[00:00:01]
MORNING EVERYONE.[BRIEFINGS]
IT IS 10:34 AM ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8TH, 2026.AND THIS IS THE BRIEFING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
CAN WE START WITH THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.
THIS DISTRICT A COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN PRESENT? DISTRICT NINE.
COMMISSIONER COX? DISTRICT 12.
DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? YES.
AND PLACE 15 CHAIR RUBIN? I'M HERE.
AND I SEE COMMISSIONER SMITH, UH, GILBERT SMITH HAS JUST WALKED IN.
AND I SEE VICE CHAIR HERBERT, I BELIEVE VERY SMALL IN THE CORNER OF MY SCREEN ONLINE.
UM, ONE ORDER OF BUSINESS VICE CHAIR.
HERBERT'S GOING TO BE VIRTUAL TODAY AND I HAVE A CONFLICT ON ONE CASE.
SO WE NEED TO ELECT A TEMPORARY VICE CHAIR.
AND COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS GRACIOUSLY AGREED TO DO SO.
CAN I GET A MOTION TO APPOINT HER AS TEMPORARY VICE CHAIR FOR TODAY'S MEETING? SECOND.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION, YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? NAY? THE MOTION CARRIES.
ALRIGHT, UH, LET'S GO INTO OUR, UM, BRIEFING.
AND JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS IS A TIME FOR, UM, FOLKS TO ASK QUESTIONS TO CITY STAFF ANY DISCUSSION OF THE CASES.
UM, PLEASE SAVE THAT FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THE AFTERNOON.
UM, OUR DOCKET CONTAINS SEVEN CASES ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, CASE NUMBER SEVEN IS GOING TO COME OFF BECAUSE I HAVE A CONFLICT AND CAN'T PARTICIPATE IN THE CONSIDERATION OF IT.
NINE IS ALREADY NINE'S NOT ON CONSENT.
SO THAT MEANS AS OF RIGHT NOW, CONSENT CONSISTS OF 1, 2, 4, 5, 4, AND FIVE.
DO ANY OF THOSE NEED TO COME OFF? ALRIGHT THEN, UH, WE WILL GET INTO BRIEFING.
UH, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO WE NEED CASE ONE BRIEFED? UH, NO.
DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR WANT CASE NUMBER ONE BRIEFED? I HAD ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I'M, I DON'T REALLY HAVE A QUESTION ON THE ZONING CASE.
IT WAS, UM, HOW THE PARCEL IS LOCATED RELATIVE TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND IF THERE WAS ANY CONSIDERATION REGARDING ACCESS TO THE SITE.
UM, AS YOU SEE, YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE TWO ACCESS POINT THERE.
UH, ONE IS A DEDICATED STREET AND THEN THE OTHER I COULDN'T VERIFY, BUT AS THERE WAS ONE ACCESS FOR THE PROPERTY, I THINK IT SHOULD BE THE REQUIREMENT.
SO THAT IS A DEDICATED STREET? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MS. SHARMA ON CASE NUMBER ONE? ALRIGHT, ITEM NUMBER TWO AGAIN, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU NEED THIS BRIEF? DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UH, NO, MR. CHAIR.
COMMISSIONER CARPENTER DOES HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, THE CASE REPORT INDICATES THAT THERE ARE CONSIDERABLE TRAFFIC INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES AT THIS LOCATION THAT, YOU KNOW, REGARDLESS OF OF ANY ZONING CHANGE THAT'S APPROVED, THERE'S LIKELY TO BE CONSIDERABLE HANGUP AT PERMITTING.
AND THAT IS TRUE REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THIS IS DEVELOPED AS CR OR IF IT WERE ATTEMPTED TO BE, UM, FLIPPED TO AN SB EIGHT 40 CASE AND DEVELOPED AS MULTIFAMILY.
[00:05:01]
ANY, ANY NEW ACTIVITY AT THIS LOCATION IS GOING TO INVOLVE CONSIDERABLE TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND SOME, UH, REAL ESTATE PROBLEMS BECAUSE THE CITY HAS TO ACQUIRE RIGHT OF WAY.IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, EVEN IF THE ZONING CHANGE WERE TO BE DENIED, THERE WOULD STILL BE TRAFFIC CONCERNS.
I DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE CITY HAS CONTRACTED HDR, PLEASE FACT CHECK ME ON THAT, TO, UH, DESIGN STOPLIGHTS IN THE AREA.
SO THERE IS CONCERNS AND THERE IS INVESTMENT FROM THE CITY.
SO WHETHER THIS IS APPROVED OR NOT, THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRAFFIC.
NOW, SPECIFICALLY THIS SITE, YES, THERE IS TRAFFIC CONCERNS AND, UM, ENGINEERING HAS COMMENTED IT ON, ON IT ALREADY, BUT UNTIL THOSE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE UM, COMPLETED, THERE WON'T BE PERMITS ISSUED FOR DEVELOPMENT AT THIS SITE.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
AND, AND GIVEN THAT THE, ASSUMING THAT THE TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE DONE, THERE'S NO OBJECTION TO THIS PARTICULAR SITE BEING CR THE USES THAT ARE PROPOSED, YES, THERE, THERE ARE TRAFFIC, THERE ARE TRAFFIC CONCERNS, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT, THAT IS NOT, UM, BUT THEY'RE NOT ADEQUATE TO SAY THIS SHOULD NOT BE REZONED TO CR UH, THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, WE ALSO HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH THE APPLICANT TO, UM, HELP PEDESTRIAN BY REQUIRING SIDEWALKS THROUGH DEED RESTRICTIONS.
SO WE HOPE THAT THAT AT LEAST HELPS IN THE MEANTIME.
OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON CASE NUMBER TWO? YEAH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
RELATED TO THAT, THE UM, FRONTAGE ALONG, UM, SORRY I'VE LOST THE STREET NAME HERE.
UM, LAWSON ROAD, IS IT CORRECT THAT BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY WILL APPLY, UH, FROM THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY? UH, I KNOW IT'S AN UNDEVELOPED TODAY, BUT IF THERE WERE, UH, RESIDENTS DEVELOPED, THERE'D BE AN OFFSET THERE.
UH, CAN YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? IF BLOCK IN TERMS OF SETBACKS RELATED TO THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, WOULD BLOCK FACE CONTINUITY FROM THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY APPLY TO CR IF THIS WAS GRANTED? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS CASE? ALRIGHT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO CASE NUMBER THREE.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, WOULD YOU LIKE THIS BRIEFED OR ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UH, NO, MR. CHAIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANYONE ELSE WANNA BRIEFING? ALL RIGHT, CASE NUMBER FOUR IN DISTRICT FOUR.
DID YOU WANT THIS BRIEF OR DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? I HAD SOME QUESTIONS.
UM, SINCE THE APPLICANT THEY REQUEST COMMISSIONER GILBERTSON, YOU NEED TO TURN YOUR MICROPHONE ON SINCE THEY'RE REQUESTING AN MU TWO ZONING SPECIFICALLY TO ACCOMMODATE THE HEIGHT 116 FEET.
UM, FOR THE ZIP LINE, UH, HAS STAFF CONSIDERED WHETHER THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OR ANOTHER ZONING MECHANISM COULD ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED HEIGHT WITHOUT PERMIT PERMITTING THE BROADER 'CAUSE? I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE TOO BROAD, BUT, UM, AND COMMISSIONER GILBERT SMITH, JUST QUESTIONS FOR STAFF RIGHT NOW.
UH, YES, WE'D LIKE OTHER ZONING DESIGNATIONS.
UM, FOR THE HIGH REQUIREMENT, THIS WAS THE, THE ZONING DESIGNATION WITH THE CLOSEST TO THE HIGH REQUIREMENT THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR 116 FEET, WHERE IT WOULDN'T BE ALSO TOO, TOO HIGH OF A HIGH A HEIGHT ALLOWANCE.
UM, WE DID, WE DIDN'T LOOK AT THE PD OPTION.
UM, BUT ALSO I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT THE, IT'S ONLY REQUESTED ONLY FOR THE AREA IDENTIFIED IN THE GIS MAPPING.
IT'S LIKE THE BLACK AND WHITE SHADED AREA.
SO ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THAT WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE A, TO BE 135 FEET.
IT'S ONLY EVERY AREA, EVERYTHING IN THAT SHADED PORTION.
UM, NAH, I'LL WAIT FOR THE HEARING.
SO COMMISSIONER COOPER SMITH RIGHT NOW, THIS IS ON CONSENT.
WOULD YOU LIKE IT REMOVED AND CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YEAH, JUST A CLARIFICATION.
SO THE ONLY THING THAT'S BEING REZONED HERE IS LITERALLY THE ZIPPER LIKE STRIP IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS RR PARCEL.
[00:10:01]
IT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE SEEN SOMETHING LIKE THAT.SO THEN OUTSIDE OF THIS STRIP, AS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER DESCRIBES IT, IT'S STILL RR AND YOU CAN'T BUILD UP TO THE HEIGHT OF, I FORGET WHAT THE R HEIGHT, CORRECT? YES, IT'LL BE LIMITED TO 70.
IT'LL BE LIMITED TO TO 70 FOOT OUTSIDE OF THAT.
UH, AND WITH THE NARROWNESS OF THE STRIP, IS IT REMOTELY FEASIBLE THAT SOMEONE COULD BUILD A ACTUAL BUILDING OR STRUCTURE OF ANY SORT? THAT'S ZIP NO, IT WON'T BE A, THEY COULDN'T DO A PERMANENT, LIKE A PERMANENT STRUCTURE.
IT ONLY COULD ACCOMMODATE THE ZIP LINE.
AND IT IS PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS AT THE END OF THE DAY.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? ITEM NUMBER FIVE? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, DO YOU WANT A BRIEFING THERE OR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DON'T NEED IT.
ANYONE ELSE? ALRIGHT, ITEM NUMBER SIX.
UM, THAT HAS COME OFF CONSENT.
WHY DON'T WE BRIEF THIS ONE SINCE IT'S A, UM, FOREIGN-BASED DISTRICT AND WE HAVE SOME NEW MEMBERS WHO I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'VE SEEN FORM-BASED BEFORE PD AND FOREIGN-BASED.
ITEM SIX IS KZ 26, LAST THREE DIGITS 1 43.
THE REQUEST, UM, IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW, UH, PLAN TO DEVELOP DISTRICT FOR WMU FIVE DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ZONE C AS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF THORNTON FREEWAY, SOUTHEAST OF 11TH STREET BETWEEN UPTOWN STREET AND FLEMING AVENUE, ALSO KNOWN AS 3 41 FLEMING AVENUE.
THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO ALLOW A MIXED, UM, USED DEVELOPMENT ON SITE.
THE LOCATION MAP, THE AREA REQUEST IS AS, UM, IN DISTRICT FOUR, UH, THIS IS THE AERIAL OF THE SITE, UM, HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE.
THE AREA REQUEST IS MOSTLY UNDEVELOPED WITH A VEHICLE DISPLAY CELLS AND SERVICE USED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A MIX USED VOLUME WITH MULTIFAMILY AND RETAIL USES THE PROPERTIES CURRENTLY ZONED C AS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT, WHICH ALLOWS SEVERITY OF HEAVY COMMERCIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES.
UH, THESE ARE THE, THE ZONING LAND USES, UM, OF SURROUNDING SITES.
THERE'S SINGLE FAMILY UNDEVELOPED TOWARDS THE, UH, WEST AS WELL AS THE CHILDRE FACILITY TOWARDS THE SOUTH IS SINGLE FAMILY AND UNDEVELOPED.
AND THEN TOWARDS THE WEST, UM, IT'S AN OUT SERVICE CENTER TOWER ANTENNA FOR CELLULAR COMMUNICATION AND UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY.
AND THEN TOWARDS THE NORTH IS THE FREEWAY.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE SITE PHOTOS LOOKING NORTHWEST TOWARDS THE EAST.
AND THEN SURROUNDING PHOTOS, UH, LOOKING SOUTH ON FLEMING, LOOKING NORTHEAST, LOOKING NORTH AND THEN LOOKING SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THEN ON UPTOWN STREET LOOKING SOUTH AND LOOKING WEST.
UM, SO THE EXISTING, UH, DISTRICT IS CS THEY ARE PROPOSING A PD WITH A WMU FIVE BASED.
HOWEVER, UM, FOR THE SIDE SUB THEY ARE REQUESTING A 10 UM, FEET.
AND THEN FOR THE REAR THEY'RE REQUESTING 10 FEET AND THEN FIVE FEET FOR THE ABUTTING ALLEY.
UM, FOR THE HEIGHT THEY ARE KEEPING THE SAME AS WITH THE WM U FIVE BASE, UH, REQUIRES HOWEVER, FOR THE GROUND STORY, UH, MINIMUM FOR THE MU UM, PLACE TYPE, THEY'RE REQUESTING INSTEAD OF 15 FEET,
[00:15:01]
A 10 FEET, UM, MINIMUM.AND THEN FOR THE LOT OF COVERAGE, THEY ARE REQUESTING 85% INSTEAD OF A HUNDRED UH, PERCENT AS THE MU PLACE TYPE REQUIRES.
AND THEN, UM, THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS.
SO THESE ARE SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT WE DO HAVE TO, UH, ADD, UM, TO, TO ABIDE BY STATE LAW, WHICH IS TO, UM, ADDING AGRICULTURE, UH, USES PERMITTED BY.
UM, THIS WAS NOT IN THE DOCKET, SO I AM NOW, UM, LETTING YOU KNOW, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO ADD THESE, UH, FOUR AGRICULTURE USES THAT IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW AND IT IS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY, UH, RESIDENTIAL, UH, PLACE TYPE.
HOWEVER, UM, ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS NOT STRICTLY CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PRIMARY LINE USES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL, IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SUPPORTING LINE USES AND TRANSITION WITH THE COMMUNITY MIXED USE PLACE TYPE TO THE WEST.
REMOVING THE CS COMMERCIAL SERVICES DISTRICT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS WOULD HOWEVER SUPPORT THE PLACE TYPE.
UM, COMMUNITY MIXED USE AREAS ARE LOCATED ON MAJOR INTERSECTIONS AND ON KEY CORRIDOR SERVING MULTIPLE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND ATTRACTING RETAIL SERVICES THAT REQUIRE A LARGER MARKET.
UM, AND IT IS ALSO WITHIN A TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.
THE ZOO STATION TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENTS IS A PATTERN OF HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL OFFICE AND CIVIC USES WITH AN ARBAN DESIGN AND HIGH QUALITY SUPPORT FOR WALKING, BICYCLING, TRANSIT USE AND OTHER FORMS OF NON VEHICLE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOP NEAR HIGH PERFORMANCE TRANSIT STATIONS.
DEPTH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST WILL CREATE ADDITIONAL HOUSING OPTIONS, UH, WITHIN THE AREA AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COURAGES OF A TRANSIT ORIENTATION DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR FIRST STATUS SUPPORTS THE PROPOSED, UH, REQUEST.
AND THEN THE STATUTE RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT, UH, TO CONDITIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR LOPEZ? YEAH, UH, MY QUESTION, A FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION IS ABOUT THE DECISION TO COMBINE A PD AND FORM-BASED ZONING.
I KNOW WHEN WE GOT OUR BRIEFING FROM THE ZONING CODE, UM, CONSULTANTS, THEY DID NOT SEEM TO BE FANS OF FORM-BASED ZONING.
THEY THOUGHT IT WAS, IF I'M PARAPHRASING THEM CORRECTLY, IT WAS UNNECESSARILY COMPLICATED TO ACHIEVE THE, THE SMALL ENHANCEMENTS YOU COULD GET IN DESIGN, UM, IMPROVEMENTS, UH, YOU KNOW, AND THE DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS ARE THE THINGS THAT WE DO, UH, FUNDAMENTALLY IN, IN PDS.
SO FIRST OF ALL, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY THERE'S A DECISION AND, AND ALSO STAFF IS GENERALLY OPPOSED TO PD.
SO WHY DO WE HAVE A MASHUP OF PD AND FORM-BASED ZONING? SO ORIGINALLY THE APPLICANT HAD REQUESTED A PD, UM, INSTEAD OF AN MF TWO, UM, DISTRICT BECAUSE, UM, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE CS OF THROUGH SB EIGHT 40, UM, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED MULTIFAMILY, BUT BECAUSE THERE IS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL NEARBY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO REZONE.
UM, AND THEN MF TWO, THEY REQUESTED, UM, A PD WITH MF TWO FOR, UM, TO MODIFY SOME OF THE ELEMENTS AND STAFF RECOMMENDED THE FORM DISTRICT, UM, IN ORDER FOR THEM TO PROVIDE THAT WALKABILITY.
THE STAFF REQUEST FOR FORM DISTRICT.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE THEY DID WANT TO AMEND SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT FORM DISTRICT REQUIRES, WHICH IN THIS CASE THIS THE, UH, SITE SUBJECT UNDER FORM DISTRICT FOR MU PLACE TYPE IS 15 FEET.
AND THEN THE STORY HIDE FROM MU THE REQUIREMENT, A MINIMUM FOR THE GROUND STORY IS, IS, UM, 15 FEET.
THEY WANTED THAT TO BE REDUCED TO 10 FEET FOR THE GROUND STORY.
AND THAT IS WHY THEY WENT FOR THE PD WITH, WITH AN MU UM, FORM DISTRICT.
BUT I, I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT COULDN'T HAVE BEEN ACCOMMODATED IN A STRAIGHT, I MEAN IN A PD WITH, WITH OTHER THAN FORM-BASED ZONING.
I'LL, I'LL ADD YEAH, ONE, ONE THING AND EVERYTHING YOU SAID WAS, WAS GREAT.
UM, OUR FORM DISTRICTS STILL FUNCTION PRETTY WELL IN, IN OUR OPINION.
WE'VE GOT A LOT OF BUILT UNITS BUILT OUT, UH, JUST ACROSS THE HIGHWAY, LIKE 500 BUILT OUT UNDER THE FORM BASED ZONING.
SO WE STILL THINK IT WORKS PRETTY, PRETTY WELL IF CODE REFORM CHANGES THAT IT'LL, IT'LL EVOLVE, UH, WITH US, UM, WITH HOW THE PD IS DRAFTED.
UM, WHAT I WILL SAY, LEMME SEE IS I THINK THAT THEY NEEDED A PD TO, TO MODIFY AS SHE SAID SOME OF THE SPECIFIC THINGS ABOUT THE SITE.
BUT THE BENEFIT OF THE FORUM DISTRICT IS IT HAS ALL OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WE WANT TO SEE, UH, BODIES, MEMBERS OF THIS BODY IS INCLUDED IN TERMS OF SIDEWALKS, TRANSPARENCY,
[00:20:01]
ACTIVATION AND ALL OF THAT.IT'S ALL BAKED IN THERE AND WE KNOW IT'S BUILDABLE AND IT, AND IT'S, UM, IS READY TO GO.
UM, AND I THINK IT'S A LOT MORE EFFICIENT FOR APPLICANTS AND TO THE CITY THAN INDIVIDUALLY ADDING, UH, DESIGN STANDARDS, UH, ONE AT A TIME.
'CAUSE WE KNOW THAT HE WANTED TO BUILD A, UH, WALKABLE PROJECT THAT WORKS WELL AND IS TRANSIT ORIENTED AND I THINK FOREIGN BASE GETS US 90% OF THE WAY THERE.
UM, AND SO USING THAT AS THE BASE, I THINK IS STILL QUITE ACCEPTABLE.
CAN YOU, UM, EXPLAIN WHAT THE NATURE IS OF THE ADJACENT INDUSTRIAL, UM, DEVELOPMENT THAT IS PREVENTING THIS FROM BEING DEVELOPED UNDER SB EIGHT 40? I BELIEVE IT'S IN THE SOUTH AND I BELIEVE IT'S THE PAPER COMPANY.
UM, BECAUSE IT IS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.
I DON'T RECALL THE, THE ACTUAL, UM, USE, BUT IT IS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, UM, THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, TRIED TO GO THROUGH THE SB EIGHT 40 AND WHEN THEY DID THE A THOUSAND FOOD RADIUS RIGHT, IT CAME UP THAT THEY COULD OKAY.
'CAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S A VERY NARROW SPECIFIC LIST OF USES THAT DISQUALIFIES AS AN SB EIGHT 40 DEVELOPMENT.
MAYBE THIS AFTERNOON I BE I UNDERSTAND.
IT'S, IT'S ONE OF THE SUBSET OF POTENTIALLY INCOMPATIBLE USES FROM THE, FROM THE WHATEVER IT IS POTENTIALLY INCOMPATIBLE.
THAT IS THE ONE THAT DISQUALIFIES THE SOUTHERN HALF OF THIS SITE.
I WILL SAY THE NORTHERN HALF, IF YOU LOOK AT IT AT, IF YOU DO A THOUSAND FEET, IF THEY, YOU KNOW, MODIFIED, SO THEY COULD DO MAYBE A, A DEVELOPMENT ON THE NORTHERN HALF AND THEY'RE OUTSIDE OF THAT A THOUSAND FEET AND NOT A SURVEYOR.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S THERE.
UM, BUT YEAH, IF THEY WANNA HAVE A CO COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE BLOCK, UM, THEY PROBABLY NEED THIS, THIS CHANGE.
UH, NEXT QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH THE DECISION TO APPROVE AN, A TOTAL EXEMPTION FROM RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE.
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, OUR BASE ZONING, UH, ALLOWS OR INCLUDES RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE.
SENATE BILL EIGHT 40 INCLUDES, YOU KNOW, UH, A MODIFIED VERSION OF RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE FORM-BASED ZONING HAS RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY SLOPE.
BUT THIS PD EXEMPTS THE PROJECT ENTIRELY, WHICH WOULD ALLOW THEM TO BUILD 80 FEET, 10 OR FIVE FEET FROM ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY.
UM, 'CAUSE THE SITE ITSELF IS A CONSTRAINT AND IT, IT'LL BE COMING FROM THE NORTH.
THEY DID, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED FOR THAT TO BE, UM, FOR IT NOT TO BE, UM, WITHIN THE, THE PD 'CAUSE OF THE SITE CONSTRAINT.
'CAUSE RIGHT NOW THE NORTH PORTION, UM, TRIANGLE IS NOT PART OF THEIR SITE.
SO THAT IS NOT WHERE THEY'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO DEVELOP.
AND, AND TO GLAD YOU MENTIONED THAT.
'CAUSE THE NORTHERN PART OF THE SITE IS, IS LOCATED HIGHER THAN THE, THAN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE.
SO THAT MAY ALSO PLAY INTO THE, UH, THE RELIEF THAT THEY NEED FROM THOSE.
UM, AND I THINK THAT, AGAIN, FORM BASE WORKS WELL, BUT SOMETIMES WHEN THE FORM, BECAUSE THE STORIES HAVE TO BE CALIBRATED CORRECTLY ALSO, UH, THAT CAN PLAY IN AS WELL.
AND I ALSO CIRCLED TO THAT THIS, THIS IS A TRANSIT-ORIENTED SITE.
THERE'S, UM, A LOT OF ENTITLEMENT TO THE WEST, UM, THAT ALLOWS CLOSER TO THAT ACTUALLY, THAT ALLOWS THAT 70, UM, FEAT.
UM, BUT NOT SO MUCH ON THIS SITE.
BUT WITH IT BEING A TRANSIT ORIENTED SITE, WE WANT TO UTILIZE LAND WELL, UM, AND HOUSE PEOPLE WHEN WE'RE CLOSE TO DOWNTOWN.
WE'RE, WE'RE A MILE FROM DOWNTOWN AND WE'RE RIGHT ON THE RED LINE THERE.
SO I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT FOR MAXIMIZING USE OF PROPERTY.
BUT I'M TRYING TO, UM, UNDERSTAND WHAT THE IMPACT COULD BE ON ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
WOULD THEY POSSIBLY BE LOOKING AT 80 FEET, FIVE OR 10 FEET FROM THEIR PROPERTY LINE? OH, AND I'D, I'D ALSO ADD THAT THEY'RE SEPARATE AND THAT'S NOT, SO BECAUSE THEY'RE SEPARATED FROM BY A STREET, FROM THE EXISTING, SINGLE FAMILY ZONING IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO THERE'S FLEMING STREET IN BETWEEN THEM AND THE, AND THIS PROPERTY.
UM, AND I THINK THAT PART OF IT IS WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A BIG HIGHWAY HERE.
I THINK, I HOPE THAT IF A BIGGER BUILDING CAN ACT AS A BUFFER MM-HMM
IT, IT SHOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THE PROPERTIES TO THE EAST, UH, TO, FOR A LITTLE MORE ENCLOSURE AND A LITTLE MORE SEPARATION FROM THAT HIGHWAY.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WITH IT BEING A, A VACANT LOT OR AN OPEN LOT, UM, YOU'RE PRETTY EXPOSED TO THE FREEWAY THERE.
AND THE, UM, ENTITLEMENT FOR STRUCTURES PROJECTING 10, UH, 12 FEET ABOVE THE MAXIMUM STRUCTURE HEIGHT.
I'M SORRY, I DON'T KNOW EVERY DETAIL OF FORM-BASED ZONING.
IS THAT A, A STANDARD FEATURE OF FORM-BASED ZONING OR IS THAT ADDED? ADDED HERE? THAT'S STANDARD IN THE BASE.
[00:25:01]
IN THE BASE CODE.AND I THINK HE WAS HOPING FOR IT IN THIS, UH, ITERATION OF FORM BASE.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON CASE NUMBER SIX, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
UM, I HAD SOME SIMILAR QUESTIONS TO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, PARTICULARLY REGARDING THE HEIGHT.
UM, WAS THERE DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT OF WM U THREE, WHICH SEEMS MORE ALIGNED WITH EXISTING? HE, HIS ORIGINAL REQUEST WAS 85 FEET.
UM, SO WHEN IT WAS LOOKING AT THE FORM DISTRICT, WMU FIVE WAS, UM, WHAT HE, HE THE DEVELOPMENT THAT HE WANTED ALIGNED MORE WITH, AND I GUESS I HAD SIMILAR QUESTIONS WITH THE ADJACENCY, UM, TO THE 10TH STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THIS SCALE WITHOUT UM, HAVING ANY BUFFER TRANSITION, UM, BETWEEN THE TWO MIGHT OVERWHELM THE SCALE OF WHAT IS PREDOMINANTLY SMALLER BUNGALOW STYLE RESIDENCES.
AND THAT WASN'T A CONSIDERATION IN STAFF'S EVALUATION.
WELL I THINK A BIG PART OF IT IS INCREASING OUR COMPATIBILITY IN A COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL AREA IS FIRST AND FOREMOST TAKING OFFLINE THE POTENTIAL FOR CS USES AND A USE AND A DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN ACCOMMODATE THAT.
I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
AND AGAIN, A BIGGER BUILDING WILL ACT A, ALTHOUGH IT'S RESIDENTIAL, A BIGGER BUILDING WILL, UM, ACT AS THAT BUFFER FROM THE, UH, THE WEST.
AND I DON'T, I THINK THERE'S MORE THREAT, UM, TO QUALITY OF LIFE FROM THE FREEWAY TO THE WEST THAN FROM A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ON THIS SIDE.
UM, COULD YOU ALSO HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE SHOP FRONT HEIGHT FROM 15 TO 10 FEET? THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY BE A LITTLE LOW IN TERMS OF CREATING, YOU KNOW, QUALITY USES BECAUSE IT IS SPECIFIC TO THE SHOP FRONT PROVISION.
SO, SO HIS, UH, REASONING WAS HE WANTED TO GO, UH, LOWER IN THE REQUIREMENTS SO THAT HE'S ABLE TO, UM, INCLUDE THE, THE APARTMENTS ABOVE.
UM, IN THE, THE, THE GROUND HEIGHT, THE MINIMUM IS, UH, 10 FEET, BUT THE MAXIMUM CAN GO UP TO 30 FEET.
AND THAT IS STILL, I GUESS, LET ME MAYBE TRY TO SAY IT DIFFERENTLY.
I THINK I'M MORE FAMILIAR WITH SEEING LOWER HEIGHTS ON RESIDENTIAL VERSUS, UM, COMMERCIAL OR, OR CHOP FRONT TYPE DEVELOPMENTS.
AND SO IT SEEMED LIKE YOU WOULD WANT THAT HIGHER, UM, GROUND PLANE.
AND SO I GUESS I'M NOT CLEAR ON, I I UNDERSTAND PUTTING THE USES ABOVE IT.
UM, YEAH, I'M JUST NOT, I HE'S LIMITED TO FIVE STORIES, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, BASED ON THE M WM E FIVE OR YES WM E FIVE.
I JUST, I'M NOT SEEING HOW THOSE RELATE AND WOULD IMPEDE GETTING THE RESIDENTIAL ABOVE.
I UNDERSTAND HE HASN'T FULLY SPECKED OUT WHERE HE WILL HAVE RETAIL PORTIONS AND WHERE HE'LL HAVE RESIDENTIAL PORTIONS.
SO HE, HE MAY WANT THAT FLEXIBILITY, UM, TO HAVE SOME OF THE GROUND FLOOR BE, UH, RETAIL, SOME OF IT BE RESIDENTIAL SINCE THAT'S NOT ALL PLOTTED OUT YET.
MY RECOLLECTION ON FORM-BASED CODE IS THAT THE LONG BLOCK WILL BE CONSIDERED THE FRONT YARD.
THERE'S SPECIFIC PROVISIONS THAT ALLOW, UM, PARKING AND LOADING IN THE FRONT YARD.
IS THAT INTENDED TO BE VEHICULAR LOADING? AND IF, IF SO, SHOULD THAT CLARIFICATION BE MADE? BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT'S, IT'S WRITTEN, IT WOULD ALLOW TRUCK DELIVERIES MORE ROBUST LOADING THAT I THINK WOULD BE COUNTER TO THE WALKABILITY STANDARDS.
I DID TALK TO HIM A LITTLE BIT.
I THINK HE MEANS, UM, DROP OFF SPACES POTENTIALLY.
AND I GUESS MY FINAL QUESTION RELATED TO THAT, THE SIDEWALKS ARE LISTED AS FIVE FOOT, I UNDERSTOOD THAT SIX FEET WAS THE GENERAL RECOMMENDATION FROM, UM, PLANNING STAFF MOVING FORWARD.
IS THERE A REASON WHY FIVE FEET WOULD BE INDICATED VERSUS A TYPICAL SIX FEET? PARTICULARLY AS WE'RE LOOKING AT INCREASING DENSITY? IT'S, IT'S THE MINIMUM UNDER STRIKE.
UH, SIDEWALK IS SIX FEET, BUT THE PATH THE PARK AWAY IS FIVE FEET.
I'M, I'M WILLING TO SAY I READ BY THAT TOO QUICKLY.
UH, ANYONE ELSE? FIRST ROUND BEFORE WE GO BACK TO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? COMMISSIONER HALL, MS. GARZA, I THINK WE HAD ONE, ONE LETTER IN OPPOSITION, I BELIEVE.
WE, AND IT DIDN'T SAY WHY THEY WERE OPPOSED OTHER THAN IT JUST HAD A, A JOTTED DOWN A NOTE ABOUT A FIVE STORY 400 UNIT.
IS THAT, IS THAT, UH, AND I ASSUME THEY MEAN APARTMENTS.
[00:30:01]
THIS PART? PART OF THIS DESIGN WOULD BE A FIVE STORY, 400 UNIT APARTMENT.THE APPLICATION DID STATE, UM, ORIGINALLY FOR 85 FEET, UM, THE MAGS HIDE THE OVERALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
UM, SO 8 85 FEET WOULD EASILY ACCOMMODATE FIVE STORIES.
I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT'S GOING TO BE HERE THIS AFTERNOON AND ABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
ANYONE ELSE? ROUND ONE? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, I SAW THE SAME, UM, UH, BALLOT OR EMAIL IN OPPOSITION THAT COMMISSIONER HALL DID AND UH, IT SEEMED TO BE SOMEONE FROM THE 10TH STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT WHO WAS SAYING THAT THEY DID NOT BELIEVE THAT A FIVE STORY APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH 400 UNITS WAS, UH, YOU KNOW, COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THEIR, IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
UNDER THIS PD WITH THE FORM BASE, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO BUILD A STRAIGHT APARTMENT BUILDING WITH NO MIXED USE, WHICH MIGHT EXPLAIN WHY THE THEY DON'T NEED THE 15 FOOT GROUND FLOOR? YES.
UH, THE CASE REPORT INDICATED THAT BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION OF THIS SITE IN PROXIMITY TO TRANSIT, THERE WOULD BE NO PARKING REQUIREMENT.
IS THAT FOR ALL USES? CORRECT.
WHEN WE GET TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE PD, IT SAYS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF SHARED ACCESS DEVELOPMENTS PARALLEL PARKING AND LOADING IN THE STREET AND FRONT YARD SHALL COUNT FOR IT SAYS COUNT FOR TOWARDS PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
HE MAY NOT NEED THAT AS IT'S NOT, UH, REQUIRED.
SO THERE WOULD BE NO PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER? NO, AS, AS WITH ALL OF OUR TRANSIT ADJACENCY.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? SORRY, I'M JUST GONNA ASK THE FOLLOW UP IS, IS IF IT IS INTENDED TO BE A PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL, UM, PROJECT, WHY WAS IT NOT WRWR FIVE AND WHY IS IT WM U'S? BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL IS A MIXED USE, UM, RESIDENTIAL WI WITH, UM, RETAIL.
I THINK THAT MAY BE COUNTER TO SOME OF THE COMMUNITY FEEDBACK, BUT I'LL SAVE THAT QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
YEAH, I THINK IN HIS, WE, WE MET WITH HIM ONCE OR TWICE AND I THINK HE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY FOR THAT.
SO HE'S LOOKING AT THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK HE HAS HIS TENANTS OR WHAT HAVE EVER, AND IT'S, I THINK MAYBE HE MENTIONED ESPECIALLY CLOSER TO THE FREEWAY, BUT THIS ZONING WOULD ALLOW THAT TO OCCUR.
SO IT'S NOT, UM, FORCED INTO ALL RESIDENTIAL OR ALL MIXED USE.
I FULLY SUPPORT THE IDEA OF MIXED USE.
I JUST WAS TRYING TO RESPOND TO WHAT WE WERE INFORMATION WE WERE RECEIVING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? ALRIGHT, NUMBER SEVEN.
I HAVE A CONFLICT ON IT, SO IF ANYONE WANTS IT BRIEFED OR HAS QUESTIONS ON ME TO STEP OUT AND TURN IT OVER TO COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
SO WOULD YOU UH, YES, I WOULD LIKE IT BRIEFED.
AND MR. KINGSTON RUN THE SHOW.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HERBERT FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE BACK ON THIS SIDE.
AND THIS IS AN APPLICATION TO TERMINATE RESTRICTIONS DRZ 8 34 12 3 ON PROPERTY ZONE CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT.
AND THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO TERMINATE GENERALLY UNENFORCEABLE DEED DECISIONS ON FILE FOR THE SITE.
UM, THIS IS THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CAMP WISDOM AND CLARK, UH, ALSO KNOWN AS 6,800 WEST CAMP WISDOM.
[00:35:01]
ABOUT SIX ACRES AND IT'S IN THE SOUTH SOUTHWEST OF THE CITY IN D THREE.AND HERE'S THE SITE, UH, AERIAL MAP OF THE SITE TODAY.
IT IS UNDEVELOPED AND IT IS SURROUNDED BY, UH, MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTH AND TO THE EAST AND UNDER DEVELOPMENT WITH MULTIFAMILY TO THE WEST AND, AND, UH, RETAIL TO THE WEST.
IT HAS, UH, THESE D RESTRICTIONS, IT'S CONSIDERED TRACKED SIX B WITHIN THOSE D RESTRICTIONS.
THAT'S A SET OF D RESTRICTIONS THAT, UM, GOES OVER A BUNCH MORE SITES THAN JUST THIS.
WE CAN ONLY TERMINATE THE APPLICABILITY, UH, WITH RESPECT TO TRACK SIX B TODAY.
UM, WITH THE PERMISSIONS THAT WE HAVE AND, AND NOTIFICATION.
SO CR TODAY PERMITS, UH, RETAIL USES, UM, UNDER STATE LAW.
WE DO HAVE TO PERMIT THOSE MULTIFAMILY, UM, WITHOUT A LIMIT ON DENSITY OR FLOOR AREA, WHICH IS WHAT THE, THE DEAN RESTRICTIONS ESSENTIALLY DO.
UM, SO THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE PICTURED IN THE REPORT.
UM, BUT GENERALLY THEY PROHIBIT, UH, MULTIFAMILY USES AND HAVE SOME LIMITATIONS ON FLOORS AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UH, THERE ARE ALSO SOME LIMITS ON HEIGHT.
I THINK THIS WAS PUT IN PLACE WHEN, UH, IT WASN'T CR IT WAS SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT, SO IT HAD A HIGHER HEIGHT THAN THE CR AT THE TIME.
UM, SO SOME OF THAT IS DEFUNCT, UH, AS WELL.
UH, GENERALLY YES, WE DO HAVE TO, WE CAN'T ENFORCE THIS.
SO, UM, THEY'RE ONLY HERE, UM, TO REMOVE FOR THEIR, FOR THE SAKE OF THEIR LENDER.
UM, THEY'VE SUBMITTED FOR PERMIT AT THIS TIME.
UM, I'M ON CLARK ROAD AT THE BUS STOP THERE.
UH, A LITTLE FURTHER UP CLARK ROAD CLOSER TO THE MULTIFAMILY ON CLARK WOOD.
TURN A CORNER UP INTO CLARK WOOD, THE MULTIFAMILY BACK THERE LOOKING ACROSS THE SITE.
UH, THIS IS A BIGGER UNDEVELOPED SITE AND THEN I THINK THERE'S MULTIFAMILY BEING BUILT BACK BEHIND THIS GAS STATION.
I HAVE THE WRONG BOX CIRCLE FOR COMMUNITY MIXED USE, BUT THIS IS COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL.
UH, WE ARE AT THE INTERSECTION, TWO PRIMARY ARTERIALS.
UM, SO I, I WOULD SAY THAT THE MULTIFAMILY USE IS SUPPORTED, ESPECIALLY WITH THE ZONING ON THE GROUND, UH, IN THE AREA.
UM, THOSE HERE, HERE ARE THOSE D RESTRICTIONS, UM, AS APPLICABLE TO SIX B.
WE CAN'T TOUCH THE OTHER TRACKS, ALTHOUGH, UH, A COUPLE YEARS BACK WE REMOVED THE RESTRICTIONS ON SIX A, WHICH IS THE SITE TO THE WEST.
I'LL COME BACK TO THOSE IF THERE WAS ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE.
BUT GENERALLY WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UH, YES.
COMMISSIONER HALL? DON'T MIND.
THIS SITE IS VERY, VERY CLOSE TO A SOMEWHAT BITTERLY CONTESTED ZONING CASE THAT WE HAD AT ARTESIA CREEK, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, I REMEMBER.
AND, UH, DO, UH, HAS THERE BEEN ANY OPPOSITION EXPRESSED TO THIS THING? I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANYTHING.
WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANYTHING IN THE MAIL.
THE COMMISSIONER MAY KNOW MORE ABOUT, UM, THAT OUTREACH 'CAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE A SMART NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT NO, I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANYTHING NOR HAS THERE BEEN ANYTHING IN WRITING.
THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT CA SITUATION THOUGH, BECAUSE THE CREEK DOES NOT RUN ANY REALLY NEAR THIS.
AND SO THIS DOESN'T HAVE ANY DIRECT IMPACT ON THE CREEK, I ASSUME? NO, NOTHING WE FOUND, NO, NO FLOODPLAIN, UM, UH, TO SPEAK OF ON THE SITE.
UH, I IN TOOK LAST TIME I HAD VISITED FOR THAT OTHER SITE, I TOOK THE BUS HERE, I, YOU, YOU COME HERE UP AT THE TOP, YOU'RE WAY UPHILL FROM THAT CREEK AS YOU GO DOWN CAMP WISDOM, YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE LITERALLY GOING DOWNHILL TO THAT CREEK.
SO IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY UPHILL FROM THAT.
HERBERT, DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YES, I DID.
UM, UH, WHICH PARTS OF TRACK B ARE STILL ENFORCEABLE TODAY, IF ANY ARE, AND, UM, WHY ARE WE TERMINATING THEM ALL INSTEAD OF ONLY THE PARTS, UH, STATE LAW VOIDS? YEAH, NO, GOOD QUESTION.
SO NUMBER A, UH, SAYS TWO STORIES IN HEIGHT EXCEPT A HOTEL LIMITED TO 84.
OF COURSE THAT'S HIGHER THAN THE BASE ZONING.
SO THIS WAS APPLICABLE, UH, WHEN IT WAS A CS DISTRICT.
SO THE HEIGHT JUST ACTUALLY GOES IN DEFAULTS TO THE, THE FIVE B.
[00:40:01]
LIMIT ON, ON THIS PROJECT BECAUSE, UH, WE HAVE TO ALLOW THAT 45 FEET.UM, THAT STORY LIMIT IS, IS NOT ENFORCEABLE FOR THE PROJECT THAT'S SUBMITTED TODAY.
THE FLOOR AREA, WE CAN'T LIMIT A FLOOR AREA RATIO, UH, FOR MIXED USE AND MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS.
UH, C PROHIBITS MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS CAN'T DO THAT IF IT PERMITS RETAIL FIVE IS WEIRD.
UH, IT'S A LOT OF WORDS TO SAY.
YOU GET ADDITIONAL DENSITY AND UNITS IF YOU BUILD CAMP WISDOM AND CEDAR RIDGE, UH, AND CLARK ROAD TO THOROUGHFARE STANDARD, THOSE ARE BUILT OUT TO THOROUGHFARE STANDARD TODAY.
BUT I ALSO DON'T THINK WE COULD ENFORCE THE FLORA AREA, UM, AND RESIDENTIAL DENSITY ON THIS.
UM, THAT'S LIKE A CROSS-CUTTING ONE.
WE'RE NOT TERMINATING THAT FROM THE OTHER TRACKS.
WE'RE TERMINATING ITS APPLICABILITY TO THIS TRACK.
BUT AGAIN, THOSE, UM, THERE ARE FAIR OBLIGATIONS HAVE GENERALLY BEEN, UM, FULFILLED BY WHOMEVER.
YOU MENTIONED THE, UH, C COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL, UH, WHERE APARTMENTS ARE SUPPORTING USE AND NOT A PRIMARY ONE.
UM, DID YOU GUYS CONSIDER FINDING, UM, ANY CONSISTENCY THERE? UM, IT, AND DO YOU THINK A FOURTH MULTIFAMILY CORNER AT THIS INTERSECTION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PLANS CALL TO, UH, COMPLEMENT EXISTING CONTEXT? YEAH, NO, NO.
UM, IF THIS IS BUILT OUT AS MULTIFAMILY, I I THINK IT'S CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING LAND USES, UM, WITH THOSE OTHER MULTIFAMILIES ADJACENT.
SO A LOT OF WHAT ZONING DOES IS, IS LOOK FOR COMPATIBLE AND COM COMPLIMENTARY USES TO EACH OTHER.
UM, SO WITH THE MULTIFAMILIES OF THE NORTH AND TO THE EAST, UH, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE AN INCONSISTENCY WITH THAT.
UM, I WOULD CAUTION AGAINST, SO WE'RE TALKING COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL PRIMARY USES IN, IN THAT ARE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED AND SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED.
SO I WOULD LOOK MORE FOR A SUPPORTING USE HERE ON A INTERSECTION OF TWO THREE LANE, WAIT, WAIT, EXCUSE ME, SIX LANE, UM, ARTERIALS.
SO I WOULD NOT BE LOOKING NECESSARILY FOR THE PRIMARY USE OF, OF SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED OR DETACHED ON THIS KIND OF CORNER.
UM, SO I DO THINK THAT THE EXISTING ZONING THAT THEY'VE GOT OF CR UM, CAN DO THE TRICK.
UM, ESPECIALLY 'CAUSE CR ALLOWS, UM, RESIDENTIAL NOW.
AND REGARDING THE EIGHT 40, UH, THAT HAS COME UP ALREADY, DID, DID STAFF CONSIDER, UM, WHETHER THE, THE APPLICANT WOULD VOLUNTEER LIKE, UH, LIGHTING, UM, EAST EDGE BUFFERING OR EVEN UM, TRASH PICKUP, ANY OF THAT BEEN DISCUSSED OR IN, OR BEING HELD UP IN, IN THE, THE, THEIR CASE AT ALL? YEAH, SO A A LOT OF, A LOT THINGS APPLY, SO SORRY, THE SCREEN'S FLASHED IN THE ROOM HERE, PSYCHED ME OUT.
UM, DUMPSTERS GENERALLY HAVE TO BE SCREENED AND THAT'S ARTICLE 10.
THAT'S A FACT FOR MULTIFAMILY USES AND, AND OTHER THINGS WHEN, WHEN THEY'RE NEAR OTHER RESIDENTIAL USES, ET CETERA.
UM, IF THEY BUILD OUT THIS SITE WITH COMMERCIAL OR A PORTION OF COMMERCIAL USES, THEY HAVE TO BUILD TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF SCREENING AND BUFFERING.
UM, BECAUSE THEY'RE MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTH AND MULTIFAMILY TO THE EAST, THEY HAVE THE SAME STANDARDS FOR LIGHTING, ADJACENCIES, SCREENING, UH, REQUIREMENTS AND BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS.
SO THEY, THEY DO HAVE TO MEET THOSE, UM, THOSE ARE IN THE BASE CODE FOR SCREENING.
THEY'RE IN ARTICLE 10 FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIKE ELSEWHERE FOR THE, FOR THE, UM, THE LIGHTING PROVISION.
SO THEY'RE HELD TO THE SAME STANDARD AS THEIR, THEIR NEIGHBORS I'D.
WELL, SO FIRST OF ALL, THEY'VE SUBMITTED FOR PERMIT.
THERE MAY BE A DEGREE THAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED AT THIS POINT IN TERMS OF WHAT, UM, CAN BE BUILT.
UM, AND I'D JUST BE A LITTLE HESITANT TO UM, WELL WE CAN'T ACTUALLY, WE CAN'T REQUEST A RESTRICTIONS.
UM, AND IN ANY CASE, BUT I'D BE HESITANT TO, UH, PUSH FOR THEM IN ANY WAY, UM, WHEN THEY HAVE UM, A LOT OF THEIR RIGHTS BAKED IN UNDER THE BILL.
ANOTHER THING THAT CAME UP WITH SENIOR HOUSING, THEY'VE COMMITTED TO SENIOR HOUSING.
UM, I KNOW WE'VE SEEN THAT WRITTEN IN REPORTS BEFORE, BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN IT HERE.
UH, IS STAFF AWARE OF IT? UM, AND IS THERE ANY WAY TO COMMIT THEM TO SENIOR HOUSING? UH, NO.
I THINK WE IN UNDER EIGHT 40 TREAT RETIREMENT HOUSING AND MULTIFAMILY PRETTY INTERCHANGEABLY.
[00:45:01]
UM, IF WE'VE GOT ONE, WE'VE KIND OF GOT THE OTHER BECAUSE THEY'RE MULTIFAMILY USES BOTH AT THE END OF THE DAY, I DON'T THINK WE CAN LOCK IN ANYTHING FROM A LAND USE PERSPECTIVE FOR THIS SITE, ESPECIALLY WHEN OUR RETAIL USES ARE ALREADY PERMITTED.UH, IF THEY VOLUNTEERED A SENIOR DESIGNATION RESTRICTION, WOULD THAT HOLD UP? I DON'T THINK WE COULD ENFORCE IT FROM A LAND USE PERSPECTIVE.
I'M, I'M SURE THEY'RE WILLING TO, TO WORK WITH US ON, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, UH, THEIR BUILDING THEIR REPUTATION AS A BUILDER IN THE AREA AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.
BUT WE, WE COULDN'T ENFORCE THAT, UH, EVEN IF THEY VOLUNTEERED IT, YOU KNOW, EVERY, EVERY REGULATION THAT A DEVELOPER OUR APPLICANT BRINGS FORWARD, UM, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF THEY VOLUNTEER IT, IT'S STILL A RESPONSIBILITY FOR US.
AND SO EVEN IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ALL COOL WITH IT, IT'S STILL A BURDEN AND, AND AN, UH, RESPONSIBILITY FOR US TO, TO ENFORCE.
UM, SO I CAN'T THINK OF A MECHANISM WE COULD ENFORCE THAT WITH.
UM, NEITHER HERE, THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO, THAT'S ALL.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU CHAIR RUBEN'S.
NOW WE'RE ONTO OUR ON YOUR ADVISEMENT CASES.
HAS THAT ONE BEEN BRIEFED? DO WE NEED IT BRIEFED? NO, WE DON'T NEED THIS ONE BRIEF.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON CASE NUMBER EIGHT? OKAY.
QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BRIEFING? NO.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN BRIEFING QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? UH, NO, THIS ONE HAD ALREADY BEEN BRIEFED.
AND OUR LAST ZONING CASE OF THE DAY, CASE NUMBER 11, COMMISSIONER SERATO.
I KNOW IT'S BEEN BRIEF BEFORE, DO YOU WANT AN UPDATE OR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YEAH, CAN WE, UH, GET A UPDATE AND THEN I'LL JUST UH, HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
I DON'T THINK WE'VE UPDATED OUR PRIMARY PRESENTATION MATERIALS OR ANYTHING, UH, VERY LATE.
UH, WE RE RECEIVED SOME UPDATED CONDITIONS AND A SITE PLAN, UM, AND THEN THEIR PROJECTED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT.
UM, I DID ASK FOR THOSE TO BE DISTRIBUTED.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW THAT WAS, UH, EARLY TODAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE GOTTEN TO THAT POINT, BUT, UM, THEY WOULD PROBABLY BE HAPPY TO SPEAK TO THOSE.
THE, THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER SERATO.
UM, HOW MUCH COMMUNICATION HAVE YOU RECEIVED FROM DISD IN THE LAST COUPLE WEEKS? REGARDING ANY CHANGES OR ANY OF THE QUESTIONS WE HAD AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING? I'M, I'M THINKING THEY WOULD BE WELL EQUIPPED TO ANSWER THE CHANGES THAT THEY CAN PUT FORWARD, BUT UM, LIKE I SAID, I THINK THE, THE SITE PLAN THAT THEY DISTRIBUTED HAD SOME MORE, UM, DETAIL ON WHERE THINGS ARE.
I DON'T HAVE IT IN THIS UNFORTUNATELY.
UH, IT WAS, UH, LATE IN THE GAME, BUT, UH, DID HAVE THAT DISTRIBUTED.
THEY'LL HAVE IT FOR DISPLAY THROUGH THEIR PROCESS.
WE'VE DEFINITELY BEEN BEEN TALKING WITH THEM, UM, TRYING TO, TO SORT THROUGH SO THEY CAN, EVERYONE CAN BE MOST SUCCESSFUL.
BUT YEAH, THOSE, THOSE CONDITIONS AND PLAN, LEMME SEE.
LIKE I SAID, THE PLAN GENERALLY SHOWS YEAH, LOOKS LIKE THEY'VE BEEN DISTRIBUTED.
THE PLAN GENERALLY SHOWS A LITTLE MORE DETAIL WHERE ZONES OF THINGS WHERE THINGS WILL BE ON THE SITE, THEY'LL, THEY'RE HELD TO THAT IF IT'S IN AN SEP SITE PLAN.
AND THEN THE CONDITIONS, UM, SPECIFY MORE ON THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.
UM, I GUESS I ASK BECAUSE WHEN WE RECEIVED THE DOCKET THERE WEREN'T MANY CHANGES.
UM, SO MOST OF THE COMMUNICATION YOU'VE RECEIVED HAS BEEN THIS WEEK FROM DISD IN TERMS OF OFFICIAL MATERIALS.
I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN TALKING TO THEM.
WE, WE SHARED, UM, PRACTICAL STEPS IN LIGHT OF THE CONVERSATION THAT WAS HAD HERE.
[00:50:01]
DON'T GET MATERIALS, WE DID NOT, THAT'S A VERY LONG WAY OF SAYING WE DIDN'T GET ANY OFFICIAL MATERIALS UNTIL AFTER WE HAD TO POST.UH, WOULD'VE HAD TO WRAP UP, UH, UH, OVER A WEEK AGO TO, FOR THE POSTING DEADLINE.
UM, SO IN TERMS OF THE, THESE OFFICIAL MATERIALS, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE NOT IN THE DOCKET.
AND I KNOW THERE WERE A LOT OF QUESTIONS LAST WEEK BROUGHT UP ABOUT LIKE WHAT'S GOING TO BE HANDLED HERE AT COMMISSION VERSUS AT PERMITTING.
COULD WE GET ANY CLARITY ON LIKE WHAT DASD IS REQUIRED TO SHOW US AND PRESENT TO US? UM, I ONLY RECEIVED A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AN HOUR AND A HALF AGO AND IT'S INCOMPLETE.
UM, SO JUST I WANT MORE CLARITY ON LIKE WHAT WE'RE REQUIRING FROM SCHOOLS WHEN THEY'RE, WHEN THEY HAVE ZONING CHANGES, UM, WHAT ARE WE EXPECTED TO SEE AND REQUIRE FROM SCHOOLS? YES.
SO WITH THE CASE IN FRONT OF US AT THIS TIME, THEY HAVE THEIR SITE PLAN.
THEY DID, LIKE I SAID, PROPOSE A MORE DETAILED SITE PLAN, UM, THAT HAS THEIR BUILDING FOOTPRINT, BUILDABLE FOOTPRINT AND THEN, UM, SOME OF THE SPORTS AREAS.
AND THEN I BELIEVE IT HAD A MAXIMUM HEIGHT ON IT, WHICH IS, IS CUTS THE THINGS THAT THEY CAN DO ON THE SITE.
SO GENERALLY WITH THESE SUVS, IT'S WHAT'S ADDED IN THE CONDITIONS.
AN SUP IS AN OR IS JUST A SIMPLE ORDINANCE THAT IT IS, THIS IS THE USE THAT'S ADDITIONALLY PERMITTED.
THESE ARE THE EIGHT OR NINE RULES THEY'RE HELD TO.
SO WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY HAVE, I'M TRYING TO PULL UP, UM, SITE PLAN IS A REQUIREMENT.
SO THEY ARE VERY MUCH HELD TO THAT IN THE ORDINANCE.
AND LIKE I SAID, THAT IS MORE DETAILED THAN IT WAS AT THE PREVIOUS HEARING.
OF COURSE IT'S NOT IN THE DOCKET.
UM, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED AND TO THE CITY AND THEN APPROVED AT THAT POINT.
SORRY, I'M TRYING TO FIND THOSE CONDITIONS THAT THEY SENT.
UM, AND ALL THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE BUILT INTO THE, THE SUP, THOSE ARE THERE.
SO, UH, INGRESS AND EGRESS IS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.
UH, OR THEY HAVE TO, LET ME SEE.
YEAH, THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE SITE PLAN.
UM, LEMME SEE IF I CAN ACTUALLY PULL UP.
UM, AND TRUST ME, IT FLUFFERS ME AS MUCH AS Y'ALL WHEN WE GET, UM, DOCUMENTS AT A LATE DATE.
UM, SO THEY'RE HELD TO THIS
SO THEY DID MENTION WHERE THEIR PROPOSED DRIVEWAY APPROACHES ARE, UM, ON HERE.
AND THAT'S ONE OF THE CONDITIONS I MENTIONED DRIVEWAYS, 'CAUSE I'M GOING DOWN THE SDP CONDITIONS ON MY, ON MY OTHER HAND THAT WILL BE IN THE ORDINANCE.
UM, THE OTHER THINGS LIKE THE LIGHT STANDARDS FOR ATHLETIC FIELDS, THOSE ARE IN THERE.
THOSE ARE GONNA BE LIMITED IN HEIGHT AND IN HOURS.
AND, UH, COMPLY WITH THE DARK SKY REGULATIONS, THEY STILL HAVE TO MEET THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.
SO THEY'LL HAVE TO BUILD THOSE OUT.
IT'S PRETTY TYPICAL THAT THEY DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THOSE ARE, BUT THERE'S STILL A REQUIREMENT.
UM, A LOT OF THESE THINGS IS LIKE ANY ZONING, IT'S A, IT'S A RULE REQUIREMENT, NOT, UM, A A PLAN REQUIREMENT.
AND IT'S A LOT MORE USEFUL THAT WAY.
UM, AS BEING A A, A WRITTEN TEXT, IT'S MORE ENFORCEABLE THAN A, THAN A PLAN NECESSARILY.
UM, THEN THE SIDEWALKS THAT THEY, THESE ARE IN THE ORDINANCE AND THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE, THE ORDINANCE AS DRAFTED.
UM, THEY'RE GONNA REBUILD SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS AND WITH THE FIVE FOOT BUFFER THEY DID LET US KNOW, UH, A DAY OR SO AGO IN, IN CONVERSATION THAT THAT'S, THAT'S DEFINITELY GONNA BE ON EVERY CASE.
THEY'RE GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH REPLACING SIDEWALKS, UPGRADING THEM TO SIX, UM, WITH A BUFFER, UM, WHICH IS GREATER THAN WHAT THEIR INTERNAL STANDARDS ARE, BUT YOU KNOW, TO, TO PUT IT IN THE ZONING, UH, MAKES IT MORE ENFORCEABLE AND, AND, UH, AN IMPROVEMENT.
SO THEY'LL HAVE TO IMPROVE ALL OF THE SIDEWALKS AROUND THE SITE, WHETHER THEY'RE ON THE PLAN OR NOT.
AND THEN THE MOST RECENT TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, THEY, THEY MUST, A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF DALLAS TREE DESIGN MANUAL MUST BE PREPARED BY A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER AT THE STATE OF TEXAS.
SO THEY'LL HAVE TO SUBMIT THAT TO THE CITY.
I'LL HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY, BY TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ARE AT THE TIME PERMITTING.
I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO ASK IS ARE, ARE WE NO LONGER GOING TO, ARE, YOU KNOW, UM, I'M TRYING TO THINK OF A NICE WAY TO SAY THIS.
[00:55:01]
ARE WE NOT HOLDING, YOU KNOW, DISD OR OTHER SCHOOLS TO THE SAME STANDARD WE'VE HELD BEFORE WITH REGARDS TO, YOU KNOW, THE DETAILED SITE PLANS, A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN? UM, 'CAUSE I, I, I ONLY RECEIVED A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AN HOUR AND A HALF AGO AND THERE IT'S, IT'S NOT BEEN APPROVED YET.UM, AND SO THE IDEA OF LIKE LEAVING IT UP TO PERMITTING, SO I MEAN THIS IS GONNA HELP ME DECIDE WHAT TO DO TODAY.
LIKE, UM, IS THIS GOING TO BE THE STANDARD FOR THE 30 PLUS SCHOOLS THAT ARE GONNA BE COMING FROM DISD THAT WE'RE NOT REQUIRING ALL OF THESE DETAILS? WELL, YES, AND I, I DON'T, I, BY NO MEANS DO I BELIEVE THIS TO BE A, UH, A SITUATION UNIQUE TO, TO DISTRICT FIVE OR THIS CASE IN PARTICULAR.
I THINK IT'S THE KIND OF STREAMLINING THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO DO BROADLY AS THEY MOVE FORWARD SEVERAL, SEVERAL SCHOOLS, UM, AND TRY AND ALIGN THIS ZONING PROCESS, WHICH IS A SLICE OF THE PROCESS WITH THE OVERALL INTENSIVE PERMITTING THAT THAT FOLLOWS.
UM, SO THEY'VE, I THINK THEY'VE VOLUNTEERED THEIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR REVIEW AT THIS STEP.
BUT LIKE ANY TRAFFIC DOCUMENT, UH, WELL FOR EXAMPLE, TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT WE RECEIVE FOR AS ZONING CASES, THOSE ARE EVOLVING DOCUMENTS WHEN WE SEE A TIA OR A TRAFFIC DOCUMENT HERE TO BUILD A LARGE, UH, MULTIFAMILY OR MIXED USE COMPLEX AND THERE'S A-T-T-I-A OR TRAFFIC STUDY, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, THAT'S OFTEN A, A STUDY, IT'S AN ASSESSMENT.
THOSE DOCUMENTS EVOLVE AS THE PLANS GET REFINED.
I THINK THAT THIS IS MORE SIMILAR TO THAT, UM, THAT OCCURS.
AND SO THOSE ARE DOCUMENTS THAT THEY STARTED THIS PLACE, THEY MUST BE KIND OF CLOSED UP AND STAMPED AND, AND APPROVED BY THE END OF THAT PROCESS BEFORE THEY CAN, CAN DO ALL THEIR PERMITTING, UM, WHERE THEY HAVE TO IMPROVE THEIR IMPROVEMENT.
UH, I THINK THEY'VE SHOWN IT TO US FOR, FOR DEMONSTRATION, UM, AS TRANS AS TRANSPORTATION NOTED IT'S NOT NOT FINISHED AND IT HAS TO BE FINISHED BEFORE THEY CLOSE THIS PROCESS FOR PERMITTING.
CAN I JUMP IN HERE JUST FOR A MINUTE FOR SORT OF AN INFORMATIONAL POINT IS, I WASN'T HERE AT THE LAST MEETING WHEN SAMUEL WAS UP, BUT I DID WATCH A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THAT MEETING AND I'VE BEEN IN CONVERSATION WITH CITY STAFF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE GIVEN THE NUMBER OF DISD CASES THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE GETTING OVER WHATEVER PERIOD OF TIME ABOUT POTENTIALLY EITHER HAVING A BRIEFING ON THESE DSDS CASES OR EVEN IF IT'S POSSIBLE UNDER OUR RULES AND TOMA A SORT OF WORK SESSION WHERE THE BODY CAN SIT DOWN WITH DISD GIVEN THE, THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT ARE COMING SO WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOME OF THESE POINTS THAT CAME UP AND IT JUST SO HAPPENED THAT I THINK SAMUEL WAS THE, THE FIRST CASE BUT THAT, THAT CAME UP WITH SAMUEL THAT ARE POTENTIALLY LIKELY TO RECUR.
SO I'VE REQUESTED THAT THE PRECISE FORMAT IS STILL NEEDS TO BE SORTED OUT BETWEEN, UM, YOU KNOW, CITY STAFF, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND AS WELL FIGURING OUT WHAT ROLE DISD MIGHT PLAY BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THEM AT THE TABLE TOO, POSSIBLY EVEN IN A MORE CONVERSATIONAL WAY AS OPPOSED TO JUST A BRIEFING, YOU KNOW, LIKE WE SEE MOST OF THE TIME WHERE WE JUST ASK QUESTIONS OF A PRIVATE PRESENTATION, A BRIEFING.
SO I DID WANNA JUST PUT THAT OUT THERE THAT THAT IS IN THE WORKS AND I HOPE TO KEEP THE BODY UPDATED AND HOPE TO HAVE THAT HAPPEN SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.
AND I PROBABLY WOULD'VE SAID SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN UM, SEPTEMBER, BUT UNFORTUNATELY I WAS TAKEN AWAY FROM LAST MEETING, SO.
AND, AND YOU KNOW, AND, AND THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I THINK, UM, A DEDICATED BRIEFING IS, IS POSSIBLE.
SO WE DISCUSSED IT A LITTLE BIT INTERNALLY, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY HAVE A BRIEFING THAT INCLUDES US, INCLUDES DISD AND THAT WAY IT CAN BE MORE BROAD, UM, AND MORE PRINCIPLED, WHAT WAS I GONNA SAY? UM, AND NOT NOT FOCUSED ENTIRELY ON ONE SCHOOL.
IF WE POST IT AS A GENERAL BRIEFING, IT CAN BE A BROADER DISCUSSION AND IT CAN INCLUDE D-I-S-D-S-A, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE BODY BRIEFING OR ONE OF THE PEOPLE BRIEFING CPC AND I'LL JUST ADD IF ANYONE HAS INPUT ON WHAT THEY THINK THAT BRIEFING OR OTHER, WHETHER IT'S A WORK SESSION OR BRIEFING OR WHATEVER IT ENDS UP BEING, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY'D LIKE TO SEE OUT OF IT OR FORMAT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
[01:00:01]
MORE THAN OPEN TO IDEAS, SO PLEASE DON'T HESITATE TO LET ME KNOW AND LET CITY STAFF KNOW AND WE CAN HOPEFULLY FIND A WAY FORWARD THERE SOON R RIGHT.AND, AND I THINK THEY'D BE HAPPY TO HAVE THAT AND, AND STAFF WOULD AS WELL.
I THINK LAST TIME ONE OF THE THINGS I SAID IS, HEY, THEY'RE LOOKING FOR PREDICTABILITY, WHICH IS CLOSER TO, TO BEST PRACTICES STANDARDS THAT APPLY ACROSS THE BOARD, UM, IN A FAIR AND PREDICTABLE WAY.
I THINK IF THIS BODY HAD THOSE IN MIND, STAFF WOULD HELP ACCOMMODATE THEM AND DISD WOULD PROBABLY ACCEPT THEM.
ALRIGHT, I, I HOPPED IN THERE.
MR. SARDA, WERE YOU DONE WITH QUESTIONS FOR NOW? YEAH.
UM, I SERVED SOMEONE ON LINE FIRST, UH, COMMISSIONER REALER.
UM, YES, UH, UH, I THINK I WANTED TO ASK THAT.
UM, I MEAN, WELL TO WHAT YOU, WHAT YOU SAID COMMISSIONER, UM, I MEAN, UH, CHAIR PROBABLY.
I ALSO ACTUALLY FOR US TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT WHAT THEY HAVE DONE BECAUSE AS I SAID IN OUR LAST STATE, UM, I MEAN LAST TIME THEY WERE HERE, WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN MOST SCHOOLS.
I, I KNOW I INTERJECTED COMMISSIONER WHEELER, REAGAN.
I KNOW I INTERJECTED MENTIONING THE, THE BRIEFING OR WORK SESSION, BUT YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS ON THAT, LET'S SEE IF THAT FOR, THIS IS JUST QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW.
SO, UM, UM, I THINK THE QUESTION I WANTED TO ASK IS, UM, IN, IN THE STAKE OF NOT HOLDING, 'CAUSE WE, WE'VE GOT REALLY WELL AND NOT, NOT HOLDING A SD CASES PERIOD.
WHAT CAN BE WORKED OUT TODAY AND THEN, AND THEN WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO BEFORE A MAKE IT TO COUNCIL.
COULD WE PUT THAT INTO THAT, INTO THAT TODAY? SAY, HEY, THIS IS, THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT NEEDS TO BE MET BEFORE YOU CAN MAKE IT TO COUNSEL.
UM, MR.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF, IF WE MOTION HERE FOR SOME KIND OF CHANGE TO A PLAN, THEY HAVE TO FULFILL THAT BEFORE THEY GO TO COUNCIL.
UM, THEY CAN SPEAK MORE TO, UH, THE THINGS THAT THEY FEEL CAPABLE OF.
I'M SURE THEY WANT TO KEEP ON A SCHEDULE, UM, WITH THIS AND ALL OF THEIR 30 ISH CASES.
UM, BUT YEAH, A MOTION CAN BE MADE HERE THAT, THAT ASKS FOR A CHANGE AND THEN THEY HAVE TO FULFILL IT.
WE TYPICALLY DON'T SCHEDULE THEM UNTIL THEY'VE DONE IT, BUT, UM, IN THESE CASES THEY'RE PROBABLY ON TOP OF IT.
UM, HOW IS THE PLAINTIFF THEY PRESENTED TO TAKE PARABLE TO THE PLANS THAT OF THE RECENT SCHOOLS THAT THEY HAVE SUBMITTED THAT HAVE WENT THROUGH OUR BOARD, UM, UH, THAT WE, THAT WE VOTED ON AND HAS WENT THROUGH COUNCIL AND THE MORE RECENT, UH, SCHOOL, UH, THE SCHOOL PLANS THAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED.
I DIDN'T, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T CATCH THE THE LAST PART.
WELL AS COMPARABLE TO THE MOST RECENT PLANS THAT THEY HAVE BROUGHT BEFORE THIS BODY.
HOW DOES THESE PLANS COMPARE TO THOSE? THANK YOU.
THAT WAS, THAT WAS LOUD AND CLEAR.
UH, SO SUP SITE PLANS, ANDS DEVELOPMENTS BUILT IN SUVS HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING.
UM, SO FIRST OF ALL, THERE'S THE ZONING THAT IS ON THE GROUND UNDERNEATH THERE THAT'S BINDING THEM AND TELLING THEM TO DO SOMETHING.
THEN AN SUP HAS SUP CONDITIONS COMMONLY.
ONE OF THE SUP CONDITIONS IS THE SITE PLAN.
AND SO THE SITE PLAN, UM, THEY'VE UPDATED IT A LITTLE BIT.
IT'S HERE IN FRONT OF US TODAY, UM, WITH MORE DETAIL.
IT DOESN'T SHOW EVERY NOOK AND CRANNY OF BUILDING, UM, WHERE BUILDING WALLS WILL BE AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT IT DOES SHOW A BUILDABLE AREA.
UM, AND I DON'T WANT US TO GET SO FOCUSED ON, ON SPECIFIC BUILDING PLANS FROM OTHER CASES, UM, BECAUSE THOSE ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
THERE ARE THINGS LIKE MINOR AMENDMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT WHERE WE DON'T REALLY GAIN ANYTHING.
I THINK THAT THIS BODY, I MEAN IF WE'RE DOING ZONING, WE SHOULD BE LOOKING MORE AT BUILDING ENVELOPES RATHER THAN BUILDING WALLS FOR INDIVIDUAL PORTIONS.
SO THIS DOES NOT SHOW THE INDIVIDUAL BUILDING WALLS.
IT SHOWS WHERE THEY'RE BUILDING AREA IS.
IF YOU DON'T LIKE THAT ZONE, UH, THEN ASK FOR THEM TO, TO ADJUST IT AND THEN THEY MAY BE ABLE TO.
UM, I THINK A LOT OF THE TIMES WHEN WE HAVE VERY SPECIFIC PLANS WITH WALLS AND AND LINES IN
[01:05:01]
VERY SPECIFIC PLACES, WE GET OUT OF THE REALM OF ZONING AND WE GET INTO THE REALM OF INDIVIDUAL PROJECT APPROVALS.UM, I THINK THAT THIS PLAN IS, IS CLOSER TO BEST PRACTICE IN THAT IT ALLOWS THEM TO SPECIFY SOME OF WHAT'S GOING ON, UM, BUT MOVE THINGS AROUND AS THEY DISCOVER THINGS, AS THEY DISCOVER EASEMENTS, AS THEY DISCOVER ELEVATIONS, AS THEY DISCOVER, UM, THINGS LIKE THAT, ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS AS THEY MOVE THROUGH THE PROCESS.
UM, THIS IS THE FLEXIBILITY WITHOUT REALLY LOSING, UM, ANY COMPATIBILITY.
IS THERE ANY WAY THAT, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE POSSIBLY CAN TO CA TO HAVE SOMEONE FROM, UM, FROM TRAFFIC OR TRANSPORTATION THAT CAN PROBABLY SPEAK TO THE, THE PRESENTED TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT HAS BEEN GIVEN TO PROBABLY TO HELP EASE WITH THE SERATO? YEAH.
CAN YOU, IS MR. NAVARRE HERE OR WILL HE BE HERE THIS AFTERNOON? HE HE MAY BE, UH, HE HE MAY BE, UM, YEAH, WATCHING ELSEWHERE.
SO PLEASE PUT A PIN IN THAT HE'S, HE'S ONLINE.
I CAN COME DOWN TO THE OR ISSUE IF NEEDED.
UM, I'M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND I'VE BEEN LISTENING AS WELL.
SO THAT PROBABLY WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE AS IT RELATES TO TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.
ALRIGHT, NEXT SET OF QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONERS, WHO'S UP NEXT? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
I HAD SIMILAR QUESTIONS, UM, TO THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS REGARDING, UM, INFORMATION THAT'S PROVIDED IN THIS CASE, UM, VERSUS HOW WE'RE THINKING ABOUT LONG-TERM.
I'M GONNA SPEAK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS CASE.
UM, I THINK I HEARD STAFF SAY PROVIDING SOME FLEXIBILITY IN BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
UM, BUT I THINK THINGS THAT I DON'T SEE ON THIS THAT WE WOULD TYPICALLY HAVE INCLUDED WOULD BE ACCESS POINTS THAT WOULD SPEAK TO CIRCULATION AND FLOW THAT THEN ARE SUPPORTED WITHIN THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN.
UM, HOW PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FROM THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY IS BEING ACCOMMODATED, HOW THAT IS REFERENCED TO VEHICULAR ACCESS POINTS.
I THINK YOU MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE ON THIS PLAN, BUT I WASN'T ABLE TO DETERMINE WHERE THEY ARE.
UH, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY, THEY DISD HAS THAT INFORMATION FROM THE COMMUNITY MEANING DECK THAT WAS CIRCULATED TO THE COMMISSION.
SO I DON'T THINK WE'RE ASKING THEM FOR THINGS THAT THEY HAVEN'T ALREADY VETTED AND INCLUDED IN THEIR ANALYSIS.
SO WOULD THERE, OR WAS THERE DISCUSSION WITH THEM TO, TO BRIDGE THAT FORWARD? AND IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO DEVELOP POTENTIALLY A NEW STANDARD FOR THESE, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE GONE MAYBE TOO FAR THE OTHER DIRECTION.
WHAT I'M SEEING AND THAT'S, IF I COULD UNDERSTAND STAFF'S, UM, REVIEW OF THAT, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
AND, AND SO THIS NEW PLAN DOES HAVE THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY APPROACHES ON THERE THE CONDITIONS ALSO STATE THAT THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE STREET DESIGN MANUAL, UM, AS WELL.
SO OUR DRIVEWAY APPROACHES ARE INCLUDED ON THIS, ON THIS AMENDED PLAN.
SO YOU CAN SEE THOSE ALONG HERE IN REGARDS TO PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.
UM, THAT'S HARD AND FAST CODE IN THE ORDINANCE, AND I THINK THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAN, THAN PUTTING IT IN A PLAN.
SO WE, THEY HAVE TO REPLACE SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS, LIKE I SAID, I THINK THAT'S THEIR ONGOING COMMITMENT AND WILL BE VERY CONSISTENT IN ALL OF THESE CASES COMING FORWARD.
SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS, FIVE FOOT BUFFERS, UM, ON ALL THEIR STREETS.
UM, AND THEN THOSE SIDEWALKS THEMSELVES HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS POINTS INTO THE BUILDING TO GET FOLKS, UM, INTO THE BUILDING.
SO THOSE HAVE TO BE PROVED TO BE DEMONSTRATED.
I, UM, SO IF THEY HAVE TO ADJUST THOSE IN A MINOR WAY, I THINK THAT THAT GETS TO, YES, THEY'VE PRESENTED A PRESENTATION THAT HAS THAT, UM, BUT I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO EXPECT SMALL CHANGES, UH, TO THOSE KINDS OF THINGS TO BE, TO COME UP ALONG THE WAY THAT THEY MAY NEED TO DO AS THEY GO THROUGH THE INTENSIVE PERMITTING PROCESS, UM, WHERE THEY MAY NEED TO SHIFT THOSE THINGS AND NOT HAVE THEM CODIFIED TO AN, TO AN ORDINANCE.
BUT, YOU KNOW, AS AN ONGOING CONVERSATION, THEY'RE ACCOUNTABLE TO THEIR COMMUNITIES BECAUSE THEY HAVE ELECTED OFFICIALS AND THEY CONTINUE TO PRESENT IN THEIR COMMUNITIES ON THESE KINDS OF THINGS.
SO I DON'T THINK IT, IT TAKES AWAY ACCOUNTABILITY.
UM, BUT AGAIN, I'M MORE HAPPY TO SEE IT AS A PERSON WHO WANTS WELL DEVELOPED PUBLIC REALMS AROUND EVERYWHERE, BUT ESPECIALLY SCHOOLS AND GOOD ACCESS TO SITES.
I'M HAPPIER TO SEE IT IN A CONDITION THAN SHOWN ON A PLAN.
'CAUSE I KNOW IT'S, UM, IT'S MORE HARD AND FAST.
SO, ONE FOLLOW UP IS, I, I GUESS I'M, AGAIN, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE VARIANCE, UM, BETWEEN WHAT WE HAVE HISTORICALLY SEEN AND WHAT
[01:10:01]
IS REFLECTED IN THE INFORMATION BEFORE US TODAY.AND YOU SPOKE OF COMPATIBILITY, I WOULD SAY, BASED ON THIS PLAN, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THEY WOULD MEET THE MINIMUM SETBACK ON THEIR FRONTAGE ON PALISADE FOR THEIR BUILDABLE AREA, AND THEN IT COULD JUST BE A BLOCK UP TO 36 FEET IN HEIGHTS AS THIS IS PRESENTED TO US.
IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, ON PALISADE, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S NOT HOMES ACROSS THE WAY THAT IS EXISTING DISD LAND.
THEY MAY OFFLOAD IT, UM, BUT RIGHT NOW THERE'S NOT, THEY'VE ACTUALLY FOCUSED THEIR MASSING FURTHEST AWAY FROM, FROM THE AREA HOMES.
I, I GUESS MY QUESTION THOUGH WAS WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE INFORMATION THAT IS PRESENTED TO US TODAY? THEY CAN BUILD THEIR BUILDING WITHIN THIS BUILDABLE AREA, UM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ZONING, UH, THE, SORRY, THEY STILL HAVE TO MEET AGAIN, ALL OF THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF, THAT'S TH SO LOT COVERAGE PLAYS IN THERE.
UM, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS PLAY IN THERE.
UH, I DON'T HAVE THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, BUT THEY HAVE TO MEET ARTICLE 10.
I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT THE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE ON A PLACE LIKE PALISADE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO ALL OF THOSE THINGS STILL PLAY IN.
WELL, I WILL HAVE MORE QUESTIONS DURING THE, UH, HEARING.
THANK YOU, MR. PEPE, COMMISSIONER HALL.
MR. PEPE, I, I APOLOGIZE IF THE, IF, IF I MISSED SOMETHING HERE, BUT, UH, YOU'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT SIDEWALKS AND BUFFERS AND SO FORTH, WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD, GREAT IDEA.
BUT, UM, WHAT ABOUT, UH, THINGS LIKE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES AT INTERSECTIONS, UM, SO THAT PEOPLE WILL HAVE A CLEAR VIEW OF PEDESTRIANS AND ONCOMING TRAFFIC? UH, I'VE JUST BEEN INFORMED THAT SOME SCHOOLS TEND TO BUILD FENCES, UH, RIGHT UP, UH, AT A 90 DEGREE ANGLE TO THE INTERSECTION.
AND IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE IN CARS TURNING TO SEE DOWN THE SIDEWALKS OR, OR WHATEVER.
SO VISIBILITY TRIANGLES ARE, I BELIEVE, BOTH IN ZONING AND, AND, UH, THE STREET DESIGN MANUALS AS WELL.
UM, IF THEY DON'T SHOW THEM ON THIS PLAN, THEY'RE STILL COMPLETELY ENFORCEABLE THROUGH THOSE, SO THEY'LL STILL APPLY, UM, AS WELL AS THE OTHER FENCE CODES.
BUT YOU, YOU RAISE A GOOD POINT.
USUALLY YOU CAN'T DO, UM, THOSE TALLER FENCES UP TO THE PROPERTY LINES.
UM, AND THAT'S PLAYED OUT IN, IN ZONING REGULATIONS.
AND THOSE, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THOSE OTHER SITUATIONS.
UM, WE HAVEN'T ALWAYS HAD VISIBILITY TRIANGLE REQUIREMENTS AND THINGS, UM, BUT THEY'D BE HELD TO THEM IN, IN THIS CASE.
WELL, I, I, I KNOW THAT PREVIOUSLY I'VE, I'VE NOTICED VISIBILITY TRIANGLES ON ALMOST EVERY SITE PLAN THAT I'VE, I'VE SEEN.
BUT THE NEW SITE PLANS DON'T GO INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL STILL.
AND SO THOSE ARE TIED TO THE TYPES OF STREETS THAT ARE, SO I THINK THEY APPLY TO, THEY APPLY TO DRIVEWAYS AND THEY APPLY TO STREET INTERSECTIONS.
THOSE ARE STILL FULLY RE REQUIRED WHEN THEY PUT IN THAT DRIVEWAY AND WHEN THEY PUT IN THE SITE, UH, THE, UM, THE FENCE.
SO THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE STILL FULLY ENFORCED THERE.
UM, THEY'VE BEEN SHOWN ON SITE PLANS BEFORE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE NOT STEPPING ON THEIR OWN TOES AS THEY GO THROUGH THE PROCESS.
UM, BUT SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A EXACT BUILDING, IT'S UNLIKELY THAT THEY'LL RUN INTO THAT KIND OF CONFLICT BETWEEN A VIS TRIANGLE AND A BUILDING.
MR. PAPPY, WITHOUT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT SPECIFIED EITHER ON THE SITE PLAN OR IN THE SUP CONDITIONS, HOW TALL COULD THIS BUILDING BE? IS IT MY, AM I CORRECT IN UNDERSTANDING THAT STAFF THINKS THAT THESE INSTITUTIONAL USES CAN BE BE ANY HEIGHT ALLOWED BY THE FAA? YES.
I THINK THE PLAN THAT THEY WERE DISTRIBUTING LATE IN THE GAME DID, UH, LIST A, A HEIGHT LIMIT.
THEY FINALLY CAME BACK WITH 80 FEET.
BUT I KNOW I HAD, UM, SOME EMAIL EXCHANGES WITH MS. THURMAN THIS WEEK, AND SHE SENT ME THE PRESENTATION DECK THAT THEY SHOWED TO THE COMMUNITY, AND THERE WAS A MUCH MORE REALIZED SITE PLAN IN IT AND A DATA TABLE THAT INCLUDED THE INFORMATION THAT IT WOULD BE THREE STORIES.
AND SO I HAD ASKED THAT THE DATA TABLE BE TRANSFERRED OVER TO OUR SITE PLAN, AND IT CAME WITHOUT STORIES, BUT WITH 80 FEET.
SO WERE YOU INVOLVED IN ANY DISCUSSION OF THIS OR I CAN CERTAINLY ASK, UH, THE REPRESENTATIVES THIS AFTERNOON.
NO, THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN, BEEN LATER ON IN, IN DISCUSSION.
SO IT MAY NOT, UH, HAVE PLAYED OUT ON, ON OUR SIDE.
[01:15:01]
THEY ADDED 80 FEET TO THE SITE PLAN.YEAH, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD CERTAINLY LIMIT THEM.
UM, I THINK THEY NEED 80 FEET, UH, STATED BECAUSE IT, 'CAUSE OF THEIR LIGHTS PRIMARILY, THEY WANT TO HAVE ATHLETIC LIGHTS, UM, FOR THEIR ATHLETIC AND SO FACILITIES.
SO THAT'S WHAT THAT 80 IS RE BUT THE LIGHTS COULD BE 80 AND IT COULD BE SPECIFIED SEPARATELY THAT THE OTHER STRUCTURES COULDN'T BE IN EXCESS OF WHATEVER IT IS.
THEY COULD ANOTHER HEIGHT OR, OKAY, THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER SERRANO? I MEAN, I HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT.
I'VE BEEN ASKING THEM FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS NOW.
UM, I DON'T QUITE KNOW WHETHER I SHOULD ASK THEM BECAUSE I DON'T, I STILL DON'T HAVE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE'RE REQUIRING SCHOOLS TO PROVIDE US.
I KNOW IN THE, UM, SO I'M TRYING NOT TO GO INTO COMMENTARY HERE.
WE GOT A COMPLETELY NEW SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS THIS MORNING AT 9 36.
DOES ANYBODY THINK IT'S REASONABLE FOR THIS COMMISSION TO REVIEW AND DIGEST THAT AND THEN VOTE ON IT TODAY? IS THAT A QUESTION FOR ME? IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE.
I CAN, I CAN SAY THAT FOR THE APPLICANT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT.
UM, I THINK, UH, CHAIR RUBEN IS STILL, UH, ON A CALL SO WE CAN MOVE ON TO WELL, THAT'S A SUBDIVISION DOCKET, SO I GUESS WE ARE, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE.
WE WILL SEE Y'ALL BACK AT COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON? YES.
CAN CAN, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? UM, ON THIS CASE, WE, UM, NO, BUT IT'S, HE GOT COMMUNICATION ABOUT A SUBDIVISION.
ARE WE SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO GET THAT EVEN IF IT CAME FROM STAFF? I'M SORRY, SAY THAT AGAIN.
IF EVEN IF, UM, COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF WAS FORWARDED FROM SOMEONE CONCERNING SUBDIVISION, IS THAT ALLOWED? NO.
UH, IT, THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FORWARDED TO YOU.
UM, YOU PROBABLY NEED TO, WHEN WE GET TO THE SUBDIVISION DOCKET THIS AFTERNOON, YOU NEED TO NOTIFY, I THINK IT WAS FORWARDED TO ALL OF US.
YEAH, WE'LL ALL HAVE TO MAKE THAT DIS YEAH.
WE'LL HAVE TO MAKE THAT DISCLOSURE WHEN WE GET TO THE VOTING DOCKET TODAY, OKAY? OKAY.
[CALL TO ORDER]
GONNA CALL THE DALLAS CITY PLAN, COMMISSION HEARING AND TAKE ROLL.GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SIMS, DISTRICT TWO.
VICE CHAIR HERBERT, DISTRICT FOUR.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN PRESENT? DISTRICT NINE.
COMMISSIONER COX? DISTRICT 12.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HERE AND PLACE 15 CHAIR RUBEN.
UM, AND LUA, I'M HERE TO, ALL RIGHT.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 17TH, 2026 CITY PLAN COMMISSION HEARING? WE DO.
UM, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 17TH, 2026 CPC MEETING AS REVISED AND POSTED ON OCTOBER 5TH, 2026.
SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
ALL THOSE AGAINST THE AYES HAVE IT.
[Zoning Cases - Consent]
[01:20:01]
TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.I BELIEVE ITEMS 1, 2, 5, 8, 1, 2, 4, AND FIVE.
ONE, TWO, AND FIVE ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO ADD A FOUR.
I'D LIKE TO ADD FOUR TO THE CONSENT.
1, 2, 4, AND FIVE ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, ITEM ONE IS Z 2 6 0 0 0 4 6 IS AN APPLICATION FOR R 10, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTIES ZONE, AA AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT BETWEEN PLAINVIEW DRIVE AND SPARROW LANE, EAST OF DOUGHTY FERRY ROAD STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL TWO IS Z 2 6 0 0 0 1 63.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE R 10, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE EAST CORNER OF SOUTH BELT LINE ROAD AND LAWSON ROAD, ALSO KNOWN AS 50, EXCUSE ME, 500 SOUTH BELT LINE ROAD STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO D RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT.
UM, THREE IS Z 2 6 0 0 0 180 4.
UM, THAT'S AN APPLICATION FOR LI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT THREE IS NOT ON CONSENT.
MIKE, EXCUSE ME, STRIKE THREE.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR MU TWO MIXED USE DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE ARE OUR REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT WITHIN THE LOT ON SOUTHWEST LINE OF SOUTH MAR SALE AVENUE BETWEEN I 35 EAST FREEWAY AND EAST CLA DRIVE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL AND FIVE IS IS Z 2 6 0 0 0 1 8 1.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT.
2, 4 3 4 FOR A METAL SALVAGE FACILITY ON PROPERTY ZONED.
IM INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING ON THE SOUTH LINE OF RYAN ROAD, EAST OF LUNAR ROAD.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR HIS FIVE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
MADAM CHAIR, IN THE MATTER OF THE ZONING CONSENT AGENDA.
DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH IS MATTERS? 1, 2, 4, AND FIVE.
ANY SPEAKERS? FOUR OR AGAINST? ALL RIGHT.
NOW, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? OKAY.
IN THE MATTER IN THE MATTER OF THE ZONING CONSENTED AGENDA ITEMS 1, 2, 4, 5, UH, MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFFS RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
[3. 26-3206A An application for LI Light Industrial District on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District and Agricultural A(A) District, on the northeast corner of Cleveland Road and Bonnie View Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Osvaldo Rojas Planner: Jason Pho Council District: 8 Z-26-000184]
UH, CASE NUMBER Z 26 0 0 0 1 8 4.AND FOR AN APPLICATION FOR A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ON PROPERTY ZONE R SEVEN FIVE, ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT AND AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CLEVELAND ROAD AND BONNIE V.
ROAD, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
ANY SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? COME ON UP.
SIR, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND PLEASE REMEMBER TO TURN ON THE MICROPHONE
[01:25:03]
AND TYPICALLY WE GIVE EACH SPEAKER THREE MINUTES.THE APPLICANT ALSO GETS THREE MINUTES AND TWO MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL.
MY NAME IS ALDO ROJAS, I AM THE APPLICANT.
AND, UH, I WANTED TO COME UP HERE AND PUT SOME NAME, A COUPLE THINGS THAT I'M PUTTING ON A DEED RESTRICTION FOR THIS PROJECT.
UM, I JUST GO OFF THE LIST ON, UH, ON THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, WHAT YOU DO AND DON'T ACCEPT.
SO I WANTED TO COME UP HERE AND, UH, READ OFF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE RESTRICTING ON THIS PROPERTY.
UH, COMMERCIAL BUS STATION, TERMINAL, COMMERCIAL CLEANING, LAUNDRY PLANT, CUSTOM BUSINESS SERVICE, ELECTRONIC SERVICE CENTER, MEDICAL OR, UH, SCIENTIFIC, UH, LABORATORY, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE MANUFACTURING, PUBLIC PARK, PLAYGROUND GOLF COURSE, ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE, 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS GENERAL, UH, MERCHANDISE FOOD STORE A HUNDRED THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OR, OR MORE.
AND, UM, LET'S SEE WHAT ELSE WE HAVE HERE.
HALFWAY HOUSE, ANY AND ALL LODGING USES EXTENDED STAY.
HOTELS, HOTELS OR MOTELS, LODGING OR BOARDING OVERNIGHT.
GENERAL PURPOSE SHELTER, UH, UNDER MI, MISCELLANEOUS WE'RE LOOKING AT CARNIVALS OR CIRCUS UNDER OFFICE USE.
ALTERNATIVE FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENT.
AND THOSE ARE THE RESTRICTIONS THAT WE'LL BE PUTTING UNDER DEED RESTRICTION.
THOSE ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS AS THE APPLICANT, YOU'RE VOLUNTARILY OFFERING? YES.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER? NO, MA'AM.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN FAVOR OF THIS APPLICATION? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY.
UM, SORRY, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN AND THE MATTER OF Z DASH 26 DASH 0 1 8 4.
I MOVE THE CLOSE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE STATUS RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT.
UM, HOUSEWRIGHT, ALL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BY THE COMMISSION? ALL RIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY YES.
[6. 26-3209A An application for a new Planned Development District for WMU-5 District uses on property zoned CS Commercial Service District, on the Southeast line of S. R.L. Thornton Frwy, south of E. 11th Street, between Upton Street and Fleming Avenue, AKA 341 S. Fleming Avenue. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to conditions. Applicant: BMH Oak Cliff III LLC / Hudson Henley Representative: Paul Carden Planner: Liliana Garza Council District: 4 Z-26-000143]
SIX A Z 2 6 0 0 0 1 43.AND THAT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR WM U FIVE DISTRICT USES ON PROPERTY ZONE CS COMMERCIAL SERVICES FROM THE SOUTHEAST LINE, SRL THORNTON FREEWAY, SOUTH OF EAST 11TH STREET BETWEEN UPTON STREET AND FLEMING AVENUE.
AKA, UH, 3, 4 1 SOUTH FLEMING AVENUE.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS.
UH, I DID HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR THIS.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S READY TO GO.
STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.
PAUL CARIN, UH, 82 35 DOUGLAS AVENUE, SUITE SEVEN 20, DALLAS, 7 5 2 2 5.
OH, WHICH ONE WAS IT? UH, YEAH, THERE YOU GO.
[01:30:15]
OKAY.UM, SO JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE CONTEXT ON THIS CASE, UH, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A WALKABLE MIXED USE DISTRICT.
SO GIVE A LITTLE CONTEXT ON THE SITE.
ABOUT 4.25 ACRES, MOSTLY VACANT.
THERE'S ONE, UH, RETAIL BUILDING THAT'S BEEN LIKE A CAR LOT AND IN LIKE SMALL OFFICE.
UM, BUT THE SITE IS WALKING RANGE TO, YOU KNOW, THE DALLAS SIOUX, NEW HAL PARK.
UM, ABOUT HALF A DOZEN RESTAURANTS THAT WEREN'T THERE, UH, A YEAR AGO.
UH, A LOT OF NEW SHOPS AND EVERYTHING.
THEY'RE ALL, AGAIN ON THE EAST SIDE OF 35.
UM, A LITTLE MORE SIDE PHOTOS YOU CAN SEE.
PRETTY FAKE, PRETTY VACANT FLAT.
UM, AND THIS IS KIND OF REALLY THE MAIN IMPETUS FOR IT.
A LOT OF NEW ACTIVITY HAS OCCURRED, UH, PARTICULARLY ON THE EAST SIDE OF INTERSTATE 35 IN EAST OAK CLIFF IN THE LAST YEAR.
UM, AND TO THE SURPRISE OF MANY, UM, THE MAIN RETAIL HUBS AND RESTAURANT HUB IS ACTUALLY CONCENTRATING ON THE EAST SIDE.
HOWEVER, THE ZONING ON THE NORTH AND WEST SIDE IS PD 4 68.
WHAT GIVES IT THE WALK OF MIXED U STONE, WHEREAS ON THE EAST SIDE, UM, YOU ONLY HAVE KIND OF THE OLD SCHOOL, UH, COMMERCIAL RETAIL, AND THAT RESULTS IN KIND OF THE DRIVE THROUGH AND KIND OF POOR LAND WE SEE.
SO FOR THIS ONE, ITS MAIN ROLE IS TO SUPPORT THE AMENITIES AND RETAIL.
SO MAIN GOALS REALLY ON THE HOUSING SIDE OF THINGS.
AND WE'RE KIND OF SANDWICHED BETWEEN THE ZOO AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO THERE'S REALLY ONLY TWO BLOCKS TO WORK WITH.
AND THIS IS THE ONLY BLOCK THAT'S PRETTY VACANT.
UM, AND AGAIN, IT KEEPS THE HOUSING OFF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, SO OFF OF 10TH STREET.
BUT, UH, WE DID WANNA BE CONSIDERATE.
SO WE WERE LOOKING AT KIND OF SOME EARLY, A VERY EARLY, VERY SIMPLISTIC PLAN.
UH, WE MADE A LOT OF REVISIONS TO THIS, BUT THE MAIN THING WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOUNT FOR IS PROVIDING THAT SUPPORTING ROLE FROM A HOUSING STANDPOINT, BUT NOT RULING OUT THE POSSIBILITY FOR RETAIL.
AND WE KIND OF FIGURED THE MAXIMUM WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THE CAPACITY TO, UH, ENABLE A GROCER.
'CAUSE IT'S THE ONLY SITE ON THE EAST SIDE THAT COULD ACCOUNT FOR IT.
UM, AGAIN, SO AGAIN, ADDING THAT HOUSING A MORE MID-SIZED HOUSING STOCK, UM, BETTER TRANSITION IS REALLY WHAT WE FOCUS ON FOR THIS PD.
SO, UM, HAVING SOME WIDER SIDEWALKS, BETTER TRANSITIONS THERE.
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF ROOM TO WORK WITH, WE HAVE TO MAKE SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE, UM, RPS.
AND BECAUSE THERE'S LIGHT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL TO THE SOUTHEAST, WE CAN'T UTILIZE SB EIGHT 40, UH, THE WAY MANY WOULD PEOPLE WOULD EXPECT US TO DO.
IT ALSO KEEPS, AGAIN, REALLY PROTECTING FLEMING.
SO KEEPING SURFACE PARKING AWAY FROM FLEMING, OF COURSE, UH, WE HAD STUDY STATE THOMAS, GET SOME CONTEXT.
HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING AS YOU WOULD ALWAYS EXPECT ME TO DO.
UH, PRETTY GOOD ATTENDANCE PHOTOS, EVERYTHING WENT WELL, PRETTY, PRETTY WELL THERE.
UM, JUST GETTING DIFFERENT FEEDBACK FROM PEOPLE, MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS, AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMISSION MAY HAVE.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? ANY SPEAKERS IN THE AUDIENCE IN OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE A SPEAKER ONLINE.
UM, MR. PIAN YANG? NOT ONLINE.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS MATTER? ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONER, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? UM, FOLLOW THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR, UH, THE NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DIS DISTRICT FOR WMU FIVE USE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
COMMENTS? ANY COM ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.
I WANTED TO, UH, THANK THE APPLICANT AND THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM FOR THEIR EFFORTS TO ENGAGE THE COMMUNITY, HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ATTEND, UM, A COMMUNITY MEETING AND A TOUR OF THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND THE NEED.
UM, AND I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR FLEXIBILITY IN THE PLAN.
I, UM, AM PARTICULARLY ENCOURAGED BY THE EMPHASIS ON WALKABILITY, ACCESSIBILITY AND TO, AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND THE REVITALIZATION OF THE UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTY.
I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THIS PROJECT MOVE FORWARD.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? CHAIR, UM, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT? UM, I'M, I'M, UH, HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS CASE.
I, I THINK IT'S, UM, WELL THOUGHT
[01:35:01]
OUT AND APPRECIATE, UH, MR. CARDIN'S PRESENTATION.I'M PARTICULARLY ENCOURAGED TO SEE DEVELOPMENT ON THE EAST SIDE OF 35 AND IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE 10TH STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT, WHICH, UM, I KNOW ALL OF US WOULD LIKE TO SEE PROSPER, AND I THINK THIS COULD BE A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TOWARDS SHOWING PEOPLE THAT WE CAN DO RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT ON THE EAST SIDE OF 35.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON? THANK YOU, MR. MR. CHAIR.
UM, I SUPPORT THE CONCEPTS BEHIND THIS, BUT BASED ON THE, UM, FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THE ADJACENT HISTORIC DISTRICT, I DON'T THINK THAT I CAN SUPPORT THE REQUEST.
I THINK I HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THE TRANSITION, AND I THINK THE SECTION THAT WAS IN THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION SHOWS PRETTY CLEARLY.
UM, THE, THE SCALE AND, AND THE, THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN WHAT'S ON THE GROUND AND THE EXISTING HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THE PROPOSED FIVE STORIES.
I DO THINK THAT ABSOLUTE AND AND INCREASE IN DENSITY IN THE HOUSING IS WARRANTED, BUT CREATING A BUFFER BETWEEN THOSE TWO SEEMS MUCH MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE IDEA OF INCREASING HOUSING DENSITY, HOUSING TYPES, AND VARIETY THAT WOULD BE, UM, MADE AVAILABLE WITH THIS PROJECT.
I THINK THE PROJECT HAS A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY, UM, FOR MY PAST ENGAGEMENT WITH COMMUNITY ON SIMILAR PROJECTS.
THERE'S AN APPETITE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT, I THINK THAT WAS QUOTED IN THE FEEDBACK THAT CAME TO US, BUT AS A STRAIGHT FIVE STORY, UM, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT LAYERING ON SOME OF THAT SENSITIVITY FOR THE EXISTING HISTORIC DISTRICT, I, UM, I, I'M NOT ABLE TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
IN THAT CASE, UM, TAKE IT FOR A VOTE.
ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON TO MATTER.
[7. 26-3210A An application to terminate deed restrictions DR Z834-123 on property zoned CR Community Retail District, on the northeast corner of W. Camp Wisdom Road and Clark Road, AKA 6800 W. Camp Wisdom Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Kiesha Kay / Mission Ridge Consultants Planner: Michael V. Pepe Council District: 3 Z-26-000191]
Z 2 6 0 0 0 1 9 1.IT'S AN APPLICATION TO TERMINATE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
DRZ 8 34 DASH 1 23 ON PROPERTY ZONE CR COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF WEST CAMP TO WISDOM ROAD IN CLARK ROAD, AKA 6,800 WEST CAMP WISDOM ROAD STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL IS THE APPLICANT HERE.
MISSION RICH CONSULTANTS, 1900 FURMAN SUITE 400, RICHARDSON, TEXAS 7 5 0 8 1.
AS THE APPLICANT, I WOULD LIKE TO READ INTO THE RECORD VOLUNTEER DEED RESTRICTIONS.
NUMBER ONE, THE ALLOWED LAND USE IS RETIREMENT HOUSING AS DEFINED IN SECTION 51 A DASH 4.209 5.2 A OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE AS A RESIDENTIAL FACILITY PRINCIPALLY DESIGNED FOR PERSONS 55 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER.
THIS USE DOES NOT INCLUDE A CONVALESCENT AND NURSING HOME HOSPICE CARE AND RELATED INSTITUTION'S USE.
NUMBER TWO, SIGHT LIGHTING WILL BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE A FIXTURE THAT PROVIDES FULL LIGHT CUTOFF DOWNCAST LIGHTING WITH NO LIGHT SPILLOVER ACROSS THE EAST PROPERTY.
LINE NUMBER THREE, INSTALLATION OF EVERGREEN TREES IN THE EAST BUFFER AREA.
NUMBER FOUR, DAYTIME ONLY REFUSE PICKUP IS ALLOWED FOR THE EAST TRASH ENCLOSURE.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR COMMENTS? YES, MA'AM.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? AND I'LL JUST ADD ONE THING.
WE CAN'T, WE WON'T BE ABLE TO ACCEPT OR ENFORCE THE FIRST RESTRICTION.
I UNDERSTAND WHERE WE WERE COMING FROM, UM, AND THE APPLICANT'S WILLINGNESS TO VOLUNTEER IT.
UH, THE OTHER ONES READ AS IF THEY CAN BE ACCEPTED AS A NEW INSTRUMENT, UH, BUT THE FIRST ONE CAN'T BE ACCEPTED UNDER STATE LAW.
DO I NEED TO REVISE MY READING INTO THE RECORD? YOU COULD STRIKE YOUR FIRST POINT BY SAYING I STRIKE THAT.
WE'RE STILL TAKING SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT.
[01:40:02]
PLEASE TURN ON YOUR MIC, GIVE AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.RYAN COMBS, 7 6 1 9 KIL LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS.
SO, UH, I UNDERSTAND THAT NUMBER ONE, UH, UH, NEEDS TO BE STRICKEN AND, AND THOSE FOR THOSE LEGAL REASONS.
I WILL SAY THAT JUST, JUST SO THAT THE COMMISSIONERS KNOW AS WELL AS COMMISSIONER HERBERT, UM, WE WILL BE, BECAUSE OF OUR FUNDING, UH, UH, UH, THAT WE, THAT WE GET THROUGH THE HOUSING TAX CREDITS, WHICH IS DISTRIBUTED THROUGH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT HOUSING COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, THERE WILL BE A, A RECORDED INSTRUMENT CALLED A LAND USE RESTRICTION AGREEMENT THAT WE ENTER INTO WITH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING COMMUNITY AFFAIRS THAT RESTRICTS IT TO SENIOR HOUSING REGARDLESS.
SO THAT WON'T BE A CITY OR A COUNTY DOCUMENT.
THAT'LL BE SOMETHING WITH THE STATE OF TEXAS, JUST SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE.
UH, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR SPEAKERS OR STAFF? SORRY.
ALL RIGHT, MR. HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, LADY CHAIR, THE MATTER OF Z 2 6 1 91, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE TERMINATION OF D RESTRICTION 7 8 3 4 DASH 23 ON TRACK SIX B SUBJECT TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT AS READ INTO THE RECORD.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
OKAY, NOW, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, THE APPLICANT, OR ANY COMMENTS? UH, NO.
THE QUICK COMMENT, UM, IF I COULD, SURE.
UM, EH, THIS CASE, UH, CAME TO ME, UM, AFTER A LOT OF THINGS HAD BEEN DETERMINED, UM, NOT KNOWING THAT THE RESTRICTIONS WERE ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, IT WAS A CASE THAT WAS APPROVED IN OTHER MECHANISMS AND BECAUSE OF THE ZONING, THEY DIDN'T NEED TO COME TO US TO GET THIS PROJECT APPROVED.
UM, BUT THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT I SAW THAT COULD BE DONE TO, TO HOLD, UM, HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE AND ENSURE THAT THEM AND THE CITIZENS AROUND THEM REMAIN SAFE.
UM, STATE LAW LIMITS WHAT THE CITY CAN REQUIRE ON THIS SITE, AND I RESPECT THAT.
UH, BUT TERMINATING THE RE THE RESTRICTIONS REMOVED, THE ONLY RECORDED DOCUMENT ON THIS PROPERTY, THE APPLICANT HAS TOLD US THIS IS A SENIOR HOUSING, THEY INTEND TO HOLD THAT LONG TERM, UM, THESE VOLUNTEER RESTRICTIONS TO MAKE SURE THOSE COMMITMENTS AND OTHERS, UH, ARE MAINTAINED, UM, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE FIRST ONE COULD NOT BE, UM, MONITORED BY THE CITY.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT.
ANY OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT, THE AYES HAVE IT.
[8. 26-3211A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise or food store 3,500 square feet or less on property zoned RR Regional Retail District with D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the Southwest corner of Great Trinity Forest Way and Murdock Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: Karim Pirani / Enigma Enterprises Inc. Representative: Robert Nunez U/A From: September 3, 2026. Planner: Jason Pho Council District: 8 Z-26-000092]
FOR ZONING CASE Z 26 0 0 0 0 9 2.AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE.
3,500 SQUARE FEET OR LESS ON PROPERTY ZONED RR REGIONAL RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A D ONE LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TRINITY FOREST WAY AND MURDOCH ROAD.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? ALRIGHT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN? YES, MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 0 9 2, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE OF THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS WITH AN EXPIRATION OF THREE YEARS.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER, HOUSEWRIGHT, ANY DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT, NO DISCUSSION.
THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM NUMBER NINE, GETTING ALL THE ATTENTION TODAY, IT SEEMS, UM, ITEM NINE
[9. 26-3212A An application for an amendment to and expansion of Tract 2 and Tract 3, and a new subdistrict within Planned Development No. 931 on property zoned MF-2(A) Multifamily District Planned Development No. 842 and Planned Development No. 931, on the north line of Bryan Street, between Greenville Avenue and Matilda Street, and on the southeast corner of N. Munger Boulevard and Bryan Street, AKA 5200 Bryan Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to amended conceptual plan and amended conditions. Applicant: Alaina Livingston / Munger Place Church Inc. Representative: Laura Lee Gunn / Masterplan U/A From: September 3, 2026. Planner: Liliana Garza Council District: 14 Z-26-000131]
IS Z 2 6 1 3 1.THAT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TWO AND EXPANSION
[01:45:01]
OF TRACK TWO AND TRACK THREE AND NEW SUBDISTRICT WITH PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 9 31 ON PROPERTY ZONE MF TWO MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT, UH, PD 8 42, PD 9 31 ON THE NORTH LINE OF BRYAN STREET BETWEEN GREENVILLE AVENUE AND MATILDA STREET, AND ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NORTH MUNGER BOULEVARD IN BRYAN STREET, ALSO KNOWN AS 5,000.STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AN AMENDED CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS AND A AS WELL AS CONDITIONS CIRCULATED.
UM, AND BRIEFED, UH, THIS MORNING, UH, I GUESS NOT, UM, EXCUSE ME.
SO, UH, I THINK THAT WE WERE PREPARED TO BRIEF THEM, BUT THERE WERE CHANGES CIRCULATED, SO WE ACCEPT THOSE.
SO STAFF RECOGNITION IS THOSE AMENDED CONDITIONS AS CIRCULATED.
CARL CROWLEY, 1341 OF WEST MOCKINGBIRD, DALLAS, TEXAS.
UM, I JUST WANT TO THANK, UH, I GUESS, UH, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR WORKING WITH US ON THIS.
WE, WE WERE BOTH CONFUSED ON EAST AND WEST AND TRACKS TWOS AND THREES AND EVERYTHING, AND THE STAFF, LILIANA AND I WENT AROUND EVEN LONGER THAN THAT.
AND I THINK IT'S ALL BEEN SETTLED AND WE HAVE, UM, UH, A STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
I THINK COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, WE MET OUT THERE AND WE ACTUALLY COULD WALK THROUGH THE SITE AND SORT OF FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE.
UM, I'VE GOT A PRESENTATION, BUT I'M NOT GONNA GIVE IT IF, UNLESS Y'ALL REALLY WANNA SEE IT.
UM, AND UM, I'M, I'M IN SUPPORT WITH WHAT WE WORKED OUT WITH COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, UH, WITH LEFTS AND RIGHTS AND EAST AND WESTS AND NORTHS, AND I DON'T THINK THERE WERE ANY SOUTHS IN THERE, BUT I THINK EVERY OTHER THING WAS IN THERE.
UM, WE TOOK OUT THE OFFICE USE, WHICH AS I RECALL FROM SEVEN OR EIGHT, 10 YEARS AGO, THE STAFF SAID, WE CAN'T DO JUST PARKING, PUT A USE IN THERE.
SO WE PUT A USE IN THERE, BUT, UM, IT'S PARKING LOTS NOW AND THAT'S WHAT IT'S GONNA BE.
UM, AND THEN WE'VE ADDED THE, UH, DOLLAR STORE, WHICH THE, THE CHURCH OWNS AND EVENTUALLY BE TURNED INTO A SORT OF A YOUTH CENTER FOR, FOR THE, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND FOR THE CHURCH.
SO HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? ALL RIGHT.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO IN THE MATTER OF Z 26 0 0 0 1 3 1.
I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE MATTER SUBJECT TO THE AMENDED CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND AMENDED CONDITIONS WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES.
UM, IN SECTION 9 31 0.105, SUBSECTION B SUBSECTION ONE, DELETE OFFICE IN SUBSECTION TWO, DELETE AND FOUR AND DELETE OFFICE ADD SUBSECTION THREE, TRACK FOUR FOR AN AD OFFICE.
PERIN ONLY IN CONJUNCTION WITH A CHURCH LOCATED IN PD ONE, I'M SORRY, 9 31.
AND SUBTRACT IN TRACK FOUR ONLY IN SUBSECTION, I'M SORRY, IN SECTION 9 31 0.107.
SUBSECTION B ADD SUB SUBSECTION THREE, MAXIMUM STRUCTURE HEIGHT FOR BUILDINGS AND TRACK FOUR AND IS 45 FEET EIGHT SECTION 9 31 0.110 SUBSECTION A ADD TO THE END OF IT AND THE TEXT OF THIS ARTICLE, IF THERE'S A CONFLICT BETWEEN THIS ARTICLE AND ARTICLE X, THIS ARTICLE CONTROLS SUBSECTION B.
STRIKE THE WORDS OR AN OFFICE.
I, I'M SORRY, YEAH, STILL IN SUBSECTION B, SUB SUBSECTION I SHOULD READ A MINIMUM OF THREE STREET TREES MUST BE PLANTED ON EACH TRACK ALONG THE BRYAN STREET FRONTAGE.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, A MINIMUM OF SIX STREET TREES MUST BE PROVIDED ALONG THE MATILDA STREET FRONTAGE PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCU OCCUPANCY.
[01:50:01]
COUNTED TOWARDS THIS REQUIREMENT.SUB SUBSECTION TWO SHOULD READ, IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIRED STREET TREES, A MINIMUM OF FIVE OTHER LARGE TREES MUST BE PLACED ON THE TRACK PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY EXISTING TREES PIT CAN BE TO COUNTED TOWARDS THIS REQUIREMENT.
SUB SUBSECTION THREE SHOULD READ A MINIMUM OF 10 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER STRIP MUST BE PROVIDED ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF BOTH TRACKS.
SUCH LANDSCAPE BUFFER SHALL BE PLANTED WITH EVERGREEN SHRUBS AT INTEGRALS OF AT LEAST ONE EVERY FOUR LINEAR FEET WITH ANY TREES COUNTING FOR SUCH SHRUBS.
SUB SUBSECTION FOUR SHOULD READ A MINIMUM FIVE FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER MUST BE PROVIDED ON THE EAST SIDE AND WEST SIDE OF THE TRACKS THREE.
AND THE WEST SIDE OF TRACK TWO.
SUCH LANDSCAPE BUFFER SHALL BE PLANTED WITH EVERGREEN SHRUBS AT INTEGRALS OF AT LEAST ONE EVERY FOUR LINEAR FEET WITH ANY TREES CROWNING FOR SUCH SHRUBS.
UM, SUB SUBSECTION SIX, THE REQUIREMENT OF A FENCE, THE SHOULD BE ELIMINATED, UM, ON THE WEST AND EAST SIDE, LEAVING ONLY THE FENCE ON THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY.
SUB SUBSECTION SEVEN SHOULD READ A MINIMUM THREE FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE AREA IS REQUIRED ALONG MATILDA STREET.
SUCH LANDSCAPE BUFFERS SHALL BE PLANTED WITH EVERGREEN SHRUBS AT INTEGRALS OF AT LEAST ONE FOR EVERY FOUR LINEAR FEET WITH ANY TREES COUNTING FOR SUCH SHRUBS.
UM, SUBSECTION C IS ELIMINATED AND FOR SECTION 9 3 1 1 0 0.1 SUBSECTION A IN THE LAST LINE, THE WORDS AND WEST AND AND EAST ARE ELIMINATED.
I THINK THAT'S ALL OF 'EM AND I'LL SEND THOSE CHANGES TO STAFF.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF BRIEF QUESTIONS.
THE WAY THAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY STRUCTURED AND WHY WE HAD SO MUCH LANDSCAPING IS BECAUSE IN LIEU OF HAVING A LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT THEY WERE GONNA HAVE TO COME BACK AND GET APPROVED.
WE JUST TRIED TO ADDRESS IT IN THE PD CONDITIONS.
AND WHAT THEY HAD ORIGINALLY PROPOSED WERE LARGE FENCES THAT WOULD WALL OFF THE PARKING FROM THE COMMUNITY.
AND I THINK THIS COMMUNITY WOULD PREFER TO JUST HAVE LANDSCAPING WHERE TRASH CAN'T BE GATHERED AND PEOPLE CAN'T HIDE, AND ALL THE THINGS THAT SOMETIMES FENCES, UM, WHILE WELL INTENDED DON'T ACTUALLY PRODUCE THE RESULTS THAT PEOPLE INTEND FOR THEM TO DO.
SO WHAT WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO DO WITH THE LANDSCAPING IS PROVIDE A GREENER, MORE EARTH-FRIENDLY, UM, BOUNDARY THAT PROVIDES SOME OF THE SIMILAR, UM, EFFECTS.
SO YOU'RE SAYING GOOD FENCES DON'T ALWAYS MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS? YEAH, NOT GENERALLY.
ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CARPENTER TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, SUBSTITUTE AMENDED CONCEPTUAL PLAN, AND AMENDED CONDITIONS AS OUTLINED BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON IN HER MOTION.
[11. 26-3214A An application for 1) R-7.5(A) Single Family District; 2) TH-1(A) Townhouse District, and 3) a new Specific Use Permit for a public school on property zoned Planned Development District No. 825, on the north line of Palisade Drive between N. Prairie Creek Road and Greendale Drive, bounded by Palisade Drive, N. Prairie Creek Road, Greendale Drive, and Tonawanda Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval of 1) R-7.5(A) Single Family District, 2) TH-1(A) Townhouse District, and 3) a new Specific Use Permit for a public school, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: Dallas Independent School District Representative: Elsie Thurman U/A From: September 17, 2026. Planner: Martin Bate Council District: 5 Z-26-000166]
QUICK HOUSEKEEPING NOTE.UM, SOMEONE ON CASE 11 HAS A, UM, DOUBLE BOOKED OR HAS A HARD STOP, SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE THAT ONE NEXT AND GO BACK TO CASE NUMBER 10.
ITEM 11 IS Z 2 6 0 0 0 1, 6 6.
AND IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR R SEVEN FIVE, A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT, UH OH YES.
AND TH ONE TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT.
AND THREE, A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A PUBLIC SCHOOL ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 8 2 5 ON THE NORTH LINE OF PALISADE DRIVE BETWEEN NORTH PRAIRIE CREEK ROAD AND GREENDALE DRIVE, UH, BOUND BY PALISADE DRIVE, NORTH PRAIRIE CREEK ROAD, GREENDALE DRIVE IN TONAWANDA, UH, DRIVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF ONE R 75, A SINGLE FAMILY TH ONE, A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT, AND THREE, A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A PUBLIC SCHOOL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS DISTRIBUTED.
[01:55:01]
BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 8.UM, THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS AND THE BRIEFING.
I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS A FEW OF THEM WE'RE WE ARE ARRANGING A PROCESS AND SINCE WE'RE REARRANGING IT, WE'RE HAVING A FEW GROWING PAINS.
AND I HOPE YOU GUYS CAN SHOW ME A LITTLE GRACE.
I'VE WORKED WITH MOST OF YOU AND I DON'T GIVE YOU THINGS LAST MINUTE.
I MAKE SURE YOU HAVE ALL THE SPECIFICS AND YOU'RE VERY WELL AWARE OF WHAT I'M DOING.
BUT BETWEEN THE DISTRICT AND THE CITY, WE ARE GETTING THERE AND I HOPE YOU CAN TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.
I'M NOT TAKING ANYTHING AWAY FROM YOU.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO REARRANGE A FEW THINGS OVER AT PERMITTING.
UM, HOPEFULLY IT'LL BE A LITTLE EASIER FOR YOU.
I ONLY MADE ONE CHANGE TO THE SUP CONDITIONS AND THAT WAS TO TRY TO CLEAR UP ANY LANGUAGE IN THE TNP AND THEN ONE CHANGE TO THE SITE PLAN.
THAT WAS TO ADD THE HEIGHT OF THE 80 FEET.
I HAVE DISD FOLKS HERE THAT WANNA SPEAK PRESENTATION.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
LET ME KNOW HOW, HOW I CAN HELP.
UM, BRENT ALFRED, UH, CHIEF CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS OFFICER WITH DALLAS.
IDI DO HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION TO SHOW YOU GUYS.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, UH, WE HEARD YOUR CONCERNS FROM THE LAST MEETING, UH, IN PARTICULAR SURROUNDING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND COORDINATION WITH THE CITY.
UH, WE TOOK THOSE CONCERNS SERIOUSLY AND WE WANT TO WORK WITH YOU TODAY TO SHOW THE, UH, WHAT ENGAGEMENT REALLY LOOKS LIKE FROM OUR SIDE AND ADDRESS ONE OF THOSE AREAS OF CONCERN AND ASK FOR SOME FLEXIBILITY, UH, WHEN ENGAGING THE SCHOOLS.
UH, WHICH SEE ON YOUR SCREEN HERE, YOU KNOW, OUR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT DIDN'T BEGIN, UH, WITH ZONING.
IT BEGAN IMMEDIATELY, UH, AFTER THE BOND PASSED WITH A 70% APPROVAL RATE, WHICH SAMUEL WAS A PART OF.
UH, SINCE THEN WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, DESIGN ETTES AND FAIRWAY EVENT AT SAMUEL.
UH, AND WE'VE BEEN LISTENING THROUGHOUT THE DESIGN PROCESS, UH, AND WE TRY TO REACH PEOPLE WHERE THEY ARE.
WE'VE TRIED SOCIAL MEDIA, PRINT MEDIA, DIRECT MAIL, SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS, AND DIRECT OUTREACH TO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
WE'VE INTENTIONALLY TRIED TO REACH AS MANY PEOPLE AS WE CAN, AND IT WASN'T DISTRICT STAFF TALKING TO DISTRICT STAFF.
WE HAD PARENTS, ALUMNI, UH, NEIGHBORS, UH, AND JUST THE SAMUEL COMMUNITY COME OUT TO HELP SUPPORT US.
UH, WE HAD REAL PEOPLE IN THE ROOM GIVING FEEDBACK.
UH, YOU SEE AT THIS FIRST MEETING WE HAD OVER 59 PARTICIPANTS AND I HAVE TO SIGN IN SHEETS THERE.
UH, MOST IMPORTANTLY, WHEN ENGAGING, UH, WITH THESE STAKEHOLDERS, WE'RE NOT CHECKING A BOX.
YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY SAID REALLY INFLUENCED THE DESIGN.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M BRINGING IN FRONT OF YOU HERE TODAY.
UH, THIS IS JUST A PICTURE OF THE IMAGE, UH, OF THAT AUDITORIUM OF MEETING TWO.
AND YOU SEE THE BEAUTIFUL CROSS SECTION WE HAD ACROSS, UH, THESE EVENTS.
NOW LET ME, UH, LIKE I SAID, THAT MEETING, WE HAD 45, UH, DIFFERENT PARTICIPANTS, UH, AT THAT, UH, ONE MEETING.
UM, BUT LET'S GET TO THE TRAFFIC CONCERN.
WHAT I HAVE TO THE LEFT HERE, YOU, YOU'LL SEE THE CURRENT SITUATION AT SAM.
WE HAD ALL THE QUEING IN THE STREET AND OUR NEW PROPOSED DESIGN, WE'RE GETTING RID 80% OF QUEING, UH, OFF THE STREET AND ONTO OUR SITE.
UH, THIS IS SOME POLLING AGAIN, UH, I TOLD YOU, UH, THAT'S TAKING PLACE, UH, HOW THE COMMUNITY SHAPE THE, THE DESIGN, THE FEEDBACK, THE VOTES THEY HAD AND HOW WE ADDRESSED IT.
UH, ARCHITECT IS ALSO HERE TO ADDRESS THAT.
BUT THIS IS THE $200 MILLION INVESTMENT.
THIS IS THE LARGEST SINGLE INVESTMENT IN THE BOND PACKAGE GOING IN PLEASANT GROVE IN THE SAMUEL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE ONLY HIGH SCHOOL WE ARE REBUILDING.
UM, SO AGAIN, WE'RE NOT, UM, WE'RE NOT ASKING TO CIRCUMVENT ANY PROBLEM.
OH, THIS IS THE ENTRY THEY DECIDED ON.
THEY HELPED SHAPE, UH, LET CLOSE, BECAUSE OUR ENGAGEMENT DOESN'T STOP AT THESE MEETINGS.
WE'RE GONNA ENGAGE WITH THEM THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.
[02:00:01]
ONGOING FACEBOOK, UH, IN IN ANY WAY THEY CAN GET IN TOUCH WITH US.UH, WE'RE NOT ASKING TO CIRCUMVENT ANY OF THE PROCESSES IN THE CITY.
WE'RE REALLY ASKING FOR THE TIME.
THANK OF THE PROCESS TO BE AT THE RIGHT PLACE.
MY NAME'S KATIE LENAHAN, 9,490 NORTH CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY.
UM, I'M THE WORK WITH CHIEF ALFRED IN THE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE SAN SAMUEL ZONING CASE.
WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THE T AND P CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE ADDRESS ON OUR END TO ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS WE'VE HEARD TODAY IN THE BRIEFING.
AND PREVIOUSLY, WE WANNA LET YOU KNOW THAT TMPS FOR US, UM, CONCERN IT EXTERNAL VEHICULAR AND INGRESS AND EGRESS POINTS.
THEY INCLUDE CONSIDERATIONS, CONCLUDE QUEUING, BUT THEY ALSO INCLUDE INTERNAL ENTRY POINTS.
WE HAVE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ON HOW THEY ENTER A BUILDING.
WE HAVE PRE-K STUDENTS WHO SHOULD ENTER CLOSEST TO THEIR DROP OFF LOCATIONS.
OUR SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS SHOULD ENTER CLOSEST TO THEIR DROP OFF LOCATIONS AND HAVE THE SHORTEST TRAVEL DISTANCE POSSIBLE.
WE REVIEW OUR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS WITH MANY DISD INTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE MEETING NOT ONLY TEA STANDARDS, BUT ALSO, UH, ENSURING STUDENT SAFETY.
THAT INCLUDES POLICE CHIEF MARTINEZ.
HE FOLLOWS, UH, RULES AND REGULATIONS PER TEA.
WE MEET WITH OUR CAMPUS SAFETY SECURITY TEAM, OUR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TEAM, OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, OUR OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT, AND OUR DESIGN STANDARDS, ALL OF WHICH ARE GOVERNED BY TEAT AND P.
CONSIDERATIONS INCLUDE WHERE THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS POINTS ARE AND WHERE PEOPLE IN OUR BUILDING, UM, THAT CAN'T BE IDENTIFIED FULLY WITHOUT A COMPLETE BUILDING DESIGN.
IF THIS IS A REQUIREMENT AT ZONING, IT MEANS IT WILL BE CODIFIED HERE AND ANY CHANGES WILL REQUIRE SUBSEQUENT ZONING AMENDMENTS.
THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS AT DALLAS IS ACTUALLY A THREE STEP PROCESS, AS I'M SURE YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH.
FIRST, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH ZONING TO DEFER, DETERMINE THE LAND USE AND SITE DEVELOPMENT RULES AND REGULATIONS.
THEN WE GO THROUGH THE, ONCE WE COMPLETE THAT, WE COMPLETE OUR DESIGN.
WE GO IN FOR ENGINEERING WHERE THEY CHECK WORK IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THEY LOOK AT THE CITY'S STREET DESIGN MANUAL.
I THINK THERE WAS A QUESTION EARLIER HEARD ABOUT, UM, VISIBILITY TRIANGLES THAT'S CHECKED DURING PERMITTING, WHICH IS A SUBSEQUENT REVIEW WHERE THEY CHECK ZONING AGAIN ALONG WITH HEIGHT SETBACKS, UM, BUILDING CODE ISSUES AND, AND MANY, MANY MORE, UH, REGULATIONS THAT ARE CODIFIED BY THE CITY OF DALLAS.
SO IT'S A THREE STEP LINEAR PROCESS.
THE THE IMPORTANCE FOR US GETTING HERE IS TO GET ZONING COMPLETE SO WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT TWO STEPS.
IF WE GET SOMETHING CODIFIED AND WE FIND OUT SUBSEQUENTLY THAT WE HAVE TO COME BACK AND CHANGE IT, WE START BACK AT THE BEGINNING.
WE HAVE A ROBUST RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY OF DALLAS.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DESIGN, UM, PROFESSIONALS FROM THE CITY'S TEAM THAT ARE MEETING WITH US AT REGULAR INTERVALS TO REVIEW THESE DRAWINGS TO ENSURE THEY MEET THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT CODES AND STANDARDS.
UM, AND SO IN CLOSING, I JUST WANNA REITERATE, I KNOW THE TMPS A LIVELY DISCUSSION.
WE WANNA SHOW AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE ON WHERE WE'RE GOING.
ALBERT MARTINEZ, CHIEF OF POLICE FOR DALLAS INDEPENDENCE SCHOOL DISTRICT POLICE DEPARTMENT.
JUST WANNA ECHO WHAT, UH, MS. LENAHAN SAID THAT BEFORE WE EVEN BRING ANYTHING BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE, WE'RE IN CONSTANT TALKS INTERNALLY TO MEET ALL THE DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF WHAT IS REQUIRED.
[02:05:01]
SEEN PLENTY ENOUGH WHEN YOU CAME ONTO THE BOARD HOW MANY RULES THERE ARE JUST FOR THIS ALONE.SO THAT'S WHY WE BRING IN OUR WHOLE TEAM.
UH, MY JOB IS TO LOOK AT IT FROM THE SAFETY AND SECURITY ASPECT OF IT.
THIS IS WHY WE LOOK AT TRYING TO QUEUE WITHIN OUR GROUNDS.
IT'S ONE OF THE BEST PRACTICES OUT THERE.
AND THEN WE'RE TRYING TO FOLLOW THAT BECAUSE WHERE IT ALSO AFFECTS ME IS WHEN WE HAVE COMPLAINTS FROM THE CITIZENS AND THE RESIDENTS AND OUR PARENTS AND OUR STUDENTS.
I HAVE TO PUT OFFICERS OUT THERE.
I DON'T USE DALLAS POLICE, I'M RETIRED DALLAS POLICE.
BUT I USE OUR OFFICERS AND OUR STAFF TO TRY TO SECURE THAT CAMPUS IN SUPPORT OF OUR PRINCIPAL.
EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE TELLING YOU IS FROM OUR CENTRAL STAFF TO SUPPORT OUR PRINCIPAL, OUR PRINCIPALS OF OUR SCHOOLS.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DID AS SOON AS IT WAS BROUGHT UP TO MY ATTENTION, I TOOK ON THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR THE REASON THAT OUR PRINCIPALS ARE DEALING WITH STAR TESTING.
AND OUR SUPERINTENDENT IS NOT EXACTLY ASKING THEM, ARE YOU FOCUSED ON YOUR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN? THAT'S MY JOB.
SO I GLADLY INVITE YOU TO COME TO ANY OF OUR MEETINGS.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, I'LL BE MORE AND OPEN TO YOU.
I HAVE A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH GUS AND NOW WITH CHARLIE SALAZAR WHO WORKED AT DFR AND IS NOW BACK AS SECOND IN COMMAND THERE.
WE ALSO DEAL WITH THE OTHER STAFF MEMBERS, INCLUDING MR. NAVARRES THERE AT THE TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS.
AND WE HAVE LIVELY DISCUSSIONS AT TIMES, BUT WE ARE DOING EVERY EFFORT WE CAN TO MEET THE NEEDS, THE REGULATIONS OF THE CITY, BUT ALSO MINDFUL OF WHAT OUR STUDENTS NEED, OUR STAFF, OUR FACULTY, SO THAT WE CAN NOT ONLY PUT FORTH THIS SCHOOL FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COMMUNITY, BUT WE ARE PROVIDING THE BEST EDUCATION, NOT ONLY THE STATE OF TEXAS, BUT IN THIS NATION.
SO WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT SO THAT WE CAN GET THIS GOING.
AND AGAIN, ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE ALLY OUTSIDE OF THESE MEETING GROUNDS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CALL US, MEET WITH ME, WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO ASSURE YOU OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING.
MY NAME IS JASMINE HARRISON AND I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR IN STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES.
AND, UM, WE WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH THE TEAM MEMBERS THAT HAVE PRESENTED TO ENSURE THAT TRANSPORTATION IS ALWAYS A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION AND THAT WE ARE ALSO IN ALIGNMENT WITH, UM, ANY COMPLIANCE ISSUES AND THAT IT ALSO WORKS WITH THE CAMPUS ADMINISTRATION IN TERMS OF THE TRAFFIC FLOW.
SO I'M HERE IN SUPPORT AND AVAILABLE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.
I'M THE PR THE PRINCIPAL AT WW SAMUEL HIGH SCHOOL.
UH, IT'S BEEN MY PRIVILEGE TO BE THE PRINCIPAL AT SAMUEL FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS.
UH, I WAS A TEACHER THERE FOR FIVE YEARS BEFORE THAT, AND I CAN'T TELL YOU THE LEVEL OF EXCITEMENT AND JOY THAT WE HAVE FOR THIS NEW OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR STUDENTS.
UM, A NEW SAMUEL WOULD PROVIDE OUR STUDENTS WITH MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES, CUTTING EDGE FACILITIES, STATE-OF-THE-ART CLASSROOMS, AND IN SUPPORT OF THE MULTIPLE PROGRAMS THAT WE HAVE AT SAMUEL.
UM, I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR THIS MOTION.
IT'S BEEN MY PRIVILEGE TO COME AND SPEAK WITH YOU, TO WORK WITH OUR TEAM TOGETHER AS WE WORK TO BUILD THIS NEW OPPORTUNITY.
AND I CANNOT WAIT FOR THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT THIS NEW SCHOOL IS GONNA PROVIDE FOR OUR STUDENTS AT WW SAMUEL FOR THE FUTURE GENERATIONS AS WE MOVE ON.
SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOU AND WE TRULY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
UM, FIRST I WOULD JUST LIKE TO THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH FOR THE LAST MEETING.
I HEARD A LOT OF DISD ALUMNI, A LOT OF PARENTS, A LOT OF YOU KNOW, JUST YOUR CONCERNS.
IT WAS OUR FIRST TIME FOR ME AND MY STUDENTS HERE AND THEY LEARNED A LOT.
AND I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THAT.
WE WANT IT TO BE DONE CORRECTLY TOO.
AND, UM, GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS DESIRE LAUREN, UH, 76 25 HUMAN DRIVE.
UM, I'M A PROUD 2015 GRADUATE OF WW SAMUEL HIGH SCHOOL.
I'VE BEEN BLESSED WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO RETURN TO SAMUEL AND SERVE THE SAME COMMUNITY THAT HELPED SHAPE ME.
MY CONNECTION TO SAMUEL IS DEEPLY PERSONAL.
AS A STUDENT, I SERVED AS SENIOR REP ON STUDENT COUNCIL.
WRESTLER GRADUATED TOP 25% OF MY CLASS.
BUT WHAT I GAINED FROM SAMUEL EXTENDS FAR BEYOND ACADEMICS, ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS.
THE SCHOOL TAUGHT ME DISCIPLINE, LEADERSHIP, PERSEVERANCE, AND THE IMPORTANCE OF SERVING OTHERS.
TODAY I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF PASSING THOSE LESSONS ONTO A NEW GENERATION OF STUDENTS.
THE SAME PROGRAMS THAT HELP SHAPE ME, I NOW SPONSOR.
I TRULY LOVE THE WORK I DO AND THE IMPACT I MAKE IN SPECIAL EDUCATION.
SAM'S IMPACT REACHES ALL THROUGH MY FAMILY.
AND ALTHOUGH WE DID NOT MEET UNTIL OUR GRADUATED, OUR STORY IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW THIS SCHOOL CONTINUES TO CONNECT PEOPLE LONG AFTER THEY LEAVE ITS HALLS.
THE SAME SENSE OF CONNECTION CAN BE SEEN AMONGST OUR STAFF.
NINE CURRENT EMPLOYEES ARE SAMUEL ALUMNI.
AND BEFORE OUR SCHOOL WAS DISPLACED, THAT NUMBER WAS 12.
SOME OF MY FORMER TEACHERS AND NOW MY FAVORITE COLLEAGUES, IN FACT MY CURRENT
[02:10:01]
PRINCIPAL, MR. GURA, WAS ONCE MY HISTORY TEACHER.UM, THESE RELATIONSHIPS DEMONSTRATE THAT SAMUEL IS MUCH MORE THAN A SCHOOL BUILDING.
IT IS A PLACE WHERE STUDENTS BECOME GRADUATES, GRADUATES BECOME EDUCATORS, TEACHERS BECOME COLLEAGUES, AND CLASSMATES BECOME FAMILY FOR GENERATIONS.
SAMUEL HAS BEEN A SOURCE OF IDENTITY, OPPORTUNITY, AND PRIDE FOR FAMILIES THROUGHOUT THIS COMMUNITY.
OUR STUDENTS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CAPABLE OF EXCELLENCE.
ANU SAMUEL WOULD PROVIDE FAR MORE THAN MODERN CLASSROOMS. IT WOULD CREATE ADEQUATE SPACE FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES, ATHLETICS, FINE ARTS, ACADEMIC PROGRAMS, STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS, AND MORE THAN THE 40 SPORTS AND CLUBS THAT'S CURRENTLY SERVE OUR STUDENTS.
IT WOULD GIVE EVERY STUDENT MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO PARTICIPATE, DEVELOP CONFIDENCE, DISCOVER TALENT, FIND A PLACE WHERE THEY BELONG.
REINVESTMENT IN SAMUEL IS REINVESTMENT IN THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
WHEN WE STRENGTHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOL, WE STRENGTHEN THE FAMILIES IT SERVES.
WE CREATE SAFER AND MORE WELCOMING SPACES, EXPAND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES, SUPPORT EDUCATORS AND DEMONSTRATE TO YOUNG PEOPLE THAT THEIR FUTURES ARE WORTH, ARE WORTHY OF MEANINGFUL INVESTMENTS.
AS WE MOVE FORWARD, WE MUST PRESERVE THE SAMUEL LEGACY, THE TRI, THE PRIDE OF THE TRADITIONS, RELATIONSHIPS, AND SENSE OF BELONGING THAT GENERATIONS OF FAMILIES HAVE BUILT HERE.
THAT MEANS HONORING THE PAST BY CREATING SOMETHING EVEN BETTER FOR THE NEXT GENERATION.
THE STUDENTS WE SERVE HAVE EXTRAORDINARY POTENTIAL.
I SEE IT EVERY DAY THROUGHOUT OUR CAMPUS.
IMAGINE HOW MUCH MORE THEY COULD ACHIEVE WITH THE POSSIBILITIES OF A NEW FACILITY, RESOURCES AND OPPORTUNITIES.
THEY DESERVE A SCHOOL THAT REFLECTS THEIR PROMISE IN A COMMUNITY THAT IS WILLING TO INVEST IN THEIR SUCCESS.
SO I'M IN HIGH SCHOOL IS MORE THAN A BUILDING.
IT IS PART OF IDENTITY AND HISTORY OF THIS COMMUNITY.
WE ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT ZONING KZ 2 6 0 0 0 1 66 AND HELP US MOVE FORWARD WITH THE NEW ASSIGNMENT FOR OUR STUDENTS, FAMILIES, AND FUTURE GENERATIONS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION AND YOUR COMMITMENT TO OUR STUDENTS AND OUR COMMUNITY.
MY NAME IS MATT NICHOLSON, 4 0 1 NORTH HOUSTON STREET, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 0 2.
UH, I'M THE ARCHITECT FOR CORGAN FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, WW SAMUEL HIGH SCHOOL.
UH, FIRST I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE CITY OF DALLAS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TEAM.
'CAUSE SAMUEL IS PART OF THE NEW STAR PROGRAM.
UH, TO DATE, WE HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH PLANNING DEVELOPMENT FOR SEVEN ONGOING MEETINGS.
AND THIS IS A FANTASTIC PROGRAM WHICH ALLOWS US THE DESIGNERS TO WORK IN TANDEM WITH THE CITY SO THAT WE CAN DEVELOP THE PROGRAM, OR EXCUSE ME, THE PROJECT, UH, ALONGSIDE.
SO ONCE WE ACTUALLY GO TO PERMITTING, THAT PROCESS IS ACTUALLY EXPEDITED.
UH, I ALSO WANTED TO ILLUSTRATE A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT CHIEF ALFRED SAID.
UH, TODAY WE HAVE ENGAGED THE COMMUNITY, UH, TWO, UH, THREE SEPARATE MEETINGS.
UH, WITHIN THOSE MEETINGS WE HAVE ACTUALLY ILLUSTRATED TO THEM THE EXISTING SITE.
SO CURRENTLY THE EXISTING SITE, UH, OF SAMUEL IS GONNA BE REPURPOSED FOR THIS NEW SCHOOL, UH, OF THIS NEW SITE.
THE EXISTING SITE ATHLETICS, WHICH ARE TO THE PLAN NORTH AS SHOWN ON THE SCREEN, ARE TO REMAIN EXISTING.
SO THAT ACTUALLY LIMITS THE LOCATION OF OUR BUILDING TOWARDS THE NORTH.
AND THROUGH OUR ANALYSIS WITH THE UNDERSTANDING OF HOW STUDENTS ACCESS THIS SITE, UH, PEDESTRIANS OVER TWO THIRDS WHO WALK ACTUALLY ACCESS THIS THROUGH THE WEST, WHICH WOULD THEN ILLUSTRATE THAT THE BEST PLACE TO PROVIDE THIS NEW BUILDING WOULD BE IN THAT NORTH WEST CORNER.
UH, THIS IS OUR CURRENT DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE TO ILLUSTRATE KIND THE TMP THAT'S BEEN DEVELOPED, UH, ALLOWING ALL CIRCULATION OF PARENT PICK UP A DROP OFF TO BE ON SITE.
UM, AND THEN THROUGH THOSE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTS, WE GO THROUGH VISIONING SESSIONS WITH THEM.
SO WHAT IS A VISIONING SESSION? SO THIS IS A SERIES OF INTERACTIVE, UH, WORK SESSIONS THAT WE HAVE WITH THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
UH, AND WE ACTUALLY TOOK ON THREE DIFFERENT ONES.
THE FIRST ONE BEING A VOCAB QUEST.
[02:15:01]
QUESTIONS THAT WE ASKED THE DISTRICT TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHO THEY ARE, WHAT'S THEIR IDENTITY, AND ULTIMATELY THEIR NEEDS AND WANTS TO BASICALLY FACILITATE, UH, DEVELOPMENT OF OUR PROJECT.SO ULTIMATELY WE CAME AWAY WITH UNDERSTANDING THEIR CULTURE, THEIR VISION, THEIR WHAT THEY DEEM AS SUCCESS, AS WELL AS WHO THEY ARE AND THE LEGACY.
UH, THE SECOND VISIONING SESSION WAS THAT OF THE AESTHETICS OF THE EXTERIOR.
UH, BY DOING THIS, WE SHOWED A SERIES OF EXTERIOR, UH, RENDERINGS, EITHER AS BUILT OR NOT BUILT, UH, TO ALLOW THEM TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY WANT.
SO THROUGH THAT THEY PROVIDED DOTS, GREEN AND RED.
GREEN MEANING YES, RED MEANING NO.
UH, ILLUSTRATING THE FRONT ENTRY NOW AS WELL AS THE PLANNED COURTYARD AND THE AFTER HOURS ENTRY, THE THIRD SESSION.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER SCHWA, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, MR. CHAIR? I DO.
UM, IN THE CASE OF Z 2 6 0 0 0 1 6 6, I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OCTOBER 22ND.
AND I DO HAVE SOME COMMENTS IF YOU GIMME A CHANCE, RIGHT? YOU HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SERATO, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
UM, AGAIN, I WANNA, UH, THANK, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SCHOOL STAFF THAT CAME HERE TODAY AND THE, THE FORMER STUDENT, THE, UH, SAMUEL GRADUATE.
UM, AGAIN, I WANNA REITERATE THAT I AM, UM, A DAUGHTER OF PLEASANT GROVE, A-D-I-S-D GRADUATE.
UM, I TRULY LOVE MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND I WANNA SAY THIS VERY LOUD AND CLEAR.
UM, SAMUEL DESERVES A NEW BUILDING.
UM, SAMUEL'S DESERVED A NEW BUILDING FOR AT LEAST 30 YEARS NOW.
AND SO I'M, I'M VERY HAPPY TO SEE THAT THERE HAS BEEN COMMUNITY INPUT.
UM, I WILL SAY, HOWEVER, SINCE OUR LAST MEETING, WHICH WAS THREE WEEKS AGO, UM, THE FOLLOWING TWO WEEKS, I HEARD ZERO COMMUNICATION FROM DISD.
I HAD NO UPDATES, NO, UM, MENTION OF ANY OF THE COMMENTS THAT OUR COMMISSIONERS MADE AT OUR LAST MEETING.
IT WASN'T UNTIL WE RECEIVED OUR NEW DOCKET LAST FRIDAY THAT I SAW THAT THERE WERE LITTLE TO NO CHANGES MADE TO THE SITE PLAN.
THERE WAS NO TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND THE SUP CONDITIONS WERE VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'D SEEN, UH, PRIOR.
SO I COMMUNICATED WITH DISD AND IT'S FELT A LITTLE LIKE THEY'VE, UH, BEEN IN A SCRAMBLE THIS WEEK TO PUT SOME THINGS TOGETHER.
UM, WE, UH, AS A COMMISSION RECEIVED, UH, THINGS THIS MORNING THROUGHOUT THIS WEEK, UH, I THINK WEDNESDAY, UH, YOU GUYS WERE IN OVERDRIVE TRYING TO GET THINGS TOGETHER.
OR TUESDAY, UM, I RECEIVED A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN TODAY AT 10 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, UM, OR WHY, UH, THERE'S A LACK OF SUBMISSION OF NEW, UM, NEW DOCUMENTS TO THIS, UH, BODY.
UM, BUT I'M HOPING THAT IN TWO WEEKS YOU CAN, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE WHAT WE NEED AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN REQUESTING, UM, FOR, YOU KNOW, THE LAST MONTH.
SO, UM, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHY I AM, I'M HOLDING THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT AND I HOPE, UH, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WILL SUPPORT ME IN THAT ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, I ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER SATA HAD TO SAY.
LOOK, I THINK DISD DOES AN EXCEPTIONAL JOB OF EDUCATING CHILDREN AND MANAGING A VERY DIVERSE POPULATION OF CHILDREN, FAMILIES, AND COMMUNITIES.
AND I KNOW THAT WE ARE UNDERTAKING TO TRY TO STREAMLINE HOW WE GET THEM THROUGH THE CITY TO BUILD NEW SCHOOLS.
AND THAT'S NOT AN EASY UNDERTAKING.
BUT THIS FIRST CASE HAS NOT GONE WELL AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM IS ON THE DISD SIDE, BUT WE'RE NOT JUST GONNA RUBBER STAMP IT.
UM, THIS NEEDS TO BE AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THE REST OF THE CASES ARE GONNA GO.
AND THE EXAMPLE SO FAR IS NOT GOOD.
WE GOT UPDATED SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS AND NOT ALL THAT UPDATED.
FRANKLY, LESS THAN AN HOUR BEFORE OUR HEARING STARTED TODAY.
I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WE'D GOTTEN THEM BECAUSE FRANKLY, I DON'T ALWAYS HAVE TIME TO LOOK AT THE VOLUME OF STUFF PEOPLE SEND US WITHIN 24 HOURS BEFORE THE COMMISSION.
AND SO THAT'S JUST NOT ENOUGH TIME FOR US TO REVIEW THINGS AND STUDY THEM.
AND BECOME PREPARED TO MAKE AN EDUCATED DECISION.
AND I'M NOT GONNA DO THINGS LAST MINUTE LIKE THAT.
AND, AND I'M NOT GONNA, YOU KNOW, FRANKLY, BLOW IT OUT OUR BACKSIDE IN ORDER TO
[02:20:01]
RUSH, RUSH, RUSH, BECAUSE YOU'RE IN A HURRY.WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO THE PUBLIC.
WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO THE CITY.
WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO THE PEOPLE WHO PUT US IN THESE CHAIRS TO DO THIS IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY.
AND SO WE'RE ASKING YOU TO HELP US HELP YOU.
DON'T GIVE US STUFF AT THE LAST MINUTE, OR WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK HERE.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? ALRIGHT, I WILL, UM, PROVIDE SOME COMMENTS.
IT'S CLEAR THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME CHALLENGING ISSUES THAT WE HAVE HERE.
YOU KNOW, DISD IS GOING TO BE COMING TO US WITH DOZENS OF ZONING CASES IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT BOND THAT THEY PASSED.
AND SIMILARLY, WE SAW A FLOOD OF ZONING CASES A FEW YEARS AGO WHEN SOME OF US WERE HERE, SOME OF US WEREN'T, WHERE DID HAD BOND FUNDS TO SPEND ON IMPROVING AND REBUILDING SCHOOLS.
AND THERE WERE SOME GROWING PAINS IN THAT PROCESS AS WELL.
SO, I, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS UNPRECEDENTED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, A BUMP IN THE ROAD THAT I THINK WE WILL WORK THROUGH.
AND AS I MENTIONED THE BRIEFING TODAY, UM, I AM WORKING WITH CITY STAFF AND, YOU KNOW, INTEND TO WORK WITH DISD TO HAVE A BRIEFING OR EVEN A, A WORK SESSION ON THESE ISSUES SO WE CAN, UM, FIGURE OUT A GOOD PATH FORWARD WITH DISD BECAUSE OF THE NUMEROUS CASES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING TO US.
UM, I DO WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT MAKES THESE DISD CASES AND OTHER, YOU KNOW, CASES FROM SOME OF OUR OTHER TRADITIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
AND YOU KNOW, HOW WE, I I THINK WE, HAVING DONE YEARS OF THE SCHOOL CASES SITTING ON THIS, THIS BODY FOR YEARS IS THINGS ARE, IF YOU COULD TAKE YOUR CONVERSATION OUTSIDE, I'D APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, THERE WERE, YOU KNOW, THINGS THAT MAKE THESE, THESE PUBLIC SCHOOL CASES DIFFERENT AS I THINK JUST ONE EXAMPLE, AS MS. LENAHAN SAID, YOU KNOW, THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN IS JUST NOT SIMPLY A FUNCTION OF, YOU KNOW, DISD ACTING AT ITS SOLE DISCRETION IN FIGURING OUT WHAT THE BEST TRAFFIC FLOW FOR THE AREA IS WITHOUT ANY OTHER CONSTRAINTS.
THERE WERE TEA REQUIREMENTS AND THERE WERE ALSO, YOU KNOW, REQUIREMENTS FROM DI'S ON VERY THOUGHTFUL POLICIES RELATING TO DEALING WITH STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES AND SPECIAL NEEDS.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE THINGS PULLING THE DISTRICT IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS, WHICH, YOU KNOW, MAY CAUSE US TO NEED TO LOOK AT TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS AND THINGS LIKE THAT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY IN THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
AND SIMILARLY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, THESE DIC SCHOOLS ARE IN THE PROCESS IN A DESIGN PROCESS.
AND I ACTUALLY HAD A CONVERSATION WITH MR. ALFRED THE OTHER DAY, CHIEF ALFRED, AND HE MENTIONED TO ME SOME OF THESE SCHOOLS, YOU KNOW, AND I, I'M NOT ARCHITECT OR AN ENGINEER, SO PLEASE FORGIVE ME IF I GET THESE WRONG, BUT YOU GET THROUGH PERCENTAGE OF DESIGNS AND WITH WHERE THESE THINGS ARE IN THE BOND CYCLE, THEY'RE THE 20, 30% MARK.
AND SOMETIMES THINGS SHIFT ALONG THE ROAD IN A VERY PRACTICAL WAY THAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY AND BEST FOR DISD WHEN WE GET TO 50%, 80%, 90% DESIGN WHERE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS AND SITE PLANS AND THINGS LIKE THAT MAY NEED TO CHANGE WITHIN A, YOU KNOW, REASONABLE TOLERANCE.
AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THIS BODY TO GET INFORMATION UPFRONT AND, AND PARAMETERS FRONT.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU KNOW, WE ALSO HAVE OUR PROCESSES, UM, AT THE CITY WITH OTHER FOLKS AT THE PERMITTING IN ENGINEERING PROCESS, AND WE NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THOSE.
AND THE LAST THING THAT I WANNA MENTION IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE APPOINTED OFFICIALS AND THEN, UH, THE POINT PEOPLE WHO APPOINT US ON COUNCIL ARE ELECTED OFFICIALS.
BUT ONE UNIQUE AND REALLY GOOD THING ABOUT THESE PUBLIC SCHOOL CASES IS WE ARE NOT THE ONLY PUBLIC OFFICIALS INVOLVED AND RESPONSIBLE HERE.
YOU KNOW, DISD ALSO HAS, UM, TRUSTEES WHO ARE ELECTED BY THE PUBLIC, WHO ARE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR THE IMPACTS THAT THEIR SCHOOLS HAVE ON THE COMMUNITY, WHICH I ALSO THINK MAKES A DIFFERENCE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S A DIFFICULT DECISION TODAY WHETHER TO, TO HOLD THIS CASE OR SEND IT ALONG TO COUNCIL.
I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHERE I'M GONNA SHAKE OUT, BUT I DO WANT THIS BODY TO THINK LONG AND HARD AND HAVE A VERY MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION WITH DISD
[02:25:01]
ABOUT WHAT DO WE WANNA SEE FROM THESE SCHOOLS THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS AND WHAT MIGHT BE, UM, BETTER LEFT FOR LATER.YOU KNOW, I'VE SEEN HAVING LIVED BOND CYCLES IN THE PAST WHERE DISD COMES WHERE, YOU KNOW, SOME DEMANDS THAT WE MAKE OR SOME REQUESTS THAT WE MAKE OF, OF DISD AND OTHER PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE QUITE REASONABLE.
AND THEN THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, REQUESTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE THAT ARE FRANKLY, I THINK OVERREACHED.
AND I THINK HAVING A REAL DIALOGUE WITH DISD IN AN APPROPRIATE SETTING WILL HELP US FIGURE OUT A GOOD PATH FORWARD WHERE WE CAN LOOK AT ONE, YOU KNOW, OUR LAND USE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE AS THE CITY'S BODY FOR ADVISING CITY COUNCIL ON LAND USE CONCERNS.
TWO, LOOK AT THE OTHER CITY PROCESSES THAT ARE DOWNSTREAM FROM US.
AND THREE, GET A FULL AND COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONSTRAINTS THAT DISD HAS ON ITS BUILDING ACTIVITIES, WHETHER THEY'RE FROM OTHER STATE LAW WELL THOUGHT OUT DISD POLICIES LIKE FOR, FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES.
AND ALSO JUST REALLY PRACTICAL CONCERNS THAT THAT DSD MAY HAVE SO WE CAN FIND A PRODUCTIVE PATH FORWARD.
I'M CONFIDENT THAT WE'LL GET HERE AND, YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY, COMMISSIONER SERATO, I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR HARD WORK.
YOU JUST HAPPEN TO HAVE THE FIRST BIG DISD ZONING CASE, SO THANK YOU.
AND I, I GUESS A COMBINATION OF BOTH, BUT SOMEONE HAD TO, UH, BE THE, UM, FIRST ONE UP ON THIS BOND PACKAGE, BUT, UM, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I GOT THAT ALL OUT ON THE RECORD.
SO WE HAVE PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS GOING FORWARD AND, YOU KNOW, EVERY DISD SCHOOL CASE, UM, ISN'T SOMETHING THAT GETS HELD ONCE OR MULTIPLE TIMES, AND WE CAN HAVE A REALLY STREAMLINED PROCESS, WHICH I THINK WILL BENEFIT THE CITY RESIDENTS AND DISD AND ITS STUDENTS AS WELL.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, I'M HAPPY TO WORK WITH CHAIR RUBEN ON ANY KIND OF WORKFORCE OR WHATEVER TO HELP STREAMLINE THE PROCESS.
I, I DON'T WANNA SEE THE CASES HELD ALL THE TIME.
I, IT'S JUST A WASTE OF EVERYBODY'S TIME AND IT'S NOT A GOOD USE OF TAXPAYER RESOURCES ON ANY FRONT.
UM, I, AND I CAN TELL YOU SOME OF WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE.
I DON'T SEE A, I DO SEE SOME UNIQUE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SCHOOL CASES AND OTHER CASES, BUT I ALSO SEE A LOT OF SIMILARITIES BETWEEN OTHER CASES IN SCHOOL CASES IN TERMS OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT.
AND WHEN I SEE THE SITE PLANS THAT DISD IS SHARING WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THEN WHAT THEY GIVE US THEIR NIGHT AND DAY.
SO THERE'S CLEARLY A LOT MORE INFORMATION OUT THERE THAN WHAT THEY'RE GIVING US.
AND I THINK THAT THERE IS A HAPPY MEDIUM THAT WE COULD COME TO IN ORDER TO HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO KNOW THAT WE'RE PROTECTING THE COMMUNITY AND GIVE THE SCHOOL ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY.
AND I THINK THAT WE CAN GET THERE.
WE CAN'T GET THERE AN HOUR BEFORE THE MEETING.
AND I THINK IT'S FAIR TO KNOW AND TO DEFINE SOME PARAMETERS AROUND THESE SCHOOLS.
WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING? WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE LIGHTS? WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO PUT LANDSCAPE BUFFERS? WHERE ARE YOUR POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS? WHERE WILL YOUR PARKING BE? WHERE WILL YOUR SPORTS FIELDS BE? WHERE WILL YOUR BUILDING BE ON THE SITE? ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE ANY UNIQUE USES LIKE FARMING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT WE NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION? ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE ANY UNIQUE USES THAT WILL BE ALLOWED OR WEIRD HOURS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT WE NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY? THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY MAY BE DIFFERENT FOR EACH SITE.
SO HAVING SOME BASIC UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE CAMPUS IS GOING TO BE AND WHERE THINGS ARE GOING TO BE ON THE CAMPUS AND HOW TALL THEY'RE GOING TO BE, AND WHAT THE HOURS OF OPERATION ARE GOING TO BE AND WHAT THE LIGHTING'S GOING TO BE, AND WHETHER THERE'RE GOING TO BE ANY UNIQUE USES THAT WE NEED TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S OUTRAGEOUS TO ASK FOR FROM THIS BODY SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE THAT WE ARE DOING OUR, WE'RE FULFILLING OUR OBLIGATION THROUGH THE COMMUNITY THAT SURROUNDS THE SCHOOL AND HELPING THE SCHOOL BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR SO THAT YOU DON'T INADVERTENTLY CREATE A PROBLEM WITH YOUR NEW CAMPUS.
SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS I WOULD LOOK FOR IN, IN EVALUATING THESE THINGS.
AND, AND, AND ALSO I THINK WE ALL HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO BE GOOD STEWARDS OF THE PLANET AND BE MAKING SURE WE'RE MAKING THE WISEST CHOICES ON THAT FRONT.
SO, YOU KNOW, I KNOW DSD HAS GOOD POLICIES IN THAT AREA, AND SO DOES THE CITY.
AND I THINK WE OUGHT TO BE LOOKING FOR THOSE OPPORTUNITIES AS WE GO, GO THROUGH THIS.
[02:30:01]
THAT WE SHOULD BE RUSHING THROUGH.AND IF WE SIT DOWN AND COLLABORATIVE WORK THROUGH A PROGRAM WHERE WE CAN IDENTIFY WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT SHOULD BE PRESENTED IN EACH CASE, YOU'LL KNOW WHAT IT IS, WE'LL KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR AND WE'LL HAVE A STREAMLINED PROCESS.
BUT WE WEREN'T GIVEN THAT OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO IT WAS DROPPED IN OUR LAP THAT THERE'S A NEW PROCESS, SURPRISE PLAN COMMISSION, HERE IT IS, AND YOU'RE NOT GIVING ANY INFORMATION.
I DON'T KNOW WHO THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA THAT NONE OF US WERE GONNA BE GIVEN A HEADS UP AT ALL, THAT THERE'S A WHOLE NEW WAY WE DO DISD CASES, BUT WE WEREN'T GIVEN ANY HEADS UP.
APPARENTLY THERE WERE MEETINGS FOR MONTHS WITH THE DISTRICT AND THE STAFF, AND NOBODY TOLD US, AND THEN WEEKS WENT BY WHEN WE HELD THIS CASE, AND YET WE GOT NO NEW INFORMATION UNTIL THE 11TH HOUR.
I WOULD LIKE TO HELP THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BE SUCCESSFUL.
WE PAY A LOT OF MONEY INTO DISD.
I VERY MUCH WANT TO SEE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BE SUCCESSFUL, BUT THAT'S DIFFICULT UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONER SERRA? UH, JUST, UH, ONE MORE THING.
THIS, UM, I'M VERY TYPE A AND I LIKE THINGS TO BE PLANNED AND IN ORDER.
UM, AND THEN THIS WHOLE CASE HAS FELT VERY MESSY AND LAST MINUTE AND REACTIVE.
UM, EVEN FROM HOW WE FOUND OUT AS COMMISSIONER KINGSTON JUST, UM, MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE WAS, UM, KIND OF THIS SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR HOW WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT DISD CASES.
I THINK SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THIS BODY HAVE ASKED IS LIKE, IS THIS HOW WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT ALL SCHOOLS FROM NOW ON? OR IS THIS JUST THE BOND CASES FOR DISD OR, YOU KNOW, SO I, I HAVE CONFLICTING FEELINGS ABOUT THAT TOO.
AND SO I APPRECIATE, UH, CHAIR RUBIN SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO HAVE A SIT DOWN DISCUSSION WITH DISD, BUT IT'S VERY REACTIVE.
LIKE, I WOULD'VE LIKED TO HAVE BEEN PREPARED FOR ALL OF THIS AHEAD OF TIME SO THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE GET WHAT LOOKS LIKE A VERY BARE, UM, YOU KNOW, SITE PLAN AND, AND CASE FROM DISD THAT LIKE, I UNDERSTAND WHY, YOU KNOW, SO, UM, AGAIN, I, I I WANT SAMUEL TO BE BUILT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE WITHOUT LOSING MONEY.
UM, BUT AGAIN, AND I, I KNOW THAT YOUNG LADY MENTIONED IT TODAY, LIKE WE WANNA BE SURE THAT IT GETS DONE RIGHT.
AND, UM, UNFORTUNATELY SAMUEL WAS, WAS THE FIRST ON THE LIST.
UM, SO I'M HOPING THAT WE CAN COME TO AN UNDERSTANDING AND AN AGREEMENT HERE SO THAT THE REMAINING, YOU KNOW, 30 PLUS CASES THAT WE'RE GONNA SEE FROM DISD IN THE NEXT YEAR GO BY MUCH, UH, MORE SMOOTHLY.
COMMISSIONER WHEELER REAGAN, UM, ARE, ARE WE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS OR NO, OR NO? YES.
JUST LIKE ANY OTHER CASE, YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS.
SO I, I THINK I WANNA ASK A QUESTION TO MR. NAVAREZ.
UM, MR. NAVAREZ, HOW SOON AFTER, HOW SOON AFTER OUR CPC, LAST CPC CASE DID DISD REACH OUT TO YOU AS IT RELATES TO THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN? GOOD AFTERNOON, MA'AM.
WE HAD A MEETING THE MORNING AFTER CBC, MA'AM, UH, FRIDAY AND THE MORNING FOLLOWING CBC.
AND WAS THERE ANY BACK AND FORTH RELATED TO THE, THAT WOULD HAVE DELAYED, THAT WOULD HAVE DELAYED US GETTING THIS TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, UM, UM, CORRECTIONS THAT WOULD'VE MADE THIS GO BACKWARDS AND FORWARD THAT WOULD, COULD HAVE BEEN POSSIBLY CONTRIBUTED TO WHY WE GOT THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AND NEW SITE PLAN SO LATE? WOULD YOU REPEAT YOUR QUESTION, MA'AM? I'M, I'M, I'M SORRY.
I COULDN'T, IT, IT IS THERE, IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT SOME GOING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN, UM, YOUR OFFICE AND DISD AS IT RELATES TO WHAT THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN SHOULD LOOK LIKE OR THE SITE PLAN SHOULD LOOK LIKE IN BETWEEN LAST CPC AND WHEN WE ACTUALLY RECEIVED IT? THAT COULD HAVE DELAYED.
WHY WE DIDN'T GET IT UNTIL TODAY? I MEAN, YEAH, SINCE WE, WE, THREE TIMES THE FRIDAY AFTER CPCI WAS ASKED TO LEAVE THE MEETING SO THAT THEY COULD COLLABORATE WITH, UH, THE PRINCIPAL.
AND WE CAME BACK A FOURTH TIME ON THE MONDAY AFTER, UH, THEY, UM, WE, IT WAS A CHALLENGING, UM, OPERATIONS PLAN BECAUSE THEIR CONSULTANT HADN'T BEEN HIRED UNTIL THAT SAME WEEK AND FIGURING OUT THE CHANGES THAT THE PLAN HAD ALREADY NEEDED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT CONSIDERING THE BUILDING IS ALREADY IN PLACE, CHALLENGED IT BECAUSE OF A 1 1 2 WAY CONVERSION.
BUT WE WERE ABLE TO COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT, UH, WE RECEIVED A REVISION THIS MORNING AND IMMEDIATELY WITHIN HOURS WE, UH, REPLIED WITH, UH, OBSERVATIONS ON THAT REVISED PLAN.
[02:35:01]
I SEE NO REASON STAFF HAS BEEN COLLABORATIVE AND, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO HELPING THEM AND THAT RE REVISION AND COME UP TO A FINAL PLAN AS QUICKLY AS THEY, THEIR CONSULTING IS AVAILABLE.SO THAT, BUT THAT COULD HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO WHY IT TOOK SO LONG.
AM I CORRECT? SO THEY DIDN'T JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND LEAVE THE MEETING AND NOT, AND NOT SO THEY DIDN'T JUST LEAVE THE MEETING LAST TIME AND, AND, AND WAITED TO CONTACT YOU ALL NO.
TO COME WITH THE BEST POSSIBLE PLAN? NO.
THE, THE CONSULTANTS HAVE BEEN WORKING, UH, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S CONSULTANTS HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS TMP IMMEDIATELY AFTER LAST CPC.
UM, SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF THOUGHT PROCESSES ON IT, AND I, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A NEW PROCESS, BUT I'M ALSO LOOKING AT, UM, AS I SAID LAST TIME, SOME OF THE SCHOOLS, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE BIGGEST AMOUNT OF EFFORT AS FAR AS NEW SCHOOLS BEING BUILT.
PLEASANT GROVE HAD QUITE A BIT, AND I REMEMBER THOSE SCHOOLS, THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN WAS HORRIBLE, BUT JUST LOOKING AT THEM NOW, THE WAY THAT THE DESIGN LOOKS ON THIS PARTICULAR PLAN AND ALSO ON THE PLAN, UM, THE PLANS FOR URBANDALE FOR, UM, NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE, FOR, UM, JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, ALL THAT ARE ON MAJOR PREPARERS AND HOW THE SPILLOVER HAS BEEN REDUCED OVER 80%.
UM, AND THIS LOOKS LIKE A NEW PLAN FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT IF WE'RE GONNA BE EVALUATING, UM, WHAT THE NEW PROCESSES IS, I REALLY BELIEVE THAT WE AS, AS THE COMMISSION AND, UM, THE CITY STAFF COLLABORATIVE, THAT WE NEED TO BE BRINGING SOME PEOPLE IN FROM PERMITTING SO THAT WE CAN GET WITH THEM TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE PROCESSES AND WHAT ARE WE PUTTING IN PLACE THAT IS HINDERING THE PROCESSES.
SOME OF THE THINGS THAT'S, THAT HAVEN'T ASKED TODAY, JUST FROM SOMEONE THAT IS, THAT PERMITTING AT LEAST FIVE DAYS, FOUR, THREE TO FOUR DAYS A WEEK, SOME OF THESE THINGS ACTUALLY DO HAPPEN AS FAR AS THE, THE SITE OF, UM, THE, UH, THE VISIBILITY, UH, SETBACKS, THOSE THINGS ARE PUT IN PLACE, UM, IN PLACE BEFORE THEY EVEN BREAK GROUND AND IT'S DONE IN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
AND SO HAVING THOSE DEPARTMENTS COME OVER AND EXPLAIN SOME OF THE THINGS, UM, IT, IT LOOKS LIKE INSTEAD OF HEARING TO ARTICLE 10, ADHERING TO ARTICLE 13 LANDSCAPING PLANS, WHETHER SETBACKS ARE SOMEWHAT LIKE THE FOREIGN DISTRICTS WITH THE FIVE FOOT, UM, BUFFER AND ALSO THE SIX FOOT SIDEWALKS.
UM, SO I THINK THAT SOME OF IT IS, SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE ASK ARE PERMITTING AND WE MIGHT NOT ALWAYS HAVE THAT UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE QUITE OFTEN A GOOD MAJORITY OF US DON'T GO THROUGH PERMITTING PROCESSES.
UM, AND SO BRINGING THAT TEAM IN TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS AND SO THAT WE WON'T BE LIMITED TO THEM TO THAT, AND OUR ACCESS POINTS HAVE TO BE PRECISE IN ANY, ANY DEVIATION IF WE PUT IT INTO WRITING, WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THEM TO COME BACK AND, AND, AND PUT IN FURTHER THE LATER PROJECTS.
AND I DON'T KNOW, I MEAN FOR ME, I JUST, UM, I THINK WE COULD PUT SOME STUFF IN PLACE TODAY THAT HAS TO BE MANDATED AND PUT IN PLACE BEFORE IT MAKES IT TO COUNCIL INSTEAD OF HOLDING IT, BUT ACTUALLY HOLDING STAFF ACCOUNTABLE THAT WE NEED TO BE HAVING A MEETING SURROUNDING DISD BEFORE, IF NOT BEFORE THE FIRST, THE END OF THE YEAR, BUT DIRECTLY AT THE FIRST PART OF THE YEAR.
IF THAT IS A SPECIAL SESSION THAT IT HAS TO BE CALLED BY OUR CHAIR.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALRIGHT, LET'S TAKE A RECORD VOTE.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER RADO, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KINGSTON TO HOLD THE MATTER UNTIL OCTOBER 22ND.
IS THAT RIGHT? DID I GET THE DATE RIGHT? OKAY.
DISTRICT SEVEN O DISTRICT EIGHT? YES.
DISTRICT 11, DISTRICT 12? YES.
[10. 26-3213A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for an accessory community center (private) on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the northeast corner of Catalonia Drive and Galicia Lane. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to site plan and conditions. Applicant: Tisha Vaidya Representative: Stephanie Murphy U/A From: September 3, 2026 and September 17, 2026. Planner: Justin Lee Council District: 8 Z-26-000122]
CASE NUMBER 10.UH, ITEM NUMBER 10, AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR ACCESSORY COMMUNITY CENTER PRIVATE ON PROPER PROPERTY ZONE R DASH 7.5.
A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF CATA DRIVE AND GALACIA LANE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS.
[02:40:01]
NEXT SPEAKER.HI EVERYONE AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
I'M VEIA FOUNDER AND CEO OF ELIZABETH PROPERTY GROUP, THE OWNER OF HACIENDA DEL.
SO LOCATED AT 1160 GIA LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 1 7.
THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING OUR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT APPLICATION.
EPG IS A DALLAS-BASED WOMAN OWNED, AFFORDABLE HOUSING OWNER WITH ABOUT 4,000 HOMES ACROSS THE STATE WHERE LONG-TERM OWNERS AND WE STAY INVESTED IN THE COMMUNITIES WHERE WE OPERATE.
I MYSELF AM BORN AND RAISED DALLAS AND AM PROUD TO CALL THIS AMAZING CITY HOME.
THIS PERMIT ALLOWS US TO USE THIS SPACE AS A LEASING OFFICE SO WE CAN PROVIDE THE BEST HOUSING EXPERIENCE TO OUR RESIDENTS RIGHT HERE IN THE COMMUNITY.
HAVING STAFF ON SITE MEANS FASTER MAINTENANCE RESPONSE, EASIER ACCESS FOR RESIDENTS WHO NEED HELP, AND A PROFESSIONAL PRESENCE THAT BENEFITS THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT ON ITEM NUMBER 10? SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, YOUR MOTION? YES, MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF Z DASH 26 DASH 0 0 1 22, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE STATUS RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS AND WITH AN EXPIRATION OF FIVE YEARS.
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION.
ALRIGHT, LET'S TAKE A 10 MINUTE BREAK AND BE BACK AT TWO 10.
[SUBDIVISION DOCKET - Consent Items]
AND THIS MEETING, THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION IS BACK ON THE RECORD.LET'S GO TO OUR SUBDIVISION CONSENT DOCKET.
UM, AND THAT CONSISTS OF ITEMS 12 THROUGH 26 AND I DO SEE THAT THERE'S SOMEONE SIGNED UP.
IT'S THE APPLICANT ON NUMBER 12.
IS THAT PERSON ONLINE? COMMISSIONER WHEELER? YES.
COMMISSIONER? UH, I DON'T KNOW.
UH, WHEN ARE WE SUPPOSED TO MAKE THE, THE DECLARATION THAT WE WERE, THAT WE RECEIVED COMMUNICATION THAT'S, THAT'S ON NUMBER 2020 BY STAFF.
SO, OKAY, WE'LL, WE'LL DO IT THEN.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE SOMEONE WHO CAN READ OUR PLATS INTO THE RECORD? DO WE NEED JUST A SECOND? I, HI.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
THE CONCERN AGENDA CONSISTS OF, UH, 15 ITEMS. ITEM 12, ITEM 13, ITEM 14, ITEM 15, ITEM 16, ITEM NUMBER 17, ITEM 18, ITEM 19, ITEM 20, ITEM 21, ITEM 22, ITEM 23, ITEM NUMBER 24, ITEM NUMBER 25 AND ITEM NUMBER 26.
ALL THE CASES HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR A HEARING AT THIS TIME.
AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS ESTIMATED AT THE HEARING.
AND THESE ARE ON A CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH MEANS THEY WILL ALL BE TAKEN UP AND APPROVED IN A SINGLE MOTION UNLESS THERE'S ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS. AND THIS IS 12 THROUGH 26TH.
THERE ARE ADDITIONAL PLATS THAT ARE GOING TO BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY AND I SEE THAT THAT IS IT.
I, I'M SORRY, I FORGOT THERE'S ONE ON THERE.
UM, I I FORGOT THE NUMBER BUT IT'S CORNELL STREET.
I NEEDED TO BE, I NEED TO BE, UM, I NEED IT TO BE TAKEN OFF THE CONSENT 'CAUSE I NEED TO RECUSE.
NO, THAT'S, YES, IT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OFF TO CONSENT.
THAT, THAT'S, THATS IN DISTRICT TWO, THE PARNELL STREET KAMINSKI? YES.
ANYTHING WITH KAMINSKY I NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OFF.
OKAY, SO THAT'S NUMBER 17, 18, 22, ALL THOSE KY YES.
17, 18, 22 WILL BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY.
[02:45:01]
OKAY.UM, ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEMS 12 THROUGH 16, 19 THROUGH 21 OR 23 THROUGH 26? SIR, ARE YOU HERE ENOUGH? NOPE.
WE WE'RE JUST GOING THROUGH 26 RIGHT NOW.
UH, THEN CAN WE GET A MOTION, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, OR I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER GILBERT SMITH ON THE SUBDIVISION CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTING OF ITEMS 12 THROUGH 16, 19 THROUGH 21 AND 23 THROUGH 26.
I MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.
CAN YOU TURN YOUR MICROPHONE ON PLEASE? I MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND A GENERAL CONSENT AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.
YOU FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR GENERAL CONSENT.
SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ADDITIONS ON THE DOCKET CONDITIONS ON THE DOCKET.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER GILBERT SMITH, YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER.
[Items 17 - 18 & 22]
ON TO ITEM NUMBER 17 AND, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEELER REAGAN WILL BE LOGGING OFF, UH, BECAUSE SHE HAS A CONFLICT.DO YOU WANNA READ IN 17, 18, AND 22 TOGETHER? 17.
ITEM NUMBER 17 PLA DASH, UH, 26 DASH 0 0 0 2 32.
IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REPLY IS 0.525 ACRE TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT ONE IN CITY BLOCK FOUR OVER 2366 TO CREATE ONE 11,415 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND ONE 11,463 SQUARE FOOT LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON EMPIRE CENTRAL EAST OF HARRY.
UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
THANK YOU MS. RETA, ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF THESE ITEMS? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER, UH, HAMPTON YOUR MOTION.
AND I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION, UH, FOR STAFF FOLLOWING THE MOTION IN THE MATTER OF SUBDIVISION DOCKET ITEM 17, 18, AND 22, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE, UM, PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, UH, HAMPTON FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER KAUFMAN FOR YOUR SECOND, YOUR QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? YES.
UH, MS. ISSA, JUST ONE QUESTION ON ITEM 17.
THIS IS A MULTIFAMILY, UM, UH, ZONING DISTRICT SUBJECT TO DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THE DEED RESTRICTIONS WILL BE, UH, REVIEWED AT PERMITTING, IS THAT CORRECT? FOR COMPLIANCE, ESSENTIALLY WITH ALL OF THE UNDERLINING ZONING REQUIREMENTS? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
IF IT'S A PUBLIC INTEREST, YES, IT'LL BE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT, ON ITEM 17, 18 AND 22, WE HAVE A MOTION BY, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER KAUFMAN.
ANY OPPOSED? A NAY? THE MOTION CARRIES.
ALRIGHT, NOW WE'RE TO ITEM 26.
CAN YOU READ THAT IN PLEASE? 27.
[27. 26-3230A An application to replat a 0.4613-acre (20,094-square foot) tract of land containing all of Lot 5 in City Block 2/6147 to create one 10,000-square foot lot and one 10,096-square foot lot on property located on Walnut Hill Lane at Lakemont Drive, southeast corner. Applicant/Owner: Gridiron Investments, LLC Surveyor: Geonav, LLC Application Filed: September 9, 2026 Zoning: R-10(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Sharmila Shrestha Council District: 13 PLAT-26-000223]
PLAT DASH 26 DASH 0 0 2 2 2 2 3.IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT A 0.463 ACRE, THAT IS 20,000 0 94 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT FIVE IN CITY BLOCK TWO OVER 61 47 TO CREATE ONE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AND ONE 10,096 SQUARE FOOT LOT ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON WALNUT HILL LANE AT LAKEMONT DRIVE SOUTHEAST CORNER 20.
IF IT'S GREEN, I TRY HITTING IT AGAIN.
I DON'T THINK THE MICROPHONE IS ON, MA'AM.
SHOULD I CONTINUE? IT'S, IT'S GREEN, YES.
AND WE'RE GONNA START WITH SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT.
ARE YOU IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION? I HAVEN'T DONE, OH, I'M SORRY.
MS. RESTA, CAN YOU FINISH READING IT IN? OKAY.
MA'AM, CAN YOU JUST WAIT? I, I APOLOGIZE.
CAN YOU WAIT ONE MORE SECOND WHILE SHE FINISHES HER READING IT INTO THE RECORD? 23 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2026.
AND WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY, ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR, AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
[02:50:01]
APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR MD AT THE HEARING.I HAVE TROUBLE HEARING YOU BECAUSE OF THE ACOUSTICS IN HERE.
SO AM I READY TO, ARE YOU SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION? I AM MARGARET ANN O'HERN.
MA'AM MA'AM, IF YOU COULD JUST WAIT, WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM OUR SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT FIRST.
ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT ON THIS ITEM? LET'S HEAR FROM THIS GENTLEMAN FIRST, THEN WE'LL GET TO YOU MA'AM.
WE'LL GET TO YOU IN JUST A MINUTE.
I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT GRIDIRON INVESTMENTS FOR 41 0 6 WALNUT HILL LANE.
UH, THIS IS FOR AN APPLICATION TO SUBDIVIDE THIS LOT FROM A 0.46, UM, ACRE LOT TO TWO LOTS FOR RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT.
UM, WE APPRECIATE, UH, THE COMMITTEE'S CONSIDERATION AND UM, AND APPROVAL, UH, FOR THAT.
IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, OBVIOUSLY HAVE ONE IN OPPOSITION.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? ALRIGHT, WE'LL HEAR FROM YOU NOW, MA'AM.
OKAY, SO I AM MARGARET ANN O'HERN.
I LIVE AT 99 45 ONTARIO LANE, DALLAS, 7 5 2 2 0.
I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE PROPERTY.
IT'S ON WALNUT HILL AND THE CORNER OF WALNUT HILL AND LAKE BOT.
THAT WATER PUT TWO HOUSES ON THAT LOT AND I OPPOSE THAT BECAUSE THE HOUSES BE SO CLOSE TOGETHER.
THEY'RE BARELY MEET CITY CODE.
I HAVE HOUSES ON EITHER SIDE OF ME, ONE OF 'EM PROBABLY RECEIVED A NOTICE, BUT IT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION WHERE THEY TORE DOWN A HOUSE.
AND NOW WE'RE BUILDING A HOUSE THAT IS TWO STORIES HIGH AND IT IS VERY MUCH LOOKING INTO MY BEDROOM AND BATHROOM WINDOWS FROM THAT HOUSE.
I THINK YOU NEED TO RECONSIDER HAVING THESE HOUSES SO CLOSE TOGETHER WITH TWO HOUSES ON THE PROPERTY.
THE SAME THING WILL HAPPEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ONE THAT IS ON ONTARIO AND LAKEMONT.
I MEANT ONTARIO AND, UH, WALNUT HILL A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO.
THE OWNER OF THOSE TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY APPROACHED YOU TO HAVE TWO HOUSES BUILT ON EACH LOT AND THEY WERE TURNED DOWN.
I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER TURNING THIS DOWN AGAIN.
THANK NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION.
UH, MY NAME'S DAVID ARD AND I'VE LIVED ON ONTARIO LANE FOR 27 YEARS AND WE'VE NEVER HAD PEOPLE COME FOR US TO BUILD SMALLER HOUSES.
SOME PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE DYSLEXIC DYS, BUT THEY USUALLY BUILD 'EM AS BIG AS THEY CAN, AS CLOSE TO THE STREET AS THEY CAN, AS WIDE AS THEY CAN.
THE GOOD THING ABOUT THE HOUSE IN FRONT OF ME, I THINK IT'LL GIMME SOME SHADE, BUT FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE INTO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY WANT BIGGER HOUSES.
IF I'M GONNA PAY TAXES, HUGE TAXES, AND WHEN I SELL MY HOUSE, AT LEAST THE PEOPLE SAY, WELL, THAT'S A NICE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE'S SOME REALLY BIG HOUSES IN THERE.
WELL, HECK YEAH, BUT WE PAY FOR IT.
AND THESE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON OUR STREET AND THEY'RE SLOWLY MOVING AWAY AND GUESS WHAT HAPPENS TO THEIR HOUSE? AND GUESS WHAT HAPPENS TO HOW CLOSE THE HOUSE IS TO THE STREET? IT'S NOT THE SAME.
THE FOOTPRINT FOR THE OLD HOUSES IS NOTHING LIKE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE NEW HOUSES AND BEFORE THE NEW HOUSES CAME, IF YOU CALL THE CITY, THEY TOOK CARE OF IT.
WELL, GUESS WHAT HAPPENS NOW WHEN YOU CALL THE CITY WITH THE BIG HOUSES? OH, IT'S OKAY, DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT.
WELL, UH, I'VE BEEN THERE A LONG TIME, BUT THE HOURGLASS IS RUNNING OUT
[02:55:01]
JUST LIKE ON, UH, THE MOVE THAT THEY JUST HADUNDER OUR RULES, THE APPLICANT GETS A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
SIR, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? YEAH, THANK YOU.
UH, WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THOSE WHO'VE LIVED IN THE COMMUNITY FOR YEARS AND YEARS, DECADES EVEN.
AND, AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR POSITION ON THIS, UM, UNDERSTANDING THAT YES, TIMES ARE CHANGING, COMMUNITIES ARE GROWING.
UH, WE WOULD LOVE TO KEEP EVERYTHING THE WAY IT IS FOREVER AND EVER, BUT THE REALITY IS THAT THINGS DO CHANGE AND, UM, WE, WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE THIS WHERE EVERY HOME IS ON TOP OF EACH OTHER.
WE CAN APPRECIATE AND UNDERSTAND THAT CONCERN WE'RE NOT BUILDING, UH, AND HAVE NO PLANS TO BUILD HOMES TO THE FULLEST CAPACITY THAT WE COULD ON THESE LOTS BASED ON, ON THESE BUILD LINES.
WE ARE BUILDING A VERY REASONABLE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME ON EACH OF THESE TWO LOTS, UH, THAT MEET EVERY GUIDELINE THAT IS REQUIRED BASED ON SETBACKS AND BUILD LINES.
SO, UH, DEFINITELY AGAIN, DO APPRECIATE IT.
WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE ANYONE UNCOMFORTABLE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WE DO WANT TO IMPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, YOU KNOW, KEEP UP WITH THE TIMES AND BEAUTIFYING THIS AREA.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
OKAY, COMMISSIONER HALL, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
UM, IN THE MATTER OF ITEM 27, PLAT 26 0 0 0 2 2 3, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE STAFF, UH, RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM, SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
AND, UH, IF IT'S APPROPRIATE, I'M, I HAVE A COMMENT OR TWO OF COURSE, AND YOU'VE GOT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, YOUR COMMENTS, UH, THANK YOU.
UM, I, I HOPE THAT I'M GLAD TO SEE THE COMMUNITY OUT HERE TO, TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS.
I'M GLAD THEY'RE TAKING AN INTEREST IN IT.
I HOPE THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDS THAT THE COMMISSION HAS LIMITED ABILITY TO REALLY DIG INTO AND TO ANALYZE THE, ANALYZE THESE, UH, REPL CASES, UH, IN, IN GREAT DETAIL OR EVEN STUDY, UH, STUDY THE THING.
WE'RE JUST LEGALLY LIMITED ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO.
HOWEVER, THE STAFF'S REPORT DOES POINT OUT THAT THIS PROPERTY OF 20,000 PLUS SQUARE FEET IS, IS REALLY SURROUNDED ON THE NORTH SIDE AND THE SOUTH SIDE BY PROPERTIES THAT ARE 10,000 SQUARE FEET OR SLIGHTLY LESS.
SO IT FITS INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE'S NOTHING UN UNUSUAL ABOUT THIS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, IT'S JUST, UH, AND SO, UH, THIS IS WHY WE REALLY HAVE TO APPROVE THIS CASE.
IT'S NOTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER? YES, I I WAS ON THE COMMISSION WHEN WE LAST HEARD OF, UH, WHEN THERE WAS A DENIAL OF A SIMILAR CASE ON, ON, ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WALNUT HILL.
AND YOU KNOW, THE STANDARD THAT THE CPC HAS HELD TO, YOU KNOW, FALLS UNDER SECTION 51, A 8.503, THAT SAYS THAT LOTS MUST CONFORM IN WIDTH, DEPTH AND AREA TO THE PATTERN ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN THE ADJACENT AREAS.
THE BEST I CAN RECALL THE, UH, REASON FOR THE DENIAL WAS IT WAS DECIDED AT THAT TIME BY THE, THE PEOPLE WHO WERE ON THIS BODY THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A CLEAR PATTERN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WALNUT HILL WITH THE LOTS THAT FACED WALNUT HILL, THAT THOSE WERE LARGER LOTS.
BUT IT IS A SUBJECTIVE DETERMINATION.
IT DEPENDS ON, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE ON THIS BODY TO DETERMINE IF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED, UM, FOLLOWS THE PATTERN ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN THE ADJACENT AREA.
AND YOU HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, DECIDE FOR YOURSELF WHAT THE ADJACENT AREA IS.
IF YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE LARGE LOTS THAT FACE WALNUT HILL, IT WOULD SEEM THAT NO, THIS PROPOSAL DOESN'T MATCH.
BUT IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE LARGER AREA, THEN YOU'D HAVE TO SAY, WELL, YES, BECAUSE THERE ARE SMALLER LOTS AROUND.
SO ULTIMATELY IT IS A SUBJECTIVE DETERMINATION AND THAT IS THE STANDARD THAT WE'RE HELD TO.
ANYONE ELSE? I'LL, I'LL JUST BE REALLY BRIEF.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE GET PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, WHO GET NOTICES ABOUT PLATTING CASES COME DOWN TO THE, YOU KNOW, CITY HALL WITH CONCERNS.
AND MA'AM, JUST SO YOU UNDERSTAND, YOU'VE HAD YOUR, YOU EACH SPEAKER GETS I UNDERSTAND.
I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE SAID.
[03:00:02]
I I DON'T THINK SHE SAID ANYTHING GENTLEMEN.GENTLEMEN, WE JUST WANNA LET GENTLEMEN, UM, YOU KNOW, OUR AUTHORITY HERE WHEN IT COMES TO PLATS IS VERY, VERY LIMITED.
IT'S NOT LIKE A ZONING CASE WHERE WE HAVE QUITE A BIT OF DISCRETION.
IF WE LOOK AT OUR PLATTING VERSUS ZONING AS A TOOLBOX, ZONING IS KIND OF A MULTI-TOOL THAT CAN DO A LOT OF THINGS.
UM, PLATTING I DESCRIBE AS A SCREWDRIVER WITH A VERY STRANGE HEAD THAT ONLY WORKS ON, ON CERTAIN SCREWS.
UM, AND OUR ABILITY TO APPROVE OR DENY PLATS IS, IS JUST LIMITED TO WHETHER THEY COMPLY WITH STATE LAW AND WHETHER THEY ESSENTIALLY, AS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER SAID, FIT THE PATTERN IN THE AREA AND GIVEN THE OTHER 10,000 SQUARE FOOT OR SO LOTS IN, IN THE, YOU KNOW, NEARBY AREAS.
I DO THINK THAT THIS DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR CODE.
I WILL ADD, I HEARD CONCERN ABOUT WHERE THE HOUSES ARE GOING TO BE PLACED IN THE LOT AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THE ZONING ON THESE LOTS WILL NOT CHANGE.
SO YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW THIS LOT HAS REQUIREMENTS FOR SIDE AND FRONT YARD SETBACKS AND ONCE THE SLOT IS DIVIDED IN TWO, THOSE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ON THE FRONT AND THE SIDE WILL STILL APPLY.
SO JUST JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT THOSE WILL NOT BE GOING AWAY.
SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION.
ANYONE ELSE? ALRIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HALL, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KINGS SIM TO FOLLOW STAFF ORATION OF APPROVAL.
MAY I ASK ONE CLARIFICATION? YEAH.
AND THIS IS A QUESTION, EXCUSE ME, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS A, UM, GREATER THAN TYPICAL SETBACK LINE INDICATED ON THE PLAT THAT WILL MAINTAIN THE CONTINUITY OF THE PLACEMENT OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT.
THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN THAT BLOCK CONTINUITY MM-HMM
AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT OBSERVATION BECAUSE I THINK AS SOME OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID, HOW YOU EVALUATE THE PATTERN IS SUBJECTIVE, BUT I THINK WHAT THE COMMUNITY I HEAR RESPONDING TO IS THAT THE NEW CONSTRUCTION IS VARYING FROM HOW EXISTING HOUSES WERE DEVELOPED IN THAT THEY WERE TYPICAL OR TYPICALLY SMALLER THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED BY CODE.
SO YES, YOU ARE LIKELY GOING TO GET A LARGER HOUSE, BUT WHAT THIS WILL ALLOW BY HAVING THIS ESTABLISHED SETBACK LINE IS IT WON'T PROJECT IN FRONT OF THE ADJACENT HOUSES.
WHY? THAT TO ME IS JUST IMPORTANT IN UNDERSTANDING HOW REDEVELOPMENT MAY OCCUR.
SO I UNDERSTAND WE ARE LIMITED, UM, AND APPRECIATE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, UM, PUTTING THOSE OBSERVATIONS ON THE RECORD.
THANK YOU FOR THE OP OPPORTUNITY TO CLARIFY ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.
SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED TO ANY OF THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 26 OR 28, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON HAS A CONFLICT, SHALL SHALL BE STEPPING OUT.
[28. 26-3231A 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. Applicants/Owners: Kavyan Corporation Surveyor: Bowman Consulting Group, LTD Application Filed: September 10, 2026 Zoning: PD 193 (TH-3) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Sharmila Shrestha Council District: 2 PLAT-26-000243]
28, UH, PLA 20, UH, PLAID DASH 26 DASH 0 2 43.IT IS AN APPLICATION TO RE PLAT A 0.275 ACRE THAT IS 12,000 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF, UH, COMMON AREA A IN CITY BLOCK 28 OVER 2280 TO CREATE THREE 0.092 ACRE.
THAT'S 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 SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2026.
AND WE HAVE RECEIVED TWO REPLIES IN FAVOR AND FIVE REPLIES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
ADDITIONAL, WE HAVE RECEIVED SIX REPLIES IN OPPOSITION, UH, AFTER DEADLINE.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
AND I JUST WANTED TO NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT I BELIEVE WE RECEIVED AN EMAIL OR TWO FORWARDED TO US, UM, BY CITY STAFF ON THIS ITEM.
AND SINCE THIS IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTER, I DO NEED TO DISCLOSE IT ON THE RECORD AND I DID NOT REVIEW IT AND I UNDERSTAND THAT ALL OF THE BODY DID RECEIVE THAT.
AND JUST SO PEOPLE KNOW FOR THE FUTURE, UM, THE WAY IT SHOULD WORK IS THE EMAIL SHOULD BE SENT TO CITY STAFF AND THEY SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED AT THE, UM, START AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PLAT CASE, WHICH IS, UM, HOW WHAT WE RECENTLY AMENDED OUR RULES TO DO.
SO I'M SURE WE'LL, UM, HAVE THAT HAPPEN GOING FORWARD.
AND WE'LL START WITH OUR APPLICANT.
PHILLIP KINGSTON 37 0 1 TURTLE CREEK, UM, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
UH, CIAN, UM, THIS IS THE THIRD TIME YOU'VE SEEN THIS AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
BUT THE, UH, THE ISSUE IS THAT, UH,
[03:05:01]
IT APPEARS TO ME THAT STAFF'S PREVIOUS ANALYSES OF THIS APPLICATION, WHICH IS IDENTICAL TO THE LAST FEW TIMES YOU SAW IT GOT SLIGHTLY CONFUSED BY THE WAY, PD ONE 90 THREE'S TOWNHOUSE ZONING WORKS.THE TOWNHOUSE ZONING CREATES A DENSITY BONUS THAT'S APPLICABLE ONLY TO INDIVIDUAL LOTS ALLOWING GREATER LOT COVERAGE IF IT'S PART OF A DEVELOPMENT THAT PROVIDES OPEN SPACE IN OTHER AREAS.
THE TOWNHOUSES THAT EXIST THAT WERE BUILT THERE THAT ARE NEXT DOOR, UH, DO NOT IN ANY INDIVIDUAL LOT EXCEED THE 60%, UH, LOT COVERAGE LIMIT OF TH THREE, UH, UNDER PD 1 93.
ITS OWN ITS OWN CREATURE OF COURSE.
UM, AND SO THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT OF GREATER OPEN SPACE IN ORDER TO GET A DENSITY BONUS.
'CAUSE WE DON'T WANT A DENSITY BONUS.
SO NOW YOU'RE JUST DOWN TO THE NORMAL LEGAL STANDARD, WHICH IS TO MAKE THE LOTS CONFORM TO THE PATTERN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THERE IS NO PREVAILING PATTERN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THERE ARE OTHER LOTS THAT ARE 4,000 SQUARE FEET AND RECTANGULAR THAT, UH, THAT EXIST IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE ARE MANY OTHER SHAPES OF LOTS.
UM, AND SO I I THINK WE, WE MEET THE LEGAL STANDARD ON THAT.
FURTHERMORE, THE, UH, THE, THE APPLICANT IS THE CURRENT DECLARANT UNDER THE CCRS OF THE HOA AND RETAINS EXPLICITLY THE RIGHT TO, UM, REPL LOTS FROM OPEN SPACE TO BUILDABLE LOTS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DO TO ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT, RIGHT? SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION, ROBERT MADANO 2315 NIGHT, THAT'S JUST ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS ISSUE.
WE WERE BEFORE, UH, FEWER RECALL WHEN THEY DID THIS PLAT, UH, PD 1 93.
THEY HAD ALREADY ACQUIRED SO MANY LOTS AND THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD THE SO-CALLED TOWNHOUSES AND WE, UH, WERE OPPOSED TO IT.
AND THE COMMISSION, THE FORMER COMMISSION AGREED TO HAVE THREE LOTS AS COMMON GROUND, UH, IN ORDER TO NOT HAVE IT ALL TOTAL 100%.
AND WE AGREED AND THE COMMUNITY AGREED AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTED THOSE THREE, UH, LOTS SO THE CHILDREN COULD, UH, HAVE A PLACE TO PLAY AND AND GROUNDS.
AND THIS IS THE ISSUE THAT'S NOW BEFORE US IS WE HAVE ALREADY AGREED TO IT ONCE BEFORE, UH, YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO HISTORY ON YOU ON HOW THAT COMMISSION AGREED TO GRANT THOSE THREE LOTS TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO THE TOWNHOUSE PEOPLE THAT OWN IT.
SO NOW WE'RE AT THAT ISSUE IS THAT THEY WANT TO GO AHEAD AND BUILD THAT.
AND CURRENTLY WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH THE DALLAS PARK AND BOARD TO SEE IF THEY WOULD, UH, WORK A LEASE WITH THESE THREE LOTS TO SEE IF THEY WOULD PUT, UH, SOME KIND OF A RECREATIONAL STUFF FOR THE COMMUNITY TO DO THEIR WALKING OF THEIR, OF THEIR PUPPIES AND THE CHILDREN COULD HAVE A, UH, SWINGS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE POINT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS KEEP, AS IT IS A COMMON GROUND AREA, THAT'S ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS KEEP IT AS IT IS AND AS IT WAS AGREED TO, NOW THE PURCHASER WENT AND BOUGHT THIS AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY GOT A HOLD OF THESE THREE LANDS, UH, BUT HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THAT WAS A COMMON GROUND AGREEMENT.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PURCHASER IF HE DIDN'T READ THE CLAUSE THAT IT WOULD, IT WOULD REMAIN COMMON GROUND.
MY NAME IS STEVE ROLAND AND I'M A PROPERTY OWNER IN, UH, SKYLINE TERRACE VILLAS ACTUALLY OVERLOOKING THE SITE IN QUESTION LIVING AT 41 51 MASON RIDGE, UM, DALLAS, TEXAS 7 5 2 9.
MY COMMENTS CONCERN WHAT THE RECORDED PLA THE RECORDED DEEDS AND THE CITY'S OWN SUBDIVISION FILES SAY ABOUT THE PROPERTY.
WE ARE NOT ASKING THE CITY TO ENFORCE THE PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
RATHER, WE ARE ASKING YOU TO LOOK AT THE RECORDED, WHAT THE RECORDED DOCUMENTS ACTUALLY SAY.
[03:10:01]
THE RECORDED, THE ORIGINAL RECORDED PLAT CREATED 16 RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN A SEPARATE TRACT, ROUGHLY 12,000 SQUARE FEET IDENTIFIED AS COMMON AREA.A SECTION ONE OF THE RECORDED DECLARATION SAY, SAYS, WHETHER PROPERTY IS COMMON AREA AS DETERMINED BY THE PLAT AND THE DECLARATION NOT BY WHO OWNS IT.
OWNERSHIP HAS CHANGED SEVERAL TIMES, BUT EVERY DEED WE HAVE REVIEWED STILL LEGALLY DESCRIBES THE PROPERTY AS COMMON AREA.
A, THE 2022 DEED FROM CADG TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WENT FURTHER.
IT SAID THE PROPERTY WAS CONVEYED TO BE HELD AS COMMON AREA FOR THE COMMON USE AND BENEFIT OF THE OWNERS IN THE SUBDIVISION.
SO OUR FIRST QUESTION IS STRAIGHTFORWARD.
WHAT RECORDED DOCUMENT CHANGED THIS PROPERTY FROM COMMON AREA A TO RESIDENTIAL LOTS? IF THERE IS ONE, WE'D LIKE TO SEE IT.
OUR SECOND QUESTION IS ABOUT THE CITY'S OWN RECORDS DEVELOPMENT CODE 51 A DASH 8.508 REQUIRES PRIVATE OWNED AREAS INTENDED FOR THE BENEFIT OF LOT OWNERS TO BE SHOWN AS COMMON AREAS ON THE PLAT.
AND IT REQUIRES A PERMANENT MAINTENANCE PLAN TO BE APPROVED BEFORE THE FINAL PLAT IS RELEASED.
THE ORIGINAL PLAT DID EXACTLY THAT AND THE DECLARATION OF SIGNS MAINTENANCE OF THE COMMON AREA THROUGH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
SO WHAT PERMANENT MAINTENANCE PLAN DID THE CITY APPROVE FOR COMMON AREA A BEFORE THE ORIGINAL PLAT WAS RELEASED? IT MAY BE THE DECLARATION, IT MAY BE A DOCUMENT IN THE CITY'S OWN SUBDIVISION FILE, BUT SECTION 8.508 SAYS ONE HAD TO BE APPROVED AND BEFORE THE COMMON AREA A DISAPPEARS FROM THE PLAT, THE COMMISSIONS SHOULD KNOW WHAT THE PLAN WAS AND WHAT HAPPENS TO THE OBLIGATIONS IT CREATED.
WE ARE NOT ASKING YOU TO DECIDE A PRIVATE HOA DISPUTE, WE ARE ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER WHETHER TO APPROVE APPLY SHOWING THREE RESIDENTIAL LOTS WHEN THE RECORDED DOCUMENTS IN THE CITY ON FILE STILL IDENTIFIES THE PROPERTY AS COMMON AREA A THANK YOU.
I RESIDE AT 2331 DOUGLAS AVENUE.
HOW CAN THERE BE ANY TRUST IN THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND DEVELOPERS WHEN THEY'RE ALLOWED TO AGREE TO A DEVELOPMENT WITH OPEN SPACE? THEN THE DEVELOPER LIES IN CHEATS TO SELL OFF THE PARTIAL LAND THAT'S IN QUESTION AND AND NOW THEY'RE TRYING TO REPLANT IT.
THAT IS A BREACH OF CONTRACT CHORAL OR WRITTEN.
FURTHERMORE, AS IT WAS STATED NOW THAT THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT CAME IN, THIS PLOT OF LAND IS TRYING TO BE REPLANTED AND IT'S FACING 90 DEGREES FROM WHAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED.
FURTHERMORE, A LOT OF MY TENANTS THAT LIVE ACROSS THE STREET GO THERE TO PLAY, TO WALK THE DOGS AND JUST ENJOY.
NOW IF THAT CHANGES, THE CLOSEST PARK TO THERE IS 3.1 MILES AWAY, MARIA LUNA PARK.
OR IF THEY WANT TO GO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, THEY CAN GO 3.7 MILES TO RIVER SEAN PARK, KNOWING NOW THAT THERE'S TRYING TO BE REDEVELOPED OR RE REZONED MAPLE AVENUE AND IT IS KNOWN AS THE MOST DANGEROUS STREET IN DALLAS.
SO NOW WE'RE EXPECTING FOR OUR KIDS TO WALK ON THAT STREET TO GET TO GO PLAY.
IT'S WRONG ALL, ALL WE'RE ASKING IS TO LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS.
MY ADDRESS IS 41 45 MASON RIDGE AND I'M A PROPERTY OWNER IN SKYLINE V TERRACE.
MY HOME SHARES A COMMON BOUNDARY WITH COMMON AREA A AS THE CHAIR MR. RUBIN JUST SAID, THE COMMISSION HAS TO CONSIDER STATE LAW WHEN CONSIDERING PLATS DALLAS DE DEVELOP DEVELOPMENTAL CODE.
SECTION FIVE ONE A DASH 8.403 ALLOWS A REPLAT TO BE RECORDED ONLY IF IT DOES NOT AMEND OR REMOVE ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS.
TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 2 1 2 0.0146 GOES FURTHER.
[03:15:01]
MAY NOT, UH, AMEND, REMOVE, OR VIOLATE OR HAVE THE EFFECT OF AMENDING, REMOVING OR VIOLATING QUALIFYING RESTRICTION IN A RECORDED DECLARATION.THIS IS WHY THE RECORDED DECLARATION MATTERS.
APPENDIX V SECTION B 3.4 D GIVES THE DECLARANT AUTHORITY TO CONVERT COMMON AREAS BACK TO LOTS.
DID THAT CONVERSION EVER HAPPEN? UH, CADG CENTURION AMERICAN DEVELOP DEVELOPMENT GROUP CONVEYED COMMON AREA A TO CALVIN CORPORATION, THE APPLICANT IN 2025.
IN THE RECORDED DOCUMENTS WE REVIEWED, WE FOUND NO RECORDED CONVERSION OF COMMON AREA A BACK INTO THE LOTS.
WE FOUND NO RECORDED DOCUMENT DESIGNATING CAVI AS A SUCCESSOR DECLAR OR ASSIGNING IT.
THE CONVERSION POWER UNDER THE BYLAWS SIMPLY CONVEYING PROPERTY IS NOT AN ASSIGNMENT OF DECLARANT RIGHTS.
THE APPLICANT HAS MISLED THE BOARD BY TELLING YOU THAT CIAN IS THE DECLARANT, THEY ARE NOT CENTURIAN.
AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP IS THE DECANT.
THERE WAS NEVER A SUCCESSOR DECLARANT, UH, REVISION TO THE CCRS MADE, MAKING CAVI THE UH, UH, SUCCESSOR DECLARANT.
UM, THE, THERE'S ALSO A TIMING PROBLEM.
THE DECLARANT CONTROL PERIOD ENDED IN DECEMBER 24 AFTER THE LAST HOME WAS SOLD.
AFTER THAT, DECLARANT HAD NO RIGHT TO NAME CAVI AS THE SUCCESSOR DECLARANT.
HENCE THEY DIDN'T CONTROL THE BOARD WAS DUE TO PASS TO THE RESIDENTS OF IN JANUARY, 2025.
THAT ELECTION WAS NEVER HELD IN SEPTEMBER 25.
THE DEED WENT TO CAVI N WE RAISED THIS BECAUSE IT BEARS ON WHETHER ANYONE WITH REAL AUTHORITY APPROVED THE CONVERSION OF THIS PARCEL.
IF SO, WE ASK THAT THEY BE IDENTIFIED TODAY WITH THE RECORDING INFORMATION, EFFECTIVE DATE, PARTY SCOPE AND WHETHER THEY PREDATE THE END OF THE CONTROL PERIOD.
AND IF THE ANSWERS THAT THE DEVELOPER CAN FIX THIS LATER, THAT DOES NOT HELP TODAY.
A POSSIBLE FUTURE AMENDMENT DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT THE RESTRICTIONS HAVE ALREADY CHANGED.
IF NONE OF THOSE DOCUMENTS EXIST, IS THIS RELA ITSELF BEING USED TO CONVERT COMMON AREA A INTO RESIDENTIAL LAWS? THAT'S YOUR TIME.
IF IT IS, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THE COMMISSION TO DETERMINE SIR WHETHER THAT COMPLIES SIR WITH DALLAS AND TEXAS LAW, SIR.
YOU NEXT SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION? GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.
I OWN A HOME AT 4 1 1 4 ENTRADA WAY IN DALLAS, TEXAS IN THE SKYLINE TERRACE VILLAS AND I OPPOSE PLAT 2 6 0 0 0 2 4 3 IN PLAIN ENGLISH.
THE CART HAS BEEN PUT BEFORE THE HORSE.
WE ARE NOT ASKING THE CITY TO ENFORCE OUR PRIVATE COVENANTS, BUT CHAIR RUBIN STATED EARLIER TODAY THAT RELAS ARE SUBJECT TO STATE LAW.
WE BELIEVE THIS RE PLAT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW AND COUNSEL FROM OUR NEIGHBORS WILL ADDRESS THAT.
BUT THREE THINGS REMAIN ON THIS RECORD.
FIRST DECLARATION SECTION 3.2 GRANTS EVERY HOMEOWNER AN EASEMENT OF ENJOYMENT OVER COMMON AREA A AND SECTION 4.1 SAYS THAT STATUS COMES FROM THE PLAT AND THE DECLARATION NOT FROM WHOM HOLDS TITLE.
SELLING THE PARCEL DOES NOT BY ITSELF REMOVE THOSE RIGHTS.
SECOND, HOW IT WAS SOLD IN 2022.
THE DEVELOPER DEEDED THIS PROPERTY TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FOR THE COMMON USE AND BENEFIT OF THE OWNERS UNDER BYLAW SECTION 4.1.
THE BOARD WAS TO HOLD AN ELECTION FOR THE HOMEOWNER DIRECTORS ONCE 75% OF THE HOMES SOLD.
AND LATER WHEN ALL THE HOMES WERE SOLD FOR A FULLY CONTROLLED BOARD BY HOMEOWNERS, THE DEVELOPER CONTROLLED BOARD HELD NEITHER ELECTION.
THE BOARD SHOULD HAVE BEEN TURNED OVER TO THE HOMEOWNERS BEFORE MAY, 2025.
THE DEVELOPER BOARD DEEDED THE PROPERTY OUT OF THE ASSOCIATION BACK TO THE DEVELOPER WITH NO HOMEOWNER ON THE BOARD, NO VOTE AND NO NOTICE TO THE OWNERS WHO HOLD THE EASEMENT.
THIRD, THE APPLICANT TOLD YOU TODAY THAT THE, THAT IT IS THE DECLARANT AS, UH, MY NEIGHBOR RUSS DESCRIBED THAT WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT TO BE TRUE.
SO PLEASE ASK STAFF A DIFFERENT QUESTION.
DOES THIS REPL REMOVE THE COMMON AREA OF RESTRICTIONS AND DOES IT ONLY CHANGE BOUNDARY LINES WHILE LEAVING THOSE RESTRICTIONS FULLY ENFORCEABLE? IF YOU APPROVE IT, WE ASK YOU TO STATE ON THE RECORD THAT APPROVAL DOES NOT ITSELF CONVERT THIS PARCEL UNDER THE DECLARATION AND DOES NOT EXTINGUISH OUR EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS.
NO RECORDED CONVERSION HAS BEEN PRODUCED EITHER.
SO IF NO RECORDED INSTRUMENT CONVERTED COMMON LAW A BACK INTO LOTS, WHAT INSTRUMENT DOES? IF THE ANSWER IS THIS PLAT, THEN THE PLAT IS BEING ASKED TO DO THE CONVERSION BEFORE THE PROCESS IN THE
[03:20:01]
RECORDED DOCUMENTS HAS OCCURRED.THE PROCESS SHOULD COME FIRST.
THE PLAQUE SHOULD COME SECOND.
WE REQUEST DENIAL FOR THE REASONS STATED AND THO THOSE COUNSEL WILL PRESENT OR A BRIEF POSTPONEMENT IF LEGALLY AVAILABLE.
SO THESE DOCUMENTS AND QUESTIONS CAN BE ADDRESSED.
WE ASK THAT THE RECORDED PLAT AND THE DECLARATION AND BYLAWS AND THE DEEDS WE HAVE REFERENCED BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
MY NAME IS MORGAN FINER AND I REPRESENT SEVERAL HOMEOWNERS IN SKYLINE TERRACE VILLAS.
WE ARE NOT ASKING THE COMMISSION TO ENFORCE A PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTION.
WE ARE ASKING THE COMMISSION TO APPLY ITS OWN APPROVAL CRITERIA.
SECTION 51 A DASH 8.43 B ONE C OF THE DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS A REPL WITHOUT VACATING THE PRECEDING PLAT ONLY IF THE REPL QUOTE DOES NOT AMEND OR REMOVE ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS.
TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 2 1 2 0.0143 IMPOSES THE SAME CONDITION STATEWIDE.
THOSE CONDITIONS ARE PART OF THE STANDARD.
THIS COMMISSION APPLIES TODAY.
THE RECORDED DOCUMENTS SHOW THAT THIS RE PLAT DOES NOT MEET THAT CONDITION.
FIRST, THE RECORDED PLAT SETS THIS TRACK ASIDE AS QUOTE, COMMON AREA A.
SECOND, THE DECLARATION RECORDED FOR THIS SUBDIVISION PROVIDES THAT COMMON AREA STATUS IS QUOTE DETERMINED BY THE PLAT IN THIS DECLARATION AND NOT BY OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND.
THIRD IN 2022, THE DEVELOPER DEEDED THIS TRACK TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
THE DEED IS TITLED COMMON AREA DEDICATION AND IT CONVEYS THE LAND TO BE HELD AS PART OF THE COMMON AREA FOR THE COMMON USE AND BENEFIT OF OWNERS OF LOTS WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION.
FOURTH, THE APPLICANT'S OWN DEED RECORDED IN SEPTEMBER, 2025 DESCRIBES THE PROPERTY AS COMMON AREA A.
IT ALSO LISTS THIS DECLARATION AMONG THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT THE APPLICANT TOOK THE LAND SUBJECT TO CONVERTING A RECORDED COMMON AREA INTO THREE PRIVATE HOUSE LOTS REMOVES THE RESTRICTION THAT GOVERNS THIS TRACT.
SECTION 15.1 OF THE DECLARATION ALSO PROVIDES THAT AN AMENDMENT AFFECTING COMMON AREAS DOES NOT TAKE EFFECT TO THE EXTENT THE CITY REQUIRES IT UNTIL THE CITY CONSENTS IN WRITING.
WE ARE NOT, WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY RECORDED IN AMENDMENT CONVERTING THIS TRACT INTO LOTS BECAUSE THIS REPL WOULD REMOVE A RECORDED COVENANT.
IT DOES NOT SA SATISFY SECTION 51 A 8.403 B ONE C.
WE ASK THE COMMISSION TO DIS DISAPPROVE OF THE REPL APPLICATION ON THESE GROUNDS.
THE HOMEOWNERS RESERVE ALL RIGHTS AND REMEDIES UNDER THE DECLARATION IN TEXAS LAW.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, WE WILL GO BACK TO OUR APPLICANT FOR THE TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL.
THE, UH, THE PROCESS IS IMPORTANT AND THIS IS THE PROCESS.
RE PLATTING IS HOW THE COMMON AREA GOES BACK TO BUILDABLE LOTS.
THERE'S NO OTHER PROCESS PUT FORWARD IN THE CCRS OR THE BYLAWS.
UM, AND CIAN IS IN FACT THE DECLARANT, UM, HAVING BOUGHT ALL RIGHT TITLE AND INTEREST FROM THE PREDECESSOR.
SO THAT INCLUDES BEING THE DECLARANT UNDER THE CCRS.
AND UH, WHILE THE HOA HAS BEEN TURNED OVER TO THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, THE DEFINITION OF DECLARANT CONTROL PERIOD IN THE CCR STILL CONTROLS AND IT IS STILL WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PERIOD.
SO THIS IS CAVI AND ABSOLUTELY EXERCISING.
ITS, UH, PREROGATIVE TO CHANGE THIS STUFF.
BB 0.3 0.4 SAYS THAT DURING THE DEVELOPMENT PERIOD, THE DECLARANT MAY AMEND THIS DECLARATION AND THE OTHER DOCUMENTS WITHOUT CONSENT OF THE BOARD, INCLUDING CONVERTING LOTS TO COMMON AREA AND BACK.
ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE STAFF RESPOND TO SOME OF THE LEGAL QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED PRIOR TO MAKING THE MOTION? I MEAN, I WOULD SAY GO AHEAD AND MAKE YOUR MOTION IF YOU NEED TO AMEND IT BASED ON OR WITHDRAW IT AFTERWARDS BASED ON YOUR DISCUSSION WITH STAFF, YOU'RE FREE TO DO THAT.
IN THE MATTER OF TWO SIX DASH 0 0 2 4 3, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DENY THE REQUEST WITH THE FINDING OF FACT THAT THE,
[03:25:05]
HANG ON, PARDON ME, THAT THE PROPOSED PLAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SECTION 51 P ONE NINE DASH 1 22 A FOUR, WHICH IS THE OPEN SPACE PROVISION FOR MY COMMISSIONERS.UM, BUT I THINK I WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL FINDINGS AND FACTS PENDING DISCUSSION WITH STAFF.
UH, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, YOUR QUESTIONS.
SO, UH, MR. MILLA, UM, CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF SUBMITTALS, UM, PLAT SUBMITTALS, UM, THAT HAVE BEEN DENIED? STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL.
THEY HAVE BEEN WITHDRAWN IN THE ONE THAT BEFORE US TODAY ASKED STACK RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.
CAN YOU HELP US UNDERSTAND HOW THAT DETERMINATION WAS MADE? SURE.
SO THIS IS OUR FOURTH SUBMITTAL AND THE FIRST SUBMITTAL WAS, UH, UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH ELLE.
BUT, UH, I BELIEVE IN THAT HEARING IT WAS BROUGHT, UH, THE SECTION CODE WAS BOUGHT, PD, THE OPEN SPACE AREA, THE SECTION CODE WAS BROUGHT THAT WAS NOT INTO TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
AND THAT'S THE REASON THE, UH, COMMISSIONER, THE COMMISSION DENIED THE PLA.
THAT WAS THE FIRST SECOND WAS, UH, UH, THE, UH, COM THE, UH, OPEN, UH, THE CALCULATION PROVIDED WAS NOT ENOUGH TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
UH, I THINK THAT'S THE REASON IT WAS DENIED.
THIRD, UH, THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT TYPO IN THE NEWSPAPER, UH, IN THE OWNER NOTICES.
SO WE HAD TO LET THE APPLICANT, UH, ASK TO WITHDRAW THE PLAT.
AND THIS IS THE FURTHER, AND THIS IS THE FIRST SUBMITTAL THAT'S COMING TO THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION.
AND IN THIS SUBMITTAL, WE DO HAVE ALL THOSE NUMBERS THAT COMMISSION BEEN ASKING.
UH, WE HAVE LIKE WE, UH, THE ZONING DEPARTMENT, THE ZONING, UH, ZONING DEPARTMENT DID CALCULATE MAKE THAT, UH, PULL ALL THOSE PERMIT AND MAKE THE CALCULATION MAKING SURE THAT ALL THOSE PERMIT THE LOT COVERAGE, WHICH THE PD 1 93 TS DOES MENTION THAT.
UH, OKAY, I'M GONNA READ THAT.
STATE THE CODE IN THE TS 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, THAT OPEN SPACE IS REQUIRED AS A BONUS COVERAGE.
LET'S SAY IF THE, ALL THOSE LOT COVERAGE ARE MORE THAN 60%, THEN YES, THEY HAVE THO THAT SPACE IS A, UH, OPEN SPACE.
AND AGAIN, WHENEVER IT COMES TO THE PLAT, WHENEVER THE SAIL AXIS WAS, UH, THE, THE ONE ON THE EAST SIDE IS A SAIL AXIS, WHICH WAS TO CREATE, UH, SIX, WHICH WAS TO CREATE 16 LOT PLUS ONE COMMON AREA.
SO WHENEVER IT COMES TO THE PLANNING, WE DON'T SEE THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, RIGHT, BECAUSE THAT'S JUST THE CREATING THE BOUNDARY.
SO WHEN THEY GO TO THE PERMITTING, THEN THE, THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT GETS IN.
SO NOW SINCE WE ARE COMING, UH, TO REPLANT THIS COMMON AREA, AND NOW WE KNOW THE EXACT FOOT, UH, BUILDING FOOT FOOTPRINT, SO WE DO PULL OUT ALL THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, YOU KNOW, FROM THE PRIOR PERMIT HISTORY.
AND WE WERE ABLE TO, AND BUILDING, UM, THE ZONING INSPECTION, ZONING DID CALCULATE IT.
THEY HAVE THEIR OWN CALCULATION.
AND WE, AS A SUBDIVISION, WE, AGAIN, WE JUST MAKE SURE WE, WE HAVE THE NUMBER, WE DID PULL OUT ALL THOSE PERMIT HISTORY.
SO IF I GO, OKAY, LOT COVERS CA I HAVE THOSE NUMBERS.
UH, FOR EXAMPLE, 4 1 1 5 MASONRIES 53.78%, 41, 21 MASONRIES 53.96%, AND THOSE PERCENT ARE LOT COVERAGE.
50, UH, 41 27 MASONRIES 53.97%, 41 33, MASONRIES 52.7%, 41 39 MASONRIES FOR 53 POINT 87%, 41 45 MASONRIES 52.99%, 41 51 MASONRIES 55.66%, 41 28 MASONRIES, UH, 49.96%.
41 40, MASONRIES 53 POINT 84%, 41 46 MASONRIES 53 POINT 84%.
SO WE WERE ABLE TO PULL THOSE PERMIT, UM, MEASURE ALL THOSE LOT COVERAGE.
SO ALL THOSE, UH, IN TOTALITY, THE LOT COVERAGE IS LESS THAN 60%.
THAT MEANS THAT SUBDIVISION DOES NOT REQUIRE THE, UH, OPEN SPACE THAT WAS PROVIDED, BUT IT WAS NOT, UH, REQUIRED.
AND THAT'S, UH, SO SINCE IT'S NOT REQUIRED, SO, UH,
[03:30:01]
THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND, UH, SO THAT'S THE REASON, UH, STAFF CONCLUDES THAT THAT COMMON AREA CAN BE DIVIDED INTO LOTS.AND IT DOES MEET THE PD REQUIREMENT.
IT DOES MEET THE 51.8 0.503, UH, REQUIREMENTS.
OKAY? SO THERE WAS A PLAT THAT WAS APPROVED BY THIS BODY.
IT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THE CONTEMPLATION OF AN OPEN SPACE AREA, BUT THAT WAS GREATER THAN WHAT THE ZONING OR WHAT WAS ACTUALLY CONSTRUCTED, ENDED UP BEING OR PROVIDING ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE AND DID NOT RE NEED THAT REQUIREMENT, WHICH IS WHAT THEN ALLOWS FOR THIS REPL TO BE SUBMITTED.
WE HAVE THE ORIGINAL PLAT, WE HAVE THE REVISED PLAT THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY.
SO THERE WAS A LOT OF, UM, OF OUR, UM, TESTIMONY, UM, THAT SPOKE ABOUT, AND THIS MAY BE BETWEEN YOU AND STAFF.
I'LL LET THE, THE CORRECT PER OR UM, CITY ATTORNEY, UM, ANSWER THIS.
SO THERE WAS AN ACCORDED, A RECORDED ORIGINAL PLAT, WHICH IDENTIFIED THIS AS COMMON AREA.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT CHANGES IN OUR CONSIDERATION OR THE DISCUSSION OF THE EASEMENTS? I BELIEVE IT'S ITEM NINE IN OUR, UM, DOCKET THAT ADDRESSES THAT, IF THERE ARE ANY.
UM, LET ME JUST READ WHAT THE ITEM NINE IS.
ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION REGARDING PLEADS DEEDS, PLATS ORDINANCES WITH A COMPLETED FINAL PLAT CHECKLIST ARE REQUIRED.
UM, AND THEY ARE SUBMITTED AFTER PLAN COMMISSION APPROVAL.
HOW, CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW THAT PROVISION WORKS RELATIVE TO SOME OF THE TESTIMONY WE HEARD ABOUT EXISTING EASEMENTS AND ALREADY FILED PLATS? HOW, HOW DO THOSE TWO WORK TOGETHER? YES.
SO BY THE, UH, BY THE DOCUMENT WHEN IT'S MISS DEEDS, THOSE ARE THE PUBLIC DEEDS.
THE CITY WENT THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL AND APPROVED THOSE PUBLIC DE BUT CITY, CITY DO DOES NOT, UH, ENFORCE THE PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTION LIKE THE PRIVATE DES, WE DON'T RECOGNIZE IT.
UH, THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TALKING OVER THE PRIVATE COVENANT.
WE DON'T CITY DON'T RECOGNIZE LIKE IN FORCE, LET'S SAY.
AND I DIDN'T GET THE FULL LISTING, BUT ONE OF THE, UM, SPEAKERS REFERENCED A, UM, DECLARATION.
IF THAT IS NOT A PUBLIC DECLARATION, THAT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERATION FOR THIS BODY, THAT WOULD BE HANDLED OUTSIDE OF A CONSIDERATION OF THIS PUBLIC PLAT.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE, BUT I WOULD LIKE DEEPER TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY FOR THAT QUESTION.
THE CITY WOULDN'T GET INVOLVED IN ANY AGREEMENTS BETWEEN PRIVATE PARTIES.
I'M JUST GOING TO, THERE WAS A, A QUESTION ABOUT, UM, YOU, I THINK THAT ANSWERED IT, BUT IF THERE WERE DECLARATIONS THAT WERE MADE, UM, THERE'S NO INDICATION THAT THOSE ARE PUBLIC DECLARATIONS THROUGH STAFF'S RESEARCH.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, MM-HMM
UM, I'M GONNA RESTATE THIS ONE MORE TIME,
AND, UM, I GUESS THE OTHER COMMENT WAS, UM, THAT THIS BODY IS SUBJECT TO STATE LAW IN TERMS OF REVIEWING THE PLAT, BUT THERE ARE NO IDENTIFIED PUBLIC CONSIDERATIONS THAT ARE BEFORE THIS BODY AND A LOT OF THE TESTIMONY WE HEARD.
UM, CAN YOU HELP US JUST UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PRIVATE AGREEMENTS AND THE PUBLIC AGREEMENTS THAT ARE THE CONSIDERATION FOR THIS BODY? HI, MEGAN WEER, UM, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
SO IF THE CITY IS NOT PARTY TO AN AGREEMENT, WE HAVE NO ENFORCEMENT POWER BECAUSE WE'RE NOT A PARTY.
SO WE, WE CAN'T OR DON'T ENFORCE PRIVATE RESTRICTIONS OF ANY KIND 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT A PARTY TO IT.
SO I'M, I'M, I THINK I'M GONNA STATE MY EARLIER QUESTION MAYBE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY, BUT THE EASEMENTS, THE DECLARATIONS AND A LOT OF THE INFORMATION THAT WAS SHARED WITH US TODAY IS NOT PART OF THE PUBLIC FILING.
SO REGRETFULLY IN MY, FOR ME, MR. CHAIR, I WOULD, UM, WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND, UM, WELL I WOULD SOMEONE ELSE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT IN THE MATTER OF, UM, ITEM NUMBER 28, PLAT TWO SIX DASH 0 0 0 2 4 3.
I MOVE THAT WE, UM, APPROVE THE PLA SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR MOTION.
[03:35:01]
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER SIMS FOR YOUR SECOND, UM, DISCUSSION? I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR BOTH SIDES, COUNSEL, MR. KINGSTON AND, UH, THE OPPONENT'S COUNSEL, CAN Y'ALL BOTH COME DOWN APPROACH THE BENCH SINCE THEY'RE QUASI-JUDICIAL OFF WITH THE OPPOSITIONS COUNSEL, SINCE I THINK MY FIRST QUESTION IS FOR HER, I DO WANNA CLARIFY SOMETHING FOR THE RECORD.MA'AM, MA'AM, THIS IS MY OPPORTUNITY TO ASK Y'ALL QUESTIONS.
SO I'VE HEARD TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES HERE.
THERE'S THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THE CONDITIONS OF PD 1 93 ARE COMPLIED WITH, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE OPPOSITION IN PAST CASES HAS MADE THAT ARGUMENT.
ARE YOU STILL ARGUING THAT PD 1 93 SECTION, IT'S 1 22, A FOUR, ARE YOU ARGUING THAT, ARE YOU STILL ARGUING THAT THAT'S NOT MET? IS YOUR ARGUMENT NOW ABOUT THE COVENANTS? MY ARGUMENT IS ABOUT THE COVENANTS THAT ARE NOT COMPLIED WITH.
UM, THEN I'M GONNA GO TO MR. KINGSTON AND I'M LOOKING AT 8.403 B, AND I THINK THERE'S A CORRESPONDING PROVISION OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 2 1 12 0.0 14 AND I THINK THEY BASICALLY MIRROR EACH OTHER AND THAT'S, I HOPE SO RE PLATTING WITHOUT VACATING A PROCEEDING.
PLAT, YOU'RE DEFINITELY RE PLATTING HERE.
ARE YOU VACATING A PROCEEDING PLAT IN PART, I WOULD SAY YES.
I THINK THE, THIS AREA WAS SUBJECT TO THE PLAT THAT APPLIES TO THE SUBDIVISION.
UM, COUNSEL FOR THE OPPOSITION, UM, I FORGET YOUR NAME.
MS. FINER, ARE THEY RE PLATTING WITHOUT VACATING A PROCEEDING? PLAT? WE, THAT IS OUR POSITION, YES.
MS. MORRISON, ANY THOUGHTS THERE IN THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE? YEAH, I MEAN, IT WOULD BE VACATED IN, IN PART THE SUBSEQUENT PLAT, UM, ON, ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY WOULD CONTROL.
SO THERE IS A VAC HERE, SO THEREFORE 2 1 2 0.014 AND 8.403 B ONE DON'T APPLY HERE BECAUSE THERE IS A PARTIAL VAC OF THE PLAT, IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, I THINK IT MIGHT APPLY TO THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, BUT THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS REFERRED TO, UM, IN, IN THIS SUBSECTION OR THIS PARAGRAPH IS NOT REFERRING TO PRIVATE COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS.
SO MS. FINER, MOVING ON FROM WHETHER THE PLATT'S BEING VACATED IN WHOLE OR IN PART, I UNDERSTAND YOU CONTEND THAT COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS ARE BEING REMOVED, IS THAT RIGHT? THAT OUR POSITION IS THAT THE COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS AREN'T BEING COMPLIED WITH AND THOSE, THOSE ARE ACTUALLY IN A PUBLIC DOCUMENT THAT WAS RECORDED IN THE, UM, PROPERTY RECORDS.
AND I JUST WANNA CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD, UM, IT WAS STATED THAT THE DECLARATION WAS NOT PUBLICLY RECORDED, BUT IT WAS, IT IS DOCUMENT NUMBER 2 0 1 9 0 0 0 5 1 3 4 8 IN THE DALLAS COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS.
IN WHATEVER SOMEONE FORMS A SUBDIVISION AND, AND PUTS IN, TYPICALLY THERE ARE CCRS OR DECLARATIONS OR THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT'S ALL BETWEEN PRIVATE PARTIES.
IS IS, IS THE CITY A PARTY TO THE CCRS OR DECLARATION? NO.
AND AGAIN, I THINK, SO DOES THIS REPL AMEND OR REMOVE ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS OR IS YOUR CONTENTION JUST THAT IT VIOLATES COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS? UH, OUR CONTENTION IS THAT IT VIOLATES COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS.
WELL, THAT, UM, RESOLVES IT FOR ME.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE LANGUAGE IN 8.403 B ONE SAYS THAT A RE PLATTER OF A SUBDIVISION
[03:40:01]
OR PART OF SUBDIVISION THAT DOES NOT MEET THE, MY PLAT CRITERIA MAY BE RECORDED, IS CONTROLLING WITHOUT VACATING IF THE REPL, SO THE REPL WOULD HAVE TO AMEND OR REMOVE THE COVENANTS OR, OR RESTRICTIONS.AND THAT'S NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE.
SO TO ME THAT'S A PRIVATE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE PARTY THAT'S DOING THE RE PLATTING AND THE OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE INTERESTED UNDER THE COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS.
YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE POWER OVER EVERYTHING HERE.
THERE MAY BE OTHER RECOURSE THAT Y'ALL HAVE OR ANOTHER GROUND FOR THIS DISPUTE, BUT IT'S NOT ONE FOR THIS BODY.
SO I APPRECIATE YOUR, YOUR ARGUMENTS, BUT ULTIMATELY I THINK THAT THE, UM, APPLICANT HAS THE RIGHT SIDE HERE.
ANYONE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
MS. FEINMAN? MS. FINER, I THINK ONE OF OUR COLLEAGUES HAD A QUESTION FOR YOU.
I JUST WANTED TO ASK FOR A CLARIFICATION.
YOU, OH, WELL, AND THIS MAY BE FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, BUT YOU SAID YOU HAD A CLARIFICATION TO SHARE WITH MS. FE THAT I, THE CLARIFICATION WAS THAT THERE WAS A PUBLICLY FILED DOC THAT THE DECLAR DECLARATION IS PUBLICLY FILED.
AND YOU'VE ALREADY ANSWERED THAT.
UM, FOR CITY ATTORNEY THEN, WOULD YOU CLARIFY ABOUT THE ABILITY OF THIS BODY TO PARTIALLY VACATE A PLAT? IF THERE'S A RECORDED PLAT AND WE ARE AMENDING A PORTION OF IT, HOW, HOW IS THAT CONSIDERED? WELL, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE IS THAT THERE WAS A PLOT OF THIS SUBDIVISION, A PORTION OF IT WAS SOLD OFF, AND NOW THAT PORTION IS BEING RE PLATTED, WHICH I THINK HAPPENS IN THE CITY OF DALLAS ALL THE TIME, AND THEY ARE ALLOWED TO REPL A PORTION OF A SUBDIVISION THAT WAS PLATTED BEFORE.
AND THAT THAT'S WHAT IS, UH, I GUESS WHAT I'M STILL NOT CLEAR ON IS HOW THAT PARTIALLY VACATES THE, THE PRIOR PLAT DESIGNATION.
IN OTHER WORDS, DO YOU NOT HAVE TO REMOVE THE COMMON SPACE, THE COMMON AREA DESIGNATION AND THEN REPL? RIGHT? THAT'S NOT NECESSARY.
THE SUBSEQUENT PLAT WOULD CONTROL OVER THE PREVIOUS PLAT FOR THE AREA IN QUESTION, AND I THINK THIS THEN I PROBABLY HAVE MADE MY OWN POINT, IS THAT IT'S, IT IS BOTH VERSIONS OF THE PLAT WILL BE COMPLIANT WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING, WHICH IS WHAT ALLOWS THE PLAT TO MOVE FORWARD.
AND THAT THE OTHER DISCUSSION TODAY IS, UM, OUTSIDE OF THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS BODY, WELL WHAT'S AN ISSUE TODAY? IS IT, DOES THIS PLAT COMPLY WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONING? AND IT DOES.
YEAH, YOU SAID THAT MORE CLEARLY THAN I DID.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WELL, I'LL, I'LL JUST STATE I, THIS HAS CLEARLY BEEN A VERY COMPLEX, UM, CASE BEFORE THIS BODY.
UM, I APPRECIATE STAFF DOING THE ADDITIONAL DUE DILIGENCE ON THE AREA REQUIREMENT BECAUSE IT WAS NOT CLEAR THAT IT WAS COMPLIANT WITH THE ZONING, WHICH WAS THE PRIOR REVIEW BY THIS BODY.
UM, I THINK THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED NOW AND UM, UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVE VERY LIMITED, UM, OTHER AREAS BASED ON WHAT IS PUBLICLY RECORDED, UM, THAT DOESN'T ALLOW THIS BODY TO CONSIDER SOME OF THE OTHER INFORMATION BROUGHT FORWARD TODAY.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HAMPTON.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT, SEEING DONE WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAMPTON SECOND, OR BY COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SIMS TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SUBJECT COMPLIANCE OF THE CONDITION SYSTEM OF THE DOCKET.
[29. 26-3232A An application to replat a 0.354-acre (15,400-square foot) tract of land containing all of Lot 3 in City Block 11/4798 to create two 0.177-acre (7,700-square foot) lots on property located on Ruidosa Avenue, east of Acoca Street. Applicants/Owners: Pacleo Corp. Surveyor: Burns Surveying Application Filed: September 11, 2026 Zoning: R-7.5(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Sharmila Shrestha Council District: 9 PLAT-26-000245]
AND WILL ALLOW COMMISSIONER KINGSTON TO REJOIN US.YOU WANNA GO AHEAD AND READ IT IN ITEM NUMBER 29 PLAT DASH 26 DASH 0 0 0 2 4 5.
IT IS AN APPLICATION TO RE PLAT A 0.354 ACRE, UH, THAT IS 15,400 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT THREE CITY BLOCK 11 OVER 47 98 TO CREATE TWO 0.177 ACRE.
THAT IS 7,700 SQUARE FOOT LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED UNDER GEORGIA AVENUE EAST OF ECHO GAS STREET.
20 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2026.
WE HAVE RECEIVED ZERO REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY.
[03:45:01]
TO THIS REQUEST.STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS SEPARABLE, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
ALRIGHT, ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT ON ITEM 29? SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER KUNZ, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF PLA 2 6 0 0 0 2 4 5? I MOVE TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET.
COMMISSIONER ANCE, YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER HALL.
[30. 26-3233A An application to replat a 1.10-acre (47,825.16-square foot) tract of land containing all of Lot 1 in City Block 555, to create one lot and to reduce a portion of the existing 50-foot platted building line to 40 feet along the east line of the Rockbrook Drive, on property located on Rockbrook Drive at Miron Drive, northeast corner. Applicant/Owner: Lysle Witter and Anah Hanson Witter Surveyor: CBG Surveying Texas, LLC Application Filed: September 9, 2026 Zoning: R-1ac(A) Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the docket. Planner: Sharmila Shrestha Council District: 13 PLAT-26-000151]
ITEM NUMBER 30, PLA 26 DASH 0 0 0 1 51.IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REPLAT A 1.10 ACRE THAT IS 47825.16 SQUARE FOOT TRACK OF LAND CONTAINING ALL OF LOT ONE IN CITY BLOCK 5 5 5 TO CREATE ONE LOT AND TO REDUCE A PORTION OF THE EXISTING 50 FOOT PLATTED BUILDING LINE TO 40 FEET ALONG THIS EAST LINE OF THE ROCK BOOK, ROCK BROOK DRIVE ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON ROCK BOOK DRIVE AND MI DRIVE NORTHEAST CORNER.
11 NOTICES WERE SENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY ON SEPTEMBER 21ST, 2026.
AND WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE REPLY IN FAVOR AND ZERO REPLY IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST.
THIS REQUEST REQUIRES TWO MOTION BECAUSE IT IS A REPLY AND IT INVOLVES, INVOLVES THE REDUCTION OF THE PLA BUILDING LINE, THE FIRST MOTION TO APPROVE OR DENY THE REDUCTION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING LINE, A STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON BUILDING LINE REDUCTION APPROVAL AND THE STAFF RECO.
THE SECOND MOTION IS TO APPROVE OR DENY THE REPLY STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REP REPLY APPROVAL SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION LISTED IN THE DOCKET AND OR AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING.
MR. BALDWIN, GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, ROB BALDWIN, 3 9 0 4 ELM STREET, SUITE V IN DALLAS.
THIS PROPERTY IS A REQUEST TO MODIFY A PORTION OF A PLATTED BUILDING LINE.
UH, THE PROPERTY IS, UH, ON ROCK BROOK AND MYRON UP IN PRESTON HOLLOW.
IT'S ON THE CORNER OF ROCK BOOK AND MYRON IS THE ONE ON THE BOTTOM.
UM, THE, THE CITY OF THE INTERESTING HERE, THE PROPERTY'S BEING RENOVATED, THE CITY OF DALLAS ISSUED A BUILDING PERMIT THAT ALLOWED FOR A POOL HOUSE THAT SLIGHTLY ENCROACHED INTO A 50 FOOT PLATTED BUILDING LINE.
WE WENT THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION, THE FOUNDATION'S POURED, IT'S ALL FRAMED.
THE BUILDING INSPECTOR CAME OUT AND SAID, OOPS, WE MADE A MISTAKE.
UH, YOU CAN, YOU CANNOT CONTINUE BUILDING THAT.
UM, WE, SO WE FILED THIS REQUEST TO SLIGHTLY AMEND THE, THE BUILDING LINE.
IN FACT, WE HAVE OUR BUILDER, OUR PROPERTY OWNER, AND THE ARCHITECT HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS.
SO THIS IS WHERE THE POOL HOUSE IS LOCATED.
UH, IT'S, YOU CAN SEE IT'S, IT'S FRAMED.
IT'S GOT A, UM, ALL OF THE, THE STEEL UP.
THIS IS LOOKING ALONG ROCK BROOK.
WE WE'RE OVER ON THE RIGHT BEHIND ALL THESE BIG HEDGES.
NOTHING CAN BE SEEN FROM THERE.
THIS IS DOWN MYRON AGAIN BEHIND BIG HEDGES.
SO THE APPROVAL OF THIS WILL NOT RESULT IN A STRUCTURE BEING NOTICEABLY CLOSER TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
SO IN THE CIRCLE, THIS IS THE CITY APPROVED SITE PLAN.
IF YOU LOOK UP IN THE FAR RIGHT HAND CORNER IN, UH, IN THE GREEN CIRCLE, THAT'S THE CITY OF DALLAS STAMP SAYING YOU CAN BUILD TO THIS PLAN.
IF YOU LOOK DOWN THE LEFT, IT SHOWS OUR POOL HOUSE.
SO THIS IS WHAT WE BUILT TO UNTIL WE WERE TOLD TO STOP BUILDING.
AND I GUESS THEY HAVEN'T BEEN BUILDING ON THIS FOR THREE OR FOUR MONTHS AS WE'VE WORKED THROUGH THIS PROCESS.
EVERYTHING IN CYAN IS LETTERS OF SUPPORT WE'VE RECEIVED FROM OUR NEIGHBORS.
UH, AS YOU SEE, ALL THE IMPORTANT NEIGHBORS HAVE, UH, A SUPPORT OF THIS.
EVERYBODY THAT WOULD HAVE ANY PROXIMITY TO THIS, THIS STRUCTURE HAS SIGNED YOU A LETTER OF SUPPORT.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, THE LIMITS OF ENCROACHMENT, THEY'RE VERY MINOR.
IT'S A LITTLE TRIANGULAR AREA.
UH, WE JUST WANT TO GO AROUND THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR PERMISSION TO BUILD ANYTHING ELSE WITHIN THE PLAID 50 FOOT BUILDING LINE.
JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO COMPLETE THE STRUCTURE.
UM, THERE'S, I KNOW YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT VALUE OR MONEY IN HERE, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY INVOLVED IN THIS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE, UH, FORFEITED TO REMOVE IT.
AND WE'RE JUST ASKING TO BE ABLE PERMISSION TO KEEP IT.
THIS IS THE STRUCTURE POST SLAB, UH, STEEL'S ALREADY IN PLACE.
IT'S A, IT'S A VERY NARROW CHANGE.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE ANY OTHER, AND LIKE I SAY, WE HAVE THE PROPERTY OWNER, ARCHITECT, AND BUILDER
[03:50:01]
HERE AS WELL.ARE THEY JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS? ARE THEY GONNA SPEAK AS WELL? JUST HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER HALL, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO.
IN THE CASE OF PLAT NUMBER 26 0 0 0 1 51, I MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST TO REDUCE A PORTION OF THE EXISTING 50 FOOT PLATTED BUILDING LINE TO 40 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF ROCKWOOD DRIVE.
WITH THE FINDING OF FACT THAT REDUCTION OF THE BUILDING LINE WILL NOT REQUIRE A MINIMUM FRONT SIDE OR REAR YARD SETBACK LESS THAN REQUIRED BY THE ZONING REGULATION, BE CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OR ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PLAN FOR THE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBDIVISION.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HALL FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, FOR YOUR SECOND.
THE MOTION CARRIES YOUR SECOND MOTION.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIR IN THE MATTER OF PLAT 26 DASH 0 0 1 5 1, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE STATUS'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM, SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF'S REPORT.
COMMISSIONER HALL AGAIN FOR YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER KINGSTON.
IT IS 3:26 PM AND THIS MEETING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION IS ADJOURNED.