[00:00:16]
WELCOME EACH OF YOU TO THE. JULY THE 13TH, 2026 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION. IF WE'LL HAVE A ROLL CALL TO ENSURE. QUORUM, PLEASE. YES, MA'AM. MISS DOROTHY? YES, MISS. CHAMPAGNE. PRESENT, MR. SALAZAR. I'M HERE, MISS WIN. MISS O'BRIEN HERE. MR. RODRIGUEZ, HERE. WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK. HAVE ANYONE WHO HAS A. COMMENT OR ANYTHING ON SOMETHING THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA FOR TODAY? ITEM THAT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA.
I HEAR. WE WILL GO. AND TO THE APPROVAL OF THE. LET'S SEE. I THINK WE HAVE TWO. OF THE MINUTES FROM WAS THAT MONDAY, APRIL THE 13TH, 2026 AND THE MINUTES FROM EXCUSE ME. WE'LL JUST DO ONE AT A TIME. WE WILL ASK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM. GO AHEAD FROM MONDAY, APRIL THE 13TH, 2026, UNLESS THERE ARE SOME CORRECTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR APRIL 2ND. WE HAVE A MOTION THAT'S BEEN APPROVED. THOSE MINUTES. APPROVED WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE OF THE COMMISSIONERS. COULD I HAVE A VOTE ON THAT, PLEASE? OKAY. THANK YOU. THE BY VOTE. THOSE MINUTES HAVE BEEN APPROVED. NOW WE'LL ASK FOR I'LL ASK FOR A MOTION TO MINUTES FROM MAY OF 2026. OH.
I'M SORRY, HAVE A MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND MOTION THAT HAS BEEN. NOW IF I COULD HAVE A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THAT MOTION. ON THAT MOTION, PLEASE. THANK YOU. THAT MOTION HAS BEEN VOTED. AT THIS TIME. IF STAFF. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSIONERS. DESIREE POWELL, CITY PLANNER, PRESENTING ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF, THIS IS PLATT DASH 20260025. CONSIDER A PUBLIC HEARING AND REQUEST FROM KEVIN SHEPHERD, APPLICANT, AGENT AND MONTY ANDERSON, OWNER, TO SPLIT ONE LOT INTO TWO LOTS ON REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 402 EAST WHEATLAND ROAD. LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT ONE, BLOCK A AND ABANDONED ALLEY. WHEATLAND PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER ON 7.501 ACRES AND THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO DIVIDE THE LOT INTO TWO LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION. RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON THE NEW LOT. THE CURRENT ZONING IS PD 2535 R OR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 2535 R AND THE CURRENT SETBACKS AS OF APRIL 2026 ARE A TEN FOOT MINIMUM IN THE FRONT, A FIVE FOOT MINIMUM ON THE SIDE AND A TEN FOOT MINIMUM ON THE REAR. THIS IS THE CURRENT ZONING MAP OF THAT PROPERTY. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS DOWNTOWN DISTRICT AND THIS IS A PROPERTY OWNER BUFFER OF ALL THE ALL THE OWNERS THAT WE NOTIFIED. THERE'S ALSO A LIST IN YOUR PACKET. AND THEN JUST AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY AND WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE GROUND. AND THEN THIS IS THE PROPOSED REPLAT. SO STAFF ANALYSIS, THIS REPORT WAS DENIED ORIGINALLY IN FEBRUARY AS IT DID NOT MEET THE SETBACKS WITHIN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT. AND SO IT HAD TO COME BACK ONCE THE PD WAS
[00:05:04]
AMENDED, TO ALLOW THESE NEW SETBACKS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON THE NEW LOT. LIKE I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE SETBACKS WERE AMENDED AND APPROVED IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR BY CITY COUNCIL. WE DID HAVE CONCERNS FOR THE NEW LOT, LOT ONE R THAT IT DID NOT TOUCH WHEATLAND AT THE TIME, AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS. AT THIS TIME. THE APPLICANT HAS ADDRESSED THAT. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF HAD POSED CONCERNS OF THE THE STANDARD OF THE THE FIRE LANE THAT IT. MEETING CURRENT FIRE CODE REGULATIONS. THE APPLICANT ALSO ADDRESSED THAT PRIOR TO. WE'VE SENT OUT 52 NOTICES, ZERO RESPONDED IN SUPPORT, ONE RESPONDED IN OPPOSITION AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PLAT AS PRESENTED. DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? ALL RIGHT. IF YOU HAVE ANY. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? IS THE APPLICANT HERE IN REGARDS TO THIS AND WANT TO SPEAK? GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. KEVIN SHEPHERD WITH VIRGINITY. I'M THE OWNERS REP. COULD I GET YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE, SIR? WE'RE AT 544. WE'RE AT WHEATLAND PLAZA. I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, AS MISS POWELL SAID, WE HAVE ADDRESSED ALL OF THE COMMENTS. OUR UNDERSTANDING IS BECAUSE THOSE CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MET THAT THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO APPROVE THIS PER LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. SO WE'RE NOT REALLY EXPECTING TOO MUCH DEBATE ON THIS, ALTHOUGH I WILL I WILL OFFER FROM MR. ANDERSON'S PERSPECTIVE THAT WE HAVE ALWAYS TRIED TO HEAR THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS, TALK WITH STAFF. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS, ABOUT THIS PROJECT, BUT I'M ALSO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM A TECHNICAL PERSPECTIVE, IF YOU HAVE ANY, AND WHAT WE'LL WHAT WE'LL DO NOW, SINCE THEY'VE BOTH PRESENTED, YOU'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO WE'LL MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'LL ASK THE QUESTIONS FROM THE APPLICANT OR THE STAFF. YEAH.COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE HEARING TO THE PUBLIC? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I'LL SECOND WHAT YOU NOW VOTE, PLEASE. OKAY. AND IT IS NOW 712. THE MEETING IS NOT OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE AGENDA? WOULD YOU COME FORWARD, PLEASE? PATRICIA EBER 115 SOUTH GREEN STONE. I WOULD JUST LIKE GUIDANCE ON THE ROLE THAT KEVIN SHEPHERD IS PLAYING TO REPRESENT THE APPLICANT, THE OWNER, MONTE ANDERSON, BECAUSE KEVIN SHEPHERD IS A CONSULTANT PAID BY THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, WHO IS REWRITING THE PLANNING, THE PLANNING ORDINANCES FOR THE NEXT 24 MONTHS AT ABOUT 150 000KA YEAR. WE'RE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO WE'LL WE'LL GET. YEAH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE AGENDA? SEEING NO OTHERS IS NOW. 713 COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, THAT MOTION. IF YOU WOULD VOTE FOR COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED AT 713. STAFF, COULD YOU GIVE US SOME CLARITY ON THAT PARTICULAR QUESTION? SO AS FAR AS I KNOW, WE HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT MR. SHEPHERD AND HIS FIRM WORKING WITH PLANNING. AS FAR AS SELECTION FOR THIS, HE CAN PROBABLY SPEAK BETTER TO IT, BUT AS FAR AS LIKE HIS ROLE, HE IS THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE. SO HE PRESENTED ALL THE THINGS ON BEHALF OF THERE, THE ENGINEERING. AND SO HE WAS ACTING ON BEHALF OF BASICALLY AS HIS AUTHORIZED AGENT. SO THAT'S AS FAR AS I CAN SPEAK OF FROM THE STAFF SIDE. WE HAVE NOT SUBMITTED ANYTHING TO THE CITY OR HAVE ANY CONTRACT TO DO ANYTHING OF THE CODE NATURE. THIS IS PURELY JUST REPRESENTING MR. ANDERSON ON HIS PROPERTY. ALL RIGHT. TIME. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ITEM ON THE AGENDA. NONE. JUST FOR THE RECORD, JUST TO MAKE SURE. DOES IT MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARD?
[00:10:11]
YES, MA'AM. SO BY THE THE MINIMUM STANDARD SO THAT THOSE ARE SET BY THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT.SO THEY ARE IRREGULAR THAN OUR NORMAL. SO THEY DO MEET THE MINIMUM SETBACKS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. 2535 ARE OKAY. STAFF AT THIS TIME I WOULD CALL FOR ON THIS ON THE THE.
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. WE MAKE A MOTION. I'M SORRY, I REALLY WAS WONDERING WAS WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS ANY MORE COMMENTS. FIRST, BEFORE I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, IS THERE ANY ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY COMMENTS BEFORE I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION? AT THIS TIME, I I'M CALLING FOR A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS PARTICULAR PLOT FOR STAFF APPROVAL. DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR THAT APPROVAL? MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS PLOT BASED UPON STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND. COMMISSIONERS.
PLEASE VOTE. THANK YOU. THE MOTION THAT MOTION HAS BEEN APPROVED. STAFF, GO TO THE NEXT ITEM, PLEASE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS. THE NEXT ITEM IS IT'S A CONJUNCTION WITH THIS ONE AND THE NEXT ONE, BUT WE'LL JUST RUN THEM SEPARATELY. IS THAT OKAY? YES. OKAY. IT'S THE SAME ADDRESS IS WHAT I MEANT TO SAY. SO THIS IS PLATT DASH 202600020. CONSIDER A PUBLIC HEARING AND REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FROM JAMES CARTWRIGHT, APPLICANT AND OWNER, FOR AN UNPLATTED PARCEL ON REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 400 EAST CENTER STREET. LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS AMG MERRILL. ABSTRACT 884, PAGE 106. TRACK 15 ON 0.26 ACRES. CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST? THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO RECORD AN UNPLATTED PARCEL FOR FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE CURRENT ZONING IS TF7 OR DUPLEX, AND THEN THE PROPERTY WAS APPROVED AND REZONED IN 2025. ADDITIONALLY, ADDITIONALLY TO THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST, THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW IS IN AN ABSTRACT. SO IT'S NEVER BEEN RECORDED WITH THE DALLAS CENTRAL APPRAISAL DISTRICT, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE HERE. THIS IS THE FIRST STEP BEFORE THEY CAN START ANY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT POOLING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT FOR THE PROPOSED USE OF DUPLEXES. SO THIS IS THE CURRENT ZONING MAP AGAIN TF7. IT WAS RECENTLY APPROVED LAST YEAR. AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL. SO STAFF'S FINDINGS ARE. THE CURRENT LOT DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR TF7.
LIKE I MENTIONED, THIS IS THE FIRST STEP IN THE PROCESS TO DEVELOP THE DUPLEXES AS WELL AS GET PERMITS, TAPS, WATER, SEWER, THAT KIND OF THING. THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED IN MARCH OF 2026. THE APPLICANT DID REQUEST A 30 DAY EXTENSION AT THE BEGINNING TO PROPERLY ADDRESS STAFF'S COMMENTS. FOLLOWING THAT, HE DID ASK FOR A HE WAS NOT GOING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS FOR 90 DAYS. WE TRIED TO REACH OUT TO HIM TO SEE IF WHAT THE STATUS OF THAT WAS. NO REVISIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED SINCE MARCH OF 2026 BY HOUSE BILL 3167, OR HB. HB 3167.
STAFF IS REQUIRED TO MAKE A DECISION OR MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL WITHIN THAT 30 DAY TIME PERIOD AND WITHIN AN EXTENSION. SO THIS IS THE THE THE PLAT THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED. THESE ARE STAFF'S COMMENTS. JUST TO GIVE AN IDEA OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE ADDRESSING, SOME OF THEM MINOR, SOME OF THEM MAJOR. THERE IS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE. AND THEN THIS IS GOING TO TURN INTO A DUPLEX. AND SO JUST JUST WANTED YOU TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT WE WERE ASKING. THESE ARE THE DIMENSIONAL STANDARD REQUIREMENTS FOR TF7. AND JUST AN AERIAL VIEW OVER THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED CENTER AND FREEMAN. AND THEN THE PROPERTY OWNER BUFFER MAP. SO WE SENT OUT 23 MAILERS, ZERO RESPONDED IN SUPPORT, ZERO RESPONDED IN OPPOSITION AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST DUE TO IT NOT MEETING THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR TF7. AND THESE ARE YOUR OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU STAFF. YES, MA'AM. IS THE APPLICANT HERE TO SPEAK? HE IS NOT ALL RIGHT. IT IS 719. COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE HEARING TO THE PUBLIC, PLEASE? LIKE MAKE A MOTION OPEN PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, IF YOU STAFF IF COMMISSIONERS WOULD VOTE ON THAT, PLEASE. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO'S WANTING
[00:15:16]
OR FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE AGENDA TODAY? IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM SEEING THERE ARE NONE. IF I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC ITEM, PLEASE MOTION TO CLOSE. SECOND, WE WILL VOTE. COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU. IT'S 720. THE. PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS FOR OR ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF IN REGARDS TO THEIR RECOMMENDATION? COMMISSIONERS. I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THE APPLICANT NEVER RESPONDED BACK IN REGARD TO THE STAFF COMMENTS. YOU NEVER. SO HE HE DID IT ORIGINALLY. HE RESPONDED THAT HE NEEDED MORE TIME. AND SO HE WAS SHOPPING SOME DIFFERENT SURVEYING COMPANIES TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS. ALL OF THEM HAD ABOUT A 90 DAY TIME FRAME. SO HE DID REQUEST ONE EXTENSION. WE REACHED OUT TO HIM IF FOR AN ADDITIONAL ONE TO KIND OF KEEP US IN THAT TIME FRAME BECAUSE WE CAN, YOU KNOW, KIND OF KEEP REVIEWING IT AS LONG AS WE HAVE AN EXTENSION, WE DIDN'T GET ANYTHING. AND SO WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN ACTUALLY ANY REVISIONS FROM THE FIRST SET THAT WE SENT OUT IN MARCH. NO PROBLEM. I'D LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF BY DENYING THIS APPLICATION FOR REPLATTING.COULD I HAVE A MOTION ON THIS PARTICULAR RECOMMENDATION, PLEASE? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR DENIAL AS WELL. I SECOND THAT, COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU VOTE, PLEASE. THE MOTION TO DENY THIS REPLATTING HAS BEEN VOTED UNANIMOUSLY. STAFF, IF WE COULD GO TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE. YES, MA'AM. SO THIS IS THE COUNTER ITEM OR ADDITIONAL ITEM TO THE PREVIOUS ONE. SO THIS IS FOR THE FINAL PLAT FOR THE SAME PROPERTY. SO PLAT DASH 2026-00021. CONSIDER A PUBLIC HEARING AND REQUEST FOR A FINAL PLAT FROM JAMES CARTWRIGHT, APPLICANT OWNER FOR AN UNPLATTED PARCEL ON REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 400 EAST CENTER STREET. LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS AMG MURAL. ABSTRACT 884. PAGE 106. TRACK 15 ON 0.26 ACRES. CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. SO, SAME AS THE PREVIOUS CASE, THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING THESE CONCURRENTLY BECAUSE THE PARCEL HAD NEVER BEEN PLATTED AND IT IS STILL EARLY. IN AN ABSTRACT. THE CURRENT ZONING IS TF7 AGAIN APPROVED IN 2025 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF DUPLEXES AT THIS PROPERTY. THE CURRENT ZONING MAP AGAIN TF7 FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION. TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL. SAME THING. SINCE HE'S SUBMITTED THEM CONCURRENTLY, WE HAVE TO DENY THEM CONCURRENTLY. BOTH ARE REQUIRED BECAUSE OF THE THE USE AND SO STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDED. DENIAL OF THE FINAL PLAT AS PRESENTED. SAME THING. HE REQUESTED AN EXTENSION FOR 30 DAYS. WE DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING. SO NOW WE'RE ABOUT AT 120 DAYS, GIVE OR TAKE. AND SO WITHIN THAT, THE RAMIFICATIONS OF HB 3167, WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION NOW. DENIAL JUST IT'S NOT MEETING THE MINIMUM SETBACKS FOR TF7. SO AGAIN, THE SAME PLOT, THE SAME REVISIONS, THE DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR TF7 AERIAL PROPERTY OWNER. SO WE SENT OUT 23 MAILERS FOR THIS ONE AS WELL.
ZERO RESPONDED IN SUPPORT AND ZERO RESPONDED IN OPPOSITION. AND THEN STAFF RECOMMENDED RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE FINAL PLAT REQUEST AND THEN YOUR OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION. DO I HAVE TO DO THAT ALL OVER AGAIN SINCE HE'S NOT HERE? OH. AND THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE. NO, MA'AM. ALL RIGHT. IT IS. 724. COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? I MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN SECOND COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU WILL VOTE, PLEASE. OH. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE HERE NOW WANTING TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE AGENDA?
[00:20:08]
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA? SEEING THERE ARE NONE AT 724, COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. SECOND, THE COMMISSIONERS WILL VOTE PLEASE. OKAY. 725 THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. I'M RECOMMENDING THAT WE NOW DENY THIS REPLAT ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE AGENDA. MAY I HAVE A MOTION ON MY RECOMMENDATION? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION OR DENY THE PLAT BASED UPON STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. I SECOND OF COMMISSIONERS WOULD VOTE PLEASE.THANK YOU. THAT MOTION HAS BEEN APPROVED TO DENY. STAFF. OH EVERY TIME. SORRY. THIS IS OUR LAST ITEM. SO THIS IS FOR ZONE DASH 2026-00016. CONSIDER A PUBLIC HEARING AND REQUEST FROM DANIEL LOZANO, APPLICANT AND OWNER, FOR A ZONING CHANGE FROM LOCAL OFFICE, RETAIL LAW TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 21 MF 21 ON REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1435 CANDLELIGHT AVENUE. LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS BLOCK L, LOT ONE CANDLELIGHT ESTATES THIRD INSTALLMENT ON 1.2 ACRES. CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A ZONING CHANGE FROM LOCAL OFFICE, RETAIL OR LOR TO MULTIFAMILY 21 OR MF 21. THE APPLICANT DID APPROVE PROPOSE THIS ABOUT A MONTH OR TWO AGO, AND SO THIS TIME HE IS PROPOSING 21 UNITS CONDOMINIUM SLASH TOWNHOMES INSTEAD OF 23. THEY WILL BE 23 OR 23 STORIES.
THEY WILL BE THREE STORIES WITH THE MINIMUM UNIT SIZE OF A LITTLE BIT OVER 1500FTā !S. AGAI, THE CURRENT ZONING IS LOCAL OFFICE RETAIL, WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW FOR MULTIFAMILY AT ALL.
AND SO HE IS WANTING TO CHANGE TO MF 21 OR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 21. THIS IS JUST CURRENT ZONING MAP OF THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED BETWEEN CANDLELIGHT AND DANIEL DALE.
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IS GATEWAY CORRIDOR. AND SO FOR STAFF'S FINDINGS, THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE DOES ALIGN WITH THE INTENTIONS OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION OF GATEWAY CORRIDOR. IT IS MEETING THAT MINIMUM LOT SIZE. THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ZONING CHANGE ITSELF, AS WELL AS THE MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. THAT WAS A CHALLENGE THAT STAFF OR CONCERNED THAT STAFF PRESENTED IN HIS PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL, ALONG WITH THE NUMBER OF UNITS, STAFF HAS ALSO INFORMED THE APPLICANT THAT PROPER DRAINAGE AND OTHER UTILITY SERVICES MAY NEED TO BE EXPANDED AND OR UPGRADED. IF THIS IS APPROVED.
IN ORDER TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CAPACITY OF ALL THE UNITS HE'S PROPOSING. AND THESE ARE A SNAPSHOT OF THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR MF 21. SO THE LOT SIZE DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, LOT LOT DIFF SETBACK, THE FRONT SIDE AND THE INTERIOR. THIS IS FROM THE APPLICANT'S ZONING EXHIBIT SHOWING THE WHAT'S CURRENTLY REQUIRED FOR LOCAL OFFICE RETAIL AND THIS COLUMN.
AND THEN WHAT HE'S PROPOSING FOR MF 21. SO IT BREAKS DOWN THIS NUMBER. THE SIZE OF THE UNITS HEIGHT, BUILDING COVERAGE OR LOT COVERAGE, AS WELL AS THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES, GARAGES AND THE ADDITIONAL GUEST PARKING SPOTS. THIS IS THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN. AND THESE ARE MINOR STAFF REVISIONS, BASICALLY JUST ASKING FOR SOME CLERICAL CHANGES, SOME LANGUAGE CHANGES, THINGS THAT ARE NOT MAJOR TO WHERE IT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU IF IT IS RECOMMENDED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. AND THEN SO THESE ARE THE ZONING CONSIDERATIONS THAT WE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHETHER THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE IMPLEMENTS THE POLICIES OF THE ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHETHER THE USES ALLOWED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA CONCERNED, AND THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE GENERAL AREA AND THE CITY AS A WHOLE. WHETHER THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY EXISTING OR PROPOSED PLANS FOR PROVIDING PUBLIC SCHOOLS, STREET STREETS, WATER SUPPLY, SANITARY SEWERS AND OTHER UTILITIES TO THE AREA. THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT, ABSORPTION OR REDEVELOPMENT RATE OF VACANT OR UNDERUTILIZED LAND CURRENTLY CLASSIFIED FOR SIMILAR DEVELOPMENT IN THE VICINITY AND ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY, AND ANY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE WHICH MAY MAKE A SUBMITTAL PART OF SUCH VACANT LAND UNAVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT, AND HOW OTHER AREAS DESIGNATED FOR SIMILAR DEVELOPMENT WILL BE, OR ARE UNLIKELY TO BE AFFECTED IF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS APPROVED, AND WHETHER SUCH DESIGNATION FOR OTHER AREAS SHOULD BE MODIFIED ALSO, AND ANY OTHER FACTORS WHICH SUSTAINABLY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS OR GENERAL WELFARE. OH MAN, THAT'S A LOT.
JUST A REVIEW OF THE PROPERTY AGAIN. CANDLELIGHT AND DANIEL DANIEL DANIEL DALE, PROPERTY OWNER, BUFFER MAP. THERE'S ALSO A LIST OF ALL THE OWNERS THAT WE MAILED OUT TO. WE SENT OUT
[00:25:01]
13 MAILERS, ZERO RESPONDED IN SUPPORT. ONE RESPONDED IN OPPOSITION STAFF DOES RECOMMEND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CHANGE CONTINGENT UPON THE APPLICANT ADDRESSING THE MINOR STAFF REVISIONS AS SHOWN BEFORE FINAL DECISION APPROVAL OR DENIAL OR APPROVAL CONDITIONS BY CITY COUNCIL AND THEN YOUR OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS? YES, I HAVE A QUESTION. SURE.THE YOU TOLD ME WHERE IS THE STAFF? I MEAN, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? HE IS NOT. OKAY. SO WE'RE GONNA WE'RE GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, THEN CLOSE IT AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK FOR QUESTIONS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IT'S NOW 730. COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE? MAKE A MOTION TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING. A SECOND. WE'LL VOTE. AREN'T. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN AT 730. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? GOOD EVENING, EMILY BRIDGES 418. OLEANDER 75137. I AM A COUPLE OF BLOCKS FROM THIS PROPOSED TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT. I'VE LIVED THERE ALMOST 20 YEARS.
OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS ALREADY EXTREMELY CONGESTED, DIRECTLY ACROSS. WELL, FIRST, IF YOU GO BACK A COUPLE OF SLIDES AND IT SHOWS THE MAILINGS, NONE OF THOSE ARE HOMES. THOSE ARE ALL BUSINESSES. SO OF COURSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO RESPOND BECAUSE IT DOESN'T AFFECT THEM AS IT WOULD US. SO THERE'S AN APARTMENT COMPLEX DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET AND IT'S NOT FULLY OCCUPIED. THEY'RE THIS TOWNHOME WOULD BE POINTED AT THE BACK OF A VERY RUNDOWN SHOPPING CENTER THAT IS RIDDLED WITH LITTER AT ALL TIMES. IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO A CAR WASH BY THE MAIN ROAD. IT'S NOT CONDUCIVE TO LIKE EVERY OTHER TOWNHOME THAT'S IN DUNCANVILLE. THERE'S ONE ON MERRILL, THERE'S ONE ON GREYSTONE THERE, THEY'RE ALL AUSTIN STONE. THEY'RE ALL OVER THE PLACE. THEY'RE NOT IN THESE TYPES OF AREAS. ANOTHER THING IS, AND I'VE ALREADY SPOKE ON THIS AT COUNCIL BEFORE, DO I HAVE A TIME LIMIT? YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES. OKAY. SO I'LL JUST TOUCH ON SOME OF THE THINGS I DID PREVIOUSLY, WHICH WAS INCREASE CONGESTION. THIS LOOKS GOOD ON PAPER. IF YOU GO TO THE AREA, YOU WILL SEE WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH OVER THERE. IT'S AROUND A BEND. APARTMENT TRAFFIC IS PARKED ON THE STREET AT ALL TIMES. IT'S ALREADY DIFFICULT TO GET THROUGH THERE. IT'S ALSO OUR WATER RUNOFF, YOU KNOW? SO WHENEVER THERE'S RAIN, THANK GOODNESS FOR THE FIELD BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY RUNNING OFF. BUT IF YOU FILL IT WITH A BUNCH OF CONCRETE, IT'S GOING TO GET WORSE ON OUR CORRIDORS. I'LL SAY, OKAY, SO CONGESTION VISIBILITY CONCERNS IN AN AREA THAT'S ALREADY IMPACTED BY HEAVY TRAFFIC, OVERDEVELOPMENT OF A SMALL PARCEL, CONCERNS ABOUT WHETHER MORE APARTMENTS ARE EVEN NECESSARY IN THIS AREA, AND THE TOWNHOMES THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN DUNCANVILLE AREN'T BEING SOLD FOR ANYTHING CLOSE TO WHAT THE. THESE ARE PROPOSED SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 275 AND 325 HOMES ON A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AREN'T SELLING FOR THAT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, SO I'M. I DON'T REALLY THINK IT'S CONDUCIVE TO THIS AREA. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE THE PUBLIC THAT WANTS TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE AGENDA? OKAY. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS BETTY TAYLOR. I'M LOCATED AT 422 OLEANDER STREET, DUNCANVILLE, TEXAS. I'M TO THE. YEAH. COULDN'T HEAR YOU. WELL, THERE YOU GO. YOU NEED ME TO REPEAT, START OVER WITH MY NAME AND ADDRESS. OKAY? PLEASE. OKAY. MY NAME IS BETTY TAYLOR. I'M LOCATED AT 422 OLEANDER STREET, DUNCANVILLE, TEXAS. I WOULD LIKE TO SOMEWHAT MIMIC SOME OF THE THINGS THAT SHE JUST STATED BY THESE CONDOMINIUMS OR TOWNHOMES. WHATEVER HE'S PROPOSING, BEING DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THESE APARTMENTS, YOU CAN BARELY GET DOWN THE STREET NOW. AND JUST THINK, IF YOU BUILD 21 CONDOS ON A LITTLE OVER AN ACRE, TWO CARS PER HOME, OR AT LEAST ONE, WHERE WOULD THE PARKING BE? WE CAN BARELY GET DOWN THE STREETS AS IT IS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT MAKES IT KIND OF DANGEROUS AS IT IS, BECAUSE YOU HAVE KIDS DARTING IN BETWEEN ALL OF THE ALREADY PARKED CARS THAT ARE OUT ON THE STREETS, AND IT'S ALREADY MAKING IT HARD FOR US AS RESIDENTS. IT'S A VERY, VERY CONGESTED AREA. SO I JUST ASK THAT YOU ALL PLEASE CONSIDER NOT APPROVING SUCH FOR THIS TO COME FORTH IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS
[00:30:06]
BECAUSE IT'S REALLY, REALLY CONGESTED. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE MAP JUST REALLY GIVES YOU GUYS A CLEARER VISUAL OF WHAT IS CURRENTLY WHAT IT REALLY, REALLY LOOKS LIKE FOR US AS RESIDENTS TO TRY TO GET DOWN THE STREETS. BECAUSE WHEN YOU TURN AROUND THAT CORNER THERE, YOU REALLY, REALLY BETTER BE CAREFUL BECAUSE YOU CAN'T EVEN SEE AS IT IS. SO I JUST THINK IT'S A DANGEROUS THING FOR ANY MORE CARS TO BE PARKED, BECAUSE THEN THAT TURNS INTO A SINGLE LANE OF TRAFFIC BEING ABLE TO GET THROUGH BECAUSE A LITTLE OVER ONE ACRE CANNOT ACCOMPANY 21 VEHICLES ALONG WITH THAT AMOUNT OF HOUSING. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YOU'RE WELCOME. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? MY NAME IS MAE DE LA ROSA. I LIVE AT 1107 ROCK SPRINGS ROAD. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS A GUIDE. IT'S A VISION OF WHAT THE COUNCIL HAS FOR THE FUTURE OF DUNCANVILLE. IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT. YOUR JOB IS TO BRING THAT VISION TO LIFE. ALL THINGS CONSIDERED. THE LAWYER IN YOUR BRIEFING PREVIOUSLY GAVE A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE WHEN HE TALKED ABOUT MCDONALD'S AND HOW THAT AFFECTS THE THE RESIDENTS AROUND IT. THAT'S WHAT I MEAN BY TAKING ALL THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION. WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR DECISIONS ON HOW YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE, YOUR VOTES ARE INSTRUMENTAL IN SHAPING THAT VISION. IF YOU CONSISTENTLY VOTE IN A WAY THAT SUPPORTS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, TAKING ALL THINGS INTO CONSIDERATION, IT SENDS A MESSAGE TO DEVELOPERS OF WHAT THEY NEED TO BRING TO YOU TO BE APPROVED. OTHERWISE, THEY WILL CONTINUE TO APPLY FOR PROJECTS THAT MEET THEIR GOALS EXCLUSIVELY. I ENCOURAGE YOU TO USE CRITICAL THINKING AS YOU CONSIDER THE WAY THIS PROJECT WILL AFFECT THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE AND THE NEIGHBORS IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING. SORRY, I'M IN FAVOR OF DENYING THIS ZONING CHANGE, PRIMARILY BECAUSE THE EXISTING ZONING SHOULD REASONABLY BE KEPT THE WAY IT IS. THERE'S A LOT OF HIGH DENSITY AROUND THERE ALREADY, TWO APARTMENT COMPLEXES, AND YOU KNOW THAT SHOPPING CENTER. SO THERE'S ALREADY HIGH DENSITY. AND TWO PEOPLE BEFORE ME HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN ABOUT THE PROBLEMS THAT THAT CAUSES FOR PARKING IN THE STREET ALREADY. I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THAT. WHAT THOSE PEOPLE NEED IN THAT HIGH DENSITY AREA, THEY NEED MORE PLACES TO SHOP. THEY NEED MORE PLACES TO HAVE THEIR BUSINESS. THEY NEED MORE PLACES TO EAT.THEY NEED MORE PLACES TO ENTERTAIN THEMSELVES ON THE WEEKEND, KEEP THAT ZONING IN PLACE. THAT'S REALLY WHAT THEY NEED. THAT AREA DOES NOT NEED MORE HIGH DENSITY. WE DO NEED MORE HIGH DENSITY IN THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE IN OTHER PLACES OF THE CITY. NOT RIGHT HERE ON THAT LOT. I THINK THAT'S IT. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S IT. ONE MORE THING. WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THEIR CONCEPTUAL PLAN, IT'S DECEIVING. TINY, TINY, TINY DRIVEWAYS, 24 POINT TURNS TO GET INTO YOUR DRIVEWAY. ONLY FIVE GUEST PARKING SPOTS FOR 21 TOWNHOMES DON'T MAKE ANY SENSE.
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE. I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. I PROVOKED COMMISSIONERS. BECAUSE I SAW, I READ. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. IT'S 738. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? I DO WELL, I THINK I TEND TO AGREE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE THIS ORIGINALLY WAS PART OF THE GATEWAY CORRIDOR FOR THE CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, AND IT WAS ACTUALLY CREATED FOR A PURPOSE AND A REASON. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THAT AREA. I ACTUALLY DROVE BY JUST SEVERAL TIMES TO KIND OF GET A BETTER VISION OF WHAT THAT THING WOULD LOOK LIKE. YOU KNOW, 21 TOWNHOMES ON AN ACRE OF LAND IS LIKE REALLY OVERWHELMING. THE OTHER THING THAT I LOOK INTO IS THE INFRASTRUCTURE. WHAT'S IT GOING TO TAKE TO REALLY GET TO WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO BE? I MEAN, THEY'RE REALLY GOING TO SPEND THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY TO I LOOKED AT RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY FLOATS BECAUSE WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL WITHIN, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY FEET. I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN AND KIND OF LOOK AT THAT TOO. SO THAT THAT WAS A CONCERN TO ME. THE OTHER CONCERN IS THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE ON SUCH A BIG CASE. IF IT
[00:35:02]
WAS REALLY THAT IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS THESE ISSUES THAT WERE PRESENTED PREVIOUS TO THE COMMISSION, WHICH I WASN'T PART OF AT THE TIME, BUT I'M STARTING TO SEE WHY IT WAS DENIED THE FIRST TIME. AND I MEAN, I JUST HAD QUESTIONS REGARDING WHY WE CHANGED. STAFF WENT FROM DENIAL, RECOMMENDED THE DENIAL IN THE FIRST ONE TO RECOMMEND AN APPROVAL ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE. WAS IT BECAUSE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP REGARDING FIRE LANES AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS? AND I SEE THEY'VE COME DOWN TO 21 UNITS AS OPPOSED TO 23, WHICH ISN'T REALLY MUCH. I LOOK AT THIS SITE PLAN AND IT'S LIKE, THIS IS GOING TO BE REALLY, REALLY TOUGH TO, TO ENGAGE AND THE ADVERSE EFFECT THAT IT'S GOING TO HAVE ON THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE LOTS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THAT, I THINK IS A BIG CONCERN TO ME. SURE.SO AGAIN, IT DID COME DOWN FROM THE 23 UNITS, WHICH BASED ON THE ACTUAL MATH FOR DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE, HE COULD DO, WE JUST FELT LIKE, AGAIN, THAT WAS AN OVER EXACERBATION ON THAT PARCEL FOR THAT SIZE. THE 23 IS WITHIN WHAT HE'S LOOKING FOR. AND SO HIS ORIGINAL PROPOSAL WAS ESSENTIALLY A MIX OF MULTIFAMILY AND PLAN DEVELOPMENT, BECAUSE HE WANTED TO NOT ONLY INCREASE THE DWELLING UNITS, HE WANTED TO CHANGE SOME OF THE SETBACKS.
PRETTY MUCH NOTHING THAT MATCHED WHAT MULTIFAMILY 21 WAS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. WHILE STAFF DID HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE THE DRIVEWAY WIDTH FOR THE FIRE LANE AND THE FIRE, LIKE GETTING IN AND OUT, HE MET WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL PRETTY EXTENSIVELY. AND SO THIS IS WHAT THEY CAME UP WITH AS FAR AS HIM NOT HAVING TO DO A TURNAROUND. AND SO THE 21 IS WHERE, AGAIN, WE ARE BOUNDED BY BECAUSE THAT'S THAT IS THE MINIMUM THAT HE HAS TO MEET.
AND THEN THE OTHER SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, THE MAIN THING WITH THE GATEWAY CORRIDOR IS WE RECOGNIZE THE IMPACT OF THE SURROUNDING AREAS. SO WE KNOW THAT PROPERTIES TO THE WEST ARE ZONED COMMERCIAL. BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF HOUSES ON THERE. AND THEN THE PROPERTY, THE NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH AND THEN THE APARTMENT COMPLEX, KIND OF CATTY CORNER. WELL TO THE NORTHEAST OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT. OH, SORRY, RIGHT HERE. AND THEN WE'VE ALSO TALKED TO THE APPLICANT EXTENSIVELY ABOUT THE DRAINAGE, KNOWING THAT HE WILL LIKELY NEED TO UPGRADE THE FIRE HYDRANT, POSSIBLY ADD ANOTHER FIRE HYDRANT. ALL THINGS THAT WE HAVE REPEATEDLY TOLD HIM THAT EVEN IF WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON WHAT WE'RE SEEING AND HOW WE VIEW THAT, AS FAR AS MEETING THAT INTENTION OF THE GATEWAY CORRIDOR, AND IF IT DOES GET APPROVED AT COUNCIL, HE'S STILL GOING TO HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO ACCOMMODATE FOR THE DRAINAGE WHEN HE GETS TO HIS SITE PLAN AND IF IF HE MAY NEED A PLAT IF EASEMENTS ARE NECESSARY. AND SO THAT'S WHERE STAFF IS. IT IS NOT THAT WE WANT TO MAKE IT CHALLENGING FOR HIM OR THAT WE DIDN'T TAKE THE CONSIDERING THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD INTO CONSIDERATION, WE DID TRY TO WORK WITH HIM ON SOME ALTERNATIVES TO THE JUST STRAIGHT MULTIFAMILY ZONING, SOME MIXED USE THAT HE JUST WASN'T INTERESTED IN. AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE OUR FINAL DETERMINATION CAME OF GATEWAY CORRIDOR DOES SEEM LIKE A STRETCH FOR THIS AREA, BUT BASED ON THAT NOT BEING BOUNDED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT TRYING TO STAY AS CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH IT AS POSSIBLE OF IT IS MEETING THAT THAT RESIDENTIAL ASPECT AND ALSO US KNOWING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DO NEED MORE RETAIL, MORE COMMERCIAL. DANIEL DALE IS KIND OF IT CAN BE A MIX OF BOTH. YEAH. I THINK ANOTHER CHALLENGE IS GOING TO BE THAT OFF STREET PARKING IN THE FRONT. THAT'S NOT A VERY WIDE STREET ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, DROVE IT. AND I DON'T KNOW IF FIRE LOOKED AT IT AND THE IMPACT THAT THESE 21 UNITS ARE GOING TO HAVE PROPOSED, 21 UNITS ARE GOING TO HAVE ON THAT STREET, ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE, EVEN IF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE IS ADDRESSED, I THINK IT'S GOING TO HAVE SOME ISSUES OVERWHELMING DOWN THE ROAD. AND, YOU KNOW, I TEND TO AGREE WITH WITH THE NEIGHBORS. I MEAN, I WOULD BE CONCERNED TOO, AND I THINK STAFF HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB ON DUE DILIGENCE AND DOING A LOT OF RESEARCH. I JUST I DON'T FEEL GOOD ABOUT THIS ONE. AND I JUST. 21 UNITS IN THE WAY THEY'RE LAID OUT AND THE EFFECT THAT IT MAY OR MAY HAVE ON DOWN THE ROAD MAY COME BACK AND HAUNT US. I WILL ADD THAT THE PARKING IS INSIDE. SO THEY ARE GARAGES. AND SO I KNOW THAT SOMETIMES THAT DOES END UP BEING A SPILLAGE OUT ON THE ROAD, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ALSO HAD TO KIND OF GO OVER A COUPLE ITERATIONS OF THE NARROWNESS OF THE STREET. SO WE'VE ALSO DRIVEN DOWN IT JUST ON A REGULAR DAY. SO WHETHER THAT'S A WORK TRUCK ON THE SIDE, PEOPLE FROM BEHIND THE SUPERMERCADO AND THE WHATABURGER OR FROM THE APARTMENTS ACROSS THE STREET.
SO I DID AT LEAST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE PARKING IS IS INSIDE AND IT WILL BE GARAGES.
AND THEN THAT GUEST PARKING TO THE FAR WEST SIDE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. MY
[00:40:03]
QUESTION IS, BEFORE IT WAS FOR OFFICE SPACE. CORRECT. THE ZONING. YEAH. THE ZONING WAS.YEAH. SO TODAY IT'S FOR LOCAL OFFICE RETAIL. SO IT'S A RANGE OF OFFICE AND RETAIL OFFICE AND RETAIL. AND SO HE WANTS TO GO FROM OFFICE RETAIL TO MULTIFAMILY. YES MA'AM. OKAY.
SO. AS FAR AS ZONING'S CONCERNS, SO WOULD ACTUALLY CHANGE THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS TO MULTIFAMILY IS WHAT HE'S REQUESTING. CORRECT. SO THIS PROPERTY WOULD THEN IF IF APPROVED, IT WOULD FALL UNDER MF 21. OKAY. NOT SPOT ZONING. NO, MA'AM. OKAY. BECAUSE THE THE INTENTION OF THAT AREA, AT LEAST AS FAR AS THE GATEWAY CORRIDOR, IS TO ENCOURAGE DIFFERENT TYPES OF MULTIFAMILY, RESIDENTIAL, THAT IS RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, OFFICE, CIVIC AND RETAIL. SO IT DOES FIT INTO AND THERE'S MULTIFAMILY ACROSS THE STREET.
WHAT I LIKE FOR YOU TO DO IS SHOW ME THE SCHEMATIC OF WHAT THE ACTUAL DUPLEX IS SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE PARKING. SO THESE ARE CONDOS. AND SO ALL WE REQUIRE IS WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW AS FAR AS AN EXHIBIT. SO WHEN THEY SUBMIT, THEY DON'T HAVE TO FILL OUT A FULL THEY DON'T HAVE TO SUBMIT A FULL SCHEMATIC. SO THIS IS JUST WHAT'S ON LIKE THE LAY OF THE LAND OF WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. SO THE YOU MENTIONED THE PARKING. SO THESE RIGHT HERE ARE GARAGES THAT ARE GOING TO GO IN FRONT OF EACH UNIT. NO, BELOW IT'S THREE STORIES. SO THE BOTTOM STORY IS GOING TO BE THE GARAGES AND THEN THE ACTUAL RESIDENCE TWO STORIES ABOVE. SO WHERE YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS THE SCHEMATIC, SORRY, THE SCHEMATIC OF HOW THE PARKING WILL BE LAID OUT. OKAY, SO WHAT I'M LOOKING AT IS I SEE TWO CARS AND THEN I SEE THE APARTMENT IS IN FRONT OF IT. ON TOP. ON TOP. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. SO THE CAR IS BACK UP IN TO EACH OTHER. SO ESSENTIALLY SIDE BY SIDE. THAT'S PRETTY TIGHT. YEAH. AND SO THE, THE SETBACKS, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT INDIVIDUALLY PLATTED, THEY ARE CONNECTED. SO THE SETBACKS ARE GOING TO BE FOR THIS WHOLE PARCEL. AND SO THIS IS A LITTLE CONFUSING. SO THE RED RIGHT HERE HE ADDED ON I GUESS AS THE ORIENTATION OF THE UNITS. BUT THE ACTUAL PROPERTY BOUNDARY IS THE BLACK LINE. SO EVERYTHING THAT'S INSIDE OF THAT. AND SO THESE ARE CONNECTED. SO THEY WILL BE TREATED AS CONDOS AS FAR AS LIKE A CONDO ASSOCIATION. SO THEY WON'T HAVE EACH LOT DOESN'T HAVE ITS OWN SETBACKS IF THAT MAKES SENSE. THE WHOLE LOT ITSELF HAS TO MEET THE MINIMUM. TWO CARS AND THE CONDOS ARE ON TOP OF IT. AND HOW MANY STORIES IS IT AGAIN? THREE. SO THE CONDOS WILL LIKELY BE ATTACHED. SO THEY'LL BE ABLE TO BUY AIR SPACE BUT NOT THE LAND. ESSENTIALLY, THEY'LL JUST HAVE A FIREWALL SEPARATION BETWEEN THEM. DON'T HOLD ME TO THAT. BUT THAT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING THAT KURT SAID. YEAH. AND I KNOW A LOT OF TIMES WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEBODY COMING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ALTHOUGH YOU SENT OUT THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE NEW BUILDING THAT'S GOING UP, THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE THAT ARE TALKING ABOUT IT OR HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT IT THAN WHAT WAS SHOWN AS FAR AS WHAT THE RESPONSE WAS. SO THAT WAS A LITTLE CONCERN FOR ME THAT WHO WHERE WERE THESE NOTICES DELIVERED TO? SO WE SEND THEM OUT WITHIN THAT 200 FOOT BUFFER IF THEY ARE RENTERS. UNFORTUNATELY, IT DOES GO TO THE PROPERTY OWNER, SO IT MAY NOT NECESSARILY GO TO THE PERSON WHO'S LIVING THERE. SO EVERYBODY WITHIN THAT YELLOW CIRCLE IS WHO WE SENT THEM OUT TO. AND SO UNFORTUNATELY, WE SOME OF THEM ARE OWNERS. SO THEY KNOW THE OWNER, THE ONES THAT ARE TO THE WEST ARE OWNERS. THESE RIGHT HERE, THEY ARE POSSIBLY PROPERTY OR OWNED AND RENTED OUT. UNFORTUNATELY, WE CAN'T MAKE THEM RESPOND. AND THEN AGAIN, IF THEY ARE A LANDLORD LIVES IN DALLAS AND THE TENANT IS HERE, THE LANDLORD DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO RELAY THE INFORMATION TO THE TENANT. SO THE NOTICE THAT WENT OUT TO THE APARTMENTS, BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THAT CIRCLE THAT JUST WENT TO WHOEVER WAS LISTED ON AS THE OWNER. YES, JUST TO THAT MAIN OFFICE. YEAH. SO THE IN THE PREVIOUS CASE, THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY FOR THE APARTMENTS DID SEND A NOTICE AND THEY SENT IN ONE IN OPPOSITION. AND SO YES, IT WOULD GO TO THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY. THANK YOU. CAN I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR YOU. AND TO THE LEFT THAT'S JUST. AND TO THE LEFT. THOSE ARE JUST THAT'S A BIT. THOSE ARE BUSINESSES. SO THESE RIGHT HERE, THESE ARE THE APARTMENTS THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT CANDLELIGHT APARTMENTS I BELIEVE. AND THEN THESE ARE THIS RIGHT HERE IS YES. SUPERMERCADO AND WHATABURGER.
IT'S RETAIL. I DO HAVE SOME COMMENTS. VICE CHAIR ONE, I WILL SAY THAT WE WE ARE IN A
[00:45:12]
POSITION THAT WE ARE, YOU KNOW, ALMOST BUILT OUT AS A CITY AND WE HAVE TO TREAT THESE CORRIDORS VERY PRECIOUSLY. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, LONG TERM, TRANSITIONING THEM TO A MULTI-FAMILY WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE BENEFICIAL, ESPECIALLY WITH THE CONDOMINIUM SENSE, BECAUSE ALL OF THEM COULD BE COULD BE APPLYING THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION. RIGHT. AND SO THAT WOULD LIKE TURN OUR TAX BASE DOLLARS DOWN AND DOWN. SO KEEPING IT COMMERCIAL AND FOLLOWING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH IS KIND OF WHAT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD DO THAT, THAT GIVES US MORE LEEWAY ON ATTRACTING MORE RESIDENCES HERE. AND IN REGARDS TO DENSITY, I BELIEVE DENSITY DOESN'T ONLY HAVE TO MEAN, YOU KNOW, PACKING PEOPLE IN AND, AND MULTI-FAMILY AND TOWNHOMES. IT COULD BE MULTI USES, YOU KNOW, LIKE MAYBE WE COULD HAVE SOME STORES AT THE BOTTOM AND THEN RESIDENCES ON TOP. SO I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND IF THIS IS A SMART WAY TO UTILIZE THIS PIECE OF LAND. AND I JUST DON'T THINK LONG TERM SUSTAINABLY THAT THIS WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR OUR CITY. AND IT, AND IT IS AFFECTING OUR RESIDENCES ALREADY LIVING THERE IN REGARDS TO THEIR WELFARE, THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE, AND THEIR SAFETY. I JUST DON'T SEE HOW A UPS TRUCK AND AMAZON PERSON UBER EATS AND A FIRE TRUCK CAN, YOU KNOW, GET AROUND THAT SPACE IF AN EMERGENCY HAPPENED WHILE THERE ARE CARS PARKED ALONG ALL THE, YOU KNOW, ALONG THE STREETS. SO IT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE I HAVE A RECOMMENDATION ON ON PLACE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM BASED UPON COMMENTS AND CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD FROM MY COLLEAGUES REGARDING SOME OF SOME OF THE QUESTIONS, AND BECAUSE OF THE FACT PRIMARILY THAT THIS IS PART OF THAT GATEWAY CORRIDOR, IT WAS DIRECTED TO BE THAT WAY YEARS AGO. AND I THINK WE NEED TO STICK TO OUR PLAN, EVEN THOUGH I THINK WE JUST NEED TO MOVE FORWARD. THERE'S BEEN A RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE VOTE AT THIS TIME. SO JUST TO CONFIRM, THE GREEN IS FOR IN FAVOR OF THE DENIAL. YEAH. OKAY. OH, GREEN IS IN FAVOR OF THE GREEN IS FOR IN FAVOR OF THE DENIAL. YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION HAS BEEN APPROVED TO DENY THIS PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE AGENDA. THAT IS THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS 753. I ALWAYS LIKE TO ASK FOR A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT. I MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE? YES.* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.