY NAME IS MELISSA RODRIGUEZ AND UH, WE DID THE APPLICATION TO DIVIDE THE, THE LOT TO REPL. 
          UH, WE WANNA DO THE SAME, UH, ABOUT 50 FEET, UM, FRONT AND I HOPE YOU GUYS APPROVE IT TONIGHT. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMERS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. 
          QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN IN THE MATTER OF S 2 45 DASH 15 TWO, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT 
          [06:45:01]
TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSIONS? SEE NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. 
          [39. 25-1774A An application to replat a 0.1148-acre (5,000-square foot) tract of land  containing all of Lots 45 and 46 in City Block 2/7675 to create one lot on  property located on Moore Street, north of Hutchins Avenue. Applicant/Owner: Pedro Garcia Leos Surveyor: A & W Surveyors, Inc. Application Filed: April 23, 2025 Zoning: PD 1052 (Subdistrict 1) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the  conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 4 S245-156]
ITEM 39 S 2 45 DASH 1 56. 
          AN APPLICATION TO PLT, A 0.1148 ACRE THAT IS 5,000 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT 45 AND 46 IN CITY LOT TWO OVER 7 6 2 5 7 6 7 6 7 5 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON MOORE STREET NORTH OF HUTCHINS AVENUE. 
          55. 
          NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON MAY 7TH, 2025. 
          WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE REPLY IN FAVOR AND ONE REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          IN ADDITION, WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE REPLY IN FAVOR AFTER THE DEADLINE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? SEE IN NON-COM. 
          FORESIGHT DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES. 
          CHAIRMAN SHAIDE IN THE MATTER OF CASE S 2 45 DASH 56 I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FORSET FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSIONS? NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          OPPOSED? AYE. 
          HAVE IT 
          [40. 25-1775A An application to replat a 0.9824-acre (42,792-square foot) tract of land  containing all of Lots 1 and 2 and part of Lots 3 and 4 in City Block B/2330 to create three lots ranging in size from 0.1723 acre (7,503 square feet) to  0.6382 acre (27,800 square feet) on property located on Maple Springs  Boulevard at Denton Drive, southeast corner. Applicant/Owner: Gregory Begnoche, Texas Capital Securities Surveyor: Urban Strategy Application Filed: April 23, 2025 Zoning: PD 193 (R-7.5) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the  conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 2 S245-166]
FOR 40 ITEM 40 S 2 45 DASH 1 66 AND APPLICATION TO REPLY AT 0.9824 ACRE THAT IS 40 2007 92 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTINUING ALL OF LOT ONE AND TWO AND PARTS OF LOT THREE AND FOUR IN CITY BLOCK B OVER 2 3 3 0 TO CREATE THREE LOTS RANGING IN SIZE FROM 0.1723 ACRE. 
          THAT IS SEVEN FIVE 7,503 SQUARE FEET TO 0.6382 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 27,800 SQUARE FEET ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON MAPLE SPRINGS BOULEVARD AT DENTON DRIVE SOUTHEAST CORNER. 
          22 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON MAY 7TH, 2025. 
          WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? IT'S 40. 
          IS OUR SPEAKER ON ONLINE ON THIS ONE? J. 
          OKAY. 
          NO. 
          GREGORY OSH? NOPE. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          IN THE MATTER OF S 2 4 5 DASH 16 SIX, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVED SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          VICE CHAIR RUBIN FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY COMMENTS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE 
          [41. 25-1776A An application to replat a 0.067-acre (2,905-square foot) tract of land  containing part of Lot 3 in City Block 4/7395 to create one lot on property  located on Pasteur Avenue, south of Ferguson Road. Applicant/Owner: Gary Hasty; 9314 Ferguson, LLC Surveyor: ARA Surveying Application Filed: April 25, 2025 Zoning: PD 1128 Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the  conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 7 S245-168]
IT. 
          41 PLEASE. 
          ITEM 41 S 2 4 5 DASH 1 68 AND APPLICATION TO REPLY AS 0.067 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 2,905 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTINUING PART OF LOT THREE IN CITY BLOCK FOUR OVER 7 3 9 5 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON PASTURE AVENUE SOUTH OF FERGUSON ROAD. 
          FIVE NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON MAY 7TH, 2025. 
          WE HAVE RECEIVED YOUR REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE THIS BE? YES MA'AM. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, JENNIFER. 
          HI MOTO 1 0 2 3 3 EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY IN DALLAS. 
          UM, ITEM 41 AND 43 ARE RELATED TO A REZONING THAT WAS APPROVED UH, LAST FALL. 
          THIS ITEM 41 IS THE CELL TOWER THAT THAT CANNOT BE PART OF A SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT. 
          SO IT IS A SEPARATE PLAT. 
          I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER'S. 
          QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. 
          QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION COMMISSIONER? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? DO YOU HAVE MOTION ON NUMBER 41? 
          [06:50:28]
COMMISSIONER WHEELER? IF YOU CAN HEAR ME, WE'RE READY FOR YOUR MOTION ON NUMBER 41. 
          ME TOO. 
          YEAH. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER, WE READY FOR YOUR MOTION? I DON'T THINK YOU CAN HEAR US. 
          FOUR. 
          YES, WE'RE READY FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER 41 VICE VIN PLEASE. 
          IN THE MATTER OF Z TWO S 2 45 1 68 I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCK. 
          THANK YOU MR. TRUMAN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE. 
          THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          OPPOSED? AYE. 
          [42. 25-1777A An application to replat a 1.9883-acre (86,612-square foot) tract of land  containing all of Lot 3A in City Block A/6226 and part of City Block 6226 to  create a 31-lot shared access development ranging in size from 0.0424 acre (1,847 square feet) to 0.0628 acre (2,736 square feet) and 6 common  areas on property located between Marsh Lane and Betty Jane Lane, north  of Walnut Hill Lane. Applicant/Owner: MM 10056 Marsh, LLC Surveyor: Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. Application Filed: April 25, 2025 Zoning: PD 1130 Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the  conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 13 S245-169]
HAVE IT. 
          42 ITEM 42 S 2 45 DASH 1 69. 
          AN APPLICATION TOLAT A 1.9883 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 86,612 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTINUING ALL OF LOT A IN CITY BLOCK. 
          A OVER 6 2, 2 6 AND A PART OF CITY BLOCK 6 2 2 6 TO CREATE A 31 LOT SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT RANGING IN SITES FROM 0.0424 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 1000 840 47 SQUARE FEET TO 0.0628 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 2,736 SQUARE FEET AND SIX COMMON AREAS ON PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN MARS LANE AND BETTY LANE. 
          BETTY JANE LANE, NORTH OF WALL, NORTH HILL LANE. 
          12 NOTICES WERE SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY. 
          ON MAY 7TH, 2025, WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE REPLY IN FAVOR AND THREE REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL, DO YOU HAVE MOTION? I DO IN THE MATTER OF ITEM 42, CASE NUMBER S 2 45 1 69. 
          I MOVE TO FOLLOW STAFF'S. 
          RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY COMMENTS? NONE OF THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          [43. 25-1778A An application to replat a 3.691-acre (160,803-square foot) tract of land  containing portion of Lots 3 and 4 in City Block 4/7395 to create a 53-lot  shared access development ranging in size from 0.048 acre (2,100 square  feet) to 0.067 acre (2,927 square feet) and 4 common areas; and to  remove existing 25-foot platted building lines along Hibiscus Drive and  Pasteur Avenue, on property located between Hibiscus Drive and Pasteur  Avenue, south of Ferguson Road. Applicant/Owner: Gary Hasty; 9314 Ferguson, LLC Surveyor: ARA Surveying Application Filed: April 25, 2025 Zoning: PD 1128 Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the  conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 7 S245-167]
ANY OPPOSED? AYES HAVE IT. 
          43 ITEM 43 S 2 45 DASH 1 67. 
          AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT A 3.691 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING PORTIONS OF LOT THREE AND FOUR IN CITY BLOCK FOUR OVER 7 3 9 5 TO CREATE A 53 LOT SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT RANGING IN SIZE FROM 0.048 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 22,100 SQUARE FEET. 
          TWO 0.067 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 2,927 SQUARE FEET AND FOUR COMMON AREAS AND TO REVIEW EXISTING 25 FOOT FLATTED BUILDING LINES ALONG HIBISCUS DRIVE AND PASTURE AVENUE ON PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN HIBISCUS DRIVE AND PASTURE AVENUE SOUTH OF FERGUSON ROAD. 
          NINE NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON MAY 7TH, 2025. 
          WE HAVE RECEIVED YOUR REPLIES IN FAVOR AND YOUR REPLIES IN OPPOSITION. 
          THIS REQUEST REQUIRE TWO MOTIONS BECAUSE IT IS TO REPLIED AND IT MO IT INVOLVES THE REDUCTION OF THE, THE REMOVAL OF THE PLA BUILDING LINE. 
          THE FIRST MOTION IS TO APPROVE OR DENIED REMOVING AN EXIST EXISTING 25 FEET PLAID BUILDING LINE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON BUILDING LINE REMOVAL APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON RELA APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? ABLE FOR QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER, WE, WE DON'T SEE YOU IF YOU'RE ONLINE. 
          WE'RE READY FOR YOUR MOTION ON NUMBER 43, 
          [06:55:03]
VICE CHAIR. 
          RUB CHAIR PLEASE. 
          IN CASE NUMBER S 2 4 5 1 6 7, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST TO MOVE THE EXISTING 25 FOOT PLATTED BUILDING LINES ALONGSIDE VISCUS DRIVE AND PASTURE AVENUE WITH THE FINDING OF FACT THAT THE REMOVAL OF THE BUILDING LINES WILL NOT REQUIRE MINIMUM FRONT SIDE OR REAR YARD SET BACK LINE LESS THAN REQUIRED BY THE ZONING REGULATION, BE CONTRARY TO PUBLICLY INTEREST ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OR ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PLAN FOR THE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBDIVISION. 
          THANK YOU MR. ROOM FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. 
          MOTION NUMBER TWO. 
          YES. 
          IN UM, S 2 45 1 16 7, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU MR. TRUVIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY COMMENTS? SEEING NONE. 
          ALLS IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          THE OPPOSED AYES HAVE IT. 
          NEXT CASE PLEASE. 
          UH, YES. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH . 
          THANKS. 
          [44. 25-1779A Amendments to the City of Dallas Thoroughfare Plan to remove 1) Forest  Lane between Reeder Road and Harry Hines Boulevard; and 2) Forest  Lane between Harry Hines Boulevard and Josey Lane. Staff Recommendation: Approval to amend the City of Dallas  Thoroughfare Plan to remove: (1) Forest Lane between Reeder Road  and Harry Hines Boulevard; and (2) Forest Lane between Harry Hines  Boulevard and Josey Lane. Applicant: City of Dallas Department of Transportation and Public Works Representative: Kierra Williams Planner: Kierra Williams Council District: 7 Forest Lane between Reeder Road and Harry Hines Boulevard and Forest Lane between Harry Hines Boulevard and Josey Lane]
WE'LL GO TO NUMBER 44. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, EVENING NOW. 
          OKAY. 
          ITEM NUMBER 44 AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF DALLAS TERRA. 
          FAIR PLAN TO REMOVE FOREST LANE BETWEEN RE ROAD AND HARRY HINES BOULEVARD AND FOREST LANE BETWEEN HARRY HINES BOULEVARD AND JOSIE LANE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL TO AMEND THE CITY OF DALLAS THOROUGHFARE PLAN TO REMOVE FOREST LANE BETWEEN RITA ROAD AND HARRY HINES BOULEVARD AND FOREST LANE BETWEEN HARRY HINES BOULEVARD AND JOSIE LANE. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UH, DO WE HAVE OUR ONE SPEAKER ONLINE? EDDIE CAMPBELL? YEP. 
          EDDIE CAMPBELL READY FOR YOUR COMMENTS. 
          CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. 
          THERE WE GO. 
          WE CAN HEAR YOU AND SEE YOU. 
          GOOD EVENING. 
          SO I MAY BE TOO LATE TO THE TABLE. 
          FIRST OF ALL, MY NAME'S EDDIE CAMPBELL. 
          I'M THE GENERAL LANE CHRYSLER DODGE JEEP RAM. 
          UH, I WAS JUST MADE AWARE OF THIS 24 HOURS AGO, SO, UH, UH, I WAS THE FIRST EMPLOYED, HIRED HERE FOR THIS DEALERSHIP ABOUT SEVEN YEARS AGO AND WE POURED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS INTO THIS DEALERSHIP. 
          UH, IT WAS A DECAYING BUILDING. 
          WE REMODELED ONE BUILDING AND BUILT ANOTHER BRAND NEW BUILDING NEXT TO IT. 
          UM, WE PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THE NAME. 
          WE THOUGHT ABOUT THE, THE ROAD FOREST LANE THAT'S BEEN HERE FOR YEARS. 
          UM, UH, WE DECIDED ON THAT NAME MAINLY BECAUSE OF THE STREET, BUT ONE OF THE OTHER REASONS WAS, YOU KNOW, WE WANTED TO STICK WITH THAT NAME. 
          UH, WE ALMOST DIDN'T BUILD IT HERE BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S SO HARD TO GET HERE AND, UH, HAD THAT EXIT NOT BEEN HERE AT THE TIME, WE MIGHT HAVE CHOSEN A DIFFERENT LOCATION OR, OR A DIFFERENT NAME. 
          AND WE THINK CLOSING THAT, UH, THAT EXIT IS REALLY GONNA HURT, UM, CUSTOMERS NOW EVEN TALK ABOUT HOW HARD IT IS TO GET HERE. 
          SO, UH, I MEAN WE'VE BEEN THROUGH, WE'VE SURVIVED COVID, PART SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES, TARIFFS. 
          I JUST WOULD HATE FOR THE CLOSING OF THAT EXIT TO BE THE, THE, THE END ALL OR THE, THE, THE REASON OUR BUSINESS GOES DOWN. 
          I MEAN, IT'S, RIGHT NOW IF WE PUT IT UP FOR SALE, IT'D BE A $40 MILLION BUILDING I THINK IF IF, UH, INCLUDING THE FRANCHISE. 
          I THINK IF THAT THAT CLOSES IT, IT'LL KNOCK US DOWN HALF PRICE. 
          SO, UM, DUNNO HOW TO SLOW THIS DOWN OR MAYBE RECONSIDER OR WHATEVER. 
          I'M SURE, I DON'T KNOW IF I'M TOO LATE, BUT, UH, I AT LEAST WANTED TO GIVE MY 2 CENTS WORTH. 
          THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. 
          UM, THERE MIGHT BE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. 
          IS THERE ANYONE ELSE I WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS FOR MR. CAMPBELL. 
          QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YEAH, I WAS GONNA PLEASE. 
          YEP. 
          THIS SAYS DISTRICT SEVEN. 
          IS THIS REALLY DISTRICT SIX? IT IS DISTRICT SIX. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH, IT IS SIX. 
          UM, YES. 
          OKAY. 
          MS. WILLIAMS, COULD YOU PLEASE JUST, JUST GIVE US A QUICK LITTLE 32ND LRP ABOUT WHAT, WHAT THIS CHANGES ON THE GROUND TO KIND OF ADDRESS MR. CAMPBELL'S COMMENTS? YEAH, SO THERE ARE NO PHYSICAL CHANGES EXPECTED FROM THIS ACTION. 
          UM, THIS IS BASICALLY TO KIND OF REFLECT, UM, PAST CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, UM, BY TEXT.TO THE 6 35 WHERE THEY MAY IMPROVEMENTS TO FOREST LANE BACK IN 2015 WHERE SOME OF THE SEGMENTS WERE CONVERTED FROM TWO WAY TO ONE WAY, KIND OF GIVE IT THE CHARACTERISTICS 
          [07:00:01]
OF A FRONTAGE ROAD. 
          AND THEY'RE CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS NOW OF PLANNING MORE IMPROVEMENTS FOR FOREST LANE, UM, AS THEY'RE LOOKING TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE 6 35 AND I 35, UM, INTERCHANGE WHERE FOREST LANE MORE LIKELY WOULD BE EXTENDED FORWARD WEST TO CO TO CREATE A CONTINUOUS FRONTAGE ROAD. 
          SO THIS PIECE, UM, THAT I'M BRINGING FORWARD TODAY WILL BASICALLY BE A, A FRONTAGE ROW FOR, I ACTUALLY SAY 6 35 AS FAR AS OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS. 
          AND SINCE THE THIRD FLOOR PLAN DOES NOT PRESERVE THOSE TYPE OF ROADWAYS AND BEING THAT THESE SEGMENTS ARE WITHIN TESTO RIGHT AWAY, WE ARE REMOVING IT FROM THE THIRD FAIR PLAN. 
          SO IT'S BASICALLY JUST REFLECTING CHANGES THAT TEST HAS DONE IN THE PAST AND ARE IN THE PLANNING STAGES FOR, UM, BUT WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY PHYSICAL CHANGES LIKE REMOVING ANYTHING OF THAT SORT. 
          DO YOU CATCH THAT MR. CAMPBELL? UM, I, I DID. 
          MAYBE I DON'T UNDERSTAND. 
          SO IT'S STILL GONNA BE NAMED FOREST LANE AND THERE'S STILL GONNA BE AN EXIT FROM 6 35? I BELIEVE SO. 
          UM, THERE'S NO NAME CHANGES ANTICIPATED OR ANYTHING. 
          UM, SO ALL OF THESE AT THINGS THAT YOU WILL SEE PO POSSIBLY ON THE GROUND WILL BE UM, DUE TO TEST STOCK. 
          MR. CHAIR, JUST ONE QUICK FOLLOW UP QUESTION. 
          IF A OWNER OF A BUSINESS THAT FRONTS ALONG THIS PART OF FOREST LANE HAS CONCERNS ABOUT ANY POTENTIAL CHANGES AS TO NAME OR ROADWAY CONFIGURATION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, WOULD, WOULD TDOT BE THE RIGHT YES. 
          PLACE TO CONTACT? YES. 
          TDOT WILL BE THE ONE SINCE THEY'RE OVERSEEING THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, THERE WOULD BE THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF CONTACT REGARDING THIS PROJECT. 
          DO YOU HAVE A TECH.CONTACT WHO WOULD HAVE INFORMATION ON THIS OR DOES SOMEONE AT THE CITY? I DO. 
          I WOULD JUST HAVE TO GO DIG FOR IT, BUT UH, FEEL FREE TO REACH OUT TO ME EMAIL AND I CAN GIVE THAT TO YOU. 
          UH, MR. CAMPBELL, DO YOU HAVE MS. WILLIAMS CONTACT INFORMATION? I DO NOT. 
          I DO NOT. 
          CAN YOU PROVIDE JUST YOUR MAYBE EMAIL? SURE. 
          UH, IT IS FIRST NAME K-I-E-R-R-A DOT WILLIAMS, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S AT DALLAS, D-A-L-L-A S.GOV GOV. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS NEIGHBORING BUSINESSES TELL ME ABOUT IT, UH, THE DEAD OR 24 HOURS AGO. 
          SO I WAS PANICKING AND I THOUGHT, WE'VE GOT THIS NAME FOREST LANE AND YOU CAN'T GET HERE ANYMORE. 
          THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THEIR UNDERSTANDING WAS AND THAT'S KIND OF THE WAY I LOOK AT THE MAP. 
          SO IF YOU SAY THAT THAT'S NOT HAPPENING, I WILL CALL, UH, OR GET THAT INFORMATION FROM YOU. 
          I'LL EMAIL YOU AND YOU GIMME TEXT DOC AND I WILL DOUBLE CHECK ON THAT. 
          PERFECT. 
          UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? OH, SHE BACK. 
          YES, I MOVE TO FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO AMEND THE CITY OF DALLAS THOROUGHFARE PLAN TO REMOVE FOREST LANE BETWEEN READER ROAD AND HARRY HINES BOULEVARD AND FOREST LANE BETWEEN HARRY HINES BOULEVARD AND JOSIE LIFE. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY COMMENTS? ANY ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? AYE. 
          THE AYES HAVE 
          [45. 25-1783A Amendments to the City of Dallas Thoroughfare Plan to remove (1)  Wycliff Avenue between Harry Hines Boulevard and Market Center  Boulevard and (2) Wycliff Avenue between Market Center Boulevard and  Interstate Highway 35 East. Staff Recommendation: Approval to remove (1) Wycliff Avenue between  Harry Hines Boulevard and Market Center Boulevard and (2) Wycliff  Avenue between Market Center Boulevard and Interstate Highway 35 East. Applicant: AM Campus LP Representative: Alex Rathbun, PE Planner: Kierra Williams Council District: 2 Wycliff Avenue between Harry Hines Boulevard and Market Center  Boulevard, and Wycliff Avenue between Market Center Boulevard  and Interstate Highway 35 East]
IT. 
          45 ITEM 45 AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF DALLAS THOROUGHFARE. 
          PLAN TO REMOVE WYCLIFFE AVENUE BETWEEN HARRY HINES BOULEVARD AND MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD AND WHITECLIFF AVENUE BETWEEN MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD AND INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35 EAST STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL TO REMOVE WHITECLIFF AVENUE BETWEEN HARRY HINES BOULEVARD AND MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD AND WHITE CLIFF AVENUE BETWEEN MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD AND INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35 EAST. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, PLEASE? WELL, JUST ONE CLARIFICATION, I'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE UM, APPLICANT, BUT, UM, MS. WILLIAMS, WOULD YOU CONFIRM THAT THE 2011 BIKE PLAN RECOMMENDED CONSIDERATION OF BIKE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SECTION BETWEEN I 35 AND MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD? UM, IF THIS IS A APPROVED, THOSE WOULD MOVE TO BEING, UM, PRIVATE FACILITIES IF THEY WERE INTEGRATED IN A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? UH, SO THE BIKE PLAN DOES RECOMMEND A SEGMENT FOR THE PIECE BETWEEN MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD AND INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35 EAST. 
          UM, IF IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A PRIVATE FACILITY, I CAN'T SAY THAT'LL BE TO THE PURVIEW OF THE DEVELOPER OR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. 
          UM, ON THE CITY SIDE, WE MORE THAN LIKELY WILL TRY TO SEE IF WE CAN 
          [07:05:01]
MAKE CONNECTIONS ELSEWHERE IN THAT AREA. 
          I KNOW CURRENTLY THERE IS A FACILITY ON THE EAST SIDE MARKET MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD, UM, THAT COULD KIND OF HELP FACILITATE BIKE TRAVEL IN THAT AREA. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          IN THE MATTER OF THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN AMENDMENT, I MOVE TO FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO REMOVE, UM, WHITECLIFF AVENUE BETWEEN HARRY HINES BOULEVARD AND MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD AND WYCLIFFE AVENUE BETWEEN MARKET CENTER BOULEVARD AND INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 35 EAST. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONER HINTON FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          I WILL SECOND IT. 
          UH, ANY DISCUSSION? SEE NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          COMMENTS? AYES HAVE IT. 
          UH, I BELIEVE, UNLESS I MISS SOMETHING THAT CONCLUDES THE DOCKET. 
          UH, CAN I GET A MOTION TO ADUR? SO MOVED. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH, UH, COMMISSIONER, IT IS 5 21 AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR HEARING. 
          HAVE A GREAT EVENING. 
          DO GOOD NIGHT. 
          GOOD NIGHT.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.