Jun 09, 2025 Planning and Zoning

[1. Call to order and Confirm a Quorum]

[00:00:06]

I'D LIKE TO CALL THE JUNE. JUNE 9TH, 2025 7:01 P.M. COMMISSIONER WYNNE IS IN ABSENCE THIS EVENING. SO. MOVING ON. SO, MISS ITEM NUMBER ONE, WE'VE CALLED TO ORDER. WE

[2. Consent Agenda]

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE. I MOVE TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BROWNING.

COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ. SO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND SECONDED. SO IF YES. I'M SORRY.

ARE WE? ROLL CALL. WE'RE DOING ROLL CALL. OKAY. NOT ROLL CALL. OKAY. SO IF IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE BY PUSHING THE BUTTON TO VOTE. COMMISSIONER O'BRIEN. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES. MOVING

[3. Public Comment]

[4.A. Case #2025-00003: Request of Oliverio Aguilar, Applicant for a Specific Use Permit to allow for the use “Short Term Rental” on real property located at 710 Valley Hill Road, City of Duncanville, Dallas County, Texas, Town and Country Estates Rep, Blk C, LT 7, more commonly known as Town and Country Estates.]

WE ARE UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE TO PROVIDE PLANNING SUPPORT TO THE CITY AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR APPLICATIONS AND CASES THAT COME IN FRONT OF YOU. SO I'M HAPPY TO BE HERE THIS EVENING WITH YOU ALL. THE FIRST PROJECT OR ITEM THIS EVENING IN FRONT OF YOU IS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 710 VALLEY HILL ROAD. THE REQUEST IS FOR A FOR THE USE OF THE PROPERTY AS A SHORT TERM RENTAL OR AIRBNB WITHIN YOUR CURRENT ZONING CODE. THESE TYPES OF USES ARE PERMITTED WITHIN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, AS LONG AS THEY RECEIVE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. IN THIS SPECIFIC INSTANCE, THE APPLICANT THIS EVENING IS LOOKING TO UTILIZE THE ENTIRE THREE BEDROOM, TWO BATHROOM HOUSE AS A FULL AIRBNB SO THEY WILL NOT BE LIVING ON THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY DOES CURRENTLY HAVE THREE PARKING SPACES ON SITE, AND THREE VEHICLES WILL BE ALLOWED AS PART OF THE AIRBNB LOCATION. AGAIN, FROM A REFERENCE STANDPOINT, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, IN A PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL AREA THAT IS ZONED SF SEVEN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. AGAIN, AS THE REQUEST IS FOR A SPECIFIC USE

[00:05:01]

DEPENDING ON THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ULTIMATELY THE CITY COUNCIL DECISION, YOU ALSO HAVE AN OPTION TO DENY THE APPLICATION, BUT IN THAT OPTION, MAKE SURE AGAIN IDENTIFY FINDINGS OF FACT YOU KNOW THAT ARE RELATED SPECIFICALLY TO ZONING, OR YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO TABLE THE APPLICATION UNTIL A FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. IF YOU SO CHOOSE. OUR RECOMMENDATION THIS EVENING WAS TO APPROVE THIS APPLICATION AND MOVE IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, MADAM CHAIR. MR. BRENNAN, QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU. IN THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL, DOES STAFF TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ANY YEAR LIMIT ON THE SNP IN IN LIGHT OF PROBABLY WHAT WE'VE DONE FOR OTHER SIMILAR REQUESTS FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS, WE DID NOT TAKE THAT THE TIME PERMITTING INTO CONSIDERATION AS PART OF THAT. NO, THAT IS A PURVIEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THOUGH. DO WE HAVE AND I DON'T INTEND TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, BUT I KNOW THAT WE HAVE TWO OF THESE AND SOME, I GUESS WE COULD SAY LEGISLATIVE HISTORY. SO I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS, DOES STAFF HAVE AT ITS DISPOSAL OR FINGERTIPS WHAT WE'VE DONE IN SIMILAR STR SUP CASES THAT HAVE COME BEFORE THIS BODY IN RECENT, JUST FOR SAKE OF CONSISTENCY AND A LOOK BACK, MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY WERE VERY SIMILAR TO THIS NATURE, AS YOU KNOW, REQUESTED FOR THE SHORT TERM RENTAL. AGAIN, THEY DO HAVE TO GO THROUGH A BUILDING AND FIRE CODE APPROVAL PROCESS, AND THEY ARE PART OF THE SHORT TERM RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM, WHICH DOES REQUIRE THEM ON A YEARLY BASIS TO COME BACK FORWARD AND HAVE THE AND HAVE THEIR HOMES INSPECTED BY THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE AND THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT ON A YEARLY BASIS.

THEY ARE ALSO REQUIRED TO REGISTER THE PROPERTY AS AN AIRBNB WITH THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE AS WELL, SO THERE ARE A MULTITUDE OF MEASURES IN PLACE TO MAINTAIN THEIR CONFORMANCE TO THE BUILDING AND FIRE CODE AND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPLICATION NOTWITHSTANDING ITS CONFORMANCE WITH BUILDING REQUIREMENTS. LET ME JUST ASK. REFRESH MY MEMORY.

ISN'T THERE A PROVISION WITHIN THE ORDINANCE THAT ALLOWS FOR, IF THERE IS ANY, IN THAT YEARLY REAPPLICATION PROCESS? IF THERE IF YOU KNOW NEIGHBORS HAVE ANY CONCERNS, THEY CAN REPORT THOSE AND THOSE ARE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. IS IT OR NOT? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IN READING THROUGH SOME OF THE COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ON THE RECORD THAT THAT NEIGHBORS DO HAVE A METHOD, IF YOU WILL, TO MAKE ANY CONCERNS THEY HAVE. IF SOMEONE IS NOT ACTING AS WE AS WE HOPE OR INTENDED. CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT FOR ME? I WILL CONFIRM THAT IN ONE SECOND, BUT I DO. IT IS IN YOUR PACKETS. THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE THAT WAS APPROVED? YES. THERE IS AN APPEAL PROCESS THAT IS WITHIN YOUR PACKET THAT IS OUTLINED BY THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, THAT DOES THAT, THAT DOES PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY IF THERE ARE CONCERNS FOR THEM TO APPEAL IT TO THE CITY, WHICH THEN WOULD BRING IT BACK FORWARD IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY COUNCIL, FOR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COMMISSIONERS. ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE, DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? YES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS OLIVER AGUILAR. ADDRESS 710 VALLEY HILL ROAD, DUNCANVILLE 75137. I'M HERE TODAY TO JUST GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF INSIGHT INTO A DUNCANVILLE RESIDENCE. FOR 30 PLUS YEARS, I RAISED MY

[00:10:02]

COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I DO, SIR, I'M ASSUMING JUST LOOKING AT THE APPLICATION THAT YOU'RE ALSO GOING TO ENGAGE A AIRBNB CONTRACT IN ORDER TO FILTER THROUGH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE RENTING THE PLACE? YES, EXACTLY. THERE IS A CONTRACT THAT I HAVE THE CHOICE OF WHO TO APPROVE OR NOT APPROVE, AND THAT GOES INTO THEIR HISTORY OF RENTAL HISTORY AND TO BE ABLE TO SAY HOW MANY PEOPLE I WANT IN THERE AT A TIME, YOU KNOW. YES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT SEEING NONE. THE QUESTION WAS FOR THE COMMISSIONERS. HAVE QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT. I DIDN'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS. OKAY. SEEING NONE. MOVING ON TO THE. DO WE HAVE A MADAM CHAIRWOMAN? I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THIS. MR. DAVIS, YOUR QUESTION IN IN SECTION 12, C DASH 60, IF THEY RECEIVE MORE THAN FOUR, IF THE CITY RECEIVES MORE THAN FOUR ISSUES, COMPLAINTS TO THE CITY, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO PULL THAT AND REPEAL THE APPROVAL OF THE PERMIT SO THAT THOSE ARE IN PLACE. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. YOU'RE WELCOME. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THIS ITEM? SO MOVED. SECOND. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER DAVIS. COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, I WILL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE BY VOTING. MOTION PASSED. SO I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANYONE THAT IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OH, IF YOU DO, PLEASE, PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM. ONCE YOU ARE AT THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. FOR THE RECORD, YOU WILL HAVE TWO MINUTES TO SPEAK. OFFICIAL SIGN UP OR NOT? MY NAME IS LARRY BARRETT. I'M A RESIDENT ACROSS FROM THIS GENTLEMAN THAT'S PUT IN HIS APPLICATION FOR HIS ARB.

I'M AT 711 VALLEY HILL ROAD. I'VE OWNED THAT RESIDENCE SINCE ABOUT THE 88 TIME FRAME. I RAISED MY KIDS THERE AT THE CURRENT PRESENT TIME. MY SON CURRENTLY LIVE THERE. I OBJECT TO THIS BE DUE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S KIND OF A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD. PARKING IS VERY HECTIC. SINCE THE TIME FRAME MY SON HAVE LIVED THERE. HE'S COMPLAINED NUMEROUS TIMES ABOUT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE PARKING IN HIS SPOT. SO WITH ARB PEOPLE COMING IN THAT'S GOING TO PUSH PARKING EVEN FURTHER. IT'S GOING TO BRING IN OUTSIDE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT AREA. THERE ARE SMALL KIDS IN THAT AREA THAT GOES TO DUNCANVILLE HIGH SCHOOL, THE SAME AS MY KIDS. DONE. AND IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH R AND B, WHAT GOES ON? IF THIS IS THE TYPE OF STUFF YOU WANT, THEN YOU APPROVE IT. BUT MYSELF PERSONALLY, I DON'T AGREE WITH THIS AND THIS IS WHY I'M VOICING MY OPINION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR, THANK YOU SIR. DOES IS

[00:15:03]

PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY STARTING TO PURCHASE HOMES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD NOW. YOU BRING IN AIRBNBS, YOU BRING THE SCHOOLS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. CAN WE GET A BREAK? IT'S JUST FLAT OUT WRONG. IF YOU DON'T WANT THE HOUSE, SELL IT. THERE'S ENOUGH GOING ON IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WITH PEOPLE NOT KEEPING UP THE YARDS. THEY'RE NOT KEEPING UP OUR AREA. WE DON'T NEED ANYBODY ELSE COMING INTO THAT SMALL AREA CREATING MORE HAVOC. PLEASE CONSIDER THE PEOPLE OVER THERE THAT'S ACTUALLY BUYING THEIR HOMES AND OWN THEIR HOMES AND DON'T WANT TO DEAL WITH THIS.

IT'S JUST IT'S JUST WRONG. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? SEE? NONE. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO. MOVED AT 718. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER DAVIS. COMMISSIONER BROWNING, INDICATE BY A VOTE.

OH. COMMISSIONER. SO MOVED. MOTION PASSES. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? I DO HAVE A QUESTION. WHAT IS THE PARKING CONFIGURATION THERE AND HOW MANY VEHICLES WOULD BE ALLOWED PARKING OR AS IDENTIFIED WITHIN YOUR PACKET, THERE ARE SPACES FOR THREE VEHICLES ON THE PROPERTY. SO A MAXIMUM OF THREE PARKING STALLS WOULD BE PERMITTED FOR THAT SITE. THE PUBLIC ROAD IS A PUBLIC ROAD, AND SO INDIVIDUALS DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO PARK ON A PUBLIC STREET. BUT THERE'S THREE PARKING SPACES. THERE ARE THREE DRIVEWAY. THERE ARE THREE SPOTS SPECIFICALLY ON THE PROPERTY. YES. QUESTION FOR STAFF. WE HAD ANY ISSUES WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT OR POLICE AT AN ADDRESS IN THAT AREA. TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY ISSUES AS IT RELATES TO ANY TYPE OF COMPLIANCE OR COMPLAINTS FROM THAT PROPERTY. NO, JUST LAST QUESTION THAT THAT THIS SPECIFIC PROPERTY IS A ROADWAY IMPROVED WITH A SIDEWALK ACCESS. I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME. I CAN HOPEFULLY LOOK DOES THE PROPERTY OWNER I DON'T KNOW WHETHER PROPERTY SIDEWALK AND CURB STREET. YEAH, YEAH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

APPROVE. I SECOND. BEFORE YOU. SECOND I NEED A I APPROVE. COMMISSIONER O'BRIEN, COULD YOU REPEAT YOUR MOTION I APPROVE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER O'BRIEN.

COMMISSIONER DAVIS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY A MOTION TO APPROVE. APPROVE THE ITEM AS LISTED. PLEASE INDICATE BY VOTING. COMMISSIONER. CHAMPAGNE. MOTION PASSES. COMMISSIONER BROWNING. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, A B.

[4.B. Case #2025-00004: Request of Keaton Mal, Applicant, for a Specific Use Permit to allow for the use of “Fuel Pumps”, on Amalgamated Properties, Blk 1, Lt 1, ACS 1.7604, more commonly known as 615 South Cockrell Hill Road, City of Duncanville, Dallas County, Texas.]

[00:20:14]

THERE IS ACTUALLY A SHARED INGRESS EGRESS ON THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE AS WELL. THE FUEL PUMPS WILL SIT OUT IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, AS YOU CAN SEE PRESENTED HERE, CLOSER TO THE CORNER OF WHEATLAND ROAD AND SOUTH COCKRELL HILL ROAD. FROM A PUBLIC. FROM A PUBLIC INPUT STANDPOINT, THERE WERE 25 MAILINGS THAT WERE SENT OUT AS PART OF OUR REQUIRED NOTIFICATION. ZERO RESPONDED WITH SUPPORT AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY IN OPPOSITION EITHER. WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? YES, MADAM CHAIR. MR. BRENNAN, BEYOND THE REVISED ELEVATIONS, THERE'S VIRTUALLY NOTHING DIFFERENT IN THIS SP REQUEST AS IT RELATES TO THE GAS PUMPS, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT.

THAT IS CORRECT. THE SITE PLAN IS IN FRONT OF YOU. THIS THERE WAS A PREVIOUS APPLICATION THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ABOUT A YEAR AGO, WHICH WAS DENIED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION 2 TO 2 THAT EVENING. THE APPLICANT WAS, YOU KNOW, DIRECTED, I WOULD SAY, OR ADVISED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THAT TIME TO CONSIDER OTHER OPTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY AND SPEAK WITH, YOU KNOW, THE DEPARTMENT ABOUT OTHER USES. THEY HAVE COME BACK FORWARD WITH THIS APPLICATION. YOU ARE CORRECT, MR. DAVIS. ALTHOUGH WE ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY FOCUSED ON THE ELEVATIONS THIS EVENING, THAT HAS BEEN THE CHANGE FROM A STANDPOINT OF THE DESIGN. THEY ARE ALSO OFFERING AS PART OF THE APPLICATION TO BUILD AN ENTRY SIGN. AS PART OF THIS, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS IDENTIFIED WITHIN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT THE CORNER OF COCKRELL HILL ROAD AND WHEATLAND IS KIND OF A SECONDARY GATEWAY INTO THE COMMUNITY. AND SO AS PART OF THE AS PART OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN THAT THEY ARE CONSIDERING, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT, THEY WOULD BE CONSTRUCTING A MONUMENT SIGN FOR THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE AS PART OF THEIR OVERALL SITE DEVELOPMENT. IS THERE ANY PARTICULARS? THANK YOU FOR RESPONDING TO THAT QUESTION THAT ELICITED THAT INFORMATION. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU CARE TO POINT THIS COMMISSION TO IN TERMS OF THOSE REVISED

[00:25:03]

COMMISSIONERS, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? I HAVE A COMMENT. IS THAT ARE WE JUST DOING QUESTIONS OR WE'RE JUST DOING QUESTIONS. AND THEN WE CAN HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT OKAY. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER DAVIS. QUESTION. SO THIS APPLICATION IS BACK BEFORE US BECAUSE THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED NEW ELEVATIONS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR THIS APPLICATION IS BACK BEFORE US BECAUSE WE ARE CONSIDERING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF FUEL PUMPS. BUT THIS APPLICATION IN EFFECT, IS BACK BEFORE US, WITH THE ONLY NET CHANGE BEING ELEVATIONS, WHICH WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING IN TANDEM WITH THIS SNP. CORRECT.

YOU'RE SPECIFICALLY ONLY FOCUSED ON THE FUEL PUMPS THIS EVENING. THANK YOU. SEEING ANY MORE QUESTIONS COMMISSIONERS? ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? COMMISSIONER O'BRIEN, SINCE WE ARE CONSIDERING FUEL PUMPS ONLY, HOW MANY FUEL PUMPS ARE GOING TO BE ASKED FOR IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE? I'LL LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER THAT TO CONFIRM THAT NUMBER. I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK OUT OF TURN OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED FOR THE SITE, BUT THE APPLICANT IS HERE THIS EVENING. IF THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION'S THIS EVENING? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US. STEPHEN OLIVER, 200 EAST PEACH STREET, EL DORADO, ARKANSAS, 7575210. SORRY. MURPHY USA HAS BEEN IN BUSINESS SINCE 1996. WE CURRENTLY OPERATE ABOUT 1300 STORES IN 27 STATES, 300 OF WHICH HAPPEN TO BE IN TEXAS. WE ARE ALL CORPORATELY OWNED AND OPERATED. WE'RE NOT A FRANCHISE OPERATION. SO YOU'RE TALKING TO THE OPERATOR, THE APPLICANT, THE PERSON THAT YOU CAN HOLD RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING YOU SEE OR QUESTIONS AS A CORPORATE CITIZEN. IN ALL OF OUR COMMUNITIES, WE SPONSOR THE BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF AMERICA.

WE'RE PROBABLY ONE OF THE LARGEST CORPORATE SPONSORS. I'M SURE THERE'S A. POST HERE THAT WOULD THAT WOULD GAIN OUR SUPPORT OR DOES HAVE OUR SUPPORT SINCE WE HAVE STORES IN IN THIS IN THIS TOWN ALREADY, FROM A TRAINING PERSPECTIVE, WE OFFER EXTENSIVE TRAINING FOR THE PREVENTION OF SALE, THE PREVENTION OF SALES OF AGE RESTRICTED PRODUCTS SUCH AS ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO. A SAFETY STANDPOINT ALWAYS SEEMS TO COME UP. WE WILL WE WILL PUT IN SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 17 AND 25 CAMERAS, HALF OF WHICH WILL BE 360 VIEW CAMERAS, AND HALF OF THOSE ARE OUTSIDE. SO WE BECOME THE EYES OF THE OF THE COMMUNITY OF THAT INTERSECTION, AND WE BECOME A FRIEND OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AS THEY'RE TRYING TO WHEN THEY NEED TAPES OF TO SEE WHAT MAY HAVE HAPPENED ACROSS THE STREET, DOWN THE STREET OR AT THE INTERSECTION. WE WILL DEVELOP AND DO DO DEVELOP A GOOD NEIGHBOR PROGRAM. WE DO DEVELOP LITTER CONTROL, LOITERING CONTROLS. WE WILL MAKE A SIGN, PLEDGE TO YOU RIGHT NOW THAT WE WILL COMPLY WITH ALL THE

[00:30:02]

KEATON. MY 10755 SAND HILL ROAD, DALLAS, TEXAS I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ON THE MORE TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE CANOPY ISSUE, THE ESTHETICS OF THE CANOPY. IF WE'RE JUST ADDRESSING THE PUMPS AND THE NUMBER OF PUMPS THAT WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW, OR YOU'RE PROPOSING FOR THIS PARTICULAR SITE, I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA. AND ALS, I'M ASSUMING IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT UP SIGNAGE, IT'LL FALL WITHIN THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE BUILDING STANDARDS AS FAR AS THE SIZE AND WHETHER IT'S A MARQUEE SIGN OR WHATEVER SIGN YOU'RE PUTTING ON THE BUILDING. YEAH.

TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, ON THE NUMBER OF PUMPS, THERE'S EIGHT PUMPS, WHICH WOULD EQUATE TO 16 FUELING POSITIONS. AND THEN ALL THE SIGNAGE PROPOSED, BOTH ON THE CANOPY AND FREESTANDING, WOULD NEED TO MEET LOCAL ORDINANCE TO SPEAK KIND OF TO THE BUILDING ELEVATION UPGRADES.

WE'RE ALSO UPGRADING THE FACADE OR THE FINISHES ON THE CANOPY WE'RE PROPOSING, LIKE A PITCHED ROOF, MASONRY WRAPPED COLUMNS OF THE CANOPY. SO IT'S KIND OF ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE WOULD TYPICALLY DO. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS. ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SEEING NONE. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM. SO MOVED AT 735. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER DAVIS AND COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, WE HAVE A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? SEEING NONE. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? I DO HAVE A COMMENT. THE KEY FEATURES OF AN SP INCLUDE. AS OUR PACKET STATES THAT THE PROPOSED USE WOULD STRENGTHEN AND HELP DIVERSIFY THE ECONOMY OF THE CITY, AND WE HAVE A NUMBER OF FUELING STATIONS ALONG COCKRELL HILL ROAD. AND SO I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT THIS DOESN'T ADD TO THE DIVERSIFICATION OF

[00:35:06]

COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE A MOTION? YES, MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS APPLICATION AS READ INTO THE RECORD FOR A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS FOR A TEN YEAR PERIOD. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. COMMISSIONER DAVIS. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ. AND, MADAM CHAIR, IF YOU OPEN THE FLOOR FOR ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION, I'LL SIMPLY SAY WHEN WE WHEN WE HEARD THIS BEFORE, I THINK THAT THIS GROUP WAS SOMEWHAT OF A MIXED BODY OF SHOULD THIS BE ALLOWABLE, SHOULDN'T THIS BE ALLOWABLE? WE HEARD A LOT OF INPUT FROM THE NEIGHBORS MOST NEAREST THIS AREA WHO SHARED SOME CONCERNS. AND I THINK THAT YOU SEE TODAY THAT WE DIDN'T GET ANY OPPOSITION. ANY COMMENTS BACK IN OPPOSITION ON THE SIMILAR ZONING REQUEST. AND THEN WE ALSO DON'T HAVE ANYONE HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS, TO THIS REQUEST TODAY. I THINK WHEN WE EVALUATE THE MERITS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE FACTORS, EVEN THAT MY COLLEAGUE MISS BROWNING MENTIONED, I THINK THIS IS IN WE'RE WE'RE CONSIDERING THIS NOT BECAUSE A, A RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT COULDN'T OPERATE ON THIS CORNER AS IT DID IN THE PAST BECAUSE IT HAS THAT ZONING BY. RIGHT. BUT THIS REALLY IS A QUESTION ABOUT THE USE OF FUEL PUMPS AND WHETHER OR NOT IT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I THINK THAT WE LOOK JUST ACROSS THE STREET TO ANOTHER OPERATOR. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IN MY ESTIMATION, THAT THIS IS WOEFULLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA AND THAT ABSENT HEARING THOSE SUSTAINED CONCERNS FROM NEIGHBORS, I MAKE THAT MOTION ALSO FOR A TEN YEAR PERIOD TO BALANCE OUT THE INVESTMENT. I THINK BACK TO THE CITY. BUT IN OUR RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL, I THINK THAT THIS THIS BALANCES THE CONCERNS WE HEARD A COUPLE MONTHS AGO. SO JUST FOR THE RECORD, MY CONCERN AGAIN, WHEN WE HEARD THIS A FEW MONTHS AGO WAS THE SAME AS COMMISSIONER BROWNING, WHICH WAS THE NUMBER OF FUEL PUMPS IN THE AREA. WE CURRENTLY HAVE A RACETRACK. THERE'S A QUICK TRIP NOT TOO FAR AWAY, AND I BELIEVE THERE'S ANOTHER FUEL PUMP. SO THINKING ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OUR PURPOSE AS A BODY TO PRESERVE AND PROMOTE COMMERCE AND NEIGHBORHOODS, I WASN'T CONVINCED THAT ALLOWING THE FUEL PUMPS ALIGNED WITH THAT. AND THAT'S MY COMMENT BEING BEING THAT IT IS WHAT IT IS. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS STATED, AND WE HAVE THAT SECOND. SECONDED.

IF THERE'S IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? IS THERE ANY. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT, COMMISSIONER. I THINK WHAT I WAS INVOLVED IN THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION AND YEAH, THERE WERE SOME CRITICAL THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON. AND I THINK THIS IS MORE OF WE'RE VOTING ON THE SCP FOR FUEL PUMPS. I THINK WE KIND OF GOT OFF TRACK ON THE ESTHETICS AND THE BUILDING AND THE ARCHITECTURE AND WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE ENTIRE CORNER. BUT BASED UPON THE PRESENTATION NOW AND BASED UPON ZERO OPPOSITION, YOU KNOW, I'M IN FAVOR OF VOTING IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL AND SECONDING THE TEN YEAR MOTION TO GO FORWARD. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION OR THIS ITEM? OKAY. SO NONE THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO APPROVE THE S U P AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE. MOTION. MOTION FAILS 2 TO

[00:40:20]

[4.C. Case #2025-00005: Request of Noemia Lara, Applicant and Owner for a Specific Use Permit to allow for the use of “Auto Repair and Services Major”, on Woodhaven Replat, Blk 2, Lot 8B, ACS 0.704, more commonly known as 508 East Red Bird Lane, City of Duncanville, Dallas County, Texas.]

AGAIN, ACCORDING TO SECTION 3.03 OF YOUR OF YOUR ZONING ORDINANCE, ANY TYPE OF AUTO REPAIR OR SERVICES THAT A MAJOR OR IDENTIFIED AS A MAJOR IS PERMITTED WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. ON YOUR SCREEN, IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY. AGAIN, IT IS CURRENTLY WITHIN AN AREA THAT IS OF THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ALONG REDBIRD LANE. THERE ARE OTHER USES OUT THERE. IT IS KIND OF ECLECTIC OUT THERE RIGHT NOW. THERE ARE SOME THERE ARE SOME HOMES. THERE ARE THERE ARE SOME OTHER BUSINESSES THAT ARE WITHIN THERE. I WANT TO BE VERY SPECIFIC THAT AS YOU CAN SEE IN YOUR SCREEN, THERE IS A HOME THAT SITS IN FRONT OF THIS RIGHT OFF OF REDBIRD LANE IS NOT PART OF THIS, YOU KNOW, SPECIFIC APPLICATION. AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S KIND OF A LITTLE FLAG LOT THAT GOES TO THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE ARE SPEAKING OF THIS EVENING. AGAIN, AUTO REPAIR AND SERVICES USES MAJORS ARE REQUIRED WITH THE SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED RETAIL COMMERCIAL IN YOUR CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT OR LAND OR CURRENT. THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT IS COMMERCIAL AS WELL. HERE'S JUST AN AERIAL OF THE PHOTO. YES, WE YOU KNOW, IT'S INCLUDED IN THE HOUSE, BUT IT DOES NOT. RIGHT NOW WE WANT TO BRING INTO JUST FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S BENEFIT. THE APPLICANT HAS SPOKEN WITH STAFF AND HAS GONE THROUGH THE DRC.

THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORWARD WITH, YOU KNOW, THE APPEARANCE OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S OUT THERE TODAY. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS AERIAL PHOTO, THERE'S A LOT OF VEHICLES THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY AND EVERYTHING ELSE, AND THEREFORE THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED AS PART OF YOUR APPLICATION. AS PART OF THIS REQUEST THIS EVENING, KIND OF A IMPROVEMENT SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT WAS DISCUSSED WITH STAFF AND ALSO THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE IN FRONT OF YOU. YOU'LL SEE THAT THEY ARE PLANNING TO PAVE AN AREA FOR THE FIRE LANE THAT'S NOT OUT THERE TODAY. IT'S MORE OF A GRAVEL ROAD AND THAT WILL BE PAVED AND STRIPED, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE RED. THAT WAS A REQUIREMENT BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THEY ARE GOING TO BE IMPROVING THE FENCE THAT'S OUT THERE TODAY AS WELL. AND THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO BE THERE WILL NOT BE, YOU KNOW, THE AREA THAT'S OUT OR IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE ASPHALTED. IF THERE ARE ANY INOPERABLE VEHICLES OR VEHICLES THAT ARE GOING TO BE WORKED ON, YOU KNOW, THAT ARE GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME. THAT AREA WHICH IS CURRENTLY GRAVEL, WILL ALSO BE PAVED AS WELL. AS PART OF THAT APPLICATION. THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS WITHIN THE APPLICATION. AGAIN, THAT STAFF HAS WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO CONSIDER AS PART OF IMPROVING THIS PROPERTY. YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THE PREVIOUS USE WAS AN AUTO REPAIR SHOP. IT DID EXPIRE, A NEW OWNERSHIP IS COMING IN. AND SO THEY ARE LOOKING TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY AS WELL FOR THEIR APPLICATION. WE DID AS PART OF THE NOTICING, WE DID SEND OUT 15 MAILINGS. WE DID RECEIVE ONE THAT RESPONDED IN OPPOSITION FOR THE APPLICATION THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET FOR CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING. AGAIN, YOUR OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMITS ARE LISTED ON THE SCREEN HERE FOR CONSIDERATION, AND STAFF DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THIS PROPERTY. AND WITH THAT I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, MADAM CHAIR. MR. BRENNAN, HELP ME UNDERSTAND. SO THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY NO LONGER OWNS THIS PROPERTY. SO THEREFORE THE SUP EXPIRED OR IS NO LONGER IN EFFECT. AND SO THIS NEW OWNER IS NOW BEFORE US MAKING THIS NEW REQUEST. HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE, THE, THE CURRENT CONDITIONS AND THE COMPLICATION AND THE NEED TO IMPROVE THAT SITE THAT'S SEPARATE AND APART AND THE RELEVANCE AND THE SEPARATE AND APART FROM THIS APPLICATION, BECAUSE I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS.

ABOUT THE USE AND THE ON SITE STORAGE. IT APPEARS IN YOUR AERIAL PHOTO OF CARS THAT ARE PERHAPS IN DISREPAIR. SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND KIND OF BOTH AND BECAUSE I WONDER IF THIS IS A

[00:45:04]

SO WE ARE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS AND BRINGING IT UP. OUR UNDERSTANDING IS, YOU KNOW, AND PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CITY, THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, DOES WANT TO MAKE AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE SITE. I BELIEVE THERE WERE CONCERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORWARD BY PREVIOUS STAFF MEMBERS OF THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY THAT IT WAS OR IS IN TODAY. AGAIN, THE GRAVEL ROADS, YOU KNOW, THE GRAVEL DRIVEWAYS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. AND AGAIN, TRYING TO BE GOOD STEWARDS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS PROPERTY DOES BACK UP TO A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AS WELL. AGAIN, IT IS A VERY UNIQUE LOCATION BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. YOU KNOW THAT WOULD THEY ARE COMMERCIAL. SOMETIMES THEY BORDERLINE GO INTO THE INDUSTRIAL AREA ON THAT PART OF IT. AND SO AS PART OF A I WOULD SAY, NOT A COMPROMISE, BUT AGAIN, THE APPLICANT WILLING TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS TO THE CITY, TO THE COMMUNITY, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. WITHIN YOUR PACKET, THEY DID IDENTIFY, AGAIN, THERE WAS CONCERNS THAT WERE THAT THAT WERE IN RED, THAT WERE IDENTIFIED BY PREVIOUS STAFF AND THE RESPONSE BY THE APPLICANT TO MAKE THE COMMITMENT TO THE CITY AND TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY, BECAUSE, AGAIN, THEY WANT TO BE GOOD STEWARDS TO THE AREA AND AGAIN, UTILIZE THE PROPERTY FOR WHAT IT WAS PREVIOUSLY USED FOR. BUT YES, BECAUSE OF THE OWNERSHIP CHANGE AND THE NEW OWNERS, IT DOES REQUIRE A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT AS PART OF THAT. UNLIKE ON ON, UNLIKE THE LAST CASE, I'M REALLY SENSITIVE TO THIS IN TERMS OF THE AUTOMOBILE USE. AUTOMOBILE AUTOMOBILE REPAIR USES THE STORAGE OF THOSE. THE NEAR PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL USES. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE ZONING MAP JUST REALLY QUICK? BECAUSE I HAVE A QUESTION. SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY NOTWITHSTANDING THE FLAG CONFIGURATION, BUT DIRECTLY SHARING THE PROPERTY LINE THAT ABUTS ARE ALL RESIDENTIAL USES, CORRECT? CORRECT. OF THOSE THAT ARE ON THE NORTHERN SIDE, YOU SAID THEY'RE COMMERCIAL AND SOME OF THEM TEETER TOWARDS INDUSTRIAL. I SEE SOME SHADES OF PURPLE OR WHATEVER. THAT'S A LITTLE BIT. BUT I GUESS MY QUESTION IS OF THOSE COMMERCIAL USES, HOW MANY OF THEM ARE AUTOMOTIVE RELATED USES? THERE ARE SEVERAL ALONG THAT AREA. AGAIN, EVEN IN THIS AERIAL PHOTO, YOU KNOW YOU KNOW, IT DOES IDENTIFY THEIR EXISTING HOMES OUT THERE. AGAIN, THIS IS WHAT WOULD BE KIND OF A TRANSITIONAL AREA WITHIN YOUR COMMUNITY THAT OVER TIME JUST HAS UNDERSTAND OF THOSE USES. HOW MANY OF THOSE ARE AUTOMOTIVE USES? BACK TO THE ZONING MAP. I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER. THAT FIGURE IN FRONT OF ME IN THE SENSE OF HOW MANY OF THOSE SPECIFIC PROPERTIES ARE AUTOMOTIVE, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE ARE SEVERAL PROPERTIES ALONG THAT THAT ARE AUTOMOTIVE OR, YOU KNOW, HIGHER INTENSITY TYPE OF USES OF THIS NATURE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. QUESTION. SO THE PRIOR SP WAS TO AN AUTOMOTIVE OR A SIMILAR BUSINESS, CORRECT? YES. AND THAT BUSINESS DIDN'T ADHERE TO OR KEEP THE PROPERTY AS, AS WE WOULD LIKE, WHICH IS WHY WE HAVE THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN. SO WHAT'S IN PLACE THAT WOULD STOP OR DECREASE THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE NEW APPLICANT WOULD DO THE SAME? AGAIN, THE APPLICATIONS IN FRONT OF YOU, BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP. AND AGAIN, THE OVER TIME, THE PROPERTY THE USE HAS NOT HAS NO HAS NOT BEEN THERE FOR SOME TIME. AND THEREFORE THE REASON WHY THE NEW SAP IS IN FRONT OF YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AGAIN, PREVIOUS STAFF THAT WERE HERE BROUGHT UP SOME CONCERNS. AGAIN, JUST THE APPEARANCE OF THE PROPERTY AND TRYING TO IMPROVE THE AREA. AND THE APPLICANT HAS MADE THOSE COMMITMENTS TO THE CITY TO IMPROVE THE AREA. BASED UPON THE COMMENTS FROM PREVIOUS STAFF ON IMPROVING THE PROPERTY. BASED ON YOUR RESPONSE, WHAT I'M GATHERING IS THERE'S NOTHING OFFICIALLY IN PLACE. WE'RE DEPENDING ON THE COMMITMENT OF THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT KEEPING HIS WORD RIGHT. SO AS PART OF A MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION, WHICH I BELIEVE WE HAVE IN HERE, TO APPROVE THESE CONDITIONS AS PART OF YOUR MOTION, IF THAT IS THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE UP TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU CAN INCLUDE AND WE RECOMMEND AS PART OF YOUR MOTION THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN. WE DID IDENTIFY THAT AS PART OF OUR AS PART OF OUR APPROVAL FOR OUR RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THIS APPLICATION, THAT THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT WAS, WAS SUBMITTED WOULD BE PART OF THAT APPLICATION, OKAY. WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO MAKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ANY MORE, I'VE GOT ONE QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF, BASED UPON THE AERIAL PICTURE THAT WE SHOWED, DO WE HAVE ANY OPEN CODE VIOLATIONS OR

[00:50:07]

THEY TEND TO START STORING CARS AFTER A WHILE AND THOSE CARS BECOME A NUISANCE. AND YOU GOT RESIDENTIAL RIGHT BEHIND YOU. SO IF WE CAN INCORPORATE THAT AS PART OF THE SUP, IF WE DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE FEASIBLE. AND IT KIND OF GIVE SOMEBODY A SENSE OF SECURITY, ESPECIALLY IF YOU LIVE BEHIND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO ADDRESS THAT A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WOULD NOT BE GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT UNTIL ALL IMPROVEMENTS WERE MADE. SO AGAIN, IF, IF THEY'RE IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES RECOMMEND CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL TO THE TO THE TO THE CITY COUNCIL, AND WITH THESE CONDITIONS THEY STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH BUILDING AND FIRE PERMIT. ALL THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE. A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WOULD NOT BE GRANTED TO THEM TO START OPERATING ALL THAT OUT OF THAT FACILITY UNTIL ALL THE IMPROVEMENTS WERE MADE. THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HAVE PURVIEW TO ALSO RESTRICT THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES THAT ARE ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW, OR YOU COULD ALSO RESTRICT HOW LONG YOU KNOW INOPERABLE VEHICLES ARE ON THE PROPERTY AS WELL. SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION COULD CONSIDER AS PART OF A MOTION TO BRING SOME SENSE OF COMFORT LEVEL TO YOU ALL, TO THE TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO THE NEIGHBORS AS WELL. THANK YOU SIR. COMMISSIONERS, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, I HAVE A QUESTION. EARLIER YOU SAID HOW MANY PEOPLE DID NOT REQUEST ANY TYPE OF PROTEST AGAINST THE. WE. THERE WERE 15 MAILINGS THAT WERE SENT OUT. WE ONLY RECEIVED ONE RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION. OKAY. AND THAT WAS INCLUDED WITHIN YOUR PACKET? YES, EXACTLY.

THAT'S INCLUDED IN MY PACKET. NOW, I DO BELIEVE THAT THE RESPONDENT WAS SAID THERE WAS TOO MANY AUTO REPAIR SERVICES IN MY AREA. TOO MANY CARS ARE BEING TEST DRIVEN WITH A VERY HIGH SPEED. ON WOODHAVEN BOULEVARD. LOUD NOISE, GUNSHOTS, MUSIC, VEHICLES BEING WORKED ON ON A BLOCK IN THE STREET. SO THE APPLICANT HERE HAS SOME GENUINE CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON BEFORE. AND SINCE. THIS IS ONE OF MANY REPAIR SHOPS, THE ACTUAL NEED FOR ANOTHER REPAIR SHOP IS IN QUESTION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER O'BRIEN. WAS THIS A DISCUSSION OR WAS THERE A QUESTION YOU WANT? IT'S JUST THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT WHAT IS THE NEED THAT IS SERVING THE COMMUNITY, OKAY. IS THIS A SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY THAT IS GOING TO BE VIABLE IN THE LONG RUN? SO IF THIS HAS BEEN AN ISSUE BEFORE, EVEN WITH THE PROMISE OF HAVING CERTAIN THINGS IN STANDARD BEFORE IT IS ABLE TO BE IN OPERATION, FOLLOWING THROUGH ON THAT IS A CONCERN OF MINE, BECAUSE THIS WAS APPROVED BY SOMEBODY SOME TIME AGO. SO WHAT HAPPENED? SO WHEN WE CONSIDER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE AND THE PLANNING FOR THAT AREA IS, IS THIS AN ALIGNED WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE AND PLANNING WITH YOUR CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? YES. THE USE IS PERMITTED WITH IS IN LINE WITH YOUR CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. YES. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT IF IT'S IF IT'S CONFORMING WITH THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DESIGN FOR THAT AREA.

WHY ARE THEY NEED A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ACTUALLY OPERATE THAT WAY. AND MY CONCERN IS ALL OF THOSE SHOPS ALONG THERE ARE PRESUMABLY UNDER AN SUP. AND IF THIS IS REALLY A TRANSITIONAL

[00:55:01]

THAT'S JUST MY COMMENT. HOW MANY EXISTING SUPS FOR THIS STRIP OR THIS THIS AREA? HOW MANY SUPS ARE? WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND RESEARCH THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF US THIS EVENING. LOOKING AT THE ZONING MAP RIGHT NOW, ALL THE I CAN SEE ONE TO THE LEFT WHICH IS UNDERNEATH THE OR I CAN SEE TWO OF THEM RIGHT NOW THAT ARE UNDERNEATH THE LEGEND. THERE'S, THERE'S SOME FOR THE HASH LINE IS AN SUP. IF YOU SEE KIND OF THE HASH LINE. OKAY. AGAIN WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT THOSE PROPERTIES ARE RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF HER HEAD, THOSE MOST LIKELY ARE AN SCP OF SOME SORT FOR A USE ON THE PROPERTY. AGAIN, WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE USE. YOU KNOW THAT. AND AGAIN, BECAUSE THE WAY THAT THE CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE OUTLINES AUTO REPAIR SHOPS, IT REQUIRES A SPECIFIC USE FOR THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT THAT THIS PROPERTY CURRENTLY LIES WITHIN. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS. ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, ANY DISCUSSION? DOES THE. SEEING NONE, DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO PRESENT TO THE COMMISSION? IS THE APPLICANT HERE? THE APPLICANTS HERE THIS EVENING. OKAY. SEEING NONE. MOVING ON. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO MOVED AT 758 SECOND. SORRY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IF WE COULD VOTE. INDICATE. PUBLIC HEARING. PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN. DO WE HAVE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? SEEING NONE, DO WE HAVE THAT GENTLEMAN? SEEING NONE, I MOVED, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING SECOND. THANK YOU. INDICATE BY VOTE. PLEASE VOTE. MOTION PASSES. DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? YES, MADAM CHAIR, I MOVED TO APPROVE THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN. THAT'S IN. AS A PART OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. AND IF I HAVE A SECOND, THEN I'LL HAVE COMMENTS AS TO MY MOTION. I'D LIKE TO SECOND THAT MOTION AND ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE VERBIAGE TO THAT, THAT VEHICLES NOT BE THERE MORE THAN 60 DAYS. THEY'RE NOT RUNNING THAT IT WOULD KIND OF ELIMINATE THE OUT OUTDOOR STORAGE OF ABANDONED VEHICLES. I ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT, COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, ACTUALL, I APPRECIATE IT TO HELP MANAGE THE SO STAFF CAN WORK THE LANGUAGE AS A PART OF THE IMPROVEMENT PLAN, PARTICULARLY AROUND ITEM NUMBER TWO, THAT WOULD THEN ALSO STIPULATE THAT INOPERABLE VEHICLES CANNOT BE THEY MUST BE STORED WITHIN THE PARAMETERS THAT YOU PROVIDED IN ITEM NUMBER TWO. BUT GOING A STEP FURTHER TO COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ'S AMENDMENT IS THAT ANY VEHICLES INOPERABLE AND IN STORAGE BEYOND 60 DAYS MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY. DID I UNDERSTAND YOUR AMENDMENT? THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK I HAVE COMMENTS IF I MAY IF WITH THE SECOND. SPECIAL USE PERMITS I THINK ARE AN EFFECTIVE TOOL FOR AREAS THAT ARE IN TRANSITION IN A CITY, IT HELPS YOU MANAGE THE ZONING THAT'S ON THE GROUND FOR A SPECIAL USE, BUT YOU CAN ALSO PULL IT IN AND MANAGE IT. IF FOR SOME REASON THAT USE GETS OUT OF HAND, OR IF AN INDIVIDUAL DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS OR THE OR THE INTENT OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. A LOT LIKE WE HEARD EARLIER WITH THE STR, THERE ARE MECHANISMS IN PLACE THAT IF AN INDIVIDUAL ACTOR IS NOT ACTING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE CONDITIONS, THAT THEY CAN BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE AND THAT USE BE STRIPPED OR TAKEN FROM THEM FOR THEIR LACK OF LACK OF

[01:00:03]

ADDING THAT TO NUMBER TWO WITH A FIVE YEAR LIMIT. THAT'S THE MOTION WE'RE VOTING ON. PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, D STAFF, DO WE

[4.D. Case #2025-00007: Request of Mario Riojas, Applicant, for a Specific Use Permit to allow for the use of “Short Term Rental” on real property located at 209 N. Royal Oak Drive, City of Duncanville, Dallas County, Texas, being part of Lot 2, Block 2 of Winona Gardens Addition No. 2, an addition to the City of Duncanville, Dallas County, Texas, according to the plat recorded in Volume 19, Page 275, Map Records, of Dallas County, Texas.]

ANY QUESTIONS? I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON THE DIAGRAM THAT THE COLOR FLOORPLAN DIAGRAM WITH THE VEHICLES IN THE DRIVEWAY. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE ARE FIVE BEDROOMS. YOU ARE CORRECT. I THINK THAT WAS ACTUALLY AN ERROR ON THAT WE CAUGHT AFTERWARDS. IT IS. IT IS A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE.

YES. AND SO THEY'RE SEEKING TO RENT OUT FOUR OF THEM. FOUR OF THEM. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION, MISS BROWNING. COMMISSIONERS, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANY

[01:05:05]

MY NAME IS MARIO RIOJAS. I LIVE IN 209 NORTH ROYAL OAK DRIVE HERE IN DUNCANVILLE, AND I'M ALONE AFTER 44 YEARS OF MARRIAGE. KIM WIDOWED LAST YEAR. I'M ALONE IN MY HOME. I'M. I'M ON DISABILITY, SO I'VE LIKED TO LIVE OUT THE REST OF MY YEARS IN MY HOME AND SUPPLEMENT MY INCOME SOMEWHAT. YOU KNOW, RAISED MY KIDS HERE A LOT OF MEMORIES. BOTH MY BOYS PLAYED VARSITY BASEBALL. DUNCANVILLE ALWAYS BEEN INVOLVED HERE, LIKED THE CITY, LIKED THE AREA, LIKED THE TREES. BUT THAT. I HOPE YOU TAKE ME IN CONSIDERATION ON THAT. THANK YOU AND GOOD EVENING.

THANK YOU SIR. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SEEING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM. SO MOVED. SECOND. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BROWNING. COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, IS THERE ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. YOU HAVE. YOU HAVE A TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT. THE TIMER IS ON TOP OF THE PODIUM. HELLO, MY NAME IS MRS. DOUGLAS ADAMS. MY HUSBAND AND I BUILT OUR HOME AT 215 ROYAL OAK DRIVE IN 1996. WE HAVE ENJOYED OUR BEAUTIFUL AND QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 29 YEARS, AND WE WOULD HATE TO SEE THAT CHANGE NOW. WE HAVE NO SIDEWALKS OR CURBS ON OUR BLOCK, AND WE ARE AGAINST SHORT TERM RENTALS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT COULD CAUSE INCREASED TRAFFIC, PARKING ISSUES, NOISE AND DISTURBANCES. WE DON'T WANT ANY POTENTIAL FOR ILLEGAL ACTIVITY. TRANSIENT GUEST. OR EXTRA TRASH IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD LATE AT NIGHT OR IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS. SHORT TERM RENTAL PROPERTIES ARE PRONE TO HAVING INCREASED INCIDENTS, SOME INVOLVING POLICE, AND THAT COULD RESULT IN SAFETY ISSUES FOR OUR HOMEOWNERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO OUR CONCERNS. DID I STATE MY ADDRESS? I'M SORRY. I MAY HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT TO 215 ROYAL OAK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YES, MY NAME IS ARTHUR JACKSON. I LIVE AT 1211 CASTLE GRUNDY PLACE, DUNCANVILLE, AND SHORT TERM RENTALS. WHAT THEY USUALLY BRING. WE ALREADY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE MOVE BACK HOME. WE GOT THREE AND FOUR CARS ALREADY PARKED IN PEOPLE'S HOUSES. NOW BECAUSE OF KIDS MOVING BACK HOME NOW, SHORT TERM RENTAL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE COMING BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY. WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO THEY ARE ANYMORE. WE HAVE ON LAW ON ROYAL LANE. WE HAVE CARS SPEEDING THROUGH THERE AT NIGHT, 50, 60 MILES AN HOUR, BURNING OUT RUBBER TIRES. YOU CAN HEAR IT ALL NIGHT LONG, ESPECIALLY SATURDAY NIGHT, AND NO ONE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING ABOUT IT. SHORT TERM RENTALS WE DO NOT NEED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU SIR. ANY MORE? ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING FOR OR AGAINST SEEING? NONE? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO MOVED. SECOND VOTE PLEASE. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NO DISCUSSION, I'LL. I DO I DO HAVE A QUESTION. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS REALLY IN OUR PURVIEW AS P AND Z. SO IF IT'S NOT JUST LET ME KNOW THE CONCERNS FROM RESIDENTS TEND TO BE ABOUT INCREASED, YOU KNOW, CRIME AND THINGS LIKE THAT WITH TRANSIENT BEHAVIORS. AND SO MY

[01:10:05]

BUT I DON'T HAVE THAT THIS EVENING OR RIGHT NOW AT LEAST. I WAS JUST CURIOUS. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. DO WE HAVE A LIST OR NUMBER OF STRS IN THAT IN THIS SPECIFIC TARGET AREA, WE HAVE ANYTHING THAT WE COULD LOOK AT. SO I'M GOING TO SAY MY UNDERSTANDING, OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE THERE'S ONLY A COUPLE THAT HAVE BEEN PERMITTED THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DATE.

YOU KNOW, SINCE THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE HAS ENACTED THIS ORDINANCE PROBABLY ABOUT SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR AGO, THERE'S ONLY BEEN A COUPLE APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE OFFICIALLY GONE THROUGH AND RECEIVED THE PERMIT APPROVAL FROM THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL.

THAT'S PROBABLY LESS THAN A HANDFUL RIGHT NOW. AND THEN THESE TWO APPLICATIONS THAT YOU'VE SEEN THIS EVENING. YEAH, I THINK THE DIFFERENCE HERE IS THAT THE ACTUAL OWNER IS GOING TO LIVE ON THE PROPERTY. I'M ASSUMING THAT AND HOPEFULLY HE'S ALSO USING AIRBNB TO KIND OF FILTER THE PEOPLE COMING IN IN AND OUT OF THAT LOCATION. YEAH, THOSE THOSE ARE JUST QUESTIONS I HAVE, WHICH ARE PRETTY STANDARD IN INDUSTRY. BUT I THINK THIS IS ONLY THE SECOND CASE THAT I'VE SEEN IN FIVE YEARS WITH THAT HAS AN OWNER OCCUPYING THE ACTUAL PROPERTY OTHER THAN AIRBNB. WE HAD DOWNTOWN A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. ALL RIGHT. THAT WAS IT. THANK YOU SIR. AND AGAIN, I MEAN WITHIN WITHIN YOUR PACKET IS THE WHEN THE CITY CREATED THIS ORDINANCE, THEY WERE PRETTY THOROUGH IN THE SENSE OF HOW TO APPROVE IT, WHAT THE MECHANISMS WERE IN PLACE FROM THE ENFORCEMENT SIDE OF STUFF. NOW UNDERSTANDING THERE ARE MOST LIKELY ONES THAT ARE NOT CONFORMING TO THIS ORDINANCE OR HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY THERE. I MEAN, WE'RE NOT THERE'S NO CRACKDOWN ON THOSE. BUT AGAIN, THE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE MOVED FORWARD ARE FOLLOWING THE REQUIREMENTS. AND AGAIN, THE CITY DOES HAVE THE RENTAL INSPECTION PROGRAM THAT DOES REQUIRE YEARLY INSPECTIONS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, NOT JUST FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS, BUT ALSO RENTALS IN THE CITY. SO ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SIR. COMMISSIONERS, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE A QUESTION. I WANTED TO KNOW IF THERE'S ANY STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES IN PLACE TO VET THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING INTO THE RENTAL HOMES OR ROOMS OR AIRBNBS. AS FAR AS MEETING STANDARD REQUIREMENTS FOR PEOPLE WHO MIGHT HAVE A BACKGROUND THAT WILL BE IN QUESTION AND NOT BE ALLOWED TO RENT THAT ROOM. I'M NOT A MANAGER OF SHORT TERM RENTALS, BUT I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WHEN YOU LIST IT ON THE PROPERTY, YOU ARE MORE I'M THE MANAGER OF THE SHORT TERM RENTALS PROJECT. MY NAME IS JOSH MCCONNELL, THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. WE CURRENTLY HAVE FOUR PROPERTIES REGISTERED AS SHORT TERM RENTALS IN THE CITY. QUICK LOOK AT AIRBNB. WE'LL FIND ABOUT 40 OF THEM ADVERTISED. THE ONLY ONES THAT WERE ABLE TO REGULATE AND MONITOR AND CHECK ON ARE THE ONES THAT ARE REGISTERED, AND WE HAVE VERY LITTLE COMPLAINTS OUT OF THEM. THERE ARE MECHANISMS TO REVOKE OUR LICENSE AND THEY GET ANNUAL INSPECTIONS EACH YEAR.

BUT LIKE I SAID, THE VAST MAJORITY 40. I LOOKED ONE DAY, I SAW 40 OF THEM ARE NOT REGISTERED AT ALL. SO IN MY VIEW, REGULATING THEM, ALLOWING THEM AND HAVING SOME CONTROL OVER THEM IS THE WAY TO MAKE SURE THERE AREN'T PROBLEMS. BECAUSE THE OTHER 40, WE REALLY DON'T HAVE VISIBILITY ON. DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? WELL, THAT REALLY DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOUT. THERE ARE PROCEDURES IN PLACE TO REVOKE THE SHORT TERM LICENSE. IF THERE'S FOUR OCCURRENCES, LIKE FOR POLICE CALLS TO A RESIDENCE, THEN THEY WOULD LOSE THEIR LICENSE. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, AND THAT WOULD BE FOR THE FOUR THAT YOU FOR THE FOUR THAT WE THAT THAT ARE AUTHORIZED AND HAVE BEEN GRANTED BY, BY BY THIS BODY. RIGHT? CORRECT. RIGHT. YOU WOULD NOT HAVE THAT RECOURSE ON THE, ON THE ON THE OTHERS. CORRECT. OKAY. WELL OUTRIGHT.

RIGHT. SO OKAY. MR. O'BRIEN, I THINK YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE ACTUAL HOMEOWNER WHEN THEY LISTED ON THE ON THE PROPERTY. AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THE BACK END OF AIRBNB AND WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE FOR HOMEOWNERS TO GO THROUGH. IT IS UP TO THEM TO EVALUATE, YOU KNOW, INDIVIDUALS THAT DO MAKE RESERVATION REQUESTS. YOU KNOW, AGAIN, AIRBNB DOES HAVE, YOU

[01:15:01]

OKAY. SO I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE TWO TWO COMMENTS. ONE, AIRBNB IS ONE PLATFORM THAT MANAGES SHORT TERM RENTALS. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHERS. SO ALTHOUGH WE'RE MENTIONING AIRBNB, THERE'S ALSO VRBO, BOOKING.COM OR AIRBNB IS JUST THE MOST POPULAR ONE AND TWO USING AN APP BASED ON WHAT I FORGET, THE GENTLEMAN NAME WHO JUST SPOKE ACTUALLY GIVES RESIDENTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO USE THEIR VOICE AND TO COMPLAIN TO THE CITY, OTHERWISE WE WOULDN'T KNOW THEY WERE THERE. AND IF THEY COMPLAINED, THE CITY WOULDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE. IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS? DISCUSSIONS? SEEING NONE. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BROWNING AND COMMISSIONER O'BRIEN. MOTION IS TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. MOVING ITEM

[4.E. Case #2024-00013: Request of Brian Nelson, Applicant, representing Life School Dallas, Owner for a zoning change from SF-13 to a PD Planned Development (Educational Facility) on Keystone Place, Block 1, Lots 1, ACS 6.005, more commonly known as 1600 South Cockrell Hill Road and Nel A Ayers, Abstract 11, Tract 9, ACS 99.265, more commonly known as 1000 East Danieldale Road, in the City of Duncanville, Dallas County, Texas.]

A COMMENT FORM SO THAT WE CAN MOVE QUICKLY THROUGH THROUGH THOSE DO. I? BEFORE WE START ON THIS ITEM, THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A STAND A MINUTE. THAT WILL GIVE PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY. IF YOU DO HAVE COMMENTS AND YOU HAVE NOT COMPLETED A CARD, PLEASE FILL THOSE OUT. SO THE TIME IS. 818. THE COMMISSION IS TAKING A TEN MINUTE RECESS. WE WILL RETURN AND RECONVENE YEAH. OKAY. THOMAS. EXCUSE ME. TIME IS NOW 829, AND I WOULD LIKE TO RECONVENE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. BEFORE WE GET STARTED ON THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM. JUST A COUPLE OF REMINDERS. ONE, WE ARE A VOLUNTEER ADVISORY BOARD TO THE COUNCIL CHARGED WITH CONSIDERING ZONING ISSUES AND LAND USAGE IN ORDER TO PROMOTE AND PRESERVE OUR COMMERCE AND OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. TWO IN ORDER IN ORDER TO BE EFFICIENT TONIGHT, IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT, WHEN YOU GUYS ARE MAKING IF THERE'S A GROUP OF PEOPLE TOGETHER, PLEASE CHOOSE A SPOKESPERSON. HAVE THAT ONE PERSON SPEAK FOR YOU GUYS SO THAT WE CAN GET THROUGH ALL OF THE COMMENTS AND WE CAN MAKE A CONSIDERATION. THREE YOU WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES. TWO MINUTES WILL BE ON THE TIMER AND YOU YOU WILL HAVE YOUR FULL TWO MINUTES. WHEN YOUR TWO MINUTES IS UP, I WILL SAY THANK YOU. IF YOU CONTINUE TO TALK, YOUR MIC WILL BE MUTED BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO GET THROUGH. WE ALSO WANT TO NOT DO A LOT OF THE HAND CLAPS SO THAT WE CAN MOVE THROUGH IT EFFICIENTLY, BECAUSE WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION AND TAKE A VOTE TONIGHT. THAT BEING SAID, DOES STAFF HAVE A SUMMARY OF THIS PARTICULAR MOTION? ITEM NUMBER FOUR E. YES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MADAM. MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THIS ITEM IN FRONT OF YOU IS A CONTINUATION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR WHAT IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS LIFE SCHOOL FROM THE MAY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. I WILL PROVIDE KIND OF JUST A BRIEF UPDATE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. AND JUST FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT, THE APPLICANT HAS, YOU KNOW, HAS IS HERE THIS EVENING TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT MAY COME UP FROM YOU ALL, WHETHER IT IS AFTER MY PRESENTATION OR PUBLIC COMMENT, IF THERE ARE DURING THE DISCUSSION STANDPOINT, THERE'S NOT INTENDED TO BE ANY TYPE OF PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT. THIS EVENING. AGAIN, JUST AS A REMINDER TO THE PLANNING

[01:20:03]

SCHOOLS ARE REQUIRED TO RECEIVE A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A LOCATION WITHIN A SINGLE FAMILY.

SF 13 ZONING DISTRICT, OR THEY HAVE THE OPTION TO SUBMIT A PD AS PART OF THEIR APPLICATION.

AGAIN, AS THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, HAS GONE THROUGH THE. THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE HAS WORKED WITH STAFF OVER THE PAST YEAR, AND IT WAS BEST DETERMINED BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR, YOU KNOW, SETBACKS AND ALSO FOR BUILDING HEIGHTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, THAT THE PD WOULD BE A BETTER OPTION FOR THE APPLICANT TO PROCEED FORWARD. AND THAT IS WHAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU FOR CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING. AGAIN, JUST A REMINDER OF THE MAP LOCATION. AGAIN, THIS IS ON THE CORNER OF DANIEL DALE ROAD. AND. I AM LOSING MY COCKRELL HILL ROAD. SORRY I LOST THE NAME OF THAT FOR A SECOND, BUT IT IS THE PROPERTY THAT IS OUTLINED IN RED FOR YOU FOR CONSIDERATION. AGAIN, THE REQUEST IS FOR THE FOR A PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL AND THEY ARE SEEKING A PD THIS THIS PROPERTY WITH YOUR CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES IDENTIFY IT AS OR DOES IDENTIFY THE AREA AS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. BUT AGAIN SCHOOLS ARE SCHOOLS ARE PERMITTED, WHETHER PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, WITHIN LOW DENSITY AREAS OR SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS. JUST A REMINDER THAT THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO BE BROKEN UP INTO TWO PHASES. PHASE ONE IS GOING TO BE FOR THE HIGH SCHOOL, THE ASSOCIATED PARKING, AND THE STADIUM WITH THE INITIAL CAPACITY OF 1500 FOR THE PROPERTY. THIS WILL ALSO INCLUDE SUFFICIENT ON SITE. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AND QUEUING FOR THE FOR PICKUP OF THE VEHICLES, OR FOR VEHICLES TO BE PICKING UP STUDENTS OR DROPPING OFF ON THE PROPERTY AS WELL, ELIMINATING BASICALLY THE NEED TO USE THE ROADS FOR THE QUEUING OF THE OF THE DISTANCE. PHASE TWO WOULD BE THE MIDDLE SCHOOL AT THAT TIME, AND THEN ADDITIONAL PARKING AND ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE WOULD BE COMING AT THAT TIME. AGAIN, THE OVERALL SITE PLAN FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AGAIN, WE'RE ONLY THE PHASE ONE IS ONLY GOING TO BE THE HIGH SCHOOL. BUT AGAIN, THERE'S GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S GOING TO BE PUT IN PLACE AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. BEFORE I GET INTO THAT, JUST AN UPDATE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE APPLICATION. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET FOR THIS EVENING AT THE MAY 12TH, 2025 PLANNING COMMISSION, THERE WAS SOME ADDITIONAL THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT A COUPLE OF SPECIFIC ITEMS, AND I ADDRESSED THAT WITHIN MY UPDATED STAFF MEMO AND REPORT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. A COUPLE ITEMS THAT I JUST WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THIS EVENING. AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION, THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY AND THE ECONOMIC SIDE OF IT. THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN TAX EXEMPT SINCE 2009. YOU KNOW, THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER WAS A TAX EXEMPT PRIVATE CHARTER SCHOOL THAT WAS GOING TO BUILD ON THE PROPERTY, AND IT WAS ONLY LIFE SCHOOL THAT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY A COUPLE YEARS AGO TO AND ARE SEEKING TO CONSTRUCT A MIDDLE SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL ON THE PROPERTY. SO FOR APPROXIMATELY 16 YEARS, THIS PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN GENERATING ANY TAX REVENUE TO THE CITY BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN A TAX EXEMPT PROPERTY. ALSO WANT TO, AT THE REQUEST OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, LAST MONTH, OLSON, ALONG WITH THE CITY, DID REQUEST THE CITY'S LEGAL FIRM AND TEAM TO PROVIDE A LEGAL OPINION FOR THE RIGHTS OF PRIVATE CHARTER SCHOOLS AND WHAT THE RIGHTS OF WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN AND CANNOT REGULATE, ALONG WITH THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THAT APPLICATION. THAT MEMO IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. BUT I JUST IN SUMMARY, I WANT TO SAY THAT IN SHORT, YOU CAN YOU MAY REGULATE THE BUILDING HEIGHT, THE SETBACKS, THE LIGHTING, PARKING AND SCREENING ALONG WITH THE LANDSCAPE AND OTHER ESTHETIC OR FUNCTIONAL STANDARDS. ANYTHING RELATED TO THE ZONING DISTRICT SPECIFICALLY, IS WHAT YOU HAVE THE PURVIEW FOR REGULATING AS PART OF THIS PD APPLICATION AS A AS IT RELATES TO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOLS WITHIN THE STATE OF TEXAS, THEY ARE PERMITTED TO GO AND DO BASICALLY ANY DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY. BUT AGAIN, YOUR PURVIEW AS A PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO EVALUATE IT FROM A SETBACKS AND BUILDING HEIGHTS STANDPOINT. AND WE DO HAVE OUR LEGAL TEAM HERE THIS EVENING. IF YOU DO HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS AS IT RELATES TO THE RIGHTS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS IT REGULATES SCHOOLS WITHIN THE CITY, THERE WAS A THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE AS IT RELATES TO AN ECONOMIC STUDY THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. I WANT TO AGAIN CONFIRM THAT THAT ECONOMIC STUDY DOES NOT HAVE ANY JURISDICTION IN THE SENSE OF THE APPLICATION THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU. AGAIN, YOU ARE ONLY FOCUSED ON THE PD WHEN IT COMES TO THE ZONING ASPECTS OF IT. IF ANY TYPE OF

[01:25:04]

I WON'T GET INTO THE DETAILS ON ON THAT PART OF IT, BUT I WANT TO CONFIRM TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT THIS HAS BEEN INDEPENDENTLY REVIEWED TWICE, AND BOTH BOTH ENGINEERS. AND THAT SUMMARY WAS PROVIDED BY HKS OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE DONE, WHETHER IT'S RECONSTRUCTION, WHETHER IT'S TRAFFIC LIGHTS, AGAIN, THOSE ARE THOSE HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED BY THE MULTIPLE CONSULTANTS THAT HAVE REVIEWED THE TRAFFIC STUDY. NOW, THAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU KNOW THE APPLICANT DEPENDENT ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME OUT OF HERE. THE APPLICANT STILL DOES NEED TO SUBMIT FOR A BUILDING PERMIT AND STILL NEEDS TO GET FINAL APPROVAL. WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS THAT WHAT THAT'S WHAT WHAT IS WITHIN THE REPORTS, YOU KNOW, MAINTAIN THE LEVELS THAT ARE OUT THERE AND ARE THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CONSULTANTS THAT THEY ARE MEETING THE EXPECTATIONS FOR MANAGING THE TRAFFIC ON THE PROPERTY AND AROUND THE PROPERTY AS WELL. SO THAT'S NOT JUST THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PUBLIC ROADWAYS, BUT THEY ARE ALSO FROM THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN EXCEEDING THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF QUEUING DISTANCE ON THEIR PROPERTY TO MINIMIZE OR ELIMINATE ANY TYPE OF QUEUING ON THE ON THE PUBLIC ROADS, WHICH WAS A CONCERN THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AS PART OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING. ALL OF THOSE LETTERS ARE WITHIN YOUR PACKET AND WERE PROVIDED AS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION. THE LETTER FROM WSB. IF THE LETTER FROM HKS, WE DID INCLUDE THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND ALSO THE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN AS PART OF YOUR PACKET FOR CONSIDERATION. AND THEN LASTLY, JUST AN UPDATE OF WHERE WE ARE AT WITH THE PUBLIC INPUT. AS A REMINDER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IT WAS STATUTORILY WE WERE ONLY REQUIRED TO NOTIFY EVERYONE WITHIN 200FT DURING THE PROCESS OF THIS APPLICATION, THERE WAS A COMMITMENT MADE TO NOTIFY EVERYONE WITHIN 1000FT OF THE PROPERTY FOR THIS APPLICATION. SO IN MAY, WE SENT OUT 561 NOTICES. AND FOR THIS MEETING AS WELL, WE SENT OUT AN ADDITIONAL 561 NOTIFICATIONS TO THE PUBLIC INFORMING THEM THAT WE ARE THAT WE WERE CONTINUING THE MAY 12TH PLANNING COMMISSION. TO DATE, THE CITY HAS RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 283 RESPONSES. WE HAVE NOT CALCULATED WHETHER THAT IS 283 OUT OF THE 561. THERE ARE DEFINITELY ADDRESSES THAT WE HAVE SEEN THAT ARE FROM CITIES OR FROM INDIVIDUALS FROM CITIES OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE. SO THERE HAS BEEN SUPPORT LETTERS OR THERE HAVE BEEN OPPOSITION LETTERS THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM INDIVIDUALS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY AS WELL. BUT I WANT TO NOTIFY THAT AGAIN, WE RECEIVED 283 TOTAL RESPONSES TO DATE AS OF THIS AFTERNOON. WHEN THIS APPLICATION, I'LL SAY IF AND WHEN THIS APPLICATION GOES TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION, WE ARE ONLY FOR AGAIN FROM A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT ONLY REQUIRED TO LOOK AT THE PROPERTIES WITHIN 200FT OF WHETHER THE CITY COUNCIL HAS TO MAKE A DETERMINATION FROM A SUPERMAJORITY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION. YOU DO NOT NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE SUPERMAJORITY, BUT I WANTED TO INFORM YOU THAT WITHIN THE 200 FOOT RADIUS, THERE ARE 92 PROPERTIES THAT THAT THAT HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED. AND TO DATE, WE HAVE RECEIVED 21 LETTERS OR NOTICES IN OPPOSITION, THAT IS, LETTERS OR INDIVIDUALS THAT SPOKE AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. AND ON MAY 12TH, IN OPPOSITION OF THIS APPLICATION. AGAIN, THAT IS ONLY WITHIN THE 200 FOOT RADIUS THAT WE ARE EVEN NEED TO, I'LL SAY, EVEN CONSIDER WHEN IT WHEN AN APPLICATION OR WHEN THIS APPLICATION DOES GO TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION. AGAIN, YOUR OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING ARE TO APPROVE THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AS SUBMITTED. YOU CAN APPROVE IT WITH CONDITIONS. IF THERE ARE ITEMS THAT YOU IDENTIFY THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THAT PD, YOU CAN DENY IT. BUT AGAIN, YOU WOULD WANT TO STATE FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DENYING THAT APPLICATION. OR YOU MAY TABLE THE APPLICATION TO A FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IF YOU SO CHOOSE. AND WITH THAT, I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE

[01:30:04]

IS THERE A I MAY BE OVER OVERLOOKING IT WITH ALL THE OTHER CORRESPONDENTS IN HERE, BUT IF YOU CAN POINT MY ATTENTION TO THAT AND WHY YOU YOU LOOK FOR THAT, GO AHEAD.

RIGHT AFTER, RIGHT AFTER THE ACTUAL APPLICATION. THERE IS AN APPLICATION THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET THAT WOULD SAY THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE. RIGHT? RIGHT. RIGHT AFTER THAT IS THE THERE IS A WORD DOCUMENT IN THERE THAT'S DATED JANUARY 29TH, 2025. THAT IS THE PD REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. AND THAT DOES IDENTIFY AND OUTLINE WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR, THE EXHIBITS. IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT THE HEIGHT AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THAT PD APPLICATION. OKAY. THANK YOU. I SEE SOMETHING THAT LOOKS MORE FAMILIAR TO WHAT I'M SAYING. OKAY. SO I ACTUALLY SEE THE TEXT. SECOND QUESTION FOR YOU. I APPRECIATE YOU DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN WHAT STATUTORILY REQUIRED VERSUS WHAT ISN'T IN TERMS OF THOSE IN OPPOSITION. BUT LET ME JUST ASK. WE I ASSUME WE WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND TO NOTICE RESIDENTS OR NEIGHBORS THAT WE WERE TAKING THIS ON SO WE COULD BE ABLE TO FACILITATE THAT FEEDBACK, CORRECT OR UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE RESPONSES ARE. THE APPLICANT AT A PREVIOUS TOWN HALL ALONG WITH THE CITY. WHEN THIS APPLICATION WAS FIRST MADE, THERE WAS A COMMITMENT MADE BY, I THINK, THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT TO NOTIFY OUTSIDE OF THE 200 FOOT RADIUS, AND IT WAS DETERMINED TO NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1000FT OF THE PROPERTY. YEAH, CONTROLLING FOR THOSE WHO PERHAPS DON'T LIVE IN THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, DO WE HAVE ANY SENSE OF THOSE? 283 OR SO, THOSE RESPONSES IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION SINCE RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED? WE DID RECEIVE AGAIN. LOOKING AT THE MERITS OF WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT, YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT A TWO THIRDS TO ONE THIRD RATIO, TWO THIRDS IN FAVOR, ONE THIRD AGAINST OF ALL THE 283 THAT WE'VE RECEIVED.

COULD YOU REPEAT THAT AGAIN, OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE 92 OR YOU KNOW, OF THE ADDITIONAL 561 NOTICES THAT WERE BEYOND THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT? I'M JUST YOU JUST SAID TO DATE, THE CITY HAS RECEIVED 283 RESPONSES. I'M JUST CURIOUS. I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME DON'T LIVE, BUT SINCE YOU PUT THE NUMBER UP, I'M JUST CURIOUS OF THE 283 GENERAL SENSE OF HOW MANY WERE IN FAVOR AND HOW MANY WERE IN OPPOSITION. OF THE 283 THAT WERE THAT WE'VE CALCULATED TO DATE, ABOUT ONE THIRD OF THEM IDENTIFIED, NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT. TWO THIRDS OF IT WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO WHY, WHILE I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK FROM THE RESIDENTS, IN ORDER TO KEEP ORDER, IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD, IN ORDER FOR TIME, IF YOU COULD HOLD YOUR COMMENTS TO THE TIME PUBLIC HEARING AND VOICE IT, THEN IT WOULD. IT WOULD HELP US MAKE SURE AS COMMISSIONERS, WE HEAR THE CONCERNS AND MAKE SURE WE MOVE FORWARD IN AN EFFICIENT AND TIMELY MANNER. SO THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING YOU SAID THAT THAT THE ASSESSMENT FOR TRAFFIC WAS DONE TWICE AND IT WAS OVER AND ABOVE THE REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT WE REQUESTED, AND LOOKING AT THE PAPERWORK OR THE REPORTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED, IT'S NOT DONE IN A WAY THAT IS MAKING A LOT OF BETTER WORD SENSE TO ME AS FAR AS HOW IT WAS CONDUCTED AND WHAT DOES THIS TRULY MEAN? SO WHEN I'M READING IT, IT'S LIKE, SO HOW IS IT INTERPRETED CORRECTLY? SO WE DO HAVE OUR WE DO HAVE ULTRA P MORE HERE THAT CAN PROBABLY SUPPLEMENT SOME OF THE INFORMATION IF NEEDED. THIS EVENING AGAIN, FROM THE REVIEWS OF THE CURRENT CONDITIONS THAT ARE OUT THERE TODAY, IN THE SENSE OF THE TRAFFIC THAT IS ON COCKRELL HILL ROAD AND ALSO ON DANIEL DALE ROAD, THERE WERE CERTAIN ELEMENTS AND CERTAIN INTERSECTIONS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED AS PART OF THE STUDY AREA TO DETERMINE HOW TRAFFIC IS MOVING, THE TIMING OF THE SIGNALS THAT ARE OUT THERE, AND EVERYTHING ELSE. ALL THAT IS OBVIOUSLY WITHIN THE REPORT. I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO NARROW IT DOWN IN THE SENSE OF CURRENTLY FROM A FROM A TRAFFIC LEVEL STANDPOINT, YOUR ROADS IN BOTH

[01:35:05]

THANK. THANK YOU, MR. BRENNAN. SO BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS ALREADY BEEN OPENED ON MAY 12TH.

SO WE'LL BE CONTINUING THAT THIS EVENING AND MOVING INTO THAT PART BEFORE WE START THAT, I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF PUBLIC COMMENT FORMS. I WILL CALL OUT TEN NAMES AND ASK YOU TO LINE UP HERE TO MY LEFT ALONG THE WALL. IF YOU HEAR YOUR COMMENT HAS ALREADY BEEN STATED OR SOMEONE HAS ALREADY MADE YOUR POINT WHEN, PLEASE. WHEN YOU GET TO THE FRONT OF THE PODIUM, SAY THAT YOU AGREE WITH WHOEVER MENTIONED IT SO THAT YOUR VOICE IS HEARD, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD, AND SO THAT THE COMMISSION HAS TIME TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT AND A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL, PLEASE JUST STATE THAT I AGREE WITH SUCH AND SUCH SO THAT WE MOVE FORWARD AGAIN. EACH PERSON WILL BE GIVEN TWO MINUTES. THE TIMER IS ON THE PODIUM. IT WILL MAKE A LOUD BEEPING SOUND. IF YOU CONTINUE, I WILL SAY THANK YOU AND THEN I WILL ASK OUR SECRETARY HERE THIS EVENING TO MUTE YOUR MIC SO THAT WE MAY CONTINUE. PLEASE HOLD APPLAUSE TO THE VERY END IF YOU WOULD LIKE, BUT NOT DURING IT IN THE MIDDLE. AND IF YOU ARE PART OF A GROUP, PLEASE CHOOSE A SPOKESPERSON TO GO UP. THAT BEING SAID, THIS IS IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER. THIS IS JUST THE ORDER IN WHICH I WAS GIVEN THE STACK I HAVE. SO AS I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE LINE UP TO MY LEFT AND THEN WHEN I GET TO TEN, WE'LL START WITH THE FIRST PERSON IN THE LINE. NESSA SASSER, SHIRLEY LACY, JASON BARTON. WILLIAM MAY. STEPHANIE SMITH, MRS. DOUGLAS ADAMS, ROBIN THOMAS. LAWRENCE SMITH. ARVIS MILLER, AND I BELIEVE THAT IS TEN. THAT BEING SAID, YES, MADAM CHAIRWOMAN, IT IS A CONTINUATION. SO WE WILL NEED A VOTE TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. SO IF YOU COULD PLEASE HAVE THAT AND THEN.

ALL RIGHT, COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO REOPEN SO MOVED SECOND. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER BROWNING.

COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, PLEASE VOTE AND INDICATE YOUR VOTE BY PUSHING THE BUTTON. THANK YOU.

SO MOTION PASSES, STARTING WITH MISS NESSA SASSER. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. GOOD EVENING. NISA SASSER, HARTFORD, 1531 MACARTHUR DRIVE, DUNCANVILLE.

RESIDENT, ALSO OF DANIEL DALE FARMS. I'M ASKING FOR NO REZONING FROM AN SF 13, THE PD.

DIMINISHES THE LIVABILITY OF THE AREA, AND KEEPING WITH THE REZONING SENTIMENTS, REZONING DECISIONS BRING UNCERTAINTY TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.

COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE LISTEN TO WHAT LIFE SCHOOL IS NOT SAYING WITH GREAT DETAIL. THE ATHLETIC

[01:40:04]

SO THAT WAS MENTIONED ALSO EARLIER. THANK YOU. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS SHIRLEY LACEY. I LIVE AT 1126 BRADLEY DRIVE, SO I LIVE IN THE MEADOWS AT DANIEL FARM. AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO STRONGLY OPPOSE THE REZONING TO A PD. THE ZONING SHOULD REMAIN SINGLE FAMILY 13. NO POSITIVE IMPACTS WITH THEM COMING TO OUR COMMUNITY, WHICH IS MAINLY RESIDENTIAL HOMES ONLY NEGATIVE IMPACTS. THERE'S NO NEED FOR A SCHOOL IN OUR AREA.

NO BENEFIT TO THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE LIKE SCHOOL PROPOSAL WOULD CHANGE THE DYNAMICS OF OUR COMMUNITY, OUR BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY, OUR PEACEFUL COMMUNITY, OUR QUIET COMMUNITY THAT WE NOW ENJOY, ENJOY LIFE, SCHOOL, CONSTRUCTION WILL CAUSE DESTRUCTION, DISTURBANCE, DISRUPTION, DISARRAY AND DISTRESS TO ALL OF THE RESIDENTS AND COMMUNITIES IN THE SURROUNDING AREAS. WE WILL HAVE TO ENDURE TORN UP STREETS, ONE LANE TRAFFIC, BULLDOZERS, DRILLING MACHINES, DUMP TRUCKS, BACKED UP TRAFFIC AND TRAFFIC JAMS, JAMS, ONE LANE TRAFFIC, LOUD NOISES BEHIND US AND IN FRONT OF US FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS, PROBABLY YEARS, CREATING CHAOS AND COMMOTION AFFECTING NOT ONLY OUR COMMUNITY, WHICH IS DANIEL FARMS, BUT OTHERS AS WELL. THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES, HOLLYWOOD PARK, WILLOW PARK, THORNTREE MANOR MEADOWS AT HOMESTEAD, CAMBRIDGE ESTATES AND FROST FARMS, AND THE OVERALL DUNCANVILLE AREA LIFE SCHOOL. REQUESTS FOR APPROVAL AND REZONING TO PD IS SELF-SERVING. WE ASK THAT IT REMAINS SINGLE FAMILY 13. WE LOVE OUR COMMUNITY AND WE LOVE THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE. THANK YOU. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. FOR THE RECORD. HI, MY NAME IS JASON BARTON. I LIVE AT 1114 BRADLEY DRIVE IN DUNCANVILLE. I LIVE IN DANIEL DANIEL DALE FARMS. I AM HERE IN OPPOSITION OF THE REZONING. THIS IS THE FOURTH EVENT THAT I'VE ATTENDED IN OPPOSITION OF THE REZONING REQUEST. I'VE SPENT HOURS AWAY FROM MY FAMILY JUST TRYING TO COUNTER THIS WHOLE MOVEMENT. I DON'T SEE IT BEING A GOOD FIT FOR OUR COMMUNITY AS IT IS. I HAVE NINE YEAR OLD TWIN GIRLS AND THE STADIUM IS SET TO BE, FROM WHAT I CAN TELL, ON THE PLANS THAT WERE PRESENTED WITHIN A COUPLE HUNDRED FEET FROM OUR BACK DOOR. SO AS IT IS, IT REPRESENTS A PRETTY BIG DISTURBANCE TO MY COMMUNITY AS WELL AS TO MY INDIVIDUAL HOUSEHOLD. IT DOESN'T BRING ANY TAX REVENUE INTO OUR COMMUNITY. IF I UNDERSTOOD THE PLANS CORRECTLY, WHEN THEY PRESENTED THE TRAFFIC STUDY AT THE LAST MEETING, THERE WERE AT LEAST TWO INTERSECTIONS THAT DID HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL IMPACT FROM THE INCREASED TRAFFIC, THAT WE'RE ALREADY INADEQUATE TO HANDLE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT WAS COMING INTO THE COMMUNITY. SO I DON'T SEE THE TRAFFIC BEING BETTER OR UNIMPACTED. AS WAS STATED EARLIER TONIGHT, FROM 2000 OR SO, STUDENTS BEING BUSSED IN AND DRIVEN INTO OUR COMMUNITY. SO YEAH, I'LL LEAVE SOME EXTRA TIME FOR THE

[01:45:02]

THAT'S ALL WE ASK. THANK YOU. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ROBIN THOMAS. I LIVE AT 1522 VALLEY VIEW LANE AND I AGREE WITH ALL MY PREVIOUS COUNTERPARTS HERE.

HE'S NOT TELLING YOU THE TRUTH. THOSE 283 PEOPLE THAT MAILED IN, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW. THEY SAY YAY OR NAY BECAUSE I KNOW THEY SAY NO. IT IS AN INCONVENIENCE FOR US THAT'S GOING TO CREATE MORE TRAFFIC. IT'S JUST LIKE THE FREEWAY. YOU BUILD A FREEWAY, MORE TRAFFIC COME. IT'S THE SAME THING WITH CROCKER HILL AND DANIEL DALE. THERE'S NO WAY TO MOVE LANES BECAUSE THERE'S TELEPHONE POLES ON ONE SIDE AND YOU GOT PEOPLE OTHER SIDE. IT'S LIKE RESIDENTIAL YARDS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE IMPEDING ON TO PUT YOUR EXTRA LANES. SO I AM AGAINST Y'ALL REPLANTING THIS TO A COMMERCIAL ZONE. PLEASE LEAVE IT AS A SINGLE FAMILY. BUILD MORE HOMES. IF YOU WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING OVER THERE, BUILD MORE HOMES. THANK YOU. BEFORE YOU START, JUST LET ME LINE UP THE NEXT TEN. IF I MAY COOK. OR MARIE COOK. OH, MARK COOK. SORRY, COOK. COREY JOHNSON, KIM.

REEP. ALICIA. YOUNG. JAN. HOFER, JOE. HOFER, JERRY MESSER, AND EDWARD MUNOZ. OKAY. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS STEPHANIE SMITH, AND I'M AT 1507 HALSEY DRIVE. I'M ALSO IN DANIEL FARMS, AND I'M A PROUD GRADUATE. 1997 CLASS OF DUNCANVILLE HIGH SCHOOL. AFTER COLLEGE AND STARTING A FAMILY, MY HUSBAND AND I CHOSE TO RETURN TO DUNCANVILLE BECAUSE OF ITS STRONG NEIGHBORHOODS AND ACCESS TO QUALITY PUBLIC AND CHARTER SCHOOLS. AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR, I FULLY SUPPORT EDUCATION AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES. OUR OWN CHILDREN ATTEND A NEARBY CHARTER SCHOOL, AND WE APPRECIATE THE VALUE THAT THEY BRING WHEN LOCATED IN APPROPRIATELY ZONED AREAS. IN FACT, THERE'S A CHARTER SCHOOL WITH A FOOTBALL STADIUM JUST DOWN THE STREET, BUILT IN AN AREA ALREADY ZONED FOR SUCH USE TONIGHT. THE ISSUE IS NOT ABOUT SUPPORTING EDUCATION, BUT ABOUT REZONING, REZONING, A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA AGAINST THE WISHES OF NEIGHBORS TO ALLOW ANOTHER CHARTER SCHOOL WHICH OFFERS NO ECONOMIC BENEFIT AND DISRUPTS OUR COMMUNITY. IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE, AND I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS REZONING REQUEST, AND I ENCOURAGE THE CHARTER SCHOOL TO SEEK LOCATIONS ALREADY ZONED FOR ITS PURPOSE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. I'M

[01:50:03]

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SURE. THANK YOU. ARVIS MILLER, 1510 HALSEY DRIVE, DUNCANVILLE, TEXAS I OPPOSE THIS TOTALLY, AND I DO WISH THAT THIS GENTLEMAN HERE COULD PROVIDE US SINCERE ANSWERS ABOUT THE TWO THIRDS SAYING YES, ALL THE DATA HE HAS ON SLIDE DECK, HE DOESN'T HAVE THAT HERE. OUR PROPERTY, OUR COMMUNITY IS 69 HOUSES, ROUGHLY 17 ACRES.

JUST SAY 20 ACRES FOR 69 HOUSES, 105 ACRES IS WHAT LIFE OWNS. 20 ACRES. OF THOSE, 105 PRODUCES ABOUT 362 HOUSES. AT $8,500 PER HOUSE FOR TAXES. I KNOW IT'S HIGHER THAN THAT, BUT I'M TRYING TO BE CONSIDERATE. $8,500 PER HOUSE AT 362 HOUSES, ABOUT $3 MILLION. THAT'S AN ECONOMIC STIMULUS TO THE CITY. MY WATER BILL IS $150 A MONTH, 150 A MONTH TIMES 362 IS ABOUT ANOTHER $54,000. THAT'S ECONOMIC STIMULUS. I ATTENDED LIFE SCHOOL AS A SEVENTH GRADER. I'M A BIG ADVOCATE OF EDUCATION. MY TWO GIRLS ATTENDED DUNCANVILLE HIGH SCHOOL. THEY BOTH ATTEND UT AUSTIN RIGHT NOW, COLLEGE EDUCATION. FROM DUNCANVILLE. WE HAVE ENOUGH SCHOOLS HERE. THE PROPERTY THAT WAS OWNED BY PREVIOUS CHARTER SCHOOL THAT HAS NO MERIT ON RIGHT NOW WITH LIFE, THE TRAFFIC, THE LIGHTS, THE LIGHT POLLUTION, THE SOUND POLLUTION, THE NOISE POLLUTION, THE CRIME, THEY SAID BEFORE 5000 SEAT STADIUM. HERE'S SOMETHING ELSE. 85% OF THE STUDENTS ARE GOING TO BE BUSSED IN. 10% IS GOING TO BE DRIVEN IN, 5% IS GOING TO BE FROM DUNCANVILLE. WE HOPE THIS IS NOT A NEW SCHOOL, THIS SCHOOL THAT'S COMING THAT THEY WANT TO BUILD OVER HERE IS COMING FROM OAK CLIFF. THE CLOSING OF OAK CLIFF AND BRINGING OAK CLIFF CHARTER SCHOOL OVER HERE. THAT'S WHY ALL THE ACTIVITY IS GOING TO BE COMING FROM. SO WE'RE OKAY.

DUNCANVILLE. WE'RE GOOD. WE SEE THE CHAMPIONS AS WE ARE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. MARK COOKS, 1106 BRADLEY DRIVE. SEVEN YEARS AGO, THIS BODY PAZ AND THE COUNCIL RESTRICTED HOW MANY DOLLAR STORES COULD BE IN DUNCANVILLE WITHIN 100FT■!S. THIS PROPERTY S ZONED FOR SINGLE FAMILY FOR A REASON OVER THE 8 TO 10 YEARS. IS THIS WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT I HEARD YOU SPOKE ABOUT TONIGHT? WE CURRENTLY HAVE THREE ISD'S WITHIN A SMALL 11.7MI■!S IN DUNCANVILLE. TWO OF THEM ARE ZONED WITH PAD. IN FRONT OF YOU IS AN UNOFFICIAL TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WE CONDUCTED, THAT I CONDUCTED OR WE CONDUCTED TALKING ABOUT HOW OUR TRAFFIC WOULD LOOK. YOU HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU. SO THOSE THOSE NUMBERS TALKED ABOUT TRAFFIC STUDY WITHIN THE WITHIN THE PROPERTY. I WANT YOU TO SEE THAT THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS REALLY WHEN WE'RE GOING TO WORK. ALL RIGHT.

THE ECONOMIC IMPACT. YOU TALK ABOUT ECONOMIC IMPACT AS OAK CLIFF TO PROPERTY. WHAT ECONOMIC IMPACT HAS LIFE SCHOOL MADE TO THEM? I'M HERE TO ARGUE THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF NONE. THIS PROPERTY WE HAVE 69 HOMES. THE GENTLEMAN MADE THE PROPERTY TAX OF 69 HOMES, AVERAGE $200,000, 160 ACRES. YOU CAN PUT 300 HOMES ON 160 ACRES, WHICH WERE REVENUE PROPERTY TAX OF $840,000. I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT PROPERTY TAX THAT THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE COULD GAIN. I'M URGING YOU TO VOTE AGAINST CHANGING IT TO PLANNING, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT. ONE OF THE REASONS I ALSO ASK YOU TO DO THAT IS THAT MANY PEOPLE YOU CAME UP AND SAYS, THIS IS A GREAT SCHOOL,

[01:55:03]

COREY. COREY JOHNSON 1502 MARSHALL, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THIS WILL BE A MAGNET FOR TRAFFIC. THE STUDY THAT THEY KEEP REFERRING TO WAS A STUDY THEY CONDUCTED, AND THEN THEY PURPORTED TO HAVE HIRED INDEPENDENT EVALUATORS, FOR WHICH THEY PROBABLY PAID FOR THE TRAFFIC THAT THEY DON'T STUDY AND THEY DON'T HAVE IN THIS REPORT RELATES TO THE INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC DURING RUSH HOUR, AS ON COCKRELL HILL, AND THE INTEREST TO 67, WHICH AS WE IF YOU GO THERE ANY MORNING, WILL BE ABOUT A 300 YARD LINE OF CARS GOING BACK FROM THE HIGHWAY. THAT'S THE FAILURE THAT THEY THEY FAIL TO ADDRESS. THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH THIS.

THIS PROPOSAL AND THE FACT THAT THEY COULD COME IN HERE AND BE SO DISMISSIVE OF BOTH THIS COUNCIL WHO ARE VOLUNTEERS, WHO RESPECTFULLY ASKED THEM TO SEND OUT ADDITIONAL REQUESTS TO SEE THE OPINIONS OF THE PEOPLE AROUND THEM, AND THEN DON'T GIVE YOU THE COURTESY OF COUNTING THOSE VOTES AND GIVING YOU THAT THE RESPECT THAT YOU DESERVE AS VOLUNTEERS SHOWS THAT WHAT WE CAN ANTICIPATE FROM THEM IN THE FUTURE, WHICH IS THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE HERE TO ADDRESS, THAT THESE THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PURPORTING TO ARE ADVOCATING THIS, THIS SCHOOL DON'T UNDERSTAND OR RESPECT THEIR NEIGHBORS BEFORE THEY EVEN GET THERE. AND THAT'S WHY THIS SHOULD BE REJECTED. THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE HEALTH AND SAFETY AND THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THIS AREA. AND THAT'S WHY I'M OPPOSED, AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S ALMOST UNIVERSAL OPPOSITION TO THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. I'M KIM RABY. I'M AT 618 SOPHIA STREET IN MIDLOTHIAN. I'M HERE TO VOICE SUPPORT FOR LIFE SCHOOL'S PLAN TO BUILD A HIGH SCHOOL IN YOUR COMMUNITY, A PROJECT THAT WILL OPEN DOORS FOR COUNTLESS FAMILIES AND STUDENTS WHO ARE EAGER FOR A HIGH QUALITY, CHARACTER DRIVEN EDUCATION IN A SMALLER ENVIRONMENT THAN THAT OFFERED BY DUNCANVILLE HIGH SCHOOL. YOU HAVE HEARD CONCERNS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR NOISE, LIGHTS FROM A STADIUM OR INCREASED TRAFFIC DUE TO SCHOOL EVENTS. WHILE THESE CONCERNS ARE UNDERSTANDABLE FOR THOSE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY, YOU SHOULD NOT ALLOW THE VOICES OF A VOCAL FEW TO DROWN OUT THE NEEDS AND HOPES OF THE SILENT MAJORITY. THOSE WHO ARE NOT PRESENT TONIGHT, BUT WHO FULLY SUPPORT LIFE SCHOOL'S PRESENCE IN THE COMMUNITY.

DUNCANVILLE FAMILIES WANT OTHER OPTIONS FOR THEIR CHILDREN'S EDUCATION. AT LEAST ONE FAMILY FROM THE OPPOSITION HAVE THEIR CHILDREN ENROLLED IN ANOTHER CHARTER SCHOOL, WHICH SUPPORTS THIS STATEMENT. LIFE SCHOOL HAS A LONG STANDING TRACK RECORD OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS, CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT, AND STRONG COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS. PARENTS TRUST LIFE SCHOOL STUDENTS THRIVE THERE, AND COMMUNITIES BENEFIT FROM THE GRADUATES THEY PRODUCE. THIS SCHOOL WILL BRING MORE THAN JUST CLASSROOMS. IT WILL BRING AN OPPORTUNITY, INSPIRATION AND THE KIND OF EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE THAT LIFTS AN ENTIRE CITY. LET'S NOT LET THE SMALL NUMBER FEELING INCONVENIENCED OUTWEIGH THE BENEFITS TO SO MANY MORE. LET'S NOT CONFUSE VOLUME WITH VISION.

I URGE YOU TO CONSIDER THE BIGGER PICTURE AND STAND WITH THE MANY FAMILIES WHO SUPPORT THIS INITIATIVE BY ALLOWING LIFE SCHOOL TO BUILD A HIGH SCHOOL RIGHT HERE WHERE IT IS SO GREATLY WANTED. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS ALICIA BROWN YOUNG. I LIVE AT 1503 HALSEY DRIVE IN THE MEADOWS OF DANIEL FARMS. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT THERE FOR OVER 18 YEARS. I DO AGREE WITH ALL THE OPPOSITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SPOKEN, BUT I WANT TO GIVE YOU A FEW OF MY REASONS ON WHY CHARTER SCHOOL EXPANSION IS NOT NEEDED IN DUNCANVILLE ISD. THE EXISTING CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE UNDER-ENROLLED. DUNCANVILLE ALREADY HAS FOUR CHARTER SCHOOLS

[02:00:04]

[02:05:06]

MIGHT BE A, YOU KNOW, SLIGHT INCONVENIENCE FOR THOSE, YOU KNOW, WITH THE LIFE SCHOOL BEING THERE IN THAT LOCATION. BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WITH DUNCANVILLE BEING THE CITY OF CHAMPIONS AND, YOU KNOW, JUST A GREAT SCHOOL HERE IN DUNCANVILLE, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'VE SUPPORTED. THE OTHER THING IS BEING SO CLOSE TO DUNCANVILLE, MY THREE DAUGHTERS WHO HAVE ALL GRADUATED FROM HIGH SCHOOL AND TWO FROM COLLEGE AND ONE THIRD ONE'S ABOUT TO GO OFF TO COLLEGE, ALL WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL. THEY ALL GRADUATED FROM HIGH SCHOOL. WAXAHACHIE. AND EVEN THOUGH WE WERE SO CLOSE TO DUNCANVILLE, THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT THEY HAD THERE, DUNCANVILLE GETTING TO KNOW THE PERSONNEL THERE, THEIR MISSION STATEMENT, WHAT THEY'RE EVEN ABLE TO DO WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO US, AND THEY'VE BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL. AND I UNDERSTAND ESPECIALLY BEING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE SCHOOL IS THE TRAFFIC AND ALL THAT, IT IS AN INCONVENIENCE, BUT IT'S A SHORT TIME, YOU KNOW, FOR THAT INCONVENIENCE ONCE IT'S DONE LIFE. SCHOOL DOES A VERY GOOD JOB OF, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITIES. WHENEVER COMMUNITY THAT THEY'RE IN. THEY DO BUILD LEADERS. THEY DO DO A VERY GOOD JOB OF EDUCATING. AND THIS IS JUST A GREAT EXAMPLE OF BEING ABLE TO GIVE MORE CHOICES AND OPPORTUNITIES HERE IN THE DUNCANVILLE AREA, THE TRI-CITY AREA HERE, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE KIDS HERE. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT KIDS, JUST, YOU KNOW, IMMEDIATELY, BUT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT OUR FUTURE KIDS AND OUR FUTURE LEADERS FOR THE CITY.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JARED GILLS. I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MY MOM, YOLANDA GILLS.

WE RESIDE AT 951 FAIRWAY CIRCLE, DUNCANVILLE 75137. THE PICTURES MAPS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE WERE INADEQUATE TO ADDRESS HER CONCERNS. THEREFORE, SHE IS VOTING AGAINST THE CURRENT PROPOSED REZONING. THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS. ISSUES CONCERNS THAT SHE HAS, SHOULD AND MUST BE ADDRESSED BEFORE THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS GIVEN FURTHER CONSIDERATION, OR ALL THE NATURAL BARRIERS OF TREES AND BRUSH, INCLUDING A DRIVEWAY. IS IT GOING TO BE REMOVED ON THE COCKRELL HILL ROAD SIDE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT? WHY HAS CLEARING OF TREES AND BRUSH ALREADY BEGUN ON THE COCKRELL HILL ROAD SIDE OF THE PROJECT, INCLUDING THE DRIVEWAY THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER FROM DANIEL DALE ROAD TO COCKRELL HILL ROAD UP INTO THE AREA ACROSS FROM NICHOLS PARK. HAS A DECISION ALREADY BEEN MADE INTERNALLY TO MOVE FORWARD REGARDLESS OF THE PUBLIC'S INPUT? FURTHER, IS THERE GOING TO BE A TRAFFIC LIGHT INSTALLED ON COCKRELL HILL ROAD AROUND OR NEAR NICHOLS PARK, AND IF SO, WHAT PLANS ARE IN PLACE TO ENSURE SCHOOL DROP OFF PICK UP LINES DON'T INHIBIT THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC ON COCKRELL HILL ROAD? WILL ALL NATURAL BARRIERS THE TREES, THE SMALL CREEK REMAIN UNTOUCHED BEHIND FAIRWAY CIRCLE TOWARDS THE GOLF COURSE. I WOULD APPRECIATE YOU ALL ADDRESSING EACH OF THE SIX ITEMS MENTIONED. THANK YOU. HELLO. YOU BUILT IN 1530 HOLLY DRIVE IN DUNCANVILLE. I'LL START WITH THE MATH AIN'T MATH. AT THE LAST MEETING, THEY REPORTED THAT THE LETTERS THEY RECEIVED WAS SOME NUMBER, AND OUT OF THE LETTER THAT THEY RECEIVED, THERE WERE 119 AGAINST AND 14 IN FAVOR. THAT JUST SORT OF MATH. MATH TO ME. HOW DO YOU GET FROM THAT RATIO TO ONE THIRD VERSUS TWO THIRDS? THE OTHER ISSUE THAT COULD YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE? THE OTHER ISSUE WITH THESE FOLKS IS THEY'RE JUST NOT GOOD NEIGHBORS. THEY'RE FROM THEIR DISMISSIVE ATTITUDE TOWARD THE RESIDENTS. ON THE FIRST CALL TO NOT MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY WITHOUT FIGHTING WITH THE RESIDENTS AND THE CITY, WE SUBMITTED A REQUEST FOR WITH COMPROMISES TO MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE PALATABLE, AND THEY REJECTED IT OUTRIGHT. AND LASTLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT UNEQUIVOCALLY I OPPOSE THE ZONING CHANGE. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. MY NAME IS SHARON GRAY. I LIVE AT 503 TOWNE PLACE IN DUNCANVILLE, AND I HAVE LIVED IN DUNCANVILLE FOR SINCE

[02:10:01]

I'VE BEEN HERE 39 YEARS AND I PLAN TO LIVE HERE A LONG TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONERS, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS NOW FOR THE APPLICANT OR FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. IS THERE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? SO MOVED AT 924 SECOND. PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. MOTION PASSES. THERE. COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. BRENNAN, IF YOU. OH. IT'S UP. COULD YOU PLEASE REMIND? EXCUSE ME? IN FRONT OF YOU ARE THE OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION FOR THIS EVENING? FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. FOR THIS APPLICATION, YOU CAN APPROVE THE APPLICATION AND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT IS SUBMITTED IN FRONT OF YOU. YOU CAN APPROVE WITH CONDITION. AND I WAS I WOULD LIKE TO CONFIRM THAT IF YOU APPROVE IT OR MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL, THAT DOES INCLUDE ALL THE ELEMENTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE PD. YOU KNOW, IN THE SENSE OF THE HEIGHT, THE SETBACKS, EVERYTHING ELSE OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. SO THAT IS ALL INCORPORATED INTO THAT PLAN DEVELOPMENT. SO JUST WANTED TO INCLUDE THAT YOU CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS BASED ON PUBLIC FEEDBACK AND OBSERVATIONS AND REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION. IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO CONSIDER AS PART OF YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT, YOU CAN DO THAT. YOU MAY DENY THE APPLICATION, BUT AGAIN, FINDINGS

[02:15:07]

ALLOWING CITY COUNCIL TO HEAR THIS ON A BROADER SCOPE AND TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THINGS THAT WE ARE REALLY UNABLE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION. I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BROWNING, IS THERE A SECOND? HEARING? NO SECOND. IS THERE A DISCUSSION OR AMENDMENT? SO SORRY. HEARING NONE. MOTION DIES. MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION. I MOVE THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR ZONING REQUEST THAT WE. I RECOMMEND DENIAL. AND ON THE BASIS OF AS I REVIEW THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT. I DO NOT SEE ANY PROVISION FOR A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I HEAR NEIGHBORS ASKING FOR AND THAT I DON'T SEE IN GOVERNANCE FOR IN PARTICULAR, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ABOUT A TRAFFIC CIRCULATION OR A TMP BEING REQUIRED WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT. THE SECOND THING IS, WHILE I SEE A PROVISION RELATED TO ATHLETIC NETTING, I DO NOT SEE A PROVISION THAT DEALS WITH THE SOUND POLLUTION THAT INDIVIDUALS WITHIN WITH WITHIN THIS. AND THEN IF I HAVE A SECOND TO THAT, BASED ON THOSE FINDING OF FACTS, THEN I HAVE SOME MORE, I THINK COMMENTS THAT ARE ILLUSTRATIVE OF, OF THE MOTION THAT'S PUT BEFORE YOU. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? I SECOND THANK YOU FOR THAT SECOND, MADAM CHAIR. MY COMMENTS REALLY GO BACK TO THE FINDING OF FACT AS IT RELATES TO I DON'T SEE ANY PROVISION THAT WOULD PROTECT THESE NEIGHBORS AS IT RELATES TO THE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, WHICH IS AT THE CORE OF THIS. I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE AN UNOFFICIAL OR A OR A TRAFFIC PLAN THAT'S WITHIN HERE, BUT I DON'T SEE A REFERENCE TO THAT WITHIN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT. I THINK THAT'S QUITE IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS. AS I MENTIONED IN MY MOTION, I DO NOT SEE A PROVISION IN HERE DEALING WITH THE VOLUME, WITH SOUND EMITTING FROM FROM THOSE ATHLETIC USES. I SEE SOME PROVISIONS FOR OTHERS, BUT BUT NOT IN THE OTHERS, BUT NOT IN THESE PARTICULAR CASES.

SOMETHING STRUCK ME IN THIS IS THAT THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE BY A PUBLIC SPEAKER DISCUSSING THE VOCAL FEW VERSUS THE SILENT MAJORITY. AND I DO BELIEVE IN NEIGHBORHOOD SELF-DETERMINATION.

I DO BELIEVE THAT NEIGHBORS SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO BRING FORWARD THEIR CONCERNS. AND AS I LISTENED TO THE VOCAL FEW THAT WERE HERE TODAY, THOSE MOST IMPACTED HAD CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC. THEY HAD CONCERNS ABOUT NOISE, AND THEY HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THE OTHER ATHLETIC USES THAT WOULD PERHAPS BLEED OVER INTO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD AND MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR EGRESS AND

[02:20:01]

THERE IS A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED AS PART OF THE APPLICATION. I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S PERSUASIVE TO MY MOTION BECAUSE I DON'T RECALL ANY LINKAGES TO IT IN THE ACTUAL TEXT OF THE DOCUMENT BINDING THEM TO THAT TMP. IN SHORT TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFYING POINT, THOUGH. THAT BEING SAID, IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE. WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY. AND A SECOND, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR VOTE. DO. THE WE'RE VOTING. SO IF YOU'RE VOTING FOR YOUR APPROVAL OF THE MOTION, WHICH IS TO DENY, THAT WOULD BE THE GREEN CORRECT. IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION WOULD BE YES. AND IF YOU'RE OPPOSED TO THE MOTION TO DENY, YOU WOULD VOTE RED I MEAN NO. YES. SO THE MOTION TO DENY PASSES. THANK YOU. MOVING ON. I BELIEVE WE HAVE. ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THE

[5. Discussion of Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Frequency]

[02:25:04]

MR. KANE, WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS THE DISCUSSION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FREQUENCY. DOES THE STAFF HAVE A. REPORT? I BELIEVE THAT WE STARTED THIS DISCUSSION LAST WEEK, BUT THERE WAS A COUPLE OF OUR LAST MEETING.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT STAFF WAS WORKING ON. YES. THERE, THERE. WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS. I THINK WE ARE STILL EVALUATING BASED UPON THE CALENDAR. WE'VE RECEIVED FEEDBACK FROM MULTIPLE MULTIPLE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS OF WHAT DAYS. YOU KNOW, EVEN AFTER THE MEETING ON MAY 12TH, WE'VE HEARD SOME COMMENTS OF WHAT WE NEED FROM YOU ALL IS TO TELL US WHAT DAY WORKS BEST AS WE CONTINUE TO EVALUATE THE CALENDAR, THE CITY CALENDAR.

AGAIN, WE'VE HEARD THAT MONDAYS MAY NOT BE THE BEST FOR SOME INDIVIDUALS, NOT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION OR NOT. SO I THINK WHAT WE THE GUIDANCE THAT WE'RE SEEKING FROM YOU ALL THIS EVENING IS WHAT DAYS OF THE WEEK WORK BEST FOR THE IF WE ARE TO MAKE A CHANGE AGAIN. RIGHT NOW, THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IS ON MONDAYS, BUT IF THERE'S AN ALTERNATIVE DAY, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE HAVE HEARD SOME CONCERNS THAT THAT MONDAYS MAY NOT ALWAYS WORK FOR INDIVIDUALS AS WELL. BUT IF WE ARE, IF WE WERE TO GO TO A22 PER MONTH SCHEDULE, WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST DAY OR DAYS FOR YOU? SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU WANT EACH COMMISSIONER TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION, YES, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE WEDNESDAYS. I. I MEAN, I THINK IT'S VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO LAND ON A DATE THAT WOULD MUTUALLY SATISFY SEVEN INDIVIDUALS WITH INDIVIDUAL SCHEDULES. I KNOW A COUPLE YEARS AGO WE MADE THE DECISION TO MOVE FROM MEETING TWICE A MONTH TO MEETING ONCE A MONTH, AND I THINK THAT THAT'S PARTICULARLY HELPED. I'LL JUST FOR ME, WEDNESDAY IS NOT A GOOD DAY FOR ME. BUT BUT WHAT I WILL SAY IS, YOU KNOW, WE TRY TO MAKE WHATEVER HAPPENS. BUT I THINK THAT THIS MEETING DATE IS ESTABLISHED IN THE CITY AS THE MEETING DATE. WE JUST REDUCED THE FREQUENCY TO MATCH THE WORKLOAD WE HAD IN TERMS OF ZONING REQUESTS AND PLATS. I'LL LET COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ CAST ANY LIGHT SHOULD HE WISH ON THAT CHANGE WE MADE A COUPLE YEARS AGO. YEAH, AND I JUST CONCUR. YOU KNOW WHAT MY COLLEAGUE SAID? IT'S. I MEAN, ME, I'M FINE WITH MONDAYS. I THINK WE TRANSITION INTO MONDAYS 2 OR 3 YEARS AGO. AND THE FREQUENCY OF THE MEETINGS CAME BECAME AN ISSUE BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF CASES WE WERE GETTING. SO WE HAD TO BALANCE THOSE THINGS OUT. AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE ALL THESE CHANGES STARTED COMING INTO PLACE. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE GOT ENOUGH CASES TO MEET TWICE A MONTH. I MEAN, I'M FINE WITH MONDAYS, BUT IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO CHANGE, I'M FINE WITH THAT TOO. WELL, WASN'T THAT THE ISSUE BEFORE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING A DAY WHERE WE HAVE A SOLID MEETING AND IF ANOTHER MEETING WAS NECESSARY, THEN THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD GO TO THE MEETING IF IT WAS NECESSARY. BUT IF IT WASN'T, THAT MEETING WOULD BE CANCELED OUT BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE ENOUGH CASELOAD TO SAY, HAVE A MEETING FOR ONE CASE. AND THAT'S WHERE I THINK WE STARTED. SO THE DISCUSSION WAS TO GO TO TWICE A MONTH. THAT'S THE DISCUSSION WE HAD LAST, LAST MEETING IN MAY AND THE PRIOR MEETING AS WELL. AND WITH THE DISCUSSION TO GO TO TWICE A MONTH, THE OPPORTUNITIES BECOME WHEN DOES IT MAKE SENSE? AND WE DON'T, YOU KNOW, BUTT UP AGAINST OTHER MEETINGS. AND SO THEN THE DAY BECAME THE QUESTION. SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT WHERE WE CURRENTLY ARE. SO NOW THE QUESTION IS IF WE'RE GOING TO TWICE A MONTH WHICH DAY WORKS. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET GUIDANCE FROM YOU ALL I'M IN FAVOR OF FIRST AND THIRD MONDAYS OR WHATEVER. WHAT ARE WE WHAT ARE WE NOW? SECOND, SECOND AND FOURTH MONDAYS. WHAT DID WE START OUT AS? I DON'T REMEMBER, I THINK IT WAS FIRST TWO YEARS WE CHANGED COUNCIL MEETS FIRST TUESDAYS THE FIRST AND THIRD.

RIGHT. SO I THINK WE WERE SECOND AND FOURTH TO STAGGER THE COUNCIL AGENDA. SO IF WE'RE

[02:30:05]

ONE WEEK WE MEET ON TUESDAYS AND THEN TWO WEEKS LATER WE MEET ON THURSDAYS. SO COULD WE IT WOULD IT WORK? WHERE THE SECOND WEEK WE MET ON A MONDAY, AND THE FOURTH WEEK WE MET ON A, I DON'T KNOW, WEDNESDAY. THAT'S HARD TO TRACK, I THINK AND I THINK THE OTHER PIECE IS THAT I THINK THE PUBLIC NEEDS SOME REASONABLE ASSURANCE OF WHEN TO EXPECT THEIR PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD.

LET ME ASK A QUESTION. WHAT ARE WE SOLVING FOR? THIS WAS THIS WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE SENSE OF JUST TRYING TO MANAGE THE CASELOAD, BUT ALSO JUST AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH, WE'VE HAD SOME INSTANCES WHERE, YOU KNOW, AS WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH THE BACKLOG OF APPLICATIONS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, TRYING TO BE AS EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE FOR APPLICATIONS AND MOVING APPLICANTS THROUGH THE PROCESS. MISS O'BRIEN IS CORRECT THAT WHEN WE DID HAVE THE CONVERSATION LAST MONTH, IT IS MORE ABOUT WE WOULD HAVE A PRIMARY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IN A MONTH. BUT WE WE'VE HAD SEVERAL CHALLENGES TRYING TO CALL SPECIAL MEETINGS AND IDENTIFYING AN APPROPRIATE DATE OR TIME FOR A SPECIAL MEETING. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS. WELL, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST WONDERING, ARE WE ARE WE REACTING TO WORKING OUR WAY OUT OF SHORT STAFFING? YOU KNOW, BEING SHORT STAFFED, A BACKLOG OF ZONING REQUESTS? AND ARE WE TRYING TO PROPOSE SOMETHING THAT MAY NOT BE A PROTRACTED ISSUE AS WE WORK OUR WAY OUT OF BEING BACKLOGGED? I'M JUST I'M JUST WONDERING, BECAUSE I'M A LOT LIKE COMMISSIONER RODRIGUEZ, I WOULD HATE FOR US TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS AND THEN KIND OF END BACK UP ON NOT NECESSARILY NEEDING A SECOND MEETING IN THE MONTH. YEAH. THE OTHER THING I'LL JUST SAY IS, YOU KNOW, ONCE WE STEP OUT OF THE RHYTHM OF WHATEVER OUR COMMITTEE MEETINGS ARE, IT BECOMES HARDER TO NAIL US ALL DOWN, WHICH MAY PRESENT THIS AS A PROBLEM. BUT IF WE JUST STICK TO, I THINK, WHAT WE HAVE SCHEDULED, I THINK PEOPLE ARE GENERALLY MORE AVAILABLE. BUT THAT'S JUST MY OBSERVATION. I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD A COMMENT HERE. THE QUESTION CAME UP BEFORE ABOUT ANY KIND OF CONFLICTS TO, YOU KNOW, THE SECOND AND FOURTH MONDAY OR FIRST AND THIRD OR WHAT HAVE YOU. AND THE FOURTH MONDAY OF EVERY MONTH IS, IS NORMALLY THE WHEN THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE EDC, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETS SO THAT THAT THERE WOULD BE A CONFLICT RIGHT THERE WITH WITH THAT FOURTH MONDAY. I REALLY THINK THIS IS JUST ME. I REALLY THINK THAT BASED ON THE VOLUME, BASED ON HAVING NEW STAFF IN PLACE, WHAT I WOULD JUST SEE, WHY DON'T WE JUST REALLY KIND OF MADE THIS CHANGE. I'M JUST WONDERING, ARE WE JUST GOING THROUGH A TEMPORARY PHASE OF SCHEDULING AND BACKLOG? THAT'S WHAT I'M JUST WONDERING. STAFF, DO YOU HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE HAD A SPECIAL MEETING LIKE IN THE LAST, I DON'T KNOW, THREE MONTHS, SIX MONTHS OR ATTEMPTED? MAYBE WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SCHEDULE ONE, BUT WE ATTEMPTED TO CALL A SPECIAL MEETING BECAUSE THERE WAS A NEED, I WOULD SAY, WHEN OLSON WAS BROUGHT ON BOARD TO SUPPORT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WE DID HAVE IN IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR. WE DID TRY COORDINATING TO, I THINK, SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS BECAUSE OF EXISTING. THE APPLICATIONS THAT YOU HAD IN FRONT OF YOU THIS EVENING WERE ALL THE WAY BACK TO MARCH. AND BY THE TIME THAT WE WERE TRYING TO COORDINATE SPECIAL MEETINGS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, WE WERE WE WERE MISSING THE DEADLINES FOR PROPER NOTIFICATION AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO FROM THE SHORT TIME PERIOD THAT OLSON'S BEEN HERE, I THINK WE TRIED COORDINATING OR SCHEDULING TWO SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS. YOU KNOW, ON TOP FOR THAT, THAT ALSO JUST FOR SOME ADDITIONAL TRAINING AS WELL. SO I'M GOING TO SAY I'M PARTIAL NEUTRAL IN THIS IN THE SENSE OF WHAT IS BEST FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AGAIN, WE'RE HERE TO SUPPORT THE STAFF AND EVERYTHING ELSE AS WE GO THROUGH THIS. IF THE DIRECTION, I WOULD SAY, AND I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER OR THE ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR, BUT IF IT'S TO MAINTAIN ONE MEETING AND MAYBE THERE'S AN INDICATION OF WHAT A SPECIAL DATE WOULD BE IF WE NEEDED TO CALL ONE, MAYBE THAT'S THE ROUTE WE NEED TO GO, BUT. I'VE, I'VE ALWAYS SORT OF MAINTAINED THAT I DIDN'T REALLY SEE THE NEED FOR TWO MEETINGS. SO I'M I'M HAPPY GOING STAYING WITH ONE. AND I DO LIKE YOUR IDEA OF MAYBE A, YOU KNOW, AN IDEA THAT CAME TO ME WAS EVERY

[02:35:04]

YOU KNOW, AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY GET THEIR PAPERWORK IN AND THEY GET TOLD, OKAY, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, YOUR CASE WILL COME, COME TO THE P AND Z IN FOUR WEEKS, YOU KNOW, AND IT WE'VE HEARD SOME FEEDBACK THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE A QUICKER TURNAROUND. BUT BUT I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE'RE HEARING TONIGHT TO, YOU KNOW, SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S NOT A PERFECT SOLUTION TONIGHT, BUT WE AT LEAST WANTED TO JUST HAVE THE CONVERSATION WITH YOU ALL AND JUST KIND OF EXPLORE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES TO SEE HOW WE CAN WE CAN ADDRESS SOME OF THESE, THESE NEEDS. SO I'M NOT SURE, STAFF, THAT WE HELPED YOU MOVE FORWARD ON THIS. AT ALL. LEAVE IT TO SHEILA AND TO MARK. WE WILL COME BACK IF WE ARE LOOKING AT A CHANGE. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE RIGHT NOW WE'LL MAINTAIN THE ONE MEETING IN A MONTH AND THEN CONTINUE TO EVALUATE IT. IS WHAT I'M HEARING OKAY, OKAY. MOVING

[6. Discussion and Update to City of Duncanville Comprehensive Plan]

GOOD AFTERNOON. CHAIR. COMMISSIONERS. CURRENTLY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE ARE PLANNING TO DO THE JULY 27TH BLOCK PARTY. WE'RE STILL TAKING IN NEW INFORMATION WE'RE GETTING WITH OUR THIRD PARTY, WHICH IS M WHAT'S THE NAME OF IT? I BELIEVE IT'S MBR. AND SO THEY STILL WORKING IN THE BACKGROUND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE EVERYTHING READY FOR THE COMP PLAN. EVERYBODY. IT'LL BE ALL THE DIFFERENT COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS FOR JULY 22ND FOR THE COMP PLAN. ALSO, THERE WILL BE A STEERING MEETING IN JULY ON JULY 8TH FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AS OF RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, WE'RE STILL WORKING ON ALL THE DETAILS OF THAT. IT'S NO REAL BIG CHANGES THAT HAS COME APART. WE WON'T BE GETTING THE FIRST DRAFT. WELL, WE SHOULD BE GETTING IT HERE IN THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO. AND SO ONCE WE GET THAT, EVERYBODY WILL GET A COPY OF THAT, AND THEN THEY WILL HAVE A PERIOD OF TIME IN ORDER TO MAKE ANY CHANGES OR SUGGESTIONS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE BEFORE JULY 8TH. AND SO THAT'S ALL WE HAVE RIGHT NOW FOR THE COMP PLAN. SO DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS COMMISSIONERS. NO QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU ALL. LOOKS LIKE WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. MOTION TO APPROVE. CAN I SAY IT. ADJOURNED AT ALL IN FAVOR. ALL IN

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.