Sep 17, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission

[00:00:04]

GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. WELCOME TO THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 17TH.

[1. Call to Order. ]

ACCORDING TO STATE LAW. SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO GET STARTED EARLY. BUT WE'VE GOT A PRETTY TIGHT AGENDA THIS EVENING, SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN WORK THROUGH IT FAIRLY EXPEDITIOUSLY.

REALLY QUICKLY, JUST IN TERMS OF HOW THIS MEETING WORKS, WE DON'T HAVE A CAPACITY CROWD.

SO I CAN KEEP THIS SHORT AND SWEET. ON EACH ITEM.

WE'LL HEAR A CITY STAFF REPORT AND HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS.

THEN WE'LL ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME UP STATE NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND MAYBE JUST DO SOME Q&A.

I DON'T THINK ANY OF THESE REQUIRE A ROBUST PRESENTATION.

AND THEN WE'LL ASK A FEW QUESTIONS AND THEN WE'LL OPEN UP A PUBLIC HEARING AS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW.

HEAR WHAT WE HEAR DURING THAT AND THEN DELIBERATE AND LIKELY COME TO A RECOMMENDATION FOR CITY COUNCIL.

SO THAT'S THE RULES OF THE ROAD. IF WE DO OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC HEARING, IF ANYONE WANTS TO COME FORWARD, THERE'S A THREE MINUTE LIMIT. YOU'LL SEE SOME COLORED LIGHTS UP THERE THAT ARE GREEN, YELLOW AND RED THAT WILL KIND OF GIVE YOU TIMING ON THAT. OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY GOOD TO ROLL. ARE THERE ANY STAFF OR ADMINISTRATIVE UPDATES?

[3. Administrative Comments. ]

YES THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S THE ONLY UPDATE THAT I HAVE IS WE DO HAVE THE CORRIDOR PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING AT 5:30 ON MONDAY.

OKAY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO STEAL YOUR THUNDER THERE, BUT CORRIDOR MEETING IS KIND OF THE VERY, VERY, VERY FRONT END OF OUR PROCESS WHERE AN APPLICANT CAN COME IN AND GET SOME INITIAL FEEDBACK ON THEIR APPLICATION INFORMALLY FROM KIND OF A CROSS-SECTION OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEMBERS AND PARKS BOARD MEMBERS TO KIND OF GIVE THEM SOME DIRECTION ON HOW THEIR APPLICATION MIGHT GO.

SO VERY FRONT END OF THE PROCESS. IT'S, THERE'S NO PUBLIC HEARING IN THOSE, BUT THERE'S PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY TO GET THE MATERIALS AND MEET WITH THE APPLICANTS AND

[4. Chairman Comments. ]

[5. Consider: Minutes for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held on September 3, 2026. ]

ANY COMMENTS OR EDITS BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? SEEING NONE. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.

MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. OKAY.

AND PASSES FOUR ZERO WITH TWO FOLKS ABSTAINING.

SO APPRECIATE THAT. NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM SIX ON OUR AGENDA, WHICH IS CONSIDERATION OF ZA26-0053 ZONING CHANGE SITE PLAN FOR 731

[6. Consider: ZA26-0053, Zoning Change and Site Plan for 731 Zena Opp, LLC, on property described as Lot 4, Block 1, Pecan Creek Addition and located 731 Zena Rucker Road. Current and Requested Zoning: “S-P-2” Generalized Site Plan District. Applicant: Roger Smeltzer Jr., 731 Zena Op, LLC. Property Owner: 731 Zena Op, LLC, Vision Commercial Capital Group, LLC. SPIN Neighborhood #9. PUBLIC HEARING ]

THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO SEEK APPROVAL OF A ZONING CHANGE IN SITE PLAN TO ALLOW AN AMBULATORY SURGERY CENTER AS A PERMITTED USE WITH THE COVERED PATIENT DROP OFF CANOPY AND A SCREEN GENERATOR ENCLOSURE LOCATED AT 731 ZENA RUCKER ROAD.

THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED OFF OF ZENA RUCKER.

FUTURE LAND USE IS OFFICE COMMERCIAL. CURRENT ZONING IS S-P-2 GENERALIZED SITE PLAN DISTRICT.

THIS IS A STREET VIEW LOOKING SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY.

THERE'S BEEN SOME EARTH DISTURBANCE. STREET VIEW LOOKING WEST AND STREET VIEW LOOKING EAST.

THIS WAS THE PREVIOUS APPROVED SITE PLAN FROM ZA21-0072.

NOTING PREVIOUSLY THAT THERE WAS A PERMITTED USE ADDED FOR A NON MEDICAL SPA.

AND THESE ARE THE PREVIOUS APPROVED VARIANCES THAT WILL RUN WITH THE SITE PLAN.

DISTRICT ONE WAS FOR THE DRIVEWAY ORDINANCE FOR THE MINIMUM STACKING DEPTH OF 50FT.

IT REMAINS TO BE 41FT FOR THE WEST SIDE AND 43FT AND NINE INCHES FOR THE EAST SIDE.

AND THERE WAS ALSO VARIANCE TO ALLOW NO TRAIL TO BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG ZENA RUCKER. THE PROPOSED.

THIS IS THEIR PROPOSED SITE PLAN. NOTING THE LOCATION OF THE DETACHED COVERED CANOPY AS WELL AS THE REMOVAL OF TWO SPOTS AND ADDING THE SURGERY CENTER AS A PERMITTED USE. THE CANOPY IS REQUIRED BY REGULATIONS TO FOR A SURGERY CENTER.

THESE ARE SOME DEVIATIONS FROM THE 01 USES AND REGULATIONS WITH THIS SP2 DISTRICT.

ALL USES ARE STILL PERMITTED WITH THE 01. NOTING AGAIN THE NON MEDICAL SPA AND THE NEW PROPOSED USES.

THE PARKING IS. PARKING RATIO IS DETERMINED BY THE BUILDING AREA BASED ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THIS IS THE

[00:05:04]

AND THIS IS THE ELEVATIONS FOR THE COVERED CANOPY.

NOTING THAT IT'S 15FT AND 11IN IN HEIGHT. THIS IS OUR GENERATOR SCREENING.

REQUIREMENT IS EIGHT FEET TALL. TREE PRESERVATION PLAN.

AND FOR THE LANDSCAPE PLAN THERE'S NO DEVIATIONS FROM THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.

AND AS OF NOW, THERE ARE NO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSES.

AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE CAN YOU GO BACK FORWARD 2 OR 3.

SORRY. GO TO THE CANOPY PICTURE, I GUESS RIGHT THERE.

YEAH. THANK YOU. OKAY, MAYBE WE CAN LEAVE IT ON THIS ONE FOR NOW, AND WE CAN MOVE IT AROUND.

BUT NO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. WE ALL GOOD? OKAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE THIS EVENING? YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, AND WE CAN PROBABLY JUST ASK A FEW QUESTIONS.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION. BILL SYBLON DIVISION COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE.

1340 MAIN STREET, GRAPEVINE, TEXAS. OKAY. ZACH JOHNSON, 2210 BONNIE VIEW LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS.

DEVELOPER. OKAY. APPRECIATE IT. YOU GET TO COME STAND UP THERE.

YOU GOT TO CONFESS YOUR ADDRESS AND NAME. SO SO REALLY THE ONLY CHANGE WE'RE LOOKING AT EFFECTIVELY THIS EVENING IS THE CANOPY.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES SIR. OKAY. AND CAN YOU MAYBE TALK THROUGH THIS STYLE OF CANOPY? TYPICALLY, WE'VE KIND OF SEEN THE TYPES WHERE MAYBE YOU CAN JUST KIND OF PULL THROUGH IT, SO TO SPEAK, VERSUS SOMETHING LIKE THIS WHERE IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE I THINK THIS THIS DESIGN IS MORE REQUIRED FOR WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

I KNOW WE DISCUSSED PUTTING A CANOPY ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING AND FOR SOME REASON IT WAS NOT PRACTICAL TO DO IT THAT WAY.

IT WAS MORE OF A, TO BE ABLE TO WHEEL THE PATIENTS POTENTIALLY OUT OF THE FRONT.

MY UNDERSTANDING AND THE ARCHITECT ISN'T HERE, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT DESIGN IS CONSISTENT WITH THAT TYPE OF USE.

SO THE FUNCTIONALITY HERE IS THAT UNLESS OTHERWISE NEEDED, THE SPOT, I GUESS WE'RE SEEING THE FAUX CAR IN HERE IS VACANT. AND THEN IF A PATIENT NEEDS TO BE WHEELED IN OR OUT.

YES SIR. THE CAR IS BACKED UP. PATIENTS PUT IN AND THEN PULLED OUT.

THAT'S FOR ASC STANDARDS. SORRY, YOU CAN SAY IT IN THE MICROPHONE.

THAT'S PER ASC STANDARDS. OKAY TO HAVE THAT. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. AND THAT WOULD ASSUME THAT IT EVER RAINS IN TEXAS.

YEAH. THAT'S FAIR. YEAH. GOOD POINT. NEED IT, NEED IT FOR FOUR MONTHS OF THE YEAR.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT ON THIS ONE? I'M JUST CLARIFYING BECAUSE THERE'S COLUMNS NEXT TO THE GHOST CAR THERE.

SO THERE'S MORE. I'M THINKING ABOUT THE WIDTH OF THE VEHICLE AND THEN STILL HAVING ENOUGH ROOM FOR SOMEBODY TO COME IN A WHEELCHAIR OR WHATEVER TO BE IN.

BUT I GUESS IF THERE'S NOTHING, IF THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE CAR, THE ABILITY TO PARK CARS ON EITHER SIDE, BECAUSE THAT COLUMN IS GOING TO ALLOW SOME SPACE TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

YES, MA'AM. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOOD. WE'LL CALL YOU BACK UP IF WE NEED.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM NUMBER SIX ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING DOES CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THAT PUBLIC HEARING UP TO ANYONE LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. AND SEEING NO ONE WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM NUMBER SIX. ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 6 CASE ZA26-0053.

ZONING CHANGE A SITE PLAN FOR 731 ZENA OPP, LLC SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER THE 11TH OF 2026 AND ALSO CITING THE SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER TWO DATED SEPTEMBER 11TH OF 2026.

OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

OKAY, LET'S GO AND VOTE, PLEASE. AND PASSES SIX ZERO.

CONGRATULATIONS. I THINK THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THAT YOU'LL LIKELY BE ABLE TO MAKE IS WILL THEY HAVE TIME TO MAKE THE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 6TH ONE OR WILL THEY PROBABLY NEED TO.

NO FOR THIS ONE IT WILL GO TO OCTOBER 20TH. OCTOBER 20TH.

SO YOU CAN THANK THE GOOD FOLKS IN AUSTIN FOR TAKING ABOUT A MONTH WITH THEIR NEW REGULATION, THE WAY THEY SET IT UP. SO OUR STAFF IS DOING ALL THEY CAN.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD LUCK. NOW WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA CONSIDERATION OF A ZA26-0060 PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BRIDLEGATE.

[7. Consider: ZA26-0060, Preliminary Plat for Bridlegate, on property described as Lot 2R, R.D. Price No. 992 Addition and located at 4000 N. White Chapel Blvd. Current Zoning: “SF 1A” Single Family Residential Zoning District. Applicant: David Lewis, Spry Surveyors. Property Owner: Frank Viola and Christopher Lamon. SPIN Neighborhood #1. PUBLIC HEARING ]

[00:10:04]

ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THIS REQUEST TO SEEK APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE THE 9.679 ACRE PROPERTY INTO EIGHT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED AT 4000 NORTH WHITE CHAPEL BOULEVARD.

THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED OFF OF BOB JONES AND WHITE CHAPEL.

FUTURE LAND USE IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. CURRENT ZONING IS SF1A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

THIS IS A STREET VIEW LOOKING WEST AND A STREET VIEW LOOKING SOUTH.

THIS WAS THE APPROVED REVISED CONCEPT PLAN ZA26-0040, NOTING THE APPROVAL FOR VARIANCE FOR THE PRIVATE STREET AND A VARIANCE FOR THE ACCESS TO THE COLLECTOR ROAD FROM LOT SIX. THIS WAS THE CITY COUNCIL MOTION FROM AUGUST 4TH.

NOTING THE APPROVED VARIANCES AND REQUIRING THAT THE DRAINAGE FOR THE DETENTION POND ON LOT 6B DIRECTED 100% TO THE SOUTH AND THEN TO THE EAST TO THE WEST, STAYING ENTIRELY ON THE PROPERTY ALONG THE NORTH BORDER OF LOTS FIVE AND SEVEN TO WHITE CHAPEL BOULEVARD.

AND THIS IS OUR PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT, NOTING THE PRIVATE STREET AND THE EIGHT RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

THIS IS CONFORMING TO THE REVISED CONCEPT PLAN.

THIS IS OUR DRAINAGE PLAN. THE DRAINAGE DESIGN WAS UPDATED FROM THE ZONING SUBMITTAL TO ROUTE THE DRAINAGE FLOW AROUND RAINEY COURT TOWARDS NORTH WHITE CHAPEL.

AS REQUESTED BY CITY COUNCIL AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO CAPTURE THE SITE DRAINAGE WITH THE STORM PIPE AND DRAINAGE SWALES TOWARDS THE DETENTION PONDS WITHIN LOTS SIX, SEVEN AND EIGHT, AND PROBABLY REFER TO THE APPLICANT FOR FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS.

AND THIS IS A PROPOSED UTILITY PLAN. AND AS OF NOW, THERE ARE NO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSES AND HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY. SO BASICALLY, CONSISTENT WITH ALL PRIOR APPROVALS, INCLUDING KIND OF THE DRIVEWAY CONFIGURATION FOR LOT 6.

SO. YES, SIR. AND THE PRIVATE STREET DESIGNATION.

OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE FOR THIS ITEM. REMINDER COMING UP NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

AND WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

YEAH. KEITH HAMILTON, 8241 MID-CITIES BOULEVARD, NORTH RICHLAND HILLS.

I'M THE CONSULTING ENGINEER ON THE PROJECT. SO JUST ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, I'LL TRY TO ANSWER THEM.

OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT.

DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT, BUT I'M GLAD YOU CAME OUT. YOU MUST BE PRESENT TO WIN. SO APPRECIATE.

APPRECIATE YOU COMING OUT. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN ON OUR AGENDA DOES CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THAT PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. AND SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, CASE ZA26-0060.

PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BRIDLEGATE SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER THE 11TH OF 2026 AND ALSO CITING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER TWO DATED SEPTEMBER 11TH OF 2026. MOTION.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

THAT'S A TOUGH ONE THERE. AND. PASSES FIVE ZERO WITH ONE PERSON ABSTAINING.

NOW CONGRATULATIONS. AND I THINK AGAIN WITH WITH CITY STAFF WILL REMIND ME WITH THE PLAT, I THINK YOU CAN MAKE THE OCTOBER 6TH MEETING.

SO. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. PERFECT. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. THERE YOU GO. NOW TIME FOR THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA.

[8. Consider: ZA26-0062, Site Plan for On Running, on property described as Lot 6, Block 14, Southlake Town Square Addition and located at 415 Grand Ave. E. Current Zoning: “DT” Downtown District. Applicant: Mary Ann Perry, Nationwide Permits. Property Owner: KRG Grand Avenue II, LLC. SPIN Neighborhood #8. PUBLIC HEARING]

GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND COMMISSION. THIS IS A SITE PLAN FOR 415 GRAND AVENUE EAST FOR THE ON RUNNING SUITE, WHICH IS A RETAIL STORE TO MODIFY THE STOREFRONT FACADE.

SO THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SITE, NOTING THE SUITE SHOWN IN THE DASHED LINES.

THE FUTURE LAND USE IS TOWN CENTER. THE CURRENT ZONING IS DOWNTOWN DISTRICT.

[00:15:04]

SHOWN IN RED IS THE FULL LEASE SPACE. AND SHOWN IN BLUE IS THE PORTION OF THE FACADE THAT'S BEING MODIFIED WITH THIS REQUEST.

THIS IS A STREET VIEW LOOKING NORTH BOTH IN AND OUT OF THE COLONNADE.

AND THIS IS A STREET VIEW LOOKING SOUTH. THESE ARE THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS.

AND THIS IS A RENDERING. AND HERE IS A ANOTHER RENDERING.

SO THIS IS A COMPARISON OF THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED ELEVATION.

MAJOR DEVIATIONS FROM THE EXISTING FACADE INCLUDE THE LED LIGHTING ON THE ROOF OF THE COLONNADE, THE REMOVAL OF THE ARCHES ON THE EXTERNAL FACADE, AND THE PROPOSED TILE MATERIAL AND COLOR OF THE EXTERNAL FACADE.

THERE WERE NO RESPONSES RECEIVED AS OF YET, AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DO WE HAVE ANYTHING THAT COLOR IN THE TOWN SQUARE? I BELIEVE WE DO. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHICH SUITE, BUT.

YEAH, SORT OF ACROSS THE STREET BRIO IS A SIMILAR COLOR.

IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT KIND OF TEXTURE. IT'S LIKE A REDDISH BRICK.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WAS THE APPLICANT CHALLENGED TO COORDINATE HIS THEIR DESIGN A LITTLE BIT BETTER WITH THE EXISTING COLONNADE THAT'S THERE.

THEY COULD, YOU KNOW, CREATE SOME OF THE COLOR AND LOOK, BUT BACK AT THE SPACE AT THE FRONT OF THE ELEVATION OR AT THE FRONT OF THE RETAIL WALL, AS OPPOSED TO CHANGING ALL THE COLONNADE.

WAS ANY OF THAT DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT AT ALL? TO AN EXTENT. I MEAN WHEN THIS CAME FORWARD IT WAS SUBMITTED AS A BUILDING PERMIT.

SO THEY HAD THE FULL PLANS DRAWN UP AT THAT POINT.

AND WE JUST WEREN'T ABLE TO ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE THAT, THAT BUILDING PERMIT.

SO THERE WERE SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM ABOUT WHAT WOULD MAYBE KIND OF QUALIFY AS MORE OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.

AND THERE WERE SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT DIFFERENT OPTIONS. BUT LIKE I SAID, THIS WAS ALREADY IN THE BUILDING PERMIT PHASE AND I MEAN, THEY CAN SPEAK MORE TO WHERE THEY ARE AT, BUT THEY'RE LOOKING TO MOVE FORWARD AND OPEN THEIR STORE.

SO, AND THEY HAD GOTTEN APPROVAL FROM KITE. SO I THINK THEY WERE INTERESTED IN PURSUING THIS AVENUE TO GO WITH THEIR ORIGINAL DESIGN.

OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION. IF THIS WAS PRESENTED NOT TO CHANGE THE MATERIALS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, BUT IF IT WAS SOLELY MORE OF A WE WANT TO PAINT THIS COLOR, WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL? IN THIS AREA, I MEAN, IT'S A LITTLE BIT SUBJECTIVE, BUT BASICALLY, IF IT'S A SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION FROM THE CHARACTER OF WHAT THE PREVIOUS FACADE WAS, AND IT, WE KIND OF LOOK AT THE WHOLE STREET.

SO I MEAN, I THINK IN THIS CASE, A COLOR CHANGE IN AND OF ITSELF ON THE OUTSIDE COLONNADE WOULD PROBABLY STILL QUALIFY AS A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE.

AND THOSE ARE MAYBE JUST TO KIND OF HELP BECAUSE THAT'S HELPFUL.

AND I KNOW IT'S A LITTLE SUBJECTIVE, BUT THINGS THAT COULD BE UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE COLOR CHANGES AND OR MATERIALS.

YES. CHANGES OR I MEAN, I GUESS KIND OF STYLISTIC OR CONFIGURATIONS AND.

RIGHT. AND OR ALL OF THE ABOVE TOGETHER. SO. OKAY.

YES. YEAH. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION.

I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS FOR YOU OR FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT IS THE CEILING LOWER WITH THE LIGHTING OR ARE THEY JUST RAISING THE WINDOWS FROM THE CURRENT ONE? IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S JUST BEING COVERED WITH THE LED LIGHT, BUT THE APPLICANT MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEAK MORE TO THAT.

WITH THEIR BUILDING PERMIT AND EVERYTHING TOO. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I KNOW THIS ISN'T A SIGN CASE, BUT THAT'S GOING TO BE ONE OF YOUR FAVORITE SIGNS.

IT'S LITERALLY TWO LETTERS. I KNOW. OKAY. SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO BRING IT UP.

NOT A SIGN. IT'S A LOVE HATE. YES, I KNOW. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. OKAY. NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD PRESENTATION.

[00:20:02]

THE ADDRESS IS 5005 GREENVILLE AVENUE IN DALLAS, AND I'M REPRESENTING THE ATLANTA OFFICE WHO DID THE DRAWINGS FOR THIS.

AND I'M ASSUMING, I GUESS MAYBE THE, THE APPLICANT REQUEST HERE, MAYBE YOU ARE, AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH IT.

I'M NOT. BUT THE OTHERS ARE, IS THIS KIND OF A STYLISTIC LOOK THAT THEY GO FOR IN ALL THEIR STORES.

IS THAT THE REASON FOR KIND OF THE DEPARTURE FROM THE CURRENT ARCHITECTURE, OR? IT DOES REPRESENT THE LOOK AND THE FEEL THAT THEY DO TRY TO BRING TO ALL THEIR STORES.

THEY ARE ALL A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, BUT THEY DEFINITELY THE COLOR AND THE STONE HAVE BEEN USED PREVIOUSLY IN OTHER LOCATIONS.

OKAY. OKAY. SO WAS THERE ANY ATTEMPT ASKING STAFF, BUT ANY ATTEMPT WHATSOEVER TO KEEP THE COLONNADE WITHOUT CHANGING THE OUTER WALL THAT'S ALONG THE CURB LINE, IF YOU WILL WORK ON ARCHITECTURE THAT'S RELATED TO THE RETAIL WALL THAT SETS BACK IN AND INTRODUCE THEIR COLORS AND STORE DEFINITION AT THAT PLANE VERSUS BRINGING IT OUT TO THE STREET. WAS THERE ANY ATTEMPT TO DO THAT WHATSOEVER? I AM NOT AWARE OF AN ATTEMPT FOR THAT. I, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND ON REQUESTED THIS DESIGN AND WHEN SHOWN TO THE LANDLORD THEY WERE TOLD YES, THAT THEY LIKED IT AS WELL.

AND SO THEY WANTED TO PURSUE IT. I PERSONALLY, I'D LIKE TO SEE SOME OTHER OPTIONS.

AND I THINK THERE'S BETTER OPTIONS THAT COULD BE OFFERED TO BE AT LEAST BE CONSIDERED BEFORE WE WOULD JUST JUMP IN AND CHANGE THE ENTIRE LOOK OF THE SHOPPING CENTER WALL. OKAY. YES. GO AHEAD. WHAT AMOUNT OF TIME WOULD IT TAKE TO DO CONSTRUCTION ON HERE? BECAUSE I WOULD ASSUME THAT THE SIDEWALK AREA WOULD HAVE TO BE BLOCKED OFF.

WHY THIS CHANGE IS MADE. AND SO JUST THINKING ABOUT THE INCONVENIENCE OF THE PUBLIC.

I AM NOT AWARE OF THE GC'S SCHEDULE BEHIND THE CONSTRUCTION, BUT LOOKING AT IT, I WOULD ESTIMATE, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE, PROBABLY 2 TO 3 MONTHS TO DO IT.

BUT IT AND ONCE AGAIN, THOUGH, I AM JUST THE ARCHITECT, NOT THE GC.

SO I WOULD DEFINITELY SAY THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO KIND OF SPEAK MORE TO THAT.

AND THERE IS PROBABLY A LOT OF PREP WORK THAT THEY CAN DO AHEAD OF TIME TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT.

SO WHAT WAS THE PROJECTED OR DESIRED START DATE FOR THIS? I AM NOT AWARE OF THAT AT THIS TIME. BECAUSE I MEAN WE'RE COMING UP ON CHRISTMAS HOLIDAY SEASON AND WHATNOT.

SO WE CERTAINLY WOULDN'T WANT TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN THE MIDDLE OF CHRISTMAS SHOPPING SEASON.

OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. YEAH, IT WAS BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE LED LIGHTING AND THE CHANGE OF THE ELEVATION OF THE CEILING IN THIS AREA. DO YOU ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT AT ALL? DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON THAT? I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S DROPPED AND I'M ASSUMING OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT'S SUSPENDED OR IS THIS A HARD CEILING? IT IS NOT A HARD CEILING. IT'S A FABRIC. SO IT'S A BACKLIT KIND OF LIKE A FABRIC COMPONENT TO IT.

IT IS UP. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ACTUALLY KIND OF LOWERED THE CEILING A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT IT IS BECAUSE THE ARCHES WERE TAKEN AWAY.

IT REALLY IS KIND OF STILL RECESSED UP THERE.

I WOULD HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK TO SEE IF THEY DID LOWER IT ANY TO ACCOMMODATE IT.

AND ARE THEY GOING TO PULL THESE WINDOWS TOTALLY OUT AND GO WITH NEW STOREFRONTS ALTOGETHER? SO THAT'LL BE IN THOSE DEMO. YEAH. IN THOSE JUST IN THAT THOSE THREE BAYS AND THEN THE ADJACENT TWO BAYS.

BECAUSE IT'S A DIFFERENT STYLE ON THE EXTERIOR.

THEY WOULD CHANGE THOSE OUT, BUT THEY WOULD MAKE IT MATCH THE ADJACENT LEASE SPACE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANKS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SORRY. YOUR LAST STATEMENT KIND OF CONFUSED ME.

SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THAT ONLY HALF OF THE ON STORE.

AND SO THE OTHER PART IS ALSO ON STORE. IT IS.

BUT IT'S ONLY IT'S THE LEASE SPACE AND ON THE INTERIOR SIDE.

AND BECAUSE IT'S ONLY TWO BAYS, THE ADJACENT LEASE SPACE, THEY DIDN'T WANT TO CHANGE THAT STYLE UP.

[00:25:06]

WELL I MEAN YOU CAN LOOK AT IT AND SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE RECTANGULAR SHAPE IS KIND OF WHAT THE TWO ON EITHER SIDE ARE GOING FOR, AND THEY PUT THE ARCHES IN THE MIDDLE TO BREAK IT UP A LITTLE BIT, WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD THING TO KIND OF BREAK THAT UP, GIVE SOME DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO. SO I GUESS THAT'S THE PROBABLY ABOUT THE ONLY THING THEY CAN DO WITH IT IS LEAVE THOSE IN THE RED ZONE OVER THERE AS BEING RECTANGULAR WINDOWS. THE STAFF MIND GOING BACK TO THE THE OTHER ONE.

THIS IS HELPFUL, BUT LET ME GO BACK TO THE OTHER ONE WE WERE ON.

OKAY. YEAH. I MEAN, I, YOU KNOW, WE'LL DELIBERATE HERE IN A SECOND, BUT I I MEAN, I THINK I'M SYMPATHETIC TO LIKE, LIKE YOU WERE SAYING THAT THE INTERIOR, YOU KNOW, CHANGES TO THE KIND OF THAT INTERIOR WALL. I'M SYMPATHETIC TO ANYTHING THAT KIND OF BRINGS LIGHT AND AIR INTO THE SPACE, WHICH IS WHAT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE TRYING TO DO MAYBE CHANGE SOMETHING A LITTLE CAVERNOUS TO SOMETHING WITH MORE LIGHT AND AIR TO IT AND VISIBILITY.

BUT IT DOES FEEL LIKE THEY CAN DO A LITTLE BETTER ON THE MATERIALS AND THE COLOR A LITTLE BIT.

I MEAN, I MEAN, I'M NOT NECESSARILY BOTHERED BY THE RECTANGULAR THING AND, AND I CAN APPRECIATE WHY STAFF FLAGGED THIS.

AND I MEAN, WE'RE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WATCHDOG IN THE ROOM, SO TO SPEAK, BETWEEN A TENANT THAT WILL ASK FOR ANYTHING, A LEASING BROKER THAT WILL AGREE TO ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY WANT A COMMISSION AND A PROPERTY OWNER THAT WILL AGREE TO ANYTHING BECAUSE THEY WANT TO RENT.

AND WE'RE KIND OF THE NON-ECONOMIC INVOLVED BODY HERE TO TRY TO KEEP SOME KIND OF CONSISTENCY WITH DESIGN, OR ELSE WE'LL LITERALLY HAVE A PATCHWORK OF EVERY SPECIFIC TENANTS, YOU KNOW, PARTICULAR DESIRES OR NEEDS.

AND IT JUST, IT'LL LOOK LIKE A JUMBLE WITHIN REASON.

SO I DO FEEL LIKE THEY COULD DO A LITTLE BETTER THAN THIS AND, OR.

I MEAN, WE'LL.

AND EITHER WAY, WHATEVER THAT RECOMMENDATION IS, YOU CAN TAKE IT ON TO COUNCIL.

WHAT I WOULD ADVISE AND COUNCIL COULD OBVIOUSLY IT GETS A LITTLE SUBJECTIVE ON THESE THINGS.

SO COUNCIL COULD LOVE IT, HATE IT. YOU KNOW, THEY USUALLY LIKE OPTIONS.

SO IF YOU CAN. AND THESE MEETINGS ARE RECORDED SO YOU CAN KIND OF HEAR ALL THIS COMMENTARY.

YOU CAN GO BACK AND LISTEN TO IT. YOUR COLLEAGUES CAN AS WELL. IF THEY CAN MAYBE SEE 1 OR 2 OPTIONS THAT ARE A LITTLE CLOSER ON COLOR AND MATERIALS TO THE ADJACENT BAYS. I MEAN, AGAIN, I PERSONALLY THINK IT'S FINE TO MAYBE EITHER GET RID OF THE ARCHES OR MOVE THEM UP TO GIVE IT MORE VISIBILITY AND LIGHT AND AIR. AND LIKE YOU SAID, IT LOOKS LIKE ON EITHER SIDE, THEY'VE KIND OF DONE THAT ANYWAY, BUT JUST MORE STYLISTICALLY MAKE IT A LITTLE CLOSER TO WHAT'S ADJACENT TO IT.

AND I MEAN, WE LOVE THE TENANT. OBVIOUSLY, THEY'RE VERY WELL KNOWN, VERY WELL THOUGHT OF.

WE'RE TRYING TO THINK ABOUT THIS, YOU KNOW, 20, 30 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, NOT FIVE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD.

BELIEVE IT OR NOT, YOU KNOW, OVER THE LAST 25 YEARS, TENANTS HAVE COME AND GONE FROM TOWN SQUARE.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO KIND OF WALK THAT BALANCE BETWEEN GREAT TENANCY AND KEEPING IT SOMEWHAT CONSISTENT.

SO. UNDERSTOOD. IF THAT ALL HELPS. BUT EITHER WAY, THE RECOMMENDATION THIS EVENING, YOU CAN TAKE IT ON TO THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING, WHICH I'VE ALREADY FORGOTTEN THE DATE WOULD BE.

20TH. OCTOBER 20TH. I THINK OCTOBER 20TH FOR A SITE PLAN.

IS THAT CORRECT? YES. OKAY. SO OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT THIS EVENING? ALL RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

BEFORE I FORGET, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT DOES CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO WE WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM FOR ANYONE WHO'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND COMMENT. BUMMER.

OKAY. SEEING NO ONE WILLING TO COME FORWARD WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.

I GUESS WE'LL SEE WHAT KIND OF MOTION YOU WANT TO CRAFT IF YOU WANT TO.

WELL, I MEAN, I THINK WE NEED TO DISCUSS IT A LITTLE BIT, SEE WHAT EVERYBODY'S THOUGHTS ARE ON IT.

BECAUSE I THINK WHAT THE REASON THAT THEY WENT TO THIS RECTANGULAR SHAPE IS BECAUSE IF THEY'RE GOING TO DROP THAT CEILING DOWN, IT WOULD BE EXPOSED IN THE ARCHES UP THERE. I MEAN, I'M SURE THAT'S THE REASON, BUT I'M WITH YOU.

THIS IS A PRETTY RADICAL CHANGE FROM WHAT'S THERE NOW.

YEAH. I MEAN, IF THEY DROP THAT LIT CEILING DOWN THAT ILLUMINATED CEILING DOWN TO THAT ELEVATION AND PULL IT OUT, IT'S GOING TO FLOOD THAT SECTION OF THE STREET WITH EXCESS LIGHT.

[00:30:01]

I DON'T THAT I DON'T THINK IT WAS EVER THE SENSE OF TOWN SQUARE THAT YOU HAD THAT KIND OF IMPACT TO THE PUBLIC SPACE.

I MEAN, I THINK THEY COULD GET RID OF THE ARCHES THAT ARE IN THOSE THREE BAYS, AND THEY COULD LEAVE THE COLONNADE AND THEY COULD LEAVE THE CORNICE AND THEY COULD LEAVE ALL OF THE DATUM LINES THAT ARE ABOVE THAT COULD PAINT THAT SECTION A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT COLOR.

BUT THE ARCHITECTURE WOULD STILL BE INTACT. AND THEN THEY COULD WORK ON THEIR PARTICULAR ARCHITECTURE, USE OF MATERIALS ON THE STOREFRONT WALL. AND I THINK IF IT'S GENSLER THAT'S DOING THIS, GENSLER CERTAINLY HAS THE ABILITY TO COME UP WITH BETTER DESIGN THAN THIS. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT, QUITE FRANKLY, THIS IS NOT GOOD.

I DON'T THINK IT'S VERY GOOD AT ALL. AND SO THAT'S MY OPINION ABOUT IT.

I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THEM COME BACK WITH SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD APPROVE THIS. BUT THAT'S MY THOUGHT.

YEAH. SUPPORTIVE OF KIND OF JUST THE GENERAL THOUGHT OF.

I MEAN, THESE SPACES ARE KIND OF DARK AND CAVERNOUS AND THINGS DONE TO KIND OF GIVE THEM MORE LIGHT AND AIR AND BRIGHTEN THEM UP AND OPEN THEM UP MORE.

BUT I PERSONALLY THINK YOU CAN DO ALL THAT AND MAYBE DO A LITTLE BETTER JOB WITH THE MATERIALS AND THE COLOR AND LET IT BLEND A LITTLE BETTER.

MAYBE I'LL CALL THE APPLICANT BACK UP REAL QUICK, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

BECAUSE EFFECTIVELY, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE OPTIONS HERE.

WE CAN TAKE A VOTE ON IT THIS EVENING. WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT BE SUPPORTIVE, BUT EITHER WAY YOU CAN MOVE THAT ALONG TO COUNCIL AND THEY'LL HAVE THE STAFF WILL GIVE THEM THE CONTEXT OF WHAT WE DEBATED AND TALKED ABOUT.

OR YOU CAN REQUEST TO TABLE THE ITEM AND TRY TO COME BACK WITH, YOU KNOW, 1 OR 2 OTHER OPTIONS FOR THIS BODY.

WE CAN CONSIDER THEM AND, AND YOU KNOW, POSSIBLY PASS ALONG ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.

I GUESS IS THERE EITHER WAY YOU WOULD PREFER? I WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE TO GO BACK AND CHECK WITH OUR CLIENT AND TALK TO THEM AND TALK TO MY ATLANTA OFFICE.

I WOULD THINK COMING UP WITH A COUPLE OTHER OPTIONS IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO.

THIS DESIGN WAS WHAT ON WANTED TO SEE, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY COME UP WITH OTHER OPTIONS.

SO WHAT I MIGHT HUMBLY SUGGEST THIS EVENING IN TERMS OF KIND OF KEEPING THINGS MOVING FORWARD, NOT NECESSARILY TO PUNT IT INTO COUNCIL'S LAP, BUT I THINK THEY GENERALLY KIND OF KNOW WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE, WHAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO SEE. I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT ENOUGH TONIGHT.

I THINK STAFF CAN KIND OF PASS ALONG WHAT OUR ANXIOUSNESS WAS, SO WE CAN VOTE ON IT TONIGHT.

AND EVEN IF IT DOES NOT PASS, YOU CAN STILL MOVE IT ALONG TO CITY COUNCIL.

AND WHEN CITY COUNCIL SEES MAYBE THAT IT DID OR DIDN'T PASS.

YEAH, THEY'LL KNOW EXACTLY WHY. AND YOU CAN SAY THIS IS WHAT WE PRESENTED AT THE MEETING. THIS IS 1 OR 2 VERSIONS OF WHAT THEY TALKED ABOUT.

THEY WANTED TO SEE MORE OF. I THINK COUNCIL WILL HAVE THEIR OWN VIEWS.

OKAY. SO I MEAN, WE CAN JUST ENTERTAIN A MOTION THIS EVENING.

EVEN IF IT DOESN'T PASS, THEY CAN MOVE IT ALONG. THEY'LL HAVE THE FEEDBACK AS TO WHY THEY CAN TAKE IT TO COUNCIL, HAVE A FURTHER DEBATE AND PROBABLY GET CLOSER AND KIND OF KEEP TIMING GOING.

OKAY. SO DOES THAT SOUND? I THINK THAT SOUNDS FINE.

I CAN TAKE THAT BACK TO MY CLIENT. OKAY. BUT I WOULD SAY EVEN WE'LL SEE WHAT THIS RECOMMENDATION GOES, WHETHER IT'S A RECOMMENDATION TO DENY OR SUPPORT.

EITHER WAY CAN MOVE ALONG. BUT I WOULD MAKE SURE YOUR CLIENT KNOWS, AND ALL THE CLIENTS ALWAYS THINK THAT THEIR THOUGHT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THOUGHT IN THE WORLD, BUT THAT CITY COUNCIL COULD VIEW IT HOWEVER THEY WANT.

SO JUST, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THEY WANT TO PRODUCE OPTIONS OR NOT, I THINK IT'S VERY MUCH IN THEIR BEST INTEREST TO DO SO.

YEAH. SO. OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

HAPPY TO BE THE BAD GUY IN TERMS OF YOUR DELIVERY OF THAT MESSAGE.

SO MAYBE, YOU KNOW, IT'S UP TO YOU IF YOU WANT TO DO A MOTION TO DENY AND WE TAKE A VOTE ON THAT.

I OKAY. YEAH. WELL, WHY DON'T YOU GIVE A STAB AT IT AND WE CAN JUST SEE IF PEOPLE WANT TO. CAN I ASK ONE QUESTION BEFORE WE DO THIS? IT'S A STAFF QUESTION. YEAH. I DON'T KNOW IF ANY.

THE QUESTION IS, WHEN IT COMES TIME TO DO ANY KIND OF WORK ON HERE, WHAT IS THE LIMITATIONS THAT THE CITY, IF ANY, CAN PLACE ON BLOCKING OF THE SIDEWALK OR TAKING OUT PARKING SPACES WHILE WORK IS DONE? IS THERE ANY LIMITATION OR IT'S NOT CONTROLLABLE? HONESTLY, I'D HAVE TO CHECK WITH OUR BUILDING DIVISION ON THAT, ON WHAT WE DO FOR PERMITTING WHILE THAT'S HAPPENING.

[00:35:06]

I MEAN, I KNOW IN SOME LARGER CITIES WHEN THERE'S SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION, THEY HAVE LIKE AN ALTERNATIVE WHERE YOU KIND OF WALK AROUND.

BUT WE'D HAVE TO COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF SOLUTION.

I JUST DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT MIGHT BE. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? I MEAN, MAYBE WE CAN JUST ENTERTAIN HIS MOTION. WE'LL SEE WHAT IT IS.

AND AS ALWAYS UP HERE, WE'RE ALWAYS WORKING TO AT LEAST FOUR VOTES ON SOMETHING.

SO WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN FIND THAT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, CASE ZA 26-0062 SITE PLAN FOR ON RUNNING SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 11, 2026 AND ALSO CITING THE SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER ONE DATED SEPTEMBER THE 11TH 26.

WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD WITH A DESIGN CLOSER TO THE EXISTING FACADES, A DESIGN THAT CHANGES THE STOREFRONT WINDOWS FROM ARCHES TO RECTANGULAR, AND LEAVES THE EXISTING ARCHWAYS AND MATCH THE COLORS CLOSER TO THE EXISTING FACADES.

OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

OKAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE, PLEASE. AND. OKAY.

FAILS. 4 TO 2. SO NOW, IF I REMEMBER MY PROCEDURE CORRECTLY WE NEED TO ENTERTAIN ANOTHER MOTION THAT CAN GAIN FOUR VOTES OF SUPPORT. SO IF SOMEONE WANTS TO PUT FORTH A MOTION TO DENY THIS ITEM, WE CAN ENTERTAIN THAT MOTION.

AND WHEN WE DO A MOTION TO DENY, WE CAN STILL PUT ALL THOSE SAME CONDITIONS THAT HE DID AFTER.

I MEAN, WELL, I'LL LET STAFF WEIGH IN ON THIS.

BUT EFFECTIVELY STAFF CAN CONVEY. I MEAN, YOU CAN PROBABLY SAY A MOTION TO DENY RELATED TO A REQUEST TO SEE A, B AND C, BUT STAFF EFFECTIVELY, STAFF CAN COMMUNICATE TO COUNCIL WHY THERE WAS A STRUGGLE AND WHAT WHAT WE WANTED TO SEE MORE OF.

SO YEAH. SO IF SOMEONE WANTS TO PUT FORTH A MOTION TO DENY AND PUT WHATEVER WORDING THEY WANT TO IN IT.

YOU WANT ME TO DO THAT SAME WAY? MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK WE'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE.

I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY ITEM NUMBER 8 CASE ZA 26-0062.

SITE PLAN FOR ON RUNNING, NOTING THE STAFF REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2026 AND THE SITE PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY NUMBER ONE DATED SEPTEMBER THE 11TH, 2026, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS THAT THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD WITH A DESIGN CLOSER TO THE EXISTING FACADE.

CHANGE THE STOREFRONTS ARCHES TO RECTANGULAR GLASS AND MATCH THE COLORS CLOSER TO THE EXISTING FACADES.

OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. REMEMBER, A VOTE YES IS TO DENY.

LITTLE COUNTERINTUITIVE. OKAY. MOTION TO DENY PASSES FIVE ONE.

YOU KIND OF HAD THAT CAVEATS READ INTO IT. YOU CAN STILL ADVANCE THIS RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL AT THAT NEXT MEETING.

THEY'LL UNDERSTAND WHY THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION TO DENY.

AND THIS HOPEFULLY WILL GIVE YOU SOME IMPETUS WITH YOUR CLIENT TO MAYBE PRESENT 1 OR 2 BETTER ALTERNATIVES TO CONSIDER.

AND AGAIN, LOVE YOUR RETAILER. LOVE THE CENTER, LOVE THE THOUGHT OF DOING THIS.

JUST TRYING TO BE CAREFUL AS WE MAKE MEANINGFUL CHANGES TO THE FACADE HERE, THAT WE'RE DOING SOMETHING THAT LASTS THE TEST OF TIME.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH THAT, I'LL GO AHEAD AND END OUR MEETING AT 7:08 P.M..

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.