* 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]
          ALRIGHT, GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. 
          IT IS THURSDAY, MAY 7TH, 2026 AT 9:28 AM THIS IS THE MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY. 
          THIS WEBINAR IS BEING TRANSCRIBED AND SUMMARIZED. 
          GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. 
          IT'S THURSDAY, AUGUST, OR MAY 7TH, THAT 9:28 AM THIS IS THE BRIEFING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION. 
          CAN WE START WITH A ROLL CALL PLEASE? DISTRICT ONE? I'M HERE. 
          DISTRICT TWO, DISTRICT THREE. 
          DISTRICT FOUR. 
          DISTRICT FIVE. 
          PRESENT DISTRICT SIX. 
          PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT SEVEN PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT. 
          PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT NINE HERE. 
          DISTRICT 10, PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT 11. 
          PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT 12. 
          DISTRICT 13 HERE. 
          DISTRICT 14, DISTRICT 15. 
          I'M HERE. 
          OKAY. 
          WE ARE HAVING SOME TECHNICAL ISSUES, SO I NEEDED TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER, BUT WE ARE GOING TO RECESS AS WE WORK THOSE OUT, SO WE WILL BE BACK ONCE WE'VE SORTED THOSE OUT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          [BRIEFINGS (Part 2 of 3)]
GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. 
          IT IS 9 39 AND THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION BRIEFING IS BACK ON THE RECORD. 
          UH, WE WENT OFF, WE WENT OFF INTO A RECESS AROUND 9 28 TO ADDRESS SOME TECHNICAL ISSUES. 
          UM, JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF CITY HAT STAFF WHO RODE TOGETHER TO GET THOSE TECHNICAL ISSUES RESOLVED SO WE CAN PROCEED WITH OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED BRIEFING. 
          JUST AS A REMINDER TO EVERYONE, UM, THIS IS JUST THE BRIEFING RIGHT NOW. 
          THIS IS YOUR TIME TO ASK STAFF QUESTIONS, ANY DISCUSSION, COMMENTARY. 
          WE WILL SAVE THAT TO THE AFTERNOON, BUT WE'LL HAVE AN AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. 
          UM, WE ARE GOING TO START WITH THE PD, THE BRIEFING ON THE PD 5 95 AUTHORIZED HEARING. 
          UM, THAT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO BE LED BY JOHN CERVANTES, WHO IS THE, UM, PROJECT MANAGER, CASE MANAGER ON THAT. 
          UM, YES, CASE MANAGER, GREAT CASE MANAGER. 
          AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE LINDSEY, JACKSON AND PATRICK BLADES AS WELL. 
          SO, UH, WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, WE WILL TURN IT OVER TO Y'ALL. 
          THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          UM, AS, UH, CHAIR RUBIN, UH, MENTIONED. 
          I'M JOHN ANTES. 
          I AM WITH THE, UH, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SPECIFICALLY ON THE AUTHORIZED HEARING TEAM. 
          AND I'VE BEEN THE CASE MANAGER FOR, UH, THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK AUTHORIZED HEARING. 
          UM, AND AGAIN WITH ME, WE HAVE, UH, LINDSEY JACKSON AND, UH, PATRICK BLADES WHO ARE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING TEAM. 
          UM, AND SO TODAY WE'RE, UH, JUST GONNA GIVE YOU A QUICK BRIEFING OF THE WORK THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS, AND THEN OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, UM, TO KIND OF PAINT THE PICTURE, UH, TO HELP INFORM Y ON, UH, SO Y'ALL CAN MAKE Y'ALL'S DECISIONS. 
          UM, SO A QUICK OVERVIEW OF THE PRESENTATION TODAY. 
          SO WE'RE JUST DOING A, A BACKGROUND, UH, REGARDING SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK, ITS INCEPTION AND THE AREA PLAN ITSELF. 
          UM, SOME OF THE FRAMEWORK REGARDING THE AREA PLAN. 
          AND THEN, UH, I'LL EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE AUTHORIZED HEARING PROCESS. 
          AND THEN FROM THERE, UH, PATRICK WILL GIVE YOU THE IMPLEMENTATION AND ACTUAL PROPOSAL, UM, FOR PD 5 95. 
          SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, LET ME GO AHEAD AND HAND IT OVER TO, UH, MS. JACKSON. 
          GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. 
          THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK AREA PLAN IS FIVE YEARS OF IMPACTFUL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND WORK AMONGST COMMUNITY MEMBERS, STAKEHOLDERS IN THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK TASK FORCE AND OUR STAFF. 
          THIS IS A COMMUNITY DRIVEN AREA PLAN THAT WAS DONE IN ALIGNMENT WITH FORWARD DALLAS 2.0. 
          AND AT THAT TIME, OUR CO-CHAIR NOW, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, ASKED THE COMMUNITY, WHERE DO YOU GO ON SATURDAY MORNINGS FOR GOODS AND SERVICES? AND THIS QUESTION WAS THE FOUNDATION OF HOW THE COMMUNITY DETERMINED WHAT USES THEY NEEDED IN THEIR COMMUNITY. 
          WE HEARD THINGS FROM THE COMMUNITY, LIKE COFFEE SHOPS, SMOOTHIE SHOPS, DINING RESTAURANTS. 
          UM, ALL OF THESE THINGS HAVE THE USES IN PLACE, SO THAT, EXCUSE ME. 
          SO THEY WANTED TO KNOW, YOU KNOW, HOW CAN WE HAVE THESE USES IN OUR COMMUNITY AND ALSO HAVE USES IN PLACE FOR SMALL SCALE DEVELOPMENT TO OCCUR SO THAT SMALL BUSINESSES CAN COME BACK TO SOUTH DALLAS. 
          AND THE COMMUNITY DETERMINED WHERE THOSE SPECIFIC USES SHOULD BE LOCATED. 
          [00:05:01]
SO WE CHOSE DIFFERENT FOCUS AREAS ALONG THE CORRIDORS. 
          SO THOSE ARE THINGS LIKE SECOND AVENUE, THE MALCOLM, MALCOLM X BOULEVARD, THE MLK JUNIOR DART STATION, LC FAY HIGGINS, AS WELL AS DIFFERENT CORRIDORS LIKE AL LIPSCOMB. 
          AND AS WE CONTINUED THAT DEEP COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OVER TIME, WE HEARD CONCERNS ABOUT DISPLACEMENT AND THE NEED FOR MORE HOUSING AND HOUSING DESIGN STANDARDS AS THE HONORABLE, HONORABLE MS. DIANE RAGSDALE HAS MENTIONED NUMEROUS TIMES. 
          SOME OF THE NEW HOUSING IS GROSSLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SURROUNDING HOMES IN SOUTH DALLAS. 
          AND SO ALL OF THAT IS ENCAPSULATED IN THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK AREA PLAN. 
          UM, IT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, IT WAS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 25TH, 2025. 
          AND THIS PLAN TODAY, YOU'RE GONNA HEAR FROM THE AUTHORIZED HEARING TEAM ABOUT HOW WE WILL GO ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          SO I DO WANNA HIGHLIGHT, UM, THERE WERE OVER A HUNDRED MEETINGS THAT WE ATTENDED WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. 
          THIS INCLUDES NUMEROUS WORKSHOPS, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION MEETINGS, PRESENTATIONS AT VARIOUS UM, SPACES, COFFEE SHOP, CONVERSATIONS, AND COMMUNITY MEETINGS. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, HANK LASA, AND I PRESENTED THE AREA PLAN AT THE TEXAS A PA IN ALLEN IN 2024. 
          AND I ALSO WANNA HIGHLIGHT THAT THIS AREA PLAN WON THE DUNNIGAN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AWARD IN DECEMBER OF 2025 WITH THE GREATER DALLAS PLANNING COUNCIL. 
          AND ALSO IT WAS RECOGNIZED AS A FINALIST WITH THE EIGHTH IMPACT AWARDS BY THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE FOR DALLAS-FORT WORTH. 
          AND MOST RECENTLY, APRIL 15TH, UM, CITY COUNCIL AND OUR CITY MANAGER, KIMBERLY TOLBERT, RECOGNIZED OUR TEAM FOR ALL OF THE WORK IN IMPACT THAT HAS BEEN DONE REGARDING THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK AREA PLAN. 
          SO TODAY WE'RE GONNA FOCUS ON LAND USE AND ZONING. 
          ALTHOUGH THE PLAN HAS, UM, SEVERAL GUIDING PRINCIPLES, ALL THAT THE COMMUNITY, UM, PICKED OUT. 
          THE PURPOSE OF THIS BRIEFING TODAY IS TO FOCUS ON THE LAND USE AND ZONING AND THE HOUSING AND DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          AGAIN, I JUST WANNA REITERATE THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS SPOKEN THROUGH THE AREA PLAN, AND THEY WOULD LIKE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS PLAN TO BE EXECUTED THROUGH OUR AUTHORIZED HEARING PROCESS. 
          AND WITH THAT, I'LL HAND IT OFF TO JOHN. 
          THANK YOU, LINDSEY. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          SO AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE AREA PLAN, UH, OUR TEAM ON THE AUTHORIZED HEARING TEAM, WE, UH, BEGAN THE PROCESS FOR INITIATING, UH, MEETINGS WITH THE COMMUNITY. 
          BUT BEFORE WE DID THAT, I WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF A BACKGROUND OF THE ACTUAL MEMORANDUM THAT TOOK PLACE. 
          SO, UM, THIS ACTUALLY GOES BACK ALL THE WAY TO JANUARY OF 2020. 
          THIS IS WHEN, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER BASIL DUA FIRST INTRODUCED, UH, THE IDEA OF, UH, PROPOSING THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING. 
          NOW, UNFORTUNATELY, UH, BECAUSE OF THE ONSET OF COVID THAT DELAYED A LOT OF, UH, THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE, IN THE, IN THE COMING YEARS. 
          SO THAT ACTUALLY DID NOT GET FORMALLY APPROVED UNTIL OCTOBER 12TH, 2022. 
          SO, JUST SO YOU GET AN IDEA OF, OF, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH TIME AND WORK HAS GONE INTO THIS, UM, SPECIFIC PROJECT. 
          UH, WITH THAT BEING SAID, SO, UM, AFTER THE ADOPTION IN JUNE, UM, OF THE AREA PLAN IN 2025, UM, STAFF, UM, BEGAN GATHERING, UM, DATA INFORMATION, ANYTHING THAT WE NEEDED IN ORDER TO START THESE MEETINGS. 
          SO, UH, WE WERE PREPARING INFORMATION REGARDING THE NUMBER OF PARCELS IN THE SPECIFIC AREA, UM, LOOKING AT THE DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO THE EXISTING ZONING AND, AND, UM, AND, UM, A PLETHORA OF OTHER ITEMS. UH, BUT AT THE FIRST MEETING, WHAT WE ESSENTIALLY DID, UH, WAS ANNOUNCED TO THE COMMUNITY, UM, THAT WE WERE TAKING ZONING ACTION IN SOUTH DALLAS. 
          UM, A LOT OF THIS WAS FAMILIAR TO COMMUNITY MEMBERS, BEING THAT THEY HAD JUST BEEN A PART OF THE AREA PLAN PROCESS. 
          AND FOR SOME COMMUNITY MEMBERS, THIS WAS BRAND NEW, RIGHT? UM, AND SO WE WANTED TO, UH, BRIDGE THAT GAP FOR THOSE THAT WERE KNOWLEDGEABLE. 
          AND THEN FOR THOSE THAT, UM, WERE FIRST HEARING ABOUT THIS, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE INCLUSIVE, UH, WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE WERE, UH, PRESENTING. 
          SO ESSENTIALLY THAT KICKOFF MEETING ALLOWED US TO EXPLAIN WHAT AN AUTHORIZED HEARING DOES, UH, WHAT IT DOESN'T DO, UM, AND EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN AREA PLAN AND AN 
          [00:10:01]
AUTHORIZED HEARING. 
          UH, AND THEN THAT MEETING ALSO HELPED US SET UP, UM, THE BASIC CONTEXT THAT WE NEEDED AND BUILT UPON THE CONTEXT THAT LINDSAY AND AND PATRICK HAD, UM, DURING THE AREA PLANT PROCESS. 
          SO WE CAN GATHER FEEDBACK AND INPUT, UH, REGARDING ANY CHANGES THAT WE WERE GONNA MAKE. 
          UM, IN THAT FIRST, UH, KICKOFF MEETING, WE HAD PRETTY GOOD ATTENDANCE, UM, FROM THE LAST COUNT THAT I DID. 
          UM, WE HAD ABOUT 85 INDIVIDUALS JOIN US, UH, FOR THE KICKOFF MEETING. 
          AND THE SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS RANGED ANYWHERE FROM 50 TO TO 70 TYPICALLY FOR ATTENDANCE. 
          UH, BUT SO AT THAT SECOND MEETING, UH, WE HAD AT THE X LINE RECREATION CENTER ON NOVEMBER, UH, 13TH, THAT MEETING WAS FOCUSED ON ZONING CONCEPTS, OR IN OTHER WORDS, TRYING TO EDUCATE THE COMMUNITY ABOUT HOW ZONING FUNCTIONS. 
          UM, THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, MISCONCEPTIONS OR, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF RELATED TOPICS TO ZONING, BUT DON'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THERE'S, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED DURING AN AUTHORIZED HEARING PROCESS. 
          UH, NEVERTHELESS, THOSE ARE STILL IMPORTANT CONCERNS TO HEAR OUT FROM THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND WE GOT THOSE INDIVIDUALS, UH, TO THE CORRESPONDING DEPARTMENT THAT THEY NEEDED TO SPEAK TO IF THEY HAD SOMETHING. 
          UM, SO WITH THE ZONING CONCEPTS, REALLY, UH, WHAT WE REALLY DID WAS, UM, EXPLAIN THE EXISTING ZONING, WHICH IS PD 5 95. 
          UM, WE EXPLAINED WHAT SUBDISTRICTS WERE INCLUDED IN THE EXISTING ZONING. 
          UH, WE TALKED ABOUT IF THERE WERE ANY OVERLAYS IN THE AREA, UM, ANY S DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          UM, AND IT ALSO ALLOWED US TO EXPLAIN WHAT TYPES OF REGULATIONS WE MIGHT, UM, END UP IMPLEMENTING, UH, WHETHER THAT WAS CONSOLIDATING DISTRICTS, CREATING NEW DISTRICTS. 
          UM, AT THIS POINT, ALL THOSE DECISIONS HAD NOT BEEN MADE YET, AND SO WE REALLY JUST WANTED TO PRIME PEOPLE FOR WHAT TYPES OF, UH, CONCEPTS THEY WOULD SEE IN THE, IN THE UPCOMING MEETINGS. 
          AND THEN ON NOVEMBER, OR SORRY, ON, UH, DECEMBER 9TH, UH, WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING AT THE MLK RECREATION CENTER. 
          UM, IN THIS MEETING, WE TRIED TO FOCUS MORE SO ON THE ACTUAL, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS NOT ONLY, UH, SPECIFIED IN THE AREA PLAN, BUT ALSO FROM, UH, CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD HAD, UH, SINCE THAT AREA PLAN ADOPTION. 
          UM, AND SO IN THIS MEETING, UH, WE PRESENTED, UH, BASICALLY A, A PROPOSAL MAP, UH, A DRAFT AT LEAST FOR INDIVIDUALS TO TAKE A LOOK AT, TO SEE. 
          UM, AND IN THAT, UH, PROPOSAL OR OF, OF, UH, OF A DRAFT, WE HAD BREAKOUT TABLES. 
          AND SO ON SOME TABLES WE HAD GEOGRAPHIC AREAS OF, UH, THE ZONING MAPS. 
          IF THERE WAS A SPECIFIC PROPERTY THAT SOMEBODY WANTED TO LOOK AT, THEY COULD COME AND TELL US, HEY, WE, WE LIKE THIS IDEA. 
          WE DON'T LIKE THAT IDEA FOR A SPECIFIC ZONING. 
          AND WE ALSO HAD, UH, BREAKOUT TABLES REGARDING SPECIFIC CONCEPTS. 
          SO, AS PATRICK WILL TALK ABOUT, UH, SHORT, UH, IN A LITTLE BIT, UM, WE HAD, UH, TOPICS ABOUT SINGLE FAMILY, UH, DESIGN STANDARDS, DUPLEX DESIGN STANDARDS, TALKED ABOUT MIXED USE, UM, SUB-DISTRICTS AND, AND, AND ALL OF THE CONCEPTS RELATED TO THOSE THINGS. 
          AND SO, REALLY FROM THAT MEETING, UH, WE GOT A LOT OF FEEDBACK, A LOT OF NOTES, UM, OUR MAPS WERE DRAWN UP, AND, UH, WE WERE ABLE TO, TO TAKE THAT INFORMATION, UH, AND, AND UTILIZE IT TO START ACTUALLY DRAFTING THE PD RED LINE, WHICH WOULD THEN TELL US WHAT WE ARE CHANGING. 
          UM, SO AFTER THE, UH, ABOUT CHRISTMAS BREAK, WE WERE, WE WERE WORKING ON THAT, WORKING ON MAPS, WHETHER THAT'S GIS, UH, INFORMATION THAT WE NEED TO CLEAN UP, UH, A PLETHORA OF, OF JUST LITTLE, UH, CHECKLIST ITEMS THAT WE NEEDED TO DO IN ORDER TO, TO COME BACK TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          WHILE WE WERE DOING THAT, WE WERE STILL ENGAGING, UM, STAKEHOLDERS, ANYBODY WHO HAD QUESTIONS. 
          UM, AND WE PRESENTED EVEN WHEN WE WERE INVITED, UH, EVEN THE, THE PLANT, UH, POINT SOUTH GROUP, WHICH IS A, UH, BUSINESS GROUP THAT MEETS MONTHLY IN SOUTH DALLAS, ASKED US TO, TO PRESENT FOR THEM, JUST TO GIVE THEM AN UPDATE ON, ON THE CONCEPTS THAT WE WERE GONNA BE INTRODUCING. 
          UM, AND THEN AFTER THAT MEETING, UH, WE DECIDED TO HAVE A FOURTH COMMUNITY MEETING. 
          UM, NOT A REQUIREMENT PER OUR CODE, BUT WE THINK THAT IS A SMART PRACTICE TO COME BACK TO THE COMMUNITY, SHOW THEM WHAT THE ACTUAL PROPOSAL WAS GONNA BE, UM, SO THAT THE INDIVIDUALS IN THE COMMUNITY DON'T FEEL NEGLECTED OR AS IF WE, WE HELD OUT FROM ANNOUNCING ANYTHING TO THEM. 
          UM, NOW, UH, WITH THAT BEING SAID, SOME, SOME, UH, THEMES THAT WE HEARD FROM THE, UH, MEETINGS THAT WE HAD AND SOME THINGS THAT WERE REITERATED FROM PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS DURING THE AREA PLAN, A LOSS OF CHARACTER, UM, UH, SPECIFICALLY WITH INFILL SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING THAT HAS BEEN, UH, UM, DEVELOPED IN, IN SOUTH DALLAS OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. 
          UH, LACK OF SERVICES, WHETHER THIS COULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH SPECIFIC LAND USE, UH, CHANGES IN THE, IN THE, IN THE, UH, STANDARDS. 
          AND THEN ACTUALLY JUST THE MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT IMPLEMENTATION AGAIN, UH, WHERE THOSE ARE, WHAT THEY MEAN, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR HEIGHT, THOSE REGULATIONS, WHAT CAN I DO WITH MY PROPERTY? AND WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, THAT ALSO GAVE US GREAT OPPORTUNITIES TO, TO, UH, UM, SHOW THE COMMUNITY WHAT COULD HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE. 
          AND SO 
          [00:15:01]
IT ALLOWED THEM TO SEE THAT THERE'S A PLETHORA OF DIFFERENT HOUSING OPTIONS THAT WOULD THEN BE AVAILABLE FOR THE COMMUNITY IN THE FUTURE. 
          ALSO, UH, AS LINDSAY HAD MENTIONED, SPECIFIC AREAS, THE CORRIDORS, UM, THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT WHERE WE WOULD SEE THE MOST CHANGE IN TERMS OF ZONING, UH, TO, UH, ALLOW US TO ACCESS OR, UH, CREATE, UH, ECONOMIC INVESTMENT IN THOSE AREAS. 
          UH, WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND, UH, HAND IT OFF TO PATRICK, WHO WILL, UH, GO MORE SP UH, SPECIFICALLY INTO THE IMPLEMENTATION AND REGULATIONS. 
          UH, GOOD MORNING CHAIR, UH, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, MS. SECRETARY. 
          MY NAME IS PATRICK BLADES, CHIEF PLANNER FOR NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY PLANNING. 
          UM, BEFORE I GET INTO MY PRESENTATION, I'M, OTHER THAN JUST RECOGNIZING JOHN AND LINDSEY HERE, UH, I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE HUGE LIFT, UH, FOR THIS AREA OR FOR THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING. 
          IT'S A HUGE AREA. 
          THERE'S TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PROPERTIES HERE. 
          UH, TO GIVE YOU A, AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW IN DEPTH THIS IS, UH, WHEN WE SEND OUT THE NOTICES, WE HAD TO PRINT OFF 54,000 SHEETS OF PAPER TO SEND TO EVERYONE HERE. 
          SO, UM, JOHN LINDSEY, UH, SETH, JP, UH, THE MICHAELS, DEWEY, UM, WAYNE, JASON, UM, I MEAN, THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE WHO HAVE HELPED CHIPPED IN THERE. 
          LIKE BASICALLY IF ANYBODY'S, IF YOU'VE SEEN ANYBODY OVER THERE, THEY'VE ALL HELPED WITH THIS. 
          SO JUST WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE EVERYBODY OVER THERE. 
          SO, UM, IN THE AREA PLAN AND THROUGH THE AUTHORIZED HEARING, ONE OF THE TWO BIG THINGS THAT WE HEARD WAS WE WANT TO CHANGE OUR COMMERCIAL AREAS TO MIXED USE AREAS AND TO CREATE VIBRANCY THERE. 
          AND SO THERE'S THREE BIG, UM, EXISTING ZONING DISTRICTS IN PD 5, 9 5 THAT ARE COMMERCIAL. 
          ONE IS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, ONE IS COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, ONE IS REGIONAL COMMERCIAL. 
          SO ONE OF THE BIG CHANGES THAT WE MADE WAS JUST TO SAY THAT THOSE ARE NOW NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE, COMMUNITY MIXED USE AND REGIONAL MIXED USE. 
          WE DIDN'T TAKE OUT ANY LAND USES THERE. 
          WE ADDED IN. 
          SO THERE ARE A COUPLE LAND USES THAT WE ADDED IN THAT ARE MORE ON THE COMMERCIAL RETAIL SIDE, BUT THE BIG ONE THAT WE ADDED IN IS THOSE THREE DISTRICTS NOW ALLOW, UM, SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX AND MULTIFAMILY. 
          UM, IT KIND OF HELPS CODIFY EIGHT 40, BUT THERE ARE SOME THINGS OVER THERE WHERE SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES WOULDN'T QUALIFY. 
          UH, THE OTHER THING THAT WE WENT INTO IS, UM, THE HEIGHT FOR THESE AREAS, UM, BECAUSE WE'RE NOW, YOU KNOW, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE HAD A LOWER HEIGHT, BUT WITH EIGHT 40, THE STATE DICTATES AT THAT HEIGHT, NOW CAN BE UP TO 45 FEET. 
          SO FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE, THAT HEIGHT IS 45 FEET. 
          FOR THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE, THAT'S THE LOW TO MID-RISE. 
          I'M GONNA GET INTO THAT ONE A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          UM, BY, RIGHT, YOU CAN DO 45 FEET IF YOU'RE GONNA GO TALLER THAN THAT RESIDENTIAL. 
          RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPES STILL APPLIES. 
          AND, UM, THERE'S SOME CAVEATS. 
          IF YOU'RE GONNA GO TALLER THAN 45 FEET, YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE GROUND FLOOR A BETTER FLOOR. 
          BASICALLY, IT MIMICS OUR, UH, OUR FORM DISTRICTS AND THEN THE REGIONAL MIX USE, THAT'S GONNA BE STUFF THAT'S TALLER THAN EIGHT STORIES UP TO 200 FEET TALL. 
          UM, BECAUSE WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY, THOSE ARE, THERE ARE LOCATIONS IN SOUTH DALLAS, PARTICULARLY ALONG ROBERT COLUMN CAL TO FAIR PARK, WHERE THEY DO WANT HEIGHT. 
          THEY DO, THEY, THEY DO UNDERSTAND MORE DEVELOPMENT AND THEY WANT THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THERE. 
          UM, ALSO WE HAVE EXISTING M TWO ZONING IN THE PD. 
          UM, THAT M TWO ZONING IS BEING MOVED TO EITHER THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE, WHICH AGAIN IS A MIXED USE, UM, BELOW TO MIDRISE DISTRICT OR TO THE, UM, THERE'S A WALKABLE MIXED USE THREE DISTRICT. 
          UM, AND WHEN I SHOW YOU THE MAP, IT BASICALLY, THE, THE, THE, THE DIFFERENCE THERE IS THE STUFF THAT'S CLOSER TO FAIR PARK THAT'S CLOSER TO COMMUNITY MIXED USE THAT MF TWO BECOMES COMMUNITY MIXED USE. 
          THE STUFF THAT'S CLOSER TO, UM, THE FOREST DISTRICT, UM, CORNERSTONE OR ST UH, PHILLIPS, THERE'S ALREADY, UM, MU THREE OUT THERE AND IT'S JUST GONNA MIRROR THAT MU THREE. 
          SO AGAIN, UM, YOU HAVE HEARD ABOUT EIGHT 40 A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TIMES. 
          UM, THIS IS, UH, THE FIRST AUTHORIZED HEARING THAT WE'VE REALLY DONE WHERE WE, UM, ARE ACKNOWLEDGING EIGHT 40 AND WORKING IT INTO, UM, THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. 
          UM, AGAIN, FOR THE, THE, THE ONE THAT IT'S GONNA BE IN THE MOST POLITICAL IS THAT COMMUNITY MIXED USE WHERE IT'S POSSIBLE TO GO TO A HUNDRED FEET, BUT BECAUSE OF THE GEOMETRY OF CERTAIN LOCATIONS, YOU, YOU, YOU CAN'T GET TO THAT A HUNDRED FEET. 
          YOU ARE GOING TO BE LIMITED TO MORE OF THAT 45 OR THAT 50 FOOT TALL BECAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING. 
          SO HERE'S JUST ANOTHER, UH, WAY TO CONCEPTUALIZE THE HEIGHT. 
          AGAIN, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE, THAT'S GONNA BE THE FOUR STORIES, 45 FEET. 
          THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE, YOU CAN DO 45 FEET BY, RIGHT? IF YOU'RE GONNA GO TALLER THAN THAT, YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE GROUND FLOOR BETTER. 
          UM, AND THERE'S, UM, AGAIN, IT MIRRORS THE, THE FORM-BASED, UM, STIPULATIONS FOR TALLER BUILDINGS, THE REGIONAL MIXED USE, THAT'S GONNA BE 18 STORIES. 
          THERE ARE TWO OTHER MIXED USE DISTRICTS. 
          THAT'S A SERVICE MIXED USE AND THE INDUSTRIAL MIXED USE, THOSE ARE CLOSER TO, UM, THERE'S AREAS THAT ARE CLOSER TO THE FREEWAY OR CLOSER TO THE DART SERVICE YARD. 
          UM, THOSE, AGAIN, WE ARE NOT REMOVING ANY LAND USES THERE TO MAKE ANY OF THOSE NON-CONFORMING. 
          HOWEVER, WE ARE ADDING IN THE, THE SINGLE FAMILY, THE DUPLEX AND THE MULTIFAMILY INTO THOSE AREAS. 
          TALKING ABOUT THE HEIGHT, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE ALONG MARTIN LUTHER KING. 
          UM, THEY'RE 
          [00:20:01]
ON THE LEFT. 
          UM, THAT'S GONNA BE COMMUNITY MAKES USE. 
          AGAIN, YOU COULD GO UP TO A HUNDRED FEET, BUT BECAUSE THAT BLOCK IS NOT MORE THAN 150 FEET DEEP, YOU CAN'T REACH A TOTAL HEIGHT OF MORE THAN 50 FEET BECAUSE OF RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE. 
          SO EVEN WITH EIGHT 40, THE, THE HEIGHT IS STILL LIMITED ON, ON MLK TO JUST A LOW RISE STRUCTURE. 
          UM, THERE ON THE RIGHT, THAT'S ROBERT B COLMAN SECOND AVENUE. 
          UM, ONCE YOU START TO GET MORE THAN A BLOCK AWAY FROM THAT RESIDENTIAL, YOU CAN SEE THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE GONNA START TO GET A TALLER STRUCTURE. 
          AND THAT AGAIN, IS WHAT WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY, IS THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED. 
          YOU CAN GET TALLER, BUT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO BE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO GET THAT HEIGHT. 
          SO THIS IS THE EXISTING, UH, ZONING THAT'S ON THE GROUND. 
          UM, THE YELLOW, THAT IS A, UM, A, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR R FIVE, R SEVEN FIVE OR THE DUPLEX. 
          UM, THE RED, THAT IS THE COMMUNITY, UH, COMMERCIAL RIGHT NOW. 
          THE DARKER BURGUNDY IS THE REGIONAL MIXED USE. 
          UM, WE HAVE SOME OF THE KIND OF YELLOW OR THE ORANGE-ISH YELLOW, THAT'S THE MF TWO, THE BLUE THERE. 
          UM, ON THE LEFT, THAT'S GONNA BE THE, UH, UH, FORM-BASED DISTRICT. 
          UM, AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT'S ON THE GROUND NOW. 
          UH, THE PROPOSAL THAT COMES FROM THE COMMUNITY, UM, IT LOOKS A LOT THE SAME. 
          UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE BLUE THERE ON THE LEFT, UM, THE, THE MULTIFAMILY THAT BLUE HAS GROWN, UM, THAT BLUE JUST INCORPORATES THE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY THAT'S OUT THERE. 
          THE, UH, THE RED THAT'S GROWN CLOSER TO FAIR PARK. 
          UM, THAT'S A LOT OF MULTIFAMILY THAT NOW WOULD BE COMMUNITY, UM, MIXED USE. 
          UM, AND THEN THE REGIONAL MIXED USE, THAT'S GROWN A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          UM, BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY HAS SAID WE, THAT, AGAIN, THAT'S AN INTENSITY THAT'S CLOSE TO FAIR PARK, THAT'S CLOSE TO THE DART STATION THAT'S DUE. 
          THAT IS WHERE THEY WANTED IN HEIGHT. 
          UM, MOVING ON TO THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. 
          SO THERE'S THREE BIG RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS IN THIS PD, R FIVE, R SEVEN FIVE, AND DUPLEX. 
          THE VERY FIRST THING THAT WE DID IS WE CHANGED THE NAME OF THOSE DISTRICTS. 
          AND IF YOU SAY, WELL, WHY ARE YOU CHANGING THE NAME OF THOSE DISTRICTS? IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE. 
          SO WHEN WE DID THAT, UM, AND WE SENT IT TO CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THEY SAID, WHAT DO YOU DO? AND WHAT, WHAT'S GOING ON? AND WE WERE LIKE, EXACTLY, BECAUSE WE WANT EVERYBODY WHO EITHER LIVES IN HERE, WHO OWNS PROPERTY HERE, AN ARCHITECT, A PLAN TO REVIEWER TO READ THIS PD AND SAY, THERE'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT IN THIS SUBDISTRICT. 
          IT'S NOT JUST PD 5 95 R FIVE. 
          THERE'S A REASON WHY THERE'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT HERE. 
          THOSE ARE THE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          IT'S A, IT'S A GIANT FLAG TO SAY, I SHOULD PAY MORE ATTENTION TO THESE, UM, THESE REQUIREMENTS THAN JUST THINK IT'S JUST NORMAL R FIVE. 
          SO AGAIN, THOSE ARE JUST GONNA BE THE SOUTH DALLAS SINGLE FAMILY, R SEVEN FIVE, SOUTH DALLAS, SINGLE FAMILY, R FIVE SOUTH DALLAS, SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX. 
          SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, IF WE RECALL FROM ALMOST A YEAR AGO WHEN WE PRESENTED THE AREA PLAN, UM, THOSE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS TALKED ABOUT A PORCH IN THE FRONT GARAGE IN THE BACK, TWO STORIES OF HEIGHT, SOME TYPE OF A PITCHED ROOF WINDOWS ON THE FRONT, UM, AND, UH, A DRIVEWAY THAT DOESN'T TAKE UP ALL THE FRONT YARD. 
          SO HOW WE TRANSLATED THAT TO, UH, ZONING REQUIREMENTS, WE HAVE THE FRONT PORCHES. 
          SO YOU'VE GOTTA BE SIX FEET DEEP, YOU'VE GOTTA BE SIX FEET WIDE, AND YOU HAVE TO BE COVERED. 
          YOU HAVE TO MEET THOSE THREE REQUIREMENTS. 
          THEN THERE'S FOUR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU HAVE TO MEET. 
          THREE OF YOU GOTTA MAKE THE PORCH A LITTLE BIT WIDER, A LITTLE BIT DEEPER. 
          HAVE ONE STEP ABOVE GRADE OR HAVE A RAILING OR A KNEE WALL AROUND IT. 
          SO AGAIN, YOU'VE GOTTA BE COVERED. 
          YOU GOTTA BE SIX FEET DEEP, YOU GOTTA BE SIX FEET WIDE. 
          AND THEN YOU CAN EITHER MAKE IT WIDER, DEEPER, HAVE A RAILING OR ANOTHER STEP UP. 
          THE GARAGES, WHEN WE SAY GARAGES IN THE BACK, WE DON'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT IT IS REAR ACCESS. 
          SO ONE THING THAT WE DID HERE IS THEY DON'T WANT A GARAGE THAT TAKES UP THE ENTIRE LOT WHERE YOU JUST SEE A GARAGE. 
          SO THE, THE GARAGE CANNOT TAKE UP MORE THAN 50% OF THE FRONT FACADE. 
          AND THEN IF YOU DO PROVIDE A GARAGE, IT HAS TO BE EITHER ACCESS FROM THE REAR, THE ALLEY FROM THE SIDE, UH, A SIDE STREET. 
          IF IT'S DETACHED, IT'S GOTTA BE IN THE REAR 30%. 
          IF IT'S ATTACHED, UM, IT'S GOTTA BE SET BACK, UM, A MINIMUM OF SIX FEET FROM THE FRONT BUILDING LINE OR THE FRONT PORCH. 
          UM, AND ONE THING THAT, UM, I NEGLECTED TO GO OVER IN THE LAST SLIDE IS, UM, WE DO HAVE THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE FRONT PORCH CAN EXCEED SIX FEET INTO THAT FRONT STEP BACK. 
          SO THE IDEA IDEA IS THAT YOUR FRONT PORCH WOULD BE SIX FEET, AT LEAST SIX FEET BEYOND WHERE YOUR GARAGE IS. 
          SO THE FIRST THING THAT YOU'RE GONNA SEE WALKING DOWN THE STREET IS THE, THE PORCH AND NOT THE GARAGE, UH, ROOF PITCH. 
          UM, SO, UH, RIGHT NOW THE PROPOSAL IS THAT THE ROOF MUST HAVE AT LEAST A FOUR 12 ROOF PITCH. 
          UM, WE'VE HEARD SOME DIFFERENT CONVERSATIONS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT MIGHT CHANGE BY THE TIME WE GET TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          UM, THE OTHER PART IS THAT THE ROOF PITCH HAS TO COME TOGETHER AT A GABLE OR AN EVE. 
          WE DON'T NEED FLYING ROOF PITCHES LIKE THIS. 
          WE NEED IT TO COME TOGETHER, 
          [00:25:02]
IMPERVIOUS SERVICE IN THE FRONT YARD. 
          UM, SO THE REQUIREMENTS THERE WOULD BE THAT IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK THAT, UH, YOUR DRIVEWAY CAN TAKE UP, UM, ONLY 25% OR 200 FEET, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. 
          UM, AND THAT YOUR FRONT PORCH DOES NOT, UH, IS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT CALCULATIONS OF IMPERVIOUS SERVICE. 
          AGAIN, THAT'S TO ENSURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE A GIANT DRIVEWAY JUST IN YOUR FRONT YARD. 
          NOW, ONCE I WILL SAY ONCE YOU GET BEYOND THAT FRONT YARD SETBACK, YOU CAN WIDEN YOUR GARAGE. 
          SO THERE'S DESIGN, THERE'S AN ABILITY TO CREATE A WIDER DRIVEWAY. 
          IT JUST CAN'T BE THERE IN THAT FRONT YARD SETBACK, UH, WINDOWS. 
          SO, UH, THE, THE RED LINE VERSION IS WRITTEN TO SAY THAT, UM, ON THE, THE FRONT FACING FACADE THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE ON THE FIRST FLOOR, A MINIMUM 10% TRANSPARENCY AND 20% TRANSPARENCY ON THE SECOND FLOOR. 
          AND THAT TRANSPARENCY WITHIN THE GARAGE DOOR WOULDN'T, UH, BE INCLUDED IN THAT CALCULATION. 
          UH, THERE'S ANOTHER, UM, AND AGAIN, TO TO BE CLEAR, UH, THESE WOULD BE THE REGULATIONS FOR THE R FIVE, THE R SEVEN FIVE, AND THE DUPLEX NEW DISTRICTS. 
          UM, AND IN THAT DUPLEX DISTRICT, UM, WE'VE CHANGED SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT BASICALLY, SO THAT IT MIRRORS THE R FIVE. 
          SO THE SETBACK IS THE SAME AS R FIVE. 
          THE HEIGHT IS THE SAME AS R FIVE. 
          THE MINIMUM LOT, UM, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR A DUPLEX WOULD NOW BE 5,000 SQUARE FEET, NOT 6,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          UM, WE'VE ALSO ADDED A LAND USE IN THERE CALLED SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT, BUT THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED WOULD BE 2,500 SQUARE FEET. 
          SO IT'S THE IDEA THAT YOU COULD BUILD A DUPLEX ON A PROPERTY. 
          YOU COULD ALSO ALSO SUBDIVIDE THAT PROPERTY, REPL IT TO TWO DIFFERENT LOTS AND BUILD TWO UNITS. 
          YOU STILL ARE BUILDING THE SAME STRUCTURE. 
          YOU'RE NOW JUST ABLE TO SELL THE STRUCTURE AND THE PROPERTY IN AN EASIER MANNER, UH, THAN YOU'D BE ABLE TO DO NOW. 
          UM, ALSO, UM, AGAIN, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS, THE AREA PLAN CALLED OUT, ONE OF THE THINGS WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY IS THE NEED FOR MORE HOUSING. 
          UM, AND ONE OF THE, UH, CONCEPTS THAT WE TALKED TO THEM ABOUT THAT THEY SAID, YES, THAT MAKES SENSE, ARE THE ADU. 
          UM, BECAUSE, UH, I, I I WILL ADMIT THAT SOMETIMES WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT ADU, UM, PEOPLE IN SOUTH DALLAS WOULD SAY, YES, I KNOW ABOUT THOSE ADU AND JUST KIND OF COVER THEIR, THEIR EYES. 
          'CAUSE THERE ARE, THERE ARE AD'S OUT THERE, SOME OF THEM WERE BUILT MAYBE ON SUNDAYS. 
          UM, BUT IT'S, UH, LEGALIZING THOSE ADUS THAT ARE OUT THERE ALLOWING FOR MORE SIMPLER PROCESS. 
          UM, THEY'D BE SUBJECT TO THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS RIGHT NOW IN 51 A. 
          UM, AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WE HEARD THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE GRANNY FLATS OR, UH, WHAT I HEARD IN SOUTH A THAT THEY WERE CALLED A, A GRANDDADDY'S HOUSE. 
          UM, THOSE WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THOSE THREE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. 
          THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL CHANGES, UM, THAT KIND OF DON'T REALLY FALL IN LINE WITH THAT MIXED USE OR THE, THE, THE, THE RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS. 
          UH, ONE IS CATERING SERVICE RIGHT NOW, IT'S NOT REALLY ALLOWED. 
          UM, WE'VE CHANGED THAT TO BE ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN MANY OF THESE, UH, MIXED USE DISTRICTS. 
          AND ALSO THAT, UM, RESTAURANTS WHERE ALL THE FOOD IS TO GO. 
          SO KIND OF THE GHOST KITCHEN OR JUST THE, THE ALL TAKEOUT PLACES WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT LAND USE, UH, MARKET GARDENS. 
          UM, RIGHT NOW, THOSE, UM, ARE, UM, REQUIRE AN SUP BECAUSE OF STATE LAW WHERE WE'RE MOVING, WE'RE REMOVING THAT. 
          WE CAN'T REQUIRE AN SUP FOR THOSE, UM, IN THE PD ANYMORE. 
          UM, MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS, UH, RIGHT NOW THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED. 
          UM, WE WOULD BE ALLOWING MASSAGE AS AN ACCESSORY USE. 
          SO IF YOU HAVE A NAIL SALON OR BARBERSHOP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND YOU PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE DOING FOOT MASSAGES, YOU COULD DO THAT. 
          UM, BUT JUST AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO OTHER PERSONAL SERVICES. 
          ALSO CHANGING THE, UH, TOBACCO SHOP, UM, TO INCLUDE ELECTRONIC SMOKING DEVICES VAPING, THAT, THAT, THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT. 
          UM, IN THAT LAND USE, WHICH IS NOT ALLOWED, UM, IN THE PD, UM, THERE'S A 30 FOOT MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK FOR PARKING THAT WE'RE REMOVING BECAUSE IT HAS PROVEN VERY DIFFICULT IN SOME OF THOSE OLDER STRUCTURES TO GET COS WITH THAT REQUIRED PARKING. 
          WITH THAT STIPULATION, UM, WE'RE REMOVING THE FLORIDA AREA RATIO, UM, UM, IN THE MIXED USE DISTRICTS, UM, PROVIDING AN OPTION TO HAVE HOTELS OR MOTELS THROUGH AN SUP, UM, IN THOSE MIXED USE DISTRICTS. 
          UM, WE'RE REDOING THE LIVE WORK UNITS. 
          UM, THERE'S SOME STIPULATIONS ABOUT THE, UM, THE SIZE OF THOSE UNITS AND THE PERCENTAGE AND THE NUMBER THAT YOU CAN HAVE, UM, IN PROPERTIES WE'RE REMOVING THOSE REQUIREMENTS. 
          UM, ALSO THERE ARE A HANDFUL OF DUPLEXES THAT, UM, ARE OUT THERE THAT ARE NOT ZONED FOR DUPLEXES. 
          UM, AND THEY'VE BEEN THERE A HUNDRED YEARS. 
          UM, WE'RE INCLUDING A PROVISION IN THE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS THAT IF YOU CAN SHOW THAT YOU WERE A DUPLEX BEFORE 2001 OR SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2001, WHICH IS WHEN THE PD WAS CREATED, THAT THAT IS ESSENTIALLY A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING LAND USE. 
          YOU CAN HAVE A DUPLEX OR YOU CAN KEEP YOUR DUPLEX THERE. 
          UM, THERE, UH, IS ONE ADDITIONAL, UH, WELL, TWO ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT WE DIDN'T INCLUDE ON THIS SLIDE, BUT I I WILL GO OVER. 
          ONE IS THAT WE WERE VERY SIMPLY SAYING THAT SIDEWALKS ARE REQUIRED IN THIS PD. 
          UM, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW PEOPLE ARE BUILDING HOMES IN SOUTH DALLAS AND THEY'RE JUST GETTING SIDEWALK WAIVERS. 
          AND SO WE HAVE WHOLE BLOCKS THAT 
          [00:30:01]
USED TO HAVE SIDEWALKS ON THEM, BUT THE HOMES WERE TORN DOWN, AND THEN THE NEW BUILDERS ARE JUST NOT BUILDING SIDEWALKS. 
          AND WE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT. 
          AND SO WE'RE JUST REQUIRING THAT IF YOU'RE GONNA BUILD A HOUSE IN SOUTH DALLAS, THAT HOUSE NOW HAS TO HAVE A SIDEWALK. 
          UH, THE OTHER THING IS, UM, IN THE AREA THAT'S CLOSE TO ST. 
          PHILIP'S, UM, AND CORNERSTONE, THEY'VE RUN INTO A LITTLE BIT OF ISSUE BECAUSE IN THE WMU THREE FORM DISTRICT, UM, EVEN THOUGH THE PD SAYS A SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE HAS ALLOWED A SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE IS NOT. 
          SO THEY'RE HAVING TROUBLE BUILDING HOMES AND DUPLEXES IN THAT, IN THAT, IN THOSE AREAS. 
          SO WE'RE CHANGING IN THE PD TO SAY THAT STRUCTURE ISN'T ALLOWED STRUCTURE, SUBJECT TO THE EXACT SAME DESIGN REQUIREMENTS THAT THE, UM, THAT THE SOUTH DALLAS DUPLEX DISTRICT WOULD HAVE. 
          SO THE SAME PORCH IN THE FRONT GARAGE IN THE BACK PITCHED ROOF THAT YOU COULD BUILD THAT STRUCTURE IN, IN THE, IN THAT FORM DISTRICT. 
          UH, SO, UM, AGAIN, WE WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, UM, AND LOOK FORWARD TO PROVIDING YOU, UM, WITH THE CASE REPORT, UM, AND THE REDLINE VERSION, UM, FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          UM, THIS WAS A REALLY GREAT BRIEFING. 
          I KNOW A LOT OF TIME HAS AND EFFORT HAS GONE INTO THIS. 
          UM, WE'LL HAVE TIME TO RECOGNIZE THAT WHEN WE ACTUALLY TAKE IT UP AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          I DID WANNA RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER DIANE RAGSDALE HERE WITH US. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR, FOR JOINING US AND WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING YOU AT THE PUBLIC HEARING WHERE I'M SURE YOU'LL HAVE REALLY GOOD INPUT FOR US. 
          UH, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER WHEELER? UM, FIRST QUESTION IS A, UM, WHERE ARE THERE MINIMUM RETAILS? WHAT ABOUT THE MINIMUM RETAIL STANDARDS? SORRY, COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? THE MINIMUM RETAIL STANDARDS. 
          OH, SO, UH, THERE ARE, FOR BUILDINGS THAT ARE TALLER THAN, UM, 45 FEET, UM, THERE ARE STANDARDS ABOUT THE, UH, THE TRANSPARENCY ON THE GROUND FLOOR ABOUT, UM, THOSE BUILDINGS HAVING, UH, A CERTAIN WIDTH WITH THE LOT. 
          UM, SO IT'S 90% OF THE PRIMARY STREET THAT THAT BUILDING HAS TO BE PUSHED CLOSER TO THAT STREET AND IT HAS TO FILL THAT SPACE AND HAS TO HAVE A TRANSPARENT LOOK, YOU KNOW, WHERE YOU'RE WALKING BY AND YOU CAN SEE INTO THAT STRUCTURE. 
          UM, THOSE ARE TWO OF THE ONES, UM, THAT I KNOW ARE IN THE PD. 
          THERE'S, UM, I BELIEVE ONE MORE, UM, THAT WE'VE PUT IN THERE, BUT IT, IT ESSENTIALLY JUST TAKES THE STANDARDS FROM WMU THREE AND FIVE AND PUTS IT IN THE OTHER MIXED USE DISTRICTS. 
          IF YOU'RE GONNA GO TALLER THAN 45 FEET, ESSENTIALLY IT'S A, UH, IF YOU'RE GONNA GO TALLER, IT, IT'S A BONUS FOR MAKING A BETTER GROUND FLOOR. 
          UM, ON THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS, UM, I KNOW THAT THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF WAS FOR, UH, FOUR TO 12, BUT DID THE COMMUNITY RECOMMEND ANOTHER FOR SINGLE FAMILY FOR THE, UM, ONE STORY AND ALSO FOR THE TWO STORY? YEAH, I, I BELIEVE WHEN WE HAD CONVERSATIONS THAT, UM, THERE IS, UH, SOME COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO SAID, YES, WE, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DO FOUR 12 IS FINE, BUT WE'D ACTUALLY LIKE FIVE 12. 
          UM, AND I THINK STAFF IS 100% OPEN TO, TO MAKING THAT CHANGE. 
          IF, IF THAT'S THE, IF THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THE RECOMMENDATION, SORRY, JUST A QUICK CLARIFICATION. 
          WHEN YOU SAY 4 12, 5 12 US THAT ROOF PITCH? YES. 
          SORRY, ROOF PITCH. 
          IT'S GOING FROM A FOUR 12 TO A FIVE 12. 
          UM, AND AGAIN, IF STAFF AGAIN SAYS, I MEAN THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S, IT'S A THING THAT IF, AGAIN, CPC SAYS THAT, THAT SEEMS REASONABLE, THAT'S A, AGAIN, STAFF AGREES WITH THAT. 
          AND THE CONSIDERATION FOR TWO STORIES WOULD STILL BE THE FOUR 12. 
          YES, WE CAN CREATE A DIFFERENT ROOF PITCH FOR A ONE STORY STRUCTURE VERSUS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE. 
          YES, MA'AM. 
          UM, ALSO, UM, THE MOTEL HOTEL, IT, THE STAFF CONSIDER IN, BECAUSE IT'S THROUGHOUT ALL MU FOR THE, UH, CONSIDERATION TO HAVE IT BY SUP WITH THAT CONSIDERATION, COULD THAT CONSIDERATION CHANGE THAT STILL DOES IT NOT ALLOWED IN THE, IN, IN THE NEW, UM, PREVIOUS NC, WHICH IS MOSTLY SURROUNDED BY HOMES THAT IS MORE NEIGHBORHOOD INSTEAD OF THE MORE, UM, THE DISTRICTS THAT HAVE MORE DENSITY, BUT IN THE NC NOT KEEPING IT NOT ALLOWED? YES. 
          YES MA'AM. 
          AND OKAY. 
          AND I PROMISE YOU ALL OF THAT. 
          UM, ARE YOU ALL REMOVING THE LANGUAGE IN THE R-A-S-M-U THAT SAYS, UM, FOR MA UM, MULTI-FAMILY AND RETIREMENT HOUSING, THAT MUST BE A COMPONENT OF A MIXED USE PROJECT MAY NOT EXCEED 85% OF THE FOUR SPACE SO THAT IT CAN BE IN LINE WITH EIGHT 40 Y? YES, MA'AM. 
          WE'RE MAKING THAT CHANGE. 
          YES, MA'AM. 
          OKAY. 
          AND TO MIMIC THE RSMU COULD ALSO IN THE CC AND IN THE FARM DISTRICT THAT, UH, THE SUP REQUIREMENT BE REMOVED FROM THE COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTERS IN THOSE TWO DISTRICTS ALONE IN THE, IN THE COMMUNITY 
          [00:35:01]
MIXED USE, IT'S, THEY'RE ALREADY ALLOWED BY WRIGHT IN THE RSMU MM-HMM . 
          BUT ALSO TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION TO, IN THE CC IN THE COMMUNITY, UM, THE NEW COMMUNITY MIXED USE AND ALSO IN THE FARM DISTRICT TO ALLOW IT. 
          THE COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER BY WRIGHT. 
          YES, MA'AM. 
          UM, AND I THINK THAT THAT'S IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          LET'S JUST GO DOWN THE LINE. 
          START WITH COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. 
          EXCUSE ME. 
          I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE NEWLY PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT. 
          NOW I KNOW WE HAVE A, BEEN GIVEN THE RED LINE VERSION OF, OF THE PD, BUT IF YOU'RE ADDING MULTIFAMILY SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX TO A DISTRICT THAT RIGHT NOW, UH, THE, THE SIMILAR DISTRICT IS THE REGIONAL SERVICE INDUSTRIAL SUBDISTRICT, I'M ASSUMING THE BOUNDARIES ARE, ARE ABOUT THE SAME. 
          UM, THERE ARE SOME VERY INCOMPATIBLE USES ON THAT LIST. 
          HAVE YOU DONE ANY EDITING OF THAT LIST TO REMOVE, UH, TROUBLESOME USES THAT PERHAPS DON'T EXIST THAT YOU DON'T WANT IN THE FUTURE THAT WOULD BE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH MIXED USE? I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT'S, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED THERE? SO, UM, WE HAVEN'T REMOVED, WELL THERE'S ONE, ONE OF THOSE DISTRICTS WERE REMOVING THE WAREHOUSE LAND USE. 
          UM, BUT THE OTHER POTENTIAL INCOMPATIBLE OR POTENTIALLY WHERE YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL AND INDUSTRIAL, UH, WE'RE, WE HAVEN'T PROPOSED TO REMOVE THOSE LAND USES BECAUSE IN REMOVING THOSE LAND USES, UM, THAT CHANGES WHAT THE AUTHORIZED HEARING THAT THAT CHANGES WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO, UM, BECAUSE WE'RE POTENTIALLY THEN MAKING SOME OF THOSE BUSINESSES, UH, NON-CONFORMING AND THAT WOULD COMPLICATE THE ENTIRETY OF THE AUTHORIZED HEARING. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT ISSUE. 
          UM, BUT FROM THE COMMUNITY, UH, WHAT WE HEARD WAS THAT THAT WASN'T THE PRIORITY. 
          THE PRIORITY WAS CHANGING THIS TO MIXED USE AND GETTING HEIGHT AND THEN DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE EXISTING HOMES. 
          NOW I UNDERSTAND THE, THE PROBLEM THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH MAKING AN EXISTING USE INCOMPATIBLE, BUT IF YOU HAVE, UH, POTENTIALLY TROUBLESOME USES THAT ARE ALLOWED ON THE, IN THIS PD THAT DON'T EXIST NOW, WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO REMOVING THOSE USES? I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE LAND. 
          I DON'T KNOW. 
          WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, LOCAL UTILITIES IS ALLOWED HERE, WHICH COULD BE DATA CENTERS. 
          I DON'T THINK MANY PEOPLE WOULD WANNA LIVE NEXT TO A DATA CENTER. 
          SO DOWN, IF THERE ARE ANY DATA CENTERS THAT EXIST THERE NOW WE CAN DOUBLE CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BUSINESSES THAT WE HAVE COS FOR IF THERE ARE EXISTING LAND USES THAT ARE ALLOWED IN THOSE TWO INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS, THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY COS FOR THOSE BUSINESSES. 
          AND IF THOSE ARE BUSINESSES THAT THE COMMUNITY RIGHT WOULD, WOULD NOT WANT, WE CAN LOOK INTO REMOVING THOSE FROM THE RED LINE VERSION. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON. 
          OH, YOU DON'T HAVE IT HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS YESTERDAY ABOUT A PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP HOTELS AND OTHER THINGS IMMEDIATELY AROUND FAIR PARK. 
          IS ANYTHING LIKE THAT PART OF, OF YOUR PLAN HERE? SO, UM, THERE, THERE HAS BEEN, I I BELIEVE THE ARTICLE THAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO WAS BASED UPON THE MEETING ON MONDAY, UM, IN FAIR PARK WHERE THEY TALKED ABOUT, UH, TO THE NORTHEAST PART OF THE PARK WHERE THERE ARE A LOT OF BIG PARKING LOTS THAT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IS LOOKING INTO DEVELOPING THOSE AS SOME TYPE OF RESTAURANT RETAIL AND LODGING MM-HMM . 
          UM, BECAUSE THOSE ARE OUTSIDE OF THE, THE PDS BOUNDARIES, UM, THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING, UM, DOESN'T DIRECTLY CONTEMPLATE THOSE, BUT INDIRECTLY, UM, THE AREA THAT IS IN THE AUTHORIZED HEARING AREA, THE AREA ON FITS YOU, UM, WHICH ON THE MAP HERE IS KIND OF THE, THE LIGHT PINK AREA. 
          UM, BECAUSE FAIR PARK IS TALKING ABOUT REDEVELOPING THOSE PARKING LOTS, THE STUFF ACROSS THE STREET THAT RIGHT NOW IS JUST ZONE FOR DUPLEXES. 
          UM, THE AUTHORIZED HEARING IS REZONING THAT TO NEIGHBORHOOD MIX USE TO ALLOW FOR THINGS LIKE RESTAURANTS AND RETAIL AND HOUSING. 
          SO THAT IF THAT DOES DEVELOP AS MORE THE, THE FAIR PARK AREA THAT IT DOES DEVELOP AS MORE RETAIL AND HOUSING THAT RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET, THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE THEN ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT REDEVELOPMENT OF FAIR PARK AND BUILD A RESTAURANT OR A STORE, UM, YOU KNOW, OR YOU KNOW, HOUSING OR HOTELS THERE AS WELL. 
          SO IT, THE ZONE THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING THIS IN LIES OUTSIDE OF THE PD? YES, IT'S IN FAIR PARK PROPER. 
          UM, AND I BELIEVE THEIR, UH, ZONED, 
          [00:40:01]
UM, CS I WANT TO SAY IN THAT PARKING LOT. 
          SO, UM, BUT I MEAN WE'RE AWARE OF WHAT, UH, FAIR PARK IS DOING OR, OR THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IS DOING WITH FAIR PARK AND THAT HAS HAD A, UM, IMPACT ON THIS PROCESS, BUT JUST NOT DIRECTLY 'CAUSE IT'S NOT WITHIN THE PD. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU ILLUSTRATED HERE, WOULD THAT ALL BE FUNDED PRIVATELY? LIKE IF SOMEONE WANTED TO BUILD A HOUSE THEMSELVES OR TO REMODEL OR DO SOMETHING OR WOULD THERE BE ANY USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS TO DO, UH, ANY OF THIS WORK OR, UM, SO, UH, I MEAN, IT, IT COULD BE POSSIBLE. 
          UM, I MEAN IF, IF THERE ARE DIFFERENT PROJECTS THAT WANT TO SEEK PUBLIC FUNDING, THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, 100% SEEK THAT. 
          UM, THIS AUTHORIZED HEARING DOESN'T NECESSARILY CONTEMPLATE WHETHER IT'S PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FUNDING THAT ACHIEVES SOME OF THIS. 
          UM, BUT IT DOES, UM, AS WE SAID, UM, AND WE TALKED TO PEOPLE WHO OWN PROPERTY OUT HERE WHO HAVE OWNED IT FOR 20, 30 YEARS WHO HAVE WANTED TO DEVELOP, UM, AND THEY'RE LIKE, OH, THESE, WE HAVE ALL THESE BARRIERS. 
          THIS REMOVES ONE OF THOSE BARRIERS WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK AND REZONE THE PROPERTY BECAUSE NOW IT ALLOWS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT THEY WANT TO DO. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          SO WE'RE, WE'RE FOCUSED STRICTLY ON LAND USE, NOT ABOUT YEAH. 
          FINANCIALS OR FUNDS. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          MM-HMM . 
          COMMISSIONER COX, PATRICK, JUST A CLARIFICATION ON THE LOT SIZES. 
          YOU MENTIONED DUPLEX WAS REDUCED FROM 6,005,000 AND THEN YOU MENTIONED SINGLE FAMILY IS DOWN TO 2,500. 
          WAS THAT REDUCED AS WELL FROM A, SO, UM, IN THE, IN THE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS, THE SOUTH DALLAS FIVE AND THE SOUTH DALLAS 7.5, THOSE MINIMUM LOT SIZES STILL STAY THE SAME. 
          UH, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE WOULD ONLY CHANGE IN THE SOUTH DALLAS DUPLEX DISTRICT AND IT WOULDN'T, IT, IT WOULD NOT GO DOWN TO 2,500 FOR A DUPLEX. 
          IT WOULD ONLY GO DOWN FOR 2,500 FOR SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED. 
          RIGHT. 
          SO ON ONE 5,000 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY, YOU CAN STILL ONLY BUILD TWO UNITS, UM, WHETHER YOU SUBDIVIDED IN THE MIDDLE OR NOT, BUT YOU CAN'T SUBDIVIDE IT AND THEN BUILD A DUPLEX HERE AND A DUPLEX HERE, YOU CAN'T DO FOUR UNITS, YOU CAN JUST DO TWO UNITS. 
          YEAH. 
          THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. 
          MM-HMM . 
          OKAY, I'LL GO TO MY RIGHT. 
          UH, START OFF WITH COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. 
          UM, YEAH, THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          I THINK I FOLLOW UH, THINGS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO ASK A COUPLE OF CLARIFYING QUESTIONS ON YOUR SOUTH THW SINGLE FAMILY, UH, SEVEN FIVE SOUTH THW SINGLE FAMILY, FIVE SOUTH TH DUPLEX, THOSE ZONING CATEGORIES WOULD BE UNIQUE TO PD 5 95, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          AND IT'S ESSENTIALLY THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT ARE MAKING THEM UNIQUE? YES. 
          YEAH, IT WOULD BE. 
          UM, IT'S NOT A CONSERVATION DISTRICT BUT IT FUNCTIONS SIMILAR TO A CONSERVATION DISTRICT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND IS THAT TRUE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE COMMUNITY, MIXED USE, REGIONAL MIXED USE? THAT WOULD BE A SOMEWHAT UNIQUE TO 5 95. 
          THEY WOULD BE UNIQUE IN THEIR LAND USES BECAUSE THERE'S A COUPLE OF LAND USES, UH, PARTICULARLY THAT THE CONVENIENCE STORE LAND USE, WHICH REALLY ONLY EXIST IN 5 9 5. 
          AND SO THEY'RE NOT TOTALLY DIFFERENT, BUT THE LAND USES ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN, THAN OTHER AREAS. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN ON UH, PAGE 13, I WAS HAVING A HARD TIME TRACKING WHAT THAT WAS TELLING ME WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS BEFORE THE MEETING. 
          I THINK YOU CLARIFIED IT THAT IT'S REALLY TRYING TO ILLUSTRATE THE IMPACT OF RPS ON SOME OF THESE NEW HEIGHT LIMITS. 
          YES. 
          THAT ALTHOUGH THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE DISTRICT IS 100, THE EFFECTIVE HEIGHT AT A LOT OF THAT IS 45 OR 48 OR 52 FEET. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, ON THE 80 DUS, COULD YOU JUST CLARIFY FOR ME, ARE YOU, YOU SAYING THAT THE ORDINANCE WILL ALLOW THEM BY, RIGHT. 
          YES. 
          IN THE THREE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS IT WOULD ALLOW ADUS BY RIGHT. 
          YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN WOULD THE SAME DESIGN STANDARDS APPLY THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE HERE IN THE CITY FOR HOW YOU CALCULATE THE MAXIMUM SIZE, ET CETERA? YES SIR. 
          YES SIR. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD NOT HAVE TO OPT IN THE WAY THAT THE ORDINANCE IS RIGHT NOW. 
          OKAY. 
          ESSENTIALLY THIS IS THEM OPTING IN. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          GOT IT. 
          UM, THEN THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAD IS I, I THINK I'M IN, IN GENERAL SUPPORT THE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          I MEAN, I THINK THAT THEY MAKE SENSE TO ME. 
          I WAS CURIOUS IN THE STAKEHOLDER GROUPS IF THOSE INCLUDED ANY OF THE, UM, DEVELOPERS, HOME BUILDERS, INVESTORS AND WHAT KIND OF RESPONSE YOU RECEIVED TO THEM? I, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WANTS AN UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE WHERE THE INVESTMENT GOES AWAY BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND, AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THEY'RE THAT THAT ONEROUS EITHER. 
          I'M JUST KINDA CURIOUS WHAT KIND OF RESPONSES YOU, YOU GOT TO THOSE. 
          WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT OUR CO-CHAIR, UM, IS A DEVELOPER AND A BUILDER MM-HMM . 
          IN SOUTH DALLAS. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, AND SO, UM, I THINK IT WAS VERY GOOD THE AUDIENCE, 
          [00:45:01]
MR. SMITH, UM, HE WAS VERY GOOD TO LIKE RUN THOSE OFF OF. 
          AND I THINK IT CREATED A REALLY GOOD DYNAMIC BECAUSE WE HAD BOTH BUILDERS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND NEIGHBORHOOD LEADERS WHERE THEY'RE ABLE TO GO BACK AND FORTH AND GET SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WORKS FOR BOTH OF 'EM. 
          SO YOU'RE TELLING ME THEY'RE SUPPORTED BY THIS? WELL, THE Z STANDARDS ARE SUPPORTED, I WOULD SAY NOT EVERYONE WILL BE MM-HMM . 
          THERE, THERE PROBABLY WILL BE BUILDERS THAT DON'T LIKE THEM. 
          MM-HMM . 
          JUST LIKE WHEN YOU DO A CONSERVATION DISTRICT, THERE ARE BUILDERS THAT DON'T LIKE 'EM. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT, UH, WE DO HAVE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS, UM, WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING IN SOUTH DALLAS WHO HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS AND SAID, YEAH, THIS MAKES SENSE. 
          I CAN BUILD THAT. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          THANKS. 
          OKAY, LET'S GO DOWN THE LINE TO MY RIGHT. 
          ANYONE ELSE WITH QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          UM, AND ALL THE WORK THAT WENT INTO THIS, UM, ON THE COMMUNITY SIDE IN STAFF, UM, THE ONE THING AND I WAS TRYING TO READ THROUGH TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD IT, I SAW THAT THERE WAS A PROPOSAL TO REMOVE THE PARKING SETBACK, BUT I ALSO HEARD THAT THERE'S A DESIRE TO IMPROVE WALKABILITY. 
          AND SO COULD YOU JUST HELP ME UNDERSTAND IF THERE'S ANY OVERLAY OF PROVISIONS THAT SORT OF, UM, ALIGN THOSE TWO THAT WOULD SEEM TO BE IN CONFLICT? SO, UM, THE 30 FOOT, THE REQUIREMENT THAT ALL PARKING BE 30 FEET, UM, FROM THE FRONT BUILDING LINE, UM, IS KIND OF A, A, A, A BLUNT FORCE TOOL. 
          UM, AND WHAT WE FOUND IN REALITY WAS YOU HAD A LOT OF EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT WERE BUILT 40 YEARS, 50 YEARS, 80 YEARS AGO THAT DID HAVE, YOU KNOW, A ROW OF PARKING IN THE VERY FRONT. 
          YOU KNOW, LIKE STUFF THAT USED TO HAPPEN ON GREENVILLE OR BISHOP OR DAVIS THAT THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO USE THAT PARKING. 
          BUT THAT'S THE WAY THAT THEY WERE BUILT. 
          AND BECAUSE OF LAPSES IN CEOS AND DIFFERENT THINGS, BUILDINGS HAD ISSUES WHERE YOU COULDN'T MOVE INTO THOSE BUILDINGS BECAUSE OF THAT BUILT CONDITION. 
          AND SO WE DO HAVE SOME STUFF, STUFF THAT TALKS ABOUT, ESPECIALLY IN THE FORM-BASED DISTRICTS ABOUT THE LOCATION OF SOME OF THOSE PARKING AND IN THE COMMUNITY MAKES USE DISTRICTS WHEN YOU'RE GONNA GO TALLER THAT, UM, I THINK SPEAKS TO THAT. 
          BUT THAT WOULD BE FOR THE MORE REDEVELOPMENT SITES. 
          AND SO EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT DON'T HAVE THAT PARKING THAT NEED THAT OR THAT CAN ONLY ACHIEVE THAT PARKING IN THE FRONT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THEY WERE BUILT IN THE LOTS CONFIGURATIONS, IT ALLOWS FOR THEM TO BE OCCUPIED WHILE ALLOWING FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT TO BE SENSITIVE TO THAT WALKABILITY. 
          SO I THINK IF I'M FOLLOWING YOU, YOU AND I'LL READ THE ORDINANCE IN MORE DETAIL TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR. 
          NEW DEVELOPMENT, IT'S ACTIVE USES AND I HEARD YOU SPEAK ABOUT HOW THAT'S BEING FOSTERED, BUT THIS IS REALLY THINKING ABOUT EXISTING BUILDINGS EXISTING, WHETHER IT'S ON STREET OR JUST THAT FRONT ROW OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S RETAIL TEASER PARKING MM-HMM . 
          UM, BUT STILL SIDEWALK STANDARDS, UM, AND OTHER COMPONENTS THAT SPEAK TO THE WALKABILITY. 
          SO IT REALLY IS A LAYERING ON BUT NOT TRYING TO REMOVE PARKING THAT HAS EXISTED FOR MULTIPLE YEARS YEAH. 
          IN DECADES. 
          YEAH. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO PREVENT, UM, AND UH, WE DON'T HAVE IT IN THIS SLIDE, BUT THERE'S A DOMINOES DOWN THERE THAT BECAUSE OF SOME OF THESE STANDARDS HAD TO BASICALLY BUY A SECOND LOT BEHIND IT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND BUILD A WHOLE NEW PARKING LOT WHERE YOU'RE LIKE, THAT'S RIDICULOUS FOLKS. 
          UM, AND SO IT'S TRYING TO ALLOW FOR EXISTING STRUCTURES TO BE UTILIZED TO GET COS TO HAVE BUSINESSES THAT ARE OPERATING THERE. 
          BUT IF YOU'RE GONNA REDEVELOP AGAIN, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE GONNA REDEVELOP WITH SOME HEIGHT, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO A, A, A BUILDING THAT DOES SPEAK TO THAT WALKABILITY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANYONE ELSE? CARPENTER ROUND TWO? YES. 
          UH, FOR THESE PROPOSED LOTS THAT ARE AS SMALL AS 2,500 SQUARE FEET WILL THE SAME ALLOWANCE FOR IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE IN THE FRONT YARD, UM, BE THE SAME. 
          THE 200 SQUARE FEET IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE GONNA END UP WITH, YOU COULD END UP WITH, UM, LOTS THAT ARE JUST ABOUT ALL CONCRETE IN THE FRONT YARD. 
          SO IT IS, IT ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS FOR THAT 2,500 SQUARE FOOT LOT TO HAVE A ONE CAR DRIVEWAY. 
          YEAH. 
          AND YOU KNOW, THAT'S 'CAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO NECESSARILY PREVENT THAT MM-HMM . 
          UM, BUT RIGHT NOW THOSE LOTS CAN HAVE, WELL 'CAUSE THEY'RE, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, YOU COULD HAVE JUST THE ENTIRETY OF THAT BE A DRIVEWAY ALL 25 FEET WIDE. 
          UM, SO THIS JUST PREVENTS A 25 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY AND IT BASICALLY LIMITS IT TO A ONE CAR WIDE DRIVEWAY. 
          RIGHT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND SECOND QUESTION, UH, WHEN ARE WE GOING TO BE RECEIVING THE RED LINE VERSION OF THE PD? UH, WE LOOK FORWARD TO PROVIDING, TO LOOK FORWARD TO PROVIDING THAT TO THE COMMISSION VERY SHORTLY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          CAN UM, DID WE HAVE ANY CONSIDERATION FOR CLUSTER HOUSING, UM, IN AREAS THAT ALREADY HAVE, UM, A GOOD COMBINATION OF HOUSING SUCH AS IN CERTAIN AREAS OF MILL CITY? WE, WE DO HAVE A, A SUBDISTRICT FOR CLUSTER HOUSING IN THE PD. 
          OKAY. 
          AND, AND 
          [00:50:01]
AND WHERE WOULD THAT BE LOCATED? THERE'S ONE DISTRICT, YEAH. 
          UH, SO THERE'S THREE POCKETS OF IT. 
          THERE'S, UH, ONE HERE. 
          UM, THERE'S ANOTHER ONE, A SMALL ONE HERE, UH, NEXT TO THE FORM BASE, UH, MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO SEE ON THIS MAP. 
          UM, AND THEN I BELIEVE THERE'S ANOTHER ONE, THERE'S, THERE'S TWO HERE BASICALLY AND THEN ONE DOWN HERE, DOWN HERE. 
          SO THREE TOTAL POCKETS OF CLUSTERED HOUSING AND IS ONE OF THOSE IN MILL CITY? 'CAUSE I CAN'T REALLY SEE IT. 
          I'M SORRY, I COULDN'T HEAR. 
          IS ONE OF THOSE IN MILL CITY? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, I, I KNOW THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE, ARE GETTING HUNG UP ON. 
          CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT, SO THE EXPLANATION IS THE 2,500 SQUARE FOOT LOTS ARE ONLY FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED, WHICH IS PARTICULARLY A DUPLEX. 
          AND CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT HOW CURRENTLY IN SOUTH DALLAS THAT, THAT THE, YOU EITHER WHY WE HAD TO PUT THAT INTO THE LANGUAGE. 
          UM, SO, UH, IF THE COMMISSION REMEMBERS FROM WHEN WE DID THE AREA PLAN, THERE IS A UNIQUE SITUATION THAT IS IN SOUTH DALLAS. 
          YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN PD 5 95 R FIVE, BUT THEY'RE PLOTTED AS 25 FOOT WIDE LOTS. 
          SOMETIMES THOSE HOMES WERE A SHOTGUN HOME. 
          SOMETIMES THOSE HOMES, SOMEONE BOUGHT TWO OF THOSE LOTS AND THEY PUT ONE HOUSE ON IT. 
          AND SO THE PD IS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY TO ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY THERE, BUT ALSO TO UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU HAVE THAT SOUTH DALLAS R FIVE LOT, YOU COULD WITHOUT RE PLATTING, REZONE IT TO A DUPLEX LOT AND THEN GO AHEAD AND BUILD THOSE TWO HOMES ON IT. 
          SO IT'S TRYING TO ENCOURAGE TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S GOOD TO HAVE THOSE STRUCTURES AND THAT LOT CONFIGURATION. 
          UM, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO ALTER IT SO MUCH THAT WE, UM, PREVENT PEOPLE FROM DEVELOPING A 25 ON A 25 FOOT WIDE LOT. 
          UM, BUT IF THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT, IT HAS TO LOOK AT A CERTAIN WAY AND HAVE A CERTAIN FIELD TO IT. 
          UM, SO I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY, UH, THE REGULATIONS ARE WRITTEN IN THE WAY THEY ARE. 
          AND ALSO TO SPEAKING TO THE REASON THAT, UM, THAT DURING THE TIME THAT WE WERE DOING THE AREA PLAN, THAT PARKING WAS THE, ONE OF THE BIGGEST GRIEVANCE THAT WAS HAD NECESSARILY, UM, WASN'T TOTALLY ADDRESSED BECAUSE OF WAITING ON, UM, ZAC TO FINISH THE PARKING REFORM FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS. 
          BUT HOW THAT 30 FOOT HAS ACTUALLY MADE WHERE SOME BUSINESS, SOME MULTI PROPERTY OWNERS WHO HAVE MULTIPLE SUITES COULD NOT RENT THOSE SUITES BECAUSE OF THAT 30 FEET FROM THE CURB LIMITATION ON PARKING. 
          Y YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          UM, AND I WILL SAY THE PARKING REFORM DOES, UM, DRAMATICALLY HELP SOUTH DALLAS AND UM, ITS ABILITY TO DEVELOP AS WELL. 
          AND COULD YOU GIVE SOME, CAN JUST KIND OF CONSIDERATION HOW 30 FEET FROM THE CURB, UH, FROM THAT YOUR PARK, YOUR FIRST PARKING STARTS, HOW THAT COULD GREATLY AFFECT A PROPERTY THAT SITS ON THAT HAS TWO, UM, I DON'T KNOW THE CORRECT LANGUAGE, BUT YOU HAVE A STREET ON ONE OR TWO, ONE OR MORE SIDE. 
          I MEAN ON MORE THAN ONE SIDE. 
          YEAH, SO SOMETIMES THE INSTANCE WOULD BE YOU WOULD HAVE A SHOPPING, UH, YOU'D HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT YOU COULD ONLY END UP, UH, OCCUPYING PART OF THAT STRUCTURE, PART OF THAT STRIP CENTER. 
          UM, BECAUSE OF THAT LIMITATION ON PARKING THAT YOU ONLY HAD ENOUGH PARKING, REQUIRED PARKING LOCATED BEYOND THAT 30 FEET TO ONLY OCCUPY PART OF THAT BUILDING. 
          UM, WE DID FIND THAT, UM, FOR SEVERAL OCCASIONS OR IN SEVERAL INSTANCES, SORRY, SEVERAL INSTANCES IN SOUTH DALLAS. 
          AND THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED THE 30 FEET IS JUST NOT ON THE FRONT FAC SIDE. 
          IT'S ON SIDES ALL WAY AROUND BOTH SIDES. 
          YES. 
          IF THERE'S A STREET, YES MA'AM. 
          OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          SECOND ROUND COMMISSIONER HALL, THE, UM, DESIGNATION OF, UH, R 7 5, 5, AND D FOR THIS, THIS DISTRICT ONLY, WOULD THOSE BE ENSHRINED IN THE DALLAS CODE BOOK IT SO THEY WOULD BE PART OF THE PD? UM, AND ONE THING THAT WE'RE WORKING VERY DILIGENTLY WITH OUR GIS STAFF IS TO ENSURE THAT, UM, THE DATE THAT THIS PD IS CHANGED AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE WHEN YOU CLICK ON THE, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU CLICK ON THE MAP, IT'S GONNA PULL IT UP AND IT'S GONNA HAVE THE LINK TO THESE REQUIREMENTS. 
          UM, SO THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE VERY OBVIOUS FOR, FOR EVERYONE. 
          SO IT'S NOT PART OF THE, THE BIG CODE BOOK THAT WE ALL CARRY AROUND, BUT IT'S, UH, LOCATED ONLINE. 
          IT, IT IS. 
          OKAY. 
          MM-HMM . 
          UM, MAYBE THIS IS A LOADED QUESTION. 
          UH, DO YOU THINK THIS WOULD SET A PRECEDENT FOR OTHER DISTRICTS? UM, I THINK, UM, WE WOULDN'T HAVE CONVERSATIONS IN OTHER DISTRICTS. 
          WHAT WORKS IN SOUTH DALLAS MIGHT NOT WORK IN OTHER AREAS. 
          I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          I THINK IT WOULD SERVE GREAT 
          [00:55:01]
USE IN OTHER, OTHER DISTRICTS. 
          BUT COMMISSIONER HALL, WE'RE GONNA JUST KEEP IT TO QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU . 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, I'VE GOT JUST ONE. 
          UM, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OUTSIDE THE BOX. 
          UM, SO FORGIVE ME AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER, THAT'S FINE. 
          I, I SEE THESE DESIGN STANDARDS, UM, FOR SOME OF THE HOUSING IS, IS BEING IN LINE WITH SOME OF THE GOALS IN, IN IN FOR DALLAS. 
          I KNOW WE'RE APPROVING AN ORDINANCE HERE, WHICH IS GREAT. 
          IS THERE ANY WAY TO, YOU KNOW, SORT OF BUILD A CASE STUDY OUT OUT OF THIS TO SEE HOW IT WORKS AND, YOU KNOW, AND WE COULD GET REPORTED BACK ON IT PERIODICALLY TO SEE IF, IF THESE DESIGN STANDARDS ARE WORKING, IF THERE ARE PAIN POINTS, UM, JUST SO WE KNOW FOR MANY PURPOSES MOVING FORWARD. 
          YES. 
          THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. 
          UM, WE DID HAVE OUR STAFF PULL BASICALLY BASELINE DATA FROM THE END OF 2025 TO SAY, OKAY, HERE'S WHAT'S ON THE GROUND. 
          WE'RE GONNA PULL BASELINE DATA IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS TO HELP UNDERSTAND WHEN THIS CHANGE IS MADE, WHAT'S THE REALITY? HOW MANY MORE DUPLEXES ARE BUILT, HOW MANY MORE ADUS ARE BUILT, HOW MANY, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE CHANGE IN, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY MORE HOMES ARE BUILT, HOW MANY APARTMENTS? LIKE WHAT, WHAT, WHAT SOME OF THESE THINGS HAPPEN BASED UPON THE, THE CHANGE IN THE ZONING OR IN PART BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN THE ZONING AND IF THERE ARE PARTICULAR SNAGS THAT ANY OF THESE DESIGN STANDARDS HIT, IF IT GETS APPROVED, WOULD THE PROCESS FOR RELIEF BE GOING THROUGH BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OR IS THERE SOME SORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS BAKED IN THAT YOU COULD GO THROUGH, YOU KNOW, DIRECTOR, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OR, OR JUST A, A ZONING CHANGE. 
          BECAUSE IF, LET'S SAY IF YOU BUY THREE PROPERTIES HERE AND YOU'RE LIKE, I CAN'T, I, I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO BUILD THESE TYPES OF HOMES, YOU COULD COME, EXCUSE ME, AND ASK TO JUST CHANGE THE ZONING ON THESE PROPERTIES JUST TO R FIVE AND THEN THAT R FIVE DISTRICT WOULDN'T HAVE THESE STANDARDS. 
          OKAY. 
          FAIR ENOUGH. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? SO YOU'RE SAYING IF THEY, IF THEY GO TO, IF, IF THEY GO TO A, UM, GET A ZONING CHANGE, SO R FIVE DESIGN STANDARDS WOULD NOT AFFECT THESE WHEN I THINK, SO IT, IT WOULD BE WITHIN THE RIGHT OF ANY PROPERTY OWNER TO SAY, I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE MY ZONING, AND THEN THEY CAN PROPOSE A DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICT. 
          THEY COULD PROPOSE BECAUSE THIS SUB, UM, THIS PD HAS ALL THE TOWN HOME DISTRICTS AS WELL. 
          THEY COULD PROPOSE TO CHANGE IT TO A TOWN HOME DISTRICT. 
          THEY COULD PROPOSE TO CHANGE IT TO AN, UH, AN RTN DISTRICT, A FORM-BASED DISTRICT. 
          THEY COULD PROPOSE TO REMOVE IT FROM THE PD. 
          UM, THAT'S WITHIN THEIR RIGHT. 
          THEY COULD PROPOSE TO CHANGE IT TO A DIFFERENT SUBDISTRICT WITH ITS OWN REGULATIONS AS WELL. 
          UM, AND, YOU KNOW, AN AUTHORIZED HEARING CAN'T REMOVE THAT INDIVIDUAL'S ABILITY TO MAKE THAT REQUEST. 
          SO IF IT'S A TOWN HOME DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS FOR A DUPLEX TO BE BUILT, THE DESIGN STANDARDS WOULD NOT APPLY TO THE DUPLEX WHEN THEY'RE UP. 
          BUT TO BE CLEAR, THIS, THAT, THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME BEFORE PLAN COMMISSION AND IT WOULD BE PUBLICLY NOTIFIED AND WOULD THEN HAVE THE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS ULTIMATELY AT CITY COUNCIL. 
          IT'S NOT THAT THEY CAN DO THAT, JUST THEIR RIGHT IS TO ASK FOR THAT, BUT THEN IT'S THE COMMUNITY AND CPC AND COUNCIL'S RIGHT. 
          TO, TO WEIGH IN ON WHETHER THAT'S A GOOD IDEA OR A BAD IDEA. 
          NO, I THINK THAT'S NOT WHAT THE QUESTION IS. 
          SO IF THE, IF IT IS A RE ZONE TO A TH DISTRICT THAT IS, THAT ALLOWS FOR DUPLEXES AND BECAUSE THEY, THEY DID THE, BECAUSE THEY CHANGED FROM, UM, A DUPLEX DISTRICT OR WHATEVER BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT THE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          YOU'RE SAYING THAT EVEN WHEN THEY MAKE IT TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AS IT BEING A DUPLEX, THE DESIGN STANDARDS WOULD NOT APPLY TO IT EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE BUILDING A DUPLEX. 
          IF CPC RECOMMENDS APPROVING THAT ZONING CHANGE AND COUNCIL APPROVES IT, THEN THEY CAN GO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. 
          BUT THE, THE INTENT OF CREATING THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE DUPLEX DISTRICT IS THAT IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR SOMEONE, THE, THE COMMUNITY WOULD FEEL BETTER ABOUT HAVING THAT CHANGE BECAUSE THAT DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT HAS THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT SOMEBODY TRYING, TRYING TO CHANGE IT TO TX OR T EXCUSE ME, WOULD SAY, WELL, PERHAPS A COMMUNITY DOESN'T LIKE THAT AND CPC DOESN'T LIKE THAT. 
          AND THEN CPC AND THE COMMUNITY CAN WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER TO SAY, YES, YOU CAN BUILD A DUPLEX, BUT YOU HAVE TO BUILD IT IN THE, THE DUPLEX ZONING DISTRICT. 
          'CAUSE IT HAS THE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          AND THEN BECAUSE THEY CHANGE IT TO THAT DUPLEX SUBDISTRICT, THEN CITY STAFF WOULD REVIEW IT FOR THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? WHY DON'T WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK, UM, AND COME BACK AT 10 43? THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT, 
          [01:00:01]
COMMISSIONERS, LET'S GET BACK ON THE RECORD. 
          IT IS 10:48 AM IT'S LIKE WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. 
          WE'RE GOING TO, UH, FOR THE TIME BEING SKIP OVER THE M-I-H-D-B BRIEFING. 
          IF WE HAVE TIME, WE'LL GET TO THAT. 
          IF NOT, WE CAN RESCHEDULE IT FOR A LATER DATE. 
          WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR CONSENT DOCKET. 
          SEVERAL ITEMS HAVE COME OFF. 
          CONSENT ALREADY. 
          ITEMS 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, AND 14 ARE ALL OFF CONSENT. 
          THAT LEAVES 3, 7, 8, 11 AND 13 ON CONSENT. 
          THE TIME BEING, DOES ANYTHING ELSE NEED TO BE REMOVED FROM CONSENT? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? HOLD ON JUST A SEC. 
          UH, CONSENT RIGHT NOW CONSISTS OF 3 7 8 11 13. 
          THOSE ARE ON CONSENT. 
          THE REST HAS COME OFF. 
          11 IS COMING OFF AS WELL. 
          SO OUR CONSENT AGENDA IS NOW DOWN TO THREE, SEVEN, AND EIGHT. 
          NOW WE CAN LEAVE THIS ON FOR THE TIME BEING. 
          OH, THIR, I'M SORRY. 
          13 IS STILL ON CONSENT, SO 3 7 8 13. 
          UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE DO NEED NUMBER ONE TO BE BRIEFED. 
          OH, JUST A QUESTION FOR STAFF, MR. GREGORY ON THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING ROOFING. 
          IF WE HAVE TIME, WE'LL GET TO IT. 
          IF NOT, WE CAN RESCHEDULE IT. 
          GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. 
          GOOD MORNING, MR. JORDAN. 
          UM, I HAD SENT THIS TO YOU, UM, AND JUST WANTED TO, WELL, THIS IS A FOLLOW UP. 
          WE, UM, RECEIVED, UH, RESPONSES IN OPPOSITION TO THE RENEWAL OF THIS VIDEO BOARD SIGN. 
          IT APPEARED, IT, UM, WAS RELATIVE TO THE, UM, IMPACT OF THEM ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES. 
          COULD YOU JUST, AND I KNOW IT'S IN THE CASE REPORT, BUT COULD YOU STATE THAT THESE ARE REVIEWED, THEY'RE LIMITED IN NUMBERS AND THAT THE MESSAGING IN THE LIGHT IS ALL REQUIRED TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THE ORDINANCE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. 
          THAT IS CORRECT. 
          AND IT IS OUTLINED IN THE REPORT. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN THE PRIOR RENEWAL PERIOD, UM, WAS SIX YEARS, WHICH I BELIEVE IS FAIRLY TYPICAL FOR THE VIDEO BOARDS MM-HMM . 
          WITHIN THIS ORDINANCE. 
          IS THAT ALSO CORRECT? I BELIEVE THAT IS CORRECT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT SIX YEARS IS TYPICAL. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER ONE? OKAY, ITEM NUMBER TWO IS GOING TO BE HELD UNTIL JUNE THE FOURTH, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT NEEDS TO BE BRIEFED. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. 
          JUNE. 
          OH, OH, IT'S JUNE 11TH. 
          I APOLOGIZE. 
          I'VE GOT MY CALENDAR OFF THEN I'LL FIX THAT. 
          UH, ITEM THREE IS ON CONSENT. 
          COMMISSIONER KUNZ, DO YOU WANT THAT ONE BRIEFED OR ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          ANYONE ELSE? ITEM FOUR IS GOING TO BE HELD UNTIL THE 21ST. 
          DOES NOT NEED TO BE BRIEFED, IS MY UNDERSTANDING FROM COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          ANYONE ELSE? OH, I APOLOGIZE. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. 
          I'M NOT ON MY GAME TODAY. 
          UH, NO BRIEFING NECESSARY. 
          ITEM FIVE IS GOING TO BE HELD. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE A DATE YET. 
          OKAY, THE SECOND JUNE 25TH, 6 25. 
          ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS UNDERNEATH THAT BRIEFED? OKAY, ITEM NUMBER SIX IS COMING OFF OR A TIME ADJUSTMENT? UM, ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS UNDERNEATH THAT BRIEFED? OKAY, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON DID WANT THIS ONE BRIEFED. 
          OKAY, THAT'S GOOD TO MS. GARZA THEN. 
          [01:05:02]
GOOD MORNING. 
          ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS KZ 26, UH, LAST DIGITS FOUR EIGHT. 
          THE REQUEST IS AN APPLICATION TO AMEND THE LAND USE MAP TO ALLOW A DUPLEX USE ON PROPERTY THAT CURRENTLY ALLOWS A SINGLE FAMILY USE WITHIN BURY WITHIN PLANT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 1 34 ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF MOUNT AUBURN AVENUE BETWEEN EARLY AVENUE AND EAST GRANT AVENUE. 
          THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW A DUPLEX USE. 
          THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP, THE AERIAL OF THE SITE. 
          UH, SO BACKGROUND, THE AERIAL REQUEST IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A DUPLEX, A PERMANENT FORAY. 
          DUPLEX WAS ISSUED IN 2022. 
          UM, PD 1 34 ACCOMPLISHES ZONING OF SIZE THROUGH A LAND USE MAP THAT DIS NEEDS SPECIFIC PARCELS AS BEING FOR SINGLE FAMILY OR FOR DUPLEX USE AS WELL AS OTHER USES. 
          THE ONLY USES PERMITTED WITHIN SUB A ARE SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX, UM, AND USES PERMIT IN THE R SEVEN, UH, 0.5, A SINGLE, UH, FAMILY DISTRICT. 
          THE CURRENT DUPLEX USE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH PD 1 34 LAND USE MAP, WHICH DESIGNATES A PARCEL AS SINGLE FAMILY. 
          THEREFORE, THE APPLICANTS ARE REQUESTING THAT THE POWER BE BE REZONED TO THE DUPLEX USE WITHIN PD 1 34 SUB AREA A. 
          THE ORDINANCE WITH THIS CASE WOULD ALLOW STAFF TO ENCODE AN UP UPDATED DIGITAL VERSION OF THE LINE USE MAP EXHIBIT 1 34 A. 
          THE DRAFT DIGITAL LINE USE MAP IS ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT. 
          UM, STAFF NOTES THAT THE PRACTICAL CHALLENGE OF READING AND INTERPRETING THE EXISTING W CAN CONTRIBUTE TO DIFFICULTIES AT PERMITTING. 
          UH, SO SURROUNDING USES AROUND THE SIDE ARE SINGLE FAMILY AND THERE ARE A FEW DUPLEXES. 
          THESE ARE SOME OF THE PHOTOS OF THE SITE, SORRY, LOOKING NORTHEAST AND THEN SURROUNDING, UH, PHOTOS AND THEN THE STARTED. 
          SO THE EXISTING PD 1 34, SINGLE FAMILY, UM, AND DUPLEX, UM, ARE WHAT IS ALLOWED. 
          UM, AND THEN FOR COMPARISON, UM, ON THE TOP IT'S THE R SEVEN FIVE, UH, SINGLE FAMILY. 
          AND THEN, UH, THE, THE DUPLEX, UM, FOR COMPARISON ON THE, ON THE SOUTH, UH, SO THIS IS THE EXISTING LAND USE MAP, UM, THAT I MENTIONED. 
          AND THEN, UH, WE WILL BE, UM, STAFF WILL BE AMENDING IT FOR TO A DIGITAL, UH, WHICH IS MORE, UH, READABLE. 
          AND THEN, UM, SO IT IS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL PLACE TYPE A $4 2.0. 
          AND THEN STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AN AN AMENDED EXHIBIT. 
          1 34. 
          A QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          UM, MS. GARZA, ARE YOU AWARE IF THERE HAS BEEN COMMUNITY OUTREACH REGARDING THIS REQUEST? YES, I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS, AND I DID RECEIVE, UH, AN EMAIL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND IS IT, I KNOW, UM, THERE WAS A LETTER THAT WAS CIRCULATED, UM, BY THE, UH, COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND FOLLOW UP TO THAT MEETING THAT THEY'RE NOT OPPOSED TO THIS REQUEST. 
          UM, ONE THING I WAS SEEKING TO UNDERSTAND IS, UM, AS YOU NOTED IN YOUR CASE REPORT, THE DUPLEX WAS PERMITTED IN ERROR, IT WAS CONSTRUCTED. 
          UM, THE CURRENT OWNERS IDENTIFIED THIS AND ARE SEEKING TO RESOLVE THE QUESTION. 
          UM, COULD YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND, IS IT THE DIGITIZING OF THE EXHIBIT THAT IS SEEKING TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S MORE CLARITY IN THE FUTURE? YES. 
          ESSENTIALLY PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN? YES. 
          THAT WAS A PRIMARY QUESTION DURING ALL OF THE MEETINGS. 
          YES. 
          HOW DID IT HAPPEN AND HOW DOES IT NOT HAPPEN AGAIN? YES. 
          SO, UM, ON OUR, THE, THE POWERPOINT IS JUST A SMALL SECTION OF THAT, BUT WE WILL BE DIGITIZING THE WHOLE ENTIRE, UM, PD 1 34 SUBDISTRICT, UM, EXHIBIT. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF THESE, UM, REQUESTS COME THROUGH. 
          SO, UM, HOPEFULLY THAT IS BEING EXPEDITED SINCE WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF THESE ALREADY, UH, TAKE PLACE. 
          UM, I'LL DEFER TO MY OTHER COMMISSIONERS. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. 
          UM, YEAH, I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT I THINK MAY GET HISTORICAL AND MAY ACTUALLY TURN TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON COUNTING ON HER, HER, UH, KNOWLEDGE OF, OF THE HISTORY. 
          BUT, UM, DID I READ THAT THERE WAS AN ORIGINAL DUPLEX ON THIS LOT THAT THEN BEEN REPLACED WITH A NEW DUPLEX? IS THAT, I DIDN'T READ THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          NO. 
          IS THIS, IS THIS A, IS THIS A NEW STRUCTURE? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          ON 
          [01:10:01]
A, THAT WAS ON A VACANT LOT SINGLE FAMILY LOT. 
          ON, ON A, ON A SINGLE FAMILY LOT. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT THEN THAT, THAT, UM, I'LL JUST MAKE, I'LL JUST MAKE ONE. 
          WELL, NO, I CAN'T MAKE COMMENTS. 
          OKAY. 
          WE'LL WAIT TILL THIS AFTERNOON. 
          THANKS. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? UM, READING FROM, UH, A EMAIL THAT WE RECEIVED FROM, UM, I'M ASSUMING THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. 
          UM, THE ISSUE IS THAT WITH THIS, IS THAT SOME KIND OF WAY IT GOT THROUGH THE CRACKS AT PERMITTING AND IT ALLOWED FOR THIS TO BE BUILT EVEN THOUGH THAT THE ZONING WAS IN PLACE FOR, UM, THAT WOULD'VE REQUIRED THEM TO COME CPC PRIOR. 
          BUT, UM, BUT SOMEWHERE OVER AT PERMITTING, THEY ALLOWED THIS TO SLIP THROUGH THE PROCESS. 
          YES. 
          SO, UM, I BELIEVE THAT, UM, THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED IN 2022. 
          UM, THE EXISTING LINE USE MAP THAT IS, UM, THAT I'VE SHOWING, UM, IS WHAT THEY WERE USING. 
          AND BECAUSE IT IS REALLY HARD TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SINGLE FAMILY AND A DUPLEX, UM, IT WAS PERMITTED. 
          UM, AND THAT IS WHY, UM, THE CONSTRUCTION HAPPENED AND IT IS EXISTING. 
          UM, AND THEN AFTER THE FACT THAT IS WHEN, UH, STAFF WENT MORE IN AND REALIZED THAT IT WAS PERMITTED, UM, AND, UM, AN ISSUE. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, WE WILL MOVE ALONG. 
          ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. 
          COMMISSIONER SIMS, DO YOU NEED A BRIEFING THERE? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ITEM NUMBER NINE, COMMISSIONER SERATO. 
          THAT'S COMING OFF. 
          CONSENT. 
          ANY QUESTIONS? NEED A BRIEFING? OKAY. 
          ITEM NUMBER 10. 
          UM, THAT IS COMING OFF CONSENT AND I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER HAMPTON DID ONE AT THAT BRIEFED BY DR. 
          HASHMI. 
          AND THAT CAN BE BRIEFED CONCURRENTLY WITH ITEM 14 PRIMARILY JUST FOR QUESTIONS. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK OR JUST QUESTIONS. 
          YEAH. 
          MM-HMM . 
          SO WHY DON'T, DO YOU WANT A FULL BRIEFING OR DO YOU JUST HAVE QUESTIONS ON THESE? I'M, I'M HAPPY TO JUST ASK QUESTIONS UNLESS THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS, LET'S GO AHEAD AND JUST ASK QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE UNLESS SOMEONE WANTS A OKAY. 
          FULL BRIEFING. 
          UH, SO THERE'S, AND GOOD MORNING MISS HIN. 
          GOOD MORNING, . 
          I KNOW YOU AND I HAD SPOKEN REGARDING THIS REQUEST. 
          SO THIS IS AN AREA, UM, CAPITAL AND THERE'S TWO REQUESTS, 10 AND 14 DIFFERENT OWNERS, DIFFERENT PROJECTS. 
          UM, IT'S ALL WITHIN THE R SEVEN FIVE ZONING, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, YEAH. 
          AND THEN THE ADJACENT IS ALL MF OR NOT ALL, BUT THE PERIMETER AROUND THIS IS MF TWO? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          AND SO THE APPLICANTS HAVE REACHED OUT TO YOU BECAUSE THEY'D LIKE TO DEVELOP TWO UNITS, IS THAT CORRECT? YES. 
          IF IT'S STRAIGHT MF TWO. 
          UM, AND I KNOW EACH ONE IS A DIFFERENT LOT SIZE, BUT THERE'S, AT LEAST ON TWO OF THEM, MORE THAN TWO UNITS WOULD BE ALLOWED, WHICH, SO IT'S GREATER THAN REALLY WHAT'S EITHER REQUESTED OR IS TYPICAL FOR THE AREA. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, YEAH. 
          AND IS IT, UM, CORRECT THAT THE HISTORICAL DATA INDICATES THAT THIS IS R SEVEN FIVE BECAUSE IT IS PREDOMINANTLY A MIX OF SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEXES HISTORICALLY? YES. 
          UM, SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT THE CHARACTER WOULD CHANGE WITH THE MF TWO FROM THE FRONT YARD SETBACKS TO LOCK COVERAGE, UM, VERSUS THE DUPLEX, WHICH HAS BEEN MORE COMMON, UM, IN THE TWO OTHER NEARBY CASES, PARTICULARLY FOR THIS LOCATION ON CARROLL? IT IS POSSIBLE, YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, UH, HAVE YOU BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE, UM, OWNERS ON THESE UM, PROPERTIES? I WAS, YEAH. 
          AND ARE YOU AWARE IF THERE HAS BEEN, UM, VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE BEING, UM, VOLUNTEERED BY THOSE OWNERS ON THESE CASES? IT SEEMS THEY ARE OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          TO DO THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, SO WE WILL, I BELIEVE THEY'RE BOTH BEING HEARD INDIVIDUALLY AND THE OWNERS ARE, UM, INTENDING TO, UH, BE HERE THIS AFTERNOON. 
          SO THANK YOU MS. HASHIMI, COMMISSIONERS. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON ITEMS 10 OR 14? OKAY, THANK YOU DR. 
          HASHMI. 
          NEXT ITEM IS ITEM NUMBER 11. 
          UM, THAT IS COMING OFF CONSENT, I BELIEVE THAT'S COMMISSIONER HERBERT'S DISTRICT. 
          HE'S GONNA BE JOINING US A LITTLE LATER, SO IF THERE, I DID HAVE A QUESTION. 
          OH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          YEAH, NOW MY QUESTION WAS ABOUT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR AUTO RENEWAL. 
          'CAUSE WE, WE GO THROUGH THIS PERIODICALLY. 
          THE STAFF REPORT SAYS THAT THE REASON, ONE OF THE REASONS FOR RECOMMENDING THE AUTORENEW IS IT ALLOWS THE STAFF TO EVALUATE THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE USE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. 
          BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENS WITH AUTO RENEWALS. 
          I MEAN, IF AUTO RENEWAL, IF YOU DO YOUR PAPERWORK BY THE DEADLINE AND PAY YOUR FEE AND YOUR INSIGHT PLAN COMPLIANCE, YOU GET, I MEAN, IT, IT'S 
          [01:15:01]
AN AUTO, IT'S A STAFF, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. 
          I MEAN, THEY, THEY HAVE TO APPROVE IT. 
          UH, AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT'D BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEIGHBORS TO MEET THE 20% REQUIREMENT TO PROTEST BECAUSE OF THE, THE CONFIGURATION OF THE SURROUNDING LAND. 
          SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, GIVEN THAT, WHY, WHY ARE WE SEEING THESE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AUTO RENEWALS WHEN IT WOULD SEEM, UH, A RECOMMENDATION WITHOUT AUTO RENEWAL WOULD BE ALLOWING THE PERIODIC REVIEW THAT THE REPORT SEEMS TO THINK IS NECESSARY? UM, MARKEL, COULD YOU PLEASE TRY? YEAH, NO, NO, THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          I MEAN, GENERALLY A BIG PART OF IT IS RIGHT NOW THE, THE LAND USE IS APPROPRIATE RIGHT NOW AT THIS TIME. 
          UM, OUR PLACE TYPE CALLS FOR SOME DIVERSIFICATION OF USES THERE. 
          IF WE SEE THAT OCCUR, THEN WE MAY HAVE MORE PROPERTY OWNERS NEARBY WHO MAY SEND IN RESPONSES. 
          UH, NO, AND, AND DON'T MEAN WE DON'T MEAN TO INTEND, UH, TO IMPLY THAT, UM, THERE ARE ARE SUBJECTIVE REVIEWS THAT OCCUR WHEN IT COMES BACK FOR AN AUTO RENEWAL. 
          UM, BUT AS WE SAID, WE DO, WE WILL REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS. 
          I THINK THAT'S PART OF COMPATIBILITY AT THAT POINT IS THE, IS THE BUILD OUT OF THE PROPERTY STILL FUNCTIONING RELATIVE TO ITS NEIGHBORS? AND THEN YES, A BIG PART OF IT IS, UM, THE WAY THAT PROPERTY OWNERS MAY OR MAY NOT RESPOND BACK IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THE PROPERTY, UH, THE AREA AS IS PLANNED TO, UH, BECOMES MORE RESIDENTIAL OR AT THE VERY LEAST MIXED. 
          YEAH, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IS COMMERCIAL, BUT UH, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS MF TWO, BUT IT IS UNDEVELOPED RIGHT NOW, AND THE REST ALL ARE COMMERCIAL. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          UM, I THINK I MIGHT HAVE SOME CONFUSION ON ME ON, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHY WE DID THE AUTOMATIC RENEWAL AND I, WHAT, SO WHAT WOULD HAPPEN ON SOMETHING THAT IS, IS A, UH, FOR A CELL TOWER, IF SOMETHING IS BUILT AROUND IT, AND THEN THOSE NEIGHBORS ARE SAYING, WE DON'T WANT A CELL TOWER, AND THE CELL TOWER DOESN'T JUST, IT GREATLY AFFECTS JUST NOT THE COMMUNITY IT'S IN AND IT'S BEEN THERE 10 YEARS FOR A REASON, AS AS THE WORLD CONTINUES TO GROW AND SELL YOUR USE RATHER THAN LANDLINES. 
          WELL, UH, IF, IF, IF APPROVED FOR AUTO RENEWAL, THEN IT HAS TO COME BACK IN 10 YEARS. 
          IT HAS TO SUBMIT DOCUMENTATION THAT THEY, UM, HAVE BUILT OUT ACCORDING TO THE SITE PLAN, BUILT OUT ACCORDING TO THE CONDITIONS, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. 
          AND WE HAVE TO NOTIFY, UM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES, WHICH IN THIS CASE IS 500 FEET FROM THE, THE PROPERTY LINE. 
          SO ALL THOSE NEIGHBORS DO NEED TO, UH, BE NOTIFIED AT THAT POINT. 
          UM, IF THEY, YOU KNOW, DECIDE THAT THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, IN, IN OPPOSITION TO IT, THEY RESPOND BACK AND REACH THE THRESHOLD AT 20%, THEN WE WILL HAVE A, A PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN. 
          WE HAD, UH, AN AUDIT RENEWAL HEARING, UH, A FEW WEEKS AGO FOR, UH, PROPERTY THAT HAD OPPOSITION, UH, NEAR IT. 
          SO BASICALLY THAT'S WHAT OCCURS. 
          IT, IT, IT DOESN'T FORCE THEM TO LEAVE, BUT IT FORCES ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING AND ANOTHER, UH, DECISION BY THE CPC AND COUNCIL AT THAT TIME. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK, YEAH. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY. 
          WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 12, WHICH I BELIEVE IS GOING TO BE HELD. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? DO WE HAVE A DATE YET? IF NOT, IT'S OKAY. 
          OKAY. 
          WE WILL DEFINITELY HAVE IT BY THE TIME A MOTION IS MADE. 
          ITEM NUMBER 13, COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          DOES THAT ONE NEED TO BE BRIEFED? ANY QUESTIONS ON ITEM 13? OKAY. 
          AND WE'VE ADDRESSED 14 ALREADY. 
          UH, 15. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, WE'VE HELD THAT ONE. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE IT BRIEFED? OKAY. 
          FIVE. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT CONDITIONS CAME IN ON THAT RECENTLY. 
          ARE WE GONNA BE GOOD TO GO ON THE 21ST? WE'VE BEGUN OUR, WE'VE BEEN BEGUN REVIEW ON THE PLAN AND CONDITIONS, SO CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO OUR REPORT THAT GOES TO THE, THE 21ST. 
          GREAT. 
          UM, IT WILL BE A, I JUST, BUT AS WE CONTEMPLATE, I'M NOT TRYING TO PUSH ANY, ANY, ANY PARTICULAR DECISION, BUT AS WE CONTEMPLATED IT WILL BE A BUSY, UH, HEARING. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, WE'LL BRING OUR SLEEPING BAGS. 
          OKAY. 
          NUMBER 16. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, I THINK YOU SAID YOU WANTED THIS ONE BRIEFED, OR QUESTIONS? EITHER WAY IS FINE. 
          WE, WE HAVE NOT BRIEFED IT BEFORE. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF THE OTHER, MY COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          LET'S, MS. LEVY, 
          [01:20:02]
LET'S BRIEF IT. 
          IT LOOKS LIKE I'M NOT SHARING THIS. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          UM, TAKE YOUR TIME. 
          I CAN'T REMEMBER HOW TO TAKE IT. 
           GEORGE. 
          I DON'T. 
          OKAY. 
          THERE YOU GO. 
          HI, MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONERS. 
          ITEM Z 2 5 1 64 IS REQUEST FOR AN APPLICATION FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM R SEVEN FIVE, A RESIDENTIAL, SORRY, FROM R SEVEN FIVE, A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WITH SUP 42 FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL KINDERGARTEN AND DAY NURSERY. 
          AND THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE TO TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT TO ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS LOCATED ON THE WEST LINE OF FERGUSON ROAD BETWEEN LARRY DRIVE AND PROVINCE LANE. 
          THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY IT'S IN COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO. 
          I'M SORRY, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DELAY. 
          UH, THIS IS THE AERIAL SHOWING THE PROPERTY OFF OF FERGUSON ROAD. 
          SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED R 75, A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WITH SUP 42 AND IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. 
          AND AGAIN, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NEW, UM, SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW THEY WERE GONNA ALLOW EIGHT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          UM, I DID WANNA SAY THAT AFTER, UM, MOST RECENTLY THE APPLICANT WILL BE VOLUNTEERING SOME AMENDED DEED RESTRICTIONS, SO THIS HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED. 
          IT WAS ALREADY, UM, TOO LATE FOR THAT, BUT, UM, SO I BELIEVE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WILL RESTRICT THEM TO SEVEN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          BUT I'LL LET THE APPLICANT, UH, EXPLAIN THAT. 
          UM, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WILL ALSO LIMIT THE HEIGHT OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO 30 FEET TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL HOMES. 
          THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED TO THE NORTH, SOUTH, AND WEST WITH R 75 A ZONING, RESIDENTIAL ZONING, IT'S BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 1989 AND THE AREAS SURROUNDED ON THOSE SIDES WITH SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          UM, TWO OF THE RESIDENTIAL ZONED LOTS, BOTH ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH, UM, ARE ZONED WITH SUP 42 FOR THAT PRIVATE SCHOOL, KINDERGARTEN AND DAY NURSERY. 
          [01:25:01]
BUT THEY'RE DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          NOW, UM, THE PROPERTY, IT DOES HAVE FRONTAGE ON FERGUSON ROAD, WHICH IS A PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL. 
          SO DR. 
          INDIVIDUAL DRIVEWAYS ARE NOT ALLOWED ONTO FERGUSON ROAD. 
          UM, SO OUR UNDERSTANDING THEIR, THEY'RE, UM, THEY WILL NEED A SHARED ACCESS FROM FERGUSON ROAD TO GET TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY REQUIRING 25 FOOT FRONT YARDS, AS WELL AS LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENTS IF THEY DO THAT PER ARTICLE 10. 
          AND THIS IS THE AERIAL LAND USE MAP. 
          AGAIN, AS YOU CAN SEE, UM, IT'S SURROUNDED BY THE, UM, BASICALLY TO THE NORTHWEST AND SOUTH BY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          AND THEN RIGHT ACROSS FERGUSON ROAD, THEY HAVE, YOU HAVE RETAIL AND PER PERSONAL SERVICE USES. 
          AND THEN SOME ALSO A COMMERCIAL USE WITH AN SUP. 
          THIS IS LOOKING INTO THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST RIGHT OFF OF FERGUSON ROAD. 
          UH, THIS IS LOOKING SOUTHWEST AT THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY. 
          UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A DART BUS RIGHT THERE. 
          THERE IS, HE'S, IT'S COVERING IT UP, BUT THERE IS A, A DART BUS STOP RIGHT THERE AT THE EDGE SURROUNDING PHOTOS. 
          UM, THERE'S THE BUS, UM, DART BUS STOP. 
          THIS IS LOOKING SOUTH ON FERGUSON ROAD TOWARD THE CREEK. 
          THERE IS A CREEK THERE, UM, LOOKING SOUTH, UM, DOWN FERGUSON ROAD WHERE YOU HAVE MORE RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICE TYPE USES. 
          THIS IS LOOKING ACROSS TO THE SOUTHEAST ACROSS FERGUSON ROAD TO THAT RETAIL AND PERSONAL SERVICE DEVELOPMENT LOOKING EAST, EAST ACROSS FERGUSON ROAD, LOOKING NORTHEAST ACROSS FERGUSON ROAD. 
          UM, THERE'S AN ALLEY IN BETWEEN THE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT AND THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. 
          UM, LOOKING AT THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME HOMES ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF FERGUSON ROAD. 
          AND THIS IS LOOKING NORTH DOWN FERGUSON ROAD AND NORTH AGAIN, FERGUSON AND LARRY DRIVE. 
          UM, THE PROPERTY DOES IS ADJACENT, UM, IMMEDIATELY LOOKING SOUTH OFF OF LARRY DRIVE. 
          AND AGAIN, THAT'S ALL SINGLE FAMILY AS WELL. 
          SO, UM, THIS IS JUST LOOKING AT THE COMPARISON OF THE, THE STANDARDS. 
          UM, AGAIN, THE, THE, UM, APPLICANT IS VOLUNTEERING THOSE D RESTRICTIONS TO MAKE IT MORE COMPATIBLE. 
          THIS IS GOING, THIS IS UPDATED EVEN FURTHER WITH, UM, SOME REVISIONS TO THE VOLUNTEER DE RESTRICTIONS BY THE APPLICANT. 
          BUT, UM, THE PRIMARY USE IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME. 
          UM, MINIMUM LOT SIZE 6,000 SQUARE FEET FOR DUPLEX, 2000 FOR SINGLE FAMILY. 
          UM, AGAIN, THE VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS WILL MATCH THE HEIGHT AT THE 30 FEET AND, UM, MAX OUT THE DWELLING UNITS TO SEVEN IF THEY'RE ABLE TO DEVELOP THAT. 
          OF COURSE, UM, WITH THE VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS, IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL PLACE TYPE. 
          SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT'S VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          I THINK THAT WOULD NOW BE THE REVISED, THE APPLICANT'S REVISED VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS AND WITH, THAT'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR AND THANK YOU MS. LEVY. 
          I KNOW WE'VE HAD A LOT OF COMMUNICATION THIS WEEK. 
          UM, ONE OF THE PRIMARY QUESTIONS THAT CAME FROM THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS HAD TO DO WITH THE CREEK FRONTAGE, WHICH IS THE LONG BOUNDARY, UM, OF THE LOT, THE SOUTHERN LOT, UM, LINE FROM THE REVIEW. 
          AND I CAN ASK THIS TO MR. NAVAREZ IF, IF THAT WOULD BE EASIER OR, UM, STAFF, BUT THE QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMUNITY TO ASK IS HOW THE ENGINEERING IS REVIEWED, WHICH IS AT PERMITTING, UM, IN TERMS OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO THE CREEK AND HOW THE CITY, UM, PARTICIPATES IN EITHER MAINTENANCE OR EVALUATION OF THE CREEK. 
          CAN YOU JUST GENERALLY TALK ABOUT HOW THAT'S CONSIDERED? YES, BECAUSE I KNOW IT, IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE ZONING, BUT OBVIOUSLY WHEN THEY GO FOR PERMITTING, THEY'LL HAVE REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE TO BE MET. 
          YES. 
          UM, OUR DALLAS WATER UTILITIES DEPARTMENT, UM, DOES 
          [01:30:01]
TAKE A LOOK AT AND, AND HELPS TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE, THERE IS PROTECTION FOR CREEKS, UM, WITH RESPECT TO PROXIMITY. 
          UM, A LOT OF THE CREEKS AND WATERSHEDS THROUGHOUT THE CITY, NOT ALL, BUT, BUT MOST OF THEM ARE PRIVATELY OWNED. 
          UM, AND SO THEY, THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE MAINTAINED PRIVATELY AS WELL TO KEEP OUT THE TRASH AND THE DEBRIS. 
          UM, THE DALLAS WATER UTILITIES GROUP WILL HELP TO EDUCATE THE RESIDENTS ABOUT HOW TO KEEP THE CREEKS CLEAN. 
          THEY WILL KIND OF MONITOR THAT AS WELL. 
          UM, AND THEN OUR, UM, ENGINEERING GROUP ALSO MAKE SURE THEY LOOK AT DEVELOPMENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, NEW DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT OR, UM, INCREASE ANY, UM, STORM WATER ISSUES WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT. 
          THEY, THEY MAKE SURE THAT IT, IT STAYS THE SAME, IT JUST CANNOT INCREASE DEVELOPMENT, CANNOT INCREASE ANY FURTHER, UM, DEGRADATION OR, OR IMPACT ON STORM WATER RIGHT. 
          IN OUR WATERSHEDS. 
          AND I THINK THAT WAS REALLY, I THINK THE PRIMARY QUESTION IS THAT WE'RE INCREASING THE ALLOWED DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, BUT EVEN WITH THAT, THEY STILL HAVE TO ESSENTIALLY, UM, DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY'RE NEUTRAL AT THE TIME OF PERMITTING IN TERMS OF THE IMPACTS ON THE ADJACENT CREEK. 
          AND THERE'LL BE SETBACKS THAT ARE EVALUATED. 
          YES. 
          ALL THE OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED TO ENGINEERING, THOSE ALL GET REVIEWED DURING PERMITTING AND IF THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY CAN'T RECEIVE A BUILDING PERMIT. 
          IS THAT FAIR? YES, YES. 
          YES. 
          ALL OF THAT IS HANDLED THROUGH PERMITTING. 
          UM, I KNOW THE, THE ORIGINAL APPLICANT FOR THE PROJECT DID MEET OR SAID THEY MET WITH, UM, SOME OF THE STAFF TO VET OUT SOME OF THOSE ISSUES, BUT OF COURSE, NOTHING WAS FORMALLY SUBMITTED. 
          THEY'LL, THEY'LL, YOU KNOW, AND THEY UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE REGULATIONS ARE WHEN THEY GO THROUGH PERMITTING. 
          YES. 
          ALL OF THAT WILL BE VETTED OUT HERE. 
          WE'RE, THIS IS STRAIGHT ZONING. 
          UM, SO HERE WE'RE JUST, YOU KNOW, CHANGING, ASKING FOR THE APPLICANT'S, ASKING FOR A REQUEST IN THE ZONING CHANGES. 
          UM, SO IT IS MEETING THE REGULATIONS AS FAR AS WHAT WE CAN ASCERTAIN WITHOUT A PLAN. 
          BUT YES, IT WILL BE ALL HANDLED THROUGH OUR PERMITTING DIVISION. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN, UM, AND I REALIZE THE COMMISSION HAS NOT SEEN THESE YET, BUT FROM THE REVIEW, UM, YOUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, WILL BE, UM, ADDING PROVISIONS, REDUCING THE NUMBER OF UNITS, ADDING OPEN SPACE PROVISIONS, AND THEN ALSO REDUCING THE LOCK COVERAGE. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? TO KEEP IT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE R SEVEN FIVE IS TODAY, UM, WHICH REFLECTS THEIR PLAN, BUT AGAIN, SPEAKS TO THIS IDEA OF TRYING TO, UM, CONTINUE TO HAVE MORE, UM, IMPERVIOUS OR IMPERVIOUS COVER, I SHOULD SAY, TO HELP JUST ADDRESS THAT CONCERN OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY IS SEEING IN TERMS OF THE SPEED AND EROSION, UM, THAT IS HAPPENING, UM, TODAY AT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. 
          YES. 
          AND, UM, SINCE THEY ARE VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS, WE WILL LET THE APPLICANT AND, AND THEY'RE REVISED NOW, , WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT READ THAT INTO THE RECORD. 
          I, I BELIEVE HE'S HERE AND PREPARED TO SPEAK TO THAT. 
          THANK YOU MS. LEVY. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          I WAS GONNA MAKE ONE NOTE. 
          EVERYTHING YOU SAID WAS WAS PERFECT ON, ON ON FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT. 
          LIKE YOU SAID, THEY'RE, THEY'RE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED CREEKS. 
          A LOT OF THESE, UH, THE GOOD OR THE THING THAT WORKS IN THIS PROJECT'S FAVOR COULD BE, YOU KNOW, THE, UH, THE BEST WAY THEY CAN BUILD IT OUT IS A SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT. 
          TYPICALLY, SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENTS HAVE A COLLECTIVE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION AND SO THAT TO A DEGREE, COLLECT EYES IS THE MAINTENANCE OF THE CREEK. 
          AND I THINK THAT USUALLY, UH, WILL BE BETTER THAN, YOU KNOW, IF THEY HAD SIX OR EIGHT INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNERS VERSUS THAT COLLECTIVE MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION. 
          SO JUST WORKING IN THEIR FAVOR, I WOULD SAY. 
          MR. CARPENTER? YES. 
          I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS YOU WERE SAYING WE'RE GOING TO BE COMING. 
          ARE, ARE THOSE GOING TO HAVE TO BE PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS GIVEN THE NEW STATE LAW? I'M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? OH, YES. 
          THE NEW DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT YOU SAY ARE COMING AS FAR AS LIMITING THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS AND THE HEIGHT, ARE THOSE GOING TO HAVE TO BE PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS? THE HEIGHT'S LOWER THAN 45 FEET. 
          THIS IS NOT, SINCE THIS IS NOT A MULTIFAMILY USE. 
          OKAY. 
          I'VE GOT YOU. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          BECAUSE THIS IS GONNA BE A, A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, USE. 
          OKAY. 
          WE CAN PUT PUBLIC RESTRICTIONS ON IT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OTHER QUESTIONS, COLLEAGUES? 
          [01:35:01]
OKAY. 
          UH, ITEM NUMBER 17. 
          UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER KONZ HAS A CONFLICT ON THIS, SO WE'LL ALLOW HIM TO STEP OUT. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSON, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE THINKING ON BRIEFING, BUT AT THE VERY LEAST I'D LIKE STAFF TO JUST ADDRESS THE POINTS OF WHERE THEY HAVEN'T LANDED ON THE SAME PAGE WITH DO YOU, IF YOU WANT A FULL BRIEFING, THAT'S FINE TOO. 
          OKAY. 
          WOULD ANYONE LIKE A FULL BRIEFING ON ITEM NUMBER 17? DID YOU WANT A FULL BRIEFING? IS THAT WHAT YOU, WHY DON'T WE DO A BRIEF BRIEFING? I JUST WANNA REALLY FOCUS ON WHAT'S IN, IN CONTENTION HERE AND WHAT THE REALLY SALIENT LAND USES LAND USE ISSUES ARE. 
          YEAH. 
          WITH, WITH THAT, NO, MY ASK IS, YEAH, WE, WE, WE COULD JUST GIVE THE BRIEF BACKGROUND AND THEN, UM, HIGHLIGHT, UH, WHERE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS DIFFER. 
          THAT'S THE REASON IT'S ON INDIVIDUAL. 
          UH, I'M HEARING THAT WE DON'T NEED THE, THE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T NEED ALL OF OUR FULL, UM, BACKGROUND ANALYSIS AND PHOTOS, JUST THAT, THOSE, MAYBE THE BACKGROUND. 
          UM, AND THEN IF YOU HAVE, UH, NOTES ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT'S GREAT. 
          I, OH, OKAY. 
          COULD YOU GO TO THE TOP LEFT AND DO, UH, I THINK IT'S FILE AND THEN VIEW IN THE DROPDOWN? I'M SORRY. 
          'CAUSE I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T GET TO SEE WHAT HE  HE DID. 
          I THINK I JUST NEED TO MAKE IT BIGGER ON HERE. 
          LET'S SEE. 
          GO TO THE GO TO HERE MENU. 
          OKAY. 
          ALL THAT APPLAUSE IS FOR US, RIGHT? YES. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          OKAY. 
          THIS IS Z 2 6 24. 
          THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SUBDISTRICT FOR ZERO DASH TWO OFFICE SUBDISTRICT USES AND IT ALSO INCLUDES TERMINATION OF EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS Z 7 9 1 8 9. 
          THIS IS ON PROPERTY ZONED OH TWO SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT, 1 93 OAKLAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT. 
          IT'S ON PROPERTY BANNER BY ALLEN STREET, COLE AVENUE AND SNEAD STREET. 
          ANOTHER DELAY, SORRY. 
          UM, THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP. 
          IT'S LOCATED IN DISTRICT 14, AND THIS IS THE AREA OF REQUEST. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S BOUNDED ON ALL SIDES BY STREETS AND IT'S CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH AN OFFICE BUILDING. 
          AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TERMINATION OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE PD TO CREATE A NEW SUBDISTRICT THAT WILL ALLOW A NEW SIX STORY, UM, SIX STORY HOTEL ON THE PROPERTY. 
          CURRENT DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH PROHIBIT STRUCTURES OVER THREE FLOORS OF OCCUPANCY WITHIN THE BUILDING, OR TO EXCEED 40 FEET, 48 FEET IN HEIGHTS. 
          SO THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF TERMINATING AND DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          AND AGAIN, THERE'S FRONTAGE ON ALL SIDES. 
          [01:40:01]
UH, COLE ALLEN, COLE AVENUE, ALLEN STREET AND SNEAD STREET. 
          APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 15 FOOT FRONT SETBACK ALONG COLE AVENUE, 10 FEET SETBACK SIDE SETBACKS FOR ALLEN AND SNEAD STREETS, AND A FIVE FOOT YARD SETBACK FOR THE NORTHWESTERN PROPERTY LINE FACING CARLISLE STREET. 
          AND, UM, WITHIN THAT SUBDISTRICT AND A REQUIREMENT OF A 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK IN LIEU OF A 20 FOOT FRONT SETBACK AND DOUBLE FRONTAGE FOR THE LONGEST STREET. 
          UM, THE APPLICANT IS ALL ALSO PROPOSING DESIGN STANDARDS THAT INCLUDE A HABITAT GARDEN, SOME DES BUILDING DESIGN, STANDARD STANDARDS, PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALKS AND PATHS, SIDEWALK AMENITIES, AND A TROLLEY STOP FOR THIS VERY URBANIZED AREA. 
          UH, THIS IS THE AERIAL AND LAND USE MAP. 
          AGAIN, IT'S SURROUNDED BY, UM, MULTIFAMILY USES TO THE NORTH AND, UH, WEST OF THE PROPERTY. 
          HAS SOME OFFICE OVER TO THE WEST AND SOME MULTIFAMILY AS WELL ALONG ALLEN STREET. 
          AND THEN, UM, DIRECTLY TO THE EAST RIGHT ACROSS IS WILLIAM B. TRAVIS. 
          UH, THIS IS ON COLE AVENUE LOOKING WEST. 
          UH, AGAIN, IT'S DEVELOPED WITH AN OFFICE BUILDING. 
          NOW, UM, THIS IS JUST ANOTHER VIEW OF IT. 
          UM, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE PERSPECTIVE OF, UM, SOME TALLER BUILDINGS. 
          AGAIN, IT'S A VERY HIGHLY URBANIZING AREA. 
          THIS IS ON COLE AVENUE AND SNEAD STREET, LOOKING WEST. 
          THIS IS COLE AVENUE, LOOKING NORTH SOUTH ON SNEAD, LOOKING SOUTH. 
          AND AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE, SOME OF THE MULTI-FAMILY IN THE BACKGROUND. 
          BACK ALONG. 
          ALLEN, THIS IS SNEAD STREET LOOKING SOUTH. 
          UH, THIS IS SNEAD AND ALLEN LOOKING EAST ALLEN STREET LOOKING EAST. 
          UM, AGAIN, THESE ARE SOME OF THE SURROUNDING PHOTOS. 
          LOOKING EAST OFF OF COAL, LOOKING SOUTH ON COAL. 
          SOUTHEAST, NORTHEAST. 
          AND THIS IS ON SNEAD, LOOKING WEST, LOOKING NORTH. 
          SNEAD AND COAL, LOOKING NORTH ON SNEAD. 
          LOOKING NORTHWEST, AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE HIGH RISE SNEAD AND, UM, AT CARLISLE LOOKING NORTHWEST WEST. 
          THIS IS ALLEN LOOKING SOUTHWEST, ALLEN STREET LOOKING SOUTH. 
          AND THEN ALLEN SOUTHEAST. 
          THIS IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 
          UM, THERE ARE QUITE A FEW, UM, CONDITIONS, OF COURSE IN THE PD. 
          I WON'T READ THEM ALL, BUT YEAH. 
          UM, CAN WE SHOW WHAT WE, IF THERE WERE CHANGE, WE HAD CHANGES DISTRIBUTED, I THINK CAN WE SHOW THOSE PRIMARILY? 'CAUSE I THINK THAT THEY'VE SEEN THE PD. 
          I THINK WE JUST NEED TO MAYBE SEE WHAT WAS DISTRIBUTED IN OUR RECOMMENDATION. 
          DID WE PUT, DO WE PUT THE DISTRIBUTED CONDITIONS IN? SO THEY'RE PRO, THEY ARE, UM, PROHIBITING SOME USES THROUGH, UM, THE PD, UM, JUST TO, YOU KNOW, FURTHER, UM, HAVE THE, HAVE IT BE THE O2 DISTRICT WITH MAINLY THE INTENDED USE OF THE HOTEL. 
          AND THEN, UM, SO TAKING SOME OUT ACCESSORY USES. 
          AGAIN, THIS IS THE YARD LOT AND SPACE REGULATIONS PROPOSED OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING. 
          UM, LET'S SEE. 
          THEY ARE, UM, ASKING FOR, UM, SOME MODIFIED PARKING REGULATIONS FOR THE HOTEL, UM, RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE. 
          AND THIS, THIS HAS ACTUALLY BEEN UPDATED, SO I'M NOT SURE THIS IS THAT, UM, REVISED POWERPOINT. 
          I THINK YOUR NEXT SLIDE HAS THAT. 
          LET ME SEE. 
          HERE IT IS. 
          OKAY. 
          SO THEY UPDATED THE STANDARDS AFTER THE DOCKET WENT OUT. 
          SO, UM, THE PROPOSAL NOW IS RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE AT ONE SPACE 
          [01:45:01]
FOR EACH 250 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA FOR THE FIRST 3000 SQUARE FEET. 
          AND THEN TO CONSULT PART ONE WITHIN THE PD 1 93 FOR FLOOR AREA GREATER THAN 3000 SQUARE FEET. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. 
          UM, WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT, UM, THE PARKING AND LOADING DEFER TO CHAPTER 51 AS AMENDED LANDSCAPING. 
          UM, THEY ARE PROPOSING HABITAT GARDEN STANDARDS AND THEN UPDATED. 
          UM, THEY WANTED TO INCLUDE SOME HABITAT GARDEN SIGNAGE WITH A UNIFIED SIGNAGE PROGRAM, IDENTIFYING THE HABITAT GARDENS WITH REFERENCE TO OUR CCAP, UH, THAT MAY BE PROVIDED IN PLANTING AREAS WITH THE MINIMUM OF ONE SIGN PER STREET FRONTAGE, UM, STAFF, UM, I'M JUST REMEMBERING, BUT, UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE NOT INCLUDE THE SIGNAGE FOR THE HABITAT GARDEN STANDARDS THAT, YOU KNOW, JUST KEEPING THE HABITAT GARDEN STANDARDS BUT NOT THE SIGNAGE. 
          UM, AND HAVE THE SIGNS JUST DEFER TO ARTICLE SEVEN BECAUSE AGAIN, WE, WE, WE DON'T HAVE SPECIFIC REGULATIONS FOR HABITATS GARDEN SIGNAGE, SO IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN, THAT CAN BE HANDLED THROUGH, UH, PERMITTING, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD MEET ARTICLE SEVEN. 
          SO IN OTHER WORDS, WE THINK THAT THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED, BUT SINCE WE DON'T HAVE STANDARDS, THAT'S WHY WE, WE DON'T WANT TO PUT THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE. 
          WE JUST WANT IT TO REFER TO, TO THE ARTICLE SEVEN SIGNAGE. 
          SO WE WANTED TO, WE DID NOT WANT TO HAVE THAT IN HERE, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING. 
          UM, ALSO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT WIDE UNOBSTRUCTED SIDEWALK WITH A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT WIDE BUFFER STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS A MINIMUM SIX FOOT WIDE UNOBSTRUCTED SIDEWALK WITH A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT WIDE BUFFER AND PRETTY MUCH STANDARD. 
          WE JUST FEEL LIKE SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS OR MORE WALKABLE. 
          THIS IS A, A HIGHLY URBANIZING AREA. 
          UM, SOME PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES. 
          UM, THEY'RE PROPOSING ONE BENCH AND ONE TRASH RECEPTACLE ALONG SNEAD AND COAL AVENUE. 
          AND, UM, MINIMUM OF ONE BENCH AND A TRASH RECEPTACLE PROVIDED AT THE TROLLEY STOP. 
          AND, UM, THIS IS JUST A COMPARISON CHART. 
          UM, AGAIN, IT'S A LOT OF IT IS VERY SIMILAR. 
          JUST THEY DID HAVE THE, THE, UM, REDUCTION FOR THE, UM, SETBACKS BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A SMALL PROPERTY AND, UM, GOING UP THEY'RE, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, MUCH, UH, LOWER IN HEIGHT THAN WHAT THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO. 
          BUT, UM, AND JUST SLIGHTLY HIGHER DENSITY AT 4.7. 
          AND AGAIN, ASKING FOR, UH, INCLUDING A LOT OF STANDARDS IN HERE TOO, STAFF. 
          SO FORWARD DALLAS DOES RECOMMEND REGIONAL MIXED USE FOR THE AREA. 
          AND SO THIS WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE LOWER, UM, HEIGHT AND, UM, HIGHLY URBANIZED AREA STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          WITH THAT, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY, QUESTIONS FOR MS. MISLEADING, MR. KINGSTON. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          SO ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE RECOMMENDATION OR THE REQUEST FOR FIVE FOOT SIDEWALKS INSTEAD OF SIX IS IN ORDER TO PRESERVE MATURE TREES ALONG ALLEN AND THAT THE APPLICANT IS ACTUALLY INTENDING TO PUT SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS ACROSS MOST OF THE SITE? UM, I'M SORRY, I THINK YOU, WERE YOU SAYING THAT SOME OF THE SIDEWALKS WOULD BE FIVE OR YES. 
          ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO USE SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS ACROSS MOST OF THE SITE, BUT ALLOWING FOR FIVE, FIVE FOOT SIDEWALKS GIVES THEM THE FLEXIBILITY 
          [01:50:01]
TO PRESERVE MATURE TREES ALONG ALLEN? I, FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE, WE FEEL LIKE THERE IS ROOM TO DO THE SIX FOOT. 
          UM, AND, AND I'LL SAY, AND THAT'S JUST OUR RECOMMENDATION. 
          IF THEY HAVE RIGHT OF AWAY, THEY CAN PUT SIDEWALKS INSIDE, INSIDE THEIR, THEIR PROPERTY, AND IT'S FAIRLY EASY PROCESS TO DO A, AN EASEMENT. 
          UH, WE COULD ALSO TEMPER THE LANGUAGE IF THEY TRULY NEEDED SOME KIND OF BREAK ON SIDEWALKS. 
          THEY COULD LIMIT IT TO A FRONTAGE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          I'M SORRY, SAY THAT AGAIN. 
          IF, IF THEY TRULY NEEDED A BREAK ON SIDEWALKS ON ONE OF THEIR FRONTAGES, THERE COULD BE LANGUAGE THAT COULD LIMIT IT TO ONE UP FRONTAGE OR OTHER. 
          OKAY. 
          AND THEN THE OTHER SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDING A DEFAULT TO 51 A FOR PARKING AND THE APPLICANT IS SUGGESTING A MODIFICATION OF PD ONE 90 THREE'S PARKING STANDARDS. 
          CORRECT. 
          ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT? UM, YEAH, I'LL, I'LL ASK, I I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS MS. LEVY OR PERHAPS, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, BUT, UM, I'M PUZZLED WHY IN ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN DALLAS THAT IS MOST WALKABLE AND MOST TRANSIT RICH, WE CONTINUE TO REQUIRE PARKING ABOVE AND BEYOND THE RECENTLY REDESIGNED PARKING ORDINANCE. 
          WELL, WE HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY LIMITED THE PARKING, UH, BELOW WHAT PD 1 93 REQUIRES. 
          HOWEVER, IT'S ALSO A VERY CONGESTED AREA. 
          AND IF WE DON'T REQUIRE PARKING, THEN A THE COMMUNITY DOESN'T SUPPORT PROJECTS LIKE THIS BECAUSE THEY UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE REQUIRED PARKING, SOMETIMES YOU END UP WITH INSUFFICIENT PARKING AND OUR NARROW STREETS GET USED FOR PARKING AND THEY DON'T, THEY END UP NOT HAVING ENOUGH PARKING AND IT CREATES A LESS WALKABLE AREA. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE STRIVE TO DO IS RIGHT SIZE THE PARKING. 
          AND FRANKLY, I DIDN'T PARK, I DIDN'T VOTE FOR THE PARKING AMENDMENT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE GOT IT RIGHT. 
          AND I THINK IN THESE URBAN AREAS, IT MAKES SENSE TO TAKE A LOOK AT EACH, USE EACH SITE AND TRY TO RIGHT SIZE IT. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE ATTEMPTED TO DO HERE. 
          WE'VE GREATLY REDUCED THE PARKING FOR A HOTEL USE. 
          UM, AND WE'VE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION A SMALL RESTAURANT WHICH DOESN'T REQUIRE A LOT OF PARKING. 
          IF THEY WERE TO SAY, LOOK, WE WANTED LARGE BANQUET SPACE OR LARGE, UM, FACILITY SPACE LIKE SOME HOTELS WOULD REQUIRE, THEN WE MIGHT LOOK AT A DIFFERENT PARKING SCENARIO. 
          BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, REALLY THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR A LOT OF PARKING. 
          BUT, UM, THE OAK LAWN COMMITTEE IS VERY CLEAR THAT THEY WANT TO EVALUATE THE PARKING ON EACH SITE AND EACH USE. 
          AND FRANKLY, I THINK IT'S ONE OF THE MOST SOPHISTICATED, UM, COMMUNITIES IN THE CITY AND I THINK THEY'RE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT AND I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY TO BACK THEM ON THAT. 
          ALRIGHT, I THINK THIS IS A PERFECT CONVERSATION FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING THIS AFTERNOON, WHICH WE CAN HAVE AS ROBUSTLY AS WE'D LIKE. 
          ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. 
          UM, A BIT OF HOUSEKEEPING. 
          [Additional Item ]
COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR HERBERT IS OUT. 
          I'M GOING TO NEED TO STEP OUT IN A FEW MINUTES TO ATTEND TO A, UH, PERSONAL MATTER. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER HAS GENERALIST GENEROUSLY AGREED TO STEP IN AS VICE CHAIR. 
          COULD WE GET A MOTION TO TEMPORARILY APPOINT HER TO DO SO? SECOND. 
          OKAY. 
          WE GOT A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIMS TO TEMPORARILY APPOINT, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER AS OUR VICE CHAIR UNTIL, UM, WE GET COMM VICE CHAIR HERBERT BACK. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          UH, LET'S GO ON 
          [BRIEFINGS (Part 3 of 3)]
BACK TO OUR M-I-H-D-B BRIEFING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          HELLO EVERYONE. 
          I'M GLAD WE GOT TO  DO THIS AFTER ALL. 
          UM, 
          [01:55:01]
SO I HAVE, UH, BOOKED US TODAY FOR, UM, A, A PRESENTATION ABOUT M-I-H-D-B. 
          UM, IF YOU'VE BEEN HERE FOR TWO, THREE YEARS, UM, ABOUT 60% OF THIS, 70% OF THIS IS, UM, SIMILAR TO A, YOU KNOW, A TRAINING YOU MIGHT HAVE RECEIVED BEFORE. 
          UM, THAT'S ALL, ALL GOOD. 
          UM, WE HAVE SOME GREAT NEW FACES HERE THAT WOULD BENEFIT, I THINK FROM THAT INFORMATION. 
          KIND OF THE REMAINDER HAS SOME, UM, THERE'S SOME NEW DATA, UM, BUT SOME OF IT IS ALSO UPDATES WITH REGARDS TO EIGHT 40 AND, AND IT'S VERY INVOLVED WITH ZONING, SO I'M HAPPY TO, UM, GIVE SOME OF WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THAT. 
          UM, JUST FOR EDUCATION SAKE, UM, M-I-H-D-B IS, YOU KNOW, A A PROGRAM THAT HAD BEEN TO A GREAT DEGREE, UM, ADMINISTERED BY THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT. 
          UM, AND LAST OCTOBER THEY REORGANIZED SOME OF THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT. 
          UM, SOME THINGS WERE MOVED AROUND. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS WAS THAT, UH, THE, THE INTAKE FOR M-I-H-D-B CAME OVER TO OUR TEAM. 
          SO I, I OVERSEE, UM, THAT PROGRAM WITH ITS ONE EMPLOYEE. 
          SHE'S FANTASTIC. 
          BA HARRAN , UM, IS OVER THERE. 
          AND SHE MAY HELP US IF WE'VE GOT, UM, KIND OF, UH, LOGISTICAL QUESTIONS. 
          TOO MANY CHAIRS, TOO MANY. 
          UM, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF THE BACKGROUND. 
          AND SO THINGS ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT. 
          I THINK IT'S A GOOD CHANGE, UM, BECAUSE THE INTAKE FOR THIS IS VERY INVOLVED WITH ZONING, UM, AND NOW VERY ENTWINED INTERTWINED WITH STATE LAW. 
          SO I'LL GO THROUGH, THESE ARE THE GENERAL KINDS OF THINGS I WANT TO, UM, COVER. 
          JUST IN HIGH LEVEL, UH, TALKING ABOUT DEFINITIONS. 
          THIS PROGRAM IS FRAUGHT WITH ACRONYMS. SO M-I-H-D-B IS MIXED INCOME HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BONUS. 
          GENERALLY THAT'S JUST A PROGRAM THAT'S BUILT INTO OUR, OUR OVERALL CITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND OUR ZONING CODE, UM, THAT ALLOWS ADDITIONAL ENTITLEMENTS, UM, IN EXCHANGE FOR HOUSING. 
          UM, THE BONUSES ARE ENTITLEMENTS GRANTED WENT INTO MIXED INCOME HOUSING AS PROVIDED, PROVIDED IT'S IN QUOTES 'CAUSE THERE'S SOME DIFFERENT METHODS OF THAT. 
          UH, THE METHOD, METHODS OF PROVISION ARE ON SITE. 
          ON SITE JUST MEANS THAT OUR UNITS IN THIS BUILDING, IN THIS BUILDING SITE, UM, THAT'S GETTING A BONUS, UM, THAT HAVE SOME KIND OF AFFORDABILITY, SOME KIND, UH, FIL OR FEE AND LIE IS THE ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF PROVISION THAT IS A POTENTIAL FEE PAID INTO THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING FUND AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO, TO ACTUALLY PROVIDING THOSE ON SITE. 
          UH, A MI OR A MFI, THEY'RE BOTH SIMILAR. 
          UM, ARE THE AVERAGE INCOME OF A HOUSEHOLD IN THE D-F-W-M-S-A, UH, DETERMINED AND UPDATED BY HUD, UM, OVER, OVER TIME. 
          SO A LOT OF THESE INCOMES ARE PEGGED TO THAT. 
          SO THEY DO TRACK WITH INFLATION. 
          UM, MSA, YOU KNOW, THE METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA, IT'S, IT'S WAY BIGGER THAN, THAN DALLAS, WAY BIGGER THAN DALLAS COUNTIES. 
          IT'S 13 COUNTIES ACROSS, ACROSS THE AREA, EVEN OUT TO ROCKWALL , UM, RESERVED UNITS IS THE TERM FOR UNITS THAT ARE TO BE LEASED AT A PERCENTAGE OF AN A MFI, UH, NOT NECESSARILY BELOW MARKET RATE. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO USE THE TERM RESERVED. 
          UH, 'CAUSE SOMETIMES THOSE CAN GET CONFLATED, THEY CAN BE SIMILAR RENTS. 
          UH, BUT RESERVED UNITS IN A BUILDING, UM, ARE THE ONES THAT AT LEAST THE, THE CITY, UH, AND THIS PROGRAM WILL BE CONCERNED WITH MONITORING OVER TIME. 
          MVA MEANS MARKET VALUE ANALYSIS. 
          THAT'S AN ONGOING, UH, STATISTICAL ASSESSMENT OF LOCAL REAL ESTATE MARKETS. 
          IT'S DOWN TO THE, UH, I WANNA SAY IT'S THE CENSUS BLOCK GROUP LEVEL. 
          UM, THAT'S ALL MY DEFINITIONS FOR NOW. 
          I GUESS THERE'S A COUPLE ACRONYMS HERE. 
          SO, UH, THIS KIND OF CAME ALONG AFTER THE FIRST COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING POLICY PASSED BY THE CITY IN 2018. 
          A BIG PART OF THAT WAS IDENTIFYING, UH, SIGNIFICANT UNIT SHORTAGE OVERALL. 
          UM, THEY, THEY SOON AFTER THAT PASSED TO CITYWIDE M-I-H-D-B. 
          UM, AND FOLLOW UP TO THAT 2023, UH, IT'S MAINLY HERE FOR CONTEXT. 
          UM, TALKING ABOUT THE DALLAS, HOW HOUSING POLICY WAS THE NEXT HOUSING POLICY. 
          THE CITY, UH, YOU KNOW, FURTHER, WE, WE ALL KNOW NORTH SOUTH DIVIDE, BUT, UM, THAT'S A BIG OVERCOMING THAT IS, WAS, WAS A BIG PART OF IT. 
          UM, TALKING ABOUT A 14 DISTRICT MODEL, MEANING, YOU KNOW, IMPROVING HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, UH, IN ALL 14 DISTRICTS. 
          'CAUSE THE CITY'S HAD A, A DOCUMENTED HISTORY OF, YOU KNOW, SORT OF UNDUE CONCENTRATION OF ONE TYPE OF HOUSING OR THE OTHER. 
          UM, IT, IT SET GOAL FOR HOUSING OVERALL, INCLUDING PERCENTAGES OF MIH UH, RESERVED UNITS, UH, WITHIN THESE PLACES. 
          AND I DO HAVE AN ASTERISK BUY-IN BECAUSE THE CITY HAS, UM, SINCE REPEALED IT. 
          BUT IT IS PART OF THE CONTEXT OF THE HISTORY OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROGRAM. 
          'CAUSE THE PROGRAM STILL CONTINUES. 
          UM, BIG PART OF IT, YOU KNOW, WHY BOTH OF THOSE, THOSE POLICIES IDENTIFIED SIGNIFICANT TOTAL HOUSING SHORTAGE. 
          SO I THINK 
          [02:00:01]
THAT TIES IN WITH BOTH ARMS OF THE BONUS, ADDITIONAL, UH, MARKET RIGHT UNITS, ADDITIONAL RESERVED UNITS. 
          UM, THERE'S MORE, THERE'S PLACES WHERE RESERVED OR, UM, OR, YOU KNOW, AFFORDABLE UNITS ARE EXTREMELY SCARCE, CERTAIN GEOGRAPHIES. 
          UM, WE ALSO KNOW THAT THAT, UH, GEOGRAPHIC ACCESS TO RESOURCES THAT'S, YOU KNOW, CORRELATED WITH OUTCOMES. 
          SO IT'S, IT'S ABOUT OPPORTUNITY AT THAT POINT. 
          UM, EACH NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS A STRATEGY. 
          SO EVERYWHERE, EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY NEEDS TO, UM, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THE ONLY SOLUTION. 
          IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY HAVE TO HAVE AN UNDUE BURDEN. 
          UM, BUT EVERY, WE HAVE TO HAVE A STRATEGY FOR EVERY SINGLE PLACE. 
          AND JUST TO TALK MORE ON THE RIGHT IS OUR MVA MAP, THAT'S THE MARKET VALUE OF, OF VARIOUS AREAS. 
          UM, TALKING ABOUT THE STRENGTH OF LOCALIZED REAL ESTATE MARKETS. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, I TALK ABOUT THINGS LIKE LIFE, LIFE EXPECTANCY. 
          YOU DON'T ALWAYS GET TO TALK ABOUT THEM IN ZONING, BUT THEY'RE TIED TO HOUSING WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT, UM, IN DALLAS AND IN THE REST OF THE UNITED STATES. 
          UM, SO THAT'S PART OF THE WHY IS, IS WHERE DO WE GET THESE, THESE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE IN PLACES WHERE THEY CAN LIVE LONGER, UM, ACCESS RESOURCES, THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          SO, LIKE I SAID, UH, ORIGINALLY CREATED IN 2019, THEY, THEY TUCKED IT INTO THE ZONING CODE AS WELL AS, UH, OTHER THINGS. 
          THERE IS SOME PRECURSORS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS, BUT THIS IS THE, THE MOST CITYWIDE VERSION OF IT, UH, UPDATED IN 2022. 
          MANY FOLKS HERE WERE IN INVOLVED IN THAT. 
          UM, I KNOW, UM, AND, AND JUST PUT VERY SIMPLY, IT, IT TRADES ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, UM, THINGS LIKE HEIGHT, FLOOR RATIO, DENSITY, UH, PARKING, UH, IN MULTIFAMILY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS, UM, FOR SOME ONSITE AFFORD MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS, UH, OR A FEE IN LIEU OF, OF THAT, UM, ON SITE. 
          UH, IT'S DISTINCT FROM TAX CREDIT, HOUSING SUBSIDIZED HOUSING OR SOCIAL HOUSING. 
          IT COULD BE PAIRED WITH SOME OF THOSE TOOLS. 
          AND IT OFTEN IS PAIRED WITH SOME OF THOSE TOOLS, UH, BUT NOT STRICTLY A, UM, ANY OLD DEVELOPER CAN GO USE THAT WITHOUT, UM, MAKING USE OF THOSE OTHER PROGRAMS, UH, A BIG WAY WHY IT WORKS THAT WAY. 
          WHY IS IT A BONUS? WELL, STATE LAW GENERALLY SAYS WE CAN'T HAVE, UH, IT'S GOTTA BE AN INCENTIVE. 
          IT CAN'T BE, WE DON'T HAVE INCLUSIONARY, UH, ZONING, UM, WITHIN OUR, UH, WITHIN OUR STATE. 
          IT CAN'T BE DONE. 
          IT'S GOTTA BE RELATIVE TO A BONUS. 
          UH, A LOT OF STUDIES ALSO SHOW LIKE IT CAN BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. 
          UH, IF WE HAVE TRUE INCLUSIONARY ZONING WHERE WE DON'T INCREASE, UH, HOW MANY UNITS YOU CAN DO AND YOU JUST WIND UP AT THE SAME, UH, SQUARE ONE. 
          SO I THINK IT WORKS WELL. 
          AND, AND WE'RE SEEING THAT BEAR OUT LIKE 75 PROJECTS TOTAL SINCE 2018. 
          THAT'S 15, LET'S CALL IT 16,000 UNITS, UM, HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED USING THE PROGRAM. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S MARKET RATE AND AFFORDABLE, UH, 750, ALMOST RESTRICTED RENT UNITS. 
          SO IT'S ALMOST ABOUT 5% OF, OF HOW MANY UNITS TOTAL HAVE BEEN DONE. 
          FIVE, THAT 5% NUMBER KIND OF COMES UP AGAIN AND AGAIN. 
          UM, BUT BEYOND THE RESTRICTED RENTS, UH, 20 PROJECTS PLANNED TO PAY FEES IN LIEU, UH, 12 UNITS HAVE HAVE ALREADY PAID AND THEY'VE PAID ABOUT 18 MILLION, ROUGHLY 18.5, UH, OVER THOSE YEARS. 
          THE, THE FEE HAS ONLY EXISTED SINCE 2022. 
          UM, SO THAT'S, I'D SAY THAT'S A LOT. 
          UM, I CAN TALK ABOUT THE FUND LATER, UM, AND JUST TALK ABOUT WHAT'S BEEN USED. 
          UM, I, THESE ARE THE BONUSES THAT HAVE BEEN USED WEIGHTED BY DENSITY, OR EXCUSE ME, WEIGHTED BY UNITS. 
          SO DENSITY IS REALLY COMMON. 
          FLURRY RATIO, UH, 20 PER, ONLY 20% OF PROJECTS USED OF THAT, UM, HEIGHT BEING THE MOST POTENT. 
          UM, AND SO THAT'S SORT OF MEANT TO SAY IT'S NOT JUST PROJECTS THAT ARE USING IT, IT'S, UM, IT'S UNITS GETTING DONE, UH, AT THE END OF THE DAY, UH, USING THESE. 
          SO, SO DENSITY, HEIGHT AND PARKING HAVE BEEN REALLY POTENT BONUSES. 
          AND SOME OF THAT IS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S WHERE OUR BASE CODE, UH, FALLS SHORT IN TERMS OF ALLOWING, UH, HOUSING PRODUCTION. 
          UH, SOME OF IT MIGHT BE HOW THE BONUSES ARE CALIBRATED. 
          SO KEEP THOSE IN MIND. 
          UM, HOW DOES IT WORK? I BOIL IT DOWN TO THE MOST SIMPLE EXAMPLE. 
          UH, SO WE'VE GOT A ZONING DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS CERTAIN TYPE OF, UH, BUILDING TO BE BUILT ON IT. 
          LET'S SAY. 
          THAT'S IT. 
          THE BUILDINGS, UH, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE IN, IN A, IN A VALUABLE ENVIRONMENT MAX OUT THE ZONING. 
          UH, THEY BUILD WHAT THEY CAN BASED ON HEIGHT REALLY COMMONLY IF THEY PARTICIPATED IN M-I-H-D-B, IF THEY'RE AN ELIGIBLE DISTRICT ELIGIBLE, UH, GEOGRAPHY. 
          UM, THEN THEY HAVE A SMALL SECTION OF THEIR BUILDING MAYBE AS AFFORDABLE UNITS. 
          UM, AND, UH, THEY CAN GO ABOVE THEIR HEIGHT. 
          IN THIS CASE, THIS IS NOT TIED TO A PARTICULAR DISTRICT, IT'S ILLUSTRATIVE OF. 
          SO IT'S A BIG, IT'S A BIG LONG PROCESS. 
          UM, THIS BODY, 
          [02:05:01]
UM, IS MAINLY JUST INVOLVED IN THESE. 
          UM, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF OTHER TEAMS AND DEPARTMENTS WHO, WHO PARTAKE IN EVERYTHING THAT FOLLOWS, UM, THE KIND OF EN ENTITLEMENT STAGE. 
          BUT NOT EVERYBODY'S GOTTA GO THROUGH A ZONING CHANGE. 
          UM, TO GO THROUGH THIS. 
          THIS APPLIES TO, UM, A LOT OF EXISTING DISTRICTS, AND I'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, I DO BEFORE WE, WE WANNA SET THE STAGE FOR, FOR, UH, THE HOUSING KIND OF LANDSCAPE. 
          SO MVA IS SOMETHING, UH, THAT IS REALLY MEANINGFUL TO THE PROGRAM. 
          IT'S AT THE, UH, CENSUS BLOCK GROUP LEVEL. 
          UH, SO THEY, THEY AGGREGATE, UH, HOUSING MEASURES ACROSS THE CENSUS BLOCK GROUP AND, UH, PUT ALL THAT TOGETHER TO KIND OF DETERMINE RELATIVE STRENGTH OF AN AREA. 
          UM, IT'S NOT INCOME NECESSARILY, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S REAL ESTATE. 
          IT'S A REAL ESTATE MARKET. 
          UM, THEY LOOK AT A LOT OF THOSE VARIABLES I LISTED. 
          I WON'T READ 'EM ALL. 
          UM, BUT IT IS PERIODICALLY UPDATED. 
          UH, OUR LAST ONE WAS FROM 2023. 
          UM, AND SO IT'S KIND OF THE HARDER, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO THIS PROGRAM, THE MBA THAT'S RELATIVE TO AN AREA BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAKING MORE TOTAL HOUSING, BUT WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OPPORTUNITY FOR VARIOUS GEOGRAPHIES. 
          THIS NORTH SOUTH DIVIDE, THIS IS, THIS IS EVERYTHING, UM, PART OF IT AND IT'S, IT'S WHY IT'S BEEN STRUCTURED THIS WAY. 
          SO LET'S TALK ABOUT ACTUALLY GETTING DOWN AND, AND, UM, FULFILLING PROVISION. 
          SO IT LIVES IN TWO PLACES IN OUR CODE CHAPTER 20. 
          AND, AND, AND IN THEN OUR ZONING CODE 51 A, UM, IT, IT SAYS TO PARTICIPATE YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE, UH, YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE FOR MIXED INCOME HOUSING FOR THERE'S TWO MEANS YOU, YOU PROVIDE IT ON SITE OR YOU PAY A FEE IN LIE. 
          UH, JUST ORGANIZATIONALLY THINGS ARE BROKEN INTO TWO SECTIONS. 
          AND I'VE MENTIONED THAT THE ZONING CODE 51 A IN CHAPTER 20, IT'S THE FAIR HOUSING SECTION. 
          UM, AND IT TELLS US HOW TO ADMINISTER THIS PROGRAM, HOW TO, UH, HOW TO CALCULATE FEES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          UM, OUR ZONING CODE DEFINES THE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT. 
          IT TALKS ABOUT THE USES IT'S APPLIED TO AND GIVES US SOME GUIDANCE FOR, UM, KIND OF BUILDING THOSE OUT IN A SPATIAL WAY, UM, AS WELL AS DESIGN STANDARDS THAT ARE, ARE RELEVANT TO THAT. 
          AND THEN A LOT OF THAT IS THE, THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, LIKE I SAID, ADMINISTRATION IS IN CHAPTER 20, SO TYPES ONE, TWO, AND THREE. 
          UH, A LITTLE JARGONY, BUT THINK OF TIME POINT AS BASE ZONING. 
          UH, WE'VE GOT MF ONE THROUGH THREE, MU ONE THROUGH THREE FLOATING AROUND OUT THERE, UM, ALL OVER THE CITY. 
          UH, THERE'S ALSO SOME PDS THAT REFERENCE THOSE DIRECTLY AND DON'T MODIFY THEM MUCH. 
          UM, THOSE MAY ALSO PARTICIPATE. 
          UH, TYPE TWO IS AN M IS IS NEW PDS, YOU KNOW, REALLY COMMON COME THROUGH HERE. 
          THEY GET A NEW PD, THEY NEGOTIATE A BASE, YOU KNOW, THEY SET A BASE AND THEY SET UP BONUS. 
          THAT'S A TYPE TWO. 
          SO YOU'VE SEEN PLENTY OF THOSE. 
          TYPE THREE WAS ADDED IN 2022. 
          UM, IT TALKS ABOUT, IT DOES TALK ABOUT NEW PDS. 
          UM, THEY HAVE A SPECIFICALLY, YOU SET THE BASE, BUT THEN THEY, THEY PULL FROM A MENU OF BONUSES. 
          UM, BEYOND THAT, UH, JUST TO BE CLEAR, I DON'T THINK WE'VE HAD ANY, ANY PD WRITE THAT IN. 
          IT COULD STILL BE, IT'S STILL AN OPTION IN OUR CODE, BUT IT HASN'T OCCURRED YET. 
          UH, ONLY BEING ADDED IN 22. 
          UH, YEAH. 
          SO BASICALLY ANYONE WHO COMES TO US, THIS IS LIKE A PERMIT DIAGRAM IF ANYONE CAN THEY, CAN THEY BUILD USING WHAT THEY'VE GOT OR DO THEY NEED, UH, MAYBE TO MAKE USE OF A BONUS? WELL, IF THEY WANT TO TYPE ONE, UH, THEY, THEY COULD, IF THEIR ZONING IS ONE OF THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT I LISTED THAT THEY CAN USE FROM, THEY JUST PULL FROM A BONUS AND SCALE THAT BONUS. 
          AND THEN THEY PROVIDE UNITS, UM, ACCORDING TO THAT, EITHER ONSITE OR THEY PAY THE FEE. 
          UH, TYPE TWO, LIKE I SAID, IT VARIES. 
          IT'S BASED ON, UH, PERCENTAGES APPROVED BY COUNSEL. 
          UM, AND THE ONSITE PROVISION VARIES. 
          THERE'S, IT, IT CAN BE FAIRLY STANDARD IN HOW THAT'S ADMINISTRATOR RATED WITHIN A TYPE TWO. 
          UH, THE FEE WILL VARY, VARY BASED ON WHAT'S IN THE BONUS. 
          UH, BUT THE, THE VARIABLES IN THAT ARE GONNA BE THE FLOOR AREA. 
          AND, UM, THE MVA CATEGORY THAT SETS A FEE RATE. 
          I'LL REALLY QUICKLY GO THROUGH THE DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          WE, WE TEND TO LIKE THEM, THAT'S WHY THEY WERE IN, ADDED TO M-I-H-D-B, BUT A LOT OF THEM ARE GOOD FOR ACTIVATION THINGS LIKE, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY MODIFY, UH, THE HUMAN SCALE AT THE, AT THE STREET LEVEL. 
          UH, THEY REDUCE PARKING TO, TO ZERO IF THEY PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM. 
          THEY'RE SO PROGRAMMED. 
          UM, TALKS ABOUT HOW PARKING CAN LOOK AND WHERE IT CAN BE. 
          UM, AND TALKS ABOUT SOME SCREENING FOR BOTH OF THOSE THINGS. 
          STREET ACTIVATION, TALKING ABOUT TRANSPARENCY FOR, UM, OUR STREET FACING FACADES, ACTIVATING THE STREET. 
          UM, 60% OF THOSE UNITS NEED TO HAVE, UH, ACCESS AT AN ENTRANCE, TALKING ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE FOR BOTH THE RESIDENTS INSIDE AND, UM, AND, AND WALKING A LONG, STEADY PROPERTY. 
          UH, YEAH. 
          LASTLY, FIVE FOOT MINUTE MINIMUM SIDEWALKS, 
          [02:10:01]
UH, PEDESTRIAN SCALE LIGHTING THAT YOU'VE SIMILAR LANGUAGE TO WHAT YOU'VE SEEN. 
          AND THEN THERE IS AN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT. 
          SO, UH, I'LL MOVE RIGHT ALONG. 
          I MENTIONED FENCES ALREADY. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, THEY APPLY TO ALL MHDB UNLESS A PD EXEMPTS THEM SPECIFICALLY. 
          UH, THEY'RE A GOOD GUIDELINE, UM, FOR THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS. 
          UM, AND THEY'RE TALKING, THEY, THEY HELP US GET TO MORE WALKABLE FORMATS FOR THESE AND, UM, YOU KNOW, NOT MEANT TO PUT A BURDEN ON. 
          UM, BUT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SETTING A STANDARD DIFFERENT FROM WHAT PEOPLE HAVE EXPERIENCED FOR AFFORDABLE, UH, HOUSING IN THE PAST. 
          UM, ITS QUALITY OF LIFE IS, IS THE PRIMARY ONE. 
          AND, AND, AND HOPING THAT A MIXED INCOME COMMUNITY, EVERYONE HAS A HIGH QUALITY OF LIFE. 
          I'LL TRY AND DO AN APPLIED EXAMPLE. 
          UM, SO I'VE GOT THIS PROPERTY. 
          IT'S MF TWO, I HOPE, HOPE NO ONE'S HOUSE IS RIGHT HERE. 
          UM, NOT TO PICK ON ANYONE. 
          IT'S TWO, 2.7 ACRES, RIGHT? UM, SO UNDER THE, UH, EXISTING ZONING, UH, IF THEY USE THEIR BASE, THEY COULD PROBABLY BUILD 36 FEET, MAYBE THREE, THREE STORIES. 
          UH, I DID SOME NAPKIN MATH KIND OF SAID WITH THAT ACREAGE AND, AND OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT, LOT COVERAGE. 
          MAYBE YOU CAN GET 65 UNITS UNDER THAT. 
          UH, OKAY. 
          SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I CAN DO BY, RIGHT? IF THERE WAS NO M-I-H-D-B TO PARTICIPATE IN, IT'S, LET ME LOOK UP. 
          THE MVA APPEARS TO BE IN AN MVAC, THAT'S ONE OF THE TOP THREE, UH, MVA CATEGORIES, ONE OF THE HIGHEST. 
          SO WHAT I DO IS I GO LOOK AT THE CODE AND I FIND THE, THE MENU OF BONUSES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO MF ONE OR TWO PROPERTIES IN AN MVAC. 
          SO WHAT KIND OF HOUSING DO THEY NEED TO PUT IN? WELL, IT DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH HEIGHT THEY NEED. 
          UM, IF THEY WANNA INCREASE THEIR HEIGHT UP TO 66 FEET, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE TO DO 5% AT, AT THE, UH, LOWER THE LOWEST M-M-A-M-I IN THE PROGRAM, AND 5% AT THE MIDDLE, MAMI OF THE PROGRAM. 
          SO IT'S 51 TO 60, 61 TO 80, UH, AND THEN THEY COULD INCREASE THEIR HEIGHT THAT THEY CAN BUILD. 
          UH, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THIS. 
          SO MEDIUM, UH, I'LL CALL THAT THE MEDIUM 'CAUSE IT'S RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE. 
          UH, IT'S FIVE AND FIVE AT TWO DIFFERENT INCOME BRACKETS. 
          UH, THAT'LL ALLOW THEM TO DO 66, UH, FEET IN HEIGHT AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE. 
          UH, LET'S CALL THAT FIVE TO SIX STORIES. 
          I DID ANOTHER ROUND OF NAPKIN MATH, UH, HELP ME, BUT THAT GOT ME ABOUT 175 UNITS AFTER, AFTER THAT POINT WITH THAT ADDITIONAL HYATT, UH, SPREAD ACROSS THAT ACREAGE. 
          SO, UH, POINT BEING IS THAT HELPS US GET NOT ONLY THE ADDITIONAL HOUSING STOCK MARKET RATE THAT WE ALL NEED, UM, BUT IT SECURES SOME HOUSING FOR PEOPLE AT THESE INCOME BRACKETS. 
          PEOPLE TALK ABOUT HOW THIS IS A LOW INCOME HOUSING. 
          I THINK THAT'S HARD TO, TO SELL WHEN, UH, THESE ARE THE 20, 25 INCOME LIMITS. 
          THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE DEFINITELY WORKING SALARIES, UH, PLANNER SALARIES AT THE END OF THE DAY. 
          SO THEY HAVE, LIKE I SAID, THEY HAVE TO HAVE 5% IN THIS BRACKET AND FIVE AT THE ABOVE. 
          AND THOSE ARE THOSE NUMBERS. 
          SO ULTIMATELY, IF THEY PROVIDE ONSITE, THEY NEED TO DO 18 UNITS THAT IF WE DO THAT 1 75. 
          SO THEY NEED TO DO 18 UNITS AT THOSE REDUCED RENTS. 
          UH, IF THEY FULFILL MIXED INCOME REQUIREMENTS THROUGH EITHER THE ONR OR THE FEE, I MEAN, IT, IT, WE CALL IT A WIN-WIN WIN-WIN WIN FOR THE CITY, FOR THE, FOR THE DEVELOPER. 
          THEY GET MORE UNITS. 
          WE GET MORE UNITS, UH, THAT ARE GOOD FOR OUR HOUSING MARKET. 
          UM, WHETHER THEY'RE MARKET RATE OR REDUCE RATE, PEOPLE LIVING IN THEM GET TO LIVE AT A REDUCED RATE. 
          UM, WE GET BETTER DESIGN, UH, AS I MENTIONED THROUGH THE DESIGN STANDARDS WE GET, THEY GET LESS PARKING REQUIREMENTS. 
          WE GET LESS IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE AND PARKING, UM, IN A CITY WHERE WE HAVE A LOT, UM, MOVING ON, GENERALLY, THE WAY IT WORKS, THE WAY IT'S STRUCTURED, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAVING THESE LOWER FA MFIS, WHICH ARE NOT ALL THAT LOW, UH, BUT THEY ARE, UH, MODERATE 51 TO 60 UP IN, UM, THE PLACES THAT ARE MBAA, B AND C, UM, INTERMEDIATE INCOMES AT THE, UM, THE MIDDLE MVA BRACKETS, AND THEN MAYBE SOME MODERATE, UM, SORT OF SOME SOMEWHAT HIGHER INCOMES THAT ARE CLOSER TO THE AREA. 
          UM, IN THOSE, UH, LOWER MVAS, UM, A LOT OF THAT CAN BE MAYBE STABILIZING. 
          THEY MAY BE CLOSER TO WHAT YOU MAY CALL A MARKET RATE. 
          UM, BUT AT THE VERY LEAST, THEY'RE STABILIZING HOUSING THAT'S LOCKED IN FOR A WHILE AT A, AT A CONTROLLED RATE, UM, AND, AND, AND CAN STILL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE IN THOSE COMMUNITIES. 
          TYPE TWOS ARE, ARE COMPLICATED, BUT, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IMPORTANT AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE POTENT TO, AND THOSE ARE IN PDS, UM, THAT ARE WRITTEN SPECIFICALLY TO REFERENCE THE PROGRAM AND SPECIFICALLY TO, UM, HAVE A, A SPECIFIC BONUS WRITTEN IN AS THEY WRITE THE PD. 
          SO IT GOES THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS. 
          YOU KNOW, THEY'VE ALWAYS GOTTA GO THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS 
          [02:15:01]
FOR THIS TO BE CREATED. 
          UM, A LOT OF, LOT OF DETAIL HERE. 
          LIKE I SAID, THIS PRESENTATION IS, IS ONLINE. 
          UM, BUT IF THAT'S THE OPTION THAT, THAT A, UH, A DEVELOPER NEEDS TO GO DOWN, UH, IT DOES TAKE LONGER AND IT CAN KIND OF GET A LITTLE, IT CAN GET A LITTLE TRICKY, UH, AS WE INTERPRET CODE AS WE WRITE THAT CODE. 
          BUT WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL WITH IT. 
          UH, BUT THEY HAVE A CHOICE, UH, EVEN AFTER THAT. 
          UM, EVEN AFTER THE BONUS IS APPROVED, WE CAN'T, UH, WE CAN'T SHOEHORN ONE PERSON OR A PERSON INTO EITHER ONSITE OR, UM, UH, A FEE. 
          AGAIN, THAT KIND OF LIMITS THE CHOICES THAT CAN BE USED. 
          UM, BUT, SO THEY'LL STILL HAVE THOSE CHOICES ONCE THEY GET TO PERMITTING. 
          UM, BUT THEY'RE STILL BOTH GOOD CHOICES FOR THE CITY. 
          SO, LIKE I SAID, ONSITE PROVISION OR FEE AND LIE. 
          UM, AGAIN, IF THEY DO THAT ONSITE, IT'S MAYBE GONNA BE DIFFERENT THAN THAT MENU I WAS LOOKING AT. 
          IT'S GONNA BE WHATEVER SPECIFIED IN THE PD. 
          UM, IT, IT COULD VARY. 
          IT COULD BE ONE, IT COULD BE UP TO, YOU KNOW, 40, BUT IT SHOULD, WE SHOULD REALLY BE CONSISTENT. 
          WE TRY AND TRACK WITH THE PROGRAM WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ON THESE PDS. 
          UM, SO AGAIN, IF WHATEVER BRACKETS OR NUMBERS ARE WRITTEN TO THAT PD, THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE GOTTA PROVIDE. 
          THEY, THEY CAN'T, UH, THEY CAN'T ALTER THOSE. 
          UM, IT'S STRICTLY WRITTEN INTO WHATEVER P WHATEVER NUMBER THE COUNCIL APPROVES IN THE PD. 
          UM, IF THEY PAY A FEE IN LIEU, AGAIN, AN UPFRONT FEE IS PAID INTO THE M-I-H-D-B FUND THAT'S CALCULATED THE PERMIT, UH, PERMIT PHASE BY, BY OUR TEAM, UH, BASED ON THE TWO VARIABLES, TWO VARIABLES OF THE FLOOR AREA, UTILIZING THE BONUS SUBMITTED BY THE DEVELOPER AND TIED TO THEIR PERMIT, UM, AND THE MVA AND THEN A MULTIPLIER BASED ON THEIR MVA AREA AND THEIR STORIES. 
          SO, UH, I THINK I HAVE THAT IN ANOTHER SLIDE, BUT THAT'S HOW YOU GET, FIND OUT WHAT THEIR FEE IN LIEU IS. 
          THERE'S STILL A BENEFIT TO THAT. 
          IT CAN BE USED TO FUND HOUSING ELSEWHERE, AND IT HAS BEEN USED TO, UM, FUND HOUSING. 
          UH, THESE, LIKE I SAID, THESE CHANGE OVER OVERALL WITH CPI. 
          UM, BUT THEY SORT OF SCALE WITH YOUR STORIES. 
          SO IF A BUILDING HAS CERTAIN AMOUNT OF STORIES YOU, YOU GET PUT INTO A, GENERALLY IT SCALES WITH A HIGHER, IF YOU HAVE A BIGGER BUILDING, YOU GENERALLY PAY A HIGHER RATE. 
          UM, AND YOU ALSO PAY A HIGHER RATE IF YOU ARE IN A HIGHER MVA CATEGORY. 
          SO THIS IS HOW WE, WE FIND IT, BUT THEN IT'S JUST THIS NUMBER FOR YOUR PROJECT, AND THEN YOUR, YOUR FLOOR AREA OF, UH, THAT'S USING THE BONUS. 
          AND THAT'S ALL BASED ON CHAPTER 20. 
          UH, I, HERE'S MY COMPLEX EXAMPLE. 
          UH, LET'S SAY THIS IS A TYPE TWO PD. 
          WE, MAYBE IT'S SIMILAR TO AN MU DISTRICT, A MIXED USE DISTRICT, BUT YOU CAN'T BUILD, IF YOU HAD AN MU BASE, YOU COULDN'T BUILD 270 FEET. 
          UH, WE KNOW THAT'S REALLY COMMON IN, IN THE CITY, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, THINGS LIKE THAT, UH, THROUGH AN MVA, AREA B THAT'S FIXED, THAT'S IMMUTABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UM, IF THE PD SAID, HEY, A 25% BONUS IS APPROPRIATE HERE, THAT GETS THEM TO ABOUT 3, 3, 3, 3 37 FEET IN HEIGHT. 
          AND IF THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO PAY AND WHAT THE COUNCIL WANTS TO APPROVE, UH, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'VE WRITTEN IN A 5% BONUS. 
          UM, SO THEY'D HAVE TO PROVIDE 5% OF THOSE UNITS ON SITE AT THE, AND THE MOST APPROPRIATE MVA, UH, WOULD BE 51 TO 60, BECAUSE IT IS THAT, AGAIN, THAT MVA, UH, B UH, UH, WHAT YOU CALL A HIGH OPPORTUNITY, UH, REAL ESTATE MARKET. 
          BUT LIKE I SAID, IT IS A DISCRETION OF COUNCIL AS THEY WRITE THAT ORDINANCE. 
          UM, BUT THAT'S WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATION'S GONNA TRACK. 
          OKAY, SO THAT, THAT WE HAVE TWO METHODS OF PROVISION. 
          THAT WAS AN ONSITE. 
          UH, LET'S THINK ABOUT THIS. 
          HERE'S OUR FLOOR AREA, UM, FEE AND LIE, UNLIKE THE OTHER ONE'S GONNA BE. 
          UH, IT'S IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT BONUS IS WRITTEN IN, HOW MANY UNITS ARE WRITTEN IN. 
          YOU COULD WRITE IN ONE, YOU COULD WRITE IN 50. 
          UM, THE FLOOR AREA CALCULATION IS GENERALLY THE SAME. 
          UM, SO IT'S IRRESPECTIVE OF BONUS STANDARDS. 
          UM, IT'S BASED ON THE FLOOR AREA UTILIZING IT. 
          UM, THE STORIES HELPS US FIND THE MULTIPLIER. 
          SO LITTLE QUIRK, UH, THIS IS A PRIME, THIS IS AN 79% RESIDE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, AND IT'S A 21% NON-RESIDENTIAL PROJECT. 
          UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, GREAT, GREAT DEGREE. 
          IT'S RESIDENTIAL, BUT THERE IS A, A, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME RETAIL OFFICE IN THE BOTTOM OF THAT THING. 
          UM, BUT WE, WE, WE HAVE A, AN OFFICIAL FLOOR AREA THAT IS TIED TO THEIR PERMIT. 
          SO I'VE GOTTA FIND MY APPLICABLE FLOOR AREA. 
          I FOUND MY FEE RATE. 
          LET'S GO FIND MY FEE RATE. 
          UM, BASED ON, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S MORE THAN 12 STORIES. 
          UM, IT, WE SAID IT WAS AN MBAB, SO THAT'S THE 99.7. 
          SO WHEN I USE MY APPLICABLE FLOOR AREA, I USE MY FEE RATE. 
          I GET A FEE IN LIEU OF, OF 1.6 MILLION. 
          [02:20:02]
AND SO THEY'LL PAY THAT, UH, AROUND THE TIME THAT THEY ARE, UM, THAT THEY'RE MOVING FORWARD WITH THEIR PERMIT. 
          UM, AND THEN THAT GOES INTO THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING FUND. 
          IT HAS TO BE SPENT ON HOUSING. 
          UM, BEFORE WE RUN OUTTA TIME, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT, UM, SOME OF THE CHANGES, UH, TO THE PROGRAM. 
          IT'S NOT NECESSARILY CHANGES 'CAUSE OUR, OUR ZONING CODE REMAINS THE SAME. 
          IT'S, IT'S HOW WE CAN ENFORCE OUR ZONING CODE THAT, UM, HAS BEEN ALTERED. 
          SO REMEMBER, KEY IS WHAT'S APPLICABLE. 
          UH, WHERE IS, WHERE TYPE ONE DEVELOPMENTS APPLICABLE TO MF ONE, MF TWO, MF THREE, MU ONE, MU TWO, MU THREE DISTRICTS. 
          THERE ARE DOZENS OF THESE FLOATING AROUND THE CITY, UM, THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED TODAY OR BE REDEVELOPED, UM, AND CAN MAKE USE OF THE BONUS. 
          UM, THERE ARE ALSO, IT CAN, LIKE I SAID, IT CAN ALSO BE USED IN PDS THAT, UM, DON'T ALTER THE YARD LATIN SPACE. 
          UM, SO THOSE ARE OUT THERE AS WELL. 
          SO THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE MODIFIED, UM, UNDER EIGHT 40. 
          UM, QUICK TABLE TALKING ABOUT THE THINGS THAT THEY COULD USE. 
          A LOT OF IT IS, IS RELATED TO HEIGHT WITH THESE MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS. 
          UH, MOST OF THE MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS IN OUR BASE CODE HAVE BONUSES TO HEIGHT. 
          AND THE GOOD NEWS IS, GENERALLY THOSE BONUSES ARE NOT TOUCHED BY EIGHT 40. 
          UM, YOU CAN SEE MF ONE, MF TWO SLIGHTLY UP FROM 36 FEET UP TO 45 FEET. 
          UM, BUT STILL TO GET UP TO THE FULL HEIGHT OF THE BONUS, THERE'S STILL A REASON TO USE THE BONUS. 
          AND THAT'S, UH, IF YOU WANTED TO GET TO 51 FEET PER YEAR, SMALL BRACKET. 
          UM, UH, ANOTHER THING THAT THE BONUS DOES, UH, DID BEFORE EIGHT 40 IS IT TOOK YOUR DENSITY OF EH, 24 TO 54 UNITS PER ACRE. 
          AND IT, IT ERASED THAT, IT WIPED THAT OUT. 
          AND, AND THEN YOU JUST ARE CONTROLLED. 
          YOUR DENSITY'S JUST CONTROLLED BY THE HEIGHT. 
          UM, THAT NOT AN OPTION UNDER EIGHT 40. 
          SO IT'S WORTH NOTING, AND THAT'S WHY I PUT IT IN RED. 
          'CAUSE IT'S, IT, IT, IT IS A LIMIT TO WHAT WE CAN DO AND HOW WE CAN USE THIS PROGRAM AND HOW WE CAN MAKE, UH, THE MOST OF IT. 
          SO IT'S BECAUSE WE CAN'T BE REGULATING DENSITY OF UNITS IN THESE MULTI-FAMILY PROJECTS. 
          UM, IT'S, IT'S IMPACTED IN THAT REGARD. 
          UH, THERE'S NO FAR IN MULTIFAMILY, SO DISREGARD THAT. 
          UM, THEY CAN STILL USE A COVERAGE BONUS. 
          OUR, OUR ABILITY TO REGULATE COVERAGE MULTIFAMILY IS NOT IMPACTED BY EIGHT 40. 
          UM, SO THAT MAY BE STILL A BENEFIT TO A DEVELOPER IF THEY WANNA MAKE USE OF IT. 
          AND THUS THE BENEFIT OF, OF US, THE CITY, 'CAUSE WE GET THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING, NF THREE, UM, PRETTY SIMILAR STORY, UM, THAT I SAID, WHERE THEY CAN STILL MAKE USE OF THOSE HIGH BONUSES. 
          ALL I'LL HOME FREE ON THOSE. 
          UM, THE DENSITY IS IMPACTED, BUT, UM, IF THEY WANT TO BUILD, YOU KNOW, TOO MUCH DENSITY OR, YOU KNOW, HIGHER THAN THOSE OLD NUMBERS, THEY'RE PROBABLY PUSHING TOWARDS THOSE, THOSE HIGHER HEIGHTS. 
          SO, UH, MEANINGFUL THERE. 
          UM, IT DOES REMOVE A FLUOR AREA RATIO, YOU KNOW, OUR ABILITY TO LIMIT FLUOR RATIO FOR THESE MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS. 
          SO THAT MAY ACTUALLY MAKE THEM MORE LIKELY TO OPT INTO A, A HIGHER HEIGHT PROGRAM OR A, UH, LOT, LOT COVERAGE BONUS. 
          SO THAT'S JUST WORTH KEEPING AN EYE ON. 
          SO I, IT COULD BE A POTENTIAL POSITIVE. 
          UM, BUT, YOU KNOW, HARD TO SAY WHICH ONE, UM, MEANS MORE TO AN INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY, UH, THIS IS MEANINGFUL. 
          UH, MU DISTRICTS, SO MU DISTRICTS, THE BONUSES IN THE PAST WERE PRIMARILY TO THE DENSITY. 
          UM, FOR MU ONE AND MU TWO, YOU CAN SEE THOSE DENSITY BONUSES. 
          IT ALLOWED YOU TO ADD 65 UNITS PER ACRE UP TO A HUNDRED UNITS PER ACRE OF DENSITY TO THOSE MIXED USE DISTRICTS. 
          UM, IF YOU PARTICIPATED, YOU KNOW, FIVE, 10, 15% OF YOUR, OF YOUR UNITS, UM, NOT AN OPTION FOR THOSE ANYMORE. 
          SO THE DENSITY, BECAUSE WE CAN'T REGULATE DENSITY IN THESE TYPES OF DISTRICTS FOR MOST, UH, PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, UH, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF OFF THE TABLE AS A BONUS. 
          SO IN THESE MU ONE AND TWO, AND, AND IF THEY'RE A TYPE ONE, UM, PRESENTS A CHALLENGE TO MAKING USE OF OF MIGB IN THOSE DISTRICTS. 
          UH, MU THREE, UH, THE BONUS WAS PRIMARILY TO FLUOR ARRAY RATIO. 
          YOU KNOW, IT ALLOWED YOU TO ADD ONE OR FROM ONE UP TO THREE ADDITIONAL POINTS OF FAR. 
          UH, NOT AN OPTION. 
          NOW WITH THE MU THREE, UM, IF THEY'RE BUILDING THAT THE, UH, SB EIGHT 40 COMPLIANT PROJECT, UM, SO MEANINGFUL THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF THE WIND TAKEN OUTTA THE SAILS OF, UM, TYPE ONES IN THIS AND, AND SOME OTHER BONUSES, UH, THEY CAN STILL USE THE COVERAGE BONUS IN THAT MU THREE. 
          SO, UH, SOME OF THOSE OTHER FACTORS MAY MAKE THEM MORE LIKELY TO USE IT. 
          UM, BUT IT, IT'S, IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT THOSE THINGS ARE MODIFIED RIGHT NOW AND HOW THE CITY CAN ENFORCE 'EM. 
          UH, AND SO WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? AGAIN, IT GOES BACK TO THE, THE OVERALL, UH, THE OVERALL IMPORTANCE OF THE PROGRAM, WHICH I THINK MANY PEOPLE HERE HAVE RECOGNIZED, UM, AS, AS A REALLY IMPORTANT PART OF OUR HOUSING 
          [02:25:01]
STRATEGY. 
          UM, WHY IS IT IMPORTANT? UH, EIGHT 40 IMPACTS HOW WE CAN REGULATE DENSITY, UH, FLOOR AREA AND TO A DEGREE HEIGHT. 
          UM, AND MANY, MANY PROJECTS HAVE MADE USE OF DENSITY BONUSES. 
          MANY HAVE USED FLOOR AIR RATIO IN, IN, IN HEIGHT. 
          UM, DENSITY OBVIOUSLY WAS ONE OF THE HIGHER ONES THAT'S COMPLETELY OFF THE TABLE FOR THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS. 
          HEIGHT STILL WILL BE MEANINGFUL, AND I THINK WE'LL STILL, UM, BE, BE WATCHING THAT, UM, AS PROJECTS COME THROUGH. 
          UM, BUT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT, THAT SOME OF THE MEANINGFUL BONUSES THAT WE HAVE GRANTED ARE IMPACTED. 
          UM, AND I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO DETAIL, BUT I DO WANT TO JUST GIVE THIS INFORMATION, UM, SO WE CAN KIND OF START THINKING ABOUT THAT AS WE LOOK AT ANY INDIVIDUAL PROJECT. 
          UM, BUT ALSO AS WE MOVE FORWARD TOWARDS, UM, REFORMING OUR CODE, I THINK THAT MOST CERTAINLY THIS IS GOING TO BE A CONSIDERATION AS THEY, UM, WRITE THE NEW CODE, UM, AS THIS BODY MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE CODE AND ITS COUNSEL, DOES IT, UM, IT'LL HAVE TO BE INTEGRATED INTO THAT THOUGHT PROCESS, BUT I'M HERE TO EXPLAIN SOME OF THAT, UM, GET US THINKING DOWN THAT ROAD AND, AND THINKING CREATIVELY. 
          UM, BUT I, AND I DON'T HAVE INDIVIDUAL LINES POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ON THAT. 
          I'D BE OUT OF LINE DOING THAT, UM, AT THIS TIME. 
          BUT I, I WANT TO SAY, HERE'S OUR PROBLEM, UH, OVER THE, OVER THE COMING DAYS, WE COMING DAYS COMING MONTHS AND YEARS, UM, WE CAN BE PART OF THE SOLUTION, I THINK FOR THAT. 
          SO I'M HERE FOR QUESTIONS NOW. 
          YES. 
          UM, THANK YOU MICHAEL. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON QUESTIONS ARE, ARE WE GIVING ANY THOUGHT TO EXPANDING THE FEE AND LU PROGRAM TO NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS? 'CAUSE CERTAINLY SB EIGHT 40 COVERS NON-RESIDENTIAL SITES. 
          UH, SO DO YOU MEAN LIKE NON RE UH, WHAT ARE CURRENTLY CONSIDERED NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING CATEGORIES? MM-HMM . 
          I WOULD, I WOULD SAY YES. 
          I THINK IT'S PART OF OUR, OUR, UM, THOUGHT PROCESS AS CODE REFORM ADVANCES. 
          UM, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, I'M THE, I OVERSEE THE PROGRAM ON THE INTAKE SIDE, SO I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. 
          UM, DON'T WANT TO STEP OUTTA LINE ON THE, THE FINAL APPROACH THAT WE'RE GONNA GONNA GO ABOUT, BUT I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. 
          UM, WE, WE, OUR DEPARTMENT AND MANY POLICY MAKERS HAVE RECOGNIZED THIS IS SUPER IMPORTANT TOOL. 
          YOU KNOW, AGAIN, PART OF THE OVERALL HOUSING STRATEGY, I THINK IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT COMPETITIVE, IF THERE'S CERTAIN AMOUNT OF, UM, DEMAND FOR MULTIFAMILY CONSTRUCTION, I, I THINK IT NEEDS TO, UH, BE EXTENDED TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH, UM, YOUR ENTITLEMENTS THAT YOU HAVE OTHERWISE UNDER EIGHT 40. 
          WELL, I MEAN, I, I GUESS I WOULDN'T NECESSARILY LIMIT TO JUST EIGHT 40, BUT IF YOU HAD OTHER TYPES OF BUILDINGS THAT WERE GETTING ENTITLEMENTS, MAYBE A LESSER FEE, BUT NEVERTHELESS, A FEE THAT SUPPORTS HOUSING THAT WE NEED TO SUPPORT THOSE OTHER USES. 
          SO I, THAT'S MY QUESTION. 
          IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO INCORPORATE INTO THE CODE? YEAH, AND I THINK, I THINK THAT WILL BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION. 
          UM, WON'T MAKE GUARANTEES, BUT I MEAN, IT'S, I'M HERE HEARING FEEDBACK THAT YOU THINK THAT'S A VALUABLE THING, AND WE'LL PROVIDE IT AS WE WALK THROUGH THAT PROCESS. 
          AND YOU'LL PROVIDE IT AS YOU, UH, SEE ZONING AMENDMENTS AND, AND THEN IF YOU HAVE A SITE THAT'S CURRENTLY GOVERNED BY EIGHT 40 THAT'S NOT ZONED FOR RESIDENTIAL, CAN THEY PARTICIPATE IN OUR MIXED INCOME HOUSING PROGRAM TODAY? UH, A BIG PART OF IT IS APPLICABILITY. 
          UH, OUR CODE SAYS WE'VE, WE'VE, THEY'VE, YOU MUST BE LOCATED IN X, Y, Z DISTRICT HERE, RIGHT? AND THEN IF YOU'RE NOT UTILIZING ONE OF THESE PRE-PROGRAM BONUSES, IT'S KIND OF OFF THE TABLE. 
          THE, THE, THE, THE BILL DOES PRESERVE OUR, UH, CITY'S ABILITY TO ENFORCE A DENSE OR A DEVELOPMENT BONUS PROGRAM. 
          UH, BUT IT HAS TO BE LESS RESTRICTIVE THAN THE BILL. 
          SO WHEN WE SEE THAT THE BILL TAKES AWAY THE, THE DENSITY REGULATION ABILITY, UM, THEN THAT TAKES IT OFF THE TABLE. 
          BUT IF THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN PROVIDE BONUSES TO ON THE TABLE, BUT WE COULD AMEND OUR MIXED INCOME HOUSING PROGRAM SO THAT IF SOMEBODY WAS USING, LET'S SAY, A CR ZONED LOT TO BUILD MIXED USE OR, OR RESIDENTIAL, THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO AVAIL THEMSELVES OF GREATER ENTITLEMENTS UNDER THE MIXED INCOME HOUSING. 
          BUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE'VE WRITTEN OUR CODE TO ONLY APPLY TO CERTAIN CATEGORIES THEY CAN'T TODAY. 
          SO THAT WOULD TAKE A ZONING CHANGE. 
          YEAH, RIGHT. 
          [02:30:01]
THAT'S CORRECT. 
          SO ARE WE WORKING ON THAT? YES. 
          WORKING, WE'RE WORKING ON IT RIGHT NOW AS PART OF THE OVERALL CODE REFORM, AND IT'S GONNA, IT WOULD FIT INTO THAT OVERALL STRATEGY. 
          UM, BUT YES, TOTALLY AGREE. 
          IT'S SORT OF A MATTER OF CALIBRATION. 
          THESE WERE PUT BEFORE CPC AND COUNCIL AND, AND THOUGHTFULLY CALIBRATED AT ONE POINT. 
          UM, IT WOULD BE A MATTER OF CALIBRATING THEM TO THOSE DISTRICTS AT THAT POINT, BUT CERTAINLY FEASIBLE. 
          WHEN, WHEN ARE WE GETTING THE OVERALL CODE REFORM AND WHEN CALLS FOR A TIME? A DATE? A TIME. 
          WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO ? YEAH, WE ARE STILL, SO WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED A DRAFT FOR STAFF REVIEW. 
          UM, WE ARE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH THAT AND, UM, ROUNDING BACK UP WITH THE CONSULTANT ON NEXT STEPS. 
          SO WE DO NOT HAVE A SPECIFIC TIME PERIOD RIGHT NOW, BUT HOPEFULLY WE WILL HAVE SOMETHING MORE DEFINITE TO UPDATE YOU GUYS WITH SOON. 
          THAT SEEMS LIKE THE ANSWER WE'VE BEEN GETTING FOR A LONG TIME. 
          YES, YES. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, YES. 
          I SEE IN THE REPORT THAT 20 PROJECTS HAVE CHOSEN TO DO THE, UH, FEE AND LIE, UM, SINCE THAT PROGRAM WAS STARTED. 
          DO WE HAVE, I, I DIDN'T SEE IN HERE, MAYBE I MISSED IT. 
          HOW MANY PROJECTS SINCE THE FEE AND LIE PROGRAM HAS STARTED HAVE CHOSEN TO PROVIDE THE UNITS? WELL, IT IS THE, THE 20 IS, IS UP TO DATE, 20 ARE DOING FEE AND LIE. 
          HOW MANY HAVE CHOSEN TO ACTUALLY DO THE UNITS SINCE THE FEE AND LIE PROGRAM GOT STARTED? OOH, GOOD. 
          GOOD QUESTION. 
          UM, IT'S, I, I DON'T, IT'S CERTAINLY NOT A MID, UH, UH, WHAT'S THE WORD I'M LOOKING FOR? MY UNDERSTANDING SINCE, SINCE 2022 WHEN THE FEE IN LIEU WAS INSTATED, UH, WE, WE STILL HAVE, MOST OF OUR PROJECTS ARE STILL DOING ON SITE. 
          I WOULD NOT SAY IT'S, IT'S MORE THAN 50% THAT PAY THE FEE. 
          UM, IT, YOU KNOW, CHANGES FROM PROJECT TO PROJECT, BUT, UM, I DON'T, I WOULD NOT SAY THAT THE FEE IN LIEU HAS COM HAS COMPLETELY WIPED AWAY OUR ONSITE PROVISION. 
          I THINK THAT MANY PROJECTS STILL COME THROUGH SINCE THEN. 
          SO THAT IS TO SAY THOSE 20, THOSE 20 ARE NOT THE ONLY PROJECTS WE'VE SEEN COME THROUGH SINCE, UH, 22, BASICALLY. 
          RIGHT. 
          BUT YEAH, I WOULD BE CURIOUS 'CAUSE I KNOW SOME OF THOSE PRO, I MEAN, I KNOW IT TAKES SOME TIME. 
          YOU'RE IN THE PIPELINE, YOU'RE MOVING ALONG. 
          UM, YEAH, I I'M VERY INTERESTED IN KNOWING WHAT PERCENTAGE OF NEW PROJECTS THAT WE APPROVE, YOU KNOW, NEW ZONING, WHATEVER, OR NEW PROJECTS THAT COME THROUGH, CHOOSE TO GO AHEAD AND PROVIDE THE PROJECTS. 
          YEAH. 
          AND NO, I, WE CAN, WE CAN LOOK AT, WE CAN LOOK AT THAT DATA, UM, AND, AND PROVIDE IT SOON. 
          I, I, MY BROAD STROKES ANSWER IS THAT I, I THINK THAT THE FEE OR THAT THE ONSITE PROVISION, THE, THE COST, THE DEVELOPER IS STILL COMPETITIVE WITH V AND L. 
          MAYBE NOT IN EVERY SINGLE PLACE IN THE CITY OR EVERY SINGLE PROJECT IN THE CITY. 
          BUT MY, MY BROAD ANSWER IS THAT IT'S GENERALLY STILL, UH, A OPTION THAT THEY WILL GO BECAUSE WHEN THEY, WHEN, UM, OUR DEVELOPERS ARE GOING DOWN THE ROAD OF, OF PARTICIPATING IN M-I-H-D-B, UH, THEN THEY NEED TO PROVIDE THE BONUS OR THEY NEED TO PROVIDE THE, YOU KNOW, THEY NEED TO FULFILL THE OBLIGATIONS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, THEY'RE DOING A MATH PROBLEM. 
          YOU KNOW, THEY'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MAKES SENSE FOR, FOR THEIR BOTTOM LINE. 
          AND THERE ARE PROJECTS THAT ARE, ARE, I WAS GONNA, I WAS GONNA SAY THEY'RE NOT RUNNING A NONPROFIT, BUT SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT DO PARTICIPATE ARE RUNNING NONPROFITS. 
          UM, BUT IN THE CASE OF MANY OF OUR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS, THEY, THEY ARE LOOKING AT THEIR BOTTOM LINE AND, AND SOME OF THOSE ARE STILL, UM, CERTAINLY PROVIDING ONSITE. 
          I WILL GET YOU, UM, MORE PRECISE DATA. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ONE MORE QUESTION. 
          HAS THERE BEEN ANY, UM, REPORTING OR ACCOUNTING OF HOW, OF WHAT'S BEING DONE WITH THE 18.5 MILLION IN FEE, IN LIEU FEES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN PAID? WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT. 
          SO, UM, IT'S FIVE OR SIX PROJECTS AS WELL AS SOME, UM, HOME REPAIR PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE. 
          SO BEFORE LAST OCTOBER, THE, THE, THE FUNDS WERE DISPERSED BY THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT, NOT PLANNING DEVELOPMENT. 
          UM, AND, AND NOW MHB IS KIND OF THE INTAKE SIDE IS WITH OUR, OUR PLANNING DEVELOPMENT. 
          UM, IT, THE FUNDS ARE GONNA BE, UH, SORT OF, UH, SAFEGUARDED BY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND I THINK THAT, UM, AS THINGS GO OUT, I THINK WE MAY HAVE MORE INFORMATION COMING SOON IN, IN BRIEFINGS FOR COUNCIL ABOUT, UM, ABOUT THE DISBURSEMENTS. 
          BUT, UM, I THINK IT'S FIVE OR SIX, UM, PROJECTS HAVE, HAVE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT HAVE HOUSING. 
          AND, AND A COOL THING ABOUT IT IS THOSE MAY BE ABLE TO BE DEEPER AFFORDABILITY, UM, 
          [02:35:01]
THAN, UH, WE HAVE THROUGH THIS, THESE ARE FIVE, YOU KNOW, 50 TO 100% OF A MFI. 
          WE MAY HAVE DEEPER LEVELS OF AFFORDABILITY IN THOSE KINDS OF PROJECTS, UM, THAT THE CITY IS, IS FUNDING INTO. 
          YEAH, IT WOULD BE VERY INTERESTING TO KNOW WHAT KINDS OF PROJECTS ARE BEING FUNDED. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          SO, SO THE 75, DO YOU HAVE THE AMOUNT OF PROJECTS THAT WE, YOU GO BACK, GO BACK, GO BACK WHEN WE WAS, SO YOU HAD 75 TOTAL PROJECTS SINCE 2018. 
          HOW MANY SINCE 2022, WHEN THE, UH, THE IN LIEU FEE TOOK PLACE, BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS 20 PROJECTS THAT, THAT DID PAY THE FEE IN LIEU. 
          SO CAN WE BASE IT OFF OF THE, DO YOU HAVE ANY OF THAT, THAT ANY PROJECTS THAT SINCE 2022 WHEN THIS WENT INTO EFFECT? UM, 'CAUSE YOU GAVE US THE NUMBER 1 28 MANY, YEAH, MANY PROJECTS. 
          I, I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE A TIMELINE OF, I MEAN, ALL, WE HAVE DATA THAT HAS ALL THE, THE TIMES IN WHICH PERMITS ARE SUBMITTED, UM, THE TIMES IN WHICH THEY ARE REMOVED FORWARD. 
          UH, I, I DON'T HAVE TIME, TIME BOUND DATA, UH, AT THIS TIME, YOU KNOW, LIKE HANDY, WE CAN DO A LITTLE RESEARCH AND PULL IT, BUT ANECDOTALLY, MANY, MANY, MANY PROJECTS HAVE COME THROUGH SINCE 2022 AS ONSITE. 
          A GOOD MAJORITY OF IT CAME BEFORE US, BECAUSE I OFTEN ASK THAT QUESTION WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY SAY HOW MANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS THEY HAVE TO, THE GOOD MAJORITY OF THE ONES THAT HAVE COME BEFORE US ACTUALLY HAVE SAID, OH, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE POSSIBLY GONNA PAY THE FEE IN LIEU. 
          AND THAT HAS HAPPENED QUITE A BIT, MOSTLY IN THE UPTOWN AREA. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND I'LL SAY THAT THE PROJECTS THAT COME THROUGH HERE SKEW A BIT TOWARDS THE MORE COMPLEX AND EXPENSIVE, BUT A LOT OF PROJECTS ARE OUT THERE GETTING DONE UNDER BAY ZONING. 
          THAT'S, THAT'S ENTITLED OUT THERE IN THE, IN THE COMMUNITIES RIGHT NOW. 
          UM, SO MANY DON'T COME THROUGH HERE. 
          KEEP IN MIND, UM, I WOULD SAY THAT THERE'S A SLIGHT DATA SKEW. 
          IF, IF YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS, YOU MIGHT BE DOING A BIG EXPENSIVE PROJECT THAT, YOU KNOW, RAISES YOUR AVERAGE RENT, RAISES YOUR OVERALL PROJECT CAPITAL COST, UM, AND SKEWS IT A BIT MORE TOWARDS THE FEE. 
          BUT, UM, WE CAN, WE CAN FIND DATA AS TO HOW THINGS HAVE BEEN DONE, BUT I, I DON'T THINK, I WOULD NOT CHARACTERIZE IT AS FEE AND LOSE SINCE 2022 HAS SUPPLANTED, UH, THE, THE ONSITE. 
          BUT I THINK THAT THERE, YES, IN SOME GEOGRAPHIES IT'S, UH, IT SKEWS. 
          OKAY. 
          I THINK WE HAVE TIME FOR ONE MORE, MAYBE TWO. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON WAS FIRST AND THEN COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN. 
          UM, I JUST HAD ONE QUICK QUESTION ON THE MAPS. 
          IT'S OBVIOUSLY SMALL FOR US. 
          UM, A CAN YOU CIRCULATE THIS AND B DOES IT BREAK DOWN BY, UM, DISTRICT WHERE THESE, UH, PROJECTS ARE TAKING PLACE? IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND. 
          I THINK WE, I THINK WE MAY HAVE SOME MAPS, UM, SOMEWHERE, BUT THEY'RE NOT IN THIS POWERPOINT. 
          YEAH. 
          UM, BE WHERE PROJECTS ARE TAKING PLACE. 
          I DO HAVE IN MY APPENDIX, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS IS ONLINE, BUT I HAVE IN MY APPENDIX THE, UM, BAR GRAPHS WERE, UM, DISTRICT PARTICIPATION. 
          UM, SO YOU CAN SEE WHERE LOTS OF ONSITE AND, AND FAMILY HAS OCCURRED. 
          UM, AND THIS IS TOTAL, TOTAL PROJECTS OVER THE, GOSH, SIX YEARS NOW. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON ACTUALLY ASKED MY QUESTION, UH, BUT I DO HAVE TWO QUICK QUESTIONS. 
          SO, IN YOUR DEFINITION OF MIXED INCOME HOUSING UNITS, DOES THAT INHERENTLY INCLUDE MARKET RATE UNITS OR CAN IT ALL BE A MI LIMITED UNITS? GREAT QUESTION. 
          I, I HINTED AT THIS, BUT UH, DIDN'T GO INTO DETAIL. 
          SO LET'S SAY YOU'RE PARTICIPATING IN THE PROGRAM BY PROVIDING ONSITE UNITS. 
          YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE WHATEVER BRACKET OF UNITS AT WHATEVER BRACKET OF INCOMES OR LESS IS PRESCRIBED BY THAT BONUS. 
          NOW I'M TRYING TO THINK WHERE, WHERE I'M HEADED. 
          IT IT, IF YOU LOOK AT THESE, YOU KNOW, WE USE A VERY TYPICAL HUD STANDARD, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE, YOU CAN'T BE TOO RENT BURDENED. 
          UM, BUT INCOME OF ONE 17 FOR A FAMILY OF FOUR DIVIDED BY THREE, DIVIDED BY 12, I'M NOT DOING THAT OUT LOUD. 
          BUT FOR EXAMPLE, YOU CAN IMAGINE IF YOU DO THE MATH ON SOME OF THESE RENTS, THEY MAY BE WHAT IS CONSIDERED MARKET RATE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ONE MARKET RATE FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS. 
          THERE'S MARKET RATES THAT ARE, ARE LOCALIZED. 
          SO IT IS POSSIBLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM AND, UH, IF YOUR MVA AND THE TYPE OF BONUS YOU'RE USING LINES UP WITH THESE, 
          [02:40:01]
AND THE, THE MATH, UM, TAKES THE RENT TO A CERTAIN PLACE, THEY COULD BE WHAT YOU MIGHT CALL GOING RATE FOR A LOCAL AREA. 
          BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT ALTHOUGH THOSE MAY BE SIMILAR, YOU'RE IN, LET'S SAY YOU'RE IN AN AREA AND THAT GOING RATE AND THIS RATE ARE SIMILAR, IF THE, IF THE GOING RATE IN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR MARKET RATE HAS GONE UP, THESE STILL ARE LOCKED IN FOR, YOU KNOW, 20 YEARS THEY TRACK WITH CPI, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE STILL LOCKED IN AS AFFORDABLE RELATIVE TO THE, THE AREA'S MEDIA AND INCOME. 
          SO YES, YOU CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE, IN THE PROGRAM BY, BY OFFERING WHAT'S SOME, A NUMBER SIMILAR TO THE GOING RATE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UM, BUT WE ARE LOCKED IN FOR A PERIOD OF TIME WITH THOSE RESERVED UNITS. 
          OKAY. 
          AND ANOTHER QUICK QUESTION IN YOUR ANALYSIS, 'CAUSE I DO GET A, A LOT OF APPLICATIONS WHERE THERE'S, UH, RE RESTRICTED UNITS AS A PART OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT. 
          NOW THE A MI THAT'S THE TOP NUMBER. 
          CORRECT. 
          DO YOU LOOK AT, UH, WHAT THE FLOOR INCOMES ARE FOR, UH, THE UNITS THAT ARE BEING RENTED? SO FOR EXAMPLE, HERE AT 50%, FOUR PEOPLE, IS THIS 58,000, RIGHT? SO IT'S, THAT PERSON CAN'T MAKE OVER 58,000, BUT COULD THAT PERSON POTENTIALLY BE IN THAT UNIT AND HAVE THE INCOME OF, OF $20,000 A YEAR? DO YOU TRACK THAT? I'M NOT, UH, THEY CAN BE LOWERED, LIKE THEY CAN BE LOWER THAN THIS, THEY CAN'T BE HIGHER THAN THIS AND THEY CAN BE, BE, UM, THEY CAN LEASE THAT UNIT. 
          UM, WE HAVE A WHOLE COMPLIANCE TEAM AND, AND OTHER TEAMS AND INSPECTIONS TEAM MAINLY IN THE HOUSING DEPARTMENT THAT MONITORS THESE OVER TIME. 
          UM, BIG PART OF IT BEING AT AT THEIR INITIAL LEASE. 
          BUT THEN OVER TIME THEY HAVE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, ACCORDING TO FAIR HOUSING STANDARDS, THEY HAVE TO MARKET THEM APPROPRIATELY, UM, AND, UM, MAINTAIN THOSE OVER TIME. 
          ONE QUICK, ONE MORE QUICK QUESTION. 
          ARE THERE ANY PROXIMITY OR RESTRICTIONS ON, UH, MULTI-FAMILY WITH INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS? UH, AND THE REASON WHY I ASK THAT QUESTION, IT ALWAYS COMES UP TO ME. 
          WHEN THERE'S A HIGHER CONCENTRATION AND THERE'S A NEW DEVELOPER COMING IN, IT'S TOUGH FOR THEM TO GET FINANCING BECAUSE IF THEY LOOK AT THE COMP IN THAT AREA, THE HIGHER CONCENTRATION OF OF INCOME RESTRICTED UNITS IMPEDES THEIR ABILITY TO, TO GET LOANS. 
          SO IT'S KIND OF A SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY ONCE YOU GET THAT HIGHER CONCENTRATION IN THE AREA. 
          YEAH, NO, NO, GOOD QUESTION. 
          UM, THE ONE, SO IT, IT IS ZONING SO IT'S NOT, UM, THERE'S NO EXCLUSIONS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT ON, ON BASED ON AN AREA. 
          BUT I WILL SAY THAT BASED ON THE BONUSES THAT ARE BUILT OUT, YOU ARE SLIGHTLY LESS INCENTIVIZED TO MAKE USE OF THE PROGRAM IN A, UM, IN AN M-V-A-G-H-I, YOU KNOW, THE LOWER ONES. 
          UM, YOU ARE LESS INCENTIVIZED AS A DEVELOPER TO DO IT. 
          YOU GET A LITTLE LESS RELATIVE TO, UM, YOUR, YOUR AREA. 
          UM, SO I THINK THAT, BUT, BUT THE POINT, AND THEN AT THE OTHER RATE WE'RE THEY'RE NOT PUTTING THE LOWEST INCOMES IN THESE, UM, IN THESE LOWER, UM, AM, UH, EXCUSE ME, MVAS. 
          SO, UH, THOSE WE WOULD CONSIDER MAYBE STABILIZING, UH, RENTS. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, MR. PEPE, UM, DOES THAT CONCLUDE OUR MORNING BRIEFING? GREAT. 
          WE'LL, UM, SEE YOU BACK AT THE HEARING. 
          YES. 
          NOW WE, UH, ONE O'CLOCK IS WHEN WE'LL COME BACK FOR THE HEARING. 
          1232, WE'LL CALL THE BRIEFING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
ALRIGHT. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. 
          IT IS 1:05 PM ON MAY 7TH, 2026. 
          THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION. 
          CAN WE PLEASE START WITH A ROLL CALL? DISTRICT ONE HERE? DISTRICT TWO PRESENT DISTRICT THREE, PRESENT DISTRICT FIVE HERE. 
          DISTRICT SIX, PRESENT DISTRICT SEVEN, PRESENT DISTRICT EIGHT, PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT NINE HERE. 
          DISTRICT 10, PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT 11 HERE. 
          DISTRICT 12, DISTRICT 13 HERE. 
          DISTRICT 14 HERE, DISTRICT 15. 
          I'M HERE. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          WE HAVE A 
          [02:45:01]
QUORUM. 
          OKAY, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HOUSEKEEPING FOR EVERYONE WHO IS JOINING US TODAY. 
          UM, THERE ARE SOME FORMS TO MY LEFT, YOUR RIGHT LITTLE YELLOW FORMS DOWN THERE. 
          UM, IF YOU ARE GONNA SPEAK TO US, PLEASE DO FILL ONE OF THOSE OUT SO WE HAVE A RECORD OF YOU JOINING US. 
          UH, WHEN YOU DO BEGIN YOUR REMARKS, PLEASE START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR OUR RECORDS AS WELL. 
          UM, OUR RULES ALLOW EACH SPEAKER TO HAVE THREE MINUTES ON AN ITEM THAT WE CAN ADJUST THAT UP OR DOWN ON A CASE BY BASIS. 
          AND IF THERE IS OPPOSITION ON A PARTICULAR CASE, THE RULES DO GIVE THE OPPOSITION OR THE THE APPLICANT A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL PERIOD AFTER THE OPPOSITION HAS FINISHED SPEAKING. 
          SO WITH THAT, WE WILL DIVE IN AND 
          [APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
THE FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS IS APPROVAL OF OUR MINUTES FROM OUR APRIL 23RD MEETING. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          UH, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 23RD, 2026 COMMISSION MEETING AS POSTED ON APRIL 29TH, 2026. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL, VICE CHAIR FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          OKAY, WE'LL MOVE ON 
          [Zoning Cases - Consent]
TO OUR ZONING CONSENT AGENDA. 
          UH, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T JOINED US BEFORE, THE WAY THAT WORKS IS THAT THESE ITEMS WILL BE TAKEN UP AND APPROVED OF IN A SINGLE MOTION UNLESS AN ITEM IS RES REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND THEN IT WILL BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY. 
          SO OUR CONSENT DOCKET FOR ZONING CASES WHEN NOTICE FOR ITEMS ONE THROUGH 14, BUT MOST OF THOSE HAVE COME OFF AND WILL BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY. 
          THE ONLY ITEMS REMAINING RIGHT NOW ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA ARE ITEMS 3, 7, 8, AND 13. 
          THAT'S 3, 7, 8, AND 13. 
          UM, WOULD ANYONE LIKE ANY OF THOSE FOUR ITEMS? 3, 7, 8, OR 13 REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND HEARD INDIVIDUALLY? OKAY, WE WILL MOVE TO OUR CONSENT AGENDA. 
          MR. BAT, CAN YOU READ IT IN GLADLY? ITEM THREE IS CASE Z 26 0 0 0 0 4 9. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR AN OPEN ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL ON PROPERTY ZONE CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF GARLAND ROAD AND THE NORTHWEST LINE OF ALVIN STREET. 
          STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONS. 
          ITEM SEVEN IS CASE Z 26 0 0 0 4 8. 
          AN APPLICATION TO AMEND THE LAND USE MAP TO ALLOW DUPLEX USE ON PROPERTY THAT CURRENTLY ALLOWS A SINGLE FAMILY USE WITHIN SUB AREA A WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 1 3 4 ON THE NORTHEAST LINE OF MOUNT AUBURN AVENUE BETWEEN GURLEY AVENUE AND EAST GRAND AVENUE. 
          STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED EXHIBIT 1 3 4 A. 
          ITEM EIGHT IS CASE Z 26 0 0 0 52. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SUBDISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE SUBDISTRICT SIX DAVIS CORRIDOR WITH THEN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 8 3 0, THE DAVIS STREET SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WEST DAVIS STREET AND NORTH VERNON AVENUE. 
          STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AND, SORRY, ITEM 13. 
          OH, SORRY. 
          THE PDF KEEPS JUMPING AWAY. 
          THERE WE GO. 
          ITEM 13 IS CASE Z 26 0 0 0 5 6. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR TH THREE EIGHT TOWNHOUSE SUBDISTRICT A PROPERTY ZONED R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 5 9 5. 
          THE SOUTH DALLAS FAIR PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST LINE OF HURLING STREET BETWEEN SOUTH SECOND AVENUE AND CROSS STREET STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU MR. BATE. 
          UM, IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? DO YOU SEE THAT THE APPLICANT ON NUMBER SEVEN IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ONLINE? IS THE APPLICANT AVAILABLE? NOPE. 
          OH, JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS. 
          WE'RE GONNA TAKE IT UP AND APPROVE IT UNLESS, ALRIGHT. 
          . 
          OKAY. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER KUNTZ, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          UH, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 3, 7, 8, AND 13 AS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KONZ FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION SAYING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          ALRIGHT, LET'S MOVE ON 
          [1. 26-1555A An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit 2302 for an attached projecting non-premise district activity videoboard sign on property zoned CA-1(A) Central Area District, on the east line of N. Ceasar Chavez Boulevard, between Elm Street and Main Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions. Applicant: Spencer Kelly / 2201 Main, LLC. Representative: Santos T. Martinez / La Sierra Planning Group Planner: Jordan Gregory Council District: 2 Z-25-000126 / Z234-342]
TO ITEM NUMBER ONE. 
          ITEM ONE IS CASE Z 25 0 0 0 1 26, ALSO KNOWN AS Z 
          [02:50:01]
2 3 4 DASH 3 42. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 2 3 0 2 FOR AN ATTACHED PROJECTING NON-PREMISE DISTRICT ACTIVITY. 
          VIDEO BOARD SIGN ON PROPERTY ZONE CA ONE, A CENTRAL AREA DISTRICT ON THE EAST LINE OF NORTH CAESAR CHAVEZ BOULEVARD BETWEEN ELM STREET AND MAIN STREET STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU MR. BATE. 
          MR. MARTINEZ, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN SANTOS MARTINEZ 24 89 CAMINO PLATA LOOP, NORTHEAST RIO RANCHO, NEW MEXICO 8 7 1 4 4. 
          UH, UNDERSTANDING FROM THE BRIEFING THAT, UH, RECOMMENDATION IS FOR A SIX YEAR SUP, WE ARE FINE WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION. 
          I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN ISSUED IN THE PAST STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. 
          THANK YOU MR. MARTINEZ. 
          ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF ITEM ONE? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION ON ITEM ONE? OKAY, WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR A MOTION. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 25 DASH 0 0 1 26, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS FOR A SIX YEAR PERIOD. 
          GREAT. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          WE WILL MOVE ON 
          [2. 26-1556A An application for a new planned development district for LI Light Industrial uses on property zoned A(A) Agricultural District, on the south line of Cleveland Road, west of Lancaster-Hutchins Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions. Applicant: Jaime Senna Representative: Santos Martinez Planner: Martin Bate Council District: 8 Z-25-000229]
TO ITEM TWO. 
          ITEM TWO IS CASE Z 25 0 0 2 2 9. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR LII INDUSTRIAL USES ON PROPERTY ZONED AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF CLEVELAND ROAD, WEST OF LANCASTER HUTCHINS ROAD. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU MR. BATE. 
          MR. MARTINEZ, AGAIN, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. 
          UH, SANTOS MARTINEZ 24 89 CAMINO PLATA LOOP, NORTHEAST RIO RANCHO, NEW MEXICO 8 7 1 4 4. 
          UH, WE'RE GONNA TRY TO COORDINATE A MEETING WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN TO GO OVER THE CASE. 
          IT'S A 50 ACRE PIECE OF PROPERTY ZONE AG THAT'S SURROUNDED BY PD 7 61. 
          AND SO WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT WHAT ELEMENTS, UH, WOULD MAKE, MAKE THIS MORE COMPARABLE TO FIT THE DEVELOPMENT AROUND US. 
          AND, UH, HOPEFULLY BE BACK HERE IN JUNE. 
          STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. 
          THANK YOU, SIR. 
          ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF ITEM TWO SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR A MOTION. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 25 DASH 0 0 0 2 2 9. 
          I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JUNE 11TH, 2026. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          [4. 26-1558A An application for CR Community Retail District on property zoned R-5(A) Single Family District, on the west line of Chalk Hill Road, south of Chippewa Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Springful Properties, LLC / Guillermo Fonseca Representative: Alexander Fonseca Planner: Jacob Rojo Council District: 6 Z-26-000034]
WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR. 
          ALL RIGHT, ITEM FOUR IS CASES Z 26 0 0 0 0 3 4. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE WEST LINE OF CHALK HILL ROAD, SOUTH OF CHIPPEWA DRIVE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU MR. BATES. 
          ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR? OKAY, NO SPEAKERS. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 2 6 3 4. 
          I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND PUT THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL MAY 21ST, 2026. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, YOUR SECOND VICE CHAIR. 
          HERBERT, ANY DISCUSSION JUST BRIEFLY? NO, WE HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING SET UP FOR NEXT WEEK AND I EXPECT WE'LL BE LOOKING AT SOME DUE RESTRICTIONS. 
          OKAY, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT, NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM NUMBER 
          [5. 26-1559A An application for LI Light Industrial District on property zoned A(A) Agricultural District, on the west line of Lancaster-Hutchins Road, north of Witt Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Ahmad Mohammad / White Dove Capital, LLC Planner: Jacob Rojo Council Distric 8
Z-26-000042]
FIVE. 
          ITEM FIVE, THIS CASE Z 26. 
          YEP. 
          Z 26 0 0 0 4 2. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES ZONE. 
          AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE WEST LINE OF LANCASTER, HUTCHINS ROAD, NORTH OF WHITT ROAD. 
          STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU MR. BATES. 
          UM, ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM? ANY SPEAKERS ON OPPOSITION? NO SPEAKERS. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO. 
          MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 4 2. 
          I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JUNE 25TH, 2026. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? SAME DATE? THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          CAN YOU PRESIDE OVER THIS ONE PLEASE? UH, 
          [6. 26-1560A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for a handicapped group dwelling unit on property zoned R-5(A) Single Family District, on the southeast line of Prosperity Avenue, west of Stanley Smith Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to site plan and conditions. Applicant: Phillip Michael Bangs Planner: Liliana Garza Council District: 4 Z-26-000038]
CASE NUMBER SIX, LAY DOWN AND YOU WANNA READ IT IN. 
          ITEM NUMBER SIX IS KZ DASH 26 0 0 0 3 8. 
          [02:55:03]
AN APPLICATION FOR ANY NEW SPECIFIC USE PERIPHERY. 
          HANDICAPPED GROUP, DWELLING UNIT ON PROPERTY ZONED R FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF PROSPERITY AVENUE WEST OF STANLEY SMITHS DRIVE STAFF CONDITION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DO WE HAVE ANYONE HERE TO, UH, SPEAK IN SUPPORT THE APPLICANT ONLINE IF THEY'RE AVAILABLE? YEP, WE'RE READY. 
          I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. 
          FOR ANY QUESTIONS. 
          GOOD. 
          ANY QUESTIONS? I'M SORRY. 
          UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS YOU WANT TO MAKE? ANY STATEMENTS? NO. 
          NO? OKAY. 
          IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? HEARING NONE. 
          UM, CHAIR, CAN WE GET A MOTION? YEAH. 
          OH YEAH. 
          ANYBODY IN OPPOSITION? SORRY. 
          NO ONE ONLINE. 
          OKAY, WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          AND MATTER Z 26 0 0 0 0 3 8. 
          I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS, BUT FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD. 
          THANK YOU FOR THE MOTION. 
          AND COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR THE SECOND, UM, COMMENTS? NOPE. 
          HEARING NONE. 
          ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, SEVEN AND EIGHT ARE ON CONSENT, 
          [9. 26-1563A An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit 2528 for an office showroom/warehouse on property zoned Subarea 1 within Planned Development 366, Buckner Boulevard Special Purpose District, on the north line of Scyene Road and east of S. Buckner Boulevard. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a five-year period, with eligibility for automatic renewals for additional five-year periods, subject to conditions. Applicant: Stonemode / Blanca Quijada Planner: Justin Lee Council District: 5 Z-26-000027]
SO WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM NINE. 
          ITEM NUMBER NINE IS CASE Z DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 2 7. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 25 28 FOR AN OFFICE SHOWROOM WAREHOUSE ON PROPERTY ZONE SIBER ONE WITH IMPLANTED ELEMENT 360 6 BUCKNER BOULEVARD, SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SEIN ROAD AND EAST OF SOUTH, UH, BUCKNER BOULEVARD. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR ADDITIONAL FIVE YEAR PERIODS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU MS. GARZA. 
          UH, IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER NINE? OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER SERRA, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF KC 2 6 0 0 0 27, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE SUP FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS WITH NO ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTO RENEWAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SERATO FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER SIM FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          WE'LL 
          [10. 26-1564A An application for MF-2(A) Multifamily District on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the northwest line of Capitol Avenue, northeast of N. Carroll Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Christina Grey Planner: Mona Hashemi Council District: 2 Z-26-000014]
DO NUMBER 10. 
          DR. 
          HASHMI CASE Z 26 0 0 0 0 1 4. 
          AND APPLICATION FOR FOR MF TWO MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES ZONE R 7.5, SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTHWEST LINE OF CAPITAL AVENUE, NORTHEAST OF, UH, NORTH CARROLL AVENUE. 
          STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU DR. 
          HASHMI. 
          ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT ON THIS ITEM? COME ON DOWN. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONER AND THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. 
          UH, KYLE GRAY, THIS IS MY WIFE CHRISTINA, UH, LIFELONG DALLAS RESIDENT. 
          WE CURRENTLY RESIDE AT 10 29 TIA OF LANE, UH, 7 5 2 1 2. 
          UM, REALLY WANT TO FIRST OF ALL THANK COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR HER TIME, UM, AND FOR MON UH, AND FOR ALL THE, THE HELP THAT WE'VE RECEIVED UP TO THIS POINT IN THE PROCESS TO GET US TO THIS POINT. 
          UM, OUR GOAL FOR THIS PROPERTY IS TO DESIGN A HIGH QUALITY HOME. 
          IT FITS THE CHARACTER, UH, AND THE FIELD OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE, BUT, UH, UPDATES THE PROPERTY FOR WHAT MODERN FAMILIES ARE LOOKING FOR IN DALLAS. 
          UH, AND WE'VE WORKED HARD TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT WE FEEL, UH, KEEPS IT FROM LOOKING OVERLY DENSE, UM, AND ALLOWS FOR, UH, PEDESTRIAN RIGHT OF WAY AS WELL, UH, AS IS IMPORTANT FOR THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UH, WE'RE PROPOSING DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          UM, I THINK THE, THE DOCKET SAYS MULTIFAMILY. 
          WE'VE, UH, SWITCHED THAT TO DUPLEX ON ARE ADVISEMENT AND PROPOSING DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR THAT, UH, TO ENSURE THAT THE PROJECT REMAINS ALIGNED. 
          UM, I THINK WE HAVE THOSE LISTED ON A VISUAL PRESENTATION IF THAT'S AVAILABLE OR I CAN JUST TALK THROUGH IT  AND WE CAN PULL THOSE UP IN. 
          OKAY. 
          JUST A SECOND. 
          UM, IF YOU HAVE, I CAN CERTAINLY READ THROUGH THEM. 
          YEAH. 
          AND INTEREST OF TIME, UH, EACH HOME'S GONNA, UH, EACH HOME ON THE PROPERTY ON THE DUPLEX WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO STORIES ABOVE GRADE. 
          UM, EACH HOME WILL INCLUDE A PEDESTRIAN ENTRANCE. 
          IT'LL HAVE A FRONT, A STREET FACING DOOR. 
          UH, THE FRONT ELEVATIONS WILL INCORPORATE, UH, STREET FACING WINDOWS, UM, PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED DESIGN ELEMENTS. 
          UH, WILL HAVE A TREE FOR EACH, UH, UNIT FRONTAGE, UH, FOR THE YARD. 
          UM, WE'LL HAVE A SEPARATION LANDSCAPE, SEPARATION STRIP BETWEEN THE TWO, UH, PROPERTIES. 
          UH, NOT BETWEEN THE HOMES, BUT BETWEEN 
          [03:00:01]
THE DRIVEWAYS. 
          PERFECT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          LEMME SEE. 
          IT'S UP, DOWN. 
          IT'S, IT'S NOT, IT'S, OH, THERE WE GO. 
          YEAH. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          IT'S PETER. 
          GOT IT. 
          UM, AND THEN, UH, WE ALSO INCLUDED A RESTRICTION FOR, UH, IMPERMEABLE MATERIALS, UH, SUCH AS CONCRETE OR SOLID STONES SO THAT WE CAN COMPLY WITH THE NEED FOR, UH, DRAINAGE AND RUNOFF. 
          UH, AS WELL AS, UH, REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF, UH, CURB CUTS REQUIRED, UH, FOR THE STREET. 
          UM, WE ALSO PREPARED, SO JUST SOME CONCEPTUAL RENDERINGS TO GIVE AN IDEA OF LIKE THE GOAL OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD, UM, AND SOME OF THE WAYS WE HOPE TO, TO COMPLY WITH THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS BY INCLUDING MORE TURF OR GRASS AREAS, UH, USING PAVERS FOR DRIVEWAY, UH, AREAS, UH, LANDSCAPE STRIPS. 
          UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT'S ONE OPTION THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING AND ALSO JUST THE STYLE OF THE HOME WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD THERE. 
          UM, AND THIS IS THE OTHER OPTION THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING OF, UH, YOU KNOW, DOING FULL CRUSHED ROCK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT ALLOWS FOR PERMEABILITY, UH, AND DOESN'T DAMAGE THE, UH, THE FLOOD RUNOFF, UM, FOR THAT AREA. 
          UM, AT THE END OF THE DAY, OUR, OUR GOAL IS TO INVEST IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          WE PLAN TO LIVE, UH, IN ONE OF THESE HOMES. 
          UM, SO WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR THIS. 
          UH, WELCOME ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, UH, AND HOPE TO GET YOUR APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU SIR. 
          MA'AM, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR YOU JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          ? NO. 
          I WAS GONNA TAKE OVER IF HE RAN OUTTA TIME. 
           WELL, YOU'RE VERY SPEEDY . 
          ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF CASE NUMBER 10, SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION ON CASE 10. 
          AND WE WILL GO TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR A MOTION. 
          UM, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          AND I WILL HAVE, UM, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 1 4. 
          I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A DUPLEX ZONING IN LIEU OF MULTIFAMILY. 
          TWO WITH THE DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT TO INCLUDE THE TWO STORY HEIGHT, FRONT ENTRY REQUIREMENT FACING THE STREET MAXIMUM 50%, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, UH, HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND, YOUR COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? YES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, MR. GREG, MAY I ASK YOU TWO QUESTIONS PLEASE? AND IF YOU COULD PLEASE COME BACK DOWN. 
          DID YOU ALSO GIVE CONSIDERATION TO, UH, MAXIMUM DRIVEWAY WIDTH, WHICH WOULD SPEAK TO MAINTAINING, UM, FRONTAGE ALONG THE, UM, PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY? UH, WE DID, UH, NOT BEING ARCHITECTS, UH, A LITTLE OF A CHALLENGE JUST IN MAKING SURE THAT WE COMPLIED WITH W WHAT'S GONNA BE A DESIGN STANDARD, UH, YOU KNOW, AND REQUIRED FOR TWO VEHICLES PER PROPERTY TO USE THE GARAGE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S WHY WE DID THE LIMITATION ON 50%. 
          WE KNOW THAT A FULL SIDEWALK WILL BE REQUIRED. 
          UM, WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE MAINTAIN THAT FOR PEDESTRIAN. 
          SO, UH, IT'S GONNA KEEP A PRETTY TIGHT LIMITATION ON WHAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO USE CONCRETE AT ALL FOUR. 
          SO THE DRIVEWAYS WILL LIKELY BE SMALLER, I THINK, THAN OUR ORIGINAL DESIGN PLAN FOR SURE. 
          SO I JUST, UM, I, WELL I'LL SAVE THAT FOR MY COMMENT. 
          SO, UM, THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. 
          UM, COMMISSIONERS, I DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL. 
          I SPENT A LOT OF TIME, UM, SPEAKING WITH THIS APPLICANT ABOUT THEIR REQUEST. 
          UM, I THINK WHAT WE SAW BEFORE US, AND I WILL  ACKNOWLEDGE COMMISSIONER, UH, WHEELER AND ALL OF HER WORK ON OUR BRIEFING THAT WE HAD EARLIER TODAY, THAT SPEAKS VERY DIRECTLY TO THE IMPORTANCE OF DRIVEWAY WITH MAINTAINING STREET FRONTAGE AND MAINTAINING HOW OUR NEW CONSTRUCTION AND NFO CONSTRUCTION, UH, FITS WITHIN THE PUBLIC REALM. 
          I HAVE GRAVE CONCERNS ABOUT NOT INCLUDING A REQUIRED DRIVEWAY WITH, UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT THE 50% COVERAGE WILL HELP MITIGATE, UM, BUT IT DOES NOT ADDRESS THE PRIMARY CONSIDERATION, WHICH IS THAT THIS SECTION OF CAPITAL IS OUR SEVEN FIVE ZONING. 
          AND WHILE THERE IS A HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF BOTH SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX, IT BY AND LARGE HAS SINGLE DRIVEWAYS WITH SMALLER FOOTPRINTS, WHICH IT VARIES FROM ITS SURROUNDING AREAS I BROUGHT UP DURING THE BRIEFING, WHICH ARE THE MUCH MORE COMMON DEVELOPMENT PATTERN THAT WE ARE SEEING, WHICH IS PRIMARILY DRIVEWAYS IN THE FRONT YARD. 
          UM, I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE APPLICANTS DID A GREAT JOB IN, YOU KNOW, ACKNOWLEDGING THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A FRONT DOOR IN RESTRICTING THE PERMEABILITY. 
          I WILL LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING THE COMMENTS OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE I CERTAINLY DO THINK THAT THAT DRIVEWAY WIDTH IS ONE OF THE KEY CONSIDERATIONS IN ALLOWING 
          [03:05:01]
FOR REDEVELOPMENT AND INFILL THAT MAINTAINS THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER REALER. 
          I THINK THAT WHEN COMMUNITIES DON'T HAVE DESIGN STANDARDS OR NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATIONS OVERLAYS, THIS HAPPENS AND IT'S HAPPENING QUITE FREQUENTLY. 
          AND, UM, OFTENTIMES WHAT, WHAT WHAT IS ALSO NOT BEING, UM, NOTED IS THAT FRONT PORCHES CREATE SENSE OF COMMUNITY. 
          WHEN DOORS ARE ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, DOORS ARE SET BACK FURTHER THAN THE GARAGE. 
          IT'S ALMOST A INSTANT BLOCKER. 
          AND WHEN YOU LIVE IN A COMMUNITY, YOU WANT TO BE A PART OF A COMMUNITY. 
          AND WE DID SEE THAT UPTICK IN A, IN OUR COMMUNITY, BE IN THESE TYPE OF HOMES AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY FROM THE KERATIN, BUT ALSO THE COMMUNITY NEEDS. 
          SITTING ON THE FRONT PORCH HELPS YOU RECOGNIZE YOUR COMMUNITY, SEE WHAT'S GOING ON ON A DAILY BASIS, GIVE YOU A A, A TIME TO RESET SOMETIME. 
          BUT WHEN YOU ARE GOING IN A DOOR THAT'S SET FURTHER BACK, UM, IN YOUR YARD, IT'S ALMOST WE'RE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND NOT A GREAT SENSE OF COMMUNITY. 
          BUT WITHOUT THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS, THIS IS GONNA CONTINUE TO HAPPEN AND I ESTABLISH COMMUNITIES, COLLEAGUES. 
          ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? I'LL JUST SAY THAT I, I THINK THE, THE PROBLEM OF THE DRIVEWAY WIDTHS, IT'S PROBABLY THE MOST, UM, CHALLENGING ONE THAT WE HAVE IN TRYING TO INFILL A DUPLEX PRODUCT THAT THE MARKET WANTS TO BUILD WHILE TRYING TO PRESERVE THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER. 
          BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE TWO, TWO CAR GARAGES FACING, YOU KNOW, UP FRONT AND YOU HAVE THE, A CONCRETE, A CON HAVE TWO CONCRETE DRIVEWAYS OF COMPARABLE WITH, UM, SERVING THOSE GARAGES, WE END UP WITH A PRODUCT THAT TO MY MIND IS REALLY NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER. 
          BUT I KNOW WE HAVE NOT COME TO THE SOLUTION YET. 
          ANYONE ELSE? UM, I, I SHARE A LOT OF THE CONCERNS THAT I'VE HEARD MY COLLEAGUES RAISE. 
          FOR ME, IT'S, IT'S NOT AS MUCH AS A COMPATIBILITY WITH THE AREA, WHETHER AN AREA IS BUILT OUT IN A DIFFERENT WAY OR NOT. 
          IT'S ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO WE WANT OUR STREETSCAPES TO LOOK LIKE AND WHAT DO WE WANT OUR, OUR HOUSING TO, HOW DO WE WANT OUR HOUSING TO INTERACT WITH THE, THE PUBLIC REALM? YOU KNOW, EVEN IN AN AREA WHERE IT WAS BUILT OUT WITH A LOT OF FRONT FACING GARAGES AND WIDE DRIVEWAYS, I, I STILL THINK WE NEED TO GIVE CONSIDERATION, EVEN IF THAT IS THE EXISTING PATTERN, UM, TO, YOU KNOW, HAVING NARROWER DRIVEWAYS TO HAVE A BETTER STREET SAFE AND, AND INTERACTION BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND THE PUBLIC REALM. 
          SO I, I THINK MAYBE I GET THERE ON A DIFFERENT PATH THAN SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES, BUT I, I SHARE THEIR CONCERN AT THE END OF THE DAY. 
          BUT I WILL, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT THIS PROJECT. 
          I THINK IT'S A GOOD PROJECT OVERALL AND HOPE THAT THE DEVELOPERS ULTIMATELY THOUGHTFUL WHEN IT COMES TO THE DRIVEWAY WITH ANY OTHER DISCUSSION. 
          OKAY, SEEING NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, UM, TO APPROVE, UM, WITH SOME CHANGES IN DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, ITEM NUMBER 
          [11. 26-1565A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for a tower/antenna for cellular communication limited to a monopole cellular tower on property zoned CR Community Retail District, on northeast corner of Pastor Bailey Drive and W. Camp Wisdom Road. 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: Jessica Claudio / Kimley-Horn Planner: Mona Hashemi Council District: 3 Z-26-000029]
11 Z 26 0 0 0 0 2 9. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A TOWER ANTENNA FOR CELLULAR COMMUNICATION LIMITED TO A MONO POLE CELLULAR TOWER ON PROPERTIES ZONE CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON NORTHEAST CORNER OF PASTOR BAILEY DRIVE AND WEST CAMP WISDOM ROAD STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWAL FOR ADDITIONAL 10 YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU DR. 
          HASHMI. 
          UM, IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 11? YES SIR. 
          , THANK YOU. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS ARI ORTIZ. 
          I WORK WITH KIMLEY HORN IN THE DOWNTOWN DALLAS OFFICE, UH, 2,500 PACIFIC AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 2 6. 
          I'M HERE REPRESENTING PUBLIC SAFETY TOWERS. 
          AND AT T UH, I WANNA GIVE A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THE PROJECT IF I COULD. 
          SO THIS SITE IS OWNED BY 
          [03:10:01]
PARAMOUNT GROUP, LLC. 
          THE TOWER IS PROPOSED TO BE IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER BY THE VEGETATION. 
          UH, THE COMPOUND WILL BE HIDDEN FROM PUBLIC VIEW WITH BY THE TREES INGRESS IS BY PASTOR BAILEY DRIVE, LOCATED IN THE WEST SIDE. 
          THERE IS AN EXISTING GATE IN THE WEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING THAT ONLY ALLOWS TENANTS AND CARRIERS AND THE OWNER OF THE TOWER TO ENTER 24 7. 
          THE PROPOSED COMPOUND WILL BE 40 BY 40 ENCLOSED BY CHAINLINK FENCE. 
          THE MONOPOLE HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO HOLD THREE CARRIERS. 
          UM, THE PROJECT COM COMPLIES WITH ALL THE SONY REQUIREMENTS EXCEPT FOR THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF 65 FEET. 
          WE ARE REQUESTING A WAIVER TO INCREASE THAT, INCREASE THE HEIGHT BY 20 FEET TO 85. 
          THIS WILL ALLOW AT AND T AND THE FUTURE CARRIERS TO PROVIDE A MORE ENHANCED, UM, COMMUNICATION TO THE COMMUNITY AND FIRST RESPONDERS. 
          AND I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, ANYBODY ELSE HAS, UH, UH, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? UM, IN SUPPORT? I'M SORRY, YOU SAID THAT IS AT T THE APPLICANT HERE IS SIMPLY ONE OF THE CARRIERS THAT WILL BE, UM, SO THE APPLICANT'S PUBLIC SAFETY TOWERS, AND THEY ALREADY HAVE AT AND T ON BOARD TO BE ON THE TOWER. 
          GIMME JUST A MOMENT, PLEASE. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER HAS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. 
          GIMME A SECOND. 
          YES, SIR. 
          I'M, I BELIEVE THAT YOU SAID THAT THE, UM, THERE WERE GONNA BE SOME TREES THAT WERE GOING TO BE SCREENING THE PROPERTY. 
          THE, THE PROPERTY APPEARS TO BE VERY HEAVILY TREE. 
          ARE MOST OF THESE TREES GOING TO HAVE TO BE REMOVED FOR YOU TO DO YOUR NO, NONE OF THE TREES WILL BE REMOVED. 
          UH, THE COMPOUND WILL BE ON A, ON THE EXISTING CONCRETE PAVEMENT. 
          MM-HMM . 
          UM, YOU CAN SEE IT HERE ON THE RIGHT SIDE, SO NO TREES WILL BE AFFECTED. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. 
          UM, YES SIR. 
          THE, THIS SUP IS FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT. 
          UM, FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE LISTENING PUBLICLY, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU NEED THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT? UM, FOR MY UNDERSTANDING IS, UM, AT AND T IS REQUESTING THIS TO PROVIDE A MORE, UM, TO ALLOW FOR BETTER SERVICE. 
          UH, YEAH. 
          UH, AT T'S JUST REQUESTING THAT HEIGHT SO THEY CAN, UH, PROVIDE A BETTER SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND JUST TO NOTE ON RECORD, UM, THE CHAIR HAD TO, UM, RECUSE ITSELF FROM THIS CASE FOR PERSONAL MATTER, UM, RELATED TO YOUR CASE. 
          SO I'M GONNA, UM, TAKE THE CASE AND UM, A COUNTERPART IS GONNA MAKE THE MOTION. 
          OKAY? OKAY. 
          ALRIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, ANYBODY HERE IN OPPOSITION OF THIS CASE? ANYBODY ON PHONE? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          HEARING NONE, CAN WE GET A MOTION COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES. 
          IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 0 2 9, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A 10 YEAR PERIOD, BUT WITH NO ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND WE HAVE A SECOND, UM, FROM COMMISSIONER SIMS. ANY COMMENTS? NO COMMENTS. 
          UM, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? THE AYES HAVE IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          CHAIR. 
          YOU CAN ENTER THE CHAMBERS NOW. 
          CASE 10 IS, WE'RE ON CASE 10, RIGHT? YOU WANT TO, UM, BRIEF IT? I MEAN, NOT BRIEF, BUT READ IT. 
          [12. 26-1566A An application for WMU-5 Walkable Urban Mixed-Use District on property zoned IR Industrial Research District, on the south corner of Empire Central Drive and Forest Park Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Reid Beucler / Slate Properties Representative: Rob Baldwin / Baldwin Associates Planner: Mona Hashemi Council District: 2 Z-26-000050]
CASE 12. 
          CAN YOU READ IT INTO THE YEAH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          CASE Z 26 0 0 0 0 5 0. 
          AND APPLICATION FOR WMU FIVE WALKABLE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT AND PROPERTY ZONE IR INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH CORNER OF EMPIRE CENTRAL DRIVE AND FOREST PARK ROAD. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS APPLICATION? MR. BALDWIN, YOU JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS? OKAY. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION? I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANY ONLINE 
          [03:15:01]
SPEAKERS REGISTERED. 
          SO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO THANK YOU. 
          IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 5 0. 
          I MOVE TO LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL JUNE THE 11TH. 
          I'M SORRY, WHO DID WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THIS MOTION? OH, HOUSE, RIGHT? THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. 
          UM, ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. 
          NEXT CASE 
          [14. 26-1568A An application for MF-2(A) Multifamily District on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the southwest and northeast line of Kirby Street, between Capitol Avenue and Belmont Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Paul Sizeland Planner: Mona Hashemi Council District: 2 Z-26-000058]
NUMBER 14, KC 26 0 0 0 5 8. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR MF TWO MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE R 7.5 SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHWEST AND NORTHEAST LINE OF CAREWAY STREET BETWEEN CAPITAL AVENUE AND BELMONT AVENUE. 
          A STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DO WE HAVE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? COME ON DOWN. 
          REMEMBER TO INTRODUCE YOURSELF. 
          GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. 
          YEP. 
          PAUL ELAND. 
          UH, 2 4 1 5 KIRBY STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 4. 
          UH, MY WIFE AND I ARE LOOKING TO BUILD A DUPLEX AT THE LOT ACROSS THE STREET FROM OUR PERSONAL RESIDENCE, WHICH IS 2 4 1 6 KIRBY. 
          UH, WE SUBMITTED SOME VOLUNTARY RESTRICTIONS. 
          THE LOT IS 5,500 SQUARE FEET, SO IT DOESN'T QUALIFY FOR TYPICAL, UH, DUPLEX ZONING. 
          SO THEREFORE WE HAVE VOLUNTARILY RESTRICTED OURSELF, UH, IN THE SENSE OF A MAX BUILDING HEIGHT OF 30 FEET, A MAXIMUM DRIVEWAY WITH OF 12 FEET AT THE RIGHT OF WAY AND MINIMUM DRIVEWAY SPACING OF 20 FEET. 
          IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE'RE LOOKING TO REZONE OUR PERSONAL RESIDENCE, WHICH IS 2 4 1 5 KIRBY, UH, THAT LOT IS MUCH LARGER. 
          SO IN ADDITION TO THE 30 FOOT HEIGHT RESTRICTION AND THE 12 FOOT MAXIMUM DRIVEWAY WIDTH AND THE 20 FOOT MINIMUM DRIVEWAY SPACING, WE ARE ALSO WILLING, UH, TO RESTRICT OURSELVES WITH A MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK OF 25 FEET. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          STANDBY. 
          THERE MAY BE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU. 
          OKAY. 
          IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE WITH, UM, UH, COMMENTS OF SUPPORT? ANYONE IN OPPOSITION OF THIS CASE? HEARING NONE. 
          CAN WE GET A MOTION? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 5 8, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST NOT FOLLOWING STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF KIRBY TO APPROVE MF TWO, SUBJECT TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AND ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF KIRBY TO APPROVE AS A DUPLEX ZONING SUBJECT TO, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIMS FOR THE SECOND, UH, ANY COMMENTS? CAN I GET A CLARIFICATION ON DE PUBLIC DEED RESTRICTIONS ON HIDE ON MF TWO? I'M ABOUT TO ASK THAT QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT IN THE CITY ATTORNEY. 
          YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER. 
          UM, AND MR. SELIN, I APPRECIATE YOU OFFERING THOSE. 
          UM, I'M GONNA ASK A QUESTION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, UM, MS. MORRISON, RELATIVE TO THE MULTIFAMILY, UM, THIS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO SB EIGHT 40 IF APPROVED. 
          THEREFORE, THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? AND I WILL ASK IF THERE CAN BE THE CLARIFICATION BETWEEN DUPLEX AND MULTIFAMILY, WHICH I BELIEVE WE DISCUSSED EARLIER TODAY. 
          THE DEED RESTRICTIONS COULD SAY THAT THE, UH, HEIGHT LIMITATION APPLIES TO DUPLEX AND SINGLE FAMILY ONLY, BUT NOT THE, ANY, ANY MULTIFAMILY THAT MIGHT GO ON THERE. 
          DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? SO DID I HAVE A SECOND TO MAKE COMMENTS? OH, THANK YOU MR. SIMS. SO YOU HAVE A QUESTION, COMMISSIONER? I'M SORRY. 
          I, I BELIEVE, AND I'LL LET MS. MORRISON OR STAFF, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS, UM, IT'S IT'S EITHER 36, WHICH IS BASE MF TWO, OR IF THEY WANT TO DO EIGHT 40 BE 45 FEET. 
          YEAH. 
          YES, THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          AND AGAIN, EIGHT 40 REGULATES OUR, OUR LIMITS ON, ON MULTIFAMILY 
          [03:20:01]
USES, BUT NOT SINGLE FAMILY OR DUPLEX, KIND OF LIKE IN THAT TOWNHOUSE CASE EARLIER. 
          SO THANK YOU AND THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES. 
          I THINK YOU'VE PROBABLY ALL REALIZED DURING THE BRIEFING THAT THESE ARE BOTH AN IMMEDIATE, UM, BOTH OUR EARLIER CASE AND THESE TWO LOTS ON KIRBY OR IN IN THE SAME, UM, AREA THAT HAS THE HISTORIC, UM, PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT AS BOTH SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX. 
          UM, IT IS BEGINNING TO SEE REDEVELOPMENT AND I TOOK A LOT OF TIME TO VISIT WITH THE APPLICANTS TO REVISIT THE AREA AND I APPRECIATE THEIR ENGAGEMENT. 
          UM, I WOULD'VE MUCH PREFERRED THAT BOTH OF THESE BE DUPLEX ZONING. 
          HOWEVER, THE LOT SIZE FOR THE PROPERTY THAT IS ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER IS LESS THAN 6,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          SO IT WILL NOT QUALIFY FOR A LEGAL BUILD SITE FOR EITHER DUPLEX, TH THREE, ANY OF THE OTHER, UM, TYPES OF ZONING THAT WE WOULD, UH, TRADITIONALLY PERHAPS CONSIDER THAT WOULD, UM, MOVE TOWARDS, UM, INFILL HOUSING WITH MORE THAN ONE UNIT. 
          I, UM, RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS A CHANGE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          I AM GOING TO GO ON TRUST THAT THIS APPLICANT HAS STATED THEIR INTENT TO BUILD TWO UNITS, AND I'M GONNA TRUST THAT'S THE CASE. 
          BUT I WANNA SAY ON THE RECORD, I UNDERSTAND THAT IS NOT WHAT IS ALLOWED IN MF TWO ZONING AND I RECOGNIZE THAT. 
          UM, BUT I DO THINK THAT THIS AREA IS CONTINUING TO GROW. 
          I CAN SAY THAT I'VE SEEN EVERYTHING IN THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY THAT IS ALREADY ZONED MF TWO, THERE IS ALMOST NONE OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSING STOCK LEFT. 
          AND SO, UM, AS WE CONTINUE TO GROW, WE TALK ABOUT THIS, I THINK EVERY, UM, DOCKET THAT WE ARE, UM, SEEING THESE TYPES OF INFILL PROJECTS. 
          AND I VERY MUCH LOOK FORWARD TO OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT THAT WILL INCLUDE SOME OF THE TYPES OF CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE REGULARLY TALK ABOUT AND NOT HAVE TO, UM, HAVE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS BECAUSE WE'LL SIMPLY HAVE A BASE ZONING THAT WILL ALLOW FOR INFILL AS THE TYPE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          SO I HOPE YOU'LL ALL SUPPORT THE MOTION. 
          I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE MR. SELIN BEING ENGAGED AND LOOK FORWARD TO, UM, WORKING WITH HIM ON HIS PROJECTS AS IF THEY MOVE FORWARD. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. 
          UH, ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? HEARING NONE. 
          ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ALL OPPOSED, THE AYES HAVE IT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          KC 
          [15. 26-1569A An application for a new Planned Development District for MH(A) Manufactured Home and CR Community Retail uses with consideration for MH(A) Manufactured Home and CR Community Retail Districts on property zoned R-10(A) Single Family and A(A) Agricultural Districts, on the west line of Haymarket Road, and the south line of Hazelcrest Drive. Staff Recommendation: Hold under advisement. Applicant: Jon Kendall / 1916 Club Development LLC Representative: Jonathan Vinson / Jackson Walker LLP U/A From: April 9, 2026. Planner: Mona Hashemi Council District: 8 Z-26-000015]
26 0 0 0 0 1 5. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MH MANUFACTURED HOME AND CR COMMUNITY RETAIL USES WITH CONSIDERATION FOR MH MANUFACTURED HOME AND CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICTS ON PROPERTY ZONED ARE 10 SINGLE FAMILY AND AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE WEST LINE OF HAYMARKET ROAD AND THE SOUTH LINE OF HAZEL CREST DRIVE A STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS HOLD ON THEIR ADVISEMENT. 
          OKAY, ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS ON ITEM NUMBER 15? OKAY, GREAT. 
          THANK YOU MR. BENSON. 
          ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON 15? NO ONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ONLINE. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? THANK YOU MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 0 15. 
          I MOVE TO FOLLOW THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL MAY 21ST, 2026. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION, VICE CHAIR FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          ITEM 
          [16. 26-1570A An application for TH-3(A) Townhouse District with deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant on property zoned R-7.5(A) with existing SUP 42 for a private school, kindergarten and day nursery, on the west line of Ferguson Road, between Larry Drive and Province Lane. Staff Recommendation: Approval for subject to deed restrictions volunteered by the applicant. Applicant: Robert Reeves / Robert Reeves & Associates, Inc. U/A From: March 26, 2026 and April 23, 2026. Planner: Lori Levy, AICP Council District: 2 Z-25-000164]
NUMBER 16, MR. CHAIR. 
          COMMISSIONERS. 
          ITEM NUMBER 16, UH, 2 6 15 70 A Z 2 5 1 64 IS AN APPLICATION FOR TH THREE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT ON PROPERTY ZONE R 75 A WITH EXISTING SUP 42 FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL KINDERGARTEN AND DAY NURSERY. 
          IT'S LOCATED ON THE WEST LINE OF FERGUSON ROAD BETWEEN LARRY DRIVE AND PROVINCE LANE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO 
          [03:25:01]
AMENDED DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AS BRIEFED AND DISTRIBUTED TO THE COMMISSIONERS. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU MS. LEVY. 
          MR. BALDWIN. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, ROB BALDWIN, 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE B, DALLAS, TEXAS. 
          I'M HERE PINCHING FOR ROBERT REEVES ON THIS CASE. 
          UM, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING HOLDING THIS CASE TO ALLOW US TO HAVE TWO NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS BETWEEN THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE BEFORE YOU, UM, HELPED US UNDERSTAND NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS AND RESULTED IN THE THE DEED RESTRICTIONS I'M ABOUT TO READ INTO THE RECORD. 
          SO THE THE REQUEST IS TO, UM, IT'S A A POINT A 0.88 ACRE LOT CURRENTLY ZONE R 75, BUT WITH AN SUP FOR A PERMANENT TIME PERIOD TO ALLOW A SCHOOL DAYCARE CENTER ON THE PROPERTY. 
          MY CLIENT WOULD LIKE TO BUILD SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENCES ON THE PROPERTY, UH, AND THAT WE'RE DOING, UM, A TH THREE DISTRICT TO ALLOW THAT. 
          AND IT'LL BE A SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT, MEANING THERE'LL BE ONE DRIVEWAY COMING OUT OF FERGUSON ROAD WITH THE HOUSES, UH, ATTACHED OFF OF THAT. 
          UH, I'D LIKE TO OFFER THE FOLLOWING DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          UH, THESE ARE PUBLIC DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          UH, THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IS SEVEN, MAXIMUM STRUCTURE HEIGHT IS 30 FEET TO MATCH THE EXISTING MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE R SEVEN FIVE DISTRICT, WHICH IS ON THREE SIDES OF US. 
          MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE IS 45% TO MATCH THE LOT COVERAGE IN THE R SEVEN FIVE DISTRICT AND A MINIMUM OF 1,350 SQUARE FEET OF CONTIGUOUS OPEN SPACE MUST BE PROVIDED ON THE PROPERTY. 
          THAT IS TO ADDRESS LOT COVERED CONCERNS AND ALSO TO HELP ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OUR, OUR NEIGHBORS HAVE WITH WATER FLOWING INTO THE, THE EXISTING CREEK. 
          WE, WE SHARE A BOUNDARY WITH. 
          UH, WITH THAT, I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS REQUEST. 
          I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU MR. BALDWIN. 
          ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEM OR ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF ITEM 16? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? OH, YES SIR. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          THANK YOU FOR THE TIME. 
          MY NAME IS CHRIS MANZ. 
          UH, MY ADDRESS IS 2 1 1 0 HEALY DRIVE, UH, DALLAS 7 5 2 2 8. 
          AND I AM A RESIDENT AFFECTED BY THE ZONING CHANGE. 
          I'M ALSO THE HEAD OF A COMMUNITY GROUP THAT FOR THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS HAS BEEN MEETING TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE ZONING CHANGE AND HOW IT COULD BENEFIT THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY THROUGH MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH JOANNA AND ROB AND JORGE WHO'S HERE, WE WERE LEFT WITH A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT REMAIN UNANSWERED. 
          UM, THERE ARE THREE MAJOR ISSUES WITH THIS PROJECT, DOWNSTREAM EROSION, VIABILITY, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, COMMUNITY EROSION. 
          SOMETHING THAT ROB JUST TOUCHED ON. 
          UH, THE PROPERTIES AT THE ENTRANCE OF A CREEK, UH, FREQUENTLY FLOODS AND ACTS AS A DETENTION POND. 
          DURING INCREASINGLY FREQUENT HEAVY RAINS, EVERY RESIDENT ALONG THE CREEK IS EXPERIENCING SIGNIFICANT EROSION. 
          AND THIS PROJECT WOULD ADD AN ADDITIONAL 50,000 GALLONS OF WATER PER STORM TO AN ALREADY TAXED CREEK SYSTEM. 
          IT'S ALSO THE STORM DRAIN. 
          WORSE YET, IT WOULD ELIMINATE A NATURAL DETENTION POND THAT PREVENTS LARGE VOLUMES OF WATER FROM FLOODING THE NATURAL CHANNEL. 
          JOIN HAS SEEN VIDEO OF THIS VIABILITY. 
          THE PROJECT PROPOSES TO ADD SEVEN TOWN HOMES AT A $550,000 PRICE POINT. 
          WE HAVE NOT SEEN A PLAN OR WHO WOULD DEVELOP THIS, AND THERE IS LITTLE TO NO INFO ON HOW THE SITE WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT. 
          IT IS UNLIKELY THAT BASED ON CITY REGULATIONS AND ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF COST AND EFFORT WOULD, I'M SORRY, IT IS LIKELY BASED ON CITY REGULATIONS THAT AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF COST AND EFFORT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PREVENT RUNOFF FROM ENTERING THE CREEK SYSTEM. 
          AS OF OUR OUR LAST MEETING, THIS COST HAD NOT BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE VIABILITY OF THIS PROJECT. 
          THE TOWN HOMES ARE ALSO SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN EXISTING HOMES THAT ARE CURRENTLY LANGUISHING ON THE MARKET. 
          I THINK THERE'S THREE ON MY STREET ALONE. 
          A TOWN HOME PROJECT ON OATS, NOT 100 YARDS AWAY HAS STALLED IN DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS EXACT REASON. 
          THE LAST MAJOR ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IS COMMUNITY. 
          UH, EVERY ONE OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT OF THE RESIDENTS THAT WE'RE INVOLVED IN THIS, INCLUDING, UH, SINGLE RESIDENT THAT STRONGLY AGREED WITH THE PROJECT, STATED THAT THE, UH, CURRENT ZONING OF R 7.5 IS PREFERRED TO TH THREE. 
          THEY SHARED THAT THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN POORLY MANAGED AND THEY WISHED SOMETHING COULD BE DONE WITH IT. 
          THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THIS PROJECT IS CONTESTED. 
          THE COMMUNITY VOTED ON THIS PROPOSAL UNDER THE ADVISEMENT OF VICKI MARTIN AT THE FERGUSON FERGUSON ROAD INITIATIVE. 
          SEVEN RESIDENTS VOTED WITH ONE BEING, 
          [03:30:01]
UH, WITH A VOTE OF ONE, MEANING THEY STRONGLY AGREE WITH IT. 
          A VOTE OF, I'M SORRY, A VOTE OF ONE, MEANING THEY STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH IT. 
          A VOTE OF FIVE BEING THEY STRONGLY AGREE WITH IT. 
          THE VOTE WAS UNSUCCESSFUL AT 2.8 OUT OF FIVE POINTS. 
          THREE WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR PROJECT APPROVAL. 
          MY REQUEST IS THIS, BEFORE MOVING FORWARD WITH A CHANGE, LET'S ASSESS THE REAL RISKS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. 
          YOUR PEN IS UP TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT. 
          LET'S COME UP WITH A PLAN TO MAKE IT BENEFIT. 
          AND AS ROB BALDWIN STATED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS, SIR TIME, THERE IS NO RUSH. 
          THANK YOU. 
          LET'S MAKE SURE WE GET THIS RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, MR. BALDWIN, TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          SO WE DID HAVE TWO, TWO GOOD MEETINGS. 
          AND THERE THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT FLOODWAY AND EROSION COMING OFF THIS PROPERTY. 
          UM, PART OF THIS PROPERTY, WE SHARE A CREEK WITH OUR NEIGHBORS, AND AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF IT, THAT PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S IN THE FLOODPLAIN WOULD GO INTO A FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT EASEMENT, WHICH WOULD BE THEN TRANSFERRED TO THE CITY IN CONTROL OF THAT. 
          SO THE CITY WOULD THEN BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING, UH, THE PORTION OF THE FLOODWAY THAT'S OUT IN THE EASEMENT. 
          AND ALSO THE, AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT, WE'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH FULL ENGINEERING, WHICH PAVING AND DRAINAGE AND WATER AND SEWER, WHICH WOULD HELP ANY STORM WATER RUNOFF CONTROLLING IT AND MAKING SURE WE DO NOT EXASPERATE, EXACERBATE ANY, UM, EXISTING ISSUES. 
          UM, AS YOU KNOW, WE CANNOT, UH, AS PART OF THE CITY'S FLOODPLAIN REGULATIONS, WE CANNOT INCREASE THE CONCENTRATION OR AMOUNT OF WATER COMING OFF THE PROPERTY IN THE AFTER SCENARIO THAT WE HAVE TODAY WHEN IT'S VACANT. 
          SO WE'D HAVE TO MAINTAIN, UH, EITHER RETAIN OR DETAIN THE WATER LEADING INTO THE, THE STORM, THE FLOODWAY IN ORDER TO, TO GET CITY APPROVAL. 
          NOW ALL THIS IS EXPENSIVE AND, UH, RIGHT NOW WE COULD PUT APPROXIMATELY FOUR HOUSES ON THE PROPERTY ON THE CURRENT ZONING, BUT THAT WOULD RESULT IN VERY EXPENSIVE HOMES IN AN AREA. 
          UH, AS CHRIS SAID, THAT, UM, IS HAVING SOME ISSUES OR CONCERNS SELLING HIGHER END HOMES. 
          UM, SO THE MORE HOMES YOU CAN GET ON THE PIECE OF PROPERTY, THE MORE YOU CAN SPREAD OUT THE, THE COST OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. 
          THAT'S WHY WE WENT FOR EIGHT HOMES. 
          BUT AS A, UM, A WAY TO TRY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS, WE AGREED TO DO SEVEN HOMES AND THOSE OTHER DEED RESTRICTIONS, UM, WE THINK IT'S A VIABLE PROJECT. 
          WE DO HAVE RESIDENTIAL ON THREE SIDES, BUT ON THE FOURTH SIDE IS A COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER. 
          UM, WE HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS. 
          I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. 
          THE OWNER'S ALSO HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          THANK YOU MR. BALDWIN. 
          MR. HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO. 
          AND I HAVE, UM, SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. 
          IF I HAVE A SECOND IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 25 DASH 0 0 0 1 6 4, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE AMENDED DEED RESTRICTIONS AS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AND AS BRIEFED. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR SECOND, YOUR QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? WELL, AND IT'S PROBABLY GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH. 
          UM, AND I BELIEVE MR. NAVAREZ MAY BE HERE, UM, OR ONLINE. 
          SO, UM, I, MR. BALDWIN COVERED GENERALLY HOW THE ENGINEERING WAS, IS REVIEWED. 
          UM, BUT COULD YOU SPEAK TO, I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME CORRESPONDENCE, UM, BECAUSE IT WAS A VERY, UM, ROBUST DISCUSSION WITH THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT THEY'RE EXPERIENCING WITH THE CREEK AND HOW THE CITY LOOKS AT THE CREEK. 
          I KNOW WE'VE HAD SOME OTHER CASES HERE RECENTLY AS WELL, BUT THERE ARE SETBACKS REQUIREMENTS, THERE'S ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS AND THERE ARE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. 
          UM, BUT COULD YOU JUST ON A HIGH LEVEL, UM, ADDRESS HOW WE MITIGATE NEW CONSTRUCTION ADJACENT TO CREEKS? YES, MA'AM. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          DAVID NAVAREZ, UH, TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ON BEHALF OF ENGINEERING ONE AND TWO. 
          UM, MR. BALDWIN EXPLAINED IT VERY WELL IN, UM, LAYMAN TERMS. UM, WHAT I WOULD ADD IS THAT DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTIES ONLY MAKES DRAINAGE BETTER. 
          UM, IF THERE IS ANY WATER DRAINING FROM THIS PROPERTY INTO THAT CREEK TODAY, UH, DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY AND GOING THROUGH THE ENGINEERING REVIEW PROCESS WILL ONLY IMPROVE OR MITIGATE IF THERE IS AN ISSUE, UH, DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY WOULD NOT EXACERBATE AN ISSUE. 
          AND IF THERE IS ONE, IT WOULD MITIGATE IT. 
          UM, MR. BALDWIN USE WORDS LIKE DETAINING OR, OR WE, WE DON'T KNOW. 
          I I, I DON'T HAVE A SET OF PLANS IN FRONT OF ME, SO I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFICS OF WHICH PATH IT WILL TAKE. 
          I JUST, 
          [03:35:01]
UH, BASED ON OUR MANUALS, I CAN JUST LET THE COMMISSION KNOW THAT DEVELOPMENT OF A PROPERTY ONLY, UM, EITHER MITIGATES OR, UM, OR, OR INDEFINITELY PREVENTS LOTTO LOT DRAINAGE OR INTO A CREEK. 
          AND SO, FOLLOW UP QUESTION. 
          THE ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS FOR, UM, OR IT IS STILL TH THREE, WHICH WOULD BE A 60% LOT COVERAGE, BUT THE APPLICANT HAS VOLUNTEERED A DEED RESTRICTION PUBLIC DEED RESTRICTION ENFORCED BY THE CITY FOR 45%. 
          SO HOW WOULD THAT COMPARE TO THE EXISTING R SEVEN FIVE, WHICH IS ALSO A 45%, UM, LOT COVERAGE. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S THE ENTIRE LOT. 
          SO THAT'S REALLY AN APPLES TO APPLES. 
          EVEN THOUGH THERE'S SEVEN UNITS, IT'S ALSO 45%. 
          IT IS. 
          MAY, MAY I ASK WHAT'S THE EXISTING ZONING? R SEVEN FIVE AND THE, THE, THE S IT'S AN SUP ESSENTIALLY. 
          SO THERE, IT'S, THERE IS NO, NO CHANGE FROM A DRAINAGE PERSPECTIVE. 
          WE, IT WOULD BE ANALYZED THE EXACT SAME WAY WE USE COEFFICIENTS AND THERE'D BE NO DIFFERENCE IN HOW IT'S PENALIZED, WHETHER IT'S AT THE A UP OR OR IT'S BUILT WITH 100. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THE SUP IS GOING AWAY 'CAUSE THAT WAS RELATED TO THE DAYCARE USE. 
          SO IT'S ONLY BASE ZONING WAS STILL R SEVEN FIVE AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO TH THREE WITH THE D RESTRICTIONS FOR THE 45% IN THE OTHER ITEMS. OKAY. 
          WELL, THE, THE CAP OF IN THE PERCENT WOULD HELP US JUSTIFY THAT THE, THE COEFFICIENTS BE APPLES TO APPLES. 
          NO, NO DIFFERENCE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          AND MS. MORRIS, MAY I ASK YOU A CLARIFICATION? THE APPLICANT HAS VOLUNTEERED A 1,350 SQUARE FOOT OPEN SPACE THAT IS INTENDED TO BOTH, UM, PROVIDE INCREASED PERMEABILITY, BUT ALSO TO PROVIDE A COMMUNITY GATHERING SPACE. 
          IS CONTIGUOUS OPEN SPACE THE CORRECT TERMINOLOGY TO USE THERE TO CAPTURE THAT INTENT? YES. 
          I REVIEWED, UH, THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS JUST YESTERDAY AND THEY'VE BEEN APPROVED BY MY OFFICE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, MR. MANZ, MAY I ASK YOU A QUESTION PLEASE? WELL, AND THE CHAIR'S GONNA ASK YOU IF YOU CAN COME DOWN. 
          YEAH, WE WANNA GET YOU ON THE MICROPHONE FOR THE RECORD. 
          THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY. 
          UM, I, UM,  WELL, AND I KNOW YEAH, WE THANK YOU. 
          SO WE CAN HEAR YOU. 
          UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE CONCERNS AND I HEARD THE COMMUNITY CONCERNS AS WELL REGARDING THE IMPACTS, BUT, UM, YOU'VE HEARD THE DISCUSSION ABOUT, UM, MAINTAINING THE 45%, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO WHAT IS ON THE GROUND TODAY MM-HMM . 
          IN THE ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE. 
          UM, YOU MENTIONED A, UM, NUMBER OF GALLONS. 
          I THINK YOU HAD CALCULATED THAT BASED ON THE 60, 50,000. 
          YEAH. 
          AND SOME OF THAT INFORMATION WAS NEWS TO ME JUST NOW. 
          SO THOSE CHANGES WERE NOT, I WASN'T PRIVY TO PRIOR TO JUST NOW, SO YEAH. 
          AND I, I WILL SAY, I, I SENT EVERYONE AN EMAIL THIS, UM, EARLIER TODAY JUST TO UPDATE YOU ON WHERE THINGS WERE AS THOSE WERE GETTING CIRCULATED. 
          SO I APOLOGIZE ON NOTES. 
          I DON'T THINK I WAS ON IT LATE NOTICE FOR YOU ALL. 
          SO, OKAY. 
          WELL, DOES THAT, UM, HELP MITIGATE SOME OF YOUR CONCERNS? I KNOW IT MAY NOT MOVE YOU TO A, I I WANNA SEE THIS HAPPEN, BUT DOES IT ADDRESS THE CURRENT CONCERNS THAT YOU HEARD? IT DOESN'T AS A COMMUNITY MEETING. 
          YEAH, IT DOESN'T, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS THAT WE COME UP WITH WHAT THE ENGINEERING PLANS WOULD BE. 
          HOW DOES THIS ACTUALLY AFFECT THE CREEK SYSTEM? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S A DETENTION POND AND YOU'VE SEEN VIDEO OF HOW MUCH WATER CAN COME DOWN THIS CREEK SYSTEM. 
          AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT CAN ALL BE RESOLVED WITH ENGINEERING, BUT THAT'S INCREDIBLY COSTLY. 
          LIKE POTENTIALLY A OVER A MILLION DOLLARS JUST ON THE SITE ITSELF AND THEN DOWNSTREAM, SO ALL OF THE RESIDENTS DOWNSTREAM, I MEAN, YOU CAN SEE WHAT WAS DONE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CREEK WITH GABBY AND WALLS AND A MASSIVE CONCRETE LIKE STORMS, UM, LIKE A CATCH SYSTEM IN THE CREEK ITSELF. 
          IT'S JUST COMPLETELY DESTROYED. 
          THE ECOSYSTEM WE'VE LOST. 
          I MEAN, THAT ENTIRE SIDE OF THE CREEK DOESN'T HAVE A SINGLE TREE ON IT ANYMORE, WHICH IS SAD. 
          YOU KNOW, LIKE MY DAUGHTER PLAYS IN THIS CREEK. 
          WE GET FOSSILS LIKE IT IS BEAUTIFUL AND THAT'S WHY ALL OF THE RESIDENTS AROUND IT ENJOY IT. 
          YOU KNOW, WE WANT THIS, IT IS PART OF THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND IF YOU GO AND YOU PUT THIS IN, YES, IT IS POSSIBLE TO REMEDIATE AT WHAT COST TO THE CITY TAXPAYERS AT WHAT COST TO THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ECOSYSTEM, WHY, YOU KNOW, LET'S WORK TOGETHER ON MAKING THIS SOMETHING THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE VIABLE AND WANTED. 
          IT IS NOT POPULAR. 
          AND YOU WERE THERE LIKE, YOU KNOW, THESE MEETINGS WERE CONTENTIOUS. 
          LIKE, LET'S COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT EVERYONE IS PROUD OF AND WANTS IN THIS COMMUNITY. 
          THERE'S NO GREEN SPACE. 
          LET'S, LIKE, 
          [03:40:01]
WHY DO WE HAVE TO DEVELOP EVERY SQUARE FOOT OF, OF THIS COMMUNITY? IT'S, THERE'S A LOT HERE. 
          SO, OKAY. 
          AND, AND THANK YOU. 
          UM, AND I HEARD YOU MENTION THE, UM, BALLOTING, IS IT CORRECT, UM, THAT WHEN THAT WAS DONE, I THINK WE HAD SEVEN FOLKS WHO WERE ABLE TO ATTEND THE COMMUNITY MEETING, AND I KNOW YOU ASKED YES. 
          AND A NUMBER THAT WEREN'T, BUT YES. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND I KNOW YOU HAD SEPARATE MEETING WITH, UM, NEIGHBORS AS WELL. 
          YES. 
          UM, BUT IT, IT WAS MIXED. 
          IT WAS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF ABSOLUTELY, YOU KNOW, YEAH. 
          AGAIN, SOME FOLKS VERY STRONGLY IN FAVOR, PROBABLY THE VAST MAJORITY KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE, AND THEN A COUPLE THAT WERE VERY STRONGLY OPPOSED. 
          AND THE MAJOR REASON THAT PEOPLE WERE FOR THIS WAS BECAUSE DURING COVID THERE WAS A HOMELESS ENCAMPMENT ON THAT PROPERTY. 
          SO THEY WERE UPSET THAT IT WAS POORLY MANAGED. 
          THE GARBAGE GETS STREWN ABOUT, AND IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY. 
          LET'S LOOK AT THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SOMETHING BEAUTIFUL FOR THIS COMMUNITY. 
          IT'S RIGHT BY BRIAN ADAMS. IT'S RIGHT BY HARRY STONE. 
          YOU KNOW, LIKE TRYING TO CROSS THE STREET OVER TO, TO HARRY STONE IS DIFFICULT. 
          LIKE, WHY? I MEAN, THERE'S JUST SO MANY THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE WITH IT. 
          AND THIS IS, THIS IS LIKE AN EXTREME. 
          SO WHAT, WHAT I'VE ASKED FROM THE BEGINNING WAS THAT WE COME TOGETHER ON A SOLUTION, LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT MAKES SENSE FOR THE COMMUNITY. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, MR. MR. UH, BECAUSE I WANNA MAKE SURE WE CLARIFY SOMETHING. 
          AND THIS IS CURRENTLY A BILLABLE SITE THAT MEAN CAN BE A BILLABLE SITE JUST AT RR SEVEN FIVE. 
          RIGHT? SO SOMETHING COULD BE BILLED THERE REGARDLESS AND, AND NO MATTER WHAT, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS A BILLABLE SITE, AND I UNDERSTAND WE NEED GREEN SPACE, UM, BUT BECAUSE IT'S A BILLABLE SITE, UM, SO YOU'RE TELLING US THAT THE MITIGATION THAT, THAT THIS WILL HELP MITIGATE THE WATER BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IT IS EXACTLY AS A RETENTION POND THAT IS NOT, THAT IS NOT WHAT THE PROPERTY OWNER WANTS, BUT MAYBE EXPLAIN IT TO US A LITTLE, A LITTLE BIT BETTER BEING SINCE THAT IT'S BILLABLE REGARDLESS. 
          AND HOW WOULD THE CITY, UM, THE SPACE THAT HE IS, THAT THEY'RE SAYING THAT THEY'RE GONNA TURN BACK OVER TO THE CITY, HOW WOULD THE CITY HELP MAINTAIN THAT? AND WHAT WE'VE SEEN, AND I KNOW KIND OF CONCERN IS WHAT WE'VE SAW RIGHT NOW IN DESOTO, UM, PROPERTY OWNERS BOUGHT PROPERTY AND RIGHT NOW UP UNDERNEATH THE BACK OF THEIR HOUSE IS HANGING OFF BY A THREAD. 
          SO HOW WOULD THAT, THE, THE PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT THEY'RE GOING TO TURN OVER TO THE CITY HELP WITH THE EROSION RO EROSION OF WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW, AND ALSO THE, THE BUILDING OF THE NEW HOMES HELP DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF WATER FLOW, UM, AS HE HAS SAID? YES, MA'AM. 
          I THINK, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF, UH, I, I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THE SITE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A SITE PLAN MM-HMM . 
          UM, YES, I, I UNDERSTAND THE, THE, THAT THERE, THERE'S EVIDENCE OF, OF WATER DRAINING, DRAINING WHEN, WHERE WE WOULD NOT WANT IT TO GO DOWN. 
          AND, AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THIS IS SPECIFICALLY PART OF THE 100 FLOODPLAIN, IT'S ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT FARTHER. 
          SO THIS MIGHT BE A A, A PRIVATE CREEK, UM, IN, IN LOOKING AT A A PLAN, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE WHICH WAY WATER'S DRAINING TODAY. 
          AND IF IT'S GOING DOWN A DOWN A CREEK, THAT CREEK SHOULD BE ABLE TO HANDLE THAT WATER. 
          AND IF IT ISN'T, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO MITIGATE THAT. 
          UM, YOU ALSO CALL IT A BUILDABLE SITE. 
          IS THAT, SO I WOULD ASSUME THAT THIS WILL BE PLATTED WILL NEED PLATTING DO, DO YOU, IT'S ZONED ALREADY R 0.75, SO THEY COULD BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT'S STILL, BUT, BUT THEY'RE BUILDING TOWN HOMES. 
          MM-HMM . 
          THIS WILL BE RE PLATTED. 
          UM, SO OKAY, THIS, THIS PROPERTY, UH, I'M NOT, I I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME, SO I DON'T KNOW FOR CERTAIN, BUT IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE SITE IS NOT AVAILABLE SITE AND IT WILL NEED TO GO THROUGH PLATTING. 
          YOU'LL SEE THIS A SET OF PLATS, UH, OF A, A PLAT. 
          UM, BEYOND THAT THEN WE WILL BEGIN WITH ENGINEERING REVIEW. 
          THE ENGINEERING REVIEW WILL DETERMINE WHICH WAY WATER'S DRAINING TODAY. 
          AND IF IT'S NOT DRAINING THE RIGHT WAY, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO MITIGATE THAT. 
          WHEN I SAY BUILDABLE SITE, IT'S BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY ALL, THEY COULD BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME RIGHT NOW ON THE SITE. 
          THEY, THEY'RE GONNA REPLAY, THEY CAN'T BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. 
          IT NEEDS TO BE A BUILDABLE SITE. 
          THAT, EXCUSE ME, MAYBE BACK UP TO ME, UH, TO STAB BUILDABLE SITE MEANS THAT THERE IS A, UM, AN ESTABLISHED, UM, SITE PLAN SURVEY OR, UH, APPLICABLE PLAT PREVIOUSLY 
          [03:45:01]
FILED WITH THE COUNTY AT, AT SOME POINT DECEMBER. 
          AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE. 
          I THINK THIS, ESPECIALLY IF THIS WILL BE BUILT WITH TOWN HOMES, THEN THIS SITE IS NOT A PLOTTED LOT. 
          NO, NO. 
          ALSO, I WAS UP, SO I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT RIGHT NOW YOU CURRENTLY CAN GO PUT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THIS SITE. 
          AND I KNOW THAT THE ZONING THAT AT SOME POINT IF THIS ZONING GOES THROUGH THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO REPL FOR YES MA'AM, FOR A TH THREE. 
          UM, BUT CURRENTLY THAT'S WHAT, SO IF I, IF I MAY THEN REPHRASE MY ANSWER, THIS PRO PROJECT MOVE, SHOULD IT MOVE FORWARD, UH, WITH AN APPROVED ZONING CHANGE, THEN THE NEXT STEP WILL BE PLATTING. 
          MM-HMM . 
          IN FACT, EXCUSE ME. 
          THE NEXT STEP IN THIS PROPERTY WILL BE PLATTING, REGARDLESS OF WHICH WAY IT MOVES FORWARD, REGARDLESS OF THE ZONING CHANGE OR NOT. 
          UH, ONCE IT IS PLATTED, THEN A CONDITION OF THE PLAT WILL BE ENGINEERED AND REVIEW. 
          AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHY, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHICH WAY WATER'S DRAINING TODAY. 
          IT COULD BE DRAINING INTO THE, I MEAN, FROM, FROM, FROM AN AERIAL. 
          YOU CAN SEE THE WATER'S GOING TO THE CREEK, BUT IT COULD BE DRAINING TO SOMEONE ELSE'S HOUSE. 
          WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND THAT WATER IS NOT SUPPOSED TO GO THAT WAY AND WE MITIGATE THAT. 
          DO YOU ALL TAKE ANY TYPE OF NOTATIONS OR, OR IF THERE IS SOME CONCERNS RAISED DOING A PUBLIC HEARING AND THE NEIGHBORS ARE SAYING, HEY, THIS IS WHAT'S GOING ON BECAUSE NECESSARILY YOU ALL MIGHT NOT SEE IT, I NOT HAVE BEEN OUT TO IT BECAUSE IT HAS NOT HIT THE RADAR, THEN THIS BECOMES A, UH, AND, AND THEY MOVE INTO THAT ENGINEERING, GO MOVE INTO THAT, UH, UH, THAT NEXT PHASE. 
          DO YOU, IS THERE ANY RECORD WHERE YOU ALL CAN MAKE IN CONSIDERATION? BECAUSE THINGS DO, DO GO THROUGH A LOOP AND QUITE OFTEN WHEN WE ARE HEARING CASES, I HAD CASES IN DISTRICT SEVEN AND UM, THEY SAY, HEY, WHEN THEY BUILD MY, WE STARTED, WE STARTED FLOODING, WE COULDN'T GET ANYONE IN. 
          AND THE ONLY TIME THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO GET ON THE RECORD IS DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SAYING, THIS IS WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON. 
          AND HOW ARE YOU ALL TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THAT IF THOSE ARE TRUE CONCERNS, HOW WOULD THAT MAKE SURE THAT A, A TWO YEARS FROM NOW'S BUILT AND HE'S, THEY'VE ALREADY TOLD YOU THAT, AND THEN NOW THEY'RE, THEY'RE RUNNING INTO FURTHER FLOODING OR NEIGHBORHOODS OR HOWEVER, IS THERE A NOTATION THAT YOU ALL TAKE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING TODAY? YES. 
          UM, I CAN'T, I CAN'T ARTICULATE MYSELF PROPERLY. 
          WHEN I SAY WE WORK AT THE BENEFIT OF THE CITIZENS, OUR REVIEW IS ON THEIR BEHALF. 
          WHAT WE DO IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. 
          NOW, OBVIOUSLY THERE IS NOT A CLEAN LINE OF COMMUNICATION, BUT I CAN OFFER MY POINT OF MYSELF AS A POINT OF CONTACT FOR THEM. 
          UH, THE MOMENT THEY SEE A PLAT MOVING FORWARD, UM, THEY CAN CONTACT OUR OFFICE AND WE CAN KEEP THEM A PRIOR OF, UH, THE STATUS OF THE REVIEW. 
          UM, OBVIOUSLY WE CAN'T SHARE PRIVATE PLANS, BUT WE CAN WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO, AND LET THEM KNOW YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE ASKING THIS QUESTIONS AND EITHER I PROVIDE THEM AN ANSWER OR YOU PROVIDE THEM AN ANSWER. 
          SO, UH, WE, WE DO IT ALL THE TIME. 
          WE, WE WE'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO BE POINT OF CONTACT AND, AND I CAN DO THAT RIGHT NOW AND PROVIDE THEM OUR, UM, CONTACT INFORMATION AND, AND THEN SEE HOW WE CAN HELP THEM, UH, ONE, UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS AND THEN ALSO, TWO, KEEP THEM INFORMED THROUGHOUT THE REVIEW PROCESS. 
          UM, WE DON'T LIVE THERE, THERE, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT OUR REVIEW, UH, WE, WE RELY ON THE ENGINEER OF RECORD TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE ITEMS GET. 
          THANK YOU, MADAM. 
          ALRIGHT, NEXT, UH, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. 
          WELL, IT'S, I THINK WE, WE COVER THIS GROUND, THIS TOPIC VIRTUALLY EVERY MEETING, BUT, UH, ALSO I'LL BE VERY BRIEF. 
          UM, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AND I DON'T SUPPORT DENYING A CASE ON ENGINEERING GROUNDS FOR WHICH IS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS BODY TO MAKE JUDGMENTS ON AND BEYOND OUR EXPERTISE. 
          UM, I, UM, WANT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE COST OF THE HOMES. 
          I THINK MR. BALDWIN MADE A, MADE A, A GREAT POINT. 
          IF WE BUILD BY RIGHT, THE HOMES WILL BE LARGER AND EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE ONES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED UNDER THIS APPLICATION. 
          UM, AND THEN, UM, AND I DON'T THINK WE, WE DON'T VOTE ON HOW EXPENSIVE A PROJECT IS, UH, AT THIS BODY. 
          WE, WE VOTE ON LAND USE AND THEN, UM, ON, UH, THE TOPIC OF, UH, THE TYPES OF HOMES AND THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY, UH, WHAT THIS PROJECT DOES WITH THIS, THIS PROJECT TYPE IS IT PROVIDES A DIVERSITY OF HOUSING TYPES THAT OUR CITY DESPERATELY NEEDS. 
          UM, I UNDERSTAND THE, UH, UH, THE FEELING THAT, WELL, WE WANT MORE OF WHAT WE'VE GOT, BUT THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT WHAT PEOPLE WANT TODAY. 
          THEY WANT CHOICES AND THEY WANT DIVERSITY. 
          AND, AND AS I'VE POINTED OUT MANY TIMES, I, MY DISTRICT HAS QUITE A BIT OF THIS TYPE OF PRODUCT BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN A MUCH NEEDED, UM, ADDITION TO OUR COMMUNITY. 
          I THINK IT'S MADE OUR COMMUNITY STRONGER. 
          SO, UM, AGAIN, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THIS MOTION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? I JUST WANTED TO MAKE VERY BRIEF, UM, FOLLOW UP 
          [03:50:01]
COMMENTS. 
          I RECOGNIZE MR. MANSON'S CONCERNS AND THOSE SHARED BY THE COMMUNITY, BUT I DID HEAR A MIX OF COMMENTS AND, UM, WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT AND WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT'S TEAM, IT WAS MY INTENT TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS. 
          I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS BODY IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF THE ENGINEERING REVIEW. 
          UM, IT IS SOMETHING THAT COMES UP QUITE FREQUENTLY AND I'VE SPENT, UM, SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF TIME WORKING WITH STAFF UNDERSTANDING WHAT CITY PROJECTS ARE UNDERWAY, WHAT OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO ADDRESS, THERE'S DEBRIS THAT'S COLLECTING IN THE CREEK, HOW TO HELP SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY ON ADDRESSING THOSE CONSIDERATIONS. 
          AND I WILL CONTINUE TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT. 
          BUT I THINK REDUCING THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT IS PROPOSED, EMBEDDING OPEN SPACE AS A PART OF THIS IS RESPONDING DIRECTLY TO WHAT I HEARD AS THE PREFERRED MODEL FOR ANOTHER RECENT DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA. 
          UM, I KNOW THERE WILL BE ONGOING DIALOGUE WITH THIS AND I WILL CONTINUE TO BE PARTICIPATING IN THOSE CONVERSATIONS. 
          SO THANK YOU TO MY COMMISSIONERS FOR THE DISCUSSION. 
          ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I, I, I'LL JUST BRIEFLY JUMP IN AS WELL. 
          I'VE BEEN SITTING ON THIS SIDE OF THE HORSESHOE FOR OVER SIX, SIX YEARS NOW, AND IT DOES SEEM LIKE, YOU KNOW, EVERY QUARTER TO EVERY OTHER MONTH WE HAVE ONE OF THESE CASES WHERE THERE ARE ENGINEERING CONCERNS AND THERE ARE JUST A COUPLE CONSIDERATIONS THAT ALWAYS COME TO MY MIND IS IT'S NOT A QUESTION OF ALLOWING THE ZONING CHANGE VERSUS NOT ALLOWING DEVELOPMENT TO GO FORWARD ON THE PROPERTY. 
          THIS IS ALLOWED TO BE DEVELOPED R SEVEN FIVE AND THERE COULD BE FOUR HOUSES DEVELOPED, RIGHT? RIGHT. 
          YOU KNOW, ON THIS PROPERTY RIGHT NOW, WHICH WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT AS WELL IN TERMS OF FLOODING AND RUNOFF REGARDLESS, AND REGARDLESS OF WHICH WAY, UM, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT GOES ON THE SITE, ULTIMATELY IT DOES COME DOWN TO AN ENGINEERING QUESTION, WHICH IS BEYOND THIS BODY'S PURVIEW AND WILL BE TAKEN UP BY THE CITY AT AN APPROPRIATE TIME. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT AT POINTS SOMETIMES THE ENGINEERING COMES BACK AND IT TURNS OUT THAT THE COST OF, OF MITIGATION JUST MEANS THE PROJECT IS NOT FE FEASIBLE. 
          BUT A PROJECT HAS TO GO THROUGH THE ENGINEERING PROCESS TO FIGURE OUT, UM, WHETHER, YOU KNOW, THE STORM STORMWATER RUNOFF ISSUES CAN BE ADDRESSED IN AN ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE MANNER OR NOT. 
          BUT WE AREN'T ENGINEERS SITTING RIGHT HERE AND THAT ULTIMATELY WILL HAPPEN DURING THE PERMITTING PROCESS. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE THAT OUR, OUR CITIES, YOU KNOW, ENGINEERS WILL AND THE ENGINEERS OF RECORDS ON THIS PROJECT WILL, YOU KNOW, DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER IT WORKS OR NOT FROM AN IN, FROM A RUNOFF PERSPECTIVE. 
          SO I AM HAPPY TO SUPPORT COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S MOTION. 
          ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER TO FOLLOW THIS THEFT COMMISSIONER OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AMENDED DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          LET'S TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK AND BE BACK AT 2:24 PM OKAY. 
          IT IS 2:28 PM AND THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION IS BACK ON THE RECORD. 
          ITEM NUMBER 
          [17. 26-1571A An application for 1) a new subdistrict for O-2 Office Subdistrict uses and 2) the termination of Deed Restrictions Z79-189, on property zoned O-2 Subdistrict within Planned Development 193 Oak Lawn Special Purpose District, on property bounded by Allen Street, Cole Avenue, and Sneed Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a development plan and staff’s recommended conditions. Applicant: Matt Segrest - AM Cole, LP / Alamo Manhattan, LLC. Representative: Suzan Kedron, Jill Smoorenburg / Jackson Walker, LLP. Planner: Lori Levy, AICP Council District: 14 Z-26-000024]
17. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          COMMISSIONERS. 
          ITEM 17 2 6 15 71 A CASE Z 2 6 24 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SUBDISTRICT FOR O2 OFFICE SUBDISTRICT USES AND THE TERMINATION OF DEED RESTRICTIONS Z SEVEN NINE DASH 8 180 9 ON PROPERTY ZONED O2 SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. 
          1 93 OAK LAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT. 
          IT'S LOCATED ON PROPERTY BOUNDED BY ALLEN STREET, COLE AVENUE, AND SNEAD STREET STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED COMMISSION CONDITIONS, EXCUSE ME, AS BRIEFED. 
          THANK YOU MS. LEVY. 
          MS. KEDRON, GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION. 
          SUZANNE KEDRON, 2323 ROSS AVENUE. 
          I'M HERE TODAY WITH ALAMO MANHATTAN, WADE JOHNS AND MATT EGRET. 
          UH, YOU GUYS PROBABLY KNOW THEM FROM A COUPLE OF PROJECTS THEY HAVE IN UPTOWN ALREADY, MONACO AND THE UPTOWN MARRIOTT. 
          TODAY WE'RE HERE SEEKING APPROVAL OF REMOVAL OF SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS AND CONDITIONS, UH, FOR A PD SUBDISTRICT. 
          THERE'S THREE POINTS THAT I JUST WOULD LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO. 
          WE'RE SUPPORTIVE OF PARKING OF PD 1 93 WITH A COUPLE OF EXCEPTIONS, ONE FOR HOTEL, ONE FOR RESTAURANT, AND ON THE SIDEWALKS WE ARE SEEKING FIVE 
          [03:55:01]
FOOT SIDEWALKS AND THAT'S TO PROTECT SOME VERY MATURE TREES THAT ARE OUT THERE. 
          AND THE HABITAT GARDENS WE'RE SUPPORTIVE OF THE, NOT ONLY THE LANDSCAPING, BUT THE REQUISITE SIGNAGE AS WELL. 
          AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. 
          WE ALSO HAVE A SUPPORTER OUT HERE TO SPEAK. 
          OKAY, NEXT SPEAKER. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          I'M PHIL PERRY. 
          36 10 NORTH VERSAILLES HERE FOR THE OAK LAWN COMMITTEE. 
          AND THIS PROJECT WAS PRESENTED TO US ON APRIL 8TH OF THIS YEAR. 
          AND AS IT WAS PRESENTED AT THIS, AT THAT POINT, THERE WAS A UNANIMOUS VOTE TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT BY OAK LAWN COMMITTEE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF Z 2 6 0 0 0 0 2 4. 
          I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THIS SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES IN SECTION 1 0 9 C TWO SHOULD READ RESTAURANT WITHOUT DRIVE IN OR DRIVE THROUGH SERVICE ONE SPACE FOR EACH 250 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA FOR THE FIRST 3000 SQUARE FEET. 
          UH, SEMI CONSULT PART ONE FOR FLOOR AREA GREATER THAN 3000 SQUARE FEET. 
          AND THEN DISREGARDING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING PARKING. 
          AND THEN SECTION ONE 11, ADD IN SUBSECTION BA SECTION THREE, HABITAT GARDEN SIGNAGE, A UNIFIED SIGNAGE PROGRAM IDENTIFYING HABITAT GARDENS WITH REFERENCE TO THE CITY OF DALLAS COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN. 
          CCAP MAY BE PROVIDED IN PLANTING AREAS WITH A MINIMUM OF ONE SIDE PER STREET FRONTAGE IN SUBSECTION 12. 
          SIGNS SHOULD SAY EXCEPT AS PROVIDED HEREIN, SIGNS MUST COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF FOR BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICTS IN ARTICLE SEVEN. 
          AND THEN IN SUBSECTION 13, DESIGN STANDARDS REJECT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. 
          OKAY, THAT'S ALL THE CHANGES. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? UM, YEAH, I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS. 
          I THINK THAT THE, UM, TEAM HAS DONE A GREAT JOB WITH INCORPORATING THE PROJECT INTO THE EXISTING SURROUNDINGS. 
          I THINK THAT THIS IS A USE THAT THIS COMMUNITY, UM, NEEDS AND WILL BE WELL USED. 
          AND I'M ALSO, I ALSO WANNA POINT OUT THAT IT IS GOING TO INCORPORATE A TROLLEY STOP, WHICH WE HAVE SEEN ON SOME OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH RECENTLY. 
          IT'S PART OF OUR EFFORTS TO, UM, AS WE ARE REDEVELOPING SITES ALONG THE MCKINNEY AVENUE CORRIDOR TO INCORPORATE SHELTERED TROLLEY STOPS. 
          AND SO I WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR PARTICIPATING IN THAT. 
          I THINK THAT THAT'LL HELP, UM, PROMOTE PUBLIC TRANSIT IN AN AREA THAT DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF THAT. 
          AND SO I'M EXCITED TO SEE WHAT THAT'LL LOOK LIKE WHEN WE'RE DONE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          I DO HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION ON YOUR MOTION. 
          YES. 
          ON ONE 12 YOU SAID ACCEPT AS PROVIDED HEREIN SIGNS HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS FOR BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICTS. 
          WHAT'S THE ACCEPT, WHAT'S THE EXCEPTION THAT, THAT WE'RE MAKING IN THE, THE, UM, ABILITY FOR THEM TO INCLUDE SIGNAGE FOR THE HABITAT GARDENS IF THEY SO DESIRE. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE. 
          WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UM, TO, UM, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING FOLLOWS STATUTE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR SUBDIVISION CONSENT 
          [SUBDIVISION DOCKET - Consent Items]
DOCKET, WHICH CONSISTS OF ITEMS 18 THROUGH 25 AND I SEE THAT THERE ARE THE APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVES ARE HERE TO SPEAK OR 
          [04:00:01]
SIGNED UP ONLINE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 24. 
          THEY JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS IF WE HAVE THEM. 
          WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRS AND GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. 
          UH, WE HAVE EIGHT ITEMS. CONSENT ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER 18, ITEM NUMBER 19, ITEM NUMBER 20, ITEM NUMBER 21, ITEM NUMBER 22. 
          ITEM NUMBER 23, ITEM NUMBER 24. 
          AND ITEM NUMBER 25. 
          ALL CASES HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR A HEARING AT THIS TIME. 
          AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION. 
          PLEASE STATE THE DOCKET AND ARREST AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU MS. RETA. 
          UM, DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE ITEMS ON OUR SUBDIVISION CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTING OF ITEMS 18 THROUGH 25? GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNSEL. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. 
          UH, I JUST WANTED TO READ OUR EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR THE PROPOSED. 
          CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE? SURE. 
          MARK GRAM, UH, THE ADDRESS IS 9,800 ELAM. 
          GO AHEAD. 
          OKAY. 
          THE ELAM PROJECT IS A NATURE INTEGRATED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY PLAN FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE BALD SPRING AREA, UM, WITH INTEGRATOR DFW METROPLEX, UH, ZONED R SEVEN 7.5. 
          THE PROJECT REPRESENTS A DISTINCTIVE VISION AND THOUGHTFULLY DESIGNED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY THAT COMBINES MODERN BUILDING SCIENCE, SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGY, AND, UH, ECOLOGICAL STEWARDSHIP. 
          EACH HOME IN THE COMMUNITY WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH, UH, TO LEED GREEN BILL STANDARDS AND WILL FEATURE ADVANCED SPECIFICATIONS INCLUDING HOME AUTOMATION, UM, WHOLE HOUSE WATER FILTRATION, DUAL ENERGY SYSTEMS WITH THE GAS AND ELECTRICITY, UH, EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE FOR EACH, UM, LOCATION. 
          UH, CLOSED CELL FOAM INSULATION FOR SUPERIOR ENTER, UH, ENERGY PERFORMANCE, THE COMMUNITY DESIGN, UH, PROPRIE PRIORITIZES, UH, ECOLOGICAL INTEGRATION AND RESIDENT QUALITY OF LIFE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE ENVIRONMENT. 
          THAT WILL INCLUDE, UH, DOG PARKS COMMUNITY CENTER. 
          UM, WE HAVE NATIVE FRUIT TREES PLANTING THROUGHOUT SOME OF THE AREAS. 
          AND WE ALSO ARE A MIGRATORY BIRTH CORRIDOR FOR THE ARBORETUM AND WE PLAN ON PARTNERING WITH THEM MOVING FORWARD IN THE FUTURE FOR STUDIES AND FIELD TRIPS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. 
          THANK YOU SIR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          YOU'RE HERE ON ITEM NUMBER 24, RIGHT? YES, SIR. 
          OKAY. 
          ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE ITEMS IN OUR CONSENT AGENDA? OKAY. 
          NO FURTHER SPEAKERS. 
          WE'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER SIMS FOR A MOTION. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          IN THE MATTER OF ITEMS NUMBER 18 THROUGH 25 ON THE SUBDIVISION CONSENT DOCKET, I MOVE TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SIMS FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER SERATO FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SAY NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 26. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS A CONFLICT AND WE'LL GIVE HER A SECOND TO STEP OUT. 
          ALL RIGHT, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. 
          [26. 26-1580A An application to replat a 0.275-acre (12,000-square foot) tract of land containing all Common Area A in City Block 28/2280 to create three 0.092-acre (4,000-square foot) lots, on property located on Knight Street, northeast of Harry Hines Boulevard. Applicant/Owner: Kavyan Corporation Surveyor: Bowman Consulting Group, LTD Application Filed: April 8, 2026 Zoning: PD 193 (TH-3) Staff Recommendation: Denial. Planner: Sharmila Shrestha Council District: 2 PLAT-26-000068]
ITEM NUMBER 26 PLA 26 DASH 0 0 68. 
          IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT A 0.275 ACRE THAT IS 12,000 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL COMMON AREA A IN CITY BLOCK 28 OVER 2280 TO CREATE THREE 0.093 0.092 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON NINTH STREET NORTHEAST OF HARRY HANS BOULEVARD. 
          32 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON MARCH 23RD, 2026. 
          AND WE HAVE RECEIVED TWO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND 13 REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL, HOWEVER, IF THE PLAT IS APPROVED, IT'LL BE SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE 
          [04:05:01]
DOCKET AND RECOMMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU MS. RETA. 
          MR. KINGSTON. 
          OH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          UH, HELLO FRIENDS. 
          PHILLIP KINGSTON 5 9 0 1 PALO PINTO. 
          UM, THE, UH, THIS IS A REFILING OF THIS, UH, PLAT APPLICATION. 
          THERE WAS A CONCERN THE LAST TIME YOU ALL HEARD IT, ABOUT WHETHER THE ORIGINAL OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT JUST TO THE NORTHEAST OF THIS HAD BEEN MET. 
          UM, AND SO WE HAD OUR ENGINEER GO MEASURE, UH, DO THE ANALYSIS AND IT TURNS OUT THAT THEY WERE BUILT EXACTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAT, WHICH REQUIRES 60% OPEN SPACE. 
          UM, THE ISSUE HERE, I THINK IS THAT THERE'S A MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT OPEN SPACE MEANS. 
          THIS IS NOT OPEN SPACE AS PLANNERS MIGHT REQUIRE FOR A, UH, UH, COMMON AREA USAGE. 
          UM, THIS IS A TOWNHOUSE OPEN SPACE, WHICH MEANS YOU DON'T COUNT ANYTHING THAT ISN'T ACTUALLY COVERED BY, UH, STRUCTURES. 
          SO THEY'RE RIGHT AT THE 60%, UM, MEANING THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO REQUIREMENT THAT THE, UH, REMAINING LOT THAT WAS SOLD OFF. 
          UM, IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE HOA ONCE IT WAS TAKEN OVER BY THE OWNERS OF THOSE LOTS, NO LONGER DESIRED TO PAY THE ASSESSMENT THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DEVELOP THE OPEN SPACE. 
          UM, AND SO WE'RE PROPOSING THREE SINGLE FAMILY, UH, TOWNHOUSES ON THREE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. 
          UM, IT'S AN INTEREST, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF AN INTERESTING BACKGROUND. 
          THE, THIS LOT IS ONE OF THE TOXIC ASSETS THAT I VOTED TO SELL OFF WHEN I WAS SERVING ON THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION, UH, BOARD. 
          THE POLICE AND FIRE PENSION HEADQUARTERS IS IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH FROM THERE ON HARRY HINES. 
          UM, AND THIS WAS PART OF TRYING TO GET RID OF SOME OF THE  BAD DECISIONS THAT WE'D MADE IN REAL ESTATE, UH, LONG BEFORE I GOT THERE. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT. 
          UM, SO WHAT WE WOULD HOPE IS THAT, UH, HAVING MET THE REQUIREMENTS FROM THE PREVIOUS PLAT, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, STAFF HAS FOUND THAT THE PROPOSED 4,000 SQUARE FOOT RECTANGULAR LOTS ARE, UH, CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND PART OF THAT IS BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONSISTENCY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD PARTICULARLY. 
          AND THAT'S GOOD. 
          IT HAS CREATED A VARIETY OF BUILDING FORMS AND IT MAKES THE NEIGHBORHOOD FRANKLY MORE ATTRACTIVE, I THINK. 
          UM, BUT THESE WILL BE THREE PRETTY DECENTLY PRICED TOWNHOUSES. 
          THE AREA, AS YOU MAY KNOW, HAS BECOME INCREDIBLY POPULAR FOR WORKERS IN THE MEDICAL DISTRICT, UM, BOTH DOCTORS AND O OTHER KINDS OF MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS. 
          UH, SO WE THINK THESE WILL BE IN HIGH DEMAND AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT. 
          HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT ON THIS ITEM, SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION. 
          HI, MY NAME IS STEVE ROLAND AND I RESIDE AT A HOME NEXT DOOR TO THE SITE IN CONSIDERATION AT, UH, 41 51 MESON RIDGE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 9. 
          I'M ALSO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SKYLINE VISTA, HOA AND I'M IN, I'M HERE IN OPPOSITION OF THE REPL ATTEMPT AS I WAS ALSO HERE EARLIER THIS YEAR WITH DOZENS OF PEOPLE ON JANUARY THE EIGHTH WITH THE SAME REPL EFFORT, WHICH WAS TRIED AND, AND DENIED. 
          NOTHING HAS CHANGED. 
          IT'S, UM, STARTING TO FEEL LIKE GROUNDHOG DAY AS THIS OPEN SPACE IS PROTECTED BY, UM, SECTION, UH, 51 P DASH 1 93, 1 22 0.4 AS PART OF THE ZONING CODE. 
          AND THIS AT LEAST THE THIRD ATTEMPT THAT I KNOW OF TO PLOT THIS SITE, INCLUDING WHEN THE PROJECT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED, WHEN THE DEVELOPER TRIED TO SHOEHORN 34 HOMES ONTO THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE CITY ADHERED TO THE MAXIMUM LOCK COVERAGE PROVISION, THUS ENDING UP WITH THE 31 HOMES THERE TODAY. 
          TOUCHING BRIEFLY ON REPRESENTATIONS MADE TO US AS HOMEOWNERS, I WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY HAD I NOT BEEN TOLD THE LAND IN QUESTION WAS DEED RESTRICTED AGAINST FURTHER DEVELOPMENT AND WOULD REMAIN OPEN, UH, GREEN SPACE IN PERPETUITY ON THE DALLAS TAX RULE THAT IS SHOWN AS OPEN SPACE AND VALUED AS SUCH BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT IS AND SHOULD REMAIN. 
          UM, SO IT SEEMS LIKE WE KEEP HAVING TO OPPOSE THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND WHAT IT WAS EXPRESSLY CREATED AS OPEN SPACE AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO PLEASE CONTINUE TO DECISIVELY OPPOSE THIS REPLANT. 
          UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT THAT, 
          [04:10:01]
THAT WAS REJECTED. 
          IT WAS NEVER BROUGHT BY, BROUGHT IN FRONT OF THE HOMEOWNERS. 
          SO THAT IS AN UNTRUTH THAT I, 'CAUSE I LIVED THERE AND I WOULD'VE BEEN NOTIFIED. 
          SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK AND, UH, REALLY APPRECIATE THE TIME. 
          ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? HELLO, ANGELA MEDRANO, 2331 DOUGLAS AVENUE. 
          UM, 7 5 2 1 9. 
          LIVE ON THE STREET OVER, UM, BUT OWN SOME HOUSES ON THE, UM, ON THE UNDEVELOPED SIDE. 
          UM, WE WERE HERE AS WELL, UM, A COUPLE MONTHS AGO AND DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT KEEPS COMING UP. 
          I MEAN, HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU GET TO RETRY TO REPL SOMETHING WHEN IT'S BEEN TOLD NO? UM, WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU SEND OUT NOTICES TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS IF YOU'RE NOT GONNA TAKE OUR INPUT INTO CONSIDERATION. 
          WE KEEP BEING TOLD ABOUT RELAS THAT Y'ALL JUST CHECK A LITTLE FEW BOXES OFF AND THEN YOU HAVE TO SAY YES. 
          SO STOP SENDING OUT THE NOTICES OR SOMETHING. 
          I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHY WE HAVE TO KEEP DOING IT AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN. 
          UM, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THIS, THAT THOSE RESIDENTS DIDN'T WANT THE LAND AND SO THE DEVELOPER SOLD IT OFF. 
          I MEAN, HOW WHEN AN AGREEMENT IS MADE THAT SOMETHING IS TO BE OPEN SPACE AND THAT THOSE WERE 31 HOUSES, NOT 34, AND THAT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE OPEN, WHEN THAT AGREEMENT IS MADE LIKE A YEAR LATER, IT'S OKAY, OR TWO YEARS LATER YOU CAN JUST NOT HAVE THE AGREEMENT ANYMORE. 
          I MEAN, IT'S JUST, IT, IT SEEMS RIDICULOUS AT THIS POINT. 
          AND, UH, WE ARE AGAINST THAT BECAUSE IT NEEDS TO REMAIN COMMON SPACE AND, UM, WHEN THEY RE PLATTED THAT AREA AND PUT THE SIDES OF THE HOUSES ON THE STREET, NOW WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO THE FRONTS OF THE HOUSES ON THE STREET. 
          SO NOW WE HAVE EVEN MORE OF A HODGEPODGE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          UM, WE'RE AGAINST IT. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 
          ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, MR. KINGSTON, TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL IF YOU'D LIKE IT. 
          UM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR. 
          UM, I, I TALKED TO THE MEDRANOS A LITTLE BIT. 
          I DO NOT LOVE BEING ON THE OTHER SIDE FROM THE MEDRANOS. 
          UH, HAVING DONE IT A FEW TIMES, IT'S NEVER VERY MUCH FUN. 
          UM, I, IF THERE WERE REPRESENTATIONS MADE, I APOLOGIZE. 
          I WASN'T THERE FOR THE ORIGINAL CASE. 
          UM, IT, IT, AS FAR AS I KNOW, IT WAS HANDLED BY ADAM MEDRANO. 
          UM, AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY RECORD OF DEED RESTRICTIONS, PLAT REQUIREMENTS OR OTHER, I CAN'T, I DON'T HAVE ANY WRITTEN RECORD OF THAT. 
          NOW IF IT OCCURRED, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT, THAT PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH WITH REGARD TO THEIR, UH, INTERPERSONAL TRUST, BUT I, I JUST DON'T WHAT, FOR WHATEVER REASON THIS NEVER GOT WRITTEN DOWN. 
          ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, YOUR MOTION. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          IN THE MATTER OF PLAT DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 6 8, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL WITH THE FINDING THAT THE PLAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH, UH, 51 P 1 93, UH, SECTION 1 22 A FOUR. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER WHEELER FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? I, I HAVE QUESTIONS UNLESS SOMEONE ELSE, MR. COX? WE'VE GOT A SECOND FOR COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          UM, UNLESS ANYONE WANTS TO JUMP IN, I'M READY TO GO WITH QUESTIONS. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I'LL START WITH MS. SHIRE. 
          I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND, IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE A BIT OF A MATH PROBLEM HERE. 
          LET ME, LET ME JUST PREFACE MY, MY QUESTION WITH SAYING I HEAR ABOUT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS. 
          I HEAR ABOUT AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN SOMEONE AND SOMEONE ELSE. 
          IN MY VIEW, AND I'M SURE THAT, I IMAGINE THE CITY ATTORNEY WILL CONFIRM THAT OUR JOB HERE AS CITY PLANNING COMMISSIONERS IS NOT TO CONSIDER PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS OR PRIVATE, UM, AGREEMENTS BETWEEN PRIVATE PARTIES. 
          IT'S ULTIMATELY TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE REQUIREMENTS OF CITY CODE AND STATE LAW ARE MET ON, UM, THIS 
          [04:15:01]
RELA APPLICATION. 
          SO NOT TO SAY THAT THERE ISN'T SOME OTHER ISSUES TO BE SORTED OUT OUTSIDE OF THIS FORUM, BUT WE ARE NOT THE, UM, WE ARE NOT, NOT THE BODY TO RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES. 
          THANK YOU FOR FINDING THE WORD FOR ME. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. 
          SO 51 P 1 93 1 22 SAYS IN THE TH SUBDISTRICT, 80% OF AN INDIVIDUAL LOT MAY BE COVERED BY STRUCTURES IF THE COVERAGE FOR THE TOTAL PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED 60% AND AT LEAST 40% IS RESERVED FOR OPEN SPACE. 
          UM, SO IT'S A BIT OF A MATH PROBLEM. 
          I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE TOTAL PROJECT HERE? IS IT JUST THESE, THIS PROPERTY THAT'S SUBJECT TO BEING REPLANTED IS SOMETHING LARGER? SO BASICALLY THIS, THIS COMMON ARRAY IS TIED TO THE PREVIOUS ZERO ACCESS DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS S 1 67 DASH 1 1 9 R ONE. 
          IF YOU LOOK AT, UH, APPLICANT'S, UM, PRO SLIDES, UH, THERE WAS TWO PORTIONS ZONE, UH, BUT THE COMMON AREA ONLY CONTAINS THE, UH, EAST, UH, THAT WOULD BE LIKE THE WEST SIDE, WHICH IS TO CREATE, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THERE. 
          SO BASICALLY THE, UH, THE SLIDE HERE, THE APPLICANT HAD IT, IT, IT, IT IS INCLUDING S 1 67 DASH ONE 19 R ONE AND S 1 67 DASH ONE ONE R UH, 1 1 8 R ONE. 
          SO IT WAS TWO PLA. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, SO I, I'VE HEARD REFERENCE TO A 31 LOT SUBDIVISION BEFORE. 
          IS THAT THOSE TWO PREVIOUS PLATS? YES. 
          BUT THE COMMON AREA IS ONLY TIED TO THAT 16 LOTS, NOT THE 31, NOT, NOT THE 16 LOTS. 
          OKAY. 
          ONLY TO THE 16 LOTS, WHICH IS S 1 67 DASH 1 1 9 R SEVEN DASH MM-HMM . 
          NINE FIVE. 
          AND THAT INCLUDES THIS, THIS TRACT OF LAND THAT IS SUBJECT TO BE, OR? YES. 
          SO THAT WILL BE, UH, THAT PLAT WAS TO CREATE 16 SHARE ACCESS DEVELOPMENT PLUS COMMON AREA, WHICH IS ATTACHED TOGETHER. 
          OKAY. 
          AND AS IT STANDS TODAY, THE OPEN SPACE ON THE TOTAL PROJECT OR, OR, OR WHAT IS THE COVERAGE OO OF THAT ON, ON THE, THE TOTAL PROJECT TODAY IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE? BECAUSE IT CAN'T EXCEED 60%, RIGHT? YES, CORRECT. 
          AND, UH, AND THE PD DOES ASK FOR AT LEAST 40% RESERVE FOR OPEN SPACE. 
          SO OPEN SPACE, UH, WE STAFF ARE INTERPRETED LIKE IT'S GONNA BE A COMMON AREA. 
          MM-HMM . 
          WHEN IT'S RESERVED FOR OPEN SPACE. 
          THAT'S WHAT WAS INTERPRETED AND THAT'S HOW THE COMMON AREA WAS CREATED FOR, UH, FOR THAT ZERO ACCESS DEVELOPMENT PLA. 
          OKAY. 
          AND I GUESS THE FIRST CLAUSE IN A FOUR REFERS TO 80% OF AN INDIVIDUAL LOT MAY BE COVERED BY STRUCTURES. 
          SO WE MEASURE THAT 80% BY HOW MUCH IS COVERED BY A STRUCTURE. 
          RIGHT. 
          NOT, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S COVERED BY SOME OTHER SURFACE OR, OR SOMETHING ELSE. 
          IT'S JUST THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT. 
          IS THAT A FAIR DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE 80% CALCULATION IS, IS DONE? YES. 
          BASICALLY THIS WAS REVIEWED BY OUR BILL INSPECTION BECAUSE SINCE WE DON'T HAVE ALL THOSE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, UH, AND THAT WAS, UH, YES. 
          AND, UH, IT WAS, UH, ZONING. 
          IT WAS DENIED BY ZONING. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S HOW WE GOT, AND THEN WE GET TO THE SECOND CLAUSE OF THE TOTAL, IF THE COVERAGE FOR THE TOTAL PROJECT DOESN'T EXCEED 60% AND MM-HMM . 
          IS THAT ALSO MEASURED BY STRUCTURE COVERAGE OR IS THAT SOME DIFFERENT MEASURE IN STAFF'S VIEW? YES. 
          IT'S, YES, IT'S FOR THE TOTAL AT ONE CLAUSE IS TALKING ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL LOT, AND ONE CLAUSE IS TALKING ABOUT THE OVERALL SITE. 
          AND THEN, UH, IF IT, UH, THEN, THEN, THEN IN THE THIRD CLAUSE, IT IS LIKE YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE LIKE 40% RESERVE FOR OPEN SPACE. 
          OKAY. 
          I, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          I, I THINK I'M HUNG UP ON THE SECOND PIECE. 
          IF THE COVERAGE FOR THE TOTAL PROJECT DOES NOT EXCEED 60%, IS THAT 60% MEASURED BY 
          [04:20:01]
COVERAGE, BY STRUCTURES OR BY SOME BY STRUCTURES. 
          OKAY. 
          BUILDING STRUCTURES. 
          SO SAME AS THE 80% MEASURE YES. 
          THE INDIVIDUAL WANT. 
          YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          AND JUST REMIND ME, AND I MAY HAVE ALREADY ASKED THIS, BUT I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. 
          SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE TOTAL PROJECT, WHAT IS THE COVERAGE FOR THE TOTAL PROJECT AT THIS POINT? OR, OR BASED ON THIS, WHAT, WHAT WOULD IT BE BASED ON THIS REPL APPLICATION? I'M SORRY. 
          YEAH, SO THE TOTAL, UH, THE TOTAL AREA FOR THAT PLA THAT HAS, UH, THE COMMON AREA INCLUDED WAS 60,592 SQUARE FEET, AND THE COMMON AREA WAS 12,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          AND AGAIN, UM, ALL THIS DATA WAS REVIEWED BY ZONING ONCE WE ROUTED TO OUR BUILDING, UH, BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT. 
          AND, UH, AFTER REVIEWING ALL THOSE, UH, INFORMATION, UH, WE CAME INTO THE CONCLUSION THAT IT, UH, THIS SPACE WAS RESERVED, WAS A REQUIRED OPEN SPACE BECAUSE IT'S NECESSARY TO HIT THE 40% OPEN SPACE. 
          YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          MM-HMM . 
          REQUIREMENT, BUT WE DON'T, ARE, ARE THERE EXACT NUMBERS RIGHT NOW? I DO NOT HAVE THE EXACT NUMBERS. 
          YES. 
          I DO NOT HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER RIGHT NOW. 
          I, I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. 
          IS THIS A PLATTING ISSUE OR IS THIS AN ISSUE THAT WHEN THEY COME IN FOR AN ACTUAL BUILDING PERMIT, THEY MAY BE HITTING 61 60 2% COVERAGE ON THE WHOLE THING AND THAT, IS THAT NOT A REASON TO DENY A, A BUILDING PERMIT AS OPPOSED TO DENY THE REPL? BECAUSE IF WE DON'T HAVE AN EXACT NUMBER OF COVERAGE BY STRUCTURE RIGHT NOW, I COULD SEE IT MAKING IT VERY HARD TO ULTIMATELY BUILD ON THESE THREE LOTS. 
          BUT IS THAT A REASON NOT TO CREATE THESE THREE LOTS? YES. 
          WHENEVER IT COMES TO PLATING, WE REALLY DON'T SEE THE STRUCTURE. 
          YOU KNOW, WHENEVER IT COMES TO THE PLATING, WE ONLY SEE THE PROPERTY LINE. 
          BUT SINCE THIS WAS ALREADY EXISTING PROJECT, AND THAT'S HOW THE COMMON AREA WAS CREATED BASED ON THE, AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER RIGHT NOW, LIKE EXACT NUMBER, UH, EXACT FIGURE RIGHT NOW TOO. 
          BUT, UH, BUT THAT'S HOW IT WAS RESERVED FOR THE OPEN SPACE COMPANY AREA. 
          UH, MR. KINGSTON, I'M GONNA HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU. 
          YES, MR. CHAIR, DO YOU AGREE WITH STAFF THAT THE PROJECT IS THE, THIS 16 LOT ISH PROPERTY? WELL, I, I, I, HERE'S WHERE STAFF IS, CORRECT. 
          IF THE BUILT, UH, SUBDIVISION, NOT INCLUDING THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION TODAY FOR RE PLATTING, UM, HAD IN EXCESS OF 60% LOT COVERAGE, THEN I BELIEVE STAFF WOULD BE CORRECT THAT THE REMAINDER WOULD NEED TO BE, UM, AT LEAST PARTIALLY LEFT AS OPEN SPACE. 
          NOT ENTIRELY AS A MATTER OF FACT, BUT PARTIALLY IN ORDER TO MEET THAT, UM, UH, PERCENTAGE. 
          BUT AS YOU MIGHT RECALL, FROM THE LAST TIME THIS BODY HEARD THIS CASE, UH, STAFF DID NOT HAVE MEASUREMENTS FOR WHAT THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE. 
          AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY HAVE THEM TODAY. 
          THEY DID NOT PUT THEM IN THE BACKUP MATERIALS. 
          WE'VE NOT BEEN PROVIDED WITH THEM, AND WE PAID A VERY, UM, HIGHLY TRAINED ENGINEER TO SIGN OFF ON THE CALCULATION THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU. 
          UM, LIKE I SAID, IT, IF I, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE BEEN ON THE TEAM BACK WHEN THIS GOT, UH, SOLD THE FIRST TIME, BUT I WASN'T. 
          SO I CAN'T REALLY COMMENT ON WHAT HAPPENED. 
          I DON'T KNOW HOW EXPECTATIONS WERE SET, BUT IN TERMS OF WHAT GOT WRITTEN DOWN ON THE PLAT REQUIREMENTS AND WHAT GOT WRITTEN DOWN IN THE ZONING, WE'RE FOLLOWING IT. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, COMMISSIONERS, DO OTHER PEOPLE HAVE QUESTIONS OR, OR COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, I JUST WANTED TO ASK ONE FOLLOW UP ON THE, UM, DEFINITION OF OPEN SPACE AS THERE IS NOT THE DEFINITION OF OPEN SPACE INCLUDED IN PD 1 93, IT WOULD THEN 
          [04:25:01]
REVERT TO CHAPTER 51, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          BUT OUR DEFER TO OUR ATTORNEY, YES. 
          SO MS. MORRISON, IS THAT CORRECT? AND THE DEFINITION OF OPEN SPACE? AND I WILL, UM, I HAD IT OPEN A MINUTE AGO. 
          I CAN FIND IT. 
          YES, IT WOULD BE THE DEFINITION IN CHAPTER 51, AND IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY, IT, IT'S OPEN TO THE SKY EXCEPT FOR NORMAL PROJECTIONS OF CORNICES AND I THINK IT HAD A FEW OTHER ITEMS, BUT IS THAT CORRECT? UH, OPEN SPACE MEANS AN AREA THAT IS UNOBSTRUCTED TO THE SKY AND CONTAINS NO STRUCTURES EXCEPT FOR ORDINARY PROJECTIONS OF CORNICES AND EAVES. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. 
          OTHER DISCUSSION QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? ARE YOU ALSO, ARE YOU ALL ALSO GOING OFF OF THE ORIGINAL SURVEY? UM, THE ORIGINAL SURVEY OF THE, UM, WHEN THE PROPERTIES WERE BUILT, UM, WHAT, WHAT WAS SUBMITTED, UM, BEFORE THE PROPERTIES WERE BUILT SO THAT THEY COULD BE, UM, SUBDIVIDED? I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER, CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION PLEASE? AS PART OF THIS, YOU ALL ARE GOING OFF OF THE ORIGINAL, UM, SURVEY THAT WAS SUBMITTED DURING THE TIME THAT THE, UH, THAT THE PROPERTIES WERE BEING SUBDIVIDED SO THAT THEY COULD BE BUILT AND, AND IN, DURING THAT TIME THAT OPEN SPACE WAS INCLUDED. 
          I THINK I STILL DIDN'T GET YOUR OR WHAT. 
          SO THE DETERMINATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR SPACE BEING THE OPEN SPACE, IS IT, IS IT, IT IS ALSO PART, PART OF LIKE THE HISTORICAL SURVEY THAT WAS SUBMITTED DURING THE TIME THAT THE PREVIOUS HOMES, THE, THE HOMES THAT ARE THERE WAS BUILT THAT MADE THIS A PART OF THE OPEN, UM, THAT, THAT MADE THIS PARTICULAR PRO, UH, CASE A PART OF THE OPEN, UM, AREA. 
          YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          THE HISTORICAL PLAT. 
          YES. 
          AND, AND THIS CAME OFF OF THE, UH, HISTORICAL, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          MM-HMM . 
          ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. 
          ONE MORE QUESTION FOR MR. KINGSTON. 
          I, I TOOK OUT MY, MY CALCULATOR, I GOT NOWHERE ELSE TO BE TODAY. 
          . 
          SO SITE AREA 1 0 3 6 40, I DIVIDE THE OPEN SPACE NUMBER 36 2 70 BY 1 0 3 6 40, AND I GET 34.9%. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T KNOW. 
          I DON'T HAVE THE, I DIDN'T DO THE CALCULATOR. 
          OKAY. 
          BUT THE CALCULATION SHOULD BE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS MET OPEN SPACE DIVIDED BY SITE AREA. 
          I, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW I WOULD DO IT. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL I'M GETTING 34.9%. 
          IF ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO CHECK MY MATH, YOU YOU'RE WELCOME TO. 
          SO I DON'T THINK THAT GETS TO THE 40% OPEN SPACE. 
          SO ON UH, OH, HERE'S THE PROBLEM. 
          THE SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE REPL TODAY. 
          SO YOU START WITH THE 91,274 NUMBER, WHICH IS THE BUILT, UH, SUBDIVISION. 
          THE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 91 2 7 4 AND 1 0 3 6 40 IS THE, UM, IS THE LOT THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING RE PLATTING HERE. 
          THE PICTURE PROBABLY MAKES IT EASIER. 
          SO OUR NUMERATOR NEEDS TO BE WHAT? AND OUR DENOMINATOR NEEDS TO BE, WHAT IF I'M DOING THIS RIGHT, 91 2 7 4 INTO 3 6 2 70. 
          BUT THAT'S NOT THE TOTAL PROJECT. 
          YOU CAN AREA, YOU CAN'T, IS IT, IT THE, I IF I'M READING THIS RIGHT, THE ORIGINAL, SO A FOUR SAYS IF THE COVERAGE FOR THE TOTAL PROJECT DOESN'T EXCEED 60%, SO YOU CAN'T EXCLUDE THE SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT FROM THE TOTAL PROJECT. 
          IT'S PART OF THE PROJECT. 
          RIGHT. 
          IF YOU INCLUDE THE SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT, THEN YOU'RE GONNA BE WAY NORTH OF 60%. 
          'CAUSE THERE'S NOTHING ON IT. 
          BUT YOU SAID THE TOTAL SITE AREA. 
          SO DO I NEED TO ADD SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT INTO THE OPEN SPACE? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? MY NUMERATOR NEEDS TO BE, SHOULD THE SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT COUNT IS 
          [04:30:03]
OPEN SPACE, IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR TO COUNT IT IF IT'S GOING TO BE REPLANTED AND BUILT ON, I DON'T, THE, I I DON'T KNOW IF I FOLLOW THAT. 
          UM, THE SHARED ACCESS AREA INTO YOUR LOT COVERAGE, YOUR LOT COVERAGE IS JUST YOUR LOT OUTSIDE THE SHARED ACCESS AREA. 
          YEAH. 
          WHAT, WHAT ROB IS, IS REMINDING ME OF IS THAT WE CAN'T COUNT THAT BECAUSE IT IS, UM, IT'S, IT'S ALREADY OPEN SPACE. 
          UM, BECAUSE IT'S NOT BUILT, THE ARGUMENT THAT WE'RE MAKING IS THAT THE RED THAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THIS FRAME IS 60% OF THE COVERAGE AREA WITHIN THE BLUE BOUNDARY. 
          OKAY. 
          WITHIN THE MEANING THAT EVEN WITHOUT THE SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT, WE'RE BELOW THE 60%. 
          BUT THE, THE BLUE BOUNDARY IS, IS NOT WHAT'S BEING RE PLATTED. 
          IT'S THE BLUE BOUNDARY PLUS THAT LITTLE DOG LEG TO THE LEFT ON THE PLAN. 
          TRUE. 
          YEAH, THAT'S TRUE. 
          BUT IT'S THE, I THINK IT'S, YOU LOOK AT THE, WHAT THE, WHAT THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE FOR THE DAUGHTER PROPERTIES AFTER THE SPLIT. 
          AND WE'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ZONING ON BOTH SECTIONS. 
          I THINK YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL PROJECTS. 
          SO YOU CAN'T LOOK AT EITHER IN ISOLATION. 
          I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT BOTH OF THEM. 
          IF WE TAKE THIS OUT, WE STILL NEED TOGETHER. 
          I I'M GONNA THINK ABOUT THIS A LITTLE LONGER. 
          ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. KAUFMAN? UH, I, I'M NEW TO THIS, SO Y'ALL ARE TALKING CIRCLES AROUND ME HERE ON THIS, BUT I THOUGHT THAT, UH, WHEN IT CAME TO THE PLANNING PROCESS, WE DIDN'T, WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO MAKE CHANGES ON WHAT WAS SUBMITTED THAT WE HAD TO VOTE IT UP OR VOTE IT DOWN. 
          CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN THAT TO ME? I I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S HERE IS SUGGESTING OR ENTERTAINING CHANGES. 
          I THINK WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER THE, THE MATH, MATHS FOR THIS OR NOT, BASED ON WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED TO US. 
          SO THE PLAT PROPOSED IN FRONT OF US IS, IS WHAT IT IS. 
          UH, SO DOES THAT MEAN WE VOTED UP OR VOTED DOWN OR NOT? MS. OH, WELL, SORRY IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, MS. MORRISON, IS IT CORRECT THAT THE ONLY MOTION THAT IS AN ORDER REGARDING A PLAT IS EITHER ACCEPT THE PLAT OR DENY THE PLAT? IS THAT CORRECT? YES. 
          APPROVAL OR DENIAL? YEAH. 
          DOES THAT HELP COMMISSIONER UFTON? WELL IT REAFFIRMS WHAT I THOUGHT I KNEW. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? HAVE THERE BEEN NEW FINDINGS SINCE THE NEW FINDINGS SINCE WE VOTED ON THIS LAST TIME? 'CAUSE I, I, I WASN'T FOR SURE, BUT I KNEW THAT WE HAD VOTE. 
          IT SOUNDED ROUGHLY FAMILIAR. 
          SO IF, IF, IS IT SOMETHING NEW THAT CAME UP SINCE LAST TIME? ARE, ARE YOU ASKING IF THE TWO YEAR WAITING PERIOD WOULD WOULD APPLY TO THIS? I DON'T, I DUNNO ABOUT TWO YEAR. 
          DON'T, NO, I'M NOT SAYING ABOUT TWO. 
          I DON'T KNOW ABOUT A TWO YEAR WAITING PERIOD. 
          I'M JUST SAYING IF WE JUST HAD THIS IN JANUARY AND WE'RE RE WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE JANUARY WHEN THE FINDINGS WERE THE SAME THING IN JANUARY? PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. 
          I'M GUESSING THE SPECIFIC THING THAT CHANGED COMMISSIONER WHEELER IS WE WERE CALLED OUT ON THE OPEN SPACE CALCULATION AND WE WENT AND MADE IT. 
          AND WHAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN IS ANYBODY ELSE'S CALCULATION THAT WOULD LEAD US TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE SOMEHOW VIOLATED ZONING. 
          SO BY ANY CHANCE IS BY ANY CHANCE HAVE, UH, MAYBE I NEED TO BE ASKING, UM, HAVE CHANGES STAFF, HAVE CHANGES HAPPENED? HAVE YOUR CALCULATIONS CHANGED SINCE THE, THE LAST COUPLE FILINGS? NO. 
          AFTER, UH, WE HAVE MEETING WITH OUR ZONING TEAM. 
          UH, UH, WE FROM, FROM THE FINDINGS, UH, UH, WE, WE CAME UP WITH THE CONCLUSION THAT THIS IS THE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE REQUIRED FOR THE PREVIOUS, PREVIOUSLY SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENTS PER PD ONE NINETY THREE. 
          HOW DO YOU CALL A POINT OF VOTE OR WHATEVER? HOW DO WE DO THAT? WE CALL, UH, CHAIR. 
          CAN I CALL A COURT OF QUESTION? UH, WOULD, WOULD TAKE A VOTE. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A MOTION TO, TO CALL THE QUESTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? A MOTION? YEAH. 
          SECOND. 
          SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. 
          I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S DEBATABLE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          UM, TO DENY THE PLAT, UM, LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE. 
          [04:35:06]
DISTRICT ONE? NO, DISTRICT TWO. 
          AYE. 
          CAN WE CLARIFY THAT A VOTE IN A VOTE OF AYE IS, IS TO DENY THE PLAN. 
          CAN WE GET CLARIFICATION ON THAT? YEAH. 
          SO WE ARE VOTING ON COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S MOTION. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UH, COMMISSIONER COX TO DENY THE PLAT APPLICATION. 
          SO A YAY IS IN SUPPORT OF MS. HAMPTON'S MOTION, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DISTRICT THREE? NO. 
          DISTRICT FIVE? YES. 
          DISTRICT SIX? YES. 
          DISTRICT SEVEN? YES. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT? YES. 
          DISTRICT NINE? YES. 
          DISTRICT 10, DISTRICT 11? YES. 
          DISTRICT 12? YES. 
          DISTRICT 13? YES. 
          DISTRICT 14 CONFLICT ON THE ITEM DISTRICT 15. 
          YES, THE EYES HAPPEN. 
          ALRIGHT, UM, THE CASE IS DENIED. 
          WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 27. 
          [27. 26-1581A An application to replat a 0.5308-acre (23,123-square foot) tract of land containing part of Lot 1 in City Block 7638 to create three 0.1769-acre (7,708-square foot) lots, on property located on Hull Avenue, south of Linfield Road. Applicant/Owner: AAAA Plus Surveyors, LLC Surveyor: ARA Surveying Application Filed: April 10, 2026 Zoning: R-5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Sharmila Shrestha Council District: 7 PLAT-26-000093]
ITEM NUMBER 27 PLAT 26 DASH 0 0 0 93. 
          IT IS AN APPLICATION TO PLAT A 0.5308 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 23,123 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING PART OF LOT ONE IN CITY BLOCK 76 38 TO GRADE THREE 0.1769 ACRE. 
          THAT IS 7,780 SQUARE FOOT LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON HALL AVENUE SOUTH OF LINFIELD ROAD. 
          13. 
          NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON APRIL 20, 20, 26. 
          WE HAVE RECEIVED, UH, ZERO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY AND OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU MS. RETA. 
          UM, I SEE WE HAVE A SPEAKER FOR THIS ITEM, MA'AM, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. 
          UH, MY NAME IS SHAINA BRUNIS. 
          I LIVE IN UH, 8 0 6 6 PARK LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 3 1. 
          AND THIS REQUEST IS, UM, A STRAIGHTFORWARD THREE LOT RESIDENTIAL, UH, RELA, WHICH, UM, IT HEARS WHICH, UM, COMPLIES WITH THE FIVE, WITH THE R FIVE A STANDARDS AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          UM, WE UM, APPRECIATE YOUR REVIEW AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE LET ME KNOW. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          UM, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? YOU'RE THE LAST PERSON IN THE ROOM SO I GUESS NOT. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          YOUR MOTION IN THE MATTER OF PLAT PLAT DASH TWO SIX DASH IN THE MATTER OF PLAT DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 9 3. 
          I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CALL ESTABLISH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONAL LISTING IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          WE MOVE ON 
          [28. 26-1582A An application to replat a 0.438-acre (19,099-square foot) tract of land containing part of Lots 6 and 7 in City Block C/6353 to create one lot, on property located on Pleasant Drive, south of Elam Road. Applicant/Owner: Jaime Espinosa-Rociia Surveyor: Rangel Land Surveying Application Filed: April 10, 2026 Zoning: R-7.5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Sharmila Shrestha Council District: 5 PLAT-26-000106]
TO ITEM 28. 
          ITEM NUMBER 28 PLAT 26 DASH. 
          IT IS AN APPLICATION TO PLETT A 0.438 ACRE THAT IS 19,000 0 9 9 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING PART OF LOT SIX AND SEVEN IN CITY BLOCK C OVER 63 53 TO CREATE ONE LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON PLEASANT DRIVE SOUTH OF ELAM ROAD. 
          15 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON APRIL 20, 20, 26. 
          WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR AND ONE REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          THANK YOU MS. RETA. 
          UM, I BELIEVE WE HAVE A ONLINE SPEAKER SIGNED UP ON ITEM 28. 
          IS HE ONLINE? OKAY, MR. HEL. 
          OH, UM, AND COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, UM, YOU CAN STEP BACK INTO THE ROOM AND AND REJOIN US AND MR. MR. 
          [04:40:01]
RONELL, ARE YOU ONLINE? OKAY, WE'LL GIVE MR. RONELL ONE MORE MINUTE. 
          OKAY. 
          I GUESS HE'S NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO GET ON. 
          SO WE WILL GO TO COMMISSIONER SERATO FOR A MOTION. 
          THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. 
          UM, IN THE MATTER CASE, UH, PLA 2 6 0 0 0 1 0 6, I MOVE TO FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS OF APPROVAL AND SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SERATO FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER SIMS FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSIONS SAYING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 29. 
          ITEM 29 
          [29. 26-1583A An application to replat a 0.99-acre (43,507-square foot) tract of land containing all of Lot 54 in City Block 6784 to create one 8,655-square foot lot and four 8,713-square foot lots, on property located on Cypress Avenue, south of Military Parkway. Applicant/Owner: QJ Development, LLC Surveyor: ARA Surveying Application Filed: April 10, 2026 Zoning: R-7.5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Sharmila Shrestha Council District: 7 PLAT-26-000110]
IS CASE PLAT 26 0 0 0 1 1 0. 
          AN APPLICATION RE PLAT IS 0.99 ACRE FOUR 3,507 SQUARE FOOT AT TRACT LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT 54 AND CITY BLOCK 6 78 4 TO CREATE ONE 8,655 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND FOUR 8,713 SQUARE FOOT LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON CYPRESS AVENUE SOUTH OF MILITARY PARKWAY. 
          STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU MR. BATE. 
          UM, THERE'S NO ONE HERE IN THE ROOM. 
          NO ONE HERE TO SUN SPEAK ONLINE. 
          COMMISSIONER WHEELER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF PLA TWO SIX DASH 0 0 0 1 1 0 MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND  RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHEELER FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER SIMS FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION SAYING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? SAY NATHAN. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          LET'S GO TO OUR SUBDIVISION CONSENT DOCKET MOTION OR 
          [Certificate of Appropriateness for Signs - Consent Items]
SIGNS CONSENT DOCKET NUMBER 30 IS SIGN DASH 26 DASH 0 0 5 4 9. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY GARY HOUSER OF 40 SIGN WORKS LTD FOR A 72.3 SQUARE FOOT BACKLIT CHANNEL LETTER SIGN MOUNTED ON A FOUR INCH DEEP PAN ON THE EASTERN FAC FACING FACADE AT 1845. 
          WOODALL ROGERS FREEWAY, EAST ELEVATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          S-S-D-A-C. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL NUMBER 31 IS SIGN DASH 26 DASH 0 0 5 51. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY GARY HOUSER OF FOUR D SIGN WORKS LTD FOR A 128.3 SQUARE FOOT BACKLIT CHANNEL LETTER SIGN MOUNTED ON A TWO INCH ALUMINUM SQUARE TUBE FRAME ON THE WESTERN FACING FACADE AT 1845. 
          WOODALL ROGERS FREEWAY ON THE WEST ELEVATION. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          S-S-D-A-C. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          ITEM NUMBER 32 IS SIGN DASH 26 DASH 0 6 1 2. 
          AN APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY SALO CARVER OF M THREE GRAPHICS INCORPORATED FOR A 180 SQUARE FOOT LED ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTER SIGN AT 200 WEST JEFFERSON BOULEVARD, SUITE A EAST ELEVATION STAFF. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          S-S-D-A-C. 
          RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. 
          ITEM NUMBER 33 IS SIGNED 
          [04:45:01]
DASH 26 DASH 0 1 35 AND APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BY JOSEPHINE GONZALEZ. 
          PATTISON ID FOR A 391 SQUARE FOOT. 
          LED ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTER SIGN ON A BACKER PANEL TO READ BUTLER BROTHERS BUILDING APARTMENTS AT 5 5 5 EVERGREEN STREET, WEST ELEVATION. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. 
          S-S-D-A-C. 
          RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          APPROVAL. 
          THANK YOU MR. ROPER. 
          NO ONE'S HERE TO SPEAK IN PERSON. 
          I SEE THAT THE APPLICANT ON ITEM 33 IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ONLINE AND HE'S THERE. 
          MR. DREWRY? YES, I'M HERE. 
          OKAY, DID YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS FOR THE BODY OR YOU'RE JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS? JUST HERE TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. 
          THAT'S IT. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, WE WILL GO TO COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR A MOTION ON OUR SIGNED CONSENT ITEM DOCKET REGARDING THE CONSENT DOCKET FOR SIGNS. 
          I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE CONSISTENT WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE DOCKET. 
          OKAY. 
          AND ON 32 STAFF RECOMMENDED APPROVAL S-S-D-A-C RECOMMENDED APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. 
          SO YES. 
          WERE YOU FOLLOWING STAFF OR S-S-D-A-C OH OR DO WE WANT TO TAKE 32 OFF AND PICK IT UP INDIVIDUALLY ON 32 SUBJECT TO APPROVE, UH, APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY S-S-D-A-C. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          THANK YOU COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
          AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? NAY, THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          I BELIEVE THAT CONCLUDES THE BUSINESS OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION TODAY. 
          SO IT IS 3 21 AND THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING STANDS ADJOURNED. 
          THANK YOU.
* 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.