[00:00:01]
OKAY.[Planning & Zoning Briefing 120924]
OF THE CITY OF GRAND PRAIRIE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE MEETING OF DECEMBER THE NINTH, 2024.I'M CHERYL SMITH, CHAIR OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
THIS STAFF BRIEFING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING IS HEREBY CALL TO ORDER AT 5:30 PM THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS WHERE THE STAFF BRIEFS 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 THE CASES.
NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IN BRIEFING, BUT THE HEARING WILL TAKE PLACE DURING THE REGULAR MEETING.
IT WILL BEGIN OR EARLY THAN 6:30 PM I'LL NOW CONDUCT A ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS TO CONFIRM THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM.
AFTER I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE SAY HERE.
HERE LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL NEIGHBORS ARE PRESENT EXCEPT FOR TY CHAPMAN AND JOHN PCO.
ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT YOU NEED TO DISCUSS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION? NO.
SO THE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON THE AGENDA IS A SITE PLAN STP 24 0 7 0 0 3 2.
THIS IS A SITE PLAN FOR GOODLAND VILLAGES.
SO THIS IS A SITE PLAN FOR A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
UM, IT WILL BE LOCATED GENERALLY SOUTH OF PRAIRIE RIDGE BOULEVARD.
I JUST WANNA REMIND YOU, THIS IS THE PD THAT YOU SAW RECENTLY THAT YOU WERE, UM, YOU'RE SEEING FOR THE GOODLAND AREA.
THEY HAD PROPOSED A PD FOR A MIXED RESIDENTIAL AREA AND A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREA.
SO THE AREAS MARKED WITH WHITE BOUNDARY ARE THE LOCATIONS WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING THIS FIRST PHASE.
I JUST PROVIDED THIS AS A KIND OF A REFERENCE SO THAT YOU CAN KIND OF LOCATE WHERE THIS DEVELOPMENT IS.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE BACK HERE IS ACTUAL PRAIRIE RIDGE DEVELOPMENT, THE PHASE ONE, AND THIS IS A RIDGE ROAD 2 87.
SO THIS PROJECT WILL BE GENERALLY LOCATED HERE.
SO THE PROVIDED CYCLING SHOWS A NEW RIGHT OF WAY THAT WILL KIND OF SUBDIVIDE AND PROVIDE A CONNECTION FROM PRAIRIE RIDGE TO THE ELECTRICAL EASEMENT TO THE SOUTH.
THEY'LL BE PRO UH, PROVIDING A, THEY'RE CALLING IT A PAIRED HOME, WHICH MEANS TWO UNITS.
SO IT'S LIKE A DUPLEX ON LY PLOTTED LOTS.
AND THEY HAVE THESE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED PRODUCTS.
SO IT'LL BE JUST ONE UNIT, A ONE DWELLING UNIT ON ONE LOT.
THEY'RE PROPOSING ABOUT 54 OF THOSE SINGLE FAMILY STYLE HOMES AND THEY'RE PROPOSING ABOUT 61 OF THE, UH, PAIRED HOMES OR THE DUPLEX STYLE.
SO THEY'LL END UP WITH A TOTAL OF 176 DWELLING UNITS ON THIS AREA.
THEY ARE PLANTING LANDSCAPE PER DEVELOPER AGREEMENT ALONG THE STREETS AND THEY WILL BE PROVIDING THIS WALKING PATH ON THE UTILITY EASEMENTS.
THESE ARE JUST FEW OF THE SIMPLE ELEVATIONS.
THEY HAVE AT LEAST 16 VARIETIES THEY HAVE PROVIDED AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN PACKAGE.
HOWEVER, THEY'RE STILL KIND OF WORKING THROUGH THE DETAILS.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO CAPTURE A FEW SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE MATERIAL MIX AND THE QUALITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
SO THEY'RE GENERALLY STAYING PREDOMINANTLY, UM, BASICALLY MATERIALS WITH MIXTURE OF STONE, A BRICK AND SOME SIDING DEPENDING ON THE HOME TYPES.
AND THEY'RE KIND OF USING THE CONTRAST BETWEEN THE DARKER ROOFS AND LIGHTER, UH, TO, UH, EARTH TONE BRICKS OR STONES, UH, VERSUS ALL THE, UH, DOORS AND OTHER WOODY TOES BECOMING MORE OF A, UH, DARKER BROWN COLOR.
SO IT KIND OF CREATES A NICE, UH, CONSCIOUSNESS, UM, SHIFTING IN THE COLORS, IN THE TEXTURES.
THEY ARE NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES.
UM, WE DO HAVE FEW RECOMMENDATIONS.
THIS IS KIND OF BASED ON THE FACT THAT UM, THERE ARE FEW THINGS THAT WE WANNA ADDRESS BEFORE THE NEXT PHASE CAN BE DEVELOPED, UM, BECAUSE THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO DEVELOP AS A WHOLE UNIT.
SO WE JUST WANNA ENSURE THESE THINGS ARE CONSIDERED BEFORE WE START APPROVING NEXT PHASES.
SO THE FIRST IS THAT THE COMMUNITY MAIN STREET AND SECONDARY STREET SHALL BE PROVIDED PER DEVELOPER AGREEMENT, WHICH IS KIND OF CAPTURED HERE WITH THE STREET NETWORK.
THEY ARE TRYING TO CAPTURE THAT AGAIN HERE.
UM, IT IS STILL NEEDS TO BE DESIGNED AND FURTHER REFINED.
WE ARE ASKING THE TREE MITIGATION PLANS TO BE PROVIDED FOR ALL THE REMAINING PHASES.
WE'RE ALSO REQUESTING THAT THE WALKING PATH BE INSTALLED BEFORE, UM, OTHER PHASES ARE CONSTRUCTED BECAUSE SOMETIMES YOU DON'T SEE THE MANY TO COME IN UNTIL THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH A LOT OF PHASES.
SO WE JUST WANNA PUT THAT IN THERE.
UH, WE ALSO ARE REQUESTING THAT THE, UH, REQUIRED LANDSCAPE OFFER BE PROVIDED ALONG, UH, FORT WORTH STREET.
I THINK THERE WAS A RIGHT AWAY DEDICATION AND IT WAS JUST
[00:05:01]
NOT ACCOUNTED FOR.WE'RE JUST MAKING THEM TO MAKE A SIMPLE, UH, ADJUSTMENT THERE.
UH, THIS CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT WILL BE HERE AT THE MEETING.
COMMISSIONER, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS COMMISSIONER? MATTHEW? YEAH, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.
CAN YOU GO BACK? SO I SEE THE PRIMARY, UM, THE PRIMARY ROAD IS RIGHT THERE.
UM, I DON'T SEE THE SECONDARY.
SO ACTUALLY THIS, UM, YELLOW OH, I SEE IT THERE.
THAT SHOULD BE THE COMMUNITY MAIN STREET WITH THE SECONDARY ROAD BEING THIS, I THINK.
I THINK BECAUSE THEY ARE NEEDING TO BUILD THIS SPACE, THEY ARE CONNECTING THIS RIDGE ROAD TO CONNECT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO HERE TO THE SOUTH.
BUT AGAIN, THIS IS STILL NOT TOTALLY FULLY DESIGNED OR ACCEPTED BY THE TRANSPORTATION MM-HMM
BUT THIS IS A REVISED TO REFLECT WHAT WE APPROVE IN THE DEVELOPER ARGUMENT.
SO IT WILL HAVE TO COME WITH THE OTHER PHASES AS THEY COME DEVELOP, BUT IT WILL HAVE TO BE FIRST APPROVED BY THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.
'CAUSE THAT OTHER GREEN STREET IS INDICATED AS A SECONDARY STREET AS WELL.
WHICH OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT NUMERICAL ORDER.
IT'S LIKE LITERALLY PRIMARY VERSUS SECONDARY, BUT, OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, I HAVE ONE.
JUST, JUST, JUST AQUI WITH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PROPOSED WALKING PATH AND YES SIR.
UM, THEY ARE PAVING ABOUT SIX FOOT WIDE WALKING STRIP, SO IT'S IN THE UTILITIES MUST, THEY CAN PLANT TREES, BUT THEY CAN INSTALL BENCHES AND OTHER, YOU KNOW, TRASH, UM, DUMPSTERS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH SO PEOPLE CAN WALK THEIR DOGS AND, YOU KNOW.
THIS IS A P UNDERTAKING, IT'S
SO IN THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF UNIT TYPES, ARE THEY GONNA BE LIKE, UM, IS THIS, THIS IS NOT REALLY GATED, IS IT PER SE? IS IT NOT THIS PARTICULAR AREA? YES, MA'AM.
SO, UM, THE P SO DEVELOPER AGREEMENT WILL ALREADY KINDA APPROVE DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPES THAT THEY CAN HAVE.
SO THIS WILL BE KIND OF A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT UNITS TYPES, BUT HERE THEIR FOCUS RIGHT NOW FOR THE PHASE ONE IS THEY WANNA HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY DE TOUCH UNIT LOOKING STYLE HOMES AND A DUPLEX LOOKING STYLE HOMES.
OTHER AREAS AS THEY DEVELOPER, THEY'LL COME WITH ANOTHER SITE PLAN WITH MORE DETAILS FOR OTHER HOUSING TYPES AND ALL THOSE WILL BE HOA MAYBE THAT, I DON'T KNOW THE DETAIL AS OF YET, BUT WE HAVE A DEVELOPER AGREEMENT FOR THE OVERALL AREA.
SO THEY WILL, UM, THE DEVELOPER ITSELF WILL HAVE THEIR, UH, OWN KIND OF ENTITY OVERSEEING SOME OF THESE THINGS.
SO YOU SAYING THERE'S A MEETING OF THE MINDS, EVERYBODY HAS TO AGREE EVERYTHING MM-HMM
BUT THE BASE OF THE WHOLE AGREEMENT IS ALREADY IN PLACE? YES.
SO THEY APPROVE THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT AND ANNEX THE PROPERTY AND WE APPROVE THE ZONING.
SO THIS IS THEIR FIRST STEP BEFORE THEY CAN BUILD THESE HOMES IS TO GET THE SITE PLAN APPROVED.
SO ARE THEY ASKING FOR ANY, ANY VARIANCES IN THE SETBACK? UM, THE, I'M LOOKING AT THE LENGTH OF THE DRIVEWAYS, LIKE WHERE, WHERE IS THIS, DOES THAT GO WITH THE TYPE OF, SO, SO, SO THEIR SITE LAYOUT AND THEIR, UH, ZONING AND DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS WRITTEN INTO THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT BASED ON WHAT THEY'RE ALREADY REQUESTING.
SO THEY'RE NOT ANY ASKING ANY VARIANCES.
HOWEVER, THEY DO HAVE DIFFERENT SET OF REGULATIONS TO FOLLOW PER THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT THAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL.
UM, SO YEAH, SO THERE MIGHT BE SOME VARIANCES FOR THE DRIVEWAYS AND OTHER THINGS THAT TRANSPORTATION MAY HAVE TO CONSIDER IN THE, UH, FUTURE AS THEY'RE GOING FURTHER DOWN INTO THE DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN, JUST KIND OF MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE DEVELOPING PER DA.
IS THERE A REALLY SHORT DRIVEWAY? IS THERE GONNA BE PARKING ALL ON THE STREET? MM-HMM
YEAH, BUT AGAIN, THEY, YEAH, THEY'RE BEATING ALL THE RICARD.
IT'S LIKE A REALLY NICE DEVELOPMENT.
SO I GUESS THIS IS A, THIS IS FAIRLY IN AN AREA BY ITSELF.
THERE'S NOTHING AROUND IT, SO NOT RIGHT NOW, LIKE THE STREET LIGHTS AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF AND WHEN, I DON'T KNOW HOW CLOSE THEY ARE IN PROXIMITY TO SCREENS OR ANYTHING.
SO RIGHT NOW THEY'RE SURROUNDED BY KIND OF OUR ETJ THAT IT'S, UM, PART OF THEIR ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT.
SO THE REASON I PROVIDED THIS IS SO YOU CAN KIND OF GET A CONTEXT, IT'S RIGHT HERE, BUT THIS WHOLE PD WAS APPROVED FOR MIXED RESIDENTIAL USES WITH OPEN SPACES.
SO THEY'RE APPROACHING THIS FIRST PHASE HERE RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVE A COMMISSIONER
UM, AS FAR AS IT BEING DOG FRIENDLY, IS THE WALKING TRAILS IT GONNA BE LIKE WHERE PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO WALK OR THE DOG'S GONNA BE WALKING ON THE SAME TRAILS OR HAVE THEY ANYTHING ABOUT, SO I, I SAY DOGS AS IN LIKE, YOU KNOW, HEY, IT COULD BE USED FOR ANY PURPOSES, BUT MAINLY THIS IS PART OF THE AMENITIES THAT THEY AGREED TO PROVIDE IT IN.
THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT IS TO THE WALKING PATH THAT'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
SO IT COULD BE PEOPLE, IT COULD BE, UM, PEOPLE WALKING THEIR PETS.
IT'S JUST A TRAIL, JUST A PAVEMENT.
[00:10:01]
CAN WALK AND THEY CAN WALK THEIR DOGS IF THEY WANT TO, BUT IT'S A PRETTY LONG TRAIL.ANYTHING ELSE YOU GUYS? CHANCE? LOOKS PRETTY GOOD.
THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM EIGHT, A ZONE CHANGE FOR 24 0 6 DALWORTH STREET.
THIS IS ZONE CHANGE CAME ABOUT.
UH, WE RECEIVED A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND THEY WANTED TO MOVE INTO, UH, 24 0 6 DALWOOD STREET.
AND THE PROPOSED USE WAS FOR A HAIR SALON.
THAT USE WAS NOT ALLOWED IN THE ZONING THAT IT WAS CURRENTLY IN, WHICH WAS OFFICE.
UH, AND THE, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE COMING IN TO REQUEST A ZONE CHANGE.
AND THE REQUESTED ZONE CHANGE IS GENERAL RETAIL, WHICH WOULD ALLOW THEM THE HAIR SALON USE BY RIGHT.
SO, AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS COMMERCIAL RETAIL OFFICE.
SO THE FLU ALIGNS WITH THE PROPOSED OR THE REQUESTED USE OR THE REQUESTED ZONING.
THEY'RE NOT REQUESTING TO DO ANYTHING, UH, NEW TO THE BUILDING.
SO THE BUILDING WILL REMAIN AS IS, UH, JUST FOR THAT REQUESTED LAND USE WAS NOT, UH, ALLOWED.
AND THIS IS THE REASON FOR THE ZONE CHANGE.
UH, WE RECEIVED ZERO IN FAVOR, ZERO OPPOSED, AND DRC IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? IT'S PRETTY SIMILAR.
THE THING I SAW WAS THE ASSISTED LIVING IS, IS NEAR, IS THERE, IS THAT, DID I READ THAT WRONG? UM, THERE IS AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY TO THE WEST OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
AND THERE'S, UH, OR THE EXISTING BUILDING, THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH THAT.
WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY LETTERS AND, AND HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING FROM THEM AT ALL.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS,
ITEM NUMBER NINE IS A SPECIFIC USE INSIGHT PLAN REQUEST FOR A HEAVY TRUCK, UH, PARKING FACILITY AT 4 2 2 6 EAST MAIN.
SO THE SUP REQUEST IS FOR A HEAVY TRUCK PARKING.
THERE ARE ZONED CURRENTLY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.
UM, IT'S GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH, ON THE SIDE OF THE MAIN STREET, UH, NORTH OF JEFFERSON STREET.
UH, I 20, UH, I'M SORRY, I 30 UP HERE.
SO I JUST WANNA GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND.
THE CURRENT AREA ACTUALLY HAS A SUP FOUR VEHICLE HOLDING YARD IN THIS UH, WESTERN PORTION.
AND ON THE EASTERN PORTION THEY GOT THE SUP AMENDED FOR AUTO SALVAGING AND INOPERABLE HOLDING YARD AND FLEA MARKET.
SO THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER PURCHASED THE LAND A FEW YEARS AGO.
UM, THEY HAVE FOUND THAT THEY COULD ACTUALLY REDUCE THE AREA OF A VEHICLE HOLDING YARD KIND OF TOUR, THE WESTERN PORTION.
AND THEY WANTED TO UTILIZE THIS EASTERN PORTION FOR A DIFFERENT USER.
SO THEY'RE COMING WITH, UH, REQUESTING A SUP FOR A HEAVY TRUCK PARKING FACILITY.
THEIR INTENT IS TO LEASE THE AREA TO EITHER ONE OR, UH, MULTIPLE, UH, TRUCKING OR LOGISTICS COMPANIES.
UM, ONE OF THE TENANTS THEY WERE CONSIDERING WAS, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE LIKE AMAZON, IF THEY HAD A FLEET VEHICLE, THEY WANTED, NEEDED A, A CERTAIN PARKING FOR HOW MANY OF A VEHICLE THAT THEY WANTED TO PARK, THEY WANTED TO HAVE A MULTIPLE LEASERS ON THIS LAND TO UM, FILL UP THE 985 PARKING SPACES THAT ARE CURRENTLY PROPOSED.
SO AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEY ARE INTENDING ON BUILDING A GUARD SHACK BECAUSE THEY INTEND TO HAVE 24 HOUR ACCESS JUST IN CASE THE DRIVERS NEED TO DRIVE OUT THE TRUCKS LIKE EARLY IN THE MORNING, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
SO PART OF THEIR OPERATIONAL PLAN, THEY'RE GONNA MAKE SURE THERE'S NO SLEEPING ON THE TRUCKS ON SIDE.
THERE WILL BE UH, NO TRUCK HOTELS.
THE AREA WILL BE PURELY FOR PARKING TRUCKS.
SO IN THIS UM, GUARD CHECK, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE A RESTROOM FACILITY IN CASE THEY NEED TO USE THE RESTROOM REALLY QUICKLY.
UM, OTHER THAN THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING THE SIX FOOT MAIN SLING SCREENING ALONG THE PROPERTY LINES.
SO THEY ARE ACTUALLY ASKING FOR TWO VARIANCES.
ONE IS LANDSCAPING, TYPICALLY FOR A, A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE.
IF YOU REMEMBER THE UH, TRUCK PARKING LOT AT HARD ROCK, YOU KNOW, WE WERE LOOKING AT 30 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON BOTH SIDES.
I THINK WE UM, WERE SAYING, HEY, YOU NEED TO HAVE A CANOPY TREE.
SO THEY'RE SAYING THIS IS EXISTING CONDITIONS.
THEY HAVE A CHAIN LINK FENCE EVERYWHERE WITH SHOVES.
THEY DON'T MIND BUILDING THE, UH, MASON SCREENING WALL TO SCREEN THE HEAVY TRUCKS THAT ARE SIX FOOT HIGH.
HOWEVER, THEY WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE THE, UH, ROWS OF SHRUB THAT THEY HAVE.
[00:15:01]
YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THEIR EXISTING SURFACE IS RIGHT NOW KIND OF PATCHES OF GRAVEL AND PATCHES OF CONCRETE FROM KIND OF REMNANT OF THE PREVIOUS USERS.THEY ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO NOT HAVE TO PAVE IT WITH CONCRETE, WHICH IS OUR CURRENT STANDARD.
SO DRC IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
ONE THE NEW DRIVEWAY THEY'RE PROPOSING AS A AT THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO ANYONE OCCUPYING THIS LAND.
SO, UM, THEY CURRENTLY HAVE A PRETTY STEEP SLOPE.
UM, SORRY FOR KEEP
SO THIS IS THE MAIN STREET AND THAT'S THE SERVICE ROAD.
SO THEY HAVE A PRETTY STEEP DROP.
SO THEY ARE MAKING PLANS TO IMPROVE THIS CONNECTION AND CREATE A NEW DRIVEWAY 'CAUSE THEIR CURRENT DRIVEWAY IS NOT SIZED FOR HEAVY TRUCKS TO TURN AND MANEUVER AROUND.
SO OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT WILL REQUEST THAT THIS DESIGN BE APPROVED AND ACCEPTED BY TXDOT AND BY OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.
THE SECOND, UH, RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE AREAS THE VEHICLES ARE PARKED SHOULD BE PAVED WITH CONCRETE PER CITY STANDARD.
THIRD IS THE GUARD ACT SHALL MEET THE SECONDARY FACADE REQUIREMENT OF APPENDIX X.
THAT MEANS A LITTLE BIT OF STUCCO, LITTLE BIT OF MASON LEAF, JUST NOT LIKE A METAL BUILDING.
UM, FOURTH, UH, LANDSCAPING BE PROVIDED PER APPENDIX X REQUIREMENT.
THESE ARE THE STEP CONDITIONS THE APPLICANT PLANS TO BE HERE AT THE MEETING AND HAS PREPARED A PRESENTATION.
THIS CONCLUDES THAT PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTION FOR STEPH AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONER? UM, IS THERE ANY THOUGHT OR ANY DISCUSSION? I, I KNOW IT'S PROBABLY DOESN'T ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS PARTICULAR, UH, APPLICANT, BUT TRUCKS COMING OUT OF THERE, UP THE ANGLE OUT ONTO THE ROADWAY.
IS THERE A THOUGHT OF A LIGHT OUT THERE AT ALL? UM, THAT'S, THAT'S HIGH.
BRETT SPEED TRAFFIC GOING OUT THERE IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE ON THEIR WAY
SO I CAN SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ON.
SO THE ANGLE, SO PART OF THE DRIVEWAY THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO DO IS TO, RIGHT NOW THERE'S AN OFFSET.
THERE'S ALSO THAT STEEP DROP OFF MM-HMM
SO THEY'RE GONNA REALIGN THIS TO BE A STRAIGHT SHOT OUT AND NEED MORE LEVEL AND JUST HAVE THE OTHER PARTS OF THE UH, GARBAGE ROAD COME UP TO THE DRIVEWAY.
MM-HMM
SO TEXT WILL NOT PUT A SIGNAL IN UNTIL AFTER TRAFFIC IS ESTABLISHED.
SO IF THAT IS AN ISSUE THAT THEY WOULD GO AND LOOK AT AFTER THE FACT, THE ACTUAL NUMBERS TO SEE IF IT MEETS WARRANTS, THEY WON'T DO IT FOR PROJECTED VOLUMES.
AND THEN ON PROJECTED VOLUMES, THEY DID DO A TRAFFIC STUDY BUT IT WAS MORE OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS TO SEE SIMILAR LOTS AND HOW MANY TRUCKS TO GO IN AND OUT OF THOSE MM-HMM
AND IT REALLY WASN'T THAT IMPACTFUL.
UM, AS MUCH AS THE PARKING WAS SUGGESTED.
I THINK A LOT, THERE'S A LOT OF OVERNIGHTS, A LOT OF TRUCKS THAT STAY THERE LONG TERM THAT THERE'S NOT A HEAVY IN AND OUT THROUGHOUT THE DAY.
SO IT'S ONE OF THOSE THAT WE'D HAVE TO WORK WITH THE STATE ON TO SEE IF WE WOULD NEED A SIGNAL THERE, BUT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT UNTIL AFTER THE FACT.
IS THERE ANY OTHER PERMISSION YOU HAVE TO WORK ON HONOR JUNE FREE? YOU OR RASHAD, UH, IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER, OR MAX COLEMAN JUST TO BE ON THE BOARD? MM-HMM
HE ACTUALLY HAD A TRUCK LEASING THING AND HE LEASED IT TO A BUNCH OF INDIVIDUALS.
IS THIS, IS THIS POSSIBLE THAT IT'S GONNA BE INDIVIDUAL LESSEES LIKE GUYS STAYING THERE OVERNIGHT LONG TERM? OR IS IT GONNA BE FLEET RELATED? SO ACCORDING TO THE OPERATIONAL PLAN THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDED, THEY'RE LEANING MORE TOWARD, WE WANNA LEASE IT TO A COMPANY 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT LOCATED LOCALLY SO THEY'RE NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN THE VEHICLE LEASES AND PART OF THE LEASE WITH THOSE COMPANIES WHO NEED A PARKING FOR THEIR OWN FLEET VEHICLES, THEY'RE GONNA, PER THEIR OPERATIONAL PLAN, THEY'RE GONNA PUT A PROHIBITION FOR ANY TRUCK HOTEL TYPE OF THINGS WHERE THEY WOULD BE SLEEPING IN THE CARS ON SITE.
THOSE WILL BE PROHIBITED PER THE LEASE AGREEMENT.
SO THE GUYS DRIVE THE TRUCK, PARK IT, AND THEN GET AN UBER OR SOMEHOW ELSE TO GO BACK.
THEY MIGHT JUST PARK THEIR OWN VEHICLES AND DRIVE OUT THE TRUCKS.
AGAIN, THE APPLICANT WILL BE HERE FOR THE MEETING.
I CAN ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS.
BUT THE PROVISIONS THAT, UH, JUNE WAS JUST SPEAKING ABOUT, WE HAD A MEETING PRIOR TO THIS MEMO WITH THE APPLICANT WITH, UH, COUNCILMAN SHOTWELL.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE KEY ELEMENTS THAT HE ASKED THE GOOD HIRE IF THERE'S NO OVERNIGHT PART YEAH.
'CAUSE THAT, THAT CAN GET IFFY THIS.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THEY GOT.
THIS IS A DEEP SITE UNDER 85 TRUCKS.
IS THERE GONNA BE AN EMERGENCY EXIT OR SOMETHING? OR HOW CAN THEY, HOW CAN ONE LITTLE, UH, OFFICE THING MANAGE THAT MANY, UH, PADS? THAT'S A LOT.
SO THERE'S NO NO, UH, EMERGENCY ENTRANCE IN, UH, UH, EXIT IN THE BACK OR A SIDE OR ANYTHING.
THEY, THEY ARE KI THEY'RE KIND OF, THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY ACCESS.
THEY HAVE A, UH, RAILROAD IN THE BACK.
THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY OTHER ROADS.
SO, UM, OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT DIDN'T
[00:20:01]
MAKE ANY COMMENTS.AND THEN THERE'S NO ONE PERSON CAN MANAGE ALL OF THAT.
I MEAN THE ONE GUARD IS MORE FOR THE ACCESS ONLY, SO MM-HMM.
BUT IT'S STILL, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU PROBABLY GONNA HAVE PEOPLE STILL SLEEPING IN THERE.
'CAUSE THAT'S NUMBER HUNDRED 85 IS A LOT.
YOU PROBABLY HAVE SEVERAL SECURITY GUARDS.
BUT I MEAN, I LOOK AT THIS AS, YES, IT'S QUITE A FEW, BUT IT IS NO DIFFERENT THAN A STORAGE FACILITY.
YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE STORAGE FACILITY UNITS WHERE IT'S JUST ONE HOUSING OR ONE PERSON GOES AND DRIVES AND SHOWS YOU WHERE THESE UNITS ARE.
SO IT'S SIMILAR TO THAT WHERE IT'S NOT INTENDED TO BE A WHOLE BUNCH OF COME AND GO.
THAT'S WHAT THEIR GOAL IS TO HAVE JUST A FLEET.
THEY PARK THEIR VEHICLES, THEY MAY STAY THERE FOR MONTHS AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THEY COME BACK AND FORTH AT THAT TIME.
WELL, DURING THE HOLIDAYS SEEMS TO BE THERE WOULD BE A TRANSPORTATION ISSUE THAT MIGHT BE BUSY.
DON'T YOU THINK? WELL TO BRAD, BRENT ALREADY KIND OF ADDRESSED THAT QUESTION.
I WILL SAY, UH, HE ALSO NOTED, YOU KNOW, TXDOT WOULD HAVE CONTROL OVER THIS AND WHETHER OR NOT IT MEET THE WARRANTS IF IT'S NEEDING A LIGHT.
BUT THERE'S ALSO FURTHER DOWN IS A PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR THAT INTERSECTION BETWEEN JEFFERSON AND MAIN, WHERE THEY'RE GONNA DO, UM, ROUNDABOUT AND MOVE THE TRUCKS, MAKE THE TRUCKS GO SOUTH TO JEFFERSON.
SO WHENEVER THEY DO THAT, THEY TYPICALLY DON'T WANT TO PUT A LIGHT NEARBY.
UM, CHRIS ISSUE WITH THE FLOW, AND I'M NOT A TRANSPORTATION GUY, BUT I JUST DON'T GO THROUGH.
SO, UM, I WOULD SAY THAT UNLESS THE WARRANTS TRIGGER THIS WITH T DO I DON'T SEE A LIGHT AND ANY CONCERNS WITH AMOUNT OF TRACKS, TRUCKS THAT THE TRAFFIC BACK AND FORTH.
THE ONLY THING THAT I WAS KIND OF CONCERNED ABOUT, I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF IT, BUT THAT INTEREST LOOKS TERRIBLE.
I MEAN, SO APPARENTLY THEY GONNA, THAT'S GONNA BE A HUGE UPGRADE OF WHAT WE SEE RIGHT NOW.
THEY'RE GONNA DO QUITE A BIT OF INVESTMENT TO GET THIS TO BE ABLE TO BE USABLE.
BECAUSE THAT WOULDN'T BE A GOOD START IN MY OPINION.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE FIRST THING YOU SEE IS THE FACADE.
I KNOW YOU GONNA HAVE TO REDO THE ENTRANCE, BUT THOSE LITTLE SHRUBS, THEY WERE TINY.
IT DIDN'T JUST DIDN'T LOOK, I IT WAS GRAND PRAIRIE RED MEAN IN JUNE.
WHAT WAS, WHAT'S THE EXISTING SURFACE THERE NOW? IT'S NOT ALL CONCRETE.
IT'S KIND OF A MIXTURE OF GRAVEL AND CONCRETE.
LET ME SEE IF I CAN PULL THIS UP.
SO THEY HAVE KIND OF PATCHES OF CONCRETE AND PATCHES OF GRABLE.
THEY PROVIDE A SURVEY, BUT THERE'S NOT REALLY A CLEAR BOUNDARIES.
AND IS THE APPLICANT WILLING TO PUT ASPHALT THERE TOO? WE ARE RECOMMENDING CONCRETE.
THAT'S OUR CURRENT STANDARD, RIGHT? MM-HMM
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? I THINK THAT'S IT.
OKAY, SO NEXT ITEM ACTUALLY IS ITEM NUMBER 10 AND 11.
AND, UM, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, THIS IS THE ITEM THAT YOU ALREADY SAW.
SO THE APPLICANT WAS GETTING READY TO PUT TOGETHER, UM, PACKAGE FOR THE PREMISES WAITING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL.
REALIZED THEY, THE ELEVATION THEY PROVIDED WAS FOR A WRONG TOWER HEIGHT.
SO BECAUSE THE HEIGHT WAS LISTED AS 1 25 AND THE ACTUAL HEIGHT OF THE TOWER IS ONE 60 WE HAD TO RE NOTIFY.
WE SENT THE NEW LETTERS, WE POSTED THE NEW NEWSPAPER NOTIFICATION TO MAKE SURE THAT CORRECT HEIGHT IS LISTED.
SO I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED THE ITEMS THAT ACTUALLY CHANGED ON THE SLIDE.
SO THEY'RE NOT REQUESTING ANY CHANGES ON THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST, WHICH BASICALLY SAYS PLEASE ALLOW THE USE, UM, WITHIN THE PD.
SO ONLY THING THEY'RE REQUESTING IS THE HEIGHT OF THE TOWER TO BE LISTED AS 160.
UM, FOR SUP, UM, THE SU THE SOUTH, UH, SOUTH TOWER HEIGHTS ONE 60 FEET.
UM, BECAUSE OF THE ONE 60 FEET TOWER, WE STILL HAVE TO UPDATE THE VARIANCES.
BUT IF I REMIND YOU THE VARIANCE WAS BECAUSE THIS PARCEL, THE CHURCH PARCEL IS ACTUALLY SINGLE FAMILY ZONED PROPERTY
SO NO MATTER HOW FAR THEY ARE FROM THE HOMES, THEY STILL HAVE TO GET A VARIANCE 'CAUSE IT'S, THEY'RE LITERALLY RIGHT ADJACENT TO A SINGLE FAMILY ZONING.
SO AGAIN, THERE ARE NO OTHER CHANGES REQUESTED.
UM, THIS IS ADMINISTRATIVELY A CHANGE THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU APPROVED.
SO WE HAD TO BRING IT BACK BEFORE YOU FOR NEW RECOMMENDATION.
WE, UH, PLAN TO KEEP THEM ON THE DECEMBER 17TH AGENDA BASED ON TONIGHT'S HEARING IF, UH, IT'S RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL SO THAT THERE IS NO FURTHER DELAY IN THEIR PERMITTING AND CONSTRUCTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? NO.
I REMEMBER THIS CASE VERY WELL.
IT WASN'T JUST INCLUDED THE UH, CORRECT.
[00:25:01]
JUST, THEY JUST, OH, THEY JUST COPY PASTED THE WRONG TOWER HEIGHT.SO, BUT SAME HEIGHT? WELL, I MEAN, IT, IT, IT WAS LISTED AS 1 25, BUT IT'S GONNA BE ONE 60.
BUT KIND OF CONSIDERING THE VERTICAL HEIGHT, I MEAN WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE ELEVATIONS THAT 35 FEET MAY NOT SEEM RIGHT AS SO MUCH DIFFERENT WHEN YOU CONSIDER A BUILDING BECAUSE YOU KNOW, IT'S A OPEN STRUCTURE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? I REMEMBER THE CASE.
THIS NEXT ITEM IS A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR FLEXING GATE.
UM, THIS REQUEST IS FOR AN SUP FOR A PRIVATE FUEL STATION.
IT'S FOR THEIR EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AT 2150 WEST BARDON ROAD.
UM, SO ON THE SCREEN YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN.
THEY'RE PROPOSING TO ADD A 12,000 GALLON DIESEL PRIVATE FUEL STATION.
IT WOULD SERVE THE FLEXING GATE FLEET, SO YOU COULDN'T GO FILL OUT YOUR CAR THERE.
OTHER FLEETS FROM OTHER COMPANIES COULD NOT FILL UP THEIR CAR THERE.
IT'S JUST SOLELY FOR THOSE FLEXING GATE FLEET.
UM, THE PURPOSE IS TO ALLOW, UH, THEIR FLEET TO REFILL ON SITE WITHOUT HAVING TO, UH, CREATE AN ADDITIONAL TRIP, UM, TO, TO REFUEL ELSEWHERE.
UM, SO THEY'RE ANTICIPATING THAT THAT IS GONNA ACTUALLY REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF TRUCK TRAFFIC, UH, GENERATED BY THIS SITE.
AND AS PART OF THE REASON THEY'RE REQUESTING THIS, UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE LOCATION ON THE SCREEN, THEY ARE PROPOSING TO PUT THE FUELING STATION ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING GUARD SHACK.
UH, SO THE, UH, FUELING STATION WILL BE SCREENED FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY ON THREE SIDES.
ONE ON THE SIDE IS THE GUARD SHACK AND TWO SIDES IS A 10 FOOT SCREENING WALL.
UH, THIS IS AN EXAMPLE PHOTO OF THE, THE TYPE OF FUELING STATION THAT WOULD BE, UH, PLACED THERE.
UH, THESE ARE A COUPLE OF VIEWS OF THE LOCATION.
YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE GUARD SHACK AT THE EDGE OF THE IMAGE.
THE PROPOSED FUELING STATION IS ABOUT 60 FEET FROM THERE AND IT WOULD HAVE A 10 FOOT SCREENING WALL.
UM, SO IT WOULD BE SCREENED BY THE WALL AND THOSE EXISTING SHRUBS.
UH, HERE'S ANOTHER VIEW FROM FURTHER EAST AND YOU CAN SEE KIND OF THE ROOF OF THE, UH, GUARD SHACK.
AND THEN AGAIN, THERE'S UH, TREES THERE THAT SCREEN IT.
BUT ADDITIONALLY THERE WOULD BE THAT 10 FOOT WALL.
UH, WE DID SEND OUT NOTIFICATIONS, UH, HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION.
AND THE DEVELOPMENT I REVIEW COMMITTEE IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST.
I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
SO CAN YOU CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG? WASN'T IT JUST TO THE RIGHT TO THE EAST OF THAT, THAT THEY PROPOSED THE GIANT SHED? YES.
AND UM, SO I'VE DRIVEN PAST THIS LOCATION.
I'M SPEAKING NOW TO MY OTHER FILE COMMISSIONERS.
THE OUTSIDE STORAGE IS STILL IN EXISTENCE.
THERE'S STILL A TON OF OUTSIDE STORAGE GOING ON, AND SO THE APPLICANT WILL BE HERE.
I, I DO WANNA POINT OUT THAT, UH, CITY COUNCIL GAVE THEM ESSENTIALLY UNTIL APRIL TO GET IT RESOLVED AND THEY WERE ACTIVELY WORKING ON COMING INTO COMPLIANCE.
THE OUTSIDE STORAGE IS SEPARATE FROM THIS REQUEST THAT IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
IT HAS A BEARING TO ME IN MY PERSONAL OPINION ON MY DECISION, BUT, UM, ANYWAY, THANK YOU.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT WAS RIGHT THERE.
SO THIS IS DISTRICT FOUR, MY AREA.
I DID SPEAK WITH COMMISSIONER LOPEZ ABOUT IT.
AND HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY REAL SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH IT SINCE, BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID WITH REGARD TO, TO GIVING HIM THE ADDITIONAL TIME AND THE OUTSIDE.
AND THE APPLICANT WILL BE HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE DETAILED OPERATIONAL QUESTIONS.
ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU.
IT INCLUDES CHANGES TO ARTICLES 1, 2, 6, 7, 12, AND APPENDIX O.
UH, REALLY THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THIS IS TO, UM, PROPOSE A TEXT AMENDMENT THAT DELEGATES OR GIVES CITY COUNCIL THE AUTHORITY TO DELEGATE PLATING, APPROVALS, APPROVALS WITH CONDITIONS OR DISAPPROVALS TO STAFF.
UH, CURRENTLY THAT AUTHORITY IS WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
UM, AND THIS CHANGE WILL ALLOW STAFF TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
UH, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF EXCEPTIONS, UH, THAT MAY UM, BE GOING TO THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF A SINGLE FAMILY PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONING REQUEST COMES IN AND THEY HAVE A PRELIMINARY THAT'S ATTACHED TO THAT AS AN EXHIBIT, YOU WOULD SEE THAT PLAT.
BUT OTHERWISE, UH, THE AUTHORITY WOULD BE WITH STAFF.
UM, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL, UH, CHANGE THAT WILL ALLOW STAFF TO GRANT AN EXCEPTION TO THE FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT IF ACRO CROSS ACCESS IS ESTABLISHED.
RIGHT NOW OUR UDC STATES THAT ALL LOTS HAVE TO HAVE STREET FRONTAGE.
[00:30:01]
WE'VE SEEN SOME, UH, LOTS BEING PLATTED WHERE THEY ARE JUST LIKE FLOODPLAIN OR, UH, SECONDARY TO THE PRIMARY USE AND, UH, HAVE TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL TO GET A VARIANCE OR AN EXCEPTION.THIS WILL ALLOW STAFF TO GRANT THAT EXCEPTION WHILE MAKING SURE THAT PROPER ACCESS IS PROVIDED.
UM, SO THIS IS REALLY THE, THE CRUX OF THE PROPOSAL IS TO ALLOW THE DIRECTOR OR DESIGNEE TO ADMINISTER THE PLATTING REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVE, APPROVE THE CONDITIONS OR DISAPPROVE.
UH, REALLY WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS AS A WAY TO IMPROVE THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS.
IT'LL, UH, DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT DEVELOPERS ARE GOING THROUGH THE PLATING PROCESS WHILE GIVING STAFF THAT AUTHORITY.
UM, AND SO THESE CHANGES WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL AND I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
SAVANNAH, IF I CAN ADD, THE STATE LAW ALSO DID CHANGE, UH, AT THE LAST SESSION, EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1ST TO ALLOW CITIES TO GRANT STAFF THIS AUTHORITY.
SO I MAY HAVE MISSED IT, BUT DID YOU SAY THAT FOLLOWING THE, UM, THE ACTION OF WHOEVER'S DESIGNATED TO MAKE THE APPROVAL STAFF OR WHATEVER TO MAKE THE DECISION, DOES IT STILL COME BEFORE CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE OR IT'S JUST SOLELY OUT OF THE HANDS OF ANY COMMISSION OR COUNCIL? AFTER THAT IT WOULD BE AT THE STAFF LEVEL.
SO RIGHT NOW IT GOES THROUGH REVIEW, IT GOES TO THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING.
THEN TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
IF THERE ARE VARIANCES, IT GOES TO COUNCIL, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE APPROVED CURRENTLY BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
THIS WILL MOVE THAT BACK TO THE APPROVAL AT THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING.
AND THE APPLICANT HAS THE CHOICE IF, LET'S SAY THEIR APPLICATION IS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS THAT THEY LIVE OR DENIED, THEY HAVE THE CHOICE TO APPEAL THAT TO THE PM C.
THIS IS REALLY A GOOD THING YOU GUYS ARE DOING BECAUSE IT KIND OF, IT'S KIND OF MORE CLEANUP AND YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE THE PROCESS EASIER AND MORE MANAGEABLE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU GUYS KNOW AS FAR AS WHAT IS REQUIRED.
SO I REALLY THINK THIS IS REALLY A GOOD, GOOD THING THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING.
SO TYPICALLY FOR THE MOST PART, ADMINISTRATIVE, MOST DEVELOPERS ADHERE TO OUR STANDARDS.
SO Y'ALL, Y'ALL HEARD THAT WHENEVER THEY'RE PRESENTED, REALLY NOT MUCH YOU CAN DO WITH REGARDS TO DENIAL IF THEY'RE MEETING OUR STANDARDS, UM, YOU CAN, BUT THAT'S A LAWSUIT.
SO IF THEY WERE TO PROPOSE SOMETHING, SOME KIND OF, UM, THEY WANTED SOME KIND OF CONCESSION THAT WOULD BE IN THE HANDS OF THE ONE PERSON IN PLANNING TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
IF THERE'S VARIATIONS PROPOSED MM-HMM
AND, AND NOT MEETING OUR STANDARDS, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THEY GO BEFORE P AND Z TO GET THAT APPROVAL.
UM, BUT, BUT IF A STAFF MEMBER COULD JUST APPROVE IT, WHY WOULD YOU SEND THEM TO US? WE WOULD ONLY APPROVE THINGS THAT MEET OUR REQUIREMENTS.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S NOT THAT MUCH FLEXIBILITY.
SO IT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE ACT.
SO IF THE LOT IS MEETING THE LOT WIDTH, THE LOT DEPTH, IF IT HAS THE SETBACKS AND THE UTILITY EASEMENTS, CHECK, CHECK, CHECK.
IT'S ESSENTIALLY AN ADMIN, AN ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION.
AND SO WE'RE NOT CHANGING THAT, WE'RE JUST SAYING STAFF CAN APPROVE IT.
NOW IF IT, LET'S SAY THEY'RE NOT MEETING SOMETHING WE CAN PROVE WITH A CONDITION, LIKE YOU'VE GOTTA ADD THE 15 FOOT UTILITY AS REQUIRED PER THE UDC.
SO THERE'S NO DISCRETION INVOLVED IN THESE TYPES OF REQUESTS.
IT'S, BUT THEY SAY IF THEY WANT QUESTIONS, WHAT IS BEING SAID, THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL THAT JUST SO WE CAN HEAR IT.
SO THERE IS AN OUT, THEY ALWAYS HAVE AN OUT THAT THEY COULD STILL BE HEARD.
IF THERE'S VARIATIONS OR ANYTHING THAT THEY WANT, IT WOULD BE APPEALED TO, YOUR HONOR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.
ALRIGHT, AND THAT BEING SAID, WAS THAT, THAT WAS THE LAST CASE.
SO THE, EVERYTHING IS DONE AND WE'LL CONVENE AT 6:30 PM.