Jun 09, 2025 Planning & Zoning 06092025

[00:00:04]

WELCOME TO

[Call to Order]

I'M CHERYL SMITH, CHAIR OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THIS MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING IS HEREBY CALL BACK 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 FALLS 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 AN 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 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.

TY CHAPMAN.

HERE.

MICHELLE MADDEN.

HERE.

CHRISTOPHER OLEY.

HERE.

FRANK GONZALEZ.

JANIE MENDEZ.

AKARI.

HERE.

VICTOR MEDINA.

HERE.

JOHN FEDCO.

HERE.

ANGELA LUCK V.

HERE, LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL MEMBERS OF PRESIDENT EXCEPT FOR FRANK GONZALEZ, AND NOW WE WILL HAVE THE, UH, INVOCATION BY YOU.

WANT YOU WANT TO DO IT? COMMISSIONER UH, TY CHAPMAN.

AND WE'LL HAVE COMMISSIONER MICHELLE MADDEN LEAD US WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND THE US AND TEXAS FLAG.

THANK YOU.

WOULD YOU BOW YOUR HEADS, PLEASE? MOST GRACIOUS AND EVERLASTING.

FATHER, WE JUST THANK YOU LORD GOD FOR TIME, SPACE FOR JOY AND PEACE.

LORD GOD, WE THANK YOU, FATHER GOD, THAT WE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE HUMBLED BY SERVING YOU, LORD GOD.

LET OUR HEARTS AND OUR MINDS BE RULED AND REGULATED BY YOUR WORD.

LET KINDNESS PREVAIL, FATHER GOD.

LET US SEE THE GOODNESS IN ALL OF THE PEOPLE THAT SURROUND US.

LORD GOD BLESS THE CITY.

LET YOUR WORD FATHER GOD, JUST PERMEATE ITS BEING.

LET US BE BETTER BECAUSE WE ARE HERE TOGETHER.

LET YOUR STRENGTH, OUR STRENGTH, AND OUR DETERMINATION, AND THE GROWTH AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR AFFAIRS CITY BE RULED AND REGULATED BY YOU.

AND LORD GOD, WE THANK YOU THAT YOU HAVE PRESERVED AND KEPT THOSE THAT SERVE THE CITY, FATHER GOD, IN EVERY WAY.

LET FATHER GOD YOUR ANOINTING, FALL FRESH ON EACH OF THEM.

AND LORD GOD, WE WILL FOREVER GIVE YOU ALL THE HONOR AND THE GLORY AND THE PRAISE.

AND WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORD.

IN JESUS' NAME WE PRAY.

AMEN.

AMEN.

AMEN.

PLEASE RISE AND JOIN US IN THE US AND TEXAS PLEDGES.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE DRAW.

AND NOW THE TEXAS PLEDGE.

HONOR THE TEXAS FLAG.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO BE TEXAS, ONE STATE 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 THAT ITEM.

ADDITIONAL SPEAKING TIME MAY BE ALLOWED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN BEFORE SPEAKING.

SPEAKER 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 CITIZEN COMMENTS.

STAFF WILL BE AVAILABLE TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS FOLLOWING PRESENTATION OF EACH TI 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? NOT FOR THIS ITEM, MA'AM.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THE NEXT MATTER

[PUBLIC HEARING CONSENT AGENDA ]

THERE IS ONLY ONE ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

ITEM ONE, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 12TH, 2025 PNZ MEETING.

UH, COMMISSIONER FCO.

MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY, I'D LIKE TO CLOSE THE DISCUSSION AND VOTE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 12TH, 2025.

I SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE THE PUBLIC CONSENT AGENDA BY COMMISSIONER JOHN DUCO FKO, AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MICHELLE MADDEN.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT CASE,

[Items 2 & 3]

ALRIGHT.

ITEM TWO AND THREE

[00:05:01]

MATT, UM, FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

UH, THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED AT 2033 GALVESTON STREET.

AGAIN, THE PROPERTY OWNER DESIRES TO CONSTRUCT A DUPLEX OR TWO SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED UNITS.

ON THE SCREEN, YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING FEATURE, LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION, UH, THE PROPERTIES OUTLINED IN BLACK.

UH, SO THAT BLOCK IS, UH, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND YELLOW, AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY SOUTH OF IT.

UH, STAFF'S UNABLE TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST, THE PRO, BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THAT FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION.

UH, PLEASE NOTE THE FLUME DESIGNATION IS NOT THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY, BUT RATHER THE RECOMMENDED LAND USE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PER THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

UH, ITEM NUMBER THREE IS THE ACCOMPANYING ZONING CHANGE FOR THIS PROPERTY.

UH, THE EXISTING ZONING IS SINGLE FAMILY SIX.

UH, THE PROPOSED, UH, PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT OF SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED.

AND AGAIN, THE APPLICANT DOES DESIRE TO CONSTRUCT TWO SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED UNITS.

IF THE ZONING CHANGE IS APPROVED, THEY WOULD NEED TO ABIDE BY THE SFA ZONING, UH, REQUIREMENTS, WHICH ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE SCREEN.

UH, STAFF'S UNABLE TO SUPPORT THE ZONING CHANGE 'CAUSE THE PROPOSED USE DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION.

THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

COMMISSIONER, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER FOR ? UH, SAVANNAH.

I'M SORRY, I, I MISSED THIS PART OF THE BRIEFING.

UM, WHAT'S, WHAT'S THERE CURRENTLY? THE EXISTING ZONING? NO, NO, NO.

WHAT'S ON THE LOT CURRENTLY? SO IT'S CURRENTLY VACANT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THERE, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? NOT FOR THIS ITEM, MA'AM.

INTERESTING.

UM, THE QUESTION I ASKED IN THE BRIEFING WAS AGAIN, UM, THE REASON FOR WANTING TO DO A, A DUPLEX THERE.

SO THE, THE PERSON THAT IS REQUESTING THIS IS NOT HERE FOR THE HEARING, CAN GRAB RECORDING.

I CAN GRAB YOU.

I THINK THEY'RE HERE.

SO I'LL GET THANK YOU.

SAVANNAH, CAN YOU COME FORWARD PLEASE? YES.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

MY NAME IS TABITHA LEE.

CAN YOU WAIT TILL YOU GET TO THE MICROPHONE? MAKE SURE NO, GET TO THE MICROPHONE SO WE CAN HEAR YOU.

EVERYONE CAN HEAR YOU IN THE MICROPHONE.

MY NAME IS TABITHA LEE.

MM-HMM .

AND THE REASON FOR THE ZONING CHANGE IS THAT THIS PARTICULAR LOT HAS BEEN IN MY FAMILY FOR A VERY LONG TIME.

IT WAS PREVIOUSLY MY GRANDFATHER'S, UH, 11 YEARS AGO.

ME AND SOME FRIENDS WERE WANTING TO BUILD ON THIS LOT, BUT WE NEVER DID ANYTHING WITH IT.

SO NOW THE LOT IS 100% FULLY OWNED AS MINE.

I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT STANDING WITH THE FAMILY IN CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ON THAT LOT.

I'M LOOKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SEEING THAT THERE ARE DUPLEXES YEARS AND YEARS AGO.

THAT'S WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY ON THAT LOT.

MM-HMM .

SO I JUST WANTED TO REBUILD THAT.

THANK YOU FOR GIVING US THAT HISTORY.

UM, SO, UH, I BELIEVE AROUND THE, THE SURROUNDING AREAS OF THAT PARTICULAR LOT.

THERE ARE NO DUPLEXES.

SO THE DUPLEXES ARE FURTHER DOWN ON OTHER STREETS, IS THAT THERE ARE DUPLEXES ON EL PASO, WEB ROBERTS, AND THEN TWO DOORS DOWN FROM MY AUNT.

THERE IS A DUPLEX, BUT THERE'S NOT ANY IN THE CLOSE PROXIMITY OF THAT PARTICULAR, THE TWO DOORS DOWN FROM MY AUNT TO THE, TO THE RIGHT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOUR AUNT LIVES.

I'M SORRY.

SHE'S RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THE LOT.

OKAY.

IMMEDIATELY NEXT DOOR TO THE LOT.

THERE IS A DUPLEX THERE.

OKAY.

A SINGLE STORY DUPLEX.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONERS.

COMMISSIONER MADDEN.

YEAH.

SO I WAS GONNA ASK TOO, UM, YOU DON'T LIVE NEXT DOOR TO THE LOT, BUT YOUR, YOUR AUNT? MY AUNT DOES.

DOES.

OKAY.

AND SO I GUESS SHE'S PROBABLY A PROPONENT OF THIS.

ARE YOU GUYS GONNA KEEP, ARE YOU GONNA RENT IT OUT OR ARE YOU GONNA LIVE THERE OR? I PLAN ON RENTING IT OUT.

YOU DO? OKAY.

MM-HMM .

OKAY.

OKAY, GREAT.

THANKS.

COMMISSIONER .

MA'AM, IT, THAT LOT IS EMPTY RIGHT NOW.

IT IS FAKING AT THIS POINT.

THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONERS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I APPLAUD YOU FOR WANTING TO KEEP THE PROPERTY IN THE FAMILY.

THAT SPEAKS VOLUMES.

A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO, UH, UH, MAKE THAT COMMITMENT, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WANT TO DO.

I, I APPLAUD YOU FOR THAT.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? COMMISSIONER, UH, MEDINA, WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS EARLIER, UM, WELL, ACTUALLY WE DIDN'T GET TO DISCUSS IT EARLIER, AND NOW'S THE TIME FOR THAT.

SO I, I JUST, I THINK AS OUR CITY GROWS, NOT IN MASS, BUT IN POPULACE, WE'RE GONNA START SEEING MORE OF THIS.

UH, IT'S GONNA BECOME MORE AND MORE COMMON PEOPLE WANTING TO DO, UH, DUPLEXES WHERE THERE'S TRADITIONALLY NOT, AND IT'S JUST A SIGN OF THE TIMES.

MM-HMM .

WE'RE GROWING, LIKE I SAID, AND WE'RE NOT GROWING MASS WISE, WE'RE GROWING POPULACE WISE.

MM-HMM .

AND SO WHEN THAT HAPPENS, UH, PRICES TEND TO GO UP AND IN ORDER TO MAKE THINGS AFFORDABLE OR MORE AFFORDABLE, ANYWAY, WE'RE GONNA, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE

[00:10:01]

MM-HMM .

SO WHAT WE DECIDE TODAY COULD SET PRECEDENT FOR THAT.

THAT'S TRUE.

JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHTS.

DO WE HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR, UM, MS. LEE? ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

DO WE HAVE ANY MORE SPEAKER CARDS? NOT FOR THIS ITEM.

I THINK WE CAN HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION ON THIS.

I THINK THIS IS THE TIME WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION.

AT FIRST, I WAS NOT REALLY CONSIDERING THIS, BUT AFTER HEARING, UH, FROM THE APPLICANT, THIS IS FAMILY PROPERTY, AND THEN THE DISCUSSIONS WITH REGARD TO OTHER CITIES ARE LOOKING INTO THIS AND, YOU KNOW, TECH PEOPLE MOVING TO TEXAS AND, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SO I'M MORE OPEN TO IT THAN I WAS AT FIRST.

SO I'D LIKE TO HEAR SOME DISCUSSION IF WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK FIRST.

I JUST WANT COMMISSIONER CLARIFICATION.

GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.

JUST CLARIFICATION.

ARI.

UM, SO WE'RE, THEY'RE TRYING TO CHANGE IT FROM LOAD DENSITY, WHICH LOAD DENSITY IS SINGLE FAMILY.

MM-HMM .

TO THE MEDIUM DENSITY, WHICH IS THE DUPLEX.

MM-HMM .

OKAY.

YES.

JUST COMMISSIONER MADDEN.

YEAH.

UM, I, I'M WITH, UM, OUR OTHER COUNCIL PERSON OR COMMISSIONER.

UH, YEAH, I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT, HONESTLY.

I, I WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

IF IT WERE A TWO STORY AND IT LOOKED LIKE A HOUSE, BUT IT WAS A DUPLEX, WOULD IT MAKE ANY DI MEAN, LIKE, IT'S, IT'S TWO HOMES, SO YEAH.

COMMISSIONER, UH, OLLEY, UM, SINCE THEY ALREADY HAVE SOMETHING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, DUPLEX MM-HMM .

I THINK I, I LIVED TO THE, UH, TOWARDS VOTING FOR IT.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER DUCO, IT IS MY DISTRICT.

AND, UM, THE LADY'S STORY IS COMPELLING, BUT EVEN THAT ASIDE, IT'S A VACANT LOT THAT SHE'S GONNA BE PUTTING INTO, I THINK, INTO THE RENTAL POOL THAT'S GONNA BE MORE AFFORDABLE.

WAY MORE, I'M WAY MORE IN FAVOR OF A, A DUPLEX THAN APARTMENTS.

AND SO I APPLAUD THE, I APPLAUD HER FOR WHAT SHE'S TRYING TO DO, AND I WOULD SUPPORT IT.

OKAY.

COULD MR. CHAPMAN? YES.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

I LOVE LINEAGE.

SO THE FACT THAT YOU'RE KEEPING IT IN YOUR FAMILY, YOU'RE NOT SELLING IT OFF.

I LOVE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UH, PORTION AS WELL AS YOU, AS A BUSINESS OWNER INVESTING IN OUR COMMUNITY.

SO I'M COMPLETELY SUPPORTIVE OF SUPPORTIVE OF IT.

COMMISSIONER MEDINA, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? NO, I, I, I, I, I'M BEHIND IT, UH, AS WELL BECAUSE I, I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GREAT CHANCE FOR, UH, YOUNG PEOPLE WHO NEED STARTER HOMES.

UH, BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, AS WE GET MORE PEOPLE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE PRICES TEND TO GO AND, AND THEY'RE JUST, I MEAN, I GOT A 24-YEAR-OLD LIVING AT HOME WHO CAN'T AFFORD TO MOVE OUT, YOU KNOW, SO I, I FEEL IT.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER.

LUCKY VONNE.

MADAME CHAIR.

YES.

I TOO AGREE WITH, UM, EVERYTHING EACH ONE OF YOU COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID.

UM, I LIKE THE FACT WITH THE LINEAGE AND THEN IT BEAUTIFIES THAT, THAT AREA, UM, THERE.

AND, UM, I WANNA SUPPORT IT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THAT.

I, AND GREATLY APPRECIATE THE INPUT.

'CAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT EVERYBODY HERE HAS A DIFFERENT OPINION, BUT IT'S, IT'S GOOD THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE ON THIS.

SO THIS BEING, UH, DISTRICT, UH, ONE COMMISSIONER, FEDCO, I BELIEVE.

ANY, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ARE WE GOOD? EVERYBODY'S GOOD.

COMMISSIONER FEDCO? YEAH.

I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR JULIE.

DO I HAVE TO DO TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS, OR CAN IT BE ALL DONE IN ONE? UM, IT WOULD BE CLEANER TO DO TWO.

OKAY.

OR YOU CAN DO ONE.

IT'S, IT'S YOUR PRO MADAM CHAIR.

IF I MAY, I'LL DO IT THE CLEAN WAY, THEN I'D LIKE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND VOTE TO APPROVE, UH, ITEM NUMBER TWO.

UM, UH, AND VOTE TO APPROVE.

I SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE ITEM TWO BY COMMISSIONER FEDORKO.

ANY SECOND BY COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

UM, WE HAVE, UM, WITH SEVEN.

SEVEN.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED? WE HAVE ONE OPPOSED.

MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU.

NEXT CASE.

MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY, I'D LIKE TO SIMILARLY MAKE A, UM, CLOSE THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND VOTE TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER THREE, WHICH I BELIEVE HAD STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

I APOLOGIZE IF MY MEMORY, IF IT, IF IT DID WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

OTHERWISE, UH, JUST VOTE TO APPROVE.

I SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION ON FLOOR BY COMMISSIONER FEDCO TO APPROVE.

AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LAVONNE.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED MOTION PASSES.

UH, SEVEN ONE.

THANK YOU.

NEXT CASE.

[4. ZON-25-04-0014 - Zoning Change/Concept Plan - 826 Forest Oaks (City Council District 2). Amendment to Planned Development-152 District to modify the development standards for the construction of a single-family home on 0.08 acres. A portion of Lot 7, Block 14, Greenwood Addition No. 2, Phase 2, City of Grand Prairie, Dallas County, Texas, zoned PD-152 and addressed as 826 Forest Oaks Dr ]

THE NEXT CASE IS THE ITEM NUMBER FOUR, UM, ZON 25 0 4 0 0 1 4.

THIS IS A PD AMENDMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8 26 4 SOAKS.

SO THIS IS A PD AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING PD 1 52, UM, TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOME.

SO BACK IN 1985, UM, THE LOT WAS DEVELOPED

[00:15:01]

BUT BACK THEN, SOMEONE HAS SOLD A PORTION OF 10 FEET TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER TO CONSTRUCT A BIGGER HOME.

SO THIS LOT HAS REMAINED, UM, UNDEVELOPABLE FOR MANY YEARS.

THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER WOULD LIKE TO BUILD A SLIGHTLY, UM, NARROWER HOME THAN WHAT'S IN THE, UM, EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD.

HOWEVER, UM, GETTING THIS STANDARD IS THE ONLY WAY THIS LOT WILL BE DEVELOPABLE, SO STAFF DOES NOT OPPOSE.

SO WHAT THEY'RE ASKING IS A SLIGHT, UH, REDUCTION IN THE LOT WIDTH.

AND THE SIDE AREAS SUSPECT MAINLY, UH, THEY'RE TRYING TO, UH, STAY AS CLOSE TO THE, THE EXISTING PD ONE 50 STANDARD AS POSSIBLE.

HOWEVER, DUE TO THE LIMITATION OF THE LOT WIDTH, THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO PROVIDE BIGGER THAN A 16 FOOT WIDE GARAGE.

SO THEY WILL HAVE TO REQUEST A GR UM, VARIANCE FOR THE TWO PARKING GR, UH, TWO GARAGE PARKING REQUIREMENT BECAUSE STANDARD SITE IS ABOUT 20, UM, OR 18 INSIDE.

SO, UM, STAFF DOES NOT REALLY OPPOSE TO THIS REQUIREMENT.

SO TO SUMMARIZE ALL THE VARIANCES, BECAUSE THEY'RE REQUESTING A MULTIPLE VARIANCES, UM, THE, THERE ARE SIX VARIANCES REQUESTED WITH THIS REQUEST.

THERE IS A MINIMUM LIVING AREA REDUCTION, UH, FROM 1400 TO 1289 AND A MINIMUM LOT AREA REDUCTION FROM 4,400 TO 35 20.

AND MINIMUM LOT WITH, UM, VARIANCE FROM 42 30 MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK REDUCTION FROM 20 TO 19 FEET, MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK REDUCTION FROM EIGHT TO SEVEN, AND GARAGE PARKING SPACES A REQUIREMENT OF TWO GARAGE PARKING TO REDUCE THE TWO.

ONE AGAIN, DRC RECOMMENDS APPROVALS THAT, UM, THIS CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION.

ANY QUESTION FOR STAFF? COMMISSIONER MADDEN? I HAVE A QUESTION ON, I'M SORRY.

THANK YOU.

ON THIS, UH, VISUAL, IT SAYS FIVE FOOT MAINTENANCE DRAIN EASEMENT WITH TWO FOOT AERIAL FOR OVER.

WHAT? FOR, IT DOESN'T FINISH THE WORD.

I'M JUST CURIOUS.

THAT'S SIDE OF THE DRAWING.

YES.

SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A SURVEY.

MM-HMM .

SO I THINK THEY WERE JUST TRYING TO RECORD THE MAINTENANCE AND DRAIN EASEMENT.

UM, I THINK THEY WERE JUST SAYING TWO FEET, AERIAL FOUR.

UM, LET ME SEE.

OVERHEAD.

OVERHEAD.

YEAH.

LIKE, BUT AGAIN, THEY'RE, THEY, THEY HAVE AN EASEMENT THAT'S ALREADY EXISTING MM-HMM .

BUT THE PD ACTUALLY REQUIRES A FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

OKAY.

SO THEY'RE REQUESTING IT TO BE SEVEN FOOT.

SO THEY CAN BUILD, THEY CAN USE THE ADDITIONAL TWO FEET TO BUILD A LITTLE BIT BIGGER, SLIGHTLY BIGGER HOME.

OKAY.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS WHAT THE AERIAL PORTION WAS AND THAT WAS APPARENTLY NOT IMPORTANT.

WELL, I MEAN, WE DO ALLOW OVERHANGS OF A ROOF EASE, UH, EASE TO OVERHANG ABOUT TWO FEET OFF, OFF OF A, UH, WALL.

SO THAT'S WHAT, MAYBE THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS.

YEAH, THAT'S WHAT IT'S OKAY.

OKAY.

I JUST, I DID NOTICE THAT AND WANTED TO MAKE SURE, MAKE SURE IT DIDN'T GO UNMENTIONED.

THANKS.

OKAY.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR JUNE? COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN? YEAH.

THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR.

JUNE, I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

MM-HMM .

I DON'T LIKE THE ONE GARAGE AS IT IS TO THE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT I'M ASSUMING ARE ALL TWO CAR GARAGE.

MM-HMM .

IS THERE ANY WAY YOU COULD DO THE LONG, KIND OF LIKE A TANDEM? YEAH, YEAH.

UM, WITH THE LOT SIZES, ESPECIALLY WITH MINIMUM LIVING AREA, THAT WILL BE VERY CHALLENGING.

OKAY.

I MEAN, THEY WILL STILL HAVE TO HAVE A ONE CAR GARAGE AND A ONE PAVEMENT SO THEY CAN PARK TWO CARS JUST INSTEAD.

TWO CARS WILL NOT FIT IN THE GARAGES.

YEAH.

OKAY.

YEAH.

THANK YOU.

YEAH.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR JUNE? THANK YOU JUNE.

VERY GOOD PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU.

DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? NONE FOR THIS ITEM, MA'AM.

UH, I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP FOR JUST A LITTLE BRIEF DISCUSSION JUST TO, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT I BELIEVE THIS IS A, A GOOD PROJECT BECAUSE THAT LOT WILL BE UNDEVELOPABLE.

IT WON'T, IT WON'T BE DEVELOPED ANY OTHER WAY.

I KNOW IT HAS ONE GARAGE, BUT I BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD BE OKAY.

YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY ARE GOING TO WANNA BUILD WITH ONE CAR GARAGE.

THAT'S UNUSUAL.

'CAUSE MOST PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TWO CAR GARAGES.

SO I COMMEND THE, THE PERSON FOR WANTING TO DO THAT.

UM, AND THAT PERSON THAT THERE'S NOBODY HERE, NO SPEAKER CARD.

SO THEY'RE NOT HERE TO REPRESENT THEMSELVES.

WELL, THE APPLICANT, UM, COMMUNICATE TO STAFF THAT SHE HAPPENS TO BE OUT OF TOWN TODAY.

SHE APOLOGIZED, BUT SHE PLANS ON BEING HERE.

WELL, THANK YOU FOR THAT LETTING US KNOW BECAUSE I WOULD, THAT WOULD BE, THAT'S MY CONCERN IF SOMEBODY'S PRESENTING TO, TO P AND Z AND THEY'RE NOT HERE.

YES.

WHY ARE THEY NOT HERE? SO, UM, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE, UH, MOVE FORWARD? OKAY.

THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER MADDEN.

THIS IS YOUR AREA.

DISTRICT TWO.

YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, MA'AM.

I WOULD, I WOULD LOVE TO.

UM, AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM NUMBER FOUR ZON 25 DASH ZERO FOUR DASH 0 0 1 4 ZONING CHANGE CONCEPT PLAN FOR 8 26 FOREST OAKS AND I MOVE TO ACCEPT, UM, APPROVE PER UH, DRC RECOMMENDATIONS.

SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE ITEM FOUR BY COMMISSIONER MICHELLE MADDEN IS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER,

[00:20:01]

SORRY.

THAT'S ALRIGHT.

UH, ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

SORRY ABOUT THAT COMMISSIONER.

ALL

[5. ZON-25-05-0020 - Zoning Change/Concept Plan - PD for General Retail (City Council District 4). Zoning Change from single family use to a Planned Development District for General Retail Use and a Concept Plan depicting a retail development on 2.59 acres. Lot 2R, Block 1, Jai Addition, City of Grand Prairie, Tarrant County, Texas, zoned for single family use, and addressed as 2800 W Camp Wisdom Rd ]

THIS NEXT ITEM IS THE ZONING CHANGE AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR 2,800 WEST CAMP WISDOM ROAD.

YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY OUTLINED IN YELLOW ON THE SCREEN.

UH, THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY USE TO A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR GENERAL RETAIL.

UH, IN TWO, UH, 2024, THE CITY RECEIVED A COURT RULING THAT STATED THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY WAS FOR SINGLE FAMILY USE.

UM, SO THE PROPOSED, UH, CONCEPT PLAN AND THE PROPOSAL TONIGHT IS TO REONE THAT PROPERTY TO A PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR GENERAL RETAIL.

UH, AND THEIR PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN REFLECTS THE EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED ON THE LOT, WHICH IS AT THE CENTER, AND A SITE PLAN THAT WAS A APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL.

UH, THE PROPOSED LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE TAKEN FROM PD ONE 30, UH, AND WOULD BE A, A APPLIED TO THIS NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.

UM, SO WE DID SEND OUT PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATIONS TO 41 PROPERTIES.

UH, WE RECEIVED TWO LETTERS OF OPPOSITION THAT REPRESENTED ONE UNIQUE ADDRESS, ZERO LETTERS IN SUPPORT.

UH, THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

COMMISSION.

DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR SAVANNAH? THOUGHT YOU DID A REALLY GOOD JOB IN BRIEFING.

I THINK THAT, UM, EVERYTHING'S OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ANY SPEAKER CARDS? JUST ONE.

JEWEL CHILDRY DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK, BUT WISHES TO RECORD HER SUPPORT.

NO OTHER SPEAKER CARDS? UH, IS THE, UM, DEVELOPER HERE.

HELLO, HOW ARE YOU? HELLO.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

JEWELERY FRISCO, TEXAS.

YES.

UM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL US ANYTHING ABOUT THE PROJECT ? WELL, IT'S BEEN IN THE MAKING FOR ABOUT FOUR YEARS.

SO WE'VE DEVELOPED A, UH, SMALL RETAIL CENTER.

UM, ALSO WE USED TO OWN THE, UH, PROPERTY THAT'S CURRENTLY A, A DAYCARE MM-HMM .

LEARNING CENTER.

MM-HMM .

UH, WE, UH, INVITED THAT DEVELOPER TO COME AND, UH, BUILD A LEARNING CENTER THERE.

SO WE HAVE PLANNED TO, UH, FURTHER DEVELOP, UH, IN THE FUTURE.

ALSO, UH, CURRENTLY WE'RE OFFERING, UH, TWO RESTAURANTS.

I THINK IT'S VERY POPULAR WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

MM-HMM .

UH, A BARBERSHOP, UH, AND, UH, POTENTIALLY A VIRTUAL GOLF TRAINING FACILITY.

SO YOU HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY? YES.

VERY GOOD.

VERY GOOD.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MADDEN? I DO.

SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE.

SO IT'S THE SECTION THAT'S TO THE, UM, NORTH, THE EMPTY SECTION THERE BEHIND THE, BEHIND THE STRIP CENTER, WHATEVER THAT YOU PLAN TO DEVELOP.

IS THAT RIGHT? YEAH.

SO THAT'S GONNA BE UP AGAINST THE BACKYARD FENCES.

SO WE CAN GO BACK TO THE, THE MASTER PLAN.

OKAY.

SO THIS WAS PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

OKAY.

I THINK AT LEAST TWO YEARS AGO.

MM-HMM .

THREE YEARS AGO.

MM-HMM .

IT LOOKS FAMILIAR.

THIS WAS APPROVED.

SO WE PLAN TO BUILD ON THIS.

OKAY.

YEAH.

SO YOU HAVE YOUR BUILDING FARTHER AWAY FROM THE BACKYARDS? YES.

OKAY.

UM, I DON'T SEE, I DON'T SEE PARKING LOT LIGHTING THERE, SO THAT SHOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE FOR THE, OR AT LEAST NOT OUT FREE STANDING.

SO THAT SHOULDN'T SHINE INTO THE BACKYARDS OF THE NEIGHBORS.

SO, YEAH, IT LOOKS GOOD TO ME.

SO ARE YOU GONNA HAVE, UH, ANY, ANY DRIVE-THROUGHS OR IS IT JUST, DOES THIS STANDALONE RESTAURANTS JUST, UH, STANDALONE RESTAURANT.

OKAY.

AND YOUR HOURS ARE GONNA BE CONDUCIVE TO BEING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD OR WHAT ARE YOUR THINKING? WELL, SO WE DON'T OPERATE ANY BUSINESSES THERE.

MM-HMM .

THESE ARE OUR TENANTS.

MM-HMM .

AND, UH, MOST OF THEM I THINK, OPERATES, UH, BETWEEN, I THINK, UH, 10 TO MIDNIGHT, PERHAPS AT THE MOST.

MM-HMM .

NOTHING BEYOND THAT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU.

GO.

GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.

WELL, NOT FOR HIM, BUT, UM, THERE WAS TWO OPPOSITION LETTERS ON THIS.

YES.

THERE THERE ARE TWO.

MY, MY, YES.

THERE ARE TWO OPPOSITION LETTERS, AND WE MAY BE ABLE TO GET THAT READ INTO THE, UH, CAN YOU READ THOSE FOR US PLEASE? JUST THE VERBIAGE ON WHAT THEY, THE REASON WHY THEY'RE OPPOSED.

UM, SO THIS FIRST LETTER IS FROM DAVE GERBER AT 51 28 GARDEN OAK PLACE.

WE DON'T NEED ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES.

TRAFFIC AND ACCIDENTS AND CRIME IS ON THE RISE.

WE

[00:25:01]

WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING FOR THE AREA TO REMAIN RESIDENTIAL.

LET'S HAVE SOME GREEN STILL IN THE GP AREA.

UM, THE SECOND IS FROM TERRY OSMOND AT 51 28.

GARDEN OAKS PLACE STATES, WE HAVE ENOUGH RETAIL IN OUR RESIDENTIAL AREA, OUR HOMES AND WAY OF LIFE IS CONSTANTLY BEING AFFECTED BY MORE DEVELOPMENT.

WHY ADD MORE TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION AND RISK OF ACCIDENTS? PLEASE RECONSIDER AND STOP THE CONTINUED BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION.

THANK YOU FOR READING THAT, SAVANNAH.

UM, YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT, SIR, UNLESS SOMEONE ELSE ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

UH, I'M GLAD YOU READ THOSE.

THIS HAPPENS TO BE MY DISTRICT AND, UM, MOST RECENTLY I HAD ONE COME, SOMETHING COME UP IN MY AREA.

BUT MY CONCERN IS THERE ARE ONLY TWO OPPOSITION LETTERS.

AND I WOULD THINK THAT, 'CAUSE I LIVE IN THE AREA, IF IF IT WERE A LOT MORE PEOPLE THAT WERE OPPOSED TO THIS, I WOULD BE MORE INCLINED TO NOT APPROVE IT.

BUT I, WE CAN DISCUSS IT, BUT I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND.

I MEAN, TO ME, IF, IF YOUR RESIDENTS REALLY DO CARE AND ARE CONCERNED ABOUT NOT HAVING ANY ADDITIONAL, UH, BUSINESSES THERE, THEY SHOULD BE HERE.

OR WE SHOULD HAVE MORE OPPOSITION LETTERS.

UH, COMMISSIONER MADDEN? YEAH.

UM, I DO, I THINK HE MENTIONED THAT IT WAS PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL BEFORE, AND I'M CURIOUS AND I, UM, STAFF, WHY, WHY ARE WE SEEING IT AGAIN? JUST REFRESH MY MEMORY.

WE'RE SEEING IT BECAUSE THE CITY RECEIVED A COURT RULING, STATED THE PD ONE 30 WAS NOT IN EXISTENCE, AND THE ZONING IS SINGLE FAMILY.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO HE HAS TO GO THROUGH THE SYSTEM AGAIN TO, OKAY.

I, YEAH, I THINK IF HE ALREADY OWNS THE PROPERTY, WANTS TO PUT IT TO GOOD USE, IT WAS ALREADY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.

OKAY.

ANY OTHER, UH, DISCUSSION COMMISSIONERS? NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM, UH, ZON 2 5 0 5 0 0 2 0 ZONING CHANGE CONCEPT.

OH CONCEPT PLAN.

UM, AS PER DRC, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.

SECOND.

HAVE A MOTION ON FLOOR BY MYSELF, CHERYL SMITH TO APPROVE ITEM FIVE AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JOHN FCO TO, UH, SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT CASE, PLEASE.

[6. ZON-25-04-0016 - Zoning Change/Concept Plan - Residences 3000 Bardin (City Council District 4). Amendment to PD-140 to add Multi-Family as an allowable use and establish the dimensional standards for MF-3 development. Lot A1A, Block 3 Sheffield Village Phase 4, 5&6 Addition, City of Grand Prairie, Tarrant County, Texas, zoned PD-140, within the IH-20 Corridor Overlay District, and addressed as 3000 W Bardin Rd]

ALL RIGHT.

THIS NEXT ITEM IS A ZONING CHANGE AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR 3000 WEST BARDON ROAD.

UH, THE PROPERTY IS OUTLINED IN YELLOW ON THE SCREEN.

YOU'LL NOTE THAT THIS IS AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.

UM, THE EXISTING ZONING IS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ONE 40.

UH, I, THIS, UH, PD IDENTIFIES THIS TRACT AS COMMERCIAL, BUT DOES ALLOW SOME RESIDENTIAL USE WITHIN THAT, UH, ONE OF THOSE BEING CONDO HIGH-RISE.

UH, THE PROPERTY WAS DEVELOPED UNDER THAT LAND USE AND FOR THOSE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

THE PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS TO AMEND THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TO ALLOW MULTIFAMILY USE AS AN ALLOWED USE.

UM, SO IT WAS ZONED, UH, PD ONE 40.

IT ALLOWS CONDO HIGH RISE.

SO THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED, UH, WAS FOR CONDOMINIUMS. IT WAS INTENDED THAT THE DWELLING UNITS WOULD BE INDIVIDUALLY OWNED.

UH, THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN MULTI, HAS BEEN OPERATING AS MULTIFAMILY WITH UNITS FOR RENT.

UH, SO THIS PROPOSAL IS TO ADD THAT MULTIFAMILY LAND USE AS AN ALLOWED USE, UH, AND BRING THAT PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE.

ADDITIONALLY, THEY'RE PROPOSING SOME AL, UM, AMENDMENTS TO THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

IT WAS DEVELOPED UNDER CONDO HIGH RISE AND MEETS THOSE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

BUT NOW SINCE IT'S BEING APPLIED UNDER THE MULTIFAMILY LAND USE, IT DOES REQUIRE SOME MODIFICATIONS SPECIFICALLY TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT TO 75 FEET AND THEN INCREASE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DENSITY TO 35 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

UH, THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, AND I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? COMMISSION FOR .

SO FORGIVE ME, SAVANNAH, I MAY HAVE BEEN OUT IN THIS PART OF THE BRIEFING AS WELL.

SO THERE, WHAT HAPPENS IF WE VOTE? NO, THEY WOULD BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE CURRENT ZONING.

UM, AND WOULD HAVE TO EITHER CONTINUE OPERATING, UH, AND FACE THOSE RAMIFICATIONS OR, UH, BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE BY, UM, HOW LONG HAVE THEY BEEN IN OPERATIONS? UH, SINCE 2020.

SO THEY'VE BEEN FIVE YEARS WITHOUT RAMIFICATIONS, RIGHT? CORRECT.

UH, THESE ARE SOPHISTICATED PLAYERS AND THEY TOOK SOMETHING THAT WAS MEANT TO BE INDIVIDUALLY DEEDED AND DOING AN END AROUND AND MAKING IT MULTIFAMILY.

MM-HMM .

WHY, WHY DOES STAFF SUPPORT THAT? IT'S AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DOES DESIGNATE THE AREA FOR HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

SO THAT IS CONSISTENT.

YEAH.

BUT INDIVIDUALLY, DEEDED IS DIFFERENT THAN MULTIFAMILY, CORRECT? THEY'RE PLANNING TO SELL.

YEAH, I'M SORRY.

THEY'RE PLANNING TO SELL.

THAT'S WHY THEY'RE, THEY'RE, OH, I KNOW THEY'RE SOPHISTICATED

[00:30:01]

I REALLY DON'T CARE ABOUT THEIR PROBLEMS. YEAH, WE WERE, THAT WAS, THAT WAS STATED IN THE BRIEFING THAT, THAT, LIKE COMMISSIONER MADDEN SAID, THE GROUP IS PLANNING TO SELL.

THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WE WERE, WERE ABLE TO FIND THAT OUT ABOUT THAT THIS IS, UH, UNUSUAL.

AND TO ME, I THINK, IS THERE SOMETHING CODE COMPLIANCE CAN DO? I MEAN, I GUESS THERE'S NOTHING NOBODY CAN DO, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM FAIR FOR THEM TO HAVE BEEN OPERATING THAT LONG WITHOUT, UM, BEING IN COMPLIANCE.

AND THEN THERE'S NO REPERCUSSIONS FOR THAT.

REALLY NO LEGISLATIVE RE, RE RE UH, COMP ON THAT, I GUESS.

SO WE HAVE TO INVESTIGATE THAT.

UH, SAY TO SAVANNAH'S POINT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS FROM A LAND USE STANDPOINT AND FUNCTION WISE, WHETHER IT'S CODE CONDOMINIUM OR MULTIFAMILY APARTMENT FOR RENT, IT FUNCTIONS THE SAME.

NOW FROM A, IT FUNCTIONS THE SAME, THE BUILDING AND THE DENSITY WOULD BE THE SAME, MR. FREDO.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM THAT STANDPOINT.

AND TRAFFIC WOULD BE THE SAME.

WE'RE NOT ADDRESSING IT FROM THE FOR SALE OR FOR RENT.

THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A LEGAL MATTER THAT WE INVESTIGATE FURTHER.

RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST ADDRESSING IT AND TRYING TO GET IT INTO COMPLIANCE.

UH, ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR SAVANNAH? I THINK YOU DID A VERY GOOD JOB EXPLAINING THAT.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE? DO WE HAVE SPEAKER CARD? YES.

DAVID DRUM IS HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT AND WISHES TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM.

CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE? I'M DAVID DRUM 9 0 1 MAIN STREET IN DALLAS.

UM, I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT, WHICH IS THE CURRENT OWNER AND VISION BARDEN, LLC.

THE, THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY IN COMPLIANCE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT CONDOMINIUM REGIME HAS BEEN RECORDED.

IT'S TRUE.

NO UNITS HAVE BEEN CONVEYED, BUT OUR OUR INTERPRETATION OF THE EXISTING USE CATEGORY HIGH-RISE CONDO DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY PARTICULAR STANDARD ABOUT HOW MANY UNITS ARE CONVEYED.

IT IS LEGALLY ESTABLISHED AS A CONDOMINIUM.

I DRAFTED AND RECORDED THE CONDOMINIUM REGIME MYSELF.

UH, THE REASON FOR THE CHANGE IS NOT BECAUSE OF CURRENT LEGAL NON-COMPLIANCE, IT'S THAT WE ARE UNDER CONTRACT TO SELL THE PROPERTY AND THE BUYER REQUIRES AS A CLOSING CONDITION THAT IT NOT BE CONDOMINIUMIZED.

UH, WHEN WE SELL IT TO THEM.

UH, THE BUYER TELLS US THAT, UH, SOME OF THE LENDERS HAVE TROUBLE WITH, UM, THE SQUATTER'S RIGHTS ASSERTED BY WHEN IT'S CONDO UNITS AND, UH, THEY DON'T WANT A CONDOMINIUM REGIME.

AND SO IT WOULD, IT WOULD HAVE TO DEPEND NOT ON MEETING THE STANDARDS OF HIGH RISE CONDOMINIUM, WHICH IT CURRENTLY DOES, BUT IT WOULD COME UNDER MF THREE.

AND SO THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE CHANGE IN THE, IT'S THE SAME PD ORDINANCE.

WE'RE JUST REQUESTING A CHANGE IN THE PD ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR AN MF THREE PERMITTED USE WITH TWO EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE DETAILED IN THE REQUEST.

AND THAT WILL ENABLE US TO, UM, DISSOLVE THE CONDOMINIUM REGIME AND CONCLUDE THE SALE WITH OUR BUYER.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER MADDEN.

SO I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU, YOU FILED ALL THE CORRECT DOCUMENTS, BUT I, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH AND HAVE WATCHED ANY OF OUR CITY COUNCIL OR OUR PLANNING AND ZONING IN THE PAST, BUT, UM, IF YOU POLL A NUMBER OF PEOPLE HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY APARTMENT COMPLEXES ARE, ARE NEGATIVE.

THEY'RE NOT LOOKED UPON FONDLY.

SO IF I WERE SITTING ON THIS OR CITY COUNCIL AND I'D SEEN THAT COME ACROSS AS SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY COULD PURCHASE, THAT WOULD'VE COME ACROSS DIFFERENTLY TO ME THAN IF IT WERE APARTMENTS.

SO JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT BECAUSE THERE'S A LITTLE BAIT AND SWITCH.

THE FACT THAT, UM, THAT YOU FILED IT IS FANTASTIC.

AND DOES YOUR CLIENT CONSIDER HIMSELF THE OWNER SOLELY OF ALL THE UNITS AND THUS IS RENTING IT AND IS AT THE LOOPHOLE? THAT IS CORRECT.

WE COULD SELL A UNIT ANYTIME.

IT'S JUST THE SALES PROGRAM HAS NOT BEEN INITIATED.

AND WHY, WHY HAS IT NOT? I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE HE LIKES THE BUSINESS MODEL IT'S UNDER NOW.

UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT IT BE A CONDOMINIUM.

AND IT IS A CONDOMINIUM.

OKAY.

HMM.

OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER DARCO.

ARE YOU A LAWYER? YES, SIR.

SO MY COLLEAGUE, MS. MADDEN, SAID A LITTLE BAIT AND SWITCH.

HOW IS IT NOT A TOTAL BAIT AND SWITCH? IT'S NOT A BAIT.

AND YOU WENT IN AS A CONDO.

RIGHT.

AND THAT PEOPLE THAT VOTE ON THAT THINK THAT THOSE ARE GONNA BE INDIVIDUALLY DEED MM-HMM .

AND PEOPLE ARE GONNA HAVE AN OWNERSHIP STAKE AS OPPOSED TO A RENTAL STAKE.

HOW IS THAT NOT A BAIT AND SWITCH? I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT PEOPLE THINK.

I, I KNOW THE REQUIREMENT IS IT'D BE A CONDOMINIUM.

AND IT IS A CONDOMINIUM.

I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GET INTO HOW MANY UNITS YOU SELL, YOU KNOW, AS OPPOSED TO RENT.

BUT, SO YOUR POSITION AS A LAWYER IS THAT FOR ANY LAND THAT'S PERMITTED TO BE A CONDOMINIUM, THEY COULD ESSENTIALLY DO THIS AND TURN IT INTO A FUNCTIONING APARTMENT.

THAT'S WHAT YOUR POSITION

[00:35:01]

IT IS A CONDOMINIUM UNIT AND THE UNITS ARE RENTED BY THEIR OWNER.

YES.

I THINK THAT'S THE MEANING OF THE USE AS IT'S IN THE CODE.

IS IN, IS IT'S IN YOUR CURRENT CODE, COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN, UM, MR. DRUM OR ATTORNEY DRUM, ARE THERE ANY OF THE UNITS THAT ARE OWNED OR ARE THEY ALL OWNED BY THE OWNER? THEY'RE ALL OWNED BY ONE OWNER.

BY ONE OWNER.

YEAH.

NOTHING ELSE.

OKAY.

GREAT.

THANK YOU.

UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, I THINK THAT YOU'VE ANSWERED OUR QUESTIONS.

UM, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE WE CAN ASK YOU ON THAT.

I THINK WE MAY HAVE A LITTLE DISCUSSION ON THIS.

I'M, I'M A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED THAT WE'RE HA WE'RE AT THIS PLACE.

'CAUSE THIS IS MY DISTRICT, DISTRICT FOUR AND IT, AND LIKE I SAID, WHEN WE, WHEN YOU, OUR PERCEPTION WAS THAT IT WAS GONNA BE, UH, THE, UH, THE TOWN HOMES, CONDOS, CONDOS, CONDOS, CONDOS.

AND NOW, YOU KNOW, WE, WE FIND THAT IT'S NOT, IT'S, IT'S JUST, UM, IT'S JUST, IT'S, I'M NOT SURE ABOUT HOW APPROVING THIS.

SO, UH, HOW DO Y'ALL FEEL ABOUT IT? I THINK I, UH, JOHN'S BE, I MEAN, HIS OPINION IS REFLECTIVE OF MINE AS WELL.

I MEAN, UM, I, I DON'T, UH, I ASKED THE SAME QUESTIONS BEFORE ABOUT RAMIFICATIONS TO, YOU KNOW, CONSEQUENCES TO HAVING RUN THIS BUSINESS AGAINST WHAT IT WAS INITIATED AT AND GOT THE SAME, YOU KNOW, SO WHY WOULD WE MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE SALE EXACTLY.

UM, TO, TO CHANGE IT INTO APARTMENTS WHEN WE ARE ESSENTIALLY, AND, AND IF YOU GO OUT AND TALK TO CONSTITUENTS HERE IN GRAND PRAIRIE, I WOULD SAY 80% OF THEM WOULD SAY, PLEASE NO MORE APARTMENTS.

AND SO WHY WOULD WE GO AHEAD AND HELP SOMEBODY WHO'S BEEN AGAINST WHAT THEY PROMOTED ORIGINALLY AND GET MORE OF WHAT WE DON'T WANT? AND SOMEBODY, IF I MAY ADD, WAS NOT A, WAS A VERY SOPHISTICATED PARTY.

THEY KNEW EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DOING.

THIS IS NOT, OH, I MADE A MISTAKE, I BUILT OVER THE LINE.

OR I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE ZONING.

THEY KNEW EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE.

I I, I'VE BEEN, I WAS, UH, OPPOSED TO THIS.

I'M EVEN MORE OPPOSED TO IT NOW.

MM-HMM .

ANY COMMISSIONERS? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UH, I THINK I, I HAVE ENOUGH TO GO ON.

COMMISSIONER CHAPMAN.

YEAH.

I JUST WANNA READ INTO THE RECORD.

UH, I UNDERSTAND, UH, AS YOU SOMETIMES SAY, MADAM CHAIR, I AM A LAYPERSON.

MM-HMM .

UM, SO THIS IS NOT WHAT I DO AS FAR AS TRYING TO BE AN ATTORNEY AND INTERPRET THE LAW, BUT I JUST GOOGLED, YOU KNOW, JUST FOR MY OWN EDIFICATION.

UM, CONDO, A CONDO SHORT FOR CONDOMINIUM IS A TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WHERE INDIVIDUAL UNITS ARE SEPARATELY OWNED, BUT OWNERS SHARE COMMON AREAS AND PAY FEES TO MAINTAIN THEM.

UM, SO IN KEEPING WITH THAT, I THINK THE UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THEY WOULD BE INDIVIDUALLY OWNED.

AND IT CONCERNS ME GREATLY THAT THE OWNER HAS EACH PROPERTY HIMSELF.

SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS? UH, THAT BEING SAID, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON ITEM, UM, WHAT AM I DOING? ITEM, WHICH ONE IS IT? FIVE, SIX.

SIX.

ITEM SIX.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY ITEM ZON 25 0 4 0 0 1 6 ZONING CHANGE CONCEPT PLAN, UH, RESIDENCES 3000 BARTON.

SECOND, I MAKE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR MYSELF, CHERYL SMITH TO DENY ITEM SIX AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER FEDCO.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THE DENIAL, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT CASE PLEASE.

[7. ZON-25-04-0009 - Zoning Change/Concept Plan - Rock Island Industrial (City Council District 1). Zoning Change from Planned Development-462 for Light Industrial Use to Planned Development for Light Industrial Use and to adopt an additional Concept Plan for Office/Warehouse development on 15.94 acres. Tracts 47, 47.1, 47.2 and 47.3, out of John C Read Survey, Abstract No. 1183, City of Grand Prairie, Dallas County, Texas, zoned PD-462, within the SH 161 Corridor Overlay District, and addressed as 3433 Hardrock Rd ]

THIS IS FOR A 34 3 3 HARD ROCK ROAD.

SO A REMINDER THAT WE RECENTLY APPROVED A, UM, CONCEPT PLAN FOR THIS, UH, PD.

THE PD, UM, 4 6 2.

UM, THIS IS THE AREA WHERE THIS WILL BE LOCATED.

UM, IT'S, UM, FACING ROCK ISLAND HARD ROCK AND 1 61 SERVICE ROAD.

HERE IS THE NEW CONCEPT PLAN.

UM, THEY'LL BE BUILDING TWO LONG OFF OF OFFICE WAREHOUSES ON, UM, THIS ENTIRE LOT.

AND WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING IS THAT THEY WILL HAVE THE, UH, CHALK DOCKS FACING HARD ROCK.

SO THEY ARE, UM, REQUESTING A PARKING VARIANCE TO INCREASE THE PARK, UH, PARKING MAXIMUM ALLOWED.

UH, STEPH DOES NOT HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS IN CASE THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE MORE, UH, OFFICE SPACES DESIGNATION.

SO HERE'S A CONCEPT LANDSCAPE PLAN.

ONE OF THE FEEDBACK THAT THEY RECEIVED FROM THE LAST ZONING PD CASE WAS THAT, UH, CITY COUNCIL WANTED TO SEE THEM INCREASING THE OVERALL LANDSCAPE AREA TO SUPPORT AS A COMPENSATORY MEASURE TO REQUEST A, UM, LANDSCAPE BUFFER REDUCTION.

SO TYPICALLY THEY NEED TO PROVIDE

[00:40:01]

RIGHT NOW THEY'RE SHOWING A, UH, LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG 1 61.

THEY HAVE A 20 FOOT BUFFER IN FRONT OF THIS, UM, BUILDING, AND THEN IT REDUCES TO 15 FOOT ALONG, UH, MORE TO THE NORTH OF THE PORTION.

AND THEY ARE PROVIDING A 20 FOOT BUFFER ALONG, UM, HARD ROCK.

BUT AS THE TABLE SHOWS, THEY HAVE PROVIDED OVERALL AREA, THEY FOCUS MORE ON THE SOUTHERN AND NORTHERN PORTION TO PROVIDE THE ADDITIONAL, UM, LANDSCAPING.

AND ALSO THEY ARE PROVIDING US, THIS SECTION SHOWS SOME EVERGREENS AND SHRUBS TO PROVIDE A LIVE SCREENING ALONG HARD ROCK.

SO THEY ARE, UH, REQUESTING VARIANCES IN, UM, MOST OF THESE WERE ACTUALLY APPROVED UNDER THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PDP D 4 62.

ONE IS THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER, A VARIANCE TO ALLOW REDUCTION FROM 30 FEET TO 15 FEET ALONG, UM, 1 61 AND 20 FOOT ALONG HARD ROCK AS DEPICTED INTO THE CONSTANT LANDSCAPE PLAN, MEANING THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS 15 YEAR, BUT WE STILL WANNA SEE THE 20 FEET HERE OR AS SHOWN AND, UH, TRUCK DUST ALONG THE HARD ROCK.

THIS REQUIRES A VARIANCE TO HAVE THE TRUCK DUCT FACING HARD ROCK ROAD.

UM, A AGAIN, THEY ARE, UH, PROVIDING SOME LIVE SCREENING AND, UM, AS A COMPENSATORY MEASURE, THE WING WALL HEIGHT REDUCTION.

UH, THIS WAS APPROVED BECAUSE WE HAVE GRANTED SIMILAR VARIANCES IN OTHER WAREHOUSES PRIOR TO, UM, THIS CASE.

AND THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE PARKING MAXIMUM TO BE, UH, INCREASED TO 1 61, WHICH EXCEED THE, UH, ALLOWABLE MAXIMUM OF ONE OF FOUR SPACES.

HERE ARE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

AGAIN, WE JUST WANNA ENSURE TO INCLUDE THIS IN THE LANGUAGE SO THAT WHEN THE SITE PLAN COMES ALONG, THERE WILL BE MEETING COMPLYING WITH ALL THE, UH, DETAILED DESIGN REQUIREMENTS THAT WAS NOT DISCUSSED DURING THE CONSEQUENCE PHASE.

SO THE FIRST ONE IS THAT THE DRIVEWAY DESIGNS AND LOCATION MUST BE APPROVED BY OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.

ANOTHER THING IS THAT THE PARKING SPACES WILL BE, SHALL BE PROVIDED PER REQUIREMENT IN THE APPENDIX X.

AGAIN, THIS IS TO ALLOW THE APPLICANTS SOME ROOM TO ADJUST THEIR PERCENTAGES.

'CAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY JUST PARKED AT, UH, APPROXIMATE NUMBER BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW THE FINAL TENANT.