[00:00:06]
[Planning & Zoning Briefing 102824]
OKAY.WELCOME TO THE STAFF BRIEFING OF THE CITY OF GRAND PRAIRIE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 28TH, 2024.
I'M CHERYL SMITH, CHAIR OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
THIS STAFF BRIEFING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING IS HEREBY POWERFUL ORDER AT 5:30 PM THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS WHERE THE STAFF BRIEFS THE COMMISSION AND REVIEWS THE CASES ON TONIGHT'S AT AGENDA COMMISSION.
MEMBERS WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS THAT MAY FACILITATE THE MEETING AND THE PRESENTATION OF THE CASES.
NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN DURING THE BRIEFING.
PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL TAKE PLACE DURING THE REGULAR MEETINGS WILL BEGIN EARLIER THAN 6:30 PM I'LL NOW CONDUCT A ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS TO CONFIRM THE PRESENCE OF THE QUORUM.
HERE, LET THE, UH, RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL MEMBERS ARE PRESENT EXCEPT FOR TY CHAPMAN.
ARE THERE ANY ITEMS FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION? NO.
STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING TO PRESENT? YES.
THE FIRST ITEM IS ITEM TWO, WHICH IS A SITE PLAN FOR THE GROVE AT GRAND PRAIRIE.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN TO ALLOW 59 TOWN HOMES.
THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF WEST MARSHALL DRIVE AND EAST OF ROBINSON ROAD.
AND THIS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED MULTIFAMILY ONE, MF ONE.
UH, THE ACREAGE IS 5.91 ACRES.
THERE ARE PROPOSING 59 TOWN HOMES WITH FRONT ENTRY GARAGES.
18 OF THE UNITS WILL BE BETWEEN 1,150 SQUARE FEET TO 1,299 SQUARE FEET.
THAT'S 30% OF THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT.
AND THEN 41% OF THE UNITS WILL BE 1300 SQUARE FEET OR MORE.
THAT WOULD BE 70% OF THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT.
THEY ARE PROPOSING 12 GUEST PARKING SPACES, WHICH IS MEETING THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR GUEST SPOTS.
THEY ARE MEETING ALL THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND THEIR TREE MITIGATION FEE IS GOING TO BE $82,800.
HERE ARE THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS.
SO THIS WILL BE UP TO THREE STORIES AND, UH, FRONT, UH, GARAGES WILL BE ON THE FRONT AND THEN IT'LL BE RECESSED, UH, AT FOUR CERTAIN TOWN HOMES.
HERE IS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
THE SITE PLAN MUST MEET ALL UDC AND APPENDIX W REQUIREMENTS.
TOWN HOME UNITS SHALL MEET THE REQUIRED SETBACKS.
UH, MASONRY WALL SHALL BE PLACED ON A COMMON LOT, UH, TO BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOA.
THE ALL THE PROPOSED PRIVATE STREETS MUST CONFORM TO THE SAME STANDARDS REGULATING THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC STREETS.
UH, PRIVATE STREETS SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE HOA SCREENING FENCE CANNOT BE LOCATED, UH, WITHIN THE REQUIRED VISIBLY TRIANGLES, UH, PARKING MUST COMPLY WITH A DESIGN CRITERIA OUTLINED IN ARTICLE 10.6.
AND LASTLY THAT THE GATED ENTRY DESIGN AND LOCATION MUST CONFORM TO PROVISIONS LISTED IN ARTICLE 25 2 2 4.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION ON THIS ITEM.
I WANNA SAY THANK YOU TO, TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR PUTTING ALL OF THOSE, UH, CONDITIONS ON ALL OF THESE CASES GOING FORWARD.
I LIKE THAT BECAUSE IT, IT TAKES THE PRESSURE OFF OF US.
UH, I'LL, I ADD THOUGH THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING QUITE SOME TIME AND SO WE'RE GETTING TO THE END, UM, SAY SEVERAL MONTHS OF GOING BACK AND FORTH.
AND SO THESE CONDITIONS WERE THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT THEY FINALIZE WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT IF THEY MOVE FORWARD.
SO THE GOAL IS TO TRY TO GET THIS, THE BELIEVE THE PRODUCT IS MODERN STYLE FOR SALE PRODUCT THAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR.
BUT THESE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE JUST COULD NOT GET THEM TO ADDRESS COMPLETELY IN THE SITE PLAN.
THEY UNDERSTAND THEY NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, BUT FROM A TIMING STANDPOINT, WE GO LIKE, OKAY, IF YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, WE PUT THEM AS CONDITIONS.
MRS. HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. VAN? CAN YOU, UH, DO YOU HAVE A SITE PLAN THAT I COULD SEE WHERE, WHAT THE DEAL IS WITH THE FIVE FEET? UM, THE SETBACK, I'M, I'M, I'M CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT THEY'RE ELIMINATING THE SETBACK FROM THE, SO, UM, THE STREET SIDES ARE, THEY'RE, SO THEY'RE NOT ELIMINATING THE SETBACK.
UH, SO IT IS A FIVE FOOT SETBACK, BUT ON CERTAIN LOCATIONS IT WAS CLOSER.
IT SEEMED LIKE THEY WERE GOING
[00:05:01]
UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND NOT PROVIDING THAT FIVE FOOT.SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ADDING THAT CONDITION.
WHENEVER THE CIVIL PLAN COMES IN, THEY'LL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THAT FIVE FOOT FOR THE DEPARTMENT.
SO THEY'RE NOT ASKING ANY VARIANCES AT THIS TIME.
UH, AND IN THE TABLE THAT THEY'VE PROVIDED, UH, LEMME GO BACK.
IT SAYS THAT THEY'RE COMPLYING WITH THE FIVE FOOT, WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WERE WITH THAT CONDITION.
WELL, I MEAN, IT'S NOT BLOWING UP PROPERLY.
IT'S, UH, BUT THE, THE TABLE WITH MF ONE, THE SIDE SETBACK MUST BE MINIMUM OF FIVE FOOT THE SIDE SETBACK.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LITERALLY THIS END IN THE END OF THE ROWS OF THE BUILDINGS SET BACK FROM THE STREET AREA.
FIVE FOOT HERE, FIVE FOOT ON THE END.
SO THEY'RE, THEY ARE ATTACHED UNITS MM-HMM
SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE, THAT'S ZERO FOOT ON THE ATTACHED, BUT ON THE SIDE.
UH, AND THAT'S THINKING FRONT WAS MY CONCERN TOO.
FRONT IS 20 FEET AND THEY'RE COMPLYING WITH THAT.
AND SO ARE THEY, IT SEEMS LIKE A PRETTY CONCRETE THING, BUT IF YOU DREW IT, YOU DRAW IT, THE MATH WORKS, YOU BUILD IT THAT WAY, WHAT IS THE CONCERN ABOUT IT NOT HAPPENING? JUST AS YOU SEE IT IS NOT NOTED ON THERE, UH, ON CERTAIN AREAS.
SO WE WERE CONCERNED THAT THEY DIDN'T COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND ON CERTAIN AREAS.
SO, UM, STAFF FELT LIKE IT WAS APPROPRIATE JUST TO COVER, UH, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT IT'S A REQUIREMENT FOR ALL AREAS OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
AND, AND CAN YOU REMIND ME AGAIN, HOW MANY UNITS IS THIS? 59.
AND SO WE ONLY HAVE 12 GUEST SPACES.
AND THAT IS CODE OR 59 UNITS? CORRECT.
SO EACH UNIT HAS, UH, TWO GARAGES.
AND THEN, UH, THE FIVE UNIT IS, SO EACH, FOR FIVE TOWN HOMES, YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE ONE GUEST PARKING SPOT.
SO 2 59 YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE 11 POINTS, SOMETHING SO ROUNDED TO 12.
AND SO IS A SETBACK FAR ENOUGH AND I THINK IT IS 20 FEET THAT WILL ACCOMMODATE CARS ON THE DRIVEWAY, RIGHT? CORRECT.
SO THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO TWO, UH, PARK TWO VEHICLES IN THE GARAGE AND PARK TWO IN THE DRIVEWAY.
SO SEAN, THIS IS, THIS USED TO BE, THIS WAS OWNED MULTIFAMILY.
NOW THEY WANT TO DO IT INDIVIDUALLY NEEDED IT? YES.
WELL, IT WAS ZONED, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND INSTEAD HELPED ME WITH THIS, UH, A LONG TIME AGO, SOMEONE CAME THROUGH WITH THE PROJECT AND IT WAS A PD.
UH, SO THEY'RE JUST REVISING THE EXISTING PD TO ADDRESS THEIR NEEDS FOR THEIR PROJECT.
UM, SO I THINK THAT THE PRIOR APPLICATION WAS TOWN HOMES.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS FOR SALE OR FOR RENT.
I THOUGHT ON YOUR ORIGINAL ON SLIDE ONE, IT SAID MULTIFAMILY ONE.
SO YEAH, CURRENTLY IT'S ZONE MULTIFAMILY ONE AND THERE ZONING, IT'S MULTIFAMILY ONE.
BUT THE ACTUAL PRODUCT THAT WAS SHOWN ON THE PLA WAS A TOWNHOME LAKE, AT LEAST FOR SALE INDIVIDUALLY NEEDED MARSHALS.
UH, THE APPLICANT WILL BE HERE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
THE QUESTIONS, I HAD A CONCERN WITH REGARD TO IT BEING THREE STORY.
I REALLY, IT BROUGHT THIS, IT WORRIES ME THAT THREE STORY AGAIN, THERE'S ONE SECTION THAT'S RESIDENTIAL SAW THAT AS RESIDENTIAL.
SO ALL, ALL OF IT WILL BE RESIDENTIAL.
UH, AND THE MULTIFAMILY MF ONE OR TOWNHOUSE ZONING STANDARD THAT THEY'RE FOLLOWING ALLOWS UP TO 35 FEET AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE COMPLYING WITH.
AND IT MAY BE SHORTER THAN THAT, UH, IN OVERALL LENGTH, BUT THAT'S THE MAX THEY CAN GO IS 35 FEET.
AND I, I NOTICED IN THE READING THAT IT SPOKE TO, UH, THE, THE, THE FACADE THAT THE, THEY LOOK SO MUCH, UH, COOKIE CUTTER BUT NOT A, MAYBE VARIATIONS IN THE DESIGN.
SO 73% STUCCO AND 23%, UH, WOOD SIDING.
SO IF THEY'RE REQUIRED TO ADHERE TO THE APPENDIX W STANDARDS, THEN THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S VARIATION IN THIS STUFF.
I MEAN, Y'ALL THINK THAT, I MEAN, IT JUST DOESN'T LOOK LIKE MUCH VARIATION TO ME.
I, I JUST THOUGHT WHEN I FIRST LOOKED AT IT, LIKE, UH, IT JUST DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, I WASN'T, IT'S NOT A PLAY ON THE MATERIAL COLOR, BUT, UM, THERE ARE VARIATIONS IN THE LAYOUT OF THE WINDOWS, AND I THINK THOSE UNITS DON'T HAVE GARAGES RIGHT IN THE BACK SIDE.
IT JUST DOESN'T, TO ME IT'S JUST KIND OF PLAIN.
IT JUST, IT, IT A LITTLE MORE VARIATION I WOULD THINK.
I WAS GLAD THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER HIT ON THE, UH,
[00:10:01]
GUEST PARKING BECAUSE I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT TOO.I THOUGHT THAT REALLY, YOU KNOW, YOU GOTTA SPEND THAT MUCH MONEY FOR A PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU HAVE VISITORS, YOU KNOW, JUST SEEMS LIKE, AND EVERY, IF EVERYBODY HAS VISITORS THINK THANKSGIVING AND THE HOLIDAYS, IT'S GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER GETS THERE FIRST.
YOU KNOW, THEY, WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF THE PEOPLE? WHO ARE THEY GONNA DO, YOU KNOW, IT'S KIND OF, YOU KNOW.
AND THEN, UM, HAVE WITH THE, THE RESIDENTIAL THAT'S ATTACHED ON ONE OF THE SIDES THAT THEY HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE HOMEOWNERS, NOT WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
THE RESIDENTIAL TO THE, TO THE NORTH IS ACTUALLY BEING CONSTRUCTED AND THOSE ARE TOWN HALLS.
I JUST KNOW IT SAID RESIDENTIAL ON THERE.
I THINK THAT WAS PRETTY MUCH IT FOR ME.
UH, ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY CONCERNS ON THIS ONE? THANK YOU.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS ANOTHER SITE PLAN FOR BJ'S WHOLESALE, UH, CLUB.
THIS, UH, WILL BE LOCATED AT 9 65 MAYFIELD DRIVE IS ZONE PD 4 5 6, UH, AND IS, UH, ALLOCATED ON 12.28 ACRES.
THIS IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE IKEA, UH, IN GRAND PRAIRIE.
SO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS 1000 FOUR HUNDRED SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY NINE SQUARE FOOT MEMBERSHIP ONLY RETAIL STORE WITH EIGHT FUEL UH PUMPS.
AND THE FUEL PUMPS ARE ON THE SOUTHWESTERN CORNER OF THE SITE PLAN.
UH, THERE WILL BE AN EIGHT FOOT MASONRY SCREENING WALL THAT IS DEPICTED WITH, UH, THE RED, UH, LINE HERE.
AND SO IT WOULD BE AN EIGHT FOOT SCREENING WALL THEN, UH, ROSA OF TREES AND SHRUBBERY.
SO THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT, UH, THE RESIDENCES TO THE NORTH HAD CONCERNS WHEN THE PD CAME THROUGH.
SO THIS WAS DEFINITELY ONE OF THE CONDITIONS.
UM, THERE WILL BE 15% OF THE TOTAL PARKING WILL BE PERMEABLE PAVING, AND THEY ARE EITHER, THEY'RE EXCEEDING THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
THEY'RE EITHER MEETING OR EXCEEDING THE PARKING OR THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
HERE ARE THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS.
SO THERE IT'LL MOSTLY BE CONCRETE WALL PANELS, EFIS AND BRICK.
THIS WAS THE SAME ELEVATION THAT WAS APPROVED WITH THE PD SLASH CONCEPT PLAN.
THEY ARE MEETING APPENDIX F MENU ITEMS, A MINIMUM OF 12.
UM, AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITHOUT CONDITIONS.
SO WE HAD CONDITIONS WHEN THE PACKET WAS RELEASED TO YOU ALL.
SINCE THEN, THE APPLICANT HAS REVISED THEIR SITE PLAN AND ARE MEETING ALL THE TRANSPORTATION COMMENTS AND WILL NOT BE NEEDING A CONDITION.
SO THIS IS THE REASON IT'S HIGHLIGHTED THE TWO CONDITIONS.
SO WE'LL BE TAKING THAT OUT FOR THE COUNCIL PACKET.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? I JUST WITNESS BS I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE BJS.
SO IT'S EXPANDING TO TO NORTH TEXAS AREA.
IT'S SAMS AND COSTCO ALL MADE UP OF DO MUCH.
I'M GLAD ENOUGH IS SITTING YOU GUYS.
ANY OTHER CONCERNS, COMMISSIONERS? I'M SORRY.
THIS IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FOUR.
THEY'RE COMING THROUGH FOR A NEW SANCTUARY LOCATED AT 2000 AND 2002 PINE STREET.
IT IS ZONED TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND IT'S ON 0.0976 ACRES.
SO YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, THAT SMALLER BUILDING IS THE EXISTING BUILDING.
IT'S A 2,198 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING.
THE BUILDING TO THE FAR RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED SANCTUARY, WHICH IS 4,500 SQUARE FEET.
SO IT IS MEETING OUR DENSITY AND ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.
IT DOES, IT DID RECEIVE A PARKING EXCEPTION THROUGH DRC.
SO OUR UDC DOES ALLOW THE REDUCTION OF PARKING, OF REQUIRED PARKING UP TO 15% BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE.
UM, AND SO FOR THIS ONE, WE FELT IT WAS APPROPRIATE BECAUSE THERE ARE 66 PARKING SPOTS, WHICH IS WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR THE NEW SANCTUARY.
TWO ADDITIONAL PARKING SPOTS WERE REQUIRED FOR THAT EXISTING BUILDING, BUT IT'S GONNA BE MAINLY USED AS STORAGE.
SO STAFF FELT IT WAS APPROPRIATE IN THIS INSTANCE TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE THAT PARKING EXCEPTION.
FOR THOSE TWO SPOTS, IT'S MEETING MOST OF OUR LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS.
AND I'LL TOUCH BASE ON THE, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IN JUST A SECOND.
THESE ARE THEIR BUILDING ELEVATIONS.
YOU CAN SEE IT'S A PRETTY, UH, STANDARD JUST METAL BUILDING.
THERE ARE VERY MINOR STUCCO ACCENTS AND VERY MINOR GLAZING, BUT FOR THE MOST PART IT'S JUST GONNA BE A METAL BUILDING.
SO THE VARIANCE THAT IS, UH, REQUIRED.
SO SECTION 8.7 0.2 OF ARTICLE EIGHT REQUIRES STREET TREES TO BE PLANTED A MINIMUM OF 25 LINEAR FEET AND A MAXIMUM OF LINEAR 50 LINEAR FEET APART ALONG COLLECTOR STREETS.
SO I'M GONNA GO BACK TO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
[00:15:01]
THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE PLAN, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S NO TREES OVER THERE.THE REASON BEING IS, SO WE REQUIRE A 15 FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
AND SO THAT CUTS INTO BASICALLY WHERE THEY CAN PUT THE TREES.
WE DON'T ALLOW ANY NEW TREES AND UTILITY EASEMENTS.
SO ON THE WESTERN PORTION, THEY EX EXTENDED THAT LANDSCAPE, UM, BUFFER.
SO THEY COULD ADD TREES THERE.
BUT ON THE EASTERN PORTION IT'S MORE CHALLENGING 'CAUSE OF THAT EXISTING BUILDING.
AND, UM, THAT BLOCK THAT'S WHITE, THAT'S ACTUALLY AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY.
SO ON THE EASTERN SIDE IS A LOT MORE CHALLENGING TO ADD TREES.
SO THEY ARE REQUIRING A, A VARIANCE FOR A MAXIMUM OF 162 FEET APART BECAUSE TREES ARE JUST REALLY CHALLENGING ALONG THAT EASTERN PORTION OF THE LOT.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCES, RECOGNIZING THAT THE SITE HAS SOME CONSTRAINTS, MAKING THAT VARIANCE NECESSARY.
UM, AND SO DOC RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
IT CONCLUDES MY STAFF PRESENTATION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS ON THIS ONE? THAT IS FOR THAT FINE.
THE NEXT ITEM IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 24 0 9, UH, 0 0 3 8 FOR ZOOM PERFORMANCE.
UH, YOU MAY REMEMBER THIS ONE.
THIS IS LOCATED ON 2100 EAST AND MAIN STREET.
THIS CAME BEFORE YOU BACK IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR.
AND AT THAT TIME THE APPLICANT WAS REQUESTING THREE LAND USES, WHICH WAS, UH, USED AUTO SALES, AUTO REPAIR, AND AUTO BODY AND PAINT WITH THEIR NEW REQUEST.
THEY'RE ONLY REQUESTING AUTO BODY AND PAINT SHOP.
THIS WAS APPROVED, THE PREVIOUS SUP WAS APPROVED BY PNC BUT WAS DENIED, UH, AT COUNSEL.
SO THE APPLICANT IS COMING BACK AND AMENDING AND ONLY REQUESTING ONE USE.
UH, THIS IS ZONE PD 60 AND UH, IS 0.30 ACRES.
THERE IS ONE VARIANCE ATTACHED, UH, TO THIS REQUEST, WHICH IS, UH, TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM PARKING FROM 11 SPACES TO EIGHT SPACES.
AND THIS WILL BE APPOINTMENT ONLY.
SO STAFF IS OKAY WITH THAT VARIANCE.
THE OPERATIONAL HOURS ARE, UH, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, 9:00 AM TO 5:00 PM APPOINTMENT ONLY.
AND THE SERVICES OFFERED WILL BE AUTO BO UH, PAINT AND BODY RESTORATION.
AND THESE ARE SPECIFICALLY FOR, UH, MAZDA MIATAS.
SO ONLY ONE BRAND OF CAR THAT THEY'RE TARGETING.
THERE WERE, UH, 20 NOTICES SENT.
WE DID RECEIVE ONE IN SUPPORT AND ONE IN OPPOSITION.
THE LETTERS ARE ON IN YOUR PACKET ON PAGE 46 AND 47 IF YOU WANNA REVIEW THEM, UH, PRIOR TO THE NEXT SESSION.
UM, DRC RECOMMENDS, UH, APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
THE BUSINESS SHALL BE OPERATED IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL STATE, FEDERAL, AND LOCAL LAWS.
THE BUSINESS SHALL OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND A RB PERMIT.
UH, AND LASTLY, ALL BUSINESS OPERATIONS MUST BE CONDUCTED INDOORS.
UH, STORING OR PARKING OF DAMAGED VEHICLES OUTDOORS IS PROHIBITED.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION SUBMISSIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? JUST FOR THE RECORD, I'M BEING NOSY.
ONE, WHAT WAS THE REASON THAT THE COUNCIL, UH, DENIED IT? IT WAS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO I'M NOT
SO THEY WERE REQUESTING THREE OF RV OUT RELATED BUSINESSES, UM, AND THEY TOOK IT DOWN TO ONE.
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX IS AN SUP SITE PLAN FOR A MIDSCALE HOTEL LOCATED AT 4 1 1 5.
IT IS LOCATED WITHIN OUR IH 20 CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT, ZONED PD 30.
SO IT WON'T BE THIS ENTIRE LOT.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO, IF IT'S APPROVED, GO AND PLAT AND CARVE OUT A PORTION OF 2.209 ACRES.
SO THIS IS A MID-SCALE HOTEL WITH 98 ROOMS. IT IS MEETING MOST OF OUR DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS.
I WILL TOUCH ON A VARIANCE LATER.
AND IT IS MEETING OUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
AGAIN, PARKING AND APPENDIX F ACTS AS MAXIMUMS, NOT MINIMUMS. AND SO THEY'RE A LITTLE UNDER WHAT THE MAX WOULD BE.
SO IT IS MEETING OUR LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL REMEMBER FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE HERE, BUT THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST THAT WENT TO COUNCIL, I BELIEVE LAST YEAR.
AND SO A SIX FOOT MASONRY SCREENING WALL IS REQUIRED.
COUNCIL ACTUALLY BUMPED THAT UP TO EIGHT FEET.
THIS APPLICANT WILL BE MATCHING THAT EIGHT FEET MASONRY SCREENING WALL TO THE SOUTH ALONG THAT RESIDENTIAL.
SO THESE ARE THEIR BUILDING ELEVATIONS.
THE WESTERN EASTERN THE SOUTHERN ELEVATION YOU SEE THERE IS ACTUALLY WHAT'S GOING TO BE FACING THAT RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH.
SO IF Y'ALL REMEMBER IN ARTICLE FOUR OF THE UDC, WE DO HAVE HOTEL PROXIMITY LIMITS.
SO IF, UH, THERE'S A LIMIT ON, DEPENDING ON YOUR CHAIN SCALE RATING, HOW MANY HOTELS CAN BE WITHIN A ONE MILE, UM, LIMIT BASICALLY.
[00:20:01]
THIS IS A MIDSCALE HOTEL.SO MIDSCALE AND UPPER MIDSCALE ARE LIMITED TO FOUR.
YOU CAN SEE ON THAT MAP PROVIDED THERE.
THE UPPER MIDSCALE ARE IN BLUE.
SO BECAUSE OF THAT, THEY DO REQUIRE A VARIANCE TO BASICALLY AND PUT A FIFTH MID-SCALE HOTEL WITHIN THIS ONE MILE RADIUS.
SO AMENITIES IN ARTICLE FOUR, WE DO HAVE AMENITY LISTS.
SO ALL HOTELS HAVE TO PROVIDE ALL TIER ONE AMENITIES.
THEY ARE PROVIDING ALL OF THEM.
THEY DO REQUIRE A VARIANCE FOR THE POOL SURFACE WATER AREA, WHICH I'LL COVER AT THE END.
SO FOR TIER TWO, UM, MIDSCALE HOTELS ONLY HAVE TO PROVIDE ONE.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY PROVIDING FOUR, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE.
SO AGAIN, THEY'RE IN THAT CORRIDOR OVERLAY.
SO THEY ARE SUBJECT TO OUR APPENDIX F CHECKLIST AND THEY ARE PROVIDING THE 12 ACQUIRED MENU ITEM LIST.
OKAY, SO VARIANCES, THE FIRST VARIANCE IS POOL SIZE.
SO THIS IS FROM THAT AMENITY CHECKLIST.
SO WE REQUIRE A POOL AREA WITH A POOL SURFACE OF 3000 SQUARE FEET.
THEY'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR 300 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS PRETTY STANDARD FOR THE HOTEL REQUEST WE GET IN THE CITY, UM, FOR ACCENT MATERIALS.
SO ARTICLE OR APPENDIX F ACTUALLY HAS A LIST OF APPROVED ACCENT MATERIALS, WHICH ARE ALLOWED ON 10% OF THE FACADE OF THE BUILDINGS ON OUR QUARTER OVERLAY DISTRICTS.
SO THE ACCENT MATERIAL THEY'RE REQUESTING IS NOT ON THAT APPROVED LIST.
SO THEY'RE ACTUALLY WANTING TO DO HIGH PRESSURE LAMINATE.
SO BECAUSE OF THAT, THEY REQUIRE A VARIANCE FOR THE TYPE OF MATERIAL THEY'RE REQUESTING.
UM, THE THIRD VARIANCE IS FOR GLAZING.
SO WE REQUIRE EITHER 50% OF THE ENTIRE VERTICAL SURFACE AREA OR THE LENGTH OF ALL FOUR FACADES TO BE GLAZING.
SO THEY'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR 31.8%.
THEY'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR CANOPY.
SO WE DO REQUIRE 25% OF THE LENGTH OF ALL FOUR FACADES.
BUIES, THEY'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR 19.4%.
SO HEIGHT, THIS WAS THE DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL VARIANCE THEY'RE REQUIRING.
SO THEIR BASE ZONING AND PD 30 IS COMMERCIAL, WHICH HAS A LIMIT OF 25 FEET.
FOR HEIGHT, THEY ARE REQUESTING 52.7 FEET.
AND AGAIN, THAT LAST VARIANCE IS BECAUSE OF THE CONCENTRATION LIMITS IN ARTICLE FOUR.
SO THEY NEEDED VARIANCE FOR ADDING A FIFTH MID-SCALE LOCATION OR FIFTH MID-SCALE HOTEL IN THAT LOCATION.
SO 57 NOTICES WERE SENT ZERO RETURN IN FAVOR AND EIGHT RETURN OPPOSED.
I'M SURE Y'ALL SAW, UM, PRETTY STANDARD CONCERNS.
UM, JUST CONCERNS ON THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING IN PARTICULAR THE LACK OF PRIVACY CITIZENS WERE CONCERNED ABOUT.
SO PRETTY STANDARD WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT? I THINK SO.
STAFF IS UNABLE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT MEET THE UDC CONCENTRATION REQUIREMENTS FOR HOTELS.
HOWEVER, SHOULD THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE DETENTION OR PROVIDE A DOWNSTREAM ASSESSMENT STUDY TO PROVE NO NEGATIVE IMPACT BY NOT PROVIDING DETENTION.
AND THE PROPOSAL SHALL MEET ALL APPENDIX F DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR ACTS OF MATERIALS.
THAT CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
SO TODAY YOU SAID THE CARBON OUT A SECTION OF THAT PIECE OF LAND AND THEY HAVE, THEY, THEY PREFER NOT TO CREATE A DETENTION POND OR, SO THE, THE, THOSE WERE CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE HAPPENED WITH ENGINEERING.
RYAN HARRELL IS HERE, BUT THEY, I BELIEVE THAT THEIR GOAL IS TO DO A STUDY TO BASICALLY PROVE NO NEGATIVE IMPACT DOWNSTREAM.
UM, AND SO WE SPOKE TO ENGINEERING AND RYAN WAS COMFORTABLE LETTING THEM, UM, MOVE FORWARD WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY'RE EITHER GOING TO HAVE TO PROVIDE THAT STUDY THAT PROVES THAT OR DO A DETENTION, SOME KINDA DETENTION SYSTEM.
SO HOW, HOW BIG WAS THE LOT AGAIN? 2.209 ACRES.
AND THEY'RE USING ONLY, SO THIS IS, THIS IS THE ENTIRE LOT.
SO THEY'RE USING THIS PORTION HERE.
UH, THEY'RE GONNA COME BEHIND MM-HMM
SO THERE, LET ME SEE IF I CAN BACK TO THIS.
ALL THE ACCESS FROM, SO YEAH, SO THE ACCESS RIGHT HERE.
SO THIS PORTION RIGHT HERE IS THAT SUP SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR? YEAH.
SO, AND THEN THIS APPEARS THE, THE BANK.
SO, BUT THEIR ACCESS IS LARGELY GONNA CUT THROUGH THAT, UM, OR THE COMMERCIAL THAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR.
SO DO YOU KNOW, ARE THERE, UM, I GUESS THERE WOULD BE NO ISSUE WITH THEM BEING ABLE TO, UM, BREAK OFF AND SELL OR BUILD SOMETHING ELSE IN THE OTHER PORTION.
SO THAT'S WHY, YEAH, THEY'RE GONNA, UH, REPL AND CARVE THIS PORTION OUT.
THAT'S WHY THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE RETENTION PLAN, I'M GUESSING.
THAT'D BE MY GUESS, BUT, OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I, I WANT, IS THIS THE ONE WHERE THERE WE'RE GONNA BE TWO HOTELS BACK TO BACK? NO.
SO THAT WAS ACTUALLY OFF OF 1 61.
BUT QUICKLY, JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY COEXISTING IN THIS FIFTH ONE, ARE WE HAVING OVERFLOW ISSUES THAT TAKE SO JUST IT'S A CONCENTRATION? YEAH, JUST A CONCENTRATION LIMIT THAT COUNCIL IMPLEMENTED, WHICH I'M NOT SURE WHEN, BUT SO JUST TO ADDRESS, I THINK THE AMOUNT OF HOTELS THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY, THEY WANTED IT TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL VARIANCE BE REQUIRED.
SO COUNSEL HAD THAT DISCRETION TO DECIDE
[00:25:01]
IF IT WAS A GOOD FIT OR NOT.EVEN IF THERE'S A LOT OF EXISTING HOTELS IN THE AREA.
MR.
CAN YOU MAKE THAT A LITTLE BIT BIGGER? 'CAUSE I'M KIND, I CAN GO BACK TO OUR LOCATION.
I WANT TO SEE THE DIFFERENT HOTELS AND PROXIMITY.
IT'S JUST KIND OF HARD TO SEE.
SO THESE TWO RIGHT HERE, THESE ARE TWO UPPER MIDSCALE HOTELS.
SORRY, I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN, THIS IS ANOTHER MID-SCALE.
AND THEN WE'VE GOT SOME ECONOMY AND INDEPENDENT ONES HERE, WHICH DON'T APPLY TO THE PROXIMITY RULES.
BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF ALL THE HOTELS IN THE AREA.
WELL, I, I HAVE CONCERN THAT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE TOO MANY IN, IN ONE CONCENTRATED AREA.
UH, JUST LIKE WE HAVE MORATORIUM AMONG THE APARTMENTS, YOU KNOW, TO A POINT.
UH, BUT THE, I DON'T REALLY LIKE THE FOUR STORY BUSINESS.
'CAUSE THAT SEEMS TO BE, I KNOW IT'S, IT CAN BE APPROVED, BUT THE HEIGHT AND THEN LOOKING DOWN, YOU KNOW, IN THE RESIDENCE, IT JUST DOESN'T APPEAL TO, IS IT FOUR STORIES? IT'S FOUR STORIES.
I GUESS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IT'S IS THAT NO, IT'S, IT'S A SUP.
SO THEY, THEY HAVE AN ABILITY TO LOOK AT HIDE, BUT THE APPROVAL PROCESS IS AN AND ORDER TO DETERMINE IF THIS, YOU KNOW, I, WELL, I, I HAD CONCERN ABOUT THAT AND THE CONCERN OF THE, UH, RESIDENTS BECAUSE ONE, UH, RESIDENT SAY THERE'S BEEN FLOODING, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE FLOODING ALL THE TIME.
AND THEN DOING SOMETHING EVERY TIME YOU BUILD AND BRING ALL THAT CEMENT, WHERE IS, WHERE IS THE WATER GONNA GO? YOU KNOW? SO I, I FEEL THEIR PAIN ON THAT, YOU KNOW, IF SHE'S ALREADY STRUGGLING, YOU KNOW, AND WHERE SHE IS AND, AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA BREAK SOMETHING ELSE THAT IT'S, AND THEN OF COURSE THE APPRAISAL VALUE, IT'S KIND OF GO BACK AND FORTH ON WHETHER OR NOT HOW THAT REALLY AFFECTS THE APPRAISAL VALUE BECAUSE, UH, THE HOTEL COULD BRING VALUE IF IT'S, IF IT'S DONE RIGHT.
BUT I, I JUST HAD CONCERNS ABOUT IT BEING THERE, PERIOD, THAT, THAT BEING NO NEED FOR IT.
SO I, THAT'S KIND OF MY READ ON IT RIGHT NOW.
WHO'S DISTRICT FOUR HERE? ME, THAT'S ME.
SO I, I, I HAVE, UH, I'M NOT REALLY FEELING IT RIGHT NOW.
AND, UH, THIS HOTEL, THE TRUE BY HILTON, IT'S A WHO ELSE IS THEIR AFFILIATIONS? THEY'RE TIED TO, WHICH BE THEIR HOTEL.
WHERE THEY HILTON, THEY JUST THE HILTON PERIOD.
AND HOW MANY OF THE HILTONS DO WE HAVE IN GRAND PRAIRIE? I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TELL YOU ON TOP OF HEAD, BUT OUR CONVENTION CENTER IS, YEAH.
SO WE ALREADY HAVE, YEAH, BUT THERE BY DIFFERENT, BUT DIFFERENT FRANCHISES.
ARE ANY OF THE OTHER FOUR? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
I HAVE MY, THAT WAS ANOTHER CONCERN.
I DON'T THINK ANY OF THESE ARE ASSOCIATED WITH HILTON.
NOW AS RED FURRY CONTINUES TO GROW AND WE ARE SO BIG WITH THE EPIC AND EVERYBODY'S COMING OVER HERE, THEN WE MAY NEED MORE, UH, HOTELS.
BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO DO ALL THAT RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW? BUT, UM, I'VE HAD FRIENDS FROM DALLAS TELL ME THAT THEY WERE GONNA COME ALL THE WAY OVER HERE JUST TO SPEND THE NIGHT AND LOT OF WATER, YOU KNOW, THE CITY WATER.
DID ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? THANK YOU.
THE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS A TEXT AMENDMENT TO OUR UDC ARTICLE, A SECTION 16 TREE MITIGATION AND, UH, A TREE PROTECTION AND MITIGATION.
SO BASICALLY WHEN A VACANT LAND IS DEVELOPED, THERE ARE SOME TREES THAT NEEDS TO BE CUT DOWN.
THE DEVELOPER HAS THE OPTION TO EITHER PLANT NEW TREES OR TO PAY THE TREE MITIGATION FEE.
THIS TREE MITIGATION FEE FROM DIFFERENT PROJECTS ARE COLLECTED INTO WHAT WE CALL A URBAN FOREST FUND, WHICH THE CITY CAN SPEND TO MAINTAIN OR PLANT SOME TREES IN, UH, CITY OWNED PROPERTIES, PARKS, OR ANY OTHER PUBLIC SPACES.
SO WHILE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WAS TRYING TO UTILIZE SOME OF THESE FUNDING TO SUPPORT THEIR PROJECTS, THEY REALIZED OUR CURRENT ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IS SO RESTRICTIVE.
IT WAS LIMITING THEM FROM
SO THE CHANGES ARE BASICALLY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE LANGUAGES.
THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND CITY MANAGEMENT WORK WITH LEGAL TEAM AND COME UP WITH THESE CHANGES.
SO THE FIRST CHANGE IS THAT THEY'RE REMOVING THAT
[00:30:01]
LANGUAGE THAT SAYS SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE, UH, ESTABLISHED HERE.IN THAT WAY, THEY CAN EXPAND ON WHERE THAT CAN BE USED.
SECOND CHANGE, THEY'RE DEFINING WHERE THE FUND CAN BE USED, WHICH IS TO PLANT TREES, REPLACE TREES TO PAY FOR THE IRRIGATION AND TO FUND THE TREE CANOPY STUDY.
TREE CANOPY STUDY BASICALLY WILL HELP THE CITY IDENTIFY WHICH DISTRICT SELECTS THE TREES THE MOST, SO THEY CAN KIND OF PRIORITIZE WHICH PROJECTS TO SUPPORT AND SPEND THE FUNDS.
WITH THIS CHANGES PLANNING IS BRINGING FORTH, UM, FEW MINOR CHANGES.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH DIFFERENT, UH, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS AND OUR AORIST, AND HAS, UH, ENCOUNTERED A FEW QUESTIONS.
WE JUST WANNA CLARIFY SOME OF THE THINGS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WITHOUT HAVING TO CHECK WITH US EVERY TIME.
SO FIRST WE'RE GONNA DEFINE A PUBLIC TREE TO HELP WITH THE AMENDMENT CHANGES.
WE ARE GONNA ADD THREE SPECIES OF TREES.
THAT TO THE UNPROTECTED TREE RELEASE, UH, TREE LIST.
THIS IS MUSKET CHINA BERRY AND, UH, FIRE THORNS.
THESE ARE ALL INVASIVE AND THEY'RE NOT MADE NATIVE TO TEXAS.
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TELL THEM.
EVERY TIME WE REVIEW, WE ARE ALSO ADDING A CLARIFYING LANGUAGE TO THE TREE CREDIT SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE.
SO JUST TO ELIMINATE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'D BE GETTING REPEATEDLY, UM, THE DRC RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THIS CONCLUDES STEP PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONER MADDEN? OKAY, SO I, UM, SO ON EIGHT POINT 16.9 A, YOU GUYS ELIMINATE THE PHRASE SHALL USED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES ESTABLISHED HEREIN.
THAT YOU CONTINUE ON TO ESTABLISH PURPOSES WITHIN, I, I'M UNCOMFORTABLE AND I'M JUST SPEAKING TO OUR, OUR BOARD HERE, UNCOMFORTABLE WITH JUST ALLOWING A BLANK CHECK, UM, TO THE USE OF THESE FUNDS BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A, IF IT'S NOT FOR THE PURPOSES HEREIN, WE SHOULD DEFINE IT.
IF IT'S THE PARK DISTRICT, WE SHOULD INDICATE THAT IT'S THE PARK DISTRICT, RIGHT? SO THIS IS WHERE THEY ARE DEFINING THAT.
SO THEY'RE SAYING IT CAN BE USED FOR CERTAIN AREAS, INCLUDING, UM, SO I THINK EARLIER THE LANGUAGE ALLOWED THEM TO ONLY PLANT THE TREES.
BUT WHEN YOU PLANT THE TREES, YOU HAVE TO REMOVE THE TREE, REPLACE THE TREE, PUT, PUT THE IRRIGATION.
AND WE ARE REALIZING THAT THE LANGUAGE IS SO SPECIFIC THAT OUR FINANCE DEPARTMENT AND LEGAL DEPARTMENT KIND OF DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITHOUT MAKING THESE CHANGES, ALLOWING THEM TO SPEND THE MONEY.
SO AGAIN, THESE LANGUAGES HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY OUR LEGAL AND OUR CITY MANAGEMENT AND HAS BEEN APPROVED.
WE'RE JUST TAKING THIS AS A TEXT AMENDMENT PROCESS SO THEY CAN ADOPT IT AND THEN START IMPLEMENTING IT.
YEAH, THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
I'M, I'M, I'M STILL NOT CLEAR ON IT THOUGH.
UM, FUNDS MAY BE USED FOR PLANTING NEW TREES IN SUPPORT OF EXISTING TREES ALONG WITH MAINTAINING ESTABLISHED.
WHY AREN'T WE REMOVING THE FIRST VERBIAGE ABOUT HEREIN IF, IF WE'RE DEFINING IT RIGHT HERE.
SO AGAIN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY FEEL COMFORTABLE, THAT IF THE SOLELY HEREIN WAS TOO LIMITING AND THEY JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY IT WITH THE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGES, IT, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IT'S PRETTY CLEAR.
I MEAN, BECAUSE THEY, THEY FURTHER DEFINE IT.
YOU CAN'T ONLY USE IT FOR PLAN AND REPLACE EVERY DAY.
AND URBAN TREE NOW DOES, DOES THIS GO BEFORE THE PARKS BOARD BEFORE IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL OR DOES JUST CITY COUNCIL? YES.
I BELIEVE THE PARKS DEPARTMENT ALREADY TOOK IT TO, WAS IT THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT? THEY, THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL THE REVIEWS.
THEY'RE JUST ASKING, PLANNING TO TAKE THIS SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY UPDATE OUR ORDINANCE WITH THE NEW LANGUAGE.
NO, THAT'S WHAT I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT.
AS PART OF THE PARK BOARD, THE LAY PARK BOARD, THAT IS, THAT'S WHERE IT HITS FIRST.
THE PARK PARKS DEPARTMENT AND CITY MANAGEMENT ARE OKAY WITH THIS CHANGE.
WE TOOK IT TO CCDC AND THEY WERE OKAY WITH THESE CHANGES.
WE'RE DOING THE PROCESS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, BEFORE WE CAN ACTUALLY, UM, UPDATE THE ORDINANCE WITH THE NEW LANGUAGE.
WE HAVE TO TAKE THE PNC FOR RECOMMENDATION AND THEN TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THIS TO BE OFFICIAL SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY UPDATE OUR SO IS IT KIND RECOMMENDATIONS THE CITY CHARTER OR THE FLOOR KIND OF DICTATES EXACTLY WHAT CAN AND CANNOT BE DONE.
SO IT'S ALREADY SOME, SOME GENERAL PARAMETERS IN THERE ANYWAY.
SO THIS IS THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SO WE DID THAT TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, UH, WHILE BACK AND IT WAS TOO LIMITING IN HOW THEY COULD ACTUALLY USE IT FUNCTION DAY TO DAY TO REPLACE TREES.
SO THAT'S WHAT THIS IS INTENDED TO ADDRESS.
JUST THE ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE ITSELF.
IT'S GOTTA GO THROUGH SO MANY PLACES BEFORE YOU, IT LANDS FOR APPROVAL.
WELL, LET'S GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS NOW.
SO C-C-D-C-P-N-Z, UH, LEGAL PARKS, UM, AND MULTIPLE ULTIMATELY COUNSEL AND THEY HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE BUDGET APPROVAL PROCESS TO BE ABLE TO SPEND THE MONEY.
IT'S JUST THAT BEFORE, UM, THE LANGUAGE SO WAS SO LIMITING, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WANTED TO SAY,
[00:35:01]
HEY, WE NEED THIS MUCH FOR IRRIGATION, THIS MUCH FOR PLANTING OF TREES, THIS MUCH FOR REMOVAL OF TREES, THEY COULD ONLY BE APPROVED FOR THE BUDGET TO PAY FOR THE NEW TREES.SO THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WORK THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE CAN BE ACTUALLY DONE WITH THE FUNDING.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT THIS FUNDING WAS ESTABLISHED FOR.
TECHNOLOGY HAS CHANGED AND EVERYTHING HAS CHANGED SO MUCH WITH EVEN DOING THESE KIND OF PROCESSES PROBABLY SINCE THIS WAS SO HOW LONG HAS THIS URBAN FOREST FUND BEEN? IN FACT? UH, SO, UM, WE'VE BEEN COLLECTING THIS SINCE THE ADOPTION, SO WE'VE BEEN COLLECTING SOME FEES SINCE 22.
SO, UM, THE TABLE ON THE LEFT EXPLAINS THE FUND THAT WE HAVE COLLECTED SO FAR.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE STARTED COLLECTING IT ON SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE APPROVED ON THE SITE PLAN IN 22.
UM, THE RIGHT SIDE SHOWS THE FUND THAT ARE, WE'RE EXPECTING TO COLLECT WITHIN THE E UM, NEXT YEAR.
UH, YOU KNOW, WE PUT THIS IN PLACE AT, UH, CLEMSON EXPERIMENT.
THIS AS WELL, UM, FOR ALL THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WE GET.
WE GETTING A LOT OF TREES JUST GETTING WIPED OUT AND MOST CITIES HAVE A, UH, TREE MITIGATION FUND ESTABLISHED.
SO WE GOT THAT PUT IN PLACE WITH
AND SO WE GOT WITH TIE IN TO HELP GET THIS IMPLEMENTED CORRECTLY.
SHE SAW SOME ISSUES WITH THE IMPLEMENTATIONS AND THE PARKS, UH, DIRECTOR ALSO DID IT.
SO, UM, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT WE'RE ABLE TO USE THE FUNDS AS A BROKER AND THE BUDGET DEPARTMENT.
THEY WANT THAT PENDING TO GO TO THIS AND THAT TO THIS.
SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE'RE, WE'RE MAKING CERTAIN THAT'S A POSSIBILITY.
SO I MORE THE UNPROTECTED TREAT LIST OF THE ADDITION.
WERE NOT BEFORE, UH, NOT PROTECTED OR PROTECT BEFORE.
SO SOME CITIES CHOOSE TO HAVE A PROTECTED TREE LIST.
THAT MEANS IF YOU FIND THAT TREE ON YOUR SITE, YOU HAVE TO PROTECT IT.
HOW WE APPROACHED IT IS WE JUST LISTED ALL THE UNPROTECTED TREES AND ANY TREES THAT ARE NOT ON THAT LIST IS CONSIDERED PROTECTED.
BUT AS WE WERE REVIEWING, WE REALIZE A LOT OF SITES HAD A LOT, SOME MUSKE, BUT THEY ACTUALLY DO SPREAD THEIR ROOTS REALLY FAR AND ACTUALLY STEALS WATER FROM ALL OTHER PLANTS AND YEAH.
SO WE DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO PROTECT THEM, YOU KNOW, UH, IF THEY REMOVE IT AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT, WE'RE OKAY.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE TREES THAT SHOULD BEEN ON THE LIST BUT WAS NOT MADE TO THE LIST BECAUSE WE'RE FOCUSING ON OTHER MORE INVASIVE NON-NATIVE TREES.
SO AGAIN, UM, CEDAR ELM AND, UH, TEXAS OAK, THOSE ARE NOT ALL ON OUR UNPROTECTED TREE LIST.
SO THEY CAN, THEY ARE CONSIDERED TO BE PROTECTED.
GO BACK TO THE, UM, THE DEVIATIONS.
YOU MEAN THE, THE MARKUP, THE REDACTIONS.
UM, WHEN WE SEE IT IN RED MM-HMM
AND THEN IT WAS REDACTED WITH THE STRIKEOUT BY WHOM? THE PARTS DEPARTMENT? YES.
AND SO IN TO COMMISSIONER MADDEN'S POINT IN THE SOLELY THE WHO WANTED SOLELY IN IT AND THEN WHO REDACTED IT.
SO SOLELY IS CURRENTLY IN OUR LANGUAGE RIGHT NOW.
SO IT SAYS SHELBY USED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE ESTABLISHED HERE WITHIN TO THE LEFT IS THE CURRENT LANGUAGE.
SO WHEN IT'S IN RED, THAT MEANS THAT IT CURRENTLY EXISTS, CORRECT.
SO THE LANGUAGE TO THE LEFT IS WHAT WE HAVE HERE CURRENTLY, AND THE RIGHT SHOWS THE CHANGE.
SO D IS BEING EXPANDED, THE D IS BEING EXPANDED TO SAY INSTEAD OF SOLELY, THEY'RE SAYING, HEY, HERE ARE SOME OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT THEY CAN FUND THIS WAY.
YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE PAYING FOR A IRRIGATION RELATED AMENITY, THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME HERE AND SAY, OH, SINCE IT DOESN'T SAY IRRIGATION PIPE, WE HAVE TO GET IT APPROVED.
YOU KNOW, IT, IT, BECAUSE OF THAT SOLELY IS REMOVED, NOW THEY CAN KIND OF WORK WITH OUR FINANCE DEPARTMENT MAKING SURE, HEY, THIS STILL QUALIFIES AS THE FUNDING FOR THIS IRRIGATION SYSTEM UPGRADE.
AND DOES THIS HAVE A LEGAL REVIEW? YES.
YEAH, THEY ACTUALLY, UM, DANA ACTUALLY DID ALL THE WORK FRONT END.
SHE WORKED WITH, UM, MEGAN FROM CITY MANAGEMENT AND THE LEGAL TEAM TO REVIEW ALL THE LANGUAGES.
UM, THERE'S JUST ASKING, PLANNING TO HELP MAKE THIS CHANGE HAPPEN IN OUR ORDINANCE.
[00:40:01]