[1. Call to order.]
[00:00:06]
MY NAME IS ERICA BROWNING AND I WILL CALL TO ORDER THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AT 702. NEXT EXCUSE ME. I'M SORRY. I BELIEVE WE NEED TO TAKE ROLL CALL FIRST.
OH. THANK YOU. YOLANDA. COLUMBUS. ERICA. BROWNING. PRESENT. ELIAS. RODRIGUEZ. HERE.
D BAILEY NGUYEN. BRENDA O'BRIEN. PRESENT. STEPHANIE. CHAMPAGNE. JARED. DAVIS. PRESENT. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO AT THIS TIME, WE WILL RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA. LIMITING TWO MINUTES PER INDIVIDUAL SPEAKER. HAS ANYBODY SUBMITTED A CARD? OKAY. WERE THERE ANY EMAILED COMMENTS? NO, MA'AM. SO THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS TO
[3. Approve minutes for the Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting on February 10, 2025.]
APPROVE MINUTES FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING THAT WAS HELD ON FEBRUARY 10TH, 2025. SO MOVED. OKAY. THE MINUTES HAVE BEEN APPROVED. AS IF EVERYONE COULD ALSO UTILIZE THE BOARD AS WELL. THANK YOU. SO IT'S NOT WORKING, RIGHT? THAT'S FINE. WE CAN JUST MOVE ON. THANK YOU. OH, YES. THERE WE GO. OKAY. THE MINUTES HAVE BEEN APPROVED. NEXT, WE[4. Conduct a public hearing (2024-20) for consideration and action regarding the request of John Dickey, applicant, for a Planned Development on CBD Hollywood Park Replat, Blk B Lot 3A ACS 0.8590, and Lot 2A, ACS 0.803, more commonly known as 914 and 918 East Highway 67, City of Duncanville, Dallas County, Texas.]
WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO 2024 DASH 20 FOR CONSIDERATION AND ACTION REGARDING THE REQUEST OF JOHN DICKEY, APPLICANT FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON CBD HOLLYWOOD PARK REPLAT BLOCK B, LOT THREE, A ACS 0.8590 AND LOT TWO, A ACS 0.803, MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS 914 AND 918 EAST HIGHWAY 67, CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. THANK YOU. TONIGHT'S REQUEST IS A ZONING CHANGE TO ALLOW FOR A NEW DEVELOPMENT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES HAVE A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF RETAIL. COMMERCIAL. THE CURRENT ZONING IS LOCAL OFFICE RETAIL. AND THE PROPOSED ZONING IS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. THIS IS AN AERIAL OF THOSE PROPERTIES. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE A MIX OF OFFICE AND RETAIL USES. THIS IS A ZONING MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES THAT ALSO SHOW THAT THE ZONING DESIGNATION FOR THOSE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE ALSO LOCAL OFFICE RETAIL. AND THE SITE WILL FEATURE TWO STRUCTURES A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION AND A RESTAURANT. USE. THERE WILL BE SITE IMPROVEMENTS THAT INCLUDE A PARKING LOT, A LANDSCAPED AREA, AND DRIVE THROUGH COMPONENTS FOR EACH USE. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT COMPLIES WITH REQUIRED PARKING, REQUIRED LANDSCAPE PERCENTAGE, AND WILL COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S CURRENT SIGN REGULATIONS. AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS, THE APPLICANT ALSO INTENDS TO REPLAT THE PROPERTIES TO ESTABLISH A MUTUAL UTILITY AND ACCESS EASEMENT. THIS IS A SITE PLAN SHOWING THOSE TWO PROPOSED STRUCTURES, ALONG WITH THE PARKING. THE FOLLOWING EXHIBITS WILL PERTAIN TO ONLY THE CREDIT UNION. SO TO GIVE SOME BACKGROUND, WHEN THE APPLICANT INITIALLY SUBMITTED THEIR ZONING APPLICATION, IT WAS INTENDED FOR A CREDIT UNION AND A STARBUCKS COFFEE SHOP. HOWEVER, DURING THAT PROCESS, THE PARTNERSHIP WITH STARBUCKS FELL THROUGH. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO FIND AN END USER WITH THE SIMILAR USE AND SAME SIZE STRUCTURE. THE APPLICANT WANTS TO CONTINUE ON IN REQUESTING THE PLAN[00:05:02]
DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO KEEP HIS PROJECT MOVING FORWARD, AND TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CREDIT UNION. THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THE CREDIT UNION. THESE ARE THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS AND THIS IS THE PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN. AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO HAVE THE APPLICANT DEVELOP A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION AND RESTAURANT USE ON THESE PROPERTIES. ACCORDING TO SECTION 3.03, A DRIVE THROUGH REQUIRES THE APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT WITHIN THE LOCAL OFFICE RETAIL DISTRICT. ADDITIONALLY, SECTION 4.08 MANDATES A MINIMUM 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ADJACENT TO THE RIGHT OF WAY OF ANY EXISTING OR PROPOSED MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. HENCE, THIS IS THE REASON FOR THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW A MODIFICATION TO THE BASE LAW ZONING REGULATIONS TO ALLOW FOR A DRIVE THROUGH COMPONENT FOR EACH PROPOSED USE, AND ALSO A REDUCTION OF THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFER FROM 15FT TO 5FT. THERE WERE TEN NOTICES MAILED OUT FOR THIS PUBLIC HEARING. ZERO REPLIED IN FAVOR. ZERO REPLIED IN OPPOSITION. AND THIS REQUEST IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED TO PROCEED TO THE TUESDAY, APRIL 1ST, 2025.CITY COUNCIL MEETING. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AS IT IS IN LINE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPROVAL BE CONTINGENT UPON STAFF REVIEW AND COMMENTS. THANK YOU. STAFF WILL STAND FOR QUESTIONS. I DO HAVE A QUESTION. SO WHILE THE ENTIRE PERCENTAGE OF LANDSCAPE IS WITHIN THE REQUIRED AMOUNT, THEY ARE OF COURSE, AS NOTED, WANTING TO REDUCE THE FRONTAGE FROM 15FT. NOW IT SAYS FIVE FEET. BUT I MEAN, SO FIRST OF ALL, THE DIAGRAM SHOWS THAT IT'S ACTUALLY FOUR FEET FIVE INCHES. SO THAT'S NOT FIVE FEET. IS CAN CAN WE KNOW THE REASON WHY THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT REDUCTION. IS THE APPLICANT HERE. YES. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. AND HONESTLY THE APPLICANT MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION BETTER THAN I CAN. BACK UP ONE MORE. CAN YOU COME UP TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE? THE REASON WE ASKED FOR THAT TWO REASONS. WELL, THE MAIN REASON IS FOR THAT FIRE ACCESS LANE ACROSS THE FRONT. IT LINES UP WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH. AND THAT CONFIGURATION, AND FLOWS BETTER TO THE EAST AS WELL. AND SO WE WERE TRYING TO GET ALL OUR FIRE LANES IN THERE FOR FIRE AND MAKE IT ALL WORK. SO WE COULD ALSO HAVE THAT ROW OF PARKING THERE INSTEAD OF LOSING THAT ENTIRE PARKING. AND THEN WE'RE RIGHT THERE BY THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND SO HOW IT'S PRESENTED HERE, IT LINES UP WITH THE DEVELOPMENTS ON EACH SIDE OF US TWO. SO IT ALL LOOKS THE SAME. AND WE GET THAT PARKING AND WE GET THE FIRE LANE THERE WITH IT ALL LINING UP. OTHERWISE THAT FIRE LANE WOULD SHIFT DOWN AND IT WOULD DO A LITTLE TURN INSIDE. AND THESE ARE 0.8 ACRE LOTS THERE. SO WE'RE KIND OF CONSTRICTED ON HOW WE CAN GET EVERYTHING ON THERE AND MAKE EVERYTHING WORK. SO FROM WHAT FROM THE INFORMATION THAT WE WERE GIVEN, 17 PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED AND THERE ARE 43 AVAILABLE. SO. I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS LANDSCAPE REDUCTION IN THE BUFFER THERE. I DROVE THE PROPERTY TODAY AND THE SURROUNDING BUSINESSES HAVE A 15 FOOT BUFFER. IT LOOKS TO BE I MEAN I DIDN'T MEASURE, BUT IT LOOKS TO BE 15FT. SO YOURS WOULD ACTUALLY BE DIFFERENT THAN THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. AND I'M WONDERING IF YOU NEED ALL OF THOSE SPACES IN THE FRONT. THEY DON'T HAVE THE 15 FOOT BUFFER. IF YOU FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, IT'S THE RIGHT OF WAY. THERE'S A HUGE GREEN SPACE THERE, AND SO THE BUFFER LOOKS A LOT LARGER THAN IT IS. SAME WITH OUR PROPERTY HERE. BUT THE ACTUAL LANDSCAPE BUFFER IS IT'S
[00:10:04]
NON-CONFORMING TECHNICALLY FROM SIDE TO SIDE. IT HAS THAT APPEARANCE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY. IT'S MADE UP IN THAT THAT AREA THERE. OKAY. THAT'S GOOD. SO WE'RE AND WE'RE NOT CUTTING DOWN TREE REQUIREMENTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. WE'RE PLACING THOSE WITHIN THE, WITHIN THE SITE. IT'S JUST THAT FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE TO OUR PARKING CURB IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SHORTEN UP. I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP. I STILL HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND I'LL RETURN TO THOSE IN A MOMENT. I'M SORRY, SIR. I'M SORRY I DIDN'T CATCH YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. JOHN DICKEY. MR. DICKEY, WHEN? SO LET ME JUST MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS, THIS SITE PLAN CORRECTLY. WHEN YOU MADE MENTION THAT THERE ARE OTHER INSTANCES FOLLOWING UP TO OUR CHAIR'S QUESTION ABOUT NONCONFORMING RIGHTS, WHO ARE YOU MAKING MENTION OF IN TERMS OF OTHER COMPARATORS? I JUST I JUST HEARD YOU MENTION THAT AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY. IN THE BUFFER, THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER, THE PROPERTY ON EACH SIDE OF US.OKAY. AND SO THIS SITE PLAN AND THE REDUCTION OF THE BUFFER IS, IS TO SATISFY WHAT IT WOULD REQUIRE WHEN YOU GET TO PERMITTING IS THAT IS IN TERMS OF FIRE LANES. WHEN YOU GET OVER TO BUILDING AND PERMITTING OR I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE GENESIS, IF YOU WILL, OF THIS SITE PLAN AS IT RELATES TO THE REDUCTION IN THE BUFFER AND THE PRESENCE OF THESE FIRE LANES TO SUPPORT THESE TWO INSTITUTIONS. I'M SORRY. ASK THAT AGAIN. AS FAR AS THE FIRE LANE REQUIREMENTS. CORRECT. IS THE BUFFER FACILITY, IS THE REDUCTION IN THE BUFFER FACILITATING YOUR ABILITY TO HAVE TWO FIRE LANES OR HAVE FIRE LANES AS REQUIRED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL? YES. IT LETS US FIT THOSE IN AND GET THE PARKING BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OVER HERE NEXT TO THE CREDIT UNION. AND THAT'S MY THAT'S MY REALLY MY SECOND QUESTION FOR YOU IS THAT THIS IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF, BUT WHICH OUT OF 914 AND 918, I THINK THAT THEY'RE MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS WHERE ARE THEY IN ORIENTATION TO THIS MAP, TO THIS SITE PLAN, WHICH ONES? 914 AND 918. 914 IS GOING TO BE THE ONE ON THE RIGHT AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT. OKAY. AND THAT OKAY. AND THAT RIGHT NOW IS THE, THE, THE STRUCTURE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF MY SCREEN. WHAT IS THAT SLATED TO BE RIGHT NOW. IT WAS GOING TO BE A STARBUCKS BUT WE DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW. NO. AND THESE TWO PROPERTIES HAVEN'T BEEN PLATTED EITHER HAVE THEY? WELL, WE'RE GOING TO REPLAT IT BECAUSE WE'RE CHANGING THE INTERIOR PROPERTY LINE. RIGHT? BUT THEY'VE NOT BEEN PLATTED TOGETHER AS OF TODAY. RIGHT? NO. OKAY, SO THEY'VE NOT BEEN THEY'VE NOT BEEN PLATTED TOGETHER. THE FIRST INSTITUTION OR THE FIRST OCCUPANT THAT WE WERE INITIALLY LOOKING AT FOR 918 HAS PULLED OUT, BUT THIS PD COVERS BOTH. CORRECT. THAT FACILITATES A DRIVE THROUGH AND ALL THE REST THAT GETS US TO THE FIRE LANE. CORRECT. BUT WE'RE BUT WE DO KNOW THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW SOMEONE FOR 914 WHICH IS THE CREDIT UNION. CORRECT? 918 IS THE CREDIT UNION. OKAY. THE ONE ON THE LEFT. CORRECT. OKAY. SO NINE. SO 918 IS ON THE LEFT. 914 IS ON THE RIGHT. SO WE DO KNOW ABOUT 914. OKAY. SO MY QUESTION I GUESS FOR STAFF IS DOES THIS INSTITUTION CAN IT EXIST IN A LAW BY RIGHT NOW. YES IT CAN. OKAY. THANK YOU. I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION, AND I MEAN IT MIGHT HAVE NO BEARING, BUT I'M LEARNING AS WE GO. WHEN I WAS AT THE PROPERTY TODAY, THERE'S A THERE'S A BIG EASEMENT WITH DRAINAGE AND ALL OF THAT. HOW HOW IS THAT GOING TO BE HANDLED? WELL, CITY RECOMMENDATION WAS TO REMOVE THAT EASEMENT THROUGH THE MIDDLE. BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING AN UNDERGROUND DETENTION. TO CATCH THE THERE'S TWO POINTS THAT WE'RE WE'RE CAPTURING HERE. TO OUR RIGHT, AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT, THAT'S THE OLD LUBY'S TRACT. AND THEY DRAIN ONTO OUR BACK RIGHT CORNER THERE. AND THEN TO THE EAST, DOWN BELOW, TO THE BOTTOM THERE. THERE'S ANOTHER OFFICE USE THERE, AND THERE'S A DETENTION POND THAT DRAINS ONTO OUR PROPERTY AND PICKS UP THAT THAT DRAINAGE, THAT BIG DRAINAGE DITCH THERE.
SO WE'RE GOING TO CATCH THOSE TWO, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE INSTALLING ALSO PART OF THIS IN THAT THAT ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT RUNNING ACROSS THE FRONT. THERE'S GOING TO BE AN UNDERGROUND STORM DETENTION THERE. AND THEN IT DISCHARGES RIGHT THERE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
[00:15:03]
THERE'S THAT KIND OF UPSIDE DOWN U SHAPE THERE. AND THAT'S WHERE IT TERMINATES. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, MADAM CHAIR FOR STAFF, PLEASE. MISS LYNETTE. MY QUESTION, I GUESS, FOR YOU IS WHAT? WHEN YOU MENTIONED STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AS APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO STAFF'S REVIEW AND COMMENTS, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? SO THAT MEANS THAT THIS SITE PLAN WILL STILL HAVE TO UNDERGO REVIEW AND COMMENTS FROM FROM STAFF. OKAY. WHICH MAY BE INSTRUCTIVE TO THIS BODY.PERHAPS. YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I'VE GOT SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. AND THAT'S JUST KIND OF JUST LOOKING AT EVEN EVEN WITH HOW THIS THING IS LAID OUT, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH TURNING RADIUS ON A FIRE TRUCK. UNLESS THESE EVEN IF THESE BUILDINGS ARE SPRINKLED. ALSO, VISIBILITY TRIANGLES ARE AN ISSUE. I DON'T KNOW IF THE LANDSCAPE OFF STREET PARKING BUFFERS ARE GOING TO BECOME AN ISSUE TO YOU, AND IT'S BECAUSE OF THE EASEMENT AND ALL THIS OTHER DETENTION POND STUFF THAT'S GOING ON. I, I CAN'T TELL ABOUT FROM THIS SITE PLAN ESSENTIALLY WHERE ALL THAT STUFF IS GOING ON OTHER THAN WHAT YOU'RE VERBALLY POINTING OUT TO US. SO, I MEAN, ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS ARE KIND OF RED FLAGS IN MY MIND THAT KIND OF JUST COME UP THAT MAY HINDER YOU MOVING FORWARD. AND THAT GOES BACK TO THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE REGARDING FURTHER STAFF COMMENTS AS MY INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING BOARD AND THE INTERPRETATION OF THIS PLAN IS WHEN WE RECEIVE SOMETHING, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW, NOT WHAT MAY CHANGE LATER ON. BECAUSE IN MY POINT OF VIEW, IT'S GOING TO BE NULL AND VOID COMING BACK. IT JUST, YOU KNOW, I KIND OF LIKE TO SEE A LOT MORE OF WHAT STAFF AS WELL AS WHAT YOU'RE WANTING TO, TO GIVE US INFORMATION ON IN ORDER FOR US TO MAKE A REASONABLE JUDGMENT DECISION TO MOVE FORWARD IN THIS CASE AND GIVE YOU THE BEST PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT WE CAN. YOU KNOW, SO, I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE, AND IN PARTICULAR THOSE I'M SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE IN EVERY PROJECT. THERE'S CHANGES AS YOU START TO MOVE FORWARD, EVEN IF YOU SUBMIT A SET OF PLANS TO BUILDING PERMITS OR DEVELOPMENT, THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK AND THEY'RE GOING TO DO A REVIEW AND THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, HEY, YOU'VE GOT TO CHANGE THIS, THIS, THIS, AND THIS, BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION BASED UPON WHAT'S PRESENTED TO US HERE NOW AND NOT GO BACKWARDS, BECAUSE THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO GO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL 1ST. AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PLEAD YOUR CASE THERE.
AND I KNOW IF I WAS SITTING BEHIND ONE OF THOSE CHAIRS, I WOULD HAVE THE SAME QUESTIONS REGARDING WHAT, YOU KNOW, ALL THE COMMISSIONERS ON THIS BOARD ARE LOOKING AT. SO TO ADDRESS SOME OF YOUR CONCERNS, WE FIRST SAT DOWN IN SEPTEMBER OF 23. THIS IS HOW LONG WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS. AND SO FIRE HAS LOOKED AT THIS, I THINK AT LEAST FOUR TIMES. AND SO WE'VE GOT ALL OUR RADIUSES TO, TO SATISFY THEM. AND FIRE LANE WIDTHS ALL MEETS CODE. AND WHAT THEY WERE ASKING, WE PUT MORE IN THERE. THAT WAS ALSO PART OF GETTING SOME OF THESE REQUESTS WAS TO WE WEREN'T REQUIRED TO PUT IN ALL THIS FIRE LANE. WE'RE PUTTING IT IN THEM BECAUSE THEY THEY SAID IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE SO THAT THAT'S THAT'S WHY WE HAVE ALL THIS FIRE LANE FOR LESS THAN TWO ACRES OF, OF DEVELOPMENT. SO I KNOW THEY'RE AS IT'S PRESENTED HERE, THEY'RE FINE WITH THOSE RADIUSES AND THOSE WIDTHS. AND THEN SAME WITH THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES. THOSE ALL MEET MEET CODE. THANK THANK THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT DOWN TO THE PORTION OF TONIGHT'S HEARING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION, BUT I'LL JUST CONTINUE ALONG. MY COLLEAGUE, COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ'S TRAIN OF THOUGHT. WHEN IF STAFF STILL HAS TO REVIEW AND MAKE SOME SUBSEQUENT RECOMMENDATIONS. I'M OF THE THOUGHT THAT THIS ISN'T READY FOR US TO CONSIDER AND EVEN TAKE UP TONIGHT WITHOUT REGARD OF WHERE IT'S HEADED AND WHEN IT'S HEADED AS SOON AS APRIL 1ST. THAT'S NOT OF ANY CONCERN TO ME. I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE AN INFORMED REPORT FOR US TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION ON TONIGHT. THE SECOND THING I WILL SAY TO THAT, THAT WILL SPARE ME FROM HAVING TO SAY IT LATER, IS THAT AND I ALSO DON'T KNOW THAT I AM COMPELLED TO CONSIDER A PD THAT SPANS TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY, BOTH 914 AND 918, PARTICULARLY
[00:20:05]
REGARDLESS OF WHEN WE STARTED THE CONVERSATION, MR. DICKEY IN 2023 OR WHENEVER THAT. THOSE PLANS HAVE SINCE CHANGED, AND WE DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW WHO THAT OPERATOR IS GOING TO BE IN THE SECOND LOCATION OR WHAT THOSE NEEDS MAY BE. THE THIRD THING I'LL SAY IS THAT THIS BODY IS NOT HERE TO ADJUDICATE OR AUTHENTICATE IN THAT. FOR THAT REGARD, WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING WILL MEET BUILDING SPECS WHEN IT GOES TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR HIS OR HER REVIEW. I THINK WE'RE HERE TO MAKE A LAND USE DECISION. AND BASED ON WHAT I'VE SEEN TONIGHT, I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS NECESSARILY READY TO BE TO BE AIRED OUT FULLY AND A DECISION MADE, AT LEAST FROM WHERE I FROM WHERE I SIT, CONSIDERING THAT WE STILL NEED STAFF TO REVIEW THIS AND GIVE US INPUT FROM A PLANNING AND ZONING PERSPECTIVE. SO WITH THAT, THOSE ARE THOSE ARE MY TWO COMMENTS IN, HOWEVER IN DISARRAY THEY MAY BE IN TERMS OF ORDER. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU. MR. DAVIS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? PRETTY MUCH GOT WHAT I WANTED TO SAY, BUT I WILL ADD THAT IN YOUR OPINION, WHEN YOU HAVE A BUFFER ZONE, IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT DO YOU WHY DO YOU THINK THAT'S IN PLACE, A BUFFER ZONE? SORRY. WHY DO YOU THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE A BUFFER ZONE IN PLACE TO HAVE A SETBACK, A SETBACK TO HAVE A SETBACK, LANDSCAPE SETBACK. BUT IT'S ALSO FOR INSULATION, NOISE REDUCTION, SAFETY, ESTHETICS, ALL THOSE THINGS ARE IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS GOING TO ATTACH TO IS ADDRESSED, THAT THEREFORE, THERE IS NOT A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE DIRECT COMMUNITY. SO THOSE BUFFER ZONES ARE REAL IMPORTANT. SO THEREFORE, IF YOU MODIFY A BUFFER ZONE, WHAT ARE GOING TO BE THE CONSEQUENCES DOWN THE LINE. BUT WE ONLY ASKED FOR IT JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT RIGHT, THAT 40 PLUS FOOT RIGHT OF WAY IN FRONT. IF THE STREET WAS MUCH CLOSER TO US, WE DIDN'T THINK IT WOULD BE A REASONABLE ASK. BUT SINCE WE HAVE MORE THAN 40FT FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE TO THE TO THE RIGHT OF WAY CURB WITH ALL THAT LANDSCAPE FROM FROM PEDESTRIANS AND FOLKS DRIVING DOWN THE WAY, THEY WOULDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS ANY LESSENING OF A OF A LANDSCAPE SETBACK. WHEN YOU LOOK DOWN THE WAY, WE HAVE MORE GREEN SPACE IN BETWEEN US AND THE HIGHWAY 67 RIGHT OF WAY THAN ADJACENT PROPERTIES. SO THAT'S WHY WE THOUGHT IT WAS A REASONABLE REQUEST. I WENT DOWN TODAY AS WELL AND WALKED THE PROPERTY AND LOOKED AT WHAT THE SCHEMATICS WERE COMPARED TO WHAT IT IS, AND I DID NOT KNOW THAT THE OTHER. PROPOSED BUSINESS PULLED OUT. AND EVEN IN MY MIND THEN I'M SAYING, WOW, THIS IS GOING TO BE REALLY TIGHT. AND SEEING HOW THAT YOU'RE GOING TO CONFIGURE ALL THIS WITHIN THE REQUIREMENTS WAS, YOU KNOW, I WAS JUST GOING TO SEE, YOU KNOW, HOW YOU WERE PLANNING TO GET THAT DONE. BUT I AGREE, IF THE OTHER BUSINESS VENTURE IS NOT IN PLACE BECAUSE THEY PULLED OUT, THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THIS ALL OVER AGAIN. BUT MADAM CHAIR, MR. DICKEY, LET ME JUST ASK YOU A QUESTION REALLY QUICKLY. WITH THE EXISTING FACILITY THERE, IF YOU IF YOU IF YOU IF YOU TRIED TO PLACE NOTHING ELSE ON THIS SITE, IF YOU JUST KEPT THE FOOTPRINT AS IT WAS IN TERMS OF THE SITE, WOULD YOU NEED AN ADDITIONAL FIRE LANE? AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, IF YOU DID NOTHING TO 914 AND 918 IN TERMS OF THE FOOTPRINT, WOULD YOU NEED TO AMEND THE SITE PLAN TO FOR AN ADDITIONAL FIRE LANE? AS IT'S PRESENTED TO US TODAY? NOTHING TO THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDINGS OF THE SITE PLAN BETWEEN 914 AND 918. WELL, I GUESS LET ME ASK IT MORE SIMPLY, WHAT'S TRIGGERING YOUR NEED TO PUT IN A FIRE LANE FIRE DEPARTMENT? AND ACCORDING TO THEM, WHAT'S TRIGGERING THAT NEED TO PUT IN A FIRE LANE? WELL, IT'S A MIXED ANSWER. WELL, I CAN TAKE IT MIXED. YEAH, BECAUSE IT'S NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRED. BUT THEY WANTED IT. THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT THERE. WHY? ENTIRELY SURE. OKAY. WE HAVE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS WE HAVE GOING ON RIGHT NOW THAT ARE MUCH LARGER THIS AND HAVE MUCH LESS FIRE LANE. SO I HONESTLY I'M NOT OKAY. I WAS JUST CURIOUS. THANK YOU. AND THE ONE ACROSS THE FRONT, IT JUST MAKES SENSE BECAUSE NOT THAT YOU CAN SEE IT ON HERE, BUT FOR CROSS ACCESS THAT'S THAT'S WHERE IT LINES UP WITH EVERYTHING ELSE. RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. WHAT REALLY CAUGHT MY ATTENTION IS THIS CENTER. YES. FIRE LANE THAT TRAVERSES BETWEEN BOTH SITES IS[00:25:04]
REALLY MY QUESTION. YES. I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW THAT ANSWER THAT THAT WAS THE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT. THAT'S WHERE WE WANT IT. SO I SAID FINE, WE'LL PUT IT THERE. WE'VE GOT TO SQUEEZE EVERYTHING ON. BUT WE WE'RE PUTTING ONE ACROSS THE FRONT AND THERE'S HYDRANT THERE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. THEN WE'RE PUTTING THERE'S ONE CURRENTLY BACK ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE BUILDING. THERE'S ONE TO THE SIDE. IT'S FLANKED. IN MY OPINION, IT DOESN'T NEED ONE IN THE MIDDLE. BUT OKAY.THAT WAS FROM MULTIPLE SIT DOWNS. THAT WAS THE MARKUP IN COMMENTS WE RECEIVED BACK.
GOTCHA GOTCHA. SO THANK YOU. THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. ARE WE OF A MIND TO TABLE THIS OR. MADAM CHAIR, I MOVED TO HOLD THIS UNDER THIS ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OUR NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED. WHAT IS THIS COMMISSION? CITY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.
SO THAT'S YOUR MOTION? YES. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? OKAY. MISS O'BRIEN? YEAH. AND MY ONLY COMMENT, MADAM CHAIR, JUST SO IT'S ON THE RECORD, AND I THINK IF STAFF STILL HAS SOME REVIEW TO DO AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DO, AND HEARING KIND OF THE COMMENTS AND THE QUESTIONS OF MY COLLEAGUES, IT MAY BE IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO HOLD THIS ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT, I THINK ANSWER AND GET ANSWERED ANY QUESTIONS AS IT RELATES TO THE SITE PLAN AND ANY OF THE OTHER MATTERS THAT ARE THAT ARE OPEN. AND THEN WE CAN WE CAN TAKE THIS UP AND THEN PERHAPS BY THEN, STAFF WOULD HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY REVIEW THIS ZONING REQUEST AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO US TO CONSIDER. WILL THE COMMISSION PLEASE VOTE? ALL IN FAVOR OF HOLDING THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT AND WAITING? MINE ON? SO MOTION PASSES, AND WE'LL HOLD THIS ITEM UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL OUR NEXT SCHEDULED, REGULARLY SCHEDULED P AND Z MEETING. SO YEAH, WE NEXT ITEM, MADAM CHAIR. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER FIVE, DISCUSS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. UNFORTUNATELY, I DO NOT HAVE ANY NEW INFORMATION TO SHARE WITH YOU ALL IN REGARDS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, VICTOR WAS TO GIVE THAT UPDATE.
BUT BEING SINCE HE IS NOT HERE, HE CAN SEND THAT INFORMATION EITHER VIA EMAIL OR HE CAN PRESENT IT AT THE NEXT MEETING. WHICHEVER THE COMMISSION PREFERS. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, WE ARE THROUGH WITH OUR AGENDA AND AT 730 WE CAN ADJOURN. SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? PUSH YOUR YES BUTTON. YES.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.