* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:03] WELCOME [Planning and Zoning Staff Briefing] TO THE STAFF BRIEFING FOR OF THE CITY OF GRAND PRAIRIE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE MEETING OF AUGUST 28TH, 2023. I'M CHERYL SMITH, CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THIS STAFF BRIEFING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING IS HEREBY CALL TO ORDER AT 5:32 PM THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS WHERE THE STAFF BRIEFS THE COMMISSION AND PREVIEWS THE CASES ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA COMMISSION MEMBERS WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS THAT MAY FACILITATE THE MEETING AND THE PRESENTATION OF CASES. NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN DURING THE BRIEFING. PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL TAKE PLACE DURING THE REGULAR MEETING, WHICH WILL BEGIN EARLIER THAN 6:30 PM I WILL NOW CONDUCT A ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS TO CONFIRM THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM. AFTER I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY HERE, CHERYL SMITH. HERE. UM, CALL RAMIREZ. MICHELLE MADDEN. HERE. TY CHAPMAN. FRANK GONZALEZ. HERE. JULIA PEREZ. HERE. CHRISTOPHER OLE. HERE. ANNA COKA. JOHN UCCO. HERE, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT EXCEPT FOR CARL RAMIREZ, TY CHAPMAN. AND, UH, LET'S SEE. AND ANNA COCA COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE REMEMBER TO TURN ON YOUR MICROPHONE BEFORE YOU SPEAK TO ENSURE THAT EVERYONE CAN HEAR YOU. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT WHICH NEED TO BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TODAY? NO. MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU. OKAY, STAFF, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO PRESENT? HI, JIM. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. THE ITEM NUMBER FOUR FOR TONIGHT'S AGENDA IS A SITE PLAN FOR NEW WAREHOUSES LOCATED AT 9 0 1 AVENUE K EAST STP 23 0 7 0 0 1 7. SO THE SITE LOCATION HAS SHOWN IT'S ABOUT 10 ACRES CURRENTLY ZONE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THE EXISTING BUILDING SHOWN ON THE LEFT BOTTOM CORNER WILL BE DEMOLISHED AND THE APPLICANT PLANS TO CONSTRUCT TWO OFFICE WAREHOUSES. THE OFFICE WAREHOUSES WILL LOOK IN SUCH A WAY WHERE THE TRUCK COURTS WILL BE LOCATED INTERNALLY, UM, AWAY FROM THE VIEW FROM THE PUBLIC STREET, WHICH INCLUDES 1 0 9, UM, STREET AND THE AVENUE K. UM, THEY'RE PROPOSING TWO BUILDINGS WITH A COMBINED, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE ABOUT 1 99, UM, K SQUARE FEET. THEY ARE COMPLYING WITH THE DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARD AND ALSO WITH THE PARKING STANDARD, THEY HAVE MET OR EXCEEDED THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT. AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY HAVE PROVIDED PLE AMOUNT OF TREES ALONG THE BOAT, STREET FRONTS. THIS IS LIKE A CONCEPT OF VIEW OF HOW THE BUILDING WILL LOOK AT THE CORNER. SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT THERE ARE TILT WALL CONSTRUCTION, WHICH MEETS THE, THE APPENDIX X STANDARD. THEY HAVE PROVIDED SOME BRICK X IN SOME DECORATED CORNICES TO MEET, TO COMPLY WITH THE APPENDIX X STANDARD. HERE'S SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME OF THE ELEVATION IN BLACK AND WHITE VIEW. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THE TRUCK COURT WILL BE HIDDEN FROM THE BUILDING CORNERS THAT ARE PROJECTING. SO THE APPLICANT IS NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES AND THE DRC RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH ONE CONDITION. SO IN THE PAST, TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN AWARE OF SOME OF THE RESIDENTS IN THIS AREA, UM, NOT DESIRING ANY OF THE TRUCK TRAFFIC TO TROUBLE EAST TOWARD THE SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT IT'S SURROUNDED BY MOSTLY WAREHOUSES. HOWEVER, IF YOU GO FURTHER DOWN IN EAST, UM, IT STARTS TO HAVE SOME OF THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY, UH, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS OUT THERE. SO, UH, AFTER DISCUSSION WITH THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, WE HAVE IMPOSED ONE CONDITION, WHICH IS THAT THE APPLICANT WILL COME BACK AND GET A SIGN PERMIT SEPARATELY. THESE ARE CALLED DIRECTIONAL SIGNS. THEY'LL BE PLACED ALL ALONG THE STREET. UM, ONE OF THE SIGN WILL SAY THE TRUCKS ARE PROHIBITED FROM MAKING A LEFT TURN WHEN THEY'RE EXITING OUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT, SO THAT THEY WILL ONLY BE ABLE TO TRAVEL TO RIGHT WHERE THEY'RE SURROUNDED BY WAREHOUSES. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES. UH, COMMISSIONER. OH, JUST GO AHEAD. NO, I JUST GO AHEAD. SO, UH, THIS IS MY DISTRICT. YES. JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. UM, I FORGET WHAT IT'S CALLED, BUT I KNOW THAT SOMETIMES INGRESS AND EGRESS MM-HMM . CAN HAVE CURBS THAT, YOU KNOW, WOULD PROHIBIT THAT KIND OF TURN. IS THAT NOT DOABLE IN THIS SCENARIO? SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE INCLUDING IN THIS IS A HOODED LEFT. SO THEY'RE MODIFYING THE MEDIAN BRAKE SO THAT YOU CAN ONLY MAKE AN INBOUND TURN GOING EAST. OKAY. AND SO YOU CAN'T MAKE THAT, UH, SOUTHBOUND, UH, LEFT COMING OUT OF IT TO GO EAST. SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE INSTALLED OR HAVING THEM INSTALL, UH, AT THAT [00:05:01] DRIVEWAY AT THE TRUCK COURT. AND WHAT DID YOU CALL THAT AGAIN? SO IT'S A HOODED LEFT. A HOODED LEFT. YEAH. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING. BASICALLY IT, WOULD THE TRUCK DRIVER'S GONNA HAVE TO GO OVER A CURB TO NO. SO IT'S A MORE OF A CHANNELIZED TURN THROUGH THE MEDIAN. UM, SO BASICALLY THERE'S A RACED CURB IF YOU WANNA LOOK AT THE MIDDLE OF THE SITE PLAN ON THE SOUTH SIDE. MM-HMM . IT'S MORE OF A CHANNELIZED TURN INTO THE SITE. OKAY. AND SO IT, WHAT THAT DOES IS THE TRUCK THEN COULDN'T CROSS OVER THAT TO GO SOUTH AND THEN EAST, UH, OUT OF THE, OUT OF THE SITE. OKAY. AND SO, ONE TO JUST ELABORATE TOO ON THE CONDITIONS THAT GINA'S TALKING ABOUT IS REALLY WHEN WE GET INTO ENGINEERING, WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT ANY ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE CAN BE PLACED IN THE PROPER LOCATION. AND SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT'S WILLING TO WORK WITH US ON ANY ADDITIONAL WAY FINDING SIGNAGE, UM, JUST TO SEE IF WE CAN PUT A LITTLE BIT MORE ON, ON TOP OF THIS. YEAH. JUST 'CAUSE IF YOU LIVE IN DISTRICT ONE, THOSE TRUCKERS OFTEN SEE SIGNS AS A SUGGESTION, NOT AS THE, AS THE LAW . YEAH. SO THIS, WITH THIS, WE WANNA DO A PHYSICAL BARRIER AS WELL AS THE WAYFINDING SIGNAGE. UM, AND, AND JUST TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THERE THAN, THAN OTHER WAREHOUSES IN THE AREA. THANK YOU. SORRY TO INTERRUPT. THAT'S OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION AS TO, UM, I KNOW THAT, UH, THERE'S AN INDUSTRIAL AREA, BUT THAT'S STILL GONNA BE MORE TRAFFIC. SO I GUESS IT DOESN'T MEET YOUR STANDARDS OF OVER TRAFFICKING, I GUESS. SO IT'S ALREADY ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL MM-HMM . UM, SO THIS IS MORE OF THE SITE PLAN. SO THE SIZE OF THE WAREHOUSES WOULDN'T TRIGGER THE NEED FOR A NEW TIA MM-HMM . UM, AND, AND THEY'VE BEEN PRETTY GOOD ON WORKING WITH US ON MAKING PHYSICAL CHANGES TO THE SITE TO ALLOW FOR THAT ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC AND TO HELP PREVENT, UM, ANY ERR AND TRUCKS FROM ANY HOPEFULLY, HOPEFULLY. I WAS RIDING, UM, HOPEFULLY OVER THE WEEKEND AND I SAW SO MANY TRUCKS COMING TO AND FROM DALLAS. YEAH. IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE BECOMING YEAH. WE'RE, I MEAN WE'RE LOOKING AT LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS OUT THERE, BUT, SO WHAT WE TRY TO DO IS, IS MAKE IT AS HARD AS POSSIBLE FOR A TRUCK TO GO THAT DIRECTION AND THEN PUT UP ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE. SO MAYBE IF THEY MISS ONE SIGN, THEY'LL SEE THE SIX OTHERS ALONG THEIR WAY BEFORE THEY REALIZE THEY MADE A MISTAKE. SO WE'LL SEE. RIGHT. THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, OF COURSE, ABOUT THE, THE, UH, OPENING AND CLOSE TIMING IS GONNA BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE AREA. DO YOU KNOW WHEN THEY'RE GONNA, THE FACILITY'S GONNA BE OPEN? SO THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE, UH, CONCERNS THAT WE HAD BECAUSE AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY WAREHOUSES. OKAY. SO I WOULD ASSUME THAT THEY'LL JUST FOLLOW GENERAL INDUSTRIAL HOURS. AND ANOTHER BENEFIT IS THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THE TRUCK COURT KIND OF INTERNALLY BLOCKED BY ALL THE BUILDINGS. OKAY. SO IT'LL HAVE A MINIMAL IMPACT. OKAY. MM-HMM . ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I THINK THAT'S IT. JUNE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON TO THE NEXT CASE, WHICH IS THE ITEM NUMBER FIVE. IT'S A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR GSW PHASE TWO. SO THIS IS THE, UM, FIVE INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSES. WE HAVE ALL SEEN SOME PARTS OF IT. SO ORIGINALLY THE PROPERTY OWNER, UM, CAME FORTH BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TO GET THE ZONING APPROVED AND CALLED THE CONS PLAN APPROVED. AND THE SITE PLAN APPROVED. SINCE THEN, THEY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACQUIRE A LITTLE MORE LAND. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN SEEING THIS YEAR, IS THAT THE ADDITIONAL LAND THEY'RE GOING THROUGH A ZONE CHANGE AND THEY'RE NOW READY TO AMEND THEIR SITE PLAN. THIS IS JUST A MINOR CHANGES TO WHAT WAS APPROVED TO REFLECT THE ADDITIONAL ACREAGE THAT WAS ADDED TO THE SITE. SO THEY'RE PROPOSING ENTIRE, UH, A FIVE INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS OVER A 1 0 9 ACRES. SO THIS IS WHAT I WAS KIND OF MENTIONING. THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IS WHAT WE APPROVED BACK IN, UM, 2021 AND 2022. AND WHAT YOU'VE BEEN SEEING THIS YEAR FOR ZONE CHANGE REQUEST AND OTHER THINGS WERE THE NEW PROPOSAL THAT'S REFLECTED TO THE BOTTOM. SO THEY ARE DOING A SITE PLAN JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, JUST WORK OUT ALL THE NUMBERS AND DIMENSIONS AND SQUARE FOOTAGE AND SO ON AND SO FORTH TO GET THEM PREPARED TO GO TO THE NEXT PHASE IN THE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WILL BE CIVIL REVIEWS AND BUILDING PREMIER REVIEWS. SO THIS IS A OVERALL SITE PLAN THAT REFLECTS KIND OF CONSISTENTLY WHAT THE CONCEPT PLAN WE HAVE SEEN. SO THERE'S A SHOWING THE LAYOUT IN THE PARKING AND TRUCK COURTS, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. THEY HAVE MET THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT AND, AND YOU CAN SEE TO THE NORTH, UM, AS THE PART OF ORIGINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW, THEY PROVIDED A WALKING TRAIL WITH SEATED, UH, SHADED SITTING AREA AND WATER FEATURES. THEY HAVE UPDATED THOSE NUMBER TO REFLECT THE, UH, INCREASE IN THE ACREAGE, BUT THEY ARE STILL PROVIDING AND, UH, MEETING THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR THE, UH, ANY AMENITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE OPEN SPACE PLAN. AGAIN, I SAID, UM, THEY ARE, THEY JUST UPDATED THE OPEN SPACE PLAN TO REFLECT ON NEW ACREAGE. THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THIS. THIS WAS THE ELEVATION THAT WAS APPROVED WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN. THEY'RE GOING WITH THIS LOOK. [00:10:01] SO THESE ARE, UM, SOME OF THE ELEVATIONS THAT I FELT LIKE WAS THE KEY. SO THE, UM, ROCK ISLAND TO THE NORTH, THIS IS ONE OF THE MAJOR, UM, INTERSECTIONS. AND YOU CAN SEE THIS IS ACTUALLY, UM, EASTERN HALF AND WESTERN HALF. IT'S VERY LONG BUILDING, BUT THEY HAVE MET THE APPENDIX F STANDARD BY PROVIDING TOT WALL WITH STONE ACCENTS AND CANOPIES AND ACCENT LIGHTING. AND THIS IS THE, UM, ELEVATION FOR THE BUILDING THAT WILL BE FACING SHADY GROVE AND ALL OTHER EAST AND WEST WALLS. THE SHORTER WALLS WILL LOOK SIMILAR TO WHAT'S SHOWN ON THE BOTTOM. AND THIS IS KIND OF GENERALLY HOW THE TRUCK COURT WILL LOOK, BUT THE TRUCK COURT WILL BE BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, AS YOU HAVE SEEN ON THE SITE PLAN. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING ONE VARIANCE. THIS IS ACTUALLY A REPEATED VARIANCE. ONLY REASON WE'RE BRINGING IT BACK FORTH WITH YOU IS BECAUSE THIS IS A NEW SITE PLAN, WE HAVE TO RE-ASK IT. SO THE UM, CITY COUNCIL BACK IN 2022 APPROVED THEM TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM PARKING. SO UVC ONLY ALLOWS THEM TO GO, UM, 115% IN THE PARKING. SO WHATEVER THE REQUIRED PARKING NUMBER IS, THEY MULTIPLY BY UH, 101 15. SO IF LET'S SAY THEY CAN, THEIR, UM, PARKING IS 100, UM, THE MAXIMUM THEY CAN PROVIDE IS ONE 15. THAT'S KIND OF THE RATE, HOWEVER, THEY WANTED TO GO A LITTLE BIT ABOVE THAT. SO JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERED THIS VARIANCE AND APPROVED IT BECAUSE THIS ALLOWS THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY, GETTING DIFFERENT TYPE OF TENANTS, SOMETIMES DISTRIBUTION, UM, E-COMMERCE. I THINK THOSE TENANTS ACTUALLY NEED MORE PARKING THAN JUST THE LOADING DOCKS. SO CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE IT. THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR THE SAME VARIANCE TO BE APPROVED AND ASSOCIATED WITH THE SITE PLAN. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONS? ANY QUESTIONS? I THINK YOU DID VERY WELL ON THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY, ONE MORE SITE PLAN. THIS IS THE ITEM NUMBER SIX SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ASHTON WAREHOUSE PHASE TWO. SO THIS IS THE EXISTING BUSINESS CALLED ASHTON, UM, SEWING AND DRILLING. THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH REVIEWS OF SITE PLANS BACK IN 2020 TO GET THE BUILDING APPROVED. UM, BUT THEY ARE WANTING TO ADD ADDITIONAL WAREHOUSE TO SUPPORT THEIR BUSINESS. SO EVERYTHING WILL BE STORED INSIDE THIS WAREHOUSE. THOSE ALSO OPERATE OUT OF THIS BUILDING. SO THIS IS TO AMEND THIS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THE YELLOW IS THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, AND THIS IS JUST THE DETENTION AREA. THEY'RE PROPOSING A NEW WAREHOUSE BUILDING, BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY'RE KIND OF FAR AWAY, HIDDEN FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY. THEY'RE MEETING ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY CHANGES, BUT THEY PROVIDE PRETTY AMBITIOUS LANDSCAPING WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN AS SHOWN. SO THIS IS KIND OF THE STREET VIEW OF HOW IT LOOKS TODAY. SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE BUILDING. THEY HAVE A SCREENING. UM, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, BECAUSE THIS, THE TENSION AREAS THERE, THE BUILDING WILL BE KIND OF FAR BACK FROM THE STREET. SO WITH THAT, THEY'RE TRYING TO ACTUALLY MATCH THE EXISTING BUILDING AND MATERIAL THEN COLOR AND THEY'RE NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS? THIS IS YOUR AREA. JOHN, DO YOU SEE ANYTHING OUTTA THE ORDINARY? OKAY, WELL, JOHN IS OUR EXPERT. . . ALL RIGHT. OKAY. NEXT ITEM IS THE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, THE ZONE CHANGE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE SQUARED AT MOUNTAIN VIEW. I JUST WANTED TO INFORM YOU THAT STEPH HAS REQUESTED SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BEFORE PNZ MEETING, BUT THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY NEEDED JUST A LITTLE MORE TIME TO WORK ON IT. SO STEPH IS, UM, REQUESTING THIS ITEM TO BE TABLED TO THE NEXT PNZ MEETING, WHICH SHOULD BE SEPTEMBER 11TH. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. MM-HMM . THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. SO THE NEXT ITEM IS ACTUALLY A, UM, COMPANION ITEM. THERE IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT WITH THE ZONE CHANGING CONCEPT PLAN. SO THE PROPOSED AREA IS ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT SOUTH OF THE GSW WAREHOUSE WHERE WE WERE DISCUSSING SITE PLAN A LITTLE BIT EARLIER. THE AREA CURRENTLY SHOWN IN RED WITH THE BLUE OUTLINE, THAT'S THE AREA THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO BE CHANGED FROM COMMERCIAL RETAIL OFFICE TO A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO ALLOW THE OFFICE WAREHOUSE THEY'RE PROPOSING. SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THAT. UM, MAINLY THE AREA IS PREDOMINANTLY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THOSE AREAS THAT ARE SHOWN AS SF ONE AND YELLOW, UM, MOST OF THOSE LANES ARE UNDEVELOPED AT THIS TIME. SO THIS KIND OF REFLECTS THE AREA CONDITION VERY WELL. SO EVEN IF THOSE AREA TRULY [00:15:01] DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY, THEY'LL STILL BE ACROSS 1 61. SO DOES NOT SEE THIS SLIDE INDUSTRIAL REALLY AFFECTING SINGLE FAMILY AS IT IS SURROUNDED ON ALL THREE SIDES BY THE WAREHOUSES AND TO THE, UH, WEST BY 1 61. SO STEPH IS NOT ABLE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL SINCE THIS IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT FUTURE LANE MAP DESTINATION. HOWEVER, THE REQUESTED ZONING MATCH IS THE PREDOMINANT ZONING OF THE AREA. WITH THAT, THERE'S A ITEM FOR A ZONE CHANGE REQUEST FOR THE SAME LOCATION. THE CURRENT ZONING IS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR TOWNHOUSES, WHICH WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2021, BUT NOTHING CAME TO FRUITION. IT'S A SET VACANT FOR A WHILE. THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING A PD FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE. THE REASON FOR PD IS SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY ADOPT A CONCEPT PLAN THAT WILL TIE THEM DOWN TO THIS PROPOSED WAREHOUSE USE ONLY, UM, NOT THE USE, BUT THIS, THIS WILL TIE DOWN TO THE LAYOUT OF THE, UH, WAREHOUSE THAT IS SHOWN. OKAY. SO THE PD FOUR 12, UM, THAT'S THE PD THAT'S CURRENTLY IN PLACE, WHICH ONLY ALLOWS TOWN HOME DEVELOPMENTS. UM, A, A TOTAL OF 1 29 RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THIS NEVER GOT DEVELOPED. THERE'S SOME CHALLENGES WITH FLOOD PLANE AND OTHER THINGS. I THINK IT'S JUST, UM, NEVER WORKED. THE MATH NEVER WORKED. UM, SO THEY'RE REQUESTING A, UM, ZONE CHANGE TO BE ABLE TO DO THE NEW PROPOSALS ON SHOWN BELOW. SO THE CONCEPT PLAN REFLECTS A 200,000 SQUARE FEET WAREHOUSE AND THE TRUCK DOT WILL BE HIDDEN TO THE EAST WHERE IT'S BE WILL BE SCREENED BY ANOTHER ALREADY EXISTING OFFICE, WHEREAS TO THE EAST, WHICH IS SHOWN AT THE BOTTOM ON THIS PICTURE. SO THE RIGHT SIDE IS THE NORTH. SO THESE ARE THE CONCEPT ELEVATIONS. SO STEPH IS AGAIN UNABLE TO SUPPORT THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST BECAUSE THE PROPOSED USE DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. HOWEVER, THE REQUESTED ZONING MATCH TO THE PREDOMINANT ZONING OF THE AREA. SHOULD THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING CONDITION. ONE IS THAT THE APPLICATION APPLICANT SHALL OBTAIN A LETTER FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS ALLOWING INCREASED RUNOFF TO A DOWNSTREAM MOTOR PER ENGINEERING CLIMATE. UM, THIS ALL TO SAY THAT THEY NEED TO, UM, TAKE THEIR, UH, RUNOFF WATER THROUGH SOMEONE ELSE'S BEFORE THEY CAN GET TO THE CREEK. SO AS LONG AS THEY CAN WORK THAT OUT WITH THE, UH, APPLICANTS THAT HAS NO ISSUES, THIS HAPPENS IN SOME LOCATIONS, THEY JUST NEED TO WORK IT OUT. BUT THEY'LL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW MUCH EASEMENT AND WHERE THE BEST LOCATION IS DURING A CIVIL ENGINEERING REVIEW TO FIGURE THAT OUT AND WORK THAT OUT WITH THE APP WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS. AND THEN THE SECOND CONDITION IS THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD OBTAIN A LETTER FROM FEMA PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF ANY VERTICAL STRUCTURES PER ENGINEERING REQUIREMENT. THIS IS A TYPICAL REQUIREMENT THE ENGINEERING HAS WHEN THEY'RE BUILDING INSIDE WHAT THEY, UH, CONSIDER TO BE PART OF THE FEMA FLOODPLAINS. THESE CAN BE REVIEWED AND ADJUSTED, BUT UH, WE JUST WANT YOU TO PUT THAT INTO CON THE CONDITIONS SO THAT EVERYBODY'S AWARE THOSE NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? OKAY, ANNA, YOU CAN GO FIRST. AND IS THE APPLICANT FOR THIS ONE GONNA BE HERE TONIGHT? YES. THE APPLICANT PLANS TO BE HERE AND SHE HAS PREPARED A PRESENTATION, WHICH, UM, I'LL LET HER GO THROUGH. MM-HMM . ANNA, WHAT YEAR DID, UM, DID THIS AREA REMAIN OPPORTUNITY FOR TOM FOLKS? FOR HOW MANY YEARS DID YOU REMAIN? SO IT SAYS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE ZONE CHANGE ON MAY 18TH, 2021. SO IT'S ABOUT BEEN ABOUT 22, 23. SO IT'S BEEN ABOUT TWO YEARS AND A FEW MONTHS. YEAH. SO IF WE, IF, UM, ON DURING DISCUSSION, IF WE DON'T APPROVE THE ZONE CHANGE MM-HMM . THEN THE NEXT STEP WOULD NOT, UM, MOVE FORWARD. YES, MA'AM. SO THE CURRENT ZONING DOES NOT ALLOW ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT WAS APPROVED WITH THE PREVIOUS ZONING. THE PD, UM, FOUR 12, WHICH IS IN PLACE. SO IF SOMEONE WANTED TO DO A WAREHOUSE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THEIR SAME ZONE CHANGE REQUESTS. UM, THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST IS COMING FORTH BECAUSE PREV, UM, LIKE I SAID, THE EASIEST THING, ZONING, PD FOUR 12 WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSES. IT WAS WRITTEN FOR TOWNHOUSES. MM-HMM . IF SOMEONE WANTED TO BUILD THE TOWNHOUSES, THEY CAN GO WITH THE APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN. AS LONG AS THEY STAY IN THE SPIRIT OF THAT PD, THEY CAN DO THE TOWNHOUSES. WE JUST HAVE NOT SEEN ANYBODY COME WITH THE ACTUAL SITE PLAN TO DO. SO. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION WITH REGARD TO ENVIRONMENTAL. IF IF IT WASN'T, YOU ARE GIVING THOSE STIPULATIONS BECAUSE OF THE, THE STREAM AND THE CREEK AND ALL THAT, WHOEVER COMES IN THERE IS GONNA HAVE TO DEAL, DEAL WITH THAT. SO I GUESS SO THIS, THE NEW PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT THEY CAN OVERCOME THAT. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY THINK. THAT THEY FEEL LIKE THEY HAVE SOME WAYS TO WORK WITH THAT. THEY HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH SUCH CONDITIONS AND THEY JUST THINK THAT [00:20:01] THIS USE WILL ACTUALLY MAKE, MAKE IT WORK. YES. MM-HMM . SO ANYBODY, YOU'RE RIGHT, ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. ANYBODY WHO COMES IN WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE SAME ISSUES. WE JUST WANTED TO PUT THAT IN THERE JUST FOR CLARITY AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY IT'S BEEN SITTING THERE THAT LONG. MM-HMM . RIGHT? YES, MA'AM. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? GO AHEAD. YES, YES. I'M SORRY. I'M SURE MIGHT HAVE ANSWERED IT ALREADY. THERE WAS AN OWNERSHIP CHANGE IN THE LAST TWO YEARS THAT I AM NOT SURE OF, BUT I CAN LOOK IN IT, LOOK INTO IT. I, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, UM, THE CURRENT APPLICANT JUST HAVE IT ON THEIR CONTRACT SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THE ZONING GOES THROUGH, THEY MAY FINISH OUT THEIR DEAL, BUT IF THE ZONING DOESN'T GO THROUGH, THAT'S REALLY UP TO THEM TO DECIDE IF THEY WANNA PURSUE. MM-HMM . MM-HMM . ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THAT'S PRETTY STANDARD. SOMETIMES THEY, UH, OWN PROPERTY, SOMETIMES THEY DON'T. SO JUST, YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU UHHUH. THANK YOU JUNE. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. GOOD EVENING. HOW ARE Y'ALL? OKAY, GOOD. SO LAST TWO ITEMS WILL ALSO BE HEARD TOGETHER. SO ITEMS NINE AND 10 ARE CPA 2 3 0 7 0 0 1 5 AND ZERO N 23 0 7 0 0 2 4. SO THIS IS ANOTHER COMP PLAN, AMENDMENT AND ZONING CHANGE. THE PEC PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 2 2 5 NORTHWEST 16TH STREET. SO FIRST WE'RE GONNA HEAR THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT. SO THIS IS THE EXISTING ZONING HERE. YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE YELLOW HATCHED BOX. SO CURRENTLY IT'S ZONE COMMERCIAL IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTHWEST AND EAST IS ALL ZONED SINGLE FAMILY FOUR. AND IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH THERE'RE ZONED ANOTHER COMMERCIAL. SO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATE THIS AREA IS A MIXED USE. AND THEN TO THE NORTH WE HAVE A COMMERCIAL RETAIL OFFICE. SO THEY ARE PROPOSING A ZONING CHANGE TO SF SIX. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO ALSO TRY TO UPDATE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AT THE SAME TIME TO LOAD IN CITY RESIDENTIAL TO MATCH THAT ZONING CHANGE. SO STAFF ISN'T ABLE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST SINCE THIS SINGLE FAMILY AREA USE IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE FLUME. HOWEVER, IT MATCHES THE PREDOMINANT ZONING OF THE AREA. SO ONTO THE ZONING CHANGE. SO AGAIN, IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED COMMERCIAL. THEY'RE WANTING TO GO TO SF SIX AND IT'S ON A LOT, THAT'S 0.7, 0.07 ACRES. SO AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE HERE IT'S PREDOMINANTLY SURROUNDED BY SF ZONING AND THEN TO THE SOUTH. WHILE THAT IS COMMERCIAL, IT'S CURRENTLY BEING USED AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. SO AGAIN, THEY RE THEY'RE PROPOSING TO REZONE TO SF SIX, BUT THE F BUT THE FLU, UH, DESIGNATES THIS AS MIXED USE. SO I DID INCLUDE A SUMMARY OF A LOT REQUIREMENTS FOR SF SIX. AND MICHELLE, I'M SURE YOU'RE AWARE THIS IS A REALLY SMALL LOT. THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS. HOWEVER, THIS IS A REALLY OLD PLAT IN THE CITY PLOTTED WELL BEFORE CURRENT, UM, REGULATIONS. SO THEY'RE ACTUALLY EXCLUDED FROM SOME OF THESE REQUIREMENTS, BUT THEY ARE GONNA HAVE TO GO TO ZBA BEFORE BUILDING PERMITS FOR A FEW OF THEM. SO THIS IS THE STREET VIEW AT THE INTERSECTION. SO THIS IS THE CONCEPT PLAN PROVIDED. THEY'RE NOT TIED DOWN TO THIS 'CAUSE THIS IS NOT A PD, BUT THIS WAS JUST TO GIVE Y'ALL AN IDEA OF WHAT THEY EXPECT TO PUT THERE. SO AGAIN, THE EXISTING LAW IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTIES OR RESIDENTIAL USES ON ALL FOUR SIDES. THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES AND DUE TO THE SIZE OF THE LAW, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MAY BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE USE OF THIS PARCEL. AND AGAIN, THEY'RE NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES AT THIS TIME. SO STAFF IS UNABLE TO RECOMMEND BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MATCH THE FLUME. HOWEVER, AGAIN, IT DOES MATCH THE PREDOMINANT ZONING OF THE AREA. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATIONS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS? YES. GOOD QUESTIONS. GO AHEAD. FINISH MY, UM, DO YOU KNOW, IS THE PERSON BUILDING THIS AS A SPEC HOME OR IS IT FOR THEMSELVES? UH, IT'S NOT FOR HIMSELF, BUT IT IS FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER. OKAY. SO HE'S A SURVEYOR WE WORK WITH OFTEN, BUT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? IT SEEMS PRETTY CLEAR. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THAT IT? WE HAVE, WELL, THAT BEING SAID, IT'S UH, 5:56 PM WE WILL CLOSE THE, UM, BRIEFING AND RECONVENE AT 6:30 PM WELCOME TO THE CITY OF GRAND PRAIRIE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 28TH, 2023. I'M CHERYL SMITH, [Call to Order] CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING IS HEREBY CALL TO ORDER AT 6:30 PM THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETS THE SECOND AND FOURTH MONDAY OF EACH MONTH. ALL MEETINGS ARE VIDEO RECORDED. NO OFFICIAL ACTION CAN BE TAKEN UNLESS PROPER APPLICATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THROUGH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOLLOWS A PRINTED AGENDA THAT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ARE ROUTINE ITEMS WHICH CAN ALL BE APPROVED IN ONE MOTION. HOWEVER, ANY MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION MAY MAKE A MOTION TO INDIVIDUALLY CONSIDER ANY ITEM FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA. INDIVIDUALS MAY ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY ITEMS ON TODAY'S AGENDA. TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM OR NOTE YOUR SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION WITHOUT SPEAKING, PLEASE FILL OUT A REQUEST TO SPEAK CARD. THESE CARDS ARE AVAILABLE AT THE COUNTER AND SHOULD BE TURNED IN AT THE BACK OF THE ROOM [00:25:01] PRIOR TO THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM BEING CALLED, I WILL NOW CONDUCT A ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS TO CONFIRM THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM. AFTER I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY, HERE CHERYL SMITH. HERE. CARL RAMIREZ. MICHELLE MADDEN. HERE. TY CHAPMAN. HERE. FRANK GONZALEZ. HERE. JULIA PEREZ. HERE KOKA. HERE. KO HERE. CHRIS CHRISTOPHER OLLEY. HERE, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT EXCEPT FOR CARL RAMIREZ. AND NOW COMMISSIONER JULIA PEREZ WILL GIVE THE INVOCATION. AND AFTER THAT, I, UH, CHERYL SMITH WILL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND THE US AND TEXAS FLAG. PLEASE BOW YOUR HEADS. DEAR LORD, HEAVENLY FATHER, WE SEEK YOUR HELP TODAY. COME AND LET YOUR WISDOM FALL UPON US. LORD, AS WE GATHER FOR THIS MEETING, GIVE US CLARITY SO THAT WE CAN EFFECTIVELY TACKLE EACH PART OF TODAY'S AGENDA, REVEAL THE PROBLEM AREAS, AND SHOW US BEST SOLUTIONS THAT WILL APPLY. POINT OUR EYES TO EVERY POSITIVE OUTCOME AND LET THESE FAVORABLE RESULTS AND DEVELOPMENTS ENCOURAGE EVERY HEART IN THIS ROOM. DEAR LORD, WE ASK YOUR HELP THAT YOU HELP US APPLY YOUR WISDOM AS WE DECIDE ON CERTAIN MATTERS AND MAKE PLANS FOR THE RESIDENTS, BUSINESSES AND VISITORS OF GRAND PRAIRIE. THIS WE PRAY IN YOUR PRECIOUS NAME, AMEN TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IS STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE. FOR HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG, I PLEDGED TO BE TEXAS ONCE THEY UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE, IN AN EFFORT TO MINIMIZE DISRUPTIONS, THE FOLLOWING MEETING GUIDELINES WILL APPLY. THE STAFF WILL PRESENT FIRST ON ANY AGENDA ITEM. FOLLOWING A BRIEF PRESENTATION BY STAFF, APPLICANTS WILL HAVE A COMBINED TOTAL OF 30 MINUTES TO PRESENT. ONCE THE APPLICANT HAS SPOKEN, EACH MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO FILLS OUT A SPEAKER CARD WILL HAVE FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM. ADDITIONAL SPEAKING TIME MAY BE ALLOWED THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN BEFORE SPEAKING. SPEAKERS SHOULD GIVE THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD ALONG WITH WHOM YOU REPRESENT. IF APPLICABLE, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON A TOPIC NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA SHOULD SPEAK UNDER THE HEADING OF PUBLIC COMMENTS. STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION OF EACH ITEM. AT THIS TIME, CITIZENS MAY SPEAK FOR UP TO FIVE MINUTES ON ANY ITEM, NOT ON THE AGENDA. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS? NO. MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU. THE NEXT MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION IS APPROVING [PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA] THE PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA. MADAM CHAIR? YES. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 14TH PNC MEETING AND ITEMS TWO AND THREE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. SECOND. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE THE PUBLIC CONSENT AGENDA BY COMMISSIONER PEREZ AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FEDCO. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. [4. STP-23-07-0017 - Site Plan - Constellation Avenue K Industrial Development (City Council District 1). Site Plan for two distribution warehouse buildings on 10.01 acres. Site 1A and a portion of Site 1, Block 5, GSID Community No. 5 Addition, Second Installment, City of Grand Prairie, Tarrant County, Texas, and addressed as 901 Avenue K East] THE UH, FIRST ITEM PLEASE. HI, JUNE. ITEM NUMBER FOUR. CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY. THE ITEM NUMBER FOUR ON THE AGENDA IS A SITE PLAN FOR STP 2 3 0 7 0 0 1 7. THIS IS A SITE PLAN FOR A NEW WAREHOUSE LOCATED AT 9 0 1 AVENUE K. SO THE APPLICANT PLANS TO COMBINE THE LOT AS SHOWN WITH THE YELLOW BOUNDARY AND DEMOLISH THE EXISTING BUILDING AT THE LEFT BOTTOM CORNER AND CONSTRUCT TWO NEW OFFICE WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS. THE SITE PLAN SHOWS TWO WAREHOUSE BUILDING WITH A COMBINED SQUARE FOOTAGE ABOUT 1 99 UH, THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. THEY HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT. THEY HAVE ALSO COMPLIED WITH THE PARKING STANDARD AS SHOWN THE APPLICANT, UM, HAS PROVIDED LANDSCAPING. THIS MEETS EITHER, UM, THIS EITHER MEETS OR EXCEED THE, UM, LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT PER APPENDIX X. HERE SHOWS THE PROPOSED ELEVATION. YOU CAN SEE THAT THE, THE BUILDING WILL BE A TILT WALL BUILDING WITH SOME BRICK ACCENTS AND DECORATIVE CORNICES AND EXCELLENT LIGHTING PROVIDED AS PART OF THIS. HERE ARE SOME OF THE ELEVATION DRAWINGS REFLECTING THE VIEWS. UM, THESE ARE KIND OF A PRIMARY FACADE. YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY HAVE PAID A LOT OF ATTENTION TO THE DETAIL OF THE, UH, EXIT MATERIALS AND THE BANDING AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. UM, AS I HAVE, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE NORTH ELEVATION, THE TRUCK COURTS WILL BE FACING INTERNALLY. IT WILL BE LOCATED BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS AS SHOWN TO MINIMIZE, UM, THE IMPACT TO THE, UM, [00:30:01] RIGHT OF WAYS NEARBY. WITH THAT BEING SAID, THE APPLICANT IS NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES. DRC RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BUT WANTED TO IMPOSE ONE CONDITION. UH, TRANSPORTATION HAS, UM, SHARED WITH UH, DRC STAFF THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONCERNS OF, UM, POSSIBLE TRUCK TRAFFIC TRAVELING TO THE EAST. UM, YOU CAN SEE ON THE AREAS THAT IT IS SURROUNDED BY WAREHOUSES. HOWEVER, FURTHER DOWN EAST THERE ARE SOME SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS THAT ARE EXISTING CURRENTLY. SO THE TRANSPORTATION HAS, UM, FORM, UH, FORMULATED A CONDITION TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO COME BACK DURING A CIVIL REVIEW TO GET A SEPARATE, UM, ROADWAY SIGNAGE APPROVED, REVIEWED, AND APPROVED BY THEM. UM, THIS WILL ACTUALLY HELP PROHIBITING SOME OF THE TRACK TR UH, TRUCK TRAFFIC EXITING THE SITE, UH, FROM TURNING LEFT. UM, AS BRETT SHARED DURING OUR, UM, BRIEFING THAT THERE ARE SOME PHYSICAL MEASURES, MEASURES THAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED ALONG AVENUE UK, WHICH WILL PHYSICALLY PREVENT IT, BUT THIS WOULD BE A SUPPORTIVE MEASURE OR A ADDITIONAL MEASURE TO HELP COMMUNICATE THAT YOU CANNOT TURN LEFT. THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION. DO YOU HAVE ANY, UM, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONERS? DO WE HAVE ANY, UM, JUST ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER CARD, MADAM CHAIR, UH, FROM THE APPLICANT, SCOTT ELLERMAN. UH, HE WANTED TO NOTE HIS SUPPORT FOR THE ITEM BUT DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK COMMISSIONERS. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ARE YOU COMFORTABLE ON THIS, JOHN? OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, MADAM CHAIR, IF NOBODY HAS ANY DISCUSSION, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE VOTE TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. UH, ITEM FOUR STP 2 3 0 7 0 1 7. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE ITEM FOUR BY COMMISSIONER FEDCO AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PEREZ. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT CASE PLEASE. [5. STP-23-07-0015 - Site Plan Amendment - GSW Phase II (City Council District 1). Site Plan for five industrial/warehouse buildings on 109.87 acres. Multiple tracts from the John C. Read Survey, Abstract No. 1183, Elizabeth Gray Survey, Abstract No. 1680, and John Hardin Survey, Abstract No. 540, City of Grand Prairie, Dallas County, Texas, Zoned Light Industrial, within SH-161 Corridor Overlay, and generally located east of Bear Creek, north of W Shady Grove Rd, and south of W Rock Island Rd, with an approximate location between 400 W Shady Grove Rd and 200 W Rock Island Rd] YES, THE ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THE AGENDA IS A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT STP 23 0 7 0 0 1 7. THIS IS THE PHASE TWO OF GSW DEVELOPMENT. THE SITE SHOWN, UM, THEY ACTUALLY GONE THROUGH A ZONE CHANGE AND CONCEPT PLAN AND SITE PLAN, UM, IN THE 2021 AND 2022 PROPOSING FIVE WAREHOUSES. SINCE THEN, THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, WAS ABLE TO ACQUIRE A LITTLE BIT ADDITIONAL LAND THAT WILL ACTUALLY IMPROVE THE OVERALL OVERALL DEVELOPMENT AND THE TRAFFIC FLOW WITHIN THE, WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT. SO THIS YEAR YOU HAVE SEEN THEM COME THROUGH WITH ZONE CHANGE REQUESTS AND, UM, OTHER REQUESTS. THIS IS A SITE PLAN. THIS WILL ALLOW THEM TO MOVE TO THE CIVIL PLANS AND THE BUILDING PERMITS THAT IS NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION. SO THEY'RE PROPOSING FIVE INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSES. SO AS I HAVE MENTIONED, UM, WHAT YOU HAVE SEEN IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR WAS THE MIDDLE BUILDING BEING VERY SHORT AND SMALL. THEY WERE ABLE TO REQUIRE THE ADDITIONAL LAND SHOWN WITH THE RED, UM, BOUNDARIES TO THE BOTTOM THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE MUCH BETTER FLOW OVERALL THROUGHOUT THE SITE. SO THIS REFLECTS THE OVERALL SITE PLAN WITH THE AREA INCORPORATED THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND THE OVERALL, UH, THE OPEN SPACE PLAN. THESE HAS BEEN UPDATED TO REFLECT JUST THE INCREASE ACREAGE. SO THEY UPDATED THE NUMBER OF TREES, UPDATED NUMBER OF SEATINGS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE STILL MEETING ALL THE APPENDIX X STANDARD. UM, THEY HAVE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED A TRAIL WALKING TRAIL WITH, UH, SHADED SEATING AREA AND WATER FEATURES AND THEY HAVE NOT MADE ANY CHANGES TO THAT. THERE'RE JUST KEEPING EVERYTHING AS IS. THIS IS THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS THAT WAS KIND OF SHOWN DURING THE CONCEPT PLAN PHASE, WHICH IS KIND OF, UM, WHAT THEY'RE PROVIDING ON THEIR ELEVATION DRAWINGS. SO YOU CAN SEE, UM, THIS IS ACTUALLY THE ROCK ISLAND, UM, ELEVATION TO THE NORTH. THIS WILL BE THE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. SO I JUST WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU, UH, THEY'RE BROKEN INTO TWO PARTS BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS VERY LONG. SO, AND THIS IS THE ELEVATION THAT YOU'LL SEE FROM THE SHADY GROVE FROM THE BUILDING THAT'S, UM, ALONG THAT STREET. AND THESE ARE THE TYPICAL EAST AND WEST ELEVATION FOR MOST OF THE BUILDING. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED TILT WALL WITH STONE ACCENT AND CORNICES AND GLAZING TO, UM, COMPLY WITH THE APPENDIX X STANDARD. UM, THE TRUCK COURTS WILL BE LOCATED BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, SO IT'LL BE HIDDEN BEHIND THE BUILDINGS FROM OUR MAJOR, UH, ROADWAYS. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING ONE VARIANCE. THIS IS ACTUALLY A REPEATED VARIANCE FROM WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. BACK IN, UM, NOVEMBER, 2022. THE APPLICANT REQUESTED TO ALLOW THEM TO GO, UM, [00:35:01] MORE THAN 1 51 15% OF THE, UM, ALLOWABLE PARKING AREA. UM, THE REASONING BEHIND THAT AT THAT TIME WAS THAT THIS ALLOWS THEM AS A SPECULATIVE WAREHOUSES SOME FLEXIBILITY WHEN ACQUIRING TENANTS. SOME OF THE USES SUCH AS DISTRIBUTION CENTERS OR E-COMMERCE CENTERS, SOMETIMES THEY'LL WANT TO SEE MORE, UH, PARKING. THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE VARIANCE THAT AT THAT TIME, BECAUSE THIS IS A NEW SITE PLAN REQUIREMENT, UH, STAFF IS BRINGING FORWARD TO THIS TO BE APPROVED ON THIS AGAIN. SO DRC RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. UM, THIS CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTION FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS, ANY DISCUSSION? THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? YES, MADAM CHAIR. WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER CARD FROM THE APPLICANT, MATT ROBERSON. UH, HE INDICATED THAT HE WANTED TO RECORD HIS SUPPORT BUT DID NOT WANT TO SPEAK COMMISSIONERS. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I THINK WE'RE GOOD ON THIS ONE AS WELL. UH, JOHN, UH, MADAM CHAIR, IF NOBODY HAS ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. UH, ITEM NUMBER FIVE TP TWO THREE DASH ZERO SEVEN DASH ZERO 15 WITH THE AFOREMENTIONED VARIANCE AND PER DRC UH, RECOMMENDATION. SECOND THAT WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE ITEM FIVE BY COMMISSIONER DUCO AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. UM, AS PER DRC RECOMMENDATIONS ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM. [6. STP-23-07-0020 - Site Plan Amendment - Ashton Warehouse Phase 2 (City Council District 1). Site Plan Amendment for a contractor shop to construct an additional 7,350 sq. ft. warehouse on 3.33 acres. Lot 1, Block 1, MBSA Addition, City of Grand Prairie, Tarrant County, zoned PD-371, and addressed as 415 S Great Southwest Pkwy] THE ITEM NUMBER SIX ON THE AGENDA IS ANOTHER SITE PLAN AMENDMENT. SDP 23 0 702. THIS IS A PHASE TWO OF THE ASHTON WAREHOUSE, SO THE ASHTON SEWING AND DRILLING. THERE ARE A EXISTING BUSINESS WITHIN GRAND PRAIRIE. THEY'RE LOCATED AT FOUR 15, UM, SOUTH GRAY SOUTHWEST. THEY ACTUALLY CAME FORTH FOR A SITE PLAN APPROVAL BACK IN, UM, A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AND CONSTRUCTED THE EXISTING BUILDING AND THE DETENTION AREA AS SHOWN THE BUSINESS BEEN, UM, DOING WELL. THEY JUST NEED ADDITIONAL WAREHOUSES WHERE THEY CAN STORE MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENTS INSIDE AND PROVIDE SMALL OFFICE FOR THE EMPLOYEE. SO THEY ARE PROPOSING THIS NEW ADDITION TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LOT. THEY HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT AND HAS MET THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THEY ARE KEEPING THE LANDSCAPING AS IT WAS APPROVED PREVIOUSLY. THEY HAVE ACTUALLY MET OR EXCEEDED THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED. SO THIS IS A STREET VIEW. YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING BUILDING TO THE LEFT OF THE PICTURE. UM, AS I HAVE SHOWN THAT THEY HAVE A DETENTION POND AREA. SO THE NEW BUILDING WILL BE SITTING KIND OF FURTHER, UM, INSIDE THEIR LOT. SO YOU'LL SEE PROBABLY THE SLIDE TOP OF IT WHERE THE ARROW INDICATES. SO THIS IS A BUILDING ELEVATION PROVIDED THEY'RE MATCHING THE EXISTING BUILDING AND MATERIALS AND COLORS SO THAT IT WILL HAVE A CONSISTENCY WHERE THEIR BUSINESS. SO THE APPLICANT IS NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES. DRC RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS? YOU'RE DOING VERY WELL, JUNE. THANK YOU . THAT BRIEFING, STAFF BRIEFING HELPS OUT TREMENDOUSLY. DO WE HAVE ANY UH, SPEAKER CARDS? NO. MADAM CHAIR, NO SPEAKER CARDS ON ITEM NUMBER. WHAT IS THIS? SIX. SIX. ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? NO QUESTIONS. CAN I GET A MOTION? DO YOU WANNA GO? IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER DISCUSSIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE. UH, ITEM NUMBER SIX S STP 2307 DASH 0 0 20, UH, WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. SECOND THAT WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE ITEM SIX AS PER DRC. RECOMMENDATIONS BY COMMISSIONER COCA AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT ITEM PLEASE. MADAM [7. ZON-23-07-0023 – PD Amendment/Concept Plan – The Square at Mountain View (City Council District 2). Application for Amendment to PD-16 to adopt a Concept Plan for a retail development on 14.33 acres. Being 14.33 acres out of the Stephen C. O'Gwinn Survey, Abstract No. 1103, J.W.E. Wallace Survey, Abstract No. 1517, and Benjamin F. Smith Survey, Abstract No. 1377, City of Grand Prairie, Dallas County, zoned PD-16, and addressed as 3940, 3948, 3950 and 3956 S. Beltline Rd] CHAIR. THE NEXT ITEM, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, A PD AMENDMENT CONCEPT PLAN ZON 23 0 7 0 0 23 STAFF HAS REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT. SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THIS TO BE TABLED TO THE NEXT PNC MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 11. UM, WE DO NEED A MOTION FOR THIS, SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JUNE, WE HAVE ITEM SEVEN, WHICH IS, UH, TO BE TABLED. CAN I GET A MOTION PLEASE? I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE CASE ZON DASH 23 DASH ZERO SEVEN DASH 0 2 3 UNTIL OUR NEXT P AND Z MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2023. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO TABLE ITEM SEVEN BY COMMISSIONER MADDEN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PEREZ. ALL THANK YOU. PLEASE RAISE, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION [00:40:01] PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. SO [Items 8 & 9] NEXT ITEM IS ACTUALLY A JOINT ITEM. THIS IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST THAT WE WILL, UH, THAT STEPH WILL BRIEF TOGE, UH, STEPH WILL EXPLAIN TOGETHER. SO THE FIRST ITEM IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. AS YOU ARE AWARE, WHEN THE REQUESTED ZONING DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE APPLICANT HAS TO REQUEST THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UM, PLAN TO BE AMENDED ONCE THE ZONING IS APPROVED. SO THE AREA SHOWN IN WITH THE, UM, BLUE OUTLINE WITH THE RED, THAT IS THE AREA THAT'S CURRENTLY DESIGNATED IT'S COMMERCIAL RETAIL OFFICE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THIS TO BE CHANGED TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. YOU CAN SEE THAT THE AREA IS PREDOMINANTLY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES CURRENTLY. UM, WE DO SEE SOME REMNANT OF SINGLE FAMILY ZONING ACROSS 1 61. SO I JUST WANTED TO COMMUNICATE TO YOU THAT EVEN IF THESE AREAS WERE TO DEVELOP AS A SINGLE FAMILY, THEY'LL STILL BE ACROSS 1 61 FROM THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. SO STEPH IS UNABLE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL SINCE THIS IS INCONSISTENT. HOWEVER, STEPH NOTES THAT THE REQUESTED ZONING MATCHES THE PREDOMINANT ZONING OF THE AREA. SO HERE'S THE ZONE CHANGE ITEM THAT IS GOING WITH THIS REQUEST. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A ZONE CHANGE FOR 14 ACRE LOT. THE CURRENT ZONING IS, UM, ACTUALLY PD FOR TOWNHOUSES. THEY'RE ASKING THIS TO BE CHANGED FOR PD FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE. THE REASON FOR THE PD IS JUST SO THAT WE CAN ADOPT THE CONCEPT PLAN WITH IT. THAT WAY ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT HAPPENS AFTERWARD, WE'LL GENERALLY HAVE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT'S SHOWN. OTHERWISE, THEY'LL HAVE TO COME AND AMEND THE CONCEPT PLAN AND COME TO YOU. UH, YOU FOR ANOTHER CONSIDERATION. SO THE PD CURRENTLY IS IN PLACE IS THE PD 4 1 12. THIS SHOWS, UH, 1 29 RESIDENTIAL LOTS. WE HAVE APPROVED THIS, UM, ZONE CHANGE BACK IN MAY OF 2021. IT'S BEEN LITTLE OVER TWO YEARS. WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANY DEVELOPMENT REQUESTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT. IT'S A SPRING SITTING VACANT. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO BE ABLE TO DO A CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE PD LIGHT INDUSTRIAL SHOWING THE 200 SQUARE FOOT WAREHOUSE. THE TRUCK DOT WILL BE HIDDEN, UM, WITH THE WING WALL THAT'S PROJECTING TO THE, AT THE CORNER AND ALSO THE EXISTING WAREHOUSE TO THE EAST, SORRY, TO THE RIGHT IS THE NORTH. SO TO THE BOTTOM IS THE EAST. SO THESE ARE THE CONCEPT ELEVATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED PRODUCT. SO AGAIN, STEPH IS UNABLE TO SUPPORT THE ZONE CHANGE BECAUSE THE PROPOSED USE IS NOT ALIGNING WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. HOWEVER, THE REQUESTED ZONING MATCHES THE PREDOMINANT ZONING OF THE AREA. STEPH WANTED TO REQUEST A CONDITION TO BE ADDED SHOULD THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL. UH, WHICH ARE THE FOLLOWING. ONE IS THAT THE APPLICANT SHALL OBTAIN A LETTER FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS ALLOWING INCREASED RUNOFF TO A DOWNSTREAM OWNER PER ENGINEERING REQUIREMENT. AND THE OTHER IS THAT THE APPLICANT SHALL OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM FEMA PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF ANY VERTICAL STRUCTURES PER ENGINEERING REQUIREMENT. SO THE CONCEPT PLAN, WE JUST WANTED TO GET THE ZONING SECURED BECAUSE FOR THEM TO DO ALL THESE STUDY AND COORDINATION, IT WILL TAKE QUITE A BIT OF TIME. SINCE THE ZONING IS NOT IN PLACE RIGHT NOW, IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO HAVE THEM, UM, HEARD, UH, BE HEARD BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST FIRST. THEN THEY CAN ADDRESS THESE THINGS DURING THE SITE PLAN, THE CIVIL PLAN REVIEW. UM, THIS CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS HERE WITH THE PRESENTATION. DO YOU HAVE ANY, UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? NO. THANK YOU. JUNE. MATT, WHAT DO WE HAVE? WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER CARD. OKAY. YES. UH, FROM SIDNEY STRATTON, WHO'S HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, UH, WHO INDICATED SHE WILL SPEAK AND SUPPORT. OKAY, WELCOME. HI, GOOD EVENING EVERYONE, AND WE'LL KEEP THIS REAL SHORT. APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S TIME. UH, SYDNEY STRATTON. I'M WITH PROLOGIS, THE DEVELOPER ON THE PROJECT. UM, 2021 MCKINNEY AVENUE OF DALLAS. OKAY, SO AS JUNE SHOWED YOU, THIS IS THE PROPOSED RENDERING FOR OUR CORNER. SO THIS WOULD BE IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT SHADY GROVE AND HIGHWAY 1 61, THE MAIN CORNER OF OUR PROPERTY. JUST WANTED TO DO A QUICK RUNDOWN, UM, OF PROLOGIS. WE'VE BEEN UP HERE A FEW TIMES. I KNOW SOME FAMILIAR FACES IN HERE. UH, WE OWN 60 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE IN DFW. UH, WE ARE THE LARGEST DEVELOPER AND OWNER OF, UH, WAREHOUSES IN THE WORLD. UM, SOME STATS UP THERE FOR YOU, SPECIFICALLY IN GRAND PRAIRIE, WE OWN 11 MILLION SQUARE FEET THAT TRANSLATES TO 47 BUILDINGS. UH, WE ARE A DEVELOPER OWNER. WE DEVELOP ALL OF OUR BUILDINGS, THEN MANAGE AND LEASE THEM IN HOUSE. I THINK THAT'S PRETTY UNIQUE COMPARED TO A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS YOU PROBABLY SEE UP HERE. SO I'LL SAY THAT ALLOWS US TO PUT A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY INTO THESE BUILDINGS. WE KNOW WE'RE GONNA BE HOLDING THEM FOR 30 50. WE'VE GOT SOME THAT ARE PROBABLY OLDER THAN THAT AT THIS POINT. UM, WE ALSO PUT SOME NOTES ON HERE JUST ABOUT THE TAXES FOR GRAND PRAIRIE. AGAIN, WE ARE COMMITTED TO BEING A PARTNER IN THIS PROJECT. UH, THIS IS JUST SORT OF AN OVERVIEW, KIND OF SAW IT THERE, BUT THE BLUE DOTS ARE ACTUALLY BUILDINGS WE OWN OR MANAGE. [00:45:01] UM, AND THEN AS YOU CAN SEE SORT OF IN THE AREA, THAT RED BOX IS THE SITE WE'RE LOOKING AT. SO A LOT OF INDUSTRIAL IN THE AREA. WE DO FEEL LIKE THIS IS THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR THIS CORNER. UH, SPECIFICALLY DUE TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. SOME CUSTOMERS WE'VE GOT IN GRAND PRAIRIE, UH, AGAIN, WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR THIS SITE TO BE SMALLER TENANTS, LIKELY THREE OR FOUR JUST IN THAT BUILDING. LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, NO MANUFACTURING AND LIGHT TROUGH TRAFFIC. SO SOME BIG NAMES YOU PROBABLY RECOGNIZE OF THERE. MAYBE SOME YOU HAVEN'T SEEN BEFORE. BUT ALL GREAT PARTNERS IN THE CITY OF GRAND PRAIRIE. UH, AND AGAIN, JUST ANOTHER VERSION OF THAT PROPOSED SITE PLAN. UH, WE ARE MEETING ALL STAFF REQUIREMENTS. NO VARIANCE IS REQUESTED. AND AGAIN, WE AGREE THAT A LOT OF ITEMS TO BE WORKED ON AT THE ENGINEERING PHASE. AGAIN, AS JUNE MENTIONED, SOME OF THOSE ITEMS CAN TAKE OVER A YEAR TO MANAGE. SO WE NEED TO GET THE ZONING CHANGE IN PLACE FIRST. UH, TWO ITEMS I DO WANNA MENTION SPECIFICALLY IS AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF, IT SEEMS THAT SHADY GROVE IS IN NEED OF SOME IMPROVEMENT. UH, WE'VE HEARD QUITE A WAYS DOWN FROM THIS CORNER. SO WE ARE COMMITTED TO HELPING PARTICIPATE IN THE FUNDING OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE STEEL AND THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND THE BUILDING HAS BEEN BACKED OFF, UH, YOU KNOW, TO REFLECT THAT. WE DON'T HAVE THE ROAD ALIGNMENT YET AS, UH, THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT'S STILL WORKING ON THAT. WE'LL ALSO HAVE ANOTHER ENTRANCE TO OUR SITE FROM HIGHWAY 1 61, JUST AGAIN TO ALLEVIATE THAT TRUCK TRAFFIC MAKE THIS CORNER REALLY USEFUL FOR OUR TEAM. AND THAT IS ALL I'VE GOT. ANY QUESTIONS? ANYTHING COMMISSIONER, ANY QUESTIONS? I JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU FIRST OF ALL FOR MAKING A COMMITMENT TO GRAND PRAIRIE . ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. WELL, I THINK IT'S NICE TO BE ABLE TO SEE SOME FACES UP HERE, SO YES, APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH. LET ME MAKE SURE WE HAVE ONE QUESTION. UH, COMMISSIONER. SURE. MS. SHANNON, RIGHT? MM-HMM. IT'S, IT'S SYDNEY. SYDNEY. OH, MISS SYDNEY. OKAY. YES. THANK YOU. SO THIS IS MY DISTRICT AND I UNDERSTAND THE IDEA ABOUT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE BECAUSE NOBODY IN MY DISTRICT SAYS I WISH WE COULD HAVE ANOTHER WAREHOUSE. UM, BUT, AND THIS AREA IS ZONED FOR TOWN, TOWN HOMES. HOWEVER, I JUST, IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE A VERY LONG PUTT TO GET TOWN HOMES DEVELOPED THERE. 'CAUSE IT'S JUST NOT CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S AROUND IT. UM, YOU HAD MENTIONED ABOUT THE TAX, THE TAX PROJECTION FOR THE CITY. YES. ARE YOU PURSUING AN ABATEMENT WITH ANY? WE'RE NOT. WE JUST THINK THAT IT WAS WORTH NOTING HOW MUCH, AGAIN, THAT WE, WE TRY TO BE A PARTNER AND MAYBE THAT'S NOT MATTERS AND MAYBE IT DOESN'T. UM, AND THEN AGAIN, NOTING THIS TRACK WOULD BE DEVELOPED WOULD BE 25 TIMES THE TAX REVENUE FOR THIS PIECE OF AREA. AGAIN, THE OTHER THING I THINK I'LL, I'M WORTH MENTIONING ABOUT PROLOGIS IS WE DO WANNA DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY. AS JUNE HAD MENTIONED, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S BEEN SITTING FOR A WHILE. UM, THERE ARE A LOT OF ENGINEERING ITEMS NEEDED ON THIS PROPERTY. FEMA IS NOT A SMALL HURDLE. WE DO HAVE THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT AND THE TEAM READY TO PREPARE THIS PROPERTY. UH, I'M SURE YOU HEAR A LOT OF THAT. BUT AGAIN, WE, WE ARE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF BUYING LAND AND LETTING IT SIT AROUND. UH, THAT'S NOT GOOD FOR ANYBODY'S BOTTOM LINE. SO. AND YOU'RE NOT THE CURRENT OWNER AT PRESENT? WE ARE NOT, NO. WE WILL BE CLOSING ON THIS LAND CONTINGENT ON THE ZONING CHANGE. I HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? GREAT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR COMING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? UH, CAN WE GET A, GET A MOTION ON THIS OR WOULD, WOULD YOU LIKE DISCUSSION? I'D LIKE TO JUST SAY THAT NO, GO AHEAD. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS WORTH THE VOTING FOR BECAUSE I, I, I TEND TO BELIEVE AS, AS JUNE SAID, THE PUTTING TOWNHOUSES THERE, IT HAS BEEN A PROBLEM GETTING SOMEBODY TO GET THAT OFF THE GROUND. AND, AND THE, THE RESIDENCE, THE RESIDENTIAL AREA IS ACROSS 1 61. IT'S NOT RIGHT NEXT TO IT. SO I, AND IT, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT AROUND THERE. SO IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING VIABLE JUST SO WE WON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, A A, A VACANT SPACE THERE. I MEAN, I THINK IT'LL BE HELPFUL. NO, YOU'RE RIGHT. AND FOR ME, IF THIS WAS CONTIGUOUS TO, UM, OR ACROSS A NORMAL STREET MM-HMM . FROM A MM-HMM . RESIDENCE, I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT, BUT MM-HMM . YOU REALLY HAVE, YOU HAVE 1 61 BETWEEN IT AND THE RESIDENCES, RIGHT. WHICH IS A, IS A DIFFERENT THING. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, DO I NEED TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE BOTH ITEMS TOGETHER OR? YES, SIR. OKAY. MM-HMM . SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, UH, TO APPROVE NOTWITHSTANDING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT WE APPROVE, UH, ITEMS EIGHT AND ITEMS NINE WITH THE, UH, RE WITH THE, UM, CONDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS THAT STAFF PUT IN THEIR PROPOSAL. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE ITEMS EIGHT AND NINE BY COMMISSIONER FEDCO AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PEREZ TO APPROVE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HANDS. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. NEXT CASE. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. [Items 10 & 11] SO OUR LAST TWO ITEMS WILL BE HEARD TOGETHER AGAIN IS YOUR CPA 23 0 7 0 0 1 5 AND ZERO N 23 0 7 0 0 2 4. SO THIS IS ANOTHER COMPREHENSIVE, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AMENDMENT AND ZONING CHANGE TOGETHER. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED 2 2 5 NORTHWEST 16TH [00:50:01] STREET. SO QUICKLY, I'M GONNA RUN THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AGAIN. SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS THAT YELLOW HATCHED BOX. IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED COMMERCIAL. UM, AND THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, UH, TO THE SOUTH OR TO THE NORTH, WEST AND EAST ARE ALL SF FOUR. THE SOUTH THAT IS COMMERCIAL. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP CURRENTLY DESIGNATES THIS AS MIXED USE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MATCH THE, UM, FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, UM, THAT IS CURRENTLY THERE. WE'RE ASKING THEM TO UPDATE THAT AS WELL AT THE SAME TIME. SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE COMING THROUGH AND THEY ARE PROPOSING A LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MATCH THAT SF SIX ZONING CHANGE THEY'RE REQUESTING. SO STAFF IS UNABLE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST SINCE THE SINGLE FAMILY USE IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE FLUME. HOWEVER, IT DOES MATCH THE PREDOMINANT ZONING IN THE AREA. SO MOVING ON TO THE ZONING CHANGE CASE. SO AGAIN, IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED COMMERCIAL. THEY ARE PROPOSING AN SF SIX WITH THE INTENTION OF BUILDING A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME THAT'S ON A LOT. THAT'S 0.07 ACRES. SO JUST ANOTHER LOOK AT THE EXISTING ZONING. AND I DO JUST WANNA NOTE THAT WHILE THAT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH IS ZONED COMMERCIAL, IT IS CURRENTLY A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. SO ON ALL FOUR SIDES, THEY'RE SURROUNDED BY EITHER SINGLE FAMILY ZONING OR SINGLE FAMILY USE. SO AGAIN, THIS IS THE SUMMARY OF THE LOT REQUIREMENTS FOR SF SIX. BECAUSE THIS IS A, A VERY OLD PLAT, THEY'RE NOT HAVING TO MEET ALL THESE REQUIREMENTS, BUT THEY WILL REQUIRE ZBA APPROVAL FOR SOME EXCEPTION OR SOME, UM, VARIANCES PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMITS. SO THIS IS THE STREET VIEW AT THE INTERSECTION. THIS IS A CONCEPT PLAN. THEY'RE NOT TIED DOWN TO THIS. THIS IS NOT A PD, BUT THIS IS AGAIN TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT IT WILL VAGUELY LOOK LIKE ON THAT LOT. SO THE EXISTING LOT IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTIES OR RESIDENTIAL USES ON ALL FOUR SIDES. THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE AND DO THE SIZE OF THE LOT. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MAY BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE USE OF THIS PARCEL AT THIS TIME. THEY'RE NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES. SO STAFF IS UNABLE TO RECOMMEND THIS REQUEST TO DO THE SINGLE FAMILY USE BEING INCONSISTENT WITH OUR FUTURE LAND USE MAP. HOWEVER, IT MATCHES THE PREDOMINANT ZONING OF THE AREA. THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? THIS IS AN INTERESTING CASE, I MUST SAY. MM-HMM . BUT YOU EXPLAINED IT VERY WELL IN THE BRIEFING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, SPEAKER CARDS? NO. MADAM CHAIR, NO SPEAKER CARDS. INTERESTING. THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER RAMIREZ IS, UH, AREA AND HE'S NOT HERE. SO WE PROBABLY NEED TO, DO WE NEED TO DISCUSS THIS OR DO Y'ALL WANNA MAKE A MOTION? ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ITEM? IT'S PRETTY, UH, YEAH, I THINK IT'S YOU. I CAN MOTION FOR THE WE. OKAY, GO AHEAD. MOTION PLEASE. MADAM SECRETARY, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM 10 CPA DASH 23 DASH ZERO SEVEN DASH 0 0 15. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ITEM 11 ZERO N DASH 23 DASH ZERO SEVEN DASH 0 0 2 4. THE ZONING CHANGE FOR 22, I'M SORRY, 2 25 NORTHWEST 16TH STREET. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE ITEM 10 AND 11, UM, WHICH IS AGAINST THE, UH, PNZ, BUT, UH, 'CAUSE IT DOESN'T CONFORM TO, UH, THE, BUT, UM, DO WE HAVE A, CAN I GET A SECOND ON THIS OR WE, IS THAT DISCUSSION? SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION TO FLOOR TO APPROVE ITEM 10 11 BY COMMISSIONER PEREZ. AND IT'S SECOND BY COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ TO APPROVE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. ITEM PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THAT BEING SAID, THAT IS THE LAST CASE. IT IS 7:00 PM AND WE ARE DONE. Y'ALL HAVE A NICE EVENING AND A GOOD LABOR. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.