[9. Consider: ZA25-0003, Preliminary Plat for Cardinal Court Addition, being a replat of Lot 9, F. Throop No. 1511 Addition, City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 2080 E. Dove Road. Current Zoning: "SF-1A" Single Family Residential District. SPIN Neighborhood #4. PUBLIC HEARING]

AND AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE UP ITEM NUMBER NINE ON OUR AGENDA.

FIRST, IT'S CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR A CARDINAL COURT ADDITION.

STAFF I GUESS DO WE NEED A PRESENTATION ON THIS OR WERE YOU GOING TO? YES. I THINK WE WOULD LIKE TO RUN THROUGH A PRESENTATION.

IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM, SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. I'LL KEEP THIS PRETTY BRIEF.

LOOKING AT A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CARDINAL COURT, LOCATED AT 2080 EAST DOVE ROAD.

SO THE PURPOSE IS TO SEEK APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE THE 7.4 ACRE LOT INTO FIVE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS.

I'VE GOT AN AERIAL VIEW FOR YOU RIGHT HERE, SO YOU COULD SEE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE SCREEN, KIMBALL AVENUE, JUST OVER THERE TO THE EAST, AND DOVE ROAD IS THAT ROAD UP TO THE SOUTH.

FUTURE LAND USE IS LISTED AS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, ZONED AS SF-1A HERE'S A STREET VIEW CURRENTLY OF THE PROPERTY. JUST A DESIGN OF HOW THE SUBDIVISION WOULD LOOK, SO YOU COULD SEE THEY HAVE THESE FIVE RESIDENTIAL LOTS HERE AND TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS BORDERING ON DOVE ROAD. TREE CONSERVATION PLAN.

SO GETTING RID OF SOME OF THESE TREES HERE BUT STILL KEEPING OTHERS SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSES.

JUST HAVE THAT ONE FROM 2080 E DOVE ROAD RIGHT THERE AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU ALL MIGHT HAVE.

SO JUST CONFIRMING THAT THIS IS THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL THE PREVIOUS APPROVALS AND THE ZONING.

THAT'S CORRECT I BELIEVE SO, YES. OKAY. AND JUST AGAIN, SO I THINK PEOPLE KNOW THESE ARE FAIRLY MINISTERIAL MATTERS FOR US IN TERMS OF STATE KIND OF TIES OUR HANDS IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, HOW WE VOTE ON IT.

AND IN FACT, I THINK THE SHOT CLOCK TIMING ON THE APPROVAL OF IT'S ALREADY STARTED.

SO ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE THIS EVENING? DOES ANYONE REQUEST TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT THIS EVENING?

[00:05:01]

CAN YOU PLEASE PUT THE APPLICANT ON THE THREE MINUTE TIMER? MR. CHAIRMAN, CHILLY RECEPTION.

MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS. SO GOOD TO SEE YOU GUYS. I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD TO THE GREAT PRESENTATION FROM STAFF.

I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS HAVE. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION? YOU GET IT EASY TONIGHT. IT'S TOO EASY. I KNOW, THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR SERVICE.

WELCOME, COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM. SIR, YES, SIR.

OH, WOW. MAKE IT EASY ON YOU. THANK YOU. IT'S AN AWARD WINNING COMMISSIONER.

THEY'RE GIVING YOU A COMPLIMENT. SO NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND AS STAFF NOTED, ITEM NUMBER NINE ON OUR AGENDA DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING. SO, I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. AND SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AND AGAIN, AS WE TALKED ABOUT FAIRLY MINISTERIAL.

SO, I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY CONSIDER A MOTION.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION. WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER NINE ON OUR AGENDA.

ZA 25-0003, SUBJECT TO OUR STAFF REPORT DATED JANUARY 31ST, 2025, AND ALSO SUBJECT TO THE PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER ONE DATED JANUARY 31ST, 2025. ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO HAVE A SECOND. SECOND. ALL RIGHT.

VOTE PLEASE. AND CONGRATULATIONS. 6-0 PASSES AND GOOD LUCK AT THE NEXT LEVEL.

THE CITY COUNCIL IS A LOT TOUGHER THAN US, SO EXPECT TO GET SOME QUESTIONS WHEN YOU GO UP THERE FOR THOSE CASES.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. NOW WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE BACK INTO THE REGULAR ORDER OF OUR AGENDA.

[6. Consider: ZA24-0050, Zoning Change and Concept Plan for 1965 and 1975 N. White Chapel Blvd., on property described as Lots 1 and 2, Thrasher Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District. Requested Zoning: "SF-20A" Single Family Residential District. SPIN Neighborhood #3. (This item was forwarded to the January 23, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting due to the weather-related cancellation of the January 9, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. At the January 23, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, this item was tabled and the public hearing continued to February 6, 2025.) PUBLIC HEARING]

WE'LL START WITH ITEM SIX, A ZONING CHANGE AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR 1965 1975 NORTH WHITECHAPEL BOULEVARD.

YES. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A ZONING CHANGE AND CONCEPT PLAN FOR A FOUR LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.

THE CURRENT ZONING IS AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT AND THE REQUESTED ZONING IS SP 28, AND THIS IS AT 1965 AND 1975 NORTH WHITECHAPEL BOULEVARD.

HERE IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY. THE FUTURE LAND USE IS MIXED USE.

THE CURRENT ZONING IS AG, AND THIS IS THE CONCEPT PLAN.

WE DID SEE THIS LAST MEETING, BUT JUST AS A REMINDER, THEY ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE MINIMUM 30,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT AREA FOR THESE TWO LOTS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO THE SP ONE LOTS TO THE NORTH.

AGAIN, IT'S 2.9 ACRES AND FOUR RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

THIS IS THE TREE CONSERVATION PLAN. SITE PHOTOS.

AND THIS IS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNER MAP.

WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE RESPONSE THAT WAS UNDECIDED FROM THIS PROPERTY UP HERE.

AND JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS WAS ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR THE JANUARY 9TH MEETING. BUT THAT MEETING WAS CANCELED DUE TO WEATHER. AND THEN THIS WAS TABLED AT THE JANUARY 23RD MEETING. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY. NOW, I APPRECIATE THE BRIEF PRESENTATION.

I GUESS, ADMITTEDLY, I GUESS WE ALL HAVE HEARD THIS PRESENTATION EXCEPT OUR NEW COMMISSIONER, SO.

BUT I KNOW YOU GOT THE MATERIALS AHEAD OF TIME, SO I GUESS ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I GUESS LARGELY UNCHANGED FROM WHEN WE SAW IT PREVIOUSLY.

ANY QUESTIONS. AND FEEL FREE TO. THERE'S A LITTLE BUTTON ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE.

YEAH, THERE YOU GO. THAT'LL TURN ON THE MIC. THERE WAS A QUESTION, I THINK, THAT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH WAS GOING TO SUBMIT A LETTER APPROVING. DID THEY DO THAT? I GUESS IS, YEAH.

IS THERE ANY NEW RESIDENT COMMUNICATION CORRESPONDENCE ON THIS CASE DOCUMENTED? WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED IT, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT PROPERTY OWNER IS HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

WELL, WE WILL HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THEM. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THE APPLICANT HERE THIS EVENING? OKAY. NO. COME UP AND I GUESS STATE NAME AND ADDRESS SIMILAR TO LAST TIME.

AND WE'LL JUST GO TO YUKON. RESIDENT OF 203 WEST SPRING LANE.

BEEN LIVING THE LAST TEN YEARS. AND THAT PROPERTY ADDRESS.

OKAY. I'M ASSUMING, YOU KNOW, KIND OF WHAT OUR QUESTIONS ARE GOING TO BE SINCE WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME.

AND YOU DID TALK TO MY NEIGHBOR. YOU KNOW, I SHOWED HIM THE PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, LOTS AND EVERYTHING.

IN FACT, HE'S HERE. SO, YEAH, I THINK HE'S I DON'T KNOW.

YOU KNOW, YOU CAN ASK HIM WHAT HIS THOUGHTS ABOUT IT, BUT WE ALREADY PRESENT WITH THE CITY, YOU KNOW, PLANNING, ZONING. WE WENT THROUGH WITH 2 OR 3 PLANS BEFORE.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY APPROVE. AND WE WORKED OUT, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH LAST SIX MONTHS.

YOU KNOW WHAT THEY APPROVED ON THIS? SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT I GUESS YOU SUBMITTED THE SAME CONCEPT AGAIN AFTER YOUR DISCUSSION WITH THE NEIGHBOR.

YES. OKAY. I GUESS IS THE NEIGHBOR HERE THIS EVENING? YEAH. DO YOU MIND COMING FORWARD? IS THAT OKAY? DO YOU MIND COMING FORWARD JUST TO THE DAIS REAL QUICK AND JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

AND THIS HAS TO DO WITH, YOU KNOW, WE HEAR FROM APPLICANTS A LOT IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY CONVEY TO US.

NEIGHBORS ARE THINKING OR SAYING OR NOT, AND IT ALWAYS HELPS TO HEAR IT DIRECTLY FROM THE NEIGHBOR.

[00:10:04]

IF YOU DON'T MIND JUST STATING YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS IN THE MIC. MY NAME GERARDO SUAREZ AND MY ADDRESS IS 2005 NORTH WHITECHAPEL BOULEVARD.

OKAY. AND YOU ARE THE PROPERTY THAT'S IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH.

IT'S JUST NEXT TO THE LOT. OKAY. AND I GUESS, DO YOU JUST MIND LETTING US KNOW? I GUESS IT SOUNDS LIKE WE REVIEWED THIS SITE PLAN AT THE LAST MEETING, AND THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE HE PRESENTED YOU WITH A SITE PLAN THAT HAS THREE LOTS, I GUESS. AND JUST MAYBE WHAT YOUR CONCERNS WERE WITH THAT SITE PLAN.

YEAH, WE ON THE SITE YET? I THINK WE STILL LIKE, STUDY WHAT HE'S PROPOSING AND WHAT THE CITY IS PROPOSING.

AND SO, YOU LIKE THE SITE PLAN THAT'S ON THIS SITE? BETTER? NOT YET. NOT YET. YOU'RE UNDECIDED? YEAH.

UNDECIDED. OKAY. OKAY. SO, YOU PROBABLY WILL HAVE A TALK WITH.

OKAY. WITH MY NEIGHBOR HERE. OKAY. OKAY. SO YOU'RE UNDECIDED IN TERMS OF WHETHER IT'S THIS FOUR LOT PLAN OR.

IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE WAS A THREE LOT PLAN WHERE THE DRIVEWAY, THE ENTRYWAY FOR DRIVEWAY SPACING FROM KIRKWOOD WOULD BE KIND OF ON THE NORTHERN PART OF THE SITE. IT WOULD KIND OF RUN ALONG YOUR PROPERTY LINE, AND THERE WOULD BE THREE LOTS, KIND OF ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE SITE.

YEAH, WE UNDECIDED ON THAT. WE ARE MAKING WE ARE ASKING SOME QUESTIONS ON THAT.

OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING UP HERE BECAUSE IT'S HELPFUL TO HEAR IT DIRECTLY FROM YOU.

SO, ALL RIGHT. APPRECIATE IT. YEAH. THANK YOU.

THAT'S IT. YES. OKAY. SO I GUESS SOUNDS LIKE IT'S UNDECIDED.

YEAH. WE WENT THROUGH WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING, AND YOU KNOW WHAT? WHAT EXACTLY? YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TWO DRIVEWAYS RIGHT NOW AND WE ARE TRYING TO PROPOSE ONE STREET FROM THERE.

IN FACT, IT'S MY LOT. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO PROPOSE WHAT I HAVE IT.

AND ACCORDING TO THE CITY PLANNING AND ZONING.

SO, WE'RE TRYING TO WORK OUT WITH, YOU KNOW WHAT? WE HAVE IT UP NORTH. HIS PROPERTY, TOO. AND WE ARE MATCHING THE SAME ONE.

SO, HE'S JUST IN THE ONE LOT IN THE MIDDLE. SO, YOU KNOW, WE CANNOT HOLD FOR SO LONG.

AND EVERYTHING FROM LAST ONE YEAR I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE CITY AND TRYING TO GET THE ZONING.

SO WHAT COMFORTABLE LIKE, YOU KNOW, TO BRING THAT LOTS TO MAKE, MAKE THAT LOTS LIFE OVER THERE.

IT'S LIKE BASICALLY IT'S DEAD RIGHT NOW. SO NOBODY IS THERE.

ONLY ONE TENANT IS RIGHT NOW. OKAY. ANY ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT ON THIS ONE? WELL, I'M STILL CONCERNED ABOUT THE 30,000 SQUARE FOOT LIMIT, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH YOUR NEIGHBOR MAY SAY HE'S FINE WITH IT, IT STILL IS JUST SETTING UP PRECEDENT THAT WE DON'T REALLY WANT TO DO FOR OTHER PARTS OF TOWN.

DOWN. AND IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE OFF BY A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT HERE.

YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE. I'M NOT GOING TO BE THE ONE TO TELL YOU HOW TO DO IT.

I HAD TO REARRANGE IT TO GET 30,000 ON THOSE TOP TWO LOTS.

BUT FOR ME, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. I'M GOING TO NEED THAT.

THE LAST MEETING, A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO. LIKE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBER HAS DISCUSSED THAT SHE LIKES TO HAVE IDEA OF HAVING EQUAL LOTS, NOT LIKE ONE BIG, ONE SMALL AND EVERYTHING.

SO THAT'S WHY WE PRESENT IT THAT WAY. THERE IS NO WAY, LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN MAKE IT THREE EQUAL LOT OVER THERE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO, I HAVE A COMMENT.

WHAT WE'LL DO IS MAYBE AFTER WE GET QUESTIONS FROM THE APPLICANT, WE'LL LET HIM SIT DOWN AND THEN WE'LL PROBABLY JUST DELIBERATE REAL QUICK.

AND THEN IF WE NEED TO CALL HIM BACK UP, WE WILL.

SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT FOR NOW? OKAY. IF WE NEED YOU, WE'LL CALL YOU BACK UP.

OKAY. YOU BET. AND WE'LL DELIBERATE IN A SECOND.

I KNOW THIS ITEM DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING, AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I READ THIS CARD INTO THE MAIL.

OR THE RECORD. GERARDO SUAREZ. I THINK I THINK HOPEFULLY I SAID ALL THAT RIGHT.

2005 NORTH WHITECHAPEL BOULEVARD. AND I BELIEVE THIS IS THE CARD YOU FILLED OUT.

AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, IT'S FILLED OUT. DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK.

SO SORRY I CALLED YOU UP, BUT IT SAYS YOU'RE IN OPPOSITION OF THE ITEM.

BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU ALSO STATED YOU'RE ON, I GUESS UNDECIDED.

SO WE KNOW THERE'S VARIOUS FEELINGS YOU HAVE ON THE APPLICATION.

BUT WITH THAT, I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.

AND SEEING NO ONE WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AND I GUESS YOU KNOW, WE'VE KIND OF DELIBERATED ON IT LAST TIME.

WE YOU KNOW, WE ASKED FOR A DIFFERENT VERSION.

WE DIDN'T GET A DIFFERENT VERSION. WE HAVE A NEIGHBOR THAT.

I'M GLAD THAT THERE'S COMMUNICATION WITH THE NEIGHBORS, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE NEIGHBOR DOESN'T HAVE A STRONG PREFERENCE.

AND I MEAN, DAVID, I'LL LET YOU GO AHEAD AND LEAD OFF, I GUESS, WITH A QUESTION OR COMMENT WHILE WE'RE DELIVERING HERE.

WELL, I MEAN, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME. I MIGHT TAKE A CONTRARIAN VIEW.

ALL OF THE LOTS THAT ARE IN CAROLINE TO THE RIGHT ARE ALL SMALLER THAN THESE LOTS.

[00:15:02]

ALL OF THE LOTS THAT ARE THE SOUTH OF IT ARE ZERO LOT LINE LOTS.

AND THERE'S A LOT OF THEM. THE METAIRIE THAT'S TO THE WEST IS QUARTER ACRE LOTS.

SO I WONDER HOW FOR 30,000 OR FOR 25,000 LOTS DOESN'T FIT AS A REALLY NEAT TRANSITION AMONGST ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT SIZES OF LOTS AS OPPOSED TO NOT SETTING A PRECEDENT THAT YOU'RE DOING THAT.

BUT I MEAN, IN THAT IT IS SETTING AMONGST ALL THESE OTHER SIZES OF LOTS AND IT'S ACTUALLY BIGGER THAN THE MAJORITY OF THEM THAT ARE AROUND IT.

YEAH, I THINK AND STAFF, I GUESS I JUST WANT TO 100% CONFIRM THIS.

I MEAN, THIS THIS APPLICATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN BECAUSE THIS IS A MIXED USE DESIGNATION.

AM I REMEMBERING THAT RIGHT? CORRECT, YES. OKAY. SO, IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND USE PLAN.

HOWEVER, I THINK THE ISSUE THAT YOU CAN VIEW ONE WAY, OR ANOTHER IS THE VARIANCE REQUEST RELATED TO THE NORTHERN PERIMETER OF THE SITE, WHICH IS WHAT COMMISSIONER SPRINGER WAS LAYING OUT. SO, I THINK THAT'S THE THAT'S THE THING THAT WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE VARYING VIEWS ON HERE.

DO YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN, COMMISSIONER PHALEN? SURE. I MEAN, I THINK I WOULD RATHER HAVE I THINK I SAID THIS LAST TIME, I THINK I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE CONSISTENT LOT SIZES BETWEEN ALL THE LOTS IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE SMALL DEVELOPMENT, RATHER THAN TRYING TO STRETCH IT INTO THREE.

THAT MAY BE INCONSISTENT WITHIN THEMSELVES. SO, I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF HEARTBURN IN THIS PARTICULAR SCENARIO BECAUSE LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER COMMISSIONER MENTIONED THAT THERE'S A LOT OF VARYING SIZES AROUND HERE. AND I DON'T THINK I DON'T THINK IT'S A HUGE VARIANCE.

BUT I MEAN, I CAN SEE STICKING TO THE RULES. I JUST I DON'T HAVE A HUGE ISSUE WITH IT.

I THINK IT LOOKS NICER TO HAVE SORT OF THE SYMMETRICAL FOUR LOTS THAT ARE ALL KIND OF SIMILAR.

SO, I'M GOOD WITH IT. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE, COMMISSIONER? I'M WITH COMMISSIONER SPRINGER. I'M OPPOSED TO IT.

I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE VARIANCE. AND I DO THINK IT'S A GOOD POINT CONSIDERING WHAT'S AROUND THERE.

AND ARE WE REALLY SETTING A PRECEDENT? BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK CITY COUNCIL'S ALSO SENT A PRETTY STRONG MESSAGE ON OTHER RECENT DEVELOPMENTS THAT THEY DON'T WANT LOTS THIS SMALL.

SO THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. OKAY. ANY OTHER. SORRY, I AGREE WITH THE GENTLEMAN WITH COMMISSIONER FORMAN.

OKAY. OKAY. I GUESS MAYBE THE APPLICANT. YOU WANT TO, I GUESS.

DO YOU MIND COMING BACK UP HERE BRIEFLY? I MEAN, I THINK MY THOUGHT IS, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THE VOTE ENDS UP GOING IN YOUR FAVOR OR NOT.

I THINK WE PROBABLY, AT THIS POINT NEED TO TAKE A VOTE.

AND WHAT THAT'LL DO IS IT'LL BE A RECOMMENDATION, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, PASSED ALONG CITY COUNCIL THAT YOU CAN TAKE THE CITY COUNCIL AND PRESENT, YOU KNOW, THIS PLAN THREE LOTS. YOU CAN CONTINUE TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR AND, YOU KNOW, KIND OF SEE WHERE THAT SHAKES OUT. BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT TABLING WOULD REALLY GET US IN THIS SITUATION.

BUT IT'S UP TO YOU. IF YOU WANT TO TABLE AGAIN, YOU CAN AT YOUR REQUEST.

SO, WE CAN TAKE IT TO CITY COUNCIL. YEAH, WE CAN.

WE CAN PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION, YOU KNOW, UP OR DOWN, AND YOU CAN MOVE IT ALONG THE CITY COUNCIL ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

SO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY REQUESTS TO TABLE.

OKAY. WE'LL TAKE IT TO CITY COUNCIL THEN. OKAY.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND I GUESS WE'LL GO AHEAD AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION THEN, MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY ITEM NUMBER SIX ON OUR AGENDA.

ZA 24-0050. OKAY. AND JUST TO CLARIFY FOR COMMISSIONERS, AGAIN, A VOTE YES IS TO DENY THE APPLICATION AS PRESENTED. SO GO AHEAD AND VOTE. AND THE MOTION TO DENY PASSES 4 TO 2.

AND SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS YOU CAN TAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.

AND YOU CAN ALSO HAVE IN YOUR BACK POCKET KIND OF A THREE LOT SITE AS WELL THAT YOU CAN SHOW COUNCIL AND MAYBE YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON THEIR GUIDANCE YOU CAN SEE WHAT YOU CAN WORK OUT WITH THEM.

SO AND I GUESS STAFF MY USUAL QUESTION. THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE FEBRUARY 18TH.

FEBRUARY 18TH. OKAY, I WILL SCRIBBLE THAT DOWN, SO I DON'T FORGET IT FOR LATER.

SO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT.

AND WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING, A ZONING CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 2300 WEST

[7. Consider: ZA25-0001, Zoning Change and Development Plan for 2300 W. Continental Blvd., on property described as Tract IBOIB, Thomas J. Thompson Survey Abstract No. 1502, Tarrant County, Texas. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District. Requested Zoning: "TZD" Transition Zoning District. SPIN Neighborhood #10. PUBLIC HEARING]

CONTINENTAL STREET. THAT'S RIGHT.

GOOD EVENING AGAIN, EVERYBODY. WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT A ZONING CHANGE AT 2300 WEST CONTINENTAL.

RIGHT ON THAT, RIGHT NEAR DAVIS. SO CURRENT ZONING IS AG FOR AGRICULTURE, AND THE REQUESTED ZONING IS THE TRANSITION DISTRICT.

[00:20:08]

AND WE'RE LOOKING AT APPROVING A ZONING CHANGE AND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS WELL.

THAT WOULD BE GOING WITH IT. SO, HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW HERE.

YOU COULD SEE CONTINENTAL HERE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE LOT DAVIS BOULEVARD OUT HERE TO THE LEFT.

FUTURE LAND USE IS DESIGNATED AS MIXED OR MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

I'M SORRY. AND THE ZONING IS AG AGRICULTURE. SO THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS AIMING FOR FIVE OF THOSE LOTS, AS WELL AS THAT DETENTION POND AREA THAT THEY HAVE ON THE SOUTHERN END OF THAT LOT.

SO THERE ARE SOME DEVIATIONS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT MAKING FROM THE TRANSITION ZONING DISTRICT GUIDELINES.

THE FIRST BEING A SHALL CONSIST OF A MINIMUM OF TWO OF THE THREE FOLLOWING DISTINCT COMPONENTS.

SO, A RETAIL AREA, A RETAIL EDGE OR NEIGHBORHOOD EDGE AND A NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO THEY ONLY HAVE ONE. IT'S THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ELEMENT.

THE SECOND BEING A MINIMUM OF SIX FOOT PLANTER PLANTING STRIP WIDTH.

AND THEY'RE LOOKING AT FIVE FEET. THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IS SET AT TWO STORIES.

THEY'RE LOOKING AT DOING TWO AND A HALF NUMBER FOR THE CUL-DE-SACS ARE PROHIBITED UNLESS NATURAL FEATURES LIKE TOPOGRAPHY OR A STREAM PREVENT A REGULAR STREET CONNECTION. AND THEY ARE LOOKING AT A CUL-DE-SAC AND THERE'S NOT A STREAM OR SOME WEIRD TOPOGRAPHY.

THE FIFTH ONE, THE FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION OF SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF TWO FEET ABOVE THE FINISHED LEVEL OF THE SIDEWALK, OR THE TRAIL IN FRONT OF THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES.

AND FROM THE CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS, IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THAT GUIDELINE WILL BE MET.

AND THE FINAL ONE BEING A MINIMUM OF 15FT OPEN SPACES REQUIRED IN A DISTRICT.

AND WHILE THEY DIDN'T SHOW THAT OPEN SPACE WOULD BE PROVIDED, A TEN FOOT LANDSCAPE EASEMENT IS SHOWN ALONG WEST CONTINENTAL.

SO, THEY SUBMITTED A TREE CONSERVATION PLAN AS WELL.

SOME MAY BE GETTING RID OF OTHERS. THEY'D BE KEEPING A FEW MOCKUPS OF THE HOMES THAT THEY WOULD BE LOOKING AT BUILDING.

STREET VIEWS LOOKING EAST AND WEST ALONG CONTINENTAL BOULEVARD.

AND THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSES THUS FAR, WHICH NONE YET.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR ANYTHING THAT Y'ALL HAVE.

QUICK QUESTION. A LITTLE BIT OF AN UNFAIR QUESTION.

DO WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE AT CONTINENTAL? I KNOW WE'VE HAD PRESENTATIONS ON WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THE UTILITIES AND THE STREET WIDENING AND THE TURN LANE AND ALL THAT.

IS DO WE HAVE A KIND OF A FINAL VIEW OF WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE? YES. I DON'T HAVE A PLAN TO PRESENT TO YOU, BUT IT WILL INVOLVE AN INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT THERE AT CONTINENTAL AND DAVIS ON BOTH THE CONTINENTAL SIDE AND THE UNION CHURCH SIDE. I THINK IT'S ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF LONG PROJECT, AND THEY'RE JUST IN THE EARLY STAGES OF CLEARING TO START RELOCATING RIGHT OF WAY, BUT IT WILL IMPROVE THE LEFT TURN LANE, PROVIDE A RIGHT TURN LANE ON THE WESTBOUND TRAFFIC, AND I THINK PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL, MORE FUNCTIONAL LANE COMING OFF DAVIS BOULEVARD ONTO WEST CONTINENTAL AND THEN FURTHER EAST ON CONTINENTAL.

IT'S TIED IN UNDER THE SAME PROJECT, BUT THEY'LL BE DONE.

CONTINENTAL DAVIS WILL BE IN UNION CHURCH WILL BE COMPLETED FIRST.

AND THEN THERE'S A ROUNDABOUT PLANNED AT PATTONVILLE AND, AND WEST CONTINENTAL.

SO A ROUNDABOUT WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THIS OVERALL PROJECT.

I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. CAN YOU CLARIFY IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT.

WHAT IS WHAT WOULD A RETAIL SLASH NEIGHBORHOOD EDGE.

IS THAT JUST TELL ME WHAT THAT IS. THAT IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION.

THANK YOU. HE KNOWS ALL THE ANSWERS. I'M STILL LEARNING.

I'M STILL LEARNING. OKAY. I'M SORRY I DID NOT HEAR THE QUESTION.

DEFINE A NEIGHBORHOOD EDGE OR RETAIL EDGE. THAT THAT WOULD INVOLVE A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE AS A COMPONENT OF THE, OF THE OVERALL TCD THAT THAT WOULD TRANSITION ON THE EDGE.

IT WOULD BE MAYBE A LESS INTENSE USE. COULD BE OFFICE, COULD BE A LOW INTENSITY RETAIL COMPONENT.

[00:25:05]

OKAY. THANK YOU. STILL COMMERCIAL. JUST A LOWER DENSITY AND INTENSITY.

YEAH. AND THEN WHAT IS THAT? I CAN'T QUITE SEE THIS ON HERE.

WHAT IS THAT? WHAT ARE THE HASH MARKS IN AND THAT'S IN THE CORNER THERE.

THE SOUTHWEST CORNER. IS THAT JUST OPEN SPACE? THAT THAT IS A COMMON ACCESS EASEMENT THAT RESIDES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THIS PROPERTY FOR THAT DRIVEWAY ON OFF OF CONTINENTAL INTO THAT RETAIL DEVELOPMENT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. YEAH. SO, WOULD LIKE SMALL OFFICES BE APPROVED IN THIS ZONING.

I MEAN, IS THE ZONING ALLOWED THAT IF IT WERE PROPOSED AS PART OF THE ZONING? YES. THAT THEY ARE NOT PROPOSING THAT. SO THE DISTRICT ITSELF CALLS FOR IT TO BE A MIXED USE TO HAVE SOME PERCENTAGE OF BOTH THE RESIDENTIAL AND THE VARIOUS INTENSITIES OF NON RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL USE.

THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN EXCEPTION TO JUST BUILD THIS OUT AS A FULL RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT, WHICH THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS THAT TO BE CONSIDERED WITH THIS ZONING, A DEVIATION FROM THAT BASELINE.

UNDERSTAND. SO, WOULD IF IT WERE AN OFFICE ONLY USE, WOULD THAT BE ALLOWED.

WOULD THEY HAVE TO HAVE A SECONDARY USE OR A TERTIARY.

IT WOULD BE THE SAME SCENARIO THEY WOULD NEED TO INCLUDE IN THEIR ZONING DOCUMENT AN EXEMPTION OR DEVIATION FROM THAT TO ALLOW IT TO BE FULLY COMMERCIAL VERSUS ANY RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT IN IT.

SO THAT THAT IS CORRECT. THE APPLICATION THAT'S BEFORE US IS FOR RESIDENTIAL ONLY, AND IF APPROVED IN THIS FORM, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO COME BACK AND AUTOMATICALLY CONSTRUCT OR BUILD OUT OR ANY NON-RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF THIS WITHOUT GOING BACK THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS TO AMEND THAT DISTRICT AND CHANGE THE PERCENTAGE.

IF THAT'S ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

IN THE STONE YARD AND EVERYTHING THAT'S ACROSS THE STREET.

AND WHAT IS THE EVENTUAL ZONING FOR THAT PROPERTY? CAN YOU GO TO THE LAND USE ON THAT? SO THE CURRENT ZONING FOR THAT STONE YARD THAT'S DOWN THERE IS AGRICULTURE.

SO, IT'S AG AND YOU COULD SEE OVER HERE, I BELIEVE IT'S NOT LOADED.

IS IT LISTED AS MIXED USE. I BELIEVE IT'S MIXED USE.

YES. WHAT IS THE SPACING BETWEEN THOSE TWO DRIVEWAYS THEN? I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. SHARED ACCESS TO THE CENTER OVER THERE AND THEN THE STREET DRIVEWAY FOR DRIVEWAY FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

I CAN'T, SEEMS LIKE IT WOULDN'T MEET DRIVEWAY SPACING.

I'M NOT SURE. DO WE HAVE THAT EXACT MEASUREMENT? THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE TWO DRIVEWAYS THERE? WE YEAH, I CAN MEASURE IT LOOKS TO BE ROUGHLY 100FT, BUT THAT'S JUST ME EYEBALLING IT.

IT'S NOT A VARIANCE, I GUESS. IS THAT MAYBE THE MOST, YOU KNOW, OR YOU, DENNIS, I GUESS.

WELL, TECHNICALLY IT DOES CREATE A NON-CONFORMING CONDITION WITH THAT DRIVEWAY IF THE STREET'S APPROVED THERE, BUT IT IS A COMPONENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT'S BEING REQUESTED.

SO IT'S JUST SOMETHING FOR US TO CONSIDER. YEAH.

CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT HERE THIS EVENING? AND WHAT'S THE LENGTH OF THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION? NOT VERY LONG. DAVID, WELCOME TO THE PLANNING ZONING COMMISSION.

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. MY NAME IS CURTIS YOUNG, 1130 NORTH CARROLL AVENUE HERE IN SOUTHLAKE.

THE CENTER LINE SPACING OF THAT IS AROUND 125FT BETWEEN THE STREET AND THE DRIVEWAY.

JUST TO WEIGH IN ON THAT IS OUR PRESENTATION.

THERE WE GO. YOU

[00:30:04]

KNOW, THE PROPERTY IS ON THE LAND USE PLAN AS ONLY RESIDENTIAL.

MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. YES, WE ARE USING THE TRANSITION ZONING ORDINANCE, BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST OVER TWO AND A HALF ACRES REALLY FROM MY VIEWPOINT.

THE OTHER COMPONENT IS THE EXISTING RETAIL THAT FRONTS ON DAVIS BOULEVARD.

THAT THAT BASICALLY CUTS OFF ALL VIEW OF THIS PROPERTY FROM DAVIS.

AND IN MY MIND, LIMITS GREATLY WHAT KIND OF A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT COULD GO HERE? AND I THINK THE RESIDENTIAL YOU KNOW, WORKS BETTER WITH OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE EAST.

BUT I'D LIKE TO EMPHASIZE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT'S AROUND US.

YOU KNOW WE HAVE INDUSTRIAL TO OUR NORTH IN THE TERMS OF A CAR WASH AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS. YOU KNOW, AS I SAID, THE STRIP CENTER WITH THE RESTAURANT IS BETWEEN US AND DAVIS ROAD AND BASICALLY CUTS OFF THE VIEW OF THAT.

THE CAR WASH IS TO OUR NORTH ACROSS THAT, AN OFFICE WAREHOUSE, A LITTLE BIT EAST OF THAT.

THERE'S A COUPLE OF MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS TO OUR EAST.

AND THEN THE STONEYARD, ROCK YARD STORAGE AND SALES SITE ACROSS THE STREET, WHICH IS A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEONE. IT IS MIXED USE ON THE LAND USE PLAN.

AND I KNOW SEVERAL PEOPLE HAVE TRIED TO GET THAT PROPERTY, BUT SOMEDAY YOU'LL.

THAT'LL PROBABLY BE BEFORE YOU. BUT IT'LL BE MIXED USE AND PROBABLY A BLEND OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.

WOULD BE MY THING ON THAT. SO, WE'RE KIND OF SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL USES TO OUR NORTH, WEST AND SOUTH FUTURE USES. SO OUR THOUGHT IS THAT THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT A TRANSITIONAL PIECE OF PROPERTY IS BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL AND THE LARGER LOT MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES.

TO OUR EAST. WE DID TAKE THIS PROPERTY TO THE CORRIDOR PLANNING COMMITTEE, AND WE TOOK THIS PLAN HERE, WHICH WAS A SIX LOT PLAN WITH AN AVERAGE LOT SIZE WAS ABOUT 14,500FT².

WE THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE KIND OF INTERMEDIATE LOT SIZE BETWEEN THE 20,000FT² LOTS TO OUR EAST AND THE COMMERCIAL THAT'S TO OUR WEST AND NORTH. THE INPUT WE GOT BACK FROM THE CORRIDOR PLANNING COMMITTEE.

THE MAJORITY OF THEM ANYWAY, SAID THEY WERE COMFORTABLE WITH FIVE LOTS, BUT NOT SIX LOTS HERE.

SO, WE'VE TAKEN THAT ADVICE AND ARE BRINGING THE FIVE LOT PLAN TO YOU AS THIS.

THEY ALSO DIDN'T WANT A SEPARATE OPEN SPACE LOT IN THE FRONT WHICH WE HAD SHOWN HERE.

SO, YOU CAN SEE THAT OPEN SPACE LOT THERE. THE INPUT WE GOT FROM THEM WAS NO, JUST GO AHEAD AND PUT THAT IN THE LOT.

WE DON'T THINK A SEPARATE OPEN SPACE LOT IS APPROPRIATE THERE.

SO WE'VE BASICALLY DONE WHAT THE CORRIDOR COMMITTEE ASKED US TO DO HERE.

THIS IS A FIVE LOT PLAN. THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE IS NOW RIGHT AROUND 19,000FT².

SO WE'RE VERY, VERY CLOSE TO THE 20,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS TO OUR EAST.

AND I THINK IT STILL ACTS AS A A VERY SLIGHT TRANSITION TO ALL THE COMMERCIAL USES AROUND US.

SO THERE'S OUR, OUR STATISTICS AND ON THE PROPERTY, BUT THIS IS OUR PROPOSAL, AND WE'D APPRECIATE YOU GIVING US A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION ON THE COUNCIL, BUT I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IN THE MEANTIME.

OKAY. NO, I'M GLAD YOU HIT ON THE CORRIDOR MEETING FEEDBACK, BECAUSE I REMEMBER IT COMING THROUGH, AND I JUST I WAS I READ THE MEETING NOTES, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS REMEMBERING SOME OF THE FEEDBACK.

RIGHT. QUESTIONS COMMENTS FOR THE APPLICANT ON THIS ONE.

I HAVE A QUESTION. DO YOU? BECAUSE MAYBE I WASN'T AT THAT QUARTER MEETING, BUT WHY WOULD THEY? WHAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION FOR PUTTING THAT LIKE SHARED ACCESS ONTO THAT LOT? BECAUSE I CAN'T IMAGINE WHOEVER BUYS THAT IS GOING TO WANT TO PAY TAXES ON A SHARED ACCESS EASEMENT TO A RETAIL CENTER.

WE'RE NOT PROVIDING THAT THAT SHARED ACCESS EXISTS.

RIGHT. BUT IT'S IT'S IN THAT SIZE OF THE LOT.

[00:35:01]

RIGHT. SO IF THEY'RE BUYING THE LOT RATHER THAN HAVING IT AS A DESIGNATED OPEN LOT, LIKE YOU WERE SAYING, THE CORRIDOR RECOMMENDED MERGING THAT INTO THAT LOT SIZE.

SO SOMEBODY IF IT YOU KNOW IT, IT'S I'M SURE THE ACCESS IS REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE COMMERCIAL CENTER.

IF IF IT'S AN OPEN SPACE LOT, THEN YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE AN HOA TAKE CARE OF THINGS AND WHAT HAVE YOU.

SO IT'S BASICALLY AS FAR AS THE COMMERCIAL CENTER GOES, NOTHING'S CHANGING.

RIGHT. I GUESS I WAS JUST SAYING, WHOEVER BUYS THAT LOT IS GOING TO BE PAYING TAXES ON LAND. THAT'S JUST AN ACCESS DRIVEWAY TO A DIFFERENT CENTER. SO I'M JUST LIKE, I WAS CONFUSED WHY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED. BUT I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING WITH THE HOA AND EVERYTHING.

OKAY. SO SO THAT'S AN EASEMENT THAT WAS GRANTED BY THE OWNER.

CURRENT OWNER OF THE PROPERTY OR PREVIOUS OWNER? DO YOU KNOW? WELL, A PREVIOUS OWNER. IT'S BEEN THERE A THERE A LONG TIME, EVER SINCE THAT WAS DONE.

I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE CURRENT OWNER THAT MY CLIENT HAS.

I MEAN, MY CLIENT HAS THE PROPERTY UNDER CONTRACT.

WHETHER THE CURRENT OWNER WHO OWNS THE HOME AND RENTS IT OUT NOW, WHETHER THEY GRANT THAT EASEMENT, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'VE OWNED IT THAT LONG. SO IT WAS, I THINK, MULTIPLE OWNERS AGO.

AND SO IT'S A PERPETUAL EASEMENT THOUGH. YES.

YEAH. OTHERWISE THEY WOULD HAVE NO WAY TO GET INTO THERE.

YOU KNOW, I, I SUSPECT I WASN'T INVOLVED, BUT I SUSPECT THEY WANTED IT A CERTAIN DISTANCE AWAY FROM THE DAVIS INTERSECTION IS WHY THAT HAPPENED.

AND THEY WENT TO THEIR NEIGHBOR AND SAID, CAN WE BUILD A DRIVEWAY HERE? WE'LL PAY YOU X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS FOR IT.

OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. CURTIS, I NOTICED IN LOOKING BACK AT THE NOTES AS WELL.

SO THIS STARTED OUT AS TEN LOTS AT ONE POINT.

QUITE A WHILE BACK, AND I THINK THE TEN LOTS INCLUDED THE LOT JUST TO THE ONE NEXT TO IT.

YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. AND THAT'S WHAT WE THOUGHT.

THAT WAS OUR INITIAL THOUGHT. WITH SOME FEEDBACK OF SOME CONVERSATIONS, WE, WE WE DECIDED NOT TO TO PURSUE THAT AT THE COURT OR COMMITTEE.

SO WE BROUGHT THEM THE SIX LOT. SURE. AND SO I KNOW THAT THERE WAS COMMENTS ABOUT LOSING ONE LOT.

AND THEN THERE WAS ALSO SOME COMMENTS ABOUT MAYBE LOSING TWO LOTS FROM THE SIX.

SO MY QUESTION WOULD BE, DID YOU LOOK AT A PROPOSED PLAN WITH FOUR LOTS, OR DO YOU HAVE THAT AS AN ALTERNATIVE? NO, WE DON'T HAVE THAT AS AN ALTERNATIVE. IS THAT.

SORRY. GO AHEAD. YEAH. WHAT I'M TOLD IS IT'S IF IT HAS TO BE FOUR LOTS, IT WON'T GO FORWARD.

OKAY, SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU'D BE WILLING TO DO AS AN OPTION.

NO. OKAY. IS THERE ANOTHER. DID YOU HAVE ONE, COMMISSIONER? I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT I THINK THAT DRIVEWAY THAT WE'RE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT'S IN QUESTION DOWN THERE. GOING INTO THE CENTER WAS PROBABLY SUPPOSED TO BE A CONTINUATION OF THE COMMERCIAL SIDE, WAS WHAT THE ORIGINAL INTENT WAS WHEN IT WAS PUT IN.

AND AND I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, IT'S TO ME, THIS IS JUST TRYING TO FORCE SOMETHING INTO THE BACK END OF A, A COMMERCIAL CENTER. I MEAN, THERE'S NO WAY I'D WANT TO LIVE IN EITHER ONE OF THOSE TWO HOUSES BACKING UP TO THAT, TO THAT CENTER LIKE THAT. AND THEN WHEN THE CAR WASH GOT SOLD AND REMANUFACTURED HERE NOT LONG AGO.

I MEAN, THERE WAS THIS BIG UPROAR ABOUT THE NOISE FROM IT THAT WAS COMING FROM THIS GENERAL AREA OVER HERE.

SO I CAN'T SEE WHERE THAT'S GOING TO HAVE IMPROVED THAT MUCH OVER TIME.

SO IT JUST SEEMS LIKE TO ME YOU'RE FORCING PEOPLE INTO JUST BACKING THEM UP AGAINST RESIDENTIAL, I MEAN, COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, WHICH IS THE WHOLE POINT OF A TRANSITIONAL SITE TO TO DO A KIND OF A LOT SIZE THAT CAN THAT CAN HANDLE THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. AND BUT A TRANSITION IS NOT BEING ON TOP OF THE DESK AND THEN BEING ON THE FLOOR.

THAT'S NOT EXACTLY WHAT I'D CALL A TRANSITION.

THAT'S A THAT'S A RADICAL. I THOUGHT THE PLAN WAS A GOOD TRANSITION BECAUSE THOSE THOSE ARE THE KIND OF LOTS PEOPLE WOULD EXPECT TO BE NEXT TO SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

BUT I DON'T KNOW, I JUST I DON'T FEEL IT RIGHT NOW.

SO. BUT DULY NOTED. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE'RE GOOD. WE'LL CALL YOU BACK UP IF WE NEED YOU AFTER HEARING.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. CURTIS. ITEM, WHERE DID MY AGENDA GO? THERE IT IS. SORRY. APOLOGIES. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA DOES CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COME FORWARD NOW.

OKAY. HERE. GO AHEAD. AND THE WAY THIS WILL WORK IS JUST GO AHEAD AND COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. AND THEN WE'LL HAVE KIND OF A THREE MINUTE LIGHT TIMER DOWN HERE.

AND THREE MINUTES CAN BE CAN BE A WHILE. YOU CAN USUALLY GET YOUR POINTS IN AND IT WILL START. AND WHEN IT GETS TO THE START OF THE THIRD MINUTE, YOU'LL SEE A YELLOW LIGHT. AND THEN WHEN THE RED LIGHT GOES OFF, THAT MEANS YOU HIT THREE MINUTES. BUT GO AHEAD PLEASE. MY NAME IS SHALINI SELVAN AND I'M FROM 2024 WOODBURY COURT, AND WE ARE VERY GLAD THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS COMING UP.

[00:40:06]

WE'RE VERY, VERY HAPPY AND THIS IS THE VERY FIRST TIME I'M COMING HERE.

SO MY APOLOGIES IF I'M RAISING SOMETHING THAT IS NOT AT THE RIGHT AUDIENCE OR AT THE RIGHT PLACE, BUT IF YOU COULD LET ME KNOW, I WOULD GO AND RAISE THE CONCERNS ACCORDINGLY.

THE ISSUE IS, YOU KNOW, THE PLACE WHERE WE ARE LIVING.

WE CAN HEAR LOUD MUSIC AT NIGHT FROM TEN ALL THE WAY EARLY IN THE MORNING.

AND BASED ON OUR CONVERSATION WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

SO I'M JUST HERE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE FUTURE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE GOING TO BE THERE.

IT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE FOR THEM. SO THAT IS ALL I WANT.

I'M VERY HAPPY THAT THIS IS COMING. WE'RE GLAD THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WONDERFUL NEIGHBORS.

AND THAT IS ALL THAT I WANTED TO SAY. I KNOW ONE PERSON CAME OVER AND HE EXPLAINED, HE ANSWERED ALL OUR QUESTIONS.

I WASN'T AT HOME THAT TIME. SO I'M FOR THIS, NOT OPPOSING ANYTHING.

SO I WAS JUST A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED LISTENING TO EVERYTHING.

SO THAT WAS THE ONLY ISSUE THAT I HAD. AND WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE OTHER ISSUES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH WE HAVE TRIED TO RESOLVE, BUT WE HAVEN'T BEEN. SO I WANT TO KNOW WHERE TO GO AND ADDRESS THESE ISSUES SO THE FUTURE NEIGHBORS WOULD NOT FACE THE SAME CITY STAFF CAN KIND OF HELP YOU WITH ANY OF THE ISSUES BEYOND THE ZONING CASE THAT WE'RE HERE TO HEAR.

YEAH. THAT'S WHAT NOISE ORDINANCES AND OTHER THINGS.

SORRY. NO, NO. NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

CITY STAFF CAN HELP YOU AT THE END OF THE MEETING. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. YOU BET. NOW, THANK YOU FOR COMING FORWARD.

ANYONE ELSE WANT TO COME FORWARD AND COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? ALL THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN AND SEEING NO ONE.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I GUESS WE CAN KIND OF DELIBERATE THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE.

I GUESS ANYONE WANT TO KICK IT OFF IN TERMS OF EITHER KIND OF AS IS OR MODIFICATIONS THEY'D RECOMMEND? AND THEN WE CAN TALK TO THE APPLICANT DEPENDING ON HOW THE FEEDBACK GOES.

WELL, IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S A TOUGH PIECE OF PROPERTY. BOTH, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF SIZE, SO IT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH SCALE TO DO MUCH DIFFERENT WITH IT. IT'S WHERE IT'S LOCATED. IT'S A TOUGH PIECE OF PROPERTY.

THE ONE THING THAT COMES BACK TO ME IS THAT IT'S AT LEAST CONSISTENT WITH THE HOUSES THAT ARE TO THE EAST.

AND SO THERE'S THERE'S SOME ARGUMENT FOR IT IN THAT RESPECT.

I, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO WHETHER YOU CAN OR CAN'T MAKE IT WORK WITH LESSER LOTS.

IT'S REALLY NOT OUR PLACE TO SAY. BUT I DO. I DO GET CONCERNED ABOUT LEAVING LOTS LIKE THIS BEHIND IN THE EVENTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY. I KNOW, I KNOW THE I KNOW THE DESIRE OF THE CITY IN TERMS OF DENSITY AND ALL THAT.

BUT BUT THERE ARE GOING TO BE SITES LIKE THIS THAT, THAT HAVE TO BE MORE CREATIVELY LOOKED AT OR THEY'LL NEVER GET DEVELOPED.

AND, AND AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE SHOULDN'T, WE SHOULDN'T DO THAT.

AND THAT'S JUST THAT'S MY OPINION. ALL RIGHT.

ANYONE ELSE WANT TO WEIGH IN? VICE CHAIR? I DON'T KNOW.

I MEAN, I, I WOULD AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER CUNNINGHAM.

I MEAN, THIS IS A A REALLY CHALLENGING PIECE OF PROPERTY HERE.

YOU KNOW, IN MY MIND, IT WAS ALMOST EASIER WHEN THE PARCEL NEXT TO IT ON THE EAST WAS PART OF THE EQUATION BECAUSE YOU WERE OBVIOUSLY TALKING ABOUT MORE LOTS, BUT AT LEAST YOU KIND OF HAD THE WHOLE THING WORKED IN TOGETHER.

BUT I'M JUST WORRIED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC. AND QUITE FRANKLY, I'M NOT SURE THIS GETS PAST CITY COUNCIL, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A CLEAR ANSWER ON THIS, BECAUSE IT REALLY IS NOT AN EASY PIECE OF PROPERTY, AND IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO SIT THERE IF SOMETHING LIKE THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN.

SO I DON'T KNOW. AND IF IT WAS FOUR LOTS, WOULD YOU? I THINK I'D FEEL BETTER IF IT WAS FOUR. BECAUSE YOU'RE OVER 20,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT.

IS THAT WHAT? YEAH. AND I KNOW THAT THAT WAS SOME OF THE QUESTIONING IN CORRIDOR.

COULD WE GET CLOSER TO 20,000? YEAH, BUT WHO KNOWS, MAYBE THAT DOESN'T MATTER.

THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING IF. YEAH, FOUR WORKS BECAUSE I.

I COULD PROBABLY DO THAT. FIVE JUST SEEMS LIKE WE'RE KIND OF STUFFING IT IN THERE.

WE'RE NOT THE PRO FORMA COMMITTEE. WE'RE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH.

OKAY. OTHER COMMENTS, THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE? WELL, I'M GOING TO REITERATE AGAIN THAT I DON'T I DON'T THINK ANY AMOUNT OF HOUSES IN THERE THEIR MATTERS. IT'S JUST IT'S TOTALLY SURROUNDED ON TWO SIDES BY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT, IN MY OPINION, IS NOT A THAT'S NOT A TRANSITION.

THAT'S A, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST RADICALLY DIFFERENT TWO USES.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME THIS WOULD BE MUCH BETTER SERVED TO BE MORE OF A COMMERCIAL APPLICATION.

ALL RIGHT. DULY NOTED. ANYONE I AGREE THE TRAFFIC IS A HUGE PROBLEM RIGHT THERE.

[00:45:04]

AND I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T HAVE THE HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE ON WHAT THE INTENTION WAS WITH THAT COMMERCIAL ACCESS, BUT PERHAPS IF IT TIED IN AND THERE WAS JUST ONE INSTEAD OF THREE ACCESS POINTS RIGHT THERE WHERE IT'S ALREADY A HUGE TRAFFIC PROBLEM, I DON'T KNOW HOW 20 SOMETHING PEOPLE COULD GET IN AND OUT OF THERE COME 5:00 AT NIGHT.

OKAY. COMMISSIONER PHALEN, DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS YOU WANT TO SHARE? NOT YET. NO. NOT YET. OKAY. GIVE ME TWO MORE SECONDS.

YEAH. I MEAN, I WAS TRYING TO KIND OF MARRY MY THOUGHTS UP WITH WHAT THE VICE CHAIR WAS SAYING.

I MEAN, IT'S I MEAN, IT'S LAND USE, MEDIUM DENSITY.

SO IT HAS THE LAND USE AND IT'S JUST HOW INTENSE DO WE WANT TO MAKE IT? YOU KNOW, AND TRYING TO MARRY THAT WITH SOME OF THE GUIDANCE WE'VE GOTTEN FROM COUNCIL LATELY AS WELL.

IT CERTAINLY SEEMS LIKE IF IT WAS, YOU KNOW, 20,000 SQUARE FOOT PLUS LOTS, THAT THAT WOULD BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH SOME OF THE NARRATIVE WE'VE HEARD FROM COUNCIL AND MAYBE STRIKE THAT RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, MEDIUM DENSITY LAND USE. FOR ME, SO, I MEAN, I THINK I COULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF SOMETHING LIKE THIS HERE, BUT MAYBE IT MIGHT BE MORE OF THE FOUR LOT VERSION.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HOW THAT STRIKES. I MEAN, I THINK I KNOW IT STRIKES DOCTOR SPRINGER, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF HOW THAT STRIKES ANYBODY ELSE FURTHER DOWN THE DAIS.

DIDN'T THE OWNER SAY THAT FOUR LOTS WASN'T. NO, THAT'S NOT HERE.

NEITHER HERE NOR THERE. WE'RE WE'RE THE COMMISSION. AND ULTIMATELY, WE LOOK, IF WE'RE GETTING TO WHERE CITY COUNCIL IS GOING TO GET, WE'RE JUST SAVING THE PROCESS TIME. SO. YEAH, I HAVE MIXED FEELINGS, I GUESS.

I GUESS THE SMALLER THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECOMES, I THINK IT COULD BE A LITTLE HARDER TO GET PEOPLE TO WANT TO BUY THOSE BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE, AS IT'S NOT SORT OF THAT LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD FEEL.

SO. BUT I MEAN, I DON'T THINK THIS IS ALL THAT TRICKY OF A PROPERTY TO DEVELOP.

IT'S A NICE SHAPE. SO I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, I GUESS I'D BE MORE IN FAVOR OF THE FOUR LOTS IF, IF THAT WAS AN OPTION. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WHY DON'T WE INVITE THE APPLICANT BACK UP, IF YOU DON'T MIND? YOU'RE KIND OF HEARING. I MEAN, WE CAN OBVIOUSLY, WE CAN TRY TO CRAFT A MOTION OF SOME KIND THAT GETS SUPPORT.

I GUESS YOU'RE HEARING A LITTLE THE BACK AND FORTH. YEAH. LET ME, IF YOU DON'T MIND COMMENTING ON A COUPLE OF THINGS REGARDING THE TRAFFIC.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY CONTINENTAL IS BEING IMPROVED. I THINK THE TRAFFIC THERE IS GOING TO IMPROVE GREATLY.

THEY'RE ADDING A COUPLE LANES TO CONTINENTAL LEFT TURN LANE, RIGHT TURN LANE.

AND SO I THINK YOU KNOW THIS. YEAH. HISTORICALLY THERE'S BEEN SOME BACKUP HERE.

BUT I THINK THAT THE CONSTRUCTION THAT HAS ALREADY STARTED AND SHOULD BE DONE HERE IN THE NEXT YEAR AND A HALF OR SO, WHILE THIS WOULD BE DEVELOPED, IS GOING TO IMPROVE THE TRAFFIC TREMENDOUSLY, I WOULD THINK.

AND JUST, YOU KNOW, THE LINES THAT YOU SEE THAT WE'VE DRAWN HERE ARE FROM THE PLANS THAT THE CITY HAS IS UNDERWAY THERE. SO YOU CAN SEE HOW WHEN IT GETS PAST THIS ENTRY HERE, IT BEGINS TO WIDEN OUT CONSIDERABLY.

AND THEN THERE'LL BE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A FREE RIGHT TURN LANE, A STRAIGHT LINE, A LEFT TURN LANE, AND, YOU KNOW, A LANE COMING IN. SO I THINK THE THINK THE TRAFFIC WOULD BE BETTER THERE.

I MIGHT ASK, YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES GOING FROM FIVE LOTS TO FOUR LOTS DO FOR US? YOU KNOW, THE YOU TALK ABOUT INPUT FROM THE COUNCIL.

I, YOU KNOW, COUNCIL SEEMS TO BE UNSURE OF IS ANY MORE OR LESS THAN 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.

I THINK AT AN AVERAGE OF 19, WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE.

YOU KNOW, IF WE HAD JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE PROPERTY, THESE COULD ALL BE, YOU KNOW, HALF ACRE LOTS HERE.

AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, DOCTOR SPRINGER'S COMMENT ABOUT BEING NEXT TO COMMERCIAL TO ME SAYS THE LOTS OUGHT TO BE EVEN SMALLER TO, YOU KNOW, BE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

SO WE'RE KIND OF GOING IN, YOU KNOW, TWO DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.

I'M NOT SURE MOVING TO FOUR LOTS DOES ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, FOR US EXCEPT MAKE IT A HARDER THING TO, TO ACCOMPLISH. SO THOSE ARE THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS.

NO, NO, I APPRECIATE IT. AND OBVIOUSLY IT'S A BALANCE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO COME UP WITH WHAT WE THINK IS A GOOD OUTCOME FOR THE SITE AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, PRECEDENT ACROSS THE ENTIRE CITY, BECAUSE AS YOU AS YOU OF ALL PEOPLE KNOW BETTER THAN ANYONE, YOU KNOW, WE SEE A LOT OF THESE APPLICATIONS. SO, WE'RE TRYING TO APPLY THEM, YOU KNOW, SOME LEVEL OF CONSISTENCY TO THEM RELATIVE TO THE LOCATION THEY'RE IN AND WHAT YOU'RE LIKELY GOING TO HEAR AT COUNCIL. SO RIGHT.

AND I'VE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH COUNCIL.

AND YOU KNOW SO FAR THE HEAD'S KIND OF NODDING.

[00:50:01]

ALL RIGHT. YOU NEVER KNOW UNTIL YOU GET THERE.

SO, I GUESS ARE YOU GOOD. IF WE CRAFT A MOTION OF SOME KIND OR WANT TO REQUEST TABLING OR.

I MEAN, WE'RE HAPPY TO SEE WHAT WE CAN CRAFT.

WELL, YOU HEARD WHAT I HEARD. SO, I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT IT WILL BE, BUT I'M HAPPY TO CRAFT ONE.

WELL, WHAT DO YOU ALL THINK? I MEAN, WE'D LIKE, OBVIOUSLY A MOTION TO GO FORWARD WITH THIS PLAN TO COUNCIL.

I HEARD SOME SUPPORT OUT THERE, BUT I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH.

IT'S YOUR CALL. SURE. LET'S GIVE IT A SHOT. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. AND OBVIOUSLY, AS YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WHATEVER THE MOTION RECOMMENDATION IS, YOU CAN TAKE THAT TO COUNCIL AND.

RIGHT. ADVOCATE FOR WHAT YOU'D LIKE. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU BET. THANK YOU. NOT SURE. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE KIND OF IN A FEW DIFFERENT SPOTS, BUT I MEAN, I SUPPOSE WE COULD, YOU KNOW, WE'LL KEEP GOING UNTIL A, YOU KNOW, A MOTION PASSES.

SO, I MEAN, I SUPPOSE WE COULD, WE CAN KIND OF MAYBE TALK OUT LOUD, KIND OF, MAYBE A FIRST ATTEMPT AT WHATEVER YOU MIGHT WANT TO PUT OUT THERE AND WELL, I'M GOING TO IF IT'S OKAY WITH THE CHAIRMAN, I'M GOING TO GO WITH AN EASY FIRST ATTEMPT.

AND IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE TO DENY IT AGAIN.

I DON'T I DON'T THINK ANYTHING THAT THE APPLICANT SAID IS INCORRECT OR INAPPROPRIATE.

BUT YOU KNOW, THE COMMENTS ABOUT COUNCIL I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY A STRING OF DEVELOPMENTS THAT THIS BODY HAS ALMOST UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED AND THEN THEY DON'T GO THROUGH AT COUNCIL.

AND SO, THE POINT BEING, I THINK THERE'S MAYBE A KIND OF A TRANSITION IN PLACE AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE COUNCIL IS LOOKING FOR. AND SO, IN MY MIND COUNCIL NEEDS TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE DO THE BEST THAT WE CAN. BUT THE GUIDANCE THAT I'M HEARING ON VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING WE'VE DONE IS WE DON'T WANT HIGH DENSITY.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU COULD CALL THIS HIGH DENSITY, BUT WE DON'T WANT THE SMALL LOTS.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT DOING THAT ANYMORE. SO I'M NOT SURE I REALLY ADD ANYTHING OTHER THAN TO SAY I WOULD PROBABLY FILE OR MAKE A MOTION TO DENY IT, KIND OF SEE WHERE IT WHERE IT GOES. AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET COUNCIL FEEDBACK. I MEAN, THESE TRANSITION ZONING THINGS ARE MUCH DIFFERENT NOW THAN THEY WERE BACK WHEN YOU AND I STARTED ON PNC. AND DR. SPRINGER 10 OR 15 YEARS AGO.

I MEAN, THEY WERE MUCH EASIER BACK THEN, I THINK.

AND THEY'RE JUST NOT NOW. AND I THINK THAT'S INDICATIVE OF WHERE THE CITY IS AT.

SO, IT'S NOT A CRITICISM OF THE DEVELOPER OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I THINK THE COUNCIL IS JUST GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE SOME TOUGH CALLS HERE, AND MAYBE JUST BEFORE YOU PUT A MOTION FORWARD AND JUST KIND OF HYPOTHETICALLY, I GUESS IF IT WAS PRESENTED AS FOUR LOTS, WOULD IT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU THINK YOU COULD GET MORE SUPPORTIVE OF? I PROBABLY COULD. AND AGAIN, THAT'S GIVEN THE FEEDBACK AT THE CORRIDOR COMMITTEE.

AND I THINK I PROBABLY COULD TOO. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT OTHER WE HAD KIND OF A NO.

NO, THANK YOU. I GUESS ANYONE ELSE DOES THAT MATTER TO ANYBODY.

FIVE VERSUS FOUR. I MEAN I'M MORE JUST TRYING TO COME UP WITH CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK FOR THE APPLICANT HERE SO THAT HOWEVER THIS GOES, THEY AT LEAST KIND OF HAVE A SENSE OF WHERE THE BODY WAS.

SO, IF WE GO FORWARD, IF WE WERE TO DENY IT ALTOGETHER, THEN ARE WE SAYING WE WOULD JUST NOT WANT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THIS LOT? I THINK WE'D BE SAYING THIS SPECIFIC APPLICATION WITH FIVE LOTS, AND THAT'S WHY I'M KIND OF TRYING TO FEEL THIS OUT RIGHT NOW, BECAUSE IF EVERYBODY WAS SAYING, HEY, WE LIKE IT, OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT IT'S FIVE LOTS, WE'D RATHER IT BE FOUR. AT LEAST THEN THE APPLICANT KNOWS WHAT TO DO, WHAT THEY WANT TO DO OR NOT IN TERMS OF GOING FORWARD TO COUNCIL.

AND COUNCIL KNOWS WHAT OUR ISSUE WAS. OBVIOUSLY, COUNCIL CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M JUST TRYING TO FEEL THROUGH, YOU KNOW, IS IT LIKE DR. SPRINGER? IS IT JUST A, I'M NOT INTERESTED OR IS IT, YOU KNOW, GOING FROM FIVE VERSUS FOUR FOR ME, I DON'T THINK GOING FROM 5 TO 4 WOULD BE A GAME CHANGER.

SO IT'S EITHER ALL OR NOTHING. I THINK YOU'D BE SUPPORTIVE AS IS, IS THAT I THINK I COULD BE SUPPORTIVE WITH THIS.

OKAY, MR. DRISCOLL, I'D BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH [INAUDIBLE].

I THINK THAT WOULD. I'M SORRY. I'D BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH FOUR LOTS. FOUR.

OKAY. OKAY. I CAN'T HELP BUT THINK CREATIVELY WHEN I GET INTO SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

AND SO I'VE BEEN TRYING TO THINK, WELL, IF IT'S NOT RESIDENTIAL, WHAT DOES IT BECOME? AND MAYBE THAT'S NOT WHERE WE'RE SUPPOSED TO GO.

BUT SINCE I ASKED THE QUESTION FROM DENNIS IF IT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, SMALL OFFICE OR THINGS LIKE THAT, IF IT WERE 4 OR 5 SMALL OFFICES, IN EACH OF THOSE WERE 4000FT.

YOU WOULD THEN CREATE 60 CARS OF TRAFFIC THAT WOULD COME AND GO TWO AND THREE TIMES A DAY.

SO, IF WE GET AWAY FROM A RESIDENTIAL USE AND SORT OF PUSH IT BACK TO A COMMERCIAL USE, EVEN A RELATIVELY

[00:55:08]

LOW DENSITY COMMERCIAL USE, LIKE A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE, WE'RE GOING TO CREATE MORE TRAFFIC AT THIS LOCATION, NOT REDUCE TRAFFIC. AND SO, THE DISCOMFORT THAT I HAVE IN TURNING IT DOWN IS THAT WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO HAVE A CHANCE TO DO IN THE FUTURE? AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY, BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT AS A GOVERNING BODY.

THAT'S OKAY. AND DENNIS, JUST CONFIRMING, I GUESS, THAT USE WOULD BE ALLOWED ON THIS SITE BECAUSE IT'S ADJACENT TO COMMERCIAL. IS THAT. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING READY TO DISCUSS IF IT CAME UP.

THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR IT IS MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WHICH THAT LAND USE DESIGNATION IN AND OF ITSELF DOES NOT RECOMMEND ANYTHING OTHER THAN SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, OPEN SPACE, AND THEN PUBLIC SEMIPUBLIC TYPE USES.

SO FROM THE LAND USE PLAN STANDPOINT, IT DOES NOT SUPPORT A COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IN HERE.

THE ZONING THEY ARE ASKING FOR, THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THAT ZONING ON THE BASELINE SET OF REGULATIONS RECOMMENDS THAT YOU HAVE AT LEAST TWO OF THE VARIOUS COMPONENTS THAT ARE DESCRIBED IN THAT ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH WOULD BE SOME LEVEL OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL EDGE, COMMERCIAL EDGE AND NEIGHBORHOOD EDGE AND RESIDENTIAL.

SO THEY'RE PROPOSING ONLY ONE. AND THAT'S PRIMARILY, MOST LIKELY DUE TO THE WHAT THE LAND USE PLAN CALLS FOR.

THEY WOULD NEED TO AMEND THE LAND USE PLAN TO EITHER PROVIDE A SITE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW SOME FORM OF COMMERCIAL ON THAT, OR AS A FINDING OF THE ZONING CHANGE THE COMMISSION COULD BOTH RECOMMEND AND THE COUNCIL COULD APPROVE A NONRESIDENTIAL COMPONENT COMING TO SOME LOGICAL FINDING OR CONCLUSION GIVEN THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AREA, POSSIBLY WITHOUT AN OUTRIGHT LAND USE AMENDMENT.

OKAY, SO DOING PRIMARY PRIMARILY COMMERCIAL ON THIS SITE WOULD BE TRICKY WITHOUT A LAND USE AMENDMENT, AS IT CURRENTLY KIND OF HELPS AS A LAND USE PLAN CURRENTLY.

TALK THROUGH THAT. YES. THAT IS. SO IT'S MORE THAT IT'S GOING TO PREDOMINANTLY BE RESIDENTIAL AND IT'S HOW DENSE DO WE WANT THAT RESIDENTIAL.

THAT'S MORE THE QUESTION. OKAY. OKAY. WELL, I THINK WITH ALL THAT, WE MIGHT AS WELL JUST ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON IT AND SEE HOW IT GOES.

I MEAN, I THINK THE APPLICANT'S KIND OF HEARD THE FEEDBACK FOR PROBABLY HAS A BETTER CHANCE THAN FIVE BUT SOUNDS LIKE THEY WANT US TO VOTE ON FIVE.

SO, WE'LL VOTE ON FIVE AND WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY ITEM SEVEN IN OUR AGENDA.

ZA 25-0001. AND NOTE THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THIS BE CHANGED TO FOUR LOTS AS AN ALTERNATIVE. OKAY, SO JUST REMEMBER, A VOTE YES IS TO DENY.

SO JUST WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR VOTE. OKAY, THERE'S A MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

A VOTE TO DENY PASSES 4 TO 2. BUT I THINK YOU KIND OF GOT THE FEEDBACK THERE.

SO, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN OBVIOUSLY TAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL AND HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, STAFF CAN KIND OF CONVEY WHAT, WHAT A LOT OF THE DELIBERATIONS WERE ON.

AND COUNSEL TO THE VICE CHAIRS POINT COUNCIL CAN KIND OF HELP TALK THROUGH THAT AND FIGURE OUT WHERE AN OUTCOME IS.

THEY'RE COMFORTABLE. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY.

LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING UNTIL WE GET THE SIGN BOARD IS ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, CONSIDERATION OF ZONING CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SHOWING PROPERTY.

[8. Consider: ZA25-0002, Zoning Change and Development Plan for the Schelling Property, on property described as Tract 3D01 , Rees D. Price Survey Abstract No. 1207 and Lot 3, Joel W. Chivers Addition, an addition to the City of Southlake, Tarrant County, Texas and located at 2665 and 2735 N. White Chapel Blvd. Current Zoning: "AG" Agricultural District. Requested Zoning: "R-PUD" Residential Planned Unit Development. SPIN Neighborhood #1, PUBLIC HEARING]

YES. THIS REQUEST IS FOR AN APPROVAL OF A ZONING CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SHOWING PROPERTY. IT'S FOR TEN RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 10.85 ACRES. THE CURRENT ZONING IS AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT AND THE REQUESTED ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AND THIS IS LOCATED AT 2665 AND 2735 NORTH WHITECHAPEL BOULEVARD.

HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY. AND THIS IS WHITECHAPEL HERE.

THE FUTURE LAND USE IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT.

[01:00:07]

THIS IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AGAIN, THEY'RE REQUESTING THE TEN RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND THE TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS.

THE NET DENSITY IS JUST UNDER ONE ACRE. THEY ARE DRAFTING THEIR DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BASED ON THE SF 20, A ZONING DISTRICT. SOME OF THE DEVIATIONS ARE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IS 25,000FT², AS OPPOSED TO 20,000FT².

MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE IS PROPOSED AT 45%. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS WOULD BE 600FT² TOTAL, AND THAT WOULD BE A CUMULATIVE OF ALL ACCESSORY BUILDINGS. AND THE MINIMUM HOUSE SIZE WOULD BE 3000FT².

THIS IS THEIR TREE CONSERVATION PLAN, SHOWING WHERE THEY'RE PLANNING TO PRESERVE THE TREES AND WHICH TREES WILL BE REMOVED.

AND WE JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF PICTURES FROM WHITECHAPEL LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY.

AS OF THE TIME THAT THIS PRESENTATION WAS PUT TOGETHER, WE HAD RECEIVED TWO RESPONSES.

ONE WAS WITHIN THE 200FT IN OPPOSITION. IT'S THIS ONE RIGHT HERE.

AND THEN WE ALSO RECEIVED ONE OUTSIDE 300FT. THAT WAS ALSO OPPOSED.