[BRIEFINGS]
          [00:00:02]
          ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. IT IS THURSDAY,
AUGUST 20TH, 2026 AT 10:31 A.M.. 
          THIS IS THE BRIEFING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          LET ME START OFF WITH THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE. GOOD MORNING,
COMMISSIONERS DISTRICT ONE COMMISSIONER SIMS, I AM HERE. DISTRICT TWO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          DISTRICT THREE. VICE CHAIR HERBERT. DISTRICT FOUR. 
          COMMISSIONER GILBERT SMITH. DISTRICT FIVE, COMMISSIONER SERRATO HERE. 
          DISTRICT SIX. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER PRESENT. 
          DISTRICT SEVEN. COMMISSIONER WHEELER REAGAN HERE. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT. COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN. DISTRICT NINE. 
          COMMISSIONER KOONTZ HERE. DISTRICT TEN. COMMISSIONER. 
          HOUSE RIGHT HERE. DISTRICT 11, COMMISSIONER COX,
DISTRICT 12. 
          COMMISSIONER KAUFMAN, DISTRICT 13, COMMISSIONER HALL HERE. 
          DISTRICT 14, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND PLACE 15. 
          SURE, RUBEN. I'M HERE. YOU HAVE? FRANKLIN JUST JOINED US. 
          THANK YOU. YOU HAVE A QUORUM, SIR? PERFECT. ALL RIGHT. 
          WELL, THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR JOINING US TODAY. AS A REMINDER,
THIS IS THE BRIEFING. THIS IS JUST TIME FOR STAFF TO PRESENT AND FOR US TO ASK QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. ANY DISCUSSION? WE WILL HAVE PLENTY OF TIME FOR THAT IN THE PUBLIC HEARING IN
THE AFTERNOON. 
          ITEM NUMBER ONE WE HAVE ONE MISCELLANEOUS ITEM WHICH IS IN DISTRICT THREE. 
          SO THE VICE CHAIR ISN'T WITH US YET. SO LET'S SKIP PAST THAT. 
          IT LOOKS LIKE ITEMS ITEM TWO IS IN COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S DISTRICT. 
          AND SHE'LL ALSO BE JOINING US IN A LITTLE BIT I ASSUME. 
          SO LET'S MOVE ON PAST THAT ITEM NUMBER THREE. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO WE NEED THAT ONE BRIEFED? YES. OKAY. MR. LEE. 
          AND VICE CHAIR HERBERT IS NOW ONLINE. 
          OKAY. ITEM 3Z-26-000106. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN COUNCIL DISTRICT EIGHT. 
          HERE'S THE AERIAL AND THE SURROUNDING ZONING. 
          LAND USES OF THE PROPERTY. SO THIS IS THE APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A
UTILITY OR GOVERNMENT INSTALLATION OR OTHER THAN LISTED ON PROPERTY ZONE. AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. 
          AND THE PURPOSE IS TO ALLOW A DALLAS CITY OF DALLAS WATER UTILITIES WATER TOWER. 
          THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED A A AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT AND IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. 
          SURROUNDING PROPERTY IS PREDOMINANTLY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY. 
          AS SUCH, THE APPLICANT WISHES TO APPLY FOR A USE PERMIT FOR THE WATER TOWER. 
          HERE'S A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ON BLANCO ROAD,
LOOKING EAST. 
          TO THE SOUTH. TO THE WEST AND TO THE NORTH. 
          HERE'S THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. 
          HERE'S THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS,
WHICH. 
          THERE HAS BEEN A SMALL ADJUSTMENT SEVERAL 195FT. 
          THERE WERE APPLICANTS REQUESTING 200FT. A CORNER FOR DALLAS. 
          THE PROPERTY IS IDENTIFIED AS LOGISTICS INDUSTRIAL PARK. 
          AND WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU, MR. LEE. QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER? NO,
MR. CHAIR. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER HALL. HOW TALL IS THE WATER TOWER? 
          [00:05:08]
I'M PROPOSING 200FT. HOW MUCH? I'M SORRY. 200FT. 
          200FT. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. 
          AND AS OF RIGHT NOW, OUR CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF ITEMS TWO,
THREE, FOUR, SEVEN AND EIGHT. 
          FIVE AND SIX HAVE COME OFF. DO ANY OTHERS NEED TO COME OFF? SEVEN SEVEN IS COMING OFF AS WELL. LEFT ON CONSENT AT THE MOMENT ARE TWO,
THREE, FOUR AND EIGHT. EIGHT IS COMING OFF OKAY. SO IT'S NOW TWO,
THREE AND FOUR. 
          OKAY. VICE CHAIR HERBERT, DID YOU NEED ITEM ONE TO BE BRIEFED? I DON'T. I SPOKE WITH THE REP IN THE TEAM AND I THINK WE'RE OKAY. 
          IF ANY OF MY COUNTERPARTS DO, I'M OKAY WITH THAT AS WELL. 
          OKAY, GREAT. ANYONE ELSE NEED NUMBER ONE BRIEFED? OKAY. DO WE NEED ITEM NUMBER FOUR BRIEFED? COMMISSIONER SERRATO. 
          ANYONE ELSE WANT THAT BRIEFED OR HAVE QUESTIONS ON IT? ITEM FIVE. DO WE NEED A BRIEFING THERE OR QUESTIONS BRIEFING, PLEASE, MR. CHAIR. OKAY. 
          YOU SAY ITEM FOUR. ITEM FIVE. ITEM FIVE. MR. AGUILERA. 
          EVERYONE CAN SEE THE APPLICATION. OKAY, SO THIS IS APPLICATION Z 260000123. 
          HAVING SOME OKAY. 
          AS AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE REQUEST IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT NUMBER 439. 
          THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST IS TO AMEND THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO INCREASE THE
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA. 
          THE FLOOR AREA AND IN THE HOURS OF OF OPERATION. 
          HERE IS THE LOCATION. THE STAR MARKS THE LOCATION TO THE PROPERTY IN RELEVANCE TO THE
PROPERTY IN RELEVANCE TO THE CITY OF DALLAS. JURISDICTION. SO HERE IS THE AERIAL OF THE MAP,
THE BLUE SQUARE THAT YOU SEE IS ACTUALLY THE ENTIRE PD,
AND THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO IT IS A RETAIL, PROFESSIONAL SERVICE THEATER AND EVENT CENTER TO THE NORTH TO THE EAST. 
          YOU HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY AS WELL AS TO THE SOUTH AND WEST. 
          SO THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED BACK IN 1996 TO ALLOW A NONPROFIT
COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER FOR OFFERS OF TECHNICAL SCHOOL, CULTURAL, SOCIAL AND RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES,
EDUCATION AND WORKSHOP THEATER AND GENERAL MERCHANDISE. 
          IT ALSO HAS A THEATER OR ART THAT THEY DO EXHIBITS AS WELL. 
          THE APPLICATION INTEND TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA. 
          THE MAIN PURPOSE IS TO INCREASE THE TECHNICAL SCHOOL,
AND THEN THE APPLICANT WISHES TO TO EXTEND THE HOURS OF OPERATIONS. HERE IS A SITE VISIT. THIS IS. I'M STANDING ON BROOKLYN AVENUE. 
          I KIND OF DO A 360 TURN AROUND TO TRY TO SHOW THE THE AREA. 
          [00:10:04]
SO THERE'S THE ALLEY HERE WHERE YOU SEE THIS AREA IS WHERE THEY'RE INTENDING TO EXPAND THE BUILDING. AND THEN THESE ARE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. 
          THIS IS ACROSS ON BROOKLYN AVENUE. THEN I MOVE TO POLK. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE THEY DO HAVE THE POSTING SIGNS. 
          AGAIN I KIND OF SHOW WHAT IS AROUND. THIS ONE IS FACING THE THE REAR OF THE HOMES. 
          AND THEN HERE IS THE PARKING AREA FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER. 
          THIS IS ON PEMBROKE AVENUE, KIND OF TO A 360. 
          THERE'S SOME SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AND THEN THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. 
          THIS IS THE, THE EXPANSION, THESE TWO SQUARES. 
          THAT YOU SEE HERE IS WHERE THERE ARE EXTENDING,
AS I STATED, DOES THAT AREA BY THE ALLEY AND I PUT THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS KIND OF IT'S A SUMMARY. 
          IT'S NOT THE ENTIRE, THE ENTIRELY, BUT IT IS WITH WITH THE,
WITH THE REPORT OR ACTUALLY WITH THE REPORT. 
          THERE'S A, AN AMENDMENT. I BELIEVE THAT EVERYBODY GOT AN UPDATED VERSION. 
          SO HERE IS WHAT IS CHANGING THE TECHNICAL SCHOOL. 
          WE'RE REMOVING THE LIMITED AREA SO THAT THE EXPANSION MAYBE IN A NEAR FUTURE COULD HAPPEN. SO AGAIN, THIS IS THE THE OFFICE USE RECREATIONAL USE. 
          THE RESIDENTIAL USES ARE NOT PERMITTED. RETAIL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES,
AGAIN, GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE. 
          AND THEN HERE ARE THE SETBACKS. THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH STAYING THE SAME. 
          AND THEN THEY'RE DOING A COMBINED TO INCREASE IT FROM 10,850 TO 15,000FT². 
          AS YOU CAN SEE IT FROM THE ADDITION DOES NOT ACTUALLY WAS,
WAS GOING TO BE, BUT IT GIVES AN AREA TO TO EXPAND MAYBE LIKE LATER ON. AND THEN THEY'RE CHANGING THE FLOOR AREA RATIO FROM THREE 3 TO 1 TO 4 TO 1. 
          AND THEN, THEY'RE ALSO CHANGING THE HOURS OF OPERATIONS BETWEEN 9 A.M. 
          TO 11 P.M. TO 1 A.M. INSTEAD. HERE IS THE PROPOSED SETBACKS. 
          AS I STATED. THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH THE, THE SAME. 
          THE, THE FRONT IS ONE FOOT AND THE REAR IS A TWO FOOT THAT STAYS THE SAME. 
          AND THEN IT IS CONSISTENT WITH WITH THE DALLAS FORWARD PLAN AS I STATE IT IS, IT IS ALLOWED IN, IN THIS PARTICULAR TYPE. 
          AND THEN THE ENTIRE PROPERTY AGAIN IS SHOWN AS PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR 39. 
          IT'S JUST MAKING SOME AMENDMENTS. A STAFF FEELS THAT IT'S IN SUPPORT. 
          IT DOES NOT FORESEE ANY DETRIMENTAL ISSUES TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. 
          DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? AND THE RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO TWO CONDITIONS
AND THE AMENDMENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN, COMMISSIONER SIMS. GREAT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. YES,
SIR. MR. AGUILAR, IF I IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I GET THIS. WHAT BROUGHT ALL THIS UP WAS THE BUILDING JUST HAS SORT OF AN ODD NOTCH OUT AT THE NORTHEAST
CORNER, AND WE'RE JUST IN THE THE PD NEEDS TO BE EXPANDED TO ALLOW THE BUILDING THE OWNER TO BUILD
INTO THAT NOTCH. 
          I THINK IT'S SLIDE NUMBER 30. YEAH, YEAH. YOU CAN GO BACK THERE. 
          IS THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING CORRECT? YES. JUST THAT SORT OF ODD NOTCH IN THE ALLEY. YES,
THAT IS CORRECT. 
          OKAY. AND THEN AS WE REVIEWED THE PD FROM A JUST A LAND USE STANDPOINT,
I THINK WE OBSERVED OR YOU OBSERVED, AND I, AND I DISCUSSED WITH YOU THAT THE HAVING SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THE PD WAS ODD FROM A
LAND USE STANDPOINT. 
          I THINK IT WAS STAFF'S VIEW. IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY,
THAT TAKING THAT OUT WOULD JUST MAKE A NICER, CLEANER PD FOR US. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. 
          GOOD. AND THEN IN TERMS OF IN TERMS OF THE EXPANDED HOURS MY UNDERSTANDING,
I WANT TO SEE IF THIS WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING AS WELL IN SPEAKING WITH THE APPLICANT. 
          THERE WERE IT'S, THERE ARE JUST A FEW OCCASIONS WHERE THE APPLICANT FELT LIKE HAVING LATER
HOURS WOULD BE HELPFUL. 
          [00:15:01]
THINGS LIKE DIA DE LOS MUERTOS, LA POSADAS AROUND CHRISTMAS THINGS,
THINGS OF THAT NATURE, AND POTENTIALLY SOME FUNERAL EVENTS AS WELL. WAS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING? THAT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING IS ALSO A CULTURAL THING. 
          I I RECALL WHEN I WAS LIVING IN MEXICO, THE PREP AND THE UNIVERSITY,
THEY OFFERED TWO DIFFERENT TIMES FOR, FOR SCHOOL, ONE A LATE LATE SCHOOL AND THEN ALSO A MORNING
SCHOOL. 
          SO THIS MIGHT ALSO BE A PART OF THAT ISSUE. GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. MR.. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIR. ANYONE ELSE QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. GOING BACK TO ITEM TWO, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON,
DID YOU WANT THAT BRIEF. 
          DID YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? ANYONE ELSE QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER TWO. 
          OKAY THEN LET'S GO ALONG TO ITEM NUMBER SIX. COMMISSIONER SERRATO,
DID YOU NEED SIX BRIEFED OR QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN,
WOULD YOU LIKE A BRIEFING OR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'M GOING TO PUSH THIS ONE, MR. CHAIR, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF REGARDING SEVEN. 
          AND THE QUESTION IS REGARDING THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT. 
          THIS SUP IS BEING REQUESTED FOR THIS SHOPPING CENTER AREA OFF OF GREAT TRINITY. 
          BUT THE SIGNS FOR THE, THE NOTICE SIGNS OR CLOSER TO THE STREET ON THE SIDEWALKS FAR AWAY
FROM THE BUILDING. 
          SO IT'S REALLY HARD TO IDENTIFY WHERE THIS SUP WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH. 
          I KNOW IT'S ON THE SITE PLAN, BUT SHOULD THE SIGN BE CLOSER TO WHERE THE CONVENIENCE STORE
IS GOING TO BE LOCATED? SO MY, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY'RE POSTING THE,
THE SIGN SO THAT IT CAN BE VISIBLE SINCE IT'S THAT SHOP IN A RETAIL AREA SO THAT PEOPLE COULD COULD SEE IT. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT IT WAS A PLACE LIKE FRONTING THE,
THE, THE STREET. 
          SO MY UNDERSTANDING AND I CAN BE CORRECTED IF IS THAT,
THAT, THAT GIVES A BETTER NOTICE AS IF IT WAS POSTED ON THE, ON, ON THE, ON THE STREET, THEN IT WILL BE A LOT MORE DIFFICULT FOR THE AREA TO DO. AND SINCE THAT THAT THE RETAIL FRONTS THE THE TWO STREETS,
THEN THAT'S THAT'S WHY WE REQUIRE TWO NOTIFICATION SIGNS. AND HE'S EXACTLY RIGHT. 
          AND I'LL ADD IN CODE THAT IT DOES SAY THAT IT SHOULD BE VIEWABLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF
WAY. 
          AND I THINK SO GENERALLY WE INTERPRET THAT WHEN WE HAVE SUITES LIKE THIS,
THAT THEY SHOULD STILL PUT IT AT THE PROPERTY LINE. AND OF COURSE, THE AREAS OF REQUEST FOR ZONING DO GO OUT TO THE,
THE STREETS TYPICALLY. 
          BUT WHEN WE HAVE AN AREA OF REQUEST, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE HERE,
BUT IF WE DO SOMETIMES HAVE INDIVIDUAL SUITES THAT ARE AREAS OF REQUEST, WE STILL DO DIRECT OUR APPLICANTS TO PUT THEM AT THE PROPERTY LINE. 
          THE SITE PLANS WILL LIMIT THEM TO THE SUITE,
BUT OUR CODE GENERALLY DIRECTS US TO HAVE IT VIEWABLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. 
          THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? WHEN ARE YOU HOLDING THAT TO? PENDING MY CONVERSATION WITH MR. BALDWIN. GREAT. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. COMMISSIONER GILBERT SMITH,
WOULD YOU LIKE THIS ONE? BRIEFED? NO, I THINK WE'LL HOLD IT UNTIL NEXT TIME. 
          OKAY, SO THAT'S GOING TO BE SEPTEMBER 3RD. GREAT. 
          OKAY. MOVING ALONG TO OUR UNDER ADVISEMENT ITEMS. ITEM NUMBER NINE. COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN. I CAN'T RECALL IF THIS ONE'S BEEN BRIEFED BEFORE. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE IT? BRIEF OR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO,
MR. CHAIR. THE APPLICANT WILL ACTUALLY LIKE THIS ONE. MOVED AND MOVE TO A LATER DATE. 
          TO A LATER DATE. OKAY. OKAY. NOVEMBER 5TH. NOVEMBER 5TH. 
          OKAY. IT'LL HOPEFULLY BE MUCH COOLER BY THEN. 
          ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, ITEM NUMBER TEN. 
          OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? ITEM NUMBER 11. WOULD YOU LIKE A BRIEFING ON THAT ONE OR ANY QUESTIONS? ITEM NUMBER 12. COMMISSIONER WHEELER, WOULD YOU LIKE THIS ITEM BRIEFED? NO, SIR. NO. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER 12? ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER 13. COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN,
DO YOU WANT A BRIEFING ON THIS ONE? 
          [00:20:01]
NO, MR. CHAIR. THE APPLICANT WILL LIKE THIS ONE. 
          MOVE TO DECEMBER THE 3RD. OKAY. IT'S THE SAME APPLICANT AS THEN. 
          THE LAST ONE. OKAY. AND THEN ITEM NUMBER 14. YOU AGAIN,
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN. 
          BRIEFING ON THIS ITEM. NOT NECESSARY. OKAY. UNLESS SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO HAVE QUESTIONS
OR WANT IT BRIEFED. 
          ITEM NUMBER 15. COMMISSIONER COX, WOULD YOU LIKE A BRIEFING ON THIS ITEM? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I DON'T NEED A BRIEF, BUT I DO HAVE JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR
STAFF. 
          OKAY, GREAT. DOCTOR HASHEMI. 
          GOOD MORNING. COMMISSIONERS. YES. GOOD MORNING,
MISS HASHIMI. 
          I'M LOOKING AT THE CASE REPORT AND UNDER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. 
          IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LANGUAGE IN THIS CASE REPORT UNDER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
REGARDING THE POTENTIAL NONCONFORMITY, WAS INADVERTENTLY CARRIED OVER FROM A PREVIOUS VERSION? YES. YEAH, I'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED IT WITH THE APPLICANT. 
          AND I WILL FIX IT FOR THE COUNCIL REPORT AND IT WILL BE UPDATED. 
          YEAH. THANK YOU. AND THEN ALSO I UNDERSTAND FROM THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE THAT A DATA
TABLE SHOWING THE TOTAL BUILDING AREA SQUARE FOOTAGE IS GOING TO BE ADDED. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THEN FINALLY UNDER BACKGROUND INFORMATION
BULLET NUMBER FOUR. 
          IT READS THE REQUEST PROPOSES AMENDMENTS TO THE PD CONDITIONS TO MODERNIZE THE DISTRICT
REGULATIONS, CODIFY THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, APPLY CURRENT DALLAS DEVELOPMENT CODE,
PARKING REGULATIONS. 
          YEAH, BECAUSE IT WAS THE INITIAL INTENT OF THE REQUEST,
BUT IT HAS CHANGED. 
          I NEED TO FIX THAT AS WELL. WELL, YEAH. AND I'LL JUST SAY I WE TRY AND WHEN WE HAVE
MULTIPLE ITERATIONS OF THESE SOURCES OF INFORMATION FOR EVERYONE, WE HAVE MULTIPLE ITERATIONS. I, I LIKE TO HAVE A LIGHT TOUCH WITH THE ORIGINAL TEXT FOR
TRANSPARENCY PURPOSES. 
          AND AS BEST WE CAN, WE TRY AND LAYER ON THAT INFORMATION AS WE GO. 
          AND I LIKE TO, TO AT THE VERY LEAST SEE WHAT WE WERE ORIGINALLY AT. 
          I CAN RECOGNIZE THAT THAT BEING CONFUSING, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO CLARIFY. 
          BUT WE WILL TRY AND ADD ON AS WE GO TO THE BOTTOM OF THESE SECTIONS. 
          BUT I RECOGNIZE THAT. THANK YOU, MR. PIP. I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. 
          ARE THERE UPDATES SINCE SINCE WHAT'S OCCURRED IN THE DOCKET AND HAVE THEY BEEN
DISTRIBUTED? I DON'T THINK SO. THAT YOU DON'T THINK THEY'RE UPDATES OR YOU DON'T THINK THEY WILL UPDATE
IT. 
          BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IT WILL BE IN THIS. COULD WE GET BRIEFED ON THE UPDATES THEN,
PLEASE? OKAY. I WILL ASK THEM TO DO THAT. ARE YOU ABLE TO GIVE US A LIST OF UPDATES THAT HAVE BEEN
MADE TO THE PD CONDITIONS? THERE WASN'T ANY UPDATES TO THE PD CONDITIONS. 
          PD CONDITIONS WILL STAY THE SAME. THE ONLY THING IS DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT THEY WILL ADD A
TABLE TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ALSO SOME PART OF THE REPORT, NOT THE PD CONDITIONS. 
          THE PD CONDITIONS IS OKAY RIGHT NOW. SO WHAT WERE THE UPDATES MADE TO THE DEVELOPMENT
PLAN? IT'S JUST A DATA TABLE THAT SHOWS THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF BUILDINGS AND THE REQUIRED
PARKING BASED ON THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDINGS. RIGHT NOW,
IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT TABLE, BUT IF THEY WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, PUT IN NEW BUILDINGS OR KNOCK THOSE BUILDINGS DOWN AND PUT IN BUILDINGS WITH A
DIFFERENT FOOTPRINT, THEY'D NEED TO COME BACK TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN ANYWAY. 
          OKAY. OKAY. AND THEN I KNOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GO WITH BASE CODE AFTER PARKING
REFORM ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. CAN YOU KIND OF COMPARE THAT TO WHERE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS AT? RIGHT NOW THERE ARE 500 PARKING SPACES AND BASED ON THE APPLICANT OF. 
          THEY ARE ALL UNDERUTILIZED AND THE EXISTING PARKING REQUIREMENT TIED TO EACH LOT. 
          THAT'S WHY IT LIMITS THE LEASE OF EXISTING SPACES. 
          SO THE INITIAL REQUEST WAS DEFAULTING THE PARKING REQUIREMENT TO OUR BASE CODE,
WHICH WITH THAT MOST OF REQUIREMENT FOR OFFICES, RESTAURANTS UNDER 2500FT² WOULD BE ZERO. 
          BUT AFTER BACK AND FORTH WITH COMMISSIONER AND COMMUNITY,
NOW THEY PROPOSE A THREE ONE SPACE 
          [00:25:08]
PER 300 SQUARE FOOT OF PROPERTIES, WHICH IS A UNIFORM,
NOT SPECIFIC. 
          NOT USE A SPECIFIC RATIO. AND WITH THAT NOW THEY WILL NEED TO PROVIDE 322 SPACES. OKAY. AND SO THAT MEANS, YOU KNOW,
ANYTIME SOMEONE COMES IN FOR A CO THAT THE PROCESS REQUIRES STAFF TO COUNT THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FOR THE ENTIRE, I GUESS, PD OR AT LEAST THE ENTIRE LOT AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE PARKING
REQUIREMENTS ARE BEING SATISFIED. 
          YEAH. THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO DEFAULT IT TO BASE CODE TO NOT TO DO THAT. 
          OKAY. AND WHAT'S THE SORT OF I MEAN, HOW LONG DOES THAT TAKE? I KNOW WE HEARD THAT IT, YOU KNOW, THE FOLKS IN PERMITTING DO SPEND BEFORE PARKING FOR A
MEANINGFUL AMOUNT OF TIME COUNTING PARKING SPACES. 
          DO YOU HAVE A SENSE. I LOVE TO SPEAK TO THAT. 
          AND IT OFTEN GETS MORE DIFFICULT WITH THE OLDER PROPERTY IS THE LONGER BACK IT WAS
DEVELOPED. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WAS WAS DEVELOPED AT LEAST IN THE,
IN THE 60S OR EARLY 70S. 
          AND SO THE OLDER PROPERTY IS THE MORE KIND OF VARIATIONS THERE ARE IN CREDITS AND THINGS
LIKE THAT, NOT TO MENTION THE WAY THAT THINGS ARE STRIPED AND ALL OF THAT. 
          I'D SAY IT TAKES A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME AND EFFORT FOR BOTH OUR STAFF AND THE THE
PERMIT, EXCUSE ME, THE APPLICANT THEMSELVES TO PROVE WHERE THINGS ARE OR WHAT NOT. 
          EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT SPACES. 
          AND AGAIN, PART OF THE CONFUSION HERE COMES FROM THIS IS A PD IT LOOKS LIKE ONE PD,
ONE DISTRICT, BUT IT SPANS OVER A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT LOTS. 
          AND RIGHT NOW YOU CAN'T GENERALLY SHARE LOTS,
A LOT IN AN EASY WAY. 
          AND THEN IT GETS EVEN MORE COMPLICATED BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO,
IF YOU DO WANT TO SHARE BETWEEN LOTS, YOU HAVE TO OFTEN RESTRICT THE USES OR TIMES OR THINGS LIKE THAT TO SAY YOU KNOW,
THIS PARKING IS SET ASIDE FOR THIS USE AND THIS IS NOT SET ASIDE FOR, FOR THIS OTHER USE. THAT IS WHERE A LOT OF THE DRAMA COMES IN AND THE TIME. 
          SO I UNDERSTAND A BIG PART OF PARKING REFORM IS NOT,
IT DOESN'T TAKE AWAY THE PARKING. 
          IT TAKES A LOT OF THE BURDEN OFF OF THE CITY AND THE SMALL BUSINESS OWNER VERSUS A LARGER
DEVELOPER. 
          WHEN THEY'RE DOING THE LARGE DEVELOPMENT, THEY ALWAYS DO ACCOUNT FOR PARKING. 
          BUT IN THIS CASE, THAT'S KIND OF WHY WE LIKE TO DEFAULT BACK TO IT. 
          THE BASE CODE AND THE BASE CODE DOESN'T HAVE NO REGULATIONS. 
          IT STILL HAS SIGNIFICANT REQUIREMENTS FOR THINGS LIKE LIKE RESTAURANTS AND A LOT OF THOSE
KINDS OF USES MULTIFAMILY AS WELL. 
          BUT SO THIS WOULD REQUIRE THE 1 TO 300 RATIO FOR ALL OF THE USES WHICH WILL BE A LOWER AMOUNT OF REQUIREMENT FOR SOME USES AND A,
MAYBE A HIGHER THAN BASE CODE OR THE OLD BASE CODE FOR SOME. 
          OKAY. AND I SEE THAT SORT OF TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY,
THERE IS A NEIGHBORHOOD YOU VIEW THAT AS BEING A RISK FOR MUCH SPILLOVER PARKING IF THIS WEREN'T ADEQUATELY PARKED. 
          EXCUSE ME, MR. CHAIR. CAN YOU SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT? I CAN'T HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IN
THIS CASE IS OBVIOUSLY IMPORTANT TO ME. YEAH. OKAY. DO YOU DO YOU SEE A RISK OF THERE BEING SPILLOVER PARKING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE EAST OF THIS FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT? I DURING MY SITE VISIT, I DIDN'T, BUT MAYBE THIS IS A APPLICANT QUESTION. 
          AND ARE THERE WAYS THAT A NEIGHBORHOOD CAN, YOU KNOW,
RESTRICT PARKING AND HELP AVOID SPILLOVER PARKING. 
          ASIDE FROM JUST MANDATING A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SPOTS ON ON SITE,
I THINK YOU'RE ASKING IF THERE ARE OTHER WAYS. 
          YEAH. NO, NO, CERTAINLY. AND ONE OF THOSE BEING THE NO PARKING SIGNS. 
          YOU KNOW, THAT'S EASY TO, IT CAN BE SIMPLY DONE WITH TRANSPORTATION OR COUNCIL OFFICES
REQUEST THEM A LOT AND IT DOES APPEAR TO HELP NEIGHBORS OUT. 
          OTHERWISE, YOU KNOW, A BIG PART OF IT IS I THINK WE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT AND FROM OUR
OBSERVATIONS THAT THERE IS NOT HIGH UTILIZATION AT THIS SITE. 
          AND SO THAT'S, I THINK, WHY WE DIDN'T HAVE CONCERN. 
          OKAY. THOSE ARE MY QUESTIONS. ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. 
          I'M LOOKING AT THE CONDITIONS HERE, BUT MAYBE YOU COULD JUST HELP ME. 
          [00:30:02]
SO THE 1 TO 300 APPLIES TO ANY USE. SO APPLIES TO RESTAURANT. 
          THAT'S MY ADDRESS TO RETAIL. IF THE APPLICANT WERE TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS UNDER SB 840
AND DO MULTIFAMILY, THE 1 TO 300 WOULD BE WILDLY OVER PARKED. 
          AND SO THEY WOULD COME BACK IN AND SEEK ANOTHER AMENDMENT TO THE PD. 
          I GOT THAT. UNDER 840. GOOD. GREAT QUESTION. UNDER 840 IF A DEVELOPMENT IS BUILT,
IT'S A IT'S A WHAT DO YOU CALL IT? WHAT'S THE WORD, A MULTIFAMILY MIXED USE PROJECT UNDER THE DEFINITION
OF 840 WHICH IS A 6535 PROJECT. 
          SO YOU CAN HAVE A MIXED USE COMPONENT, YOU CAN HAVE A RETAIL COMPONENT AND THOSE SORTS OF
THINGS. 
          THE BILL SAYS WE CAN'T HAVE THAT DEVELOPMENT REQUIRE MORE THAN ONE SPACE PER UNIT. 
          SO THE FOR THE RETAIL COMPONENTS, THERE WOULDN'T BE A REQUIREMENT IF THEY WERE TO GO
VERTICAL AND DO A MIXED USE, SMALL MIXED USE PROJECT UNDER 840. THEY WOULD JUST HAVE TO PROVIDE THE ONE SPACE PER UNIT
FOR THAT PROJECT, AND WE CAN'T ASK FOR MORE. OKAY. THANKS FOR THAT REMINDER. 
          APPRECIATE IT. DOCTOR HASHMI HOW DID WHERE DID THE 1 TO 300 COME FROM? WHAT DOES THAT RELATE TO? HOW DOES THAT, HOW IS THAT SUBSTANTIATED FROM A,
A USE AND A NEED STANDPOINT? I THINK THIS IS THE APPLICANT QUESTION AS WELL. 
          I THINK THEY WORKED WITH THE COMMISSIONER AND COUNCIL MEMBER TO GET TO THAT NUMBER,
BUT I DON'T KNOW WHERE THIS NUMBER EXACTLY COME FROM. SO DO YOU THINK THIS MIGHT BE ARBITRARY? I DON'T THINK SO. BUT MICHAEL, DO YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T WANT TO. 
          I'M NOT I'M NOT CALLING THIS, BUT I KNOW THAT HISTORICALLY MOST OF OUR PARKING MINIMUMS
WERE ARBITRARY AND NOT BASED ON SIGNIFICANT SCIENCE. 
          AND SO. COULD I ASK MR. PEPE A QUESTION? SURE. 
          SO YOU MADE A REMARK EARLIER, LIKE I FOLLOW THE WHEN I LOOK AT THE SOME OF THE EXHIBITS
HERE. 
          WHILE THIS PD COVERS A SUBSTANTIAL FRONTAGE ON PRESTON ROAD,
IT'S NEVER BEEN PLATTED AS ONE LOT. 
          IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S LIKE 4 OR 5 LOTS. YEAH. SO SO THAT THEN COMPLICATES YOUR WORK AT
BUILDING AND INSPECTION TO TRACK ALL THESE VARIOUS PARKING COUNTS BY PARCEL. BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT,
BECAUSE YOU CAN'T TAKE IT AS A SINGLE PD. 
          YOU HAVE TO DO IT BY, BY PLATTED PARCEL. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. 
          AND SO COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES CAN'T EASILY SHARE PARKING ONE TO ANOTHER. 
          IT'S A FAIRLY ENCUMBERED PROCESS. RIGHT. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU, MR. COX. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I'VE GOT A COUPLE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS. 
          I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WITH THIS CASE BECAUSE IT IS SOMEWHAT OF AN ANOMALY. 
          YOU'VE GOT FOUR OWNERS THAT COMPRISE THE OWNERSHIP OF THIS THIS DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT, RIGHT? AND SO IT'S ALSO CURRENTLY WITH THE PD THERE IS ZONING,
I'M SORRY, PARKING IDENTIFIED AS PART OF THIS PD. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. AND SO. WE CAN CERTAINLY TALK ABOUT THE EXISTING PARKING RATIOS. 
          BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY MY UNDERSTANDING IS AND YOU CAN CORRECT ME ON THIS,
THERE ARE CURRENTLY 562 PARKING SPACES. 
          THE 1 TO 300 RATIO WOULD ACTUALLY BRING THAT DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY TO 300 2020 ROUGHLY
ROUGHLY. 
          AND SO JUST TO, TO SHED A LITTLE BIT OF LIGHT ON THIS,
IF I COULD, MR. CHAIR, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. SOMEBODY ASKED THE QUESTION EARLIER,
IS THE 1 TO 300 RATIO ARBITRARY? I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS. IT WAS ARRIVED AT THIS THIS AFTERNOON,
COMMISSIONER COX. 
          OKAY. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. OKAY, SO, MISS HASHIMI,
A COUPLE OF OTHER QUESTIONS FOR YOU THEN. 
          UNDER THE PARKING REFORM ORDINANCE, CITYWIDE STANDARDS APPLY ONLY WHEN A PD IS SILENT. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? COULD YOU REPEAT IT, PLEASE? UNDER PARKING REFORM. PARKING REFORM ORDINANCE,
CITYWIDE STANDARDS ONLY APPLY WHEN THE PD IS SILENT ON PARKING. 
          YEAH. GENERALLY YES. YEAH. WELL, I MEAN. THAT WAS KIND OF A YES NO QUESTION. 
          IS IT. OH THERE IS NO YES NO QUESTIONS WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS. 
          BUT BUT NO I REALLY I'M IN TRUTH. YEAH. RIGHT. 
          RIGHT. AND SHE IS REMINDING ME THAT VERY. AND I DON'T WANT TO SAY NEVER,
BUT ALMOST ALWAYS THERE. 
          THE PD FIRST SAYS, LOOK BACK AT CHAPTER 51 OR 51 A AND THEN IT MAY SPECIFY A RATIO. 
          [00:35:02]
THOSE. IF THAT RATIO IS SPECIFIED IN THAT PD,
IT'LL OVERRIDE. 
          BUT THEN. OTHERWISE IT WILL DEFAULT BACK. OKAY. 
          SO IS STAFF ASSERTING THAT A REDUCTION IN THE RATIOS CONSTITUTES THE ELIMINATION OF
PARKING ELIMINATION? OKAY. NO. SO THEN IF SO, WELL. OKAY, FINE. IF IS THERE ANY LEGAL BARRIER PREVENTING THE
APPLICANT FROM REQUESTING A REDUCTION OF PD SPECIFIC RATIOS WHILE WHILE RETAINING PD SPECIFIC STANDARDS? THE THE APPLICANT CAN CAN REQUEST WHATEVER EXCUSE ME,
WHATEVER RATIO THEY WANT IN THIS PD. 
          CORRECT. WE'VE GOT A DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATION THAT DEFAULTS TO DIFFERENT RATIOS THAT ARE
IN OUR BASE CODE BECAUSE AT THIS, YOU KNOW, ANY ZONING DOCUMENT IS NOT JUST ABOUT A BURDEN ON AN APPLICANT. 
          IT'S ABOUT A BURDEN ON THE CITY. AND IT'S A,
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO ENFORCE CERTAIN RULES. 
          SO WE CAN'T JUST PUT ANYTHING THAT AN APPLICANT LIKES IN A PD. 
          THAT SAID, IT IS, IT IS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE FOR THEM TO DO SO THAT'S,
BUT SIMPLY WE HAVE A DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATION. 
          SO IS THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION BASED ON SPECIFIC CRITERIA? YES. THE CITYWIDE THE CITYWIDE POLICY ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL WHEN THEY AMENDED OUR
OVERALL PARKING CODE, THE 2025 PARKING REFORM. YEAH. OKAY. COMMISSIONER WHEELER HAD HER HAND UP. 
          I'M NOT FINISHED, MISTER CHAIR. OH. I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT YOU WERE. 
          AND ONE, ONE LAST QUESTION. MR. PEPE MAY WANT TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION. 
          DOES STAFF AGREE THAT ONLY THE CITY COUNCIL CAN REMOVE OR REPLACE PD SPECIFIC RATIOS,
ALL ZONING IS DETERMINED AT THE CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WHEELER. 
          YES. SO IN THE PROCESS OF DOING THIS, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT'S FOR FOUR DIFFERENT OWNERS,
ARE THEY ALSO GOING TO HAVE TO ENTER INTO A PARKING AGREEMENT, A PARKING AGREEMENT. AND THAT HAS TO BE SIGNED OFF THROUGH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND, AND FILED WITH THE COUNTY AND THE CITY IF THEY WANT TO. 
          YES, IF THEY WANT TO SHARE PARKING ACROSS PROPERTY LINES. 
          AND I DON'T HAVE THE PARKING OR THE PROPERTY LINES MEMORIZED HERE,
BUT IN A IN A TIGHT RETAIL ENVIRONMENT WHERE THE LINES CROSS, RARELY ARE THESE BUSINESSES IN PARKING LOTS OF THIS SIZE DIVIDING UP SPACES. 
          BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE AT BUILDING INSPECTION ARE COUNTING THE SPACES ON A SITE
PLAN AND ACCOUNTING AND TABULATING FOR THEM IN. IF SHARED IN A DEED RESTRICTION. 
          YEAH. SO IS THAT BECAUSE SOME OF THE SOME OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS,
SOME OF THE PARKING AGREEMENTS WERE DONE PRIOR TO GOING DIRECTLY THROUGH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE? HAVE WE HAVE YOU ALL LOOKED TO SEE. 
          HAVE THOSE ALREADY BEEN PLACED IN PLACE? BECAUSE THE ONES THROUGH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE HAVE BEEN MAYBE TEN YEARS AGO, ONCE PRIOR TO WAS MORE OF A READING NOTARIZED LETTER BETWEEN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS. 
          HAVE THAT BEEN CHECKED YET? I WHAT'S I, I'M SORRY I MISSED THE QUESTION. 
          WHAT'S THE HEART OF THE QUESTION? SO PRIOR TO TEN YEARS PRIOR TO ROUGHLY ABOUT TEN YEARS
AGO, WHEN THEY STARTED DOING THE ACTUAL ONES THAT HAD TO GO THROUGH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
AND THEN BE FILED AT THE COUNTY, THEY WERE DOING THE READING, THE READING PARKING PARKING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN TWO PROPERTY
OWNERS AND THEN NOTARIZED AND THEN ON FILE AYE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. 
          WILL THOSE CHECK TO SEE IF THOSE ARE ALREADY IN PLACE? I,
WE HAVE NOT CHECKED IF ANY ARE IN PLACE HERE. 
          IT'S IT'S PRETTY INVOLVED. OKAY. IS THERE A REASON WHY,
SINCE WE'RE ASKING FOR PROPERTY OWNERS ARE COMING TOGETHER TO SEE IF THAT IS ALREADY IN PLACE. 
          BECAUSE IF PROPERTY OWNERS DON'T HAVE IT IN PLACE,
THEN ISN'T THIS ALMOST PREMATURE? I WOULD, I WOULDN'T SAY BECAUSE WE'RE HERE AMENDING THE THE FUNDAMENTAL RATIOS. 
          THEY STILL HAVE TO PROVIDE THOSE AT PERMITTING IF SHARING IS GOING ON AND THOSE. 
          THAT HAS TO BE DONE. I WOULD NOT WANT TO PULL ALL OF THE CEOS AND ALL OF THE AGREEMENTS
THAT MAY EXIST, AND THE APPLICANT COULD SPEAK TO WHAT THEY HAVE. 
          BUT I DON'T KNOW. I WOULD NOT SAY IT'S NECESSARY. 
          AND IT IS, AS WE SAID, VERY, VERY INVOLVED BECAUSE IT USUALLY IS NOT BETWEEN THE CEOS. 
          IT'S BETWEEN PROPERTY OWNERS. PROPERTY OWNER. 
          BUT I WOULD THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE PUTTING THIS IN PLACE,
IF THEY DON'T HAVE A SHARED AGREEMENT FILED FOR PROPERTY AND ALLOW SHARED PARKING. 
          [00:40:08]
22 IT DOESN'T REALLY WORK. EVEN IF IT'S APPROVED BECAUSE I CAN DECIDE I DON'T WANT YOU TO
PARK ON MY PROPERTY OR YOUR CLIENT OR YOUR TENANTS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS. I THINK THAT DEFINITELY NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED WHILE WE'RE DOING THIS
PROCESS. 
          BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT HARDER. IT WILL MAKE IT HARDER AT WHERE YOU,
WHERE YOU'RE AT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND THEY ARE HAVING TO COUNT PARKING HAVING THAT SHOWING THAT THAT'S ALREADY ON FILE DOES MAKE THAT PROCESS EVEN FASTER. 
          WHEELER. I'M NOT SURE THE SPECIFIC SHARED PARKING AGREEMENTS,
WHETHER THEY EXIST OR NOT, ARE RELEVANT TO THE ZONING CASE IN FRONT OF US TODAY. 
          IF IF, IF IF IT'S FOR IF IT'S FOR PROPERTY OWNERS,
I WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. 
          BECAUSE IF WE'RE DOING IF EVEN IF IT'S IN A PD AND THESE OTHER FOUR PROPERTY OWNERS,
THEN WITHOUT THAT CHART AGREEMENT, THE PD DOESN'T WORK. OKAY, I THINK. ALL RIGHT. 
          DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS,
COMMISSIONER WHEELER? NO. I'LL ASK I'LL ASK THAT AT THE HEARING. 
          OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS CASE,
COMMISSIONERS? OKAY. CASE NUMBER 16. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU WANT THIS ONE BRIEFED? I THINK THAT MAY BE HELPFUL FOR THE COMMISSION. I THINK IT WOULD TO. 
          USUALLY THE CRICKETS COME AFTER I TRY TO MAKE A JOKE LIKE THAT. THERE WE GO. 
          ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING. THIS IS CASE Z 2594. 
          IS AN APPLICATION FOR ONE AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 800 AND THE CREATION
AND EXPANSION OF NEW SUB DISTRICTS THEREIN FOR SPECIFIED NONRESIDENTIAL USES. 
          AND TWO A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGE ON PROPERTY ZONED P 800 ON THE
SOUTHEAST LINE OF CADIZ STREET BETWEEN RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD AND THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD, AND THE NORTH AND SOUTH LINES OF RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD,
NORTHWEST OF CORINTH STREET. 
          IT'S ABOUT 60.5 ACRES IN SIZE OVER ON, AS YOU CAN SEE ON RIVERFRONT,
RIGHT ON THE SORT OF THE CEDARS WEST AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE CEDARS PROPER. 
          THIS IS THE AERIAL MAP SHOWING THE AREA OF REQUEST. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S A VERY LARGE UNDEVELOPED SITE. 
          RIVERFRONT RUNNING THROUGH ALONG HERE. THE ZONING,
IT'S DESPITE BEING LARGE, THERE'S REALLY JUST TWO PREDOMINANT NEARBY ZONING DISTRICTS. 
          THERE'S PD 317, WHICH IS THE CEDARS PD TO THE NORTHEAST,
AND THEN PD 784, WHICH IS THE CEDARS WEST PD SURROUNDING THE REST OF THE SITE OVER ON THE CEDARS, OF COURSE, THERE'S A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL,
RETAIL, COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT, ETC. 
          THEN OVER ALONG RIVERFRONT, A MIX OF RETAIL,
PERSONAL SERVICE, RESTAURANT VEHICLE SALES. 
          OVER IN THE SOUTHEASTERN SIDE, YOU HAVE A MIX OF LIGHTER INDUSTRIAL USES AS WELL. 
          SO THE AREA REQUEST UNDEVELOPED AND THEY WISH TO DEVELOP THE SITE WITH SPA AND HOTEL
LODGING AMONG OTHER USES. 
          AND THEY'RE REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO PD 800. 
          WE'LL GET INTO MORE OF THE DETAILS THERE AND EXPLAIN KIND OF WHAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. 
          I'LL SAY THE LONG AND SHORT IS THAT WHEN YOU'RE AMENDING A VERY DETAILED PD LIKE THIS,
IT LOOKS PRETTY SCARY WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL THE CONDITIONS BECAUSE THERE'S STRIKETHROUGHS AND BRACKETS AND THIS AND THAT. BUT THE LONG AND SHORT IS IT'S CHANGING SOME OF THE DESIGN
AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO ACCOMMODATE THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. 
          THESE ARE SOME SITE PHOTOS THAT WE TOOK. AND UNFORTUNATELY,
I GOT THESE BEFORE I GOT MY DRONE. 
          SO I DON'T HAVE ANY GOOD AERIAL PHOTOS HERE. BUT JUST TO PAINT A PICTURE OF WHAT IT LOOKS
LIKE ALONG CATO STREET, SPECIFICALLY LOOKING SOUTHWEST HERE, I THINK IF ANY OF YOU HAVE DRIVEN THROUGH HERE,
IT LOOKS A LITTLE DIFFERENT RIGHT NOW WITH ALL THE CONSTRUCTION GOING ON. 
          NOT THAT THERE WASN'T CONSTRUCTION WHEN I TOOK THESE PHOTOS. IT'S JUST EVER EXPANDING. 
          AND LOOKING SOUTHWEST. AND THEN THESE ARE FROM GOOGLE STREET VIEW. 
          I WAS A BIT DIFFICULT TO TRY TO GET PHOTOS MYSELF GIVEN THE CURRENT STATE OF RIVERFRONT
BOULEVARD. 
          BUT THESE WERE AS OF MAY 2025 AND IS LOOKING SOUTH TOWARDS THE SOUTHERN PORTION ON THE
SOUTH LINE OF RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD. 
          [00:45:10]
SO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. THIS TABLE HERE,
IT'S IT'S THERE'S A LOT THAT'S CHANGED THAT I DON'T THINK YOU CAN REALLY FIT INTO A TABLE HERE. THE MAIN THING IS THAT THE BUILD TWO ZONES,
WHICH YOU CAN READ AS SETBACKS WOULDN'T APPLY TO THE RESIDENTIAL WELLNESS CAMPUS. 
          THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN,
WHICH THIS ALSO WILL SERVE AS THE SITE PLAN. 
          THE CRUX OF IT IS THAT SUBDISTRICT ONE, THERE'S THIS DEFINITION THAT'S BEEN ENTERED FOR
REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE A WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER,
WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THE SPA DEVELOPMENT, AS WELL AS SUPPORTING USES INCLUDING HOTEL, MULTIFAMILY,
RETAIL, PERSONAL SERVICE, ETC.. 
          THE CAMPUS IS CONTIGUOUS WITH SUBDISTRICT ONE. 
          IN THIS CASE, IT SPANS ACROSS WHAT WOULD BE A NEW ROAD HERE AND AN EXTENSION OF HOTEL
STREET ON THE NORTH SIDE AND ACROSS SOUTH RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD INTO THIS AREA AS WELL. THERE'S TWO HASH MARKED AREAS RIGHT HERE. 
          THIS ONE IS MARKED AS OCCUPIABLE FLOOR AREA. THIS ONE IS MARKED AS PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGE
AREA. 
          AND THE REASON FOR THAT DISTINCTION IS JUST THE WAY THAT OUR DEPARTMENT CLASSIFIES
SKYBRIDGES. 
          GENERALLY SPEAKING, IF THERE'S SIMPLY A CONVEYANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES THAT'S CONSIDERED A
SKYBRIDGE AND IT NEEDS AN SUP WHEN IT HAS OCCUPIABLE FLOOR AREA WHERE IT'S PART OF THE MAIN USE OVERALL, THEN IT DOESN'T REQUIRE AN SUP. 
          OF COURSE, THERE'S STILL REQUIREMENTS FOR REAL ESTATE LICENSES,
ETC. FROM THE CITY TO CROSS OVER PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY, BUT THAT FALLS OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THE ZONING PROCESS ITSELF. 
          THE SUB-DISTRICT MAP. THIS SUB-DISTRICT WON AGAIN. 
          THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO CONTAIN THE REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS. SUBDISTRICT TWO. 
          IS THIS PORTION OVER HERE TO THE WEST GOING TOWARDS CADIZ STREET? IF YOU'LL NOTICE, IN THE CONDITIONS, ONE OF THE USES THAT'S ALLOWED IN SUBDISTRICT TWO BY
CP IS A CONTRACTOR'S MAINTENANCE YARD. 
          OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE USED,
OR PART OF THAT WILL BE USED AS A YARD FOR THE SUPPORT OF THE VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS OCCURRING ALONG RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD, ETC. AS SUCH,
WE'RE ALLOWING THE USE BY CP SUCH THAT IF CP IS REQUESTED, IT WILL BE TIME LIMITED AND JUST THERE FOR THE DURATION OF THOSE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. 
          SUBDISTRICT THREE TO THE SOUTHWEST OR SOUTHEAST OF THE SITE THAT WILL BE PART OF THE
FUTURE DALLAS WATER COMMONS SUBDISTRICT FOUR IS TO BE DETERMINED, BUT IT IS PART OF THE PD NOW. THE CONDITIONS. 
          SO THE INTENT. AGAIN, THEY'RE CREATING A SITE THAT OFFERS SPA POOLS,
WATER, AMUSEMENT, AMENITIES, ETC. THERE'S A CUSTOM DEFINITION OF THE REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS,
WHICH INCLUDES WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER, WHICH IS ALSO A CUSTOM DEFINITION. AND WITH THOSE DEFINITIONS,
THERE ARE VARIOUS KIND OF CHANGES AND DEVIATIONS FROM THE ORIGINAL PDS DESIGN STANDARDS. 
          THE IDEA THERE IS THAT A LOT OF THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS,
THEY'RE VERY WELL AND GOOD FOR WHAT COULD BE BUILT ON THE SITE. 
          BUT IN SOME CASES, GIVEN THE NATURE OF WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE,
A LARGE, YOU KNOW, SPA AND WHATNOT WITH POOLS AND BOTH INDOOR AND OUTDOOR POOLS, ETC., IT MAY NOT ALWAYS MAKE SENSE TO, FOR INSTANCE,
HAVE SEVERAL PEDESTRIAN ENTRANCES ALONG THE WHOLE PART OF THAT BUILDING. 
          OR, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU GET INTO TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS,
I'M SURE SOME OF YOU ALL HAVE SEEN SOME OF THE RENDERINGS THAT HAVE BEEN OUT IN THE NEWS. 
          THERE'S COMPONENTS THAT ARE VERY TRANSPARENT,
BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO COMPONENTS WHERE YOU PROBABLY DON'T WANT TRANSPARENCY SAUNAS OR SPAS, FOR INSTANCE. IN TERMS OF THE WAYS TO REALLY PUT A BOUND ON THIS SO THAT WHAT'S
BEING PROPOSED IS WHAT GETS THOSE CHANGES, BUT NOTHING ELSE. THERE'S A MINIMUM FLOOR AREA REQUIREMENT OF 250,000FT² WITHIN
THE USES FOR WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER. 
          THE IDEA THERE BEING THAT IF THIS WERE TO BE ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEN THE
PROJECT DOESN'T COME TO FRUITION, YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SIMPLY PUT IN A LA FITNESS YMCA,
WHAT HAVE YOU, AND SUDDENLY GET ALL THESE CHANGES IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND WHATNOT. 
          THE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA OF 250,000FT² FOR THE WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER,
AMONG SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IN THE DEFINITION FOR THAT AS WELL, REALLY DO PUT A BOUND ON THIS SO THAT IT'S BASICALLY,
IF THIS GETS BUILT, THEN IT GETS THOSE DESIGN STANDARD CHANGES. 
          IF IT DOESN'T GET BUILT, IT GENERALLY DEFAULTS BACK TO THE BASE PD WELLNESS AND EDUCATION
CENTER. 
          THERE'S A LOT OF WORDS, BUT THIS IS, I THINK IN SOME WAYS,
PART OF HOW YOU MAKE IT ROBUST SO THAT IT DOESN'T SIMPLY LET AN LA FITNESS OR WHAT HAVE YOU. AND AND THAT'S JUST THE FIRST ONE THAT COMES TO MIND. 
          I'M NOT PICKING ON LA FITNESS SPECIFICALLY. BUT IT'S TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS REALLY
FOCUSED ON THE PROPOSAL THAT WE'VE BEEN SHOWN AND TOLD ABOUT WITHIN YOUR CONDITIONS ON THE DOCKET, THIS DID INCLUDE THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE
REQUIREMENT AS WELL. 
          BASED ON DISCUSSION WITH OUR ATTORNEY, WE DETERMINED THAT WASN'T REALLY APPROPRIATE WITHIN
THE DEFINITION, BUT IT IS WITHIN THE USE. 
          THE USE IS ALLOWED. THAT'S WHERE IT PUTS THAT FLOOR FOR 250,000FT². 
          [00:50:02]
IT DOES ALLOW THE CONTRACTORS MAINTENANCE YARD BY SCP AND SUB-DISTRICT TWO,
AS MENTIONED, THAT WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THE RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD AS ETC. 
          IMPROVEMENTS. IT DOES ALLOW COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT OUTSIDE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE WELLNESS
CAMPUS IN SUBDISTRICT ONE, BUT IT IS OTHERWISE BY SCP. THERE'S A VARIETY OF DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE ENTRANCES,
FACADES AND STOREFRONT TREATMENTS, AS WELL AS PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES FOR THE REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS. A LOT OF THIS WAS COME
CAME UP IN CONJUNCTION WITH MEETINGS THAT THE APPLICANT HAD WITH THE URBAN DESIGN AND PEER REVIEW PANEL, WHICH FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO AREN'T AWARE OR FAMILIAR WITH THAT,
IT'S A SERVICE THAT THE CITY OFFERS WHERE WE HAVE OUR URBAN DESIGN TEAM AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, AS WELL AS, I BELIEVE, SOME MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT ARE APPOINTED ONTO
IT, WHO REVIEW APPLICATIONS AND COME UP WITH SUGGESTIONS AND FEEDBACK ON WHAT THE WHAT,
WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. 
          AGAIN, AS, AS STATED EARLIER, THE NATURE OF WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE DIDN'T NECESSARILY
LEND ITSELF WELL TO SOME OF THE BASE CONDITIONS IN HERE. 
          AND I THINK THE CHALLENGE WE HAD WAS FIGURING OUT HOW TO PROVIDE ENOUGH ALLOWANCES TO LET
THE APPLICANT OR TO ENABLE THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, WHILE STILL OVERALL MAINTAINING WHAT WE THINK WOULD BE GOOD PEDESTRIAN
ORIENTED AND URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS THAT, YOU KNOW, APART FROM THE CAMPUS OR APART FROM THE WELLNESS CENTER ITSELF,
WHICH AGAIN, THE WELLNESS CENTER IS THE BIG SPA FACILITY, MAKING SURE THAT THE REST OF IT'S GENERALLY COHESIVELY AND COHERENTLY DESIGNED AND DONE IN
A WAY WHERE IT'S PROMOTING THIS BROADER VISION OF THE PD FOR AN URBAN AREA. 
          IT DOES REQUIRE NATIVE AND WELL ADAPTED SPECIES ALONG THE MEANDERS AND SUB DISTRICT ONE,
AS WELL AS PERVIOUS PAVING FOR FIRE LANES ALONG THE MEANDERS. 
          THAT IS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY FIRE CODE AT PERMITTING REVIEW. 
          I KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM AND I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS. 
          AND I'LL JUST SAY THAT D F.R REVIEW CAN SOMETIMES BE A LITTLE FINICKY ON PERVIOUS
PAVEMENTS FOR FIRE LANES AS OPPOSED TO PARKING. 
          BUT WE DO WANT TO HAVE THAT IN THERE THAT THEY AT LEAST NEED TO PROPOSE IT AND HAVE IT
REVIEWED BY FIRE CODE. 
          IN TERMS OF THE SUITABILITY FOR DALLAS DOES DESIGNATE THE SITE AS REGIONAL MIXED USE AND
LODGING AND MIXED USE IS OUR PRIMARY USES WITHIN THAT PLACE TYPE. 
          IN TERMS OF THE USES, WE DON'T FIND IT INCOMPATIBLE. THEY WOULDN'T CONFLICT WITH ANY
NEARBY USES. THE PROPOSED DESIGN STANDARDS DO PROMOTE COMPATIBILITY WITH THE REGIONAL MIXED USE GOALS. THE SKYBRIDGE SUP DOES ALLOW CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN THE WELLNESS CAMPUS
BUILDINGS AND THE GARAGE. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, GET INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT. SKYBRIDGE IS SOMETIMES RAISE THE IRE,
LET'S SAY, OF URBAN DESIGN PROFESSIONALS BECAUSE IN CERTAIN CASES THEY DO OR COULD DETRACT FROM
ENGAGEMENT ON THE GROUND. 
          THE IDEA BEING THAT IF YOU CAN JUST KIND OF GO BETWEEN BUILDING A TO BUILDING B TO
BUILDING C WITHOUT GOING ON THE GROUND, IT TAKES AWAY FROM SOME OF THE LIVELINESS AND WHATNOT THAT COULD OCCUR ON THE PEDESTRIAN
REALM AT THE GROUND LEVEL. 
          IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT REALLY IS A PRIMARILY A CONNECTOR BETWEEN THE GARAGE ITSELF
AND THE WELLNESS WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER BASED ON WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THROUGH SOME OF THE CONDITIONS
THAT ARE ON THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USES ON THE GARAGE, I, WE DON'T FORESEE THAT THE SKYBRIDGE ITSELF WOULD NECESSARILY DETRACT FROM THAT
PEDESTRIAN ENGAGEMENT AND ACTIVATION, BECAUSE ALONG THERMA WAY, THE PROPOSAL FOR THAT NEW STREET OR THE NAME FOR THAT PROPOSED
STREET THEY'RE, THEY'RE JUST REALLY WOULDN'T BE A WHOLE LOT OF PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USES IN GENERAL. 
          THE MAJORITY OF IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE CORNER OF HOTEL THERMA AND THEN ALONG HOTEL AS
WELL. 
          IT WILL MOST LIKELY SERVE JUST TO PROVIDE EASY CONVEYANCE,
MAYBE WHEN IT'S REALLY HOT OUT OR WHEN IT'S NASTY WEATHER OUT BETWEEN THE GARAGE AND THE WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER. BUT WE WOULD FORESEE THAT,
YOU KNOW, ASSUMING THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMES TO, YOU KNOW, COMES TO FRUITION AND REALLY GETS FLESHED OUT THAT PEOPLE WOULD STILL BE
INTERESTED IN EXPLORING THE REST OF THE DISTRICT AND TAKING ADVANTAGE OF WHAT IT COULD OFFER AS IT BUILDS OUT. OUR RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO PD 800,
SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDED EXHIBITS 800 A AND B, AND AMENDED CONDITIONS, AND A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGE,
SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. 
          I'LL ALSO SAY THAT I THINK YOU ALL RECEIVED A SET OF UPDATED CONDITIONS FROM THE APPLICANT
YESTERDAY, STAFF HAS REVIEWED THEM AND THOSE CHANGES WERE MADE,
YOU KNOW, IN CONCERT WITH RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAME FROM, FROM STAFF. I WOULD SAY WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THOSE CHANGES IN THERE. 
          I WILL SAY I'M IN DISCUSSION WITH TRANSPORTATION ON A SLIGHT CHANGE ON THE BIKE LANE
LANGUAGE, JUST THERE'S A REFERENCE TO RUMBLE STRIPS THAT MAY CHANGE TO TACTILE DIRECTIONAL
INDICATORS, I BELIEVE IS THE INDUSTRY TERM THEY PREFER. BUT OTHERWISE,
I KNOW THAT WAS BOTH A LOT AND NOT A LOT IN THE BRIEFING. 
          SO HAPPY TO START TAKING QUESTIONS ON HERE. I DO HAVE THE CONDITIONS PULLED UP. JUST ONE
CLARIFYING HOUSEKEEPING QUESTION. 
          BEFORE I GO TO MY COLLEAGUES, YOU MENTIONED THAT THE APPLICANT CIRCULATED RECOMMENDATIONS
THAT ARE AMENDED CONDITIONS YESTERDAY THAT STAFF IS GENERALLY FINE WITH, 
          [00:55:03]
BUT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS STILL THE PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION AND THE APPLICANT'S IS IT
OR WOULD THE APPLICANT'S CONDITIONS NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN A MOTION? THEY WOULD EITHER NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN A MOTION,
OR I CAN READ THEM INTO THE RECORD. 
          WHEN I INTRODUCE THE ITEM. I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT. I'VE GOT IT KIND OF READY TO ROCK HERE. 
          OKAY, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO SHARE. I'LL PRINT THOSE OUT JUST ONCE WE FINALIZE THESE LAST
COUPLE DETAILS, I'LL PRINT THOSE OUT AND SHARE IT WITH THE COMMISSION SO YOU ALL CAN FOLLOW ALONG. AS LONG
AS WE HAVE A CLEAN RECORD, WE'RE GOOD. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. WELL, IT'S IN YOUR DISTRICT,
SO LET'S LET'S GET RIGHT TO YOU. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND THANK YOU, MR. BATE,
FOR HELPING FIELD QUESTIONS THESE LAST FEW WEEKS. 
          TWO ITEMS I WANTED TO CLARIFY. THERE WAS A BASE PD CONDITIONS THAT EMBEDDED URBAN DESIGN
STANDARDS. 
          AND I KNOW YOU COVERED THIS, YOUR BRIEFING. I JUST WANT TO MAYBE RESTATE IT AND MAKE SURE
I'M FOLLOWING KIND OF WHAT'S BEFORE THE BODY TODAY. 
          THOSE DON'T FIT WITH THE PROPOSED SUBAREA ONE USE,
BUT SUBAREA ONE ALREADY EMBEDDED EXCEPTIONS FOR THE OBSERVATION WHEEL, WHICH IS NO LONGER MOVING FORWARD. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. THERE WERE A NUMBER OF EXCEPTIONS THAT WERE BUILT IN THERE FOR THE AS IT
WAS ORIGINALLY CALLED, I THINK THE REGIONAL OBSERVATION CAMPUS. AND I GUESS JUST AGAIN,
SOME BACKGROUND IN COLOR FOR YOU ALL. 
          THIS PD WAS INITIALLY WRITTEN FOR WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A. 
          AS YOU SEE IN THE CONDITIONS, A REGIONAL OBSERVATION CAMPUS. I THINK THE IDEA WAS TO BUILD
SOMETHING KIND OF LIKE THE LONDON EYE, A LARGE. I DON'T THINK YOU CAN QUITE CALL IT A FERRIS WHEEL,
BUT LARGER THAN THAT. 
          AND SO THERE WERE SOME, PARDON ME, THERE WERE SOME EXEMPTIONS AND CONDITIONAL CHANGES THAT
WERE IN THERE SPECIFIC TO THAT. 
          BECAUSE AGAIN, FOR INSTANCE, HOW DO YOU PUT PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USES ON A,
ON A FERRIS WHEEL? ONE COULD ARGUE ITSELF IS A PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USE,
BUT IT ALREADY DID HAVE SOME CHANGES AND EXEMPTIONS IN THERE. 
          SO I WOULD SAY THAT THE AMENDED CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE TODAY,
IT'S A MIX OF CHANGING WHAT THOSE EXCEPTIONS WERE ALREADY AND SHORING THINGS UP AS WELL, SO THAT THE BULK OF THESE EXCEPTIONS APPLY MAINLY TO THE WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER,
BUT SUPPORTING USES WITHIN THE CAMPUS ARE SUBJECT TO OTHER REQUIREMENTS AS WELL. AND THEN ALL THAT IS BUNDLED WITHIN THAT CAMPUS DEFINITION. 
          SO AGAIN, WITHOUT THE WELLNESS EDUCATION CENTER,
THERE IS NO REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS. 
          AND SO WITHOUT A REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS, IT DEFAULTS TO A WHOLE BUNCH OF THE NORMAL
STANDARDS THAT ARE IN THERE. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND ON THE DEFINITION. I KNOW WE'VE GOT A SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT'S ADDED. 
          ARE YOU AWARE FROM THEIR PRESENTATIONS TO UDAP OR OTHER INFORMATION,
WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED SIZE OF THE CAMPUS? AND AGAIN, I KNOW THEY'RE VERY EARLY IN CONCEPTUAL DESIGN. 
          WE'VE GOT 250,000FT² IN THE ORDINANCE. IS THAT WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING? IS IT LARGER OR IS IT SMALLER? I THINK THAT WOULD BE YEAH,
I THINK THAT WOULD BE BEST FOR THE APPLICANT TO ANSWER. 
          I BELIEVE FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN IN SOME INITIAL SOME INITIAL DOCUMENTATION,
I'LL BE FRANK, IN SOME INITIAL NEWS PRESS COVERAGE, I THINK IT WAS, YOU KNOW, AROUND 300, 350. I'LL SAY LOOKING AS WELL AT JUST SOME
COMPARISONS OF LARGE FITNESS CENTERS. 
          GENERALLY, THEY TEND TO CLOCK IN AROUND 180 170. 
          SOME OF THE LARGEST ONES. I'D SAY 250 DOES PUT A PRETTY GOOD BAR ABOVE THAT. 
          YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IN A FLOOR AREA REQUIREMENT,
IT'S A BALANCING ACT. 
          YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED AND WHAT'S BEING TALKED
ABOUT. 
          AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK IT'S FAIR TO HAVE AT LEAST SOME WIGGLE ROOM AS DESIGNS CHANGE. 
          COULD BE MAYBE A 20% WIGGLE ROOM JUST SO THAT IF SOMETHING GETS A LITTLE SMALLER,
YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME IN FOR A WHOLE AMENDMENT. 
          I DO THINK 250,000 CLEARS THE BAR PRETTY WELL IN TERMS OF WHEN YOU LOOK AT OTHER LARGE
SCALE FITNESS FACILITIES THAT COULD THEORETICALLY INCLUDE A LOT OF WHAT'S DEFINED IN A MENDELSOHN EDUCATION CENTER. BUT CERTAINLY I THINK THE APPLICANT COULD
PROVIDE MORE CLARITY ON WHAT THEIR TARGET FLOOR AREA IS. 
          THANK YOU FOR THIS. AND THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT AS WELL,
BUT THE DEFINITION THAT'S GOT IS CRAFTED AND PROPOSED. 
          IT IS STRUCTURED AROUND THREE MAIN COMPONENTS. 
          ONE IS THE WELLNESS, ONE IS PROGRAMING AND ONE IS THE OUTDOOR SPACE. 
          SO IN ORDER TO BE QUALIFIED AS A REGIONAL WELLNESS CENTER,
WHICH THEN LEADS YOU TO THE CAMPUS, YOU'D HAVE TO MEET ALL THREE OF THOSE CRITERIA. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? YES. SO IT PROVIDES WELLNESS OR EDUCATION PROGRAMING,
WHICH, YOU KNOW, THAT ITSELF IS NOT NECESSARILY DEFINED. 
          BUT I THINK WE CAN TAKE THAT AS A, YOU KNOW,
A LAY DEFINITION OR LAY INTERPRETATION OF WELLNESS PROGRAMING COURSES RELATED TO ARTS, ENTERTAINMENT, NUTRITION, FITNESS, ETC., BOTANY,
AGRICULTURE, IT DOES INCLUDE ALL OF THOSE. 
          [01:00:02]
AND THEN ALSO THAT IT HAS WELLNESS ACTIVITIES SUCH AS THE INDOOR AND OUTDOOR POOLS AND
BEACHES, SPA HEALTH TREATMENTS, SAUNAS AND STEAM ROOMS AND BOTANICAL GARDENS AND TERRACES. 
          ADDITIONALLY, IT DOES SPECIFICALLY DEFINE OUT THAT IT IS NOT A PRIVATE REC CENTER CLUB OR
AREA OR PUBLIC, PRIVATE OR BUSINESS SCHOOL. SO YOU COULDN'T SIMPLY HAVE A SCHOOL IN THERE THAT TEACHES
THINGS AND MAYBE HAS A GYM ON SITE. 
          YOU COULDN'T HAVE A SIMPLE PRIVATE RECREATION CENTER,
CLUB OR AREA. 
          IT HAS TO REALLY, I THINK, PULL IN ALL THOSE COMPONENTS IN ORDER TO QUALIFY. AND IS IT
CORRECT THAT PART OF WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO SENT THROUGH IS TO ADD A CLARIFICATION THAT THE CENTER APPLIES EFFECTIVELY THROUGHOUT SUB DISTRICT ONE. 
          SO THE ORIGINAL EXCLUSIONS WERE ALL AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY,
NOMINALLY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF RIVERFRONT TOWARDS THE TRINITY. 
          AND NOW THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT A LARGER AREA OF SUB DISTRICT ONE,
THEY'VE CLARIFIED THAT IT WILL BE DISPERSED THROUGHOUT THE CAMPUS. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? THAT WAS ONE OF THE WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER CAN BE THROUGHOUT THE
CAMPUS, WHICH IS CONTIGUOUS. PARDON ME. CONTIGUOUS WITH SUB DISTRICT ONE. 
          THANK YOU. AND I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON TWO OTHER OR WELL THREE ACTUALLY ITEMS THERE
MEANDERS THAT ARE REFERENCED IN THE ORIGINAL PD OBVIOUSLY CARRIED FORWARD. THOSE ARE NOW INDICATED ON THE EXHIBIT A,
IS THAT CORRECT? TO GIVE SOME SOME GUIDANCE, I WILL SAY I DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHERE THE MEANDERS WERE
INTENDED TO GO WHEN I FIRST STARTED LOOKING AT THIS. 
          COULD YOU JUST TALK THROUGH KIND OF WHAT THAT CONCEPT IS AND WHY THAT MAY BE IMPORTANT? YES. SO THE MEANDERS, MY UNDERSTANDING, THE MEANDERS ARE KIND OF REMNANTS OF THE OLD
TRINITY RIVER. 
          THERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE FULL ON PROTECTED WATERSHEDS OR I'M GETTING A LITTLE
OUTSIDE OF MY WHEELHOUSE HERE IN TERMS OF, LET'S SAY, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS AND WHATNOT. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY'RE,
YOU KNOW, SENSITIVE WETLAND AREAS THAT WHEN THE PD WAS WRITTEN, I THINK IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PLANS FOR THE DALLAS WATER COMMONS,
ETC. 
          THEY WANTED TO RETAIN THEM AS NATURAL AREAS THAT WOULD BE THAT PEOPLE COULD GO AND STROLL
BY, HOPEFULLY JUST TAKING A BIT OF NATURE, SEE KIND OF HOW THE AREA IN SOME WAYS HOW THE AREA
LOOKED ALL BEFORE SETTLEMENT. 
          ENJOY THE WILDLIFE AND SUCH. BUT THEY'VE THEY WERE INCLUDED IN THE PD AND WITH I THINK THE
BIGGEST THING THAT STOOD OUT IS THERE WERE A LOT OF SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MEANDERS THAT WERE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE GENERAL SETBACKS OR THE TWO ZONES WERE JUST
TO REALLY ENSURE PROTECTION OF THOSE WATER AREAS. 
          THANK YOU. AND IS IT CORRECT THAT WITH THE I'M GOING TO CALL IT THE INTERNAL CIRCULATION? THE TRAILS THAT ARE PROPOSED SOME OF THE BLOCK CONFIGURATIONS THAT THAT'S ALL MEANT TO
ESSENTIALLY KNIT TOGETHER TO HELP PROVIDE IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN AREAS, TRAIL ACCESS YOU KNOW, FORWARD LOOKING TO FUTURE TRINITY RIVER CORRIDOR
IMPROVEMENTS AS WELL. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. TWO OTHER ITEMS. WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN UNUSUAL OCCUPIABLE FLOOR AREA. 
          AND YOU MENTIONED CROSSING RIVERFRONT. AND THEN WE HAVE THE SEPARATE PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGE. 
          IS THE PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGE. I KNOW THE SUP IS BEFORE US. 
          IT'S EFFECTIVELY DEFAULTING BACK TO BASE CODE REQUIREMENTS WHICH WILL SET MAXIMUM WIDTHS,
MAXIMUM HEIGHTS. 
          RELATED TO THAT, THE QUANTITY THAT'S A VERY LARGE AREA THAT IS SHOWN ON WHERE THAT COULD
GO. 
          BUT IS IT CORRECT THAT FUNCTIONALLY YOU COULDN'T GET MORE THAN ONE SKYBRIDGE IN THAT AREA? THAT IS CORRECT. AND MICHAEL I THINK MICHAEL'S DONE A LOT OF SKYBRIDGES. 
          SO IT LOOKS LIKE HIS. YEAH, GEARS ARE TURNING,
BUT I'M PULLING UP THE SKYBRIDGE REGULATIONS. 
          BROADLY THEY'RE PERMITTED IN MOST DISTRICTS WITH AN SUP ONLY. 
          AND THIS IS ALSO APPLICABLE IN THE SUP EXCUSE ME IN IN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS. 
          WE CAN'T OVERRIDE THAT. THERE ARE A LOT OF DESIGN STANDARDS THAT APPLY TO SKYBRIDGE AS
BROADLY, HOW THEY CAN BE TREATED, WHERE THEY CAN BE LOCATED,
WHERE THE SUPPORTS CAN BE LOCATED. 
          AND I THINK AS WELL AS THE SPACING, THOSE CAN BE PROVIDED RELIEF THROUGH THE,
APPROVAL OF THE COUNCIL, ULTIMATELY. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY'LL FOLLOW ALL OF THOSE OR THEY PLAN TO. 
          I'LL SAY THAT WITHIN THE PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGE STANDARDS,
ONE OF THEM IS REGARDLESS OF LENGTH, THEY CANNOT BE MORE THAN 20FT IN WIDTH. I THINK THAT'S ALSO RELATED TO WELL THANK YOU. 
          THERE'S A COUPLE OF PROVISIONS THAT SET WHAT THEIR WIDTHS ARE. 
          SO YEAH, IT DEPENDS ON THE LENGTH OF THE, THERE'S A MINIMUM WIDTH AS WELL. 
          BUT REGARDLESS OF THE LENGTH THEY CANNOT BE MORE THAN 20FT. 
          THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN MINIMUM WIDTH FOR THE LENGTH. 
          AND I KNOW WE DO NOT ADD ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS,
BUT THE GARAGE ITSELF EMBEDS MANY OF THE TYPICAL REQUIREMENTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE. SO PRESUMABLY THEY WOULD HAVE A HOLISTIC APPEARANCE OF
THAT. 
          AND I KNOW THAT'S PART OF SOME SEPARATE APPROVALS. 
          [01:05:02]
OCCUPIABLE FLOOR AREA. COULD YOU SPEAK TO WHAT THAT IS INTENDED TO BE. 
          YES, THE OCCUPIABLE FLOOR AREA. SO WHAT THAT MEANS,
AND THAT'S FOR THE CONNECTION OF A RIVERFRONT. 
          MY UNDERSTANDING FROM WHAT THE APPLICANT EXPLAINED IS THAT THAT PORTION THAT CROSSES OVER
WILL HAVE. 
          I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT DETAILS ON WHICH SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES WOULD GO ON IN THERE,
BUT THE IDEA IS THAT THERE'S SOMETHING IN THERE MORE THAN JUST A CONVEYANCE. 
          IT'S MORE THAN JUST CARPETING. AND EVEN IF YOU PUT CHAIRS AND WHATNOT IN THERE TO GIVE AN
EXAMPLE, FOR INSTANCE, WHEN WE LOOK AT SOME OF OUR HOSPITAL COMPLEXES IN I THINK BAYLOR IS A GOOD
EXAMPLE. 
          I THINK THEY DO HAVE 1 OR 2 SKYBRIDGE PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGES PROPER WHERE ALL IT IS IS A
CONVEYANCE BETWEEN TWO BUILDINGS, BUT THEY DO HAVE ADDITIONAL PORTIONS OF THEIR OVERALL HOSPITAL FACILITY THAT IF YOU LOOK
AT IT FROM THE OUTSIDE, YOU THINK THAT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE A SKYBRIDGE. BUT WITHIN THAT WITHIN THAT STRUCTURE,
THERE'S DOCTOR'S OFFICES, LABORATORIES, IMAGING ROOMS SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. 
          I CAN'T TELL YOU SPECIFICALLY WHAT'S IN THOSE,
BUT IT'S CONSIDERED PART OF THE MAIN USE OVERALL. 
          AND WHEN IT COMES TO THAT, THE CITY DOES NOT READ THOSE AS PEDESTRIAN SKY BRIDGES. 
          THEY READ THEM AS PART OF THE MAIN USE. AGAIN,
THE I THINK PART OF THE CONSIDERATION THAT THESE ARE EVEN SUBJECT TO CPS IS, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE CONCERN AROUND PEDESTRIAN LEVEL ACTIVATION STREET LEVEL
ACTIVATION. 
          I THINK WHEN THIS WAS PROMULGATED, IT WAS PROBABLY MOSTLY FOCUSED ON DOWNTOWN MORE THAN
ANYTHING ELSE. 
          AND SO IT, I THINK IT WAS WRITTEN WITH THAT IN MIND. 
          HENCE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE THE MAIN USE OCCURRING WITHIN THAT STRUCTURE CROSSING OVER A
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, THEN FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, I, I'M SOMEWHAT PONTIFICATING HERE BECAUSE I WASN'T
THERE WHEN THEY WROTE THIS REQUIREMENT, BUT MY GUESS IS THAT THEY FIGURED, WELL, IF IT'S PART OF THE MAIN USE,
IT'S NOT TAKING AWAY FROM THE PEDESTRIAN LEVEL ACTIVATION BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S JUST PART OF THE MAIN USE, RIGHT? BUT IT'S A FUNCTIONALLY IT'S PART OF THE PROGRAM. 
          IT'S GOING TO CONNECT THE TWO SECTIONS OF SUBDISTRICT,
ONE THAT FORM THE CAMPUS. 
          AND IT WAS REQUESTED TO BE CONSIDERED BECAUSE IT'S A CORE FUNCTION IN CONNECTING THE
CAMPUS AS A WHOLE. 
          AND THAT'S IS IT CORRECT THAT THE PROVISIONS ARE WRITTEN IN HERE? TALK ABOUT ITS WIDTH, IT'S HEIGHT, HOW IT IS INTEGRATED WITH THE OVERALL ARCHITECTURAL
EXPRESSION SO THAT IT CONTRIBUTES TO THE PUBLIC REALM. 
          THAT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A COMMENT. I'LL APOLOGIZE TO MY CHAIR. 
          YEAH. ANYONE ELSE QUESTIONS? YEAH. OKAY. MR. CARPENTER,
I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER IS REQUIRED IN THE FIRST PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. 
          YES. THE PHASING? YES. AND IT HAS TO BE 250,000FT² MINIMUM. 
          AND IT HAS TO OCCUR NORTH AND SOUTH OF RIVERFRONT. 
          AND IF THAT DOESN'T GET BUILT, THEN THE CAMPUS DOESN'T HAPPEN. 
          CORRECT. THE CAMPUS HAS TO HAVE A WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER. 
          IF IT DOESN'T HAVE WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER,
YOU DON'T HAVE A CAMPUS. THANK YOU, MR. HALL. MR.. IT WAS PART OF PART OF YOUR DEPARTMENT'S DELIBERATIONS ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THIS CASE. DID YOU LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF EXTREME WEATHER
EVENTS OR SERIOUS FLOODING IN THIS PART OF TOWN? I'LL SAY NO. AND I DON'T SAY THAT AS IN, OH,
WE DON'T THINK ABOUT THAT SORT OF THING. 
          BUT THE FACT IS THAT IN TERMS OF, LET'S SAY,
EITHER WEATHER OR READINESS FOR, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT GLASS STRUCTURE, RIGHT? THAT WE'VE SEEN ON THE RENDERINGS AS WELL AS FLOODPLAIN REQUIREMENTS AND
WHATNOT, THAT JUST GENERALLY OCCURS DOWNSTREAM OF THE ZONING PROCESS THAT OCCURS MORE AT PERMITTING
WHERE THE ACTUAL FLOODPLAIN ENGINEERS, ETC.. LOOK AT THE PROPOSED PROJECT. BUILDING CODE LOOKS AT THE PROPOSED PROJECT. 
          DFR LOOKS AT IT. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ARE GOING TO BE BETTER SUITED TO DETERMINE IF IF A
PROJECT IS ACTUALLY VIABLE OR IF IT NEEDS CHANGES TO ACCOMMODATE ANY STATUTORY OR ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS. IT JUST,
IT WOULD BE, I THINK IT WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF OUR SCOPE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION AT THIS STAGE. AND I THINK THAT GETS INTO, I'LL SAY,
PART OF WHY WE WANTED TO SHORE UP THESE REQUIREMENTS AND THESE CONDITIONS IN HERE, BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE COME UP WITH A PD OR WITH A REZONING WHERE FOR WHATEVER REASON,
SOMETHING JUST FALLS THROUGH. 
          RIGHT. I MEAN, IT COULD BE AS SIMPLE AS A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. IT COULD BE A PROJECT LIKE
THIS. AND OUR FIRST THOUGHT, WHENEVER WE LOOK AT A ZONING CASE, WHETHER IT'S A GENERAL ZONING CHANGE OR A PD IS,
WELL, IF IT'S PART OF IF IT'S COMING AS PART OF A PROPOSED PROJECT,
WHAT'S LEFT IN THE AFTERMATH IF THAT PROPOSAL FALLS THROUGH? WE SEE THIS WITH GENERAL ZONING CHANGES, FOR INSTANCE,
WHERE THE APPLICANT COULD BE PROPOSING THE ZONING CHANGE FOR ONE PARTICULAR USE THAT THEY 
          [01:10:03]
HAVE IN MIND. BUT THE ZONING DISTRICT ITSELF COULD ALLOW A WHOLE HOST OF USES. 
          SO WE KIND OF LOOK AT THAT HOLISTICALLY AND SAY,
WELL, IF THIS DOESN'T OCCUR, THEN WHAT ARE WE LEFT WITH? AND DO WE FIND THAT COMPATIBLE? SO IN THIS CASE,
YOU KNOW, WE I THINK THOSE ARE ALL VALID CONCERNS. 
          THEY'LL BE ADDRESSED DOWNSTREAM AND PERMITTING. 
          AND IF FOR WHATEVER REASON, IF BASED ON ALL THAT THE PROJECT ISN'T VIABLE,
WE'D STILL BE LEFT WITH A STRONG PD THAT DOESN'T PROVIDE ALL THESE EXEMPTIONS TO WHATEVER ELSE WOULD COME IN. DOES THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION OR THE CONCERN? YES. THERE'S THERE IS COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS GOING ON IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THIS THIS
LOT BETWEEN IT AND THE RIVER ITSELF HAS THERE. ARE YOU AWARE,
HAS THERE BEEN ANY FLOODING OF THOSE BUSINESSES DOWN THERE? I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY FLOODING. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT HAS ANYTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH
OUR VOTE, BUT. AND I WOULD ASSUME THAT THERE'S BEEN CONSIDERATION GIVEN TO THAT YOU KNOW,
IN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT. 
          AND ONE FINAL QUESTION. IT'S NOT THIS BODY'S RECOMMENDATION TO WORRY ABOUT CONSTRUCTION
STANDARDS FOR A GIANT GLASS DOME. 
          IS THAT SOMETHING FOR PERMITTING AS WELL, OR. 
          YEP. THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE REVIEWED AT PERMITTING. 
          THAT WOULD BE UNDER, I MEAN, IT WOULD BE A, IT WOULD BE UNDER SOME SORT OF INTERNATIONAL
BUILDING CODE. 
          I COULDN'T TELL YOU WHICH SECTIONS AND WHATNOT. IT'LL PROBABLY BE A PRETTY NOVEL PERMIT
FOR THEM. 
          I DON'T THINK WE'VE HAD TOO MANY STRUCTURES KIND OF LIKE THIS BEFORE. BUT AT THE SAME
TIME, I'M SURE THAT THROUGH THEIR, THROUGH THEIR REVIEW PROCESS AND I THINK THE EXTENSIVE
KNOWLEDGE THEY HAVE, BOTH OF THE CODE WE HAVE AND I'M SURE CONTACTS IN OTHER PLACES AND OTHER JURISDICTIONS
THAT HAVE WORKED WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO GIVE IT A THOROUGH REVIEW AND ENSURE THAT IT MEETS STANDARDS FOR
ENGINEERING AND SAFETY. 
          SO OUR CHARGE IS JUST TO JUST TO CONSIDER THE LAND USE IMPLICATIONS AND NOT CONSTRUCTION
OR WEATHER RELATED. 
          THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY,
ONWARD TO MOVE CASE NUMBER 17. 
          MR. KINGSTON, DO YOU WANT A BRIEFING THERE? ANY QUESTIONS? YOU'RE HOLDING IT. OKAY. IT'S BEING HELD. DO WE HAVE A DATE? TWO WEEKS. SO SEPTEMBER 3RD. OKAY. CASES. CASE 18. 
          MR. HAMPTON. NEED A BRIEFING ON THAT ONE. ANYONE ELSE QUESTIONS? AND OUR LAST ZONING CASE ON OUR AGENDA, CASE NUMBER 19. 
          COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, WOULD YOU LIKE A BRIEFING? OKAY. DOES ANYONE ELSE NEED A BRIEFING OR HAVE QUESTIONS? OKAY. THAT WILL CONCLUDE THE BRIEFING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION. 
          IT IS 11:44 A.M.. WE WILL BE BACK AT 1230 FOR OUR PUBLIC HEARING. 
          ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. IT IS THURSDAY,
AUGUST 20TH, 2026 AT 12:33 P.M. 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
AND THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING OF THE DALLAS CITY PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          CAN WE START WITH THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE? GOOD AFTERNOON,
COMMISSIONERS DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SIMS, I'M HERE. DISTRICT TWO, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. 
          DISTRICT THREE VICE CHAIR HERBERT PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT FOUR. 
          COMMISSIONER GILBERT SMITH HERE. DISTRICT FIVE. 
          COMMISSIONER SERRATO HERE. DISTRICT SIX, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER,
DISTRICT PRESENT. 
          SORRY. DISTRICT SEVEN, COMMISSIONER WHEELER REAGAN. DISTRICT EIGHT. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN PRESENT. DISTRICT NINE. 
          COMMISSIONER KOONTZ HERE. DISTRICT TEN. COMMISSIONER. 
          HOUSE RIGHT HERE. DISTRICT 11, COMMISSIONER COX DISTRICT 12 COMMISSIONER KAUFMAN DISTRICT
13 COMMISSIONER HALL, DISTRICT 14 COMMISSIONER KINGSTON AND PLACE 15. 
          CHAIRMAN. I'M HERE. THANK YOU SIR. MAKE SURE THE MICROPHONE IS OFF. 
          OKAY. THAT SEEMS BETTER. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU EVERYONE SO MUCH FOR JOINING US TODAY. 
          JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HOUSEKEEPING. IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK TO US AND PROVIDE PUBLIC
COMMENT, PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF THOSE YELLOW CARDS DOWN TO MY LEFT. 
          YOUR RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A RECORD OF WHO'S BEEN HERE TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY. 
          AND ALSO START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. 
          OUR RULES ALLOW FOR EACH CASE THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER,
WHICH WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO FLEX UP OR DOWN, DEPENDING ON THE CASE. AND IF THERE IS OPPOSITION ON THE CASE,
OUR RULES ALLOW FOR THE APPLICANT TO HAVE A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL PERIOD. 
          SO WITH THAT, WE WILL GET INTO OUR AGENDA. AND COMMISSIONER HALL,
DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE PREVIOUS MINUTES? 
          [APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
I DO, MR. CHAIR. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 6TH,
2026, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 
          [01:15:10]
MEETING AS POSTED ON AUGUST 6TH, 2026. GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HALL. COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT,
FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NUMBER ONE. PRESENT. 
          I. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR. COMMISSIONER AND ALL. 
          [1. 26-2654A An application for an amendment for Specific Use Permit No. 2602 for retirement housing on property zoned TH-2(A) Townhouse District 2, on the east line of S. Westmoreland Road, south of Watership Lane. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Aron Eaquinto Representative: Robert Baldwin Planner: Hema Sharma Council District: 3 MZ-26-000015]
ITEM ONE. MS DASH 26-000015. AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR AMENDMENT FOR SPECIFIC USE PERMIT
NUMBER 2602 FOR RETIREMENT HOUSING ON PROPERTY ZONE TS2A TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT TWO ON THE EAST LINE
OF SOUTH WESTMORELAND ROAD, SOUTH OF WATERSHIP LANE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. 
          APPROVAL. THANK YOU, MISS SHARMA. MR. BALDWIN. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON. ROB BALDWIN, 3904 ELM STREET,
SUITE B, HERE, REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER. 
          THIS IS A MINOR AMENDMENT TO A SUP SITE PLAN FOR RETIREMENT. 
          RETIREMENT COMMUNITY. THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN. 
          WE MISLABELED THE DOG PARK. IT'S STILL IN THE SAME LOCATION,
BUT WE DIDN'T LABEL IT PROPERLY. 
          WE'RE ADDING A SMALL ACCESSORY BUILDING AND WE'RE TAKING AMENITY CENTER WITH THE POOL AND
SPLITTING THE BUILDINGS FROM ONE BUILDING TO TWO BUILDINGS. 
          I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. I HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS REQUEST. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, MR. BALDWIN. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER TWO? ITEM NUMBER ONE. OKAY. SEEING NONE, COMMISSIONER OR VICE CHAIR? HERBERT, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES. IN CASE 262654AMZ2600015000015. I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE MISCELLANEOUS ZONING ITEM AS PRESENTED IN DOCKET. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION. VICE CHAIR HERBERT,
FOR YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER. CARPENTER. ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA,
WHICH, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO DON'T KNOW, 
          [Zoning Cases - Consent]
ALL THE CASES ARE TAKEN UP AND WOULD BE APPROVED OF IN A SINGLE MOTION UNLESS SOMEONE
WANTS ONE OF THEM CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY. 
          OUR DOCKET WAS ORIGINALLY NOTICED TO HAVE ITEMS TWO THROUGH EIGHT CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY
OR CONSIDERED ON CONSENT. 
          BUT ITEMS FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, AND EIGHT HAVE BEEN ALREADY BEEN PULLED OFF FOR INDIVIDUAL
CONSIDERATION. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WANTS ITEMS TWO, THREE,
OR FOUR CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY? OR ARE WE GOOD TO LEAVE THEM ON CONSENT AND HAVE THEM DISPOSED OF IN A SINGLE MOTION? SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEMS TWO, 3 OR 4,
WE WOULD NEED TO PULL THEM OFF THE CONSENT. 
          SO LET US KNOW NOW. ALL RIGHT THEN MISTER PEPE,
CAN YOU READ THE CONSENT AGENDA OR THE CONSENT DOCKET INTO THE RECORD? ITEM TWO IS Z 2600144. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXPANSION OF
SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. 
          2549 FOR A PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGE ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ONE,
ONE, ONE, TWO AND MU THREE MIXED USE DISTRICT ON THE RIGHT OF WAY ON HARRY HINES BOULEVARD BETWEEN
PLANTATION ROAD AND RECORD CROSSING ROAD, ALSO KNOWN AS SIX 300 HARRY HINES BOULEVARD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO
AN AMENDED SITE PLAN. 
          ITEM THREE IS Z 26000106. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A UTILITY OR
GOVERNMENT INSTALLATION OTHER THAN LISTED ON PROPERTY ZONED A AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH AND WEST LINES OF BLANCO DRIVE, EAST OF BONNYVIEW ROAD. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED. 
          ITEM FOUR IS Z 26000138. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR R5A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON PROPERTY
ZONED R 7.5. 
          A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ROAD AND NORTH MASTERS DRIVE. STAFF
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU, MR. PEPE. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEMS TWO,
3 OR 4 OR CONSENT AGENDA? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON,
DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA,
ITEMS TWO, THREE AND FOUR, AS READ INTO THE RECORD, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE CASES FOR
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND STATED CONDITIONS. 
          [01:20:01]
GREAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER KAUFMAN,
FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE. 
          [5. 26-2658A An application for an amendment to Planned Development District No. 439, on the east line of S. Polk Street, between W. Brooklyn Avenue and W. Pembroke Avenue, [AKA 1002 W. Brooklyn Avenue]. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to amended conditions and an amended development plan. Applicant: Tereso Ortiz / Casa Guanajuato Representative: Adair Aranda Planner: Oscar Aguilera Council District: 1 Z-26-000123]
THIS IS ITEM FIVE IS Z 26000123. IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT NUMBER 439 ON THE EAST LINE OF SOUTH POLK STREET BETWEEN WEST BROOKLYN AVENUE AND WEST PEMBROKE AVENUE,
ALSO KNOWN AS 1002 WEST BROOKLYN AVE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS AS BRIEFED AND DISTRIBUTED
AND IN AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 
          THANK YOU, MR. PEPE. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE? ADDRESS IS 1030 CEDAR HILL AVENUE. I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE CLIENT WHO IS ALSO HERE. 
          I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. GREAT. THANK YOU. 
          ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF ITEM NUMBER FIVE? I'M SORRY. MR. TERESO DOES NEED AN INTERPRETER FOR THIS. 
          HE'S GOING TO MAKE HIS COMMENTS IN SPANISH PERFECT. 
          AND UNDER OUR RULES, IF IF SOMEONE IS USING AN INTERPRETER. 
          I BELIEVE THE TIME GOES UP TO SIX MINUTES FROM THE USUAL THREE. 
          GRACIAS. MUY BUENAS TARDES. MI NOMBRE ES TERESO ORTIZ. 
          DIRECTOR. FUNDADOR. PRESIDENT DE DALLAS. MEXICO. 
          CASA. GUANAJUATO. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          HIS NAME IS ORTIZ. HE'S THE DIRECTOR AND FOUNDER OF CASA GUANAJUATO. 
          SOLAMENTE QUIERO EXPRESAR TRES PUNTOS. UNO LA RAZON POR LA ESTE CENTRO SE HACE LA
CREACION. 
          HE JUST WANTED TO BRING UP THREE POINTS. ONE IS THE REASON THEY'RE REQUESTING THE REZONING
OR THE AMENDMENT. 
          NUMERO DOS HEMOS HECHO EN LOS DOS ANOS DE VIDA DE ESTA CORPORACION. 
          SECOND, WHAT THEY'VE DONE FOR THE 32 YEARS THAT THIS ORGANIZATION HAS BEEN HERE. 
          E ES LO Q PENSAMOS Y CON SEGUIR ADELANTE DE LA MANO DE NUESTRA CIUDAD DE DALLAS. AND FINALLY, WHAT THEY HOPE TO CONTINUE DOING IN THE FUTURE WITH THE CITY'S
SUPPORT. 
          DE SEPTIEMBRE DE CUATRO AYE DE UN GRUPO PEQUENO NOMBRADO COMPANEROS UNIDOS DE OCAMPO NACE CASA GUANAJUATO EN LA CIUDAD DE DALLAS. ON SEPTEMBER 18TH 19. 
          1990 QUATTRO. 1994 SMALL GROUP. STARTED. GUANAJUATO. 
          DALLAS. MEXICO. CASA. GUANAJUATO. MEXICO. CASA. 
          GUANAJUATO. E SU MISION. OBJETIVOS ES NUEVE DE ELLOS. 
          NO LO MENCIONO PORQUE ES MUY AMPLIO, PERO BASADO EN ESOS OBJETIVOS Y ESA MISSION CASA A LA FECHA ESTA TRABAJANDO MENCIONAR LUEGO UNOS DOS. 
          THEY HAVE NINE SORT OF OBJECTIVES OR MISSIONS THAT HE'S NOT GOING TO ENUMERATE. 
          BUT THIS IS WHAT THEY'VE BEEN WHAT THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON AND PROMOTING SINCE THEIR
FOUNDING. 
          AND HE'LL GO INTO DETAIL ON A COUPLE CASA GUANAJUATO ESTA PARA TODOS SEEING NONE POR LA
RAZA CREDO O PRETENSIONS DE COLORES CASA. GUANAJUATO IS OPEN TO EVERYONE, REGARDLESS OF RACE,
CREED OR COLOR. 
          LA FAMILIA PRINCIPAL PARA RESOLVER CUALQUIER PROBLEMA EN NUESTRA COMUNIDAD. 
          HE BELIEVES FAMILY IS THE WAY TO RESOLVE ANY PROBLEMS THAT OCCUR IN THE COMMUNITY. 
          MANTENER UN LUGAR EN NUESTRA COMUNIDAD SE CULTIVE Y SE CAPACITY MANTENER UN LUGAR EN NUESTRA COMUNIDAD SE CULTIVE Y SE CAPACITY TO HAVE A PLACE WHERE OUR COMMUNITY CAN SORT OF
CULTIVATE AND THRIVE. 
          [01:25:08]
DE AGOSTO DE PROXIMO SE SE ABRE FISICAMENTE EN EL DIA DE HOY ES BROOKLYN DE LA CALLE, WEST BROOKLYN, AND NORTHCLIFF SE ABREN LAS PUERTAS DE ESTE CENTRO. 
          ON AUGUST 30TH, IT'LL BE AUGUST 30TH. SE ABRE LAS PUERTAS DEL CENTRO AND OPENING UP ON BROOKLYN. THIS. WEST BROOKLYN. 1002 WEST BROOKLYN. 
          DESDE LA FECHA ESTAMOS TRABAJANDO PARA AYUDAR AL PROXIMO A QUIEN VAYA PARA AYUDAR ESTA DESDE ENTONCES PARA ESCUCHAR A LA COMUNIDAD. 
          YO DE TRES ASPECTOS MAS IMPORTANTES NUMERO UNO EDUCACION. 
          PARA OKAY. DE AGOSTO SE ABRE EL CENTRO FISICO. 
          30TH OF AUGUST IS WHEN THE CENTER WILL OPEN OR HOPES TO OPEN. 
          SI SE HAN LLEVADO A CABO ACTIVIDADES PARA AYUDAR A LA COMUNIDAD EN TRES ASPECTOS. 
          AND WITH THAT, THEY WANT TO HAVE PUT ON SOME ACTIVITIES TO HELP THE COMMUNITY IN THREE
DIFFERENT ASPECTS ESPECIALMENTE EN EDUCACION CULTURA Y DEPORTE. THEY WANT TO FOCUS ON EDUCATION, SPORT AND CULTURE. 
          ADELANTE EL CRECIMIENTO HABIDO LA NECESIDAD DE AMPLIAR LOS SERVICIOS PARA MUCHOS OTROS ACTIVOS. AND THROUGH THAT, THEY'VE FOUND A NEED TO EXPAND THOSE SERVICES TO TO A BROADER,
BROADER SET OF SERVICES. 
          SUBIENDO EN LA COMUNIDAD NO SOLAMENTE LATINA LA COMUNIDAD DALLAS FORWARD ES UN
CRECIMIENTO. 
          TENGO LA EXPERIENCIA DE CINCO ANOS EN DALLAS VIVIENDO POR ESO CONOZCO BIEN ESTA PASANDO. 
          HE KNOWS THAT THE CITY ITSELF IS GROWING, AND REGARDLESS OF WHO'S COMING HERE,
HE'S GOT 55 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY. 
          EN ESTOS ANOS. PUES HEMOS VISTO Q HACE FALTA UN CAMBIO NO SOLAMENTE ESTRUCTURAL EN LO FISICO, PERO TAMBIÉN ESTRUCTURAL EN OTROS ASPECTOS. 
          AND I'VE SEEN OVER THE YEARS THAT THERE'S A NEED FOR CHANGE,
NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, IN THE STRUCTURE AND ALL THAT, BUT IN OTHER ASPECTS OF THE SITE AS WELL. YOLANDA DEL PUNTO NUMERO THREE ES LO VOY A PONER
A LA CIUDAD PARA Q NO SOPORTE NO PODEMOS LOGRAR ESTE CRECIMIENTO SENCILLO,
PERO ES NECESARIO. 
          AND THIS THIRD POINT IS THAT HE JUST HOPES THAT HE CAN GET THE CITY'S SUPPORT ON THIS FOR
THEIR EXPANSION THAT THEY BELIEVE IS CRITICAL TO THEIR MISSION. 
          QUÉ NO SOLAMENTE LA CIUDAD DE DALLAS SE UTILIZA EN NUESTRO ESPACIO DE VEZ EN CUANDO CUANDO
HAY ALGUNA NECESIDAD EN EL BARRIO PARA REUNIR A LA A LA COMUNIDAD, TAMBIÉN SE OFRECE EN MUCHOS OTROS ASPECTOS. 
          HE POINTS OUT THAT THE CITY HAS UTILIZED THEIR SPACE THEMSELVES FOR PUTTING TOGETHER
COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND OTHER OTHER FUNCTIONS, AND THAT IT'S OPEN TO OTHERS AS WELL TO USE IT. 
          AGRADEZCO LA VERDAD Y EN LO FISICO GUSTAN CONOCER EL CENTRO Y UN EQUIPO IN UNION PODAMOS SACARLE MAS PROVECHO DE NUESTRA COMUNIDAD. 
          HE SAYS THANK YOU FOR, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 
          HE HOPES TO THAT YOU ALL WILL TAKE A LOOK AND SEE THE PLACE AND AND MEET THE TEAM AND
UNDERSTAND THE MISSION THEY'RE DOING. 
          MUCHAS GRACIAS. USTED SU DIRECCION DE DIRECCION DE CASA DE OFICINA DE DOS WEST BROOKLYN AVENUE, DALLAS, TEXAS 70. CINCO DOS ZERO. MUCHAS GRACIAS. 
          ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF ITEM FIVE? COME ON DOWN. OKAY. 
          OKAY. HELLO, I'M LUCY BOCANEGRA. MY ADDRESS IS 918 HARTSDALE. 
          DALLAS, TEXAS 75211. I SERVE ON THE BOARD OF CASA GUANAJUATO AS THEIR TREASURER. 
          [01:30:04]
I'LL ABBREVIATE IS CASA GTO. FOR US THAT AREN'T BILINGUAL. 
          I AM HOPING THAT YOU WILL SUPPORT THE, THE CHANGES THAT WE ARE REQUESTING BECAUSE THERE
HAS BEEN OVER 32 YEARS, A LOT OF GROWTH AND A LOT OF SERVICE THAT WE'VE BEEN PROVIDING TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          EVERYTHING FROM PHYSICAL FITNESS ACTIVITIES. WE'VE HAD EVERYTHING FROM WE STILL HAVE
BOXING ALL THESE YEARS AND WE'VE HAD ZUMBA. 
          WE HAD ALL KINDS OF THINGS TO TRY TO BRIDGE THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, KIND OF LIKE BLEND AND YOU KNOW,
STILL PROVIDE CULTURAL EVENTS, ART, ALL KINDS OF THINGS. 
          AND WITH THE GROWTH OF THE CITY AND THE GROWTH OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ALL THE DIVERSITY,
WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO BE MORE INVITING AND TO THE, TO THE NEW COMMUNITY ALSO THAT'S COMING IN WITH THE GROWTH. 
          SO WITH THAT SAID, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL GIVE US,
GRANT US THAT CHANGE THAT WE WANT. 
          AND WE ALSO INVITE YOU TO COME OUT AND TAKE A LOOK AT CASA GUANAJUATO AND EVERYTHING IT
OFFERS EVERYTHING FROM GED CLASSES, ESL, ALL KINDS OF STUFF. I MEAN, IT'S JUST A REALLY BEAUTIFUL PLACE THAT IS WELCOMING. 
          AND ONE THING THAT THE DIRECTOR ALWAYS SAYS IS CASA IS FOR EVERYBODY. 
          SO BASICALLY NUESTRA CASA ES SU CASA. AND SO Y'ALL ARE WELCOME TO COME AND VISIT AND SEE
WHAT WE HAVE GOING ON. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? COME ON DOWN. HELLO. MY NAME IS RUBEN HERRERA AND I'M I ACTUALLY VOLUNTEER AT CASA GUANAJUATO. I'VE BEEN THERE FOR SIX YEARS. 
          I'M THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS THERE. 
          SO WHAT WE DO IN CASA GUANAJUATO FOR THE EDUCATIONAL AREA,
WE TEACH GED EXAM PREPARATION CLASSES, CITIZENSHIP CLASSES, ESL CLASSES, AND COMPUTER CLASSES. 
          ALSO MICROSOFT EXCEL FOR SMALL BUSINESSES. SO WE TEACH OUR COMMUNITY,
ESPECIALLY OUR LATINO COMMUNITY, TO, YOU KNOW, WITH THEIR EDUCATION AND ALSO BE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS. 
          CASA GUANAJUATO IS ALWAYS BEEN KNOWN FOR ALSO THEIR CULTURAL PROGRAMS AND ALSO ALL THE
ROOMS THAT WE HAVE THERE AT CASA GUANAJUATO. 
          MR TERESA, HE JUST LOANED THEM FOR FREE. LIKE HE TAKES NO MONEY. 
          HE TAKES NO PROFIT. HE'LL DO THAT FOR FREE. THE ROOMS,
EVERYTHING THAT HE GOES WITH ELECTRICITY, WATER, AC TABLES, CHAIRS, HE JUST LOANED THEM JUST TO PRETTY MUCH ANYBODY WHO ASKS FOR A
ROOM, ESPECIALLY FOR A CITY EVENT OR A COMMUNITY EVENT. 
          AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THIS, AND I JUST WANTED TO VOUCH FOR HIM AND FOR CASA GUANAJUATO. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND CAN YOU PROVIDE YOUR ADDRESS? YES. 
          MY ADDRESS IS 2430 8TH APRIL LANE, AND I LIVE IN GRAND PRAIRIE,
TEXAS, 75050. 
          THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF ITEM NUMBER FIVE? SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION. OKAY. COMMISSIONER SIMS,
DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. IN THE MATTER OF CASE NUMBER Z-26-00123. 
          I MOVE TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL,
SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS AS DISTRIBUTED AND BRIEFED, AND AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER SIMS, YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER SERRATO. ANY DISCUSSION? JUST A BRIEF DISCUSSION, MR. CHAIR. JUST WITH THANKS,
MR. BAIT, FOR AN AMAZING JOB OF TRANSLATING THAT ONE SMALL THING GOT LOST IN TRANSLATION THAT
THEY'RE NOT OPENING ON AUGUST 30TH OF THIS YEAR, BUT AUGUST 30TH THIS YEAR WILL BE THE 31ST ANNIVERSARY OF WHAT IS TRULY A FACILITY. 
          THAT IS A HEARTBEAT OF THIS COMMUNITY. AND SO I THINK,
MR. CHAIR, WHAT WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO HERE TODAY IS NOT ONLY HELP OUT A TREMENDOUS
FACILITY, BUT FIX A VERY STRANGE PD. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S A GREAT TWOFER,
AND I URGE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO SUPPORT IT. 
          THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. SEEING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX. ITEM NUMBER SIX IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW
SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC 
          [6. 26-2659A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise or food store greater than 3,500 square feet on a property zoned CR Commercial Retail District with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the north line of Bruton Road, west of Prairie Creek Road, [AKA 9009 Bruton Road]. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: Ortega LMMM Interests Limited Partnership / Roade Properties, Ltd. Representative: Jeniffer Hiromoto Planner: Oscar Aguilera Council District: 5 Z-26-000147]
BEVERAGES IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE. 
          GREATER THAN 3500FT² ON A PROPERTY ZONED CR COMMERCIAL RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A D1 CONTROL
OVERLAY LOCATED ON THE NORTH LINE OF BURTON ROAD, WEST OF PRAIRIE CREEK ROAD ALSO KNOWN AS 9009
BURTON ROAD. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS. 
          [01:35:07]
MISS HIRAMOTO. GOOD AFTERNOON. JENNIFER HIRAMOTO 10233 EAST NORTHWEST HIGHWAY. 
          I'M HERE FOR QUESTIONS. GREAT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON ITEM NUMBER FIVE OR ITEM
SIX? OKAY. SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONERS. OKAY. COMMISSIONER SERRATO,
DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? YES, I DO, MR. CHAIR. AND THE MATTER OF OF CSEA 26000147. 
          I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS,
WITH NO ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER SERRATO YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER SIMS. ANY
DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. 
          [7. 26-2660A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise or food store 3,500 square feet or less, on property zoned CR Commercial Retail District with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the southeast corner of Great Trinity Forest Way and Forsythe Drive, [AKA 7602 Great Trinity Forest Way]. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: Prabin Shakya / S Great Trinity Forest Way LLC. Representative: Baldwin Associates / Rob Baldwin Planner: Oscar Aguilera Council District: 8 Z-26-000148]
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALES OF
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE IN CONJUNCTION WITH GENERAL MERCHANDISE. 
          FOOD STORE 3500FT² OR LESS ON A PROPERTY ZONED CR COMMERCIAL RETAIL DISTRICT WITH A LIQUOR
CONTROL OVERLAY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF GREAT TRINITY FOREST WAY AND A FROSTY DRIVE,
ALSO KNOWN AS 7602 GREAT TRINITY FOREST WAY. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. 
          MR. BALDWIN, GOOD AFTERNOON, ROB BALDWIN, 3904 ELM STREET,
SUITE B. 
          I'VE ASKED THAT THIS BE HELD TO GIVE ME TIME TO WORK WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON A COUPLE OF
ITEMS REGARDING OUR PROXIMITY TO A CHURCH AND THE, THE BEST WAY TO IDENTIFY THE SITE FOR YOU HEARD ABOUT THE,
THE QUESTION ABOUT THE SIGN AND THINKING MAYBE THERE'S ANOTHER WAY TO MAKE SURE THE NEIGHBORS KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THIS IS. 
          SO I WOULD I'M FINE WITH HOLDING THIS UNDER ADVISEMENT. 
          I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT OF ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION. NO FURTHER SPEAKERS. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. AND THE MATTER OF Z-26-000148. I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THE
MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL SEPTEMBER 17TH, 2026. GREAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSE RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. IN THE MATTER OF CASE Z,
THE STAFF WILL READ IT IN. 
          [8. 26-2661A An application for D(A) Duplex District on property zoned R-10(A) Single Family District, on the southwest corner of Seaton Drive and Humphrey Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: Juan Rankin [KJBJ Enterprises LLC], Antonio Everette {AE Equity Group LLC] Representative: Matthew Meals [Verdunity] Planner: Martin Bate Council District: 4 Z-26-000146]
THEN WE'LL GO TO SPEAKERS. THEN WE'LL GO TO YOU FOR A MOTION. 
          ALL GOOD. DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. I DON'T. NUMBER EIGHT IS AN APPLICATION FOR A D A DUPLEX
DISTRICT ON A PROPERTY ZONE. 
          R TEN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DRIVE AND HUMPHREY DRIVE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL. THANK YOU. MR. AGUILERA? ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT? SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION. OKAY. SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER GILBERT SMITH,
YOUR MOTION IN THE MATTER OF CASE Z 26000148. I MOVE TO HOLD THE CASE UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL SEPTEMBER 3RD. 
          OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER GILBERT SMITH FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSE. RIGHT. FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NUMBER NINE. 
          [9. 26-2662A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a general merchandise or food store greater than 3,500 square feet on property zoned CS Commercial Service District with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, on the west corner of C. F. Hawn Fwy. and S. Woody Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: 14020 CF Hawn FWY, LLC / Shzeb Daredia U/A From: April 23, 2026. Planner: Justin Lee Council District: 8 Z-25-000228]
AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES IN
CONJUNCTION WITH A GENERAL MERCHANDISE OR FOOD STORE GREATER THAN 3500FT² ON PROPERTY ZONED CS COMMERCIAL SERVICE DISTRICT. WITH THE D1 LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY ON THE WEST
CORNER OF CF HORNES FREEWAY AND SOUTH WOODY ROAD, STAFFORD. CONDITION APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. 
          GREAT. THANK YOU. MR. LEE, IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF ITEM NUMBER NINE? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? NO SPEAKERS. SO WE'LL GO TO YOU,
COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, FOR ANOTHER MOTION. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. IN THE MATTER OF Z-26-000228,
I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL NOVEMBER 19TH, 2026. THAT'S NOVEMBER 19TH. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN,
FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. 
          [01:40:05]
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. ITEM NUMBER TEN. AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A
BAR, 
          [10. 26-2663A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for a bar, lounge, or tavern on property zoned Tract A within Planned Development District No. 269, Deep Ellum/Near East Side District, on the south line of Elm Street, west of N. Crowdus Street, [AKA 2650 Elm Street]. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a site plan and staff’s recommended conditions. Applicant: Sweet Bar Dallas / Marvin Regalado U/A From: August 6, 2026. Planner: Justin Lee Council District: 2 Z-26-000135]
LOUNGE OR TAVERN ON PROPERTY ZONED TRACK A WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 269
DEEP ELLUM SLASH NORTH EAST SIDE DISTRICT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF ELM STREET, WEST OF NORTH CARTER STREET, ALSO KNOWN AS 2650 ELM STREET. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT ON ITEM NUMBER TEN? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? SEE, THERE'S ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION
ONLINE, CHRIS SCHRAG. ARE THEY ONLINE? NO. OKAY, THEN WE WILL GO TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR HER
MOTION. 
          THANK YOU. AND OUR BRIEF COMMENTS, IF I HAVE A SECOND. IN THE MATTER OF 26000135. 
          I MOVE TO LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL
SEPTEMBER 3RD. 
          GREAT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          VICE CHAIR HERBERT, FOR YOUR FOR YOUR SECOND ANY DISCUSSION? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THIS IS BEING HELD AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT. 
          I KNOW IT WAS CIRCULATED TO THE COMMISSION THAT WE DID RECEIVE SOME COMMUNITY FEEDBACK AND
THERE HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATIONS TO ME IN OPPOSITION TO THIS REQUEST. 
          SO WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THIS TIME TO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND OUTREACH
AND LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING THIS BACK BEFORE US ON THE THIRD. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? NO OTHER DISCUSSION. 
          SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO HOLD TO NINE THREE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR,
SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 11. 
          [11. 26-2664A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for an alcoholic beverage establishment limited to a bar, lounge, or tavern and an inside commercial amusement use limited to a dance hall, on property zoned Tract A within Planned Development No. 269, Deep Ellum/Near East Side District, on the south line of Elm Street, east of N. Good Latimer Expwy., west of N. Crowdus Street, [AKA 2638 Elm Street]. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: Trakass Bar & Lounge, LLC / Tomas Alonzo Representative: Audra Buckley U/A From: August 6, 2026. Planner: Justin Lee Council District: 2 Z-26-000136]
AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW USE PERMIT FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT,
LIMITED TO A BAR, LOUNGE OR TAVERN AND AN INSIDE COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT USE. 
          LIMITED TO A DANCE HALL ON PROPERTY ZONED TRACK A WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER
269 SLASH NORTH EAST SIDE DISTRICT ON THE ON THE SOUTH LINE OF ELM STREET. EAST OF NORTH GOOD LATIMER EXPRESSWAY,
WEST OF NORTH CARTER STREET, ALSO KNOWN AS 2638 ELM STREET. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN. 
          CONDITIONS. MISS BUCKLEY AUDRA BUCKLEY, 1414 BELLEVUE STREET,
SUITE 150, DALLAS, TEXAS, 75215. 
          REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE, IT WAS HELD THE LAST TIME BECAUSE THEY NEEDED TO
MEET WITH THE DEEP ELLUM FOUNDATIONS SUP COMMITTEE THAT HAS TRANSPIRED, AND THEY HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER TO MOVE FORWARD FOR A ONE YEAR SUV. 
          IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M AVAILABLE. ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU, MISS BUCKLEY. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? SEEING NONE COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, YOUR MOTION. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. IN THE MATTER OF Z-26-000136, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR A ONE YEAR PERIOD FOR
APPLICANT'S REQUEST, SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? I HAVE ONE QUESTION. 
          HOW DO YOU PRONOUNCE THE NAME OF THIS ESTABLISHMENT? OKAY. 
          NEVER MIND. ALL RIGHT. NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR,
SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. I GUESS I'LL FIND THAT OUT OFFLINE. 
          ALL RIGHT, MR. AGUILERA, ITEM NUMBER 12. ITEM 12 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE
PERMIT FOR THE SALES OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A 
          [12. 26-2665A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for the sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with a restaurant without drive-in or drive-through service on property zoned RR Regional Retail District with a D-1 Liquor Control Overlay, between Samuell Boulevard and E I-30 Fwy., east of N. Jim Miller Road, [AKA 6465 Samuell Boulevard]. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: Cesar Villasenor / Trakas Sports Cantina LLC. Representative: Warren Cohen U/A From: July 23, 2026. Planner: Oscar Aguilera Council District: 7 Z-26-000070]
RESTAURANT, WITHOUT DRIVING OR DRIVE THRU SERVICE ON A PROPERTY ZONED RR REGIONAL RETAIL
DISTRICT WITH A D1 LIQUOR CONTROL OVERLAY LOCATED BETWEEN SAMUEL BOULEVARD AND I30 EXPRESSWAY,
EAST OF NORTH JIM MILLER ROAD, ALSO KNOWN AS 6465 SAMUEL BOULEVARD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND
CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU, MR. AGUILERA. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM NUMBER 12? GOOD AFTERNOON. COMMISSIONERS. SORRY. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. 
          MY NAME IS. AND I REPRESENT DRAKA SPORTS CANTINA. 
          IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HERE PRESENT. 
          AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT ON ITEM 12? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? NO. SEEING NONE COMMISSIONER WHEELER,
DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO HAVE A MOTION, BUT CAN I ASK A QUESTION BEFORE THEN? 
          [01:45:03]
MOTION TO STAFF RIGHT QUICK. YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE YOUR MOTION. 
          THEN WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF. IT'S A PART OF IT'S A PART OF MY MOTION. 
          THEY DON'T HAVE A TIME PERIOD ON HERE. WELL I THINK THE SUP WAS SET WITHOUT A TIME PERIOD. 
          BUT YOU'RE FREE TO RECOMMEND IT. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I WANT TO KNOW. 
          OKAY. IN THE MATTER OF Z-26-000070, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FILE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND
CONDITIONS. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER WHEELER,
YOUR SECOND COMMISSIONER KINGSTON. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. YES. OH, YEAH. SO WE WE'RE SUPER THANKFUL FOR THIS. 
          BUILDING HAS SAT VACANT SINCE FIRST CAFETERIA WENT OUT OF BUSINESS AND IT'S HELPING KEEP
ACTIVATED THAT SAMUEL BOULEVARD. 
          I-30 CORRIDOR. WE'RE THANKFUL TO HAVING SOME BUSINESSES THAT ARE RESTAURANT BUSINESSES
THAT ARE CONTINUING TO MOVE INTO THIS AREA. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WHEELER, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO SITE PLANNING CONDITIONS,
BUT FOR A FIVE YEAR PERIOD. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM NUMBER 13. ITEM NUMBER 13 IS AN APPLICATION FOR KR COMMUNITY
RETAIL DISTRICT 
          [13. 26-2666A An application for CR Community Retail District on property zoned R-7.5(A) Single Family District, on the southwest corner of Bonnie View Road and Highland Hills Drive. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Applicant: 5900 Bonnie View Rd LLC / Shazeb Daredia Representative: S.I. Abed of DDC, Inc. / Shafiqul Abed U/A From: May 21, 2026. Planner: Oscar Aguilera Council District: 8 Z-26-000071]
ON A PROPERTY ZONED R SEVEN FIVE SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
BONNYVIEW ROAD AND HIGHLAND HILLS DRIVE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED. THANK YOU,
MR. AGUILAR. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 13? OKAY. NO SPEAKERS. WILL GO TO COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN FOR A MOTION. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. IN THE MATTER OF Z-26-000071,
I MOVE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND HOLD THIS MATTER UNDER ADVISEMENT UNTIL DECEMBER 3RD, 2026. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN,
FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSE RIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 14. ITEM 14 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE
PERMIT FOR COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING ON A PROPERTY 
          [14. 26-2667A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for commercial motor vehicle parking on property zoned LI, Light Industrial District, on the west line of Bonnie View Road, south of Telephone Road, [AKA 9300 Bonnie View Road]. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a ten-year period with eligibility for automatic renewals for an additional ten-year period, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: Lets Build it LLC / Huma Al Baroodi U/A From: June 25, 2026. Planner: Oscar Aguilera Council District: 8 Z-26-000084]
ZONE. L I LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT LOCATED ON THE WEST LINE OF BONNYVIEW ROAD,
SOUTH OF TELEPHONE ROAD, ALSO KNOWN AS A 9300 BONNYVIEW ROAD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL FOR A TEN YEAR
PERIOD, WITH ELIGIBILITY FOR AUTOMATIC RENEWALS FOR AN ADDITIONAL TEN YEAR PERIOD,
SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU, MR. AGUILERA. ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 14? GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JEFF. I'M HERE FOR Z 2600084. 
          IT'S ON 9300 BONNYVIEW ROAD. WE'RE HOPING TO GET YOUR SUPPORT TO HAVE A COMMERCIAL MOTOR
VEHICLE, BASICALLY AN 18 WHEELER PARKING LOT ON THIS LAND. 
          AND WE'RE WILLING TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. 
          AND ALSO, JUST TO ADD UP TO IT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT CHAIN LINK FENCE AROUND
IT AND TREES ALL AROUND JUST TO BLOCK THE, YOU KNOW, THE VIEW OF THE 18 WHEELER FROM THE STREET. 
          AND BASICALLY THIS LAND HAS BEEN OUT THERE FOR A LONG TIME WITH NO USE. 
          WE'RE HOPING TO PUT IT INTO USE AND HAVE BRING IN SOME REVENUE TO THE OWNER AND ALSO TO
THE CITY. 
          I HOPE WE CAN GET YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          THANK YOU SIR. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT ON ITEM 14? ANY SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION? OKAY. SEEING NONE. 
          COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN, YOUR MOTION. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. IN THE MATTER OF Z-26-000084, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE SUP,
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. 
          THE SUP EXPIRES IN FIVE YEARS WITHOUT AUTO RENEWAL AT A CONDITION REQUIRING A MINIMUM
EIGHT FOOT TALL PERIMETER SCREENING FENCE IN THE LOCATION SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED SITE PLAN. 
          THE SUP IS SUBJECT TO A REVISED SITE PLAN SHOWING THE LOCATIONS OF THE REQUIRED PERIMETER
SCREENING FENCE. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER FRANKLIN,
YOUR SECOND VICE CHAIR. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY. NO DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR,
SAY AYE. 
          ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. ON TO ITEM NUMBER 15. 
          [15. 26-2668A An application for an amendment to Planned Development District No. 17, on the southeast corner of Alpha Road and Preston Road. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to staff’s recommended conditions. Applicant: John Falb / Gilliland Properties II, LLC Representative: Rob Baldwin / Baldwin Associates, LLC U/A From: July 23, 2026. Planner: Mona Hashemi Council District: 11 Z-26-000079]
THANK YOU. ITEM 
          [01:50:01]
15KZ26000079. AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 17 ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ALPHA ROAD AND PRESTON ROAD. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU, DOCTOR HASHEMI. MR. BALDWIN, MISS MURPHY. 
          EITHER ONE AND TAKE YOUR TIME IF YOU NEED TO GET YOUR PRESENTATION UP. GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          MY NAME IS MARGO MURPHY WITH BALDWIN ASSOCIATES,
3904 ELM STREET, SUITE B, DALLAS, TEXAS, 75226. ROB BALDWIN AND I ARE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNERS OF PD 17,
AND I'M GOING TO TELL YOU SOMETHING ABOUT PD 17. 
          IT IS MEDICARE ELIGIBLE IN FEBRUARY. THAT'S HOW OLD THAT PD IS. 
          SO THE PROPERTY OWNERS OF PD 17. I'M GLAD YOU GUYS THOUGHT THAT WAS FUNNY. 
          SO THE, THE PROPERTY OWNERS JOINTLY AGREED TO BRING THIS CASE BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO
UPDATE THE PD MAINLY TO UPDATE THE PARKING PROVISIONS AND ALSO TO REMOVE SOME OBSOLETE PROVISIONS, BECAUSE THERE'S SOME ABOUT,
YOU KNOW, GIVING LAND FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY TO EXPAND. PRESTON. 
          WELL, THAT HAPPENED DECADES AGO, JUST DECADES AGO. 
          SO WE SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION AND WE MADE THAT REQUEST JUST TO REMOVE THE OBSOLETE
UPDATE. 
          THE PARKING AND STAFF CAME BACK AND SAID, HEY,
WHILE YOU'RE AT THAT, CAN CAN WE JUST GO TO THE NEW KRT STANDARDS? BECAUSE THE L.R. THREE STANDARDS, THEY DATE BACK TO THE 1948 CODE,
WHICH, BY THE WAY, I UNDERSTAND A STAFF MEMBER HAD TO FIND IN A TOP DRAWER SOMEWHERE AND IT'S MODIFIED BY THE 1951 CODE. I'VE GOT IMAGES OF THAT IF YOU WANT. 
          SO THEY SAID, CAN WE JUST GO TO THE KRT STANDARDS? SO SURE, SURE. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, JUST GO TO THE PARKING STANDARDS,
ADD LANDSCAPING. 
          SO WE SAID YES. AND THEN IN JUNE, WE HAD A COMMUNITY MEETING. 
          AT THAT COMMUNITY MEETING, WE SENT OUT THE NOTICES,
A LETTER OF INFORMATION TO THE 75 PROPERTY OWNERS AND THE NOTICE AREA. 
          WE TELL THEM ALL ABOUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO, AND WE INVITE THEM TO A COMMUNITY MEETING. THEY
COME TO A COMMUNITY MEETING IN JUNE, ALL FIVE OF THEM. AND ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, THEY WERE A LITTLE NERVOUS WHEN THEY WALK IN
LIKE MANY ARE LIKE, WHAT ARE YOU GUYS GOING TO DO? AND WE BASICALLY SAY,
WE'RE JUST GOING TO UPDATE THE CODE. 
          AND BY THE WAY, IT'S JUST GOING TO MAKE IT EASIER TO INTERPRET IT PERMITTING. 
          I DON'T THINK ANYTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE. IT'S JUST GOING TO OPERATE BETTER. 
          SO AFTER OUR PRESENTATION, THE NEIGHBORS WENT AWAY PRETTY HAPPY ACTUALLY. 
          THEY WERE RELIEVED. COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH AND COMMISSIONER COX,
TO THEIR CREDIT, WERE BOTH THERE. 
          AND AFTERWARDS, COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH SAID, HEY,
LOOK, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M PROTECTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          SOMETHING BIG IS GOING TO HAPPEN AT VALLEY VIEW,
AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M PROTECTING THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO HE SAID, I WANT YOU TO COMPARE THE KR AND THE LR THREE STANDARDS, WHICH WE DID. 
          BASICALLY, WE SAID, OKAY, WE'LL REMOVE SOME KR. 
          THREE THINGS THAT WE DON'T THINK WE NEED, LIKE BUILDING REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE,
ELECTRONIC SERVICE CENTER, ETC. BUT BY THE WAY, UNDER LR THREE, WE COULD HAVE A USED CAR LOT AND WE COULD HAVE A
THINGS LIKE VULCANIZING THAT'S A TIRE STORE. 
          AND YEAH, WE'RE GIVING THAT UP. OKAY. IN ADDITION,
COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH SAID I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH JUST THE PARKING AMENDMENT, I PREFER RATIOS. OKAY, SO WE SAID 1 TO 300 WORK AND OUR,
OUR OWNERS AGREED. 
          AND THEN THE HEIGHT BECAUSE UNDER LR THREE, THE HEIGHT IS TWO AND A HALF STORIES. 
          SO YOU ASK STAFF, WELL WHAT DOES THAT MEAN. AND THEY SAID MAYBE 30.5FT. 
          32FT. I MEAN THEY WERE GUESSING TWO. THE SITE IS SUBJECT TO SB 840. 
          CR STANDARDS ARE LIKE 54FT. SO WE DECIDED AS 45 YOUR TIME. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS MURPHY. MR. BALDWIN. 
          GOT A COUPLE OF SLIDES HERE THAT'LL HELP. I DON'T THINK WE NEED THIS. 
          BASICALLY MARCO HIT IT ON THE HEAD. WE'RE TRYING TO MODERNIZE THIS PD. 
          PD 17 IS VERY OLD. I'VE NEVER SEEN AN LR THREE DISTRICT BEFORE. 
          IT SURPRISED ME THAT THERE WAS EVEN SUCH A THING EXISTING. 
          WE DID HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. THE COUNCIL MEMBER ASKED US TO CONSIDER A PARKING
REQUIREMENT. 
          WE WE SAID 1 TO 300 WOULD WORK FOR FOR WHAT WE'RE DOING. 
          IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE SHOPPING CENTER IT'S AROUND THE CORNER OF PRESTON AND ALPHA. 
          IT'S AN OLDER SHOPPING CENTER AND WE DID SOME HISTORICAL AERIALS AND THERE WAS PLENTY OF
PARKING. 
          THERE'S 526 PARKING SPACES. 520 PARKING SPACES ON THE SITE TODAY. 
          AT 1 TO 300. IT STILL GIVES US AN EXCESS OF OVER 200 PARKING SPACES. 
          SO WE THINK IT'S REASONABLE. WE THINK UPGRADING TO THE NEW CR IS GOING TO MAKE EVERYBODY'S
LIFE EASIER, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE GO TO PERMITTING, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT NO ONE OVER AT THE OAK CLIFF
MUNICIPAL CENTER HAS A COPY OF THE LR THREE ZONING DISTRICT. 
          HOPE YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS. WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. ALL RIGHT. 
          [01:55:02]
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT? HI. JOHN HETZEL WITH MADISON PARTNERS. THEY ALREADY GAVE THE PRESENTATION,
SO I WON'T BELABOR THE POINT, BUT WE'RE ONE OF THE THREE PROPERTY OWNERS OF THIS REQUEST. 
          WHAT I WILL SAY ON THE 1 TO 300 PARKING RATIO IS OUR PORTION OF THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW,
IF IT EVEN WERE TO GO DOWN TO 1 TO 250, WE'D BE SHORT ON THREE PARKING SPACES. AND SO THAT'S KIND OF HOW WE CAME UP WITH THE 1 TO
300. 
          AND IT PREVENTS US FROM DOING THINGS LIKE, WE HAVE A DOMINO'S IN THERE. 
          WE CAN'T LET THEM PUT TABLES AND CHAIRS IN THE PIZZA RESTAURANT. YOU KNOW,
JUST LITTLE SIMPLE STUFF THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA FLEXIBILITY ON. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND YOUR ADDRESS,
MR. HETZEL. OH, YEAH. SORRY. 2622 COMMERCE STREET. 
          I SHOULD KNOW BETTER. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION. OKAY. COMMISSIONER COX,
YOUR MOTION. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR COMMISSIONER COX. 
          MOTION. THEN YOU CAN COMMENT QUESTION WHATEVER YOU'D LIKE. 
          SO, MR. CHAIR, I MOVE TO APPROVE ZONING CASE Z-26-00079 AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT,
SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE CONDITIONS INCLUDED IN THE CASE REPORT. THIS MOTION DOES NOT ADOPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION
THAT PARKING CONFORM TO THE CURRENT CITYWIDE PARKING STANDARD. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER COX COMMISSIONER KAUFMAN FOR YOUR
SECOND FLOOR IS YOURS. 
          COMMISSIONER COX. THANK YOU, CHAIR. MISS MURPHY,
JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, AND I THINK YOU'VE ADDRESSED MOST OF THEM. 
          BETWEEN YOU AND MR. BALDWIN, MOST OF THEM HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED. WERE ALL THE PROPERTY
OWNERS WITHIN PD 17 ENGAGED IN THE AMENDMENT PROCESS? YES, SIR. AND HAS EVERY PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN PD 17 AGREED TO THE CHANGES PROPOSED IN THIS
AMENDMENT? YES, SIR. AND CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY THE APPLICANTS BELIEVE A CUSTOMIZED PD SPECIFIC RATIO IS
MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS SITE THAN THE CITYWIDE PARKING STANDARDS? WE'RE JUST RESPONDING TO THE CONCERNS THAT WERE MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER
ROTH. 
          I MEAN, HE'S VERY PROTECTIVE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND HE WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT PARKING AND AND WE CAME UP WITH THAT
RATIO THINKING IT WOULD BE A WIN WIN. 
          OKAY. AND WERE THOSE RATIOS ACCEPTABLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS AS WELL? YES, SIR. AND WE DID, SIR. ON THAT POINT, I DID SEND A FOLLOW UP LETTER TO THE FIVE
PROPERTY OWNERS WHO ATTENDED BECAUSE WE HAD THEIR EMAIL ADDRESSES. 
          AND IN THAT LETTER, I INCLUDED THE UPDATED CONDITIONS WITH AN EXPLANATION. 
          I ALSO INVITED THEM TO MEET WITH US AT THE STARBUCKS THERE ON SITE AT PRESTON AND ALPHA,
AND GAVE A COUPLE OF DATES, BUT NO ONE REPLIED. SO I THINK THEY MUST BE SATISFIED. 
          AND THERE'S JUST A COUPLE OF OTHER QUESTIONS. FOR THE RECORD,
IS THE APPLICANT REQUESTING A MODIFICATION OF THE PD EXISTING PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND NOT THE ADOPTION OF THE CITYWIDE PARKING STANDARDS? THE THE APPLICANT IS IS IS HAPPY WITH THE 1 TO 300 RATIO,
SIR. 
          OKAY. AND ARE THE APPLICANTS ASKING THE COMMISSION TO APPROVE A TAILORED REDUCTION THAT
PRESERVES PD SPECIFIC STANDARDS AND AVOIDS TRIGGERING CITYWIDE PARKING REQUIREMENTS? WELL, THEY'RE HAPPY WITH THE 1 TO 300,
SIR. 
          THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. I DO HAVE A FEW OTHER COMMENTS. 
          OH, YEAH. FLOOR IS YOURS. THANK YOU. SO AS YOU'VE HEARD,
THIS PD IS A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED. 
          LONG LEGISLATIVE HISTORY BEGAN IN 62 AS A SPECIAL PERMIT UNDER ORDINANCE 9148. 
          IT WAS FORMALLY CONVERTED INTO A PD IN 65. SINCE THEN,
IT'S BEEN AMENDED MULTIPLE TIMES, MOST RECENTLY IN 1984. 
          GIVEN THE AGE OF THE ORDINANCE AND THE NUMBER OF AMENDMENTS OVER THE YEARS,
THE APPLICANTS FELT A CLEANUP, AS MISS MURPHY EXPLAINED, IS APPROPRIATE TO IMPROVE CLARITY AND ENTITLEMENTS FOR THE
PROPERTY OWNERS AS THEY WORK OUT A JOINT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. 
          IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE FOUR OWNERS,
NEIGHBORHOODS AND DISTRICT LEADERSHIP HAVE WORKED COLLABORATIVELY ON THIS REQUEST AND SUPPORT ITS APPROVAL. THESE PARTIES BELIEVE THAT A CUSTOM PARKING RATIO PRODUCES A MORE
CONTEXT SENSITIVE AND OPERATIONALLY SOUND OUTCOME THAN THE CITYWIDE STANDARD. THE TAILORED RATIO AVOIDS THE DOCUMENTED EFFECTS OF PARKING,
SUCH AS SPILLOVER INTO ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS AND PROPERTIES. 
          UNSAFE CIRCULATION WITHIN THE SITE AND CONFLICTS WITH THE LOADING AND ADA ACCESS,
WHILE STILL REDUCING EXCESS IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND SUPPORTING IMPROVED SITE DESIGN. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS ARE LEGISLATIVE
ZONING TOOLS. 
          THEY EXIST PRECISELY BECAUSE THE BASE CODE IS NOT ALWAYS APPROPRIATE FOR EVERY SITE. 
          IT IS THIS COMMISSION'S RESPONSIBILITY, NOT STAFF'S,
TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE CITYWIDE STANDARD FITS THE SPECIFIC CONTEXT, 
          [02:00:02]
ADJACENCY AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IN FRONT OF US. 
          IN THIS CASE, IT DOES NOT. THE APPLICANT'S CUSTOM PARKING RATIO IS THE CORRECT STANDARD
FOR THIS CORRIDOR. 
          THE CITYWIDE RATIO WAS DESIGNED FOR A WALKABLE,
TRANSIT SERVED ENVIRONMENT. 
          PRECEDENT ALPHA IS NEITHER. APPLYING THE CITYWIDE STANDARD HERE COULD CREATE PREDICTABLE
OPERATIONAL FAILURES, SPILLOVER PARKING INTO ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS AND PROPERTIES. 
          UNSAFE CIRCULATION WITHIN THE SITE, CONFLICTS WITH LOADING AND ADA ACCESS AND PRESSURE ON
SURROUNDING BUSINESSES. 
          THE TAILORED RATIO AVOIDS THOSE HARMS WHILE STILL SERVING EXCESS. 
          I'M SORRY, REDUCING EXCESS IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND SUPPORTING IMPROVED SITE DESIGN. 
          IT IS CONTEXT APPROPRIATE, OPERATIONALLY SOUND AND FULLY CONSISTENT WITH HOW THE PD IS
ACROSS THE CITY ARE STRUCTURED. 
          WHEN THE BASE CODE DOES NOT FIT THE CORRIDOR,
THE CUSTOM PARKING RATIO IS A NECESSARY PART OF THAT COMPATIBILITY. 
          FOR THESE REASONS, I MOVE AGAIN FOR THE APPROVAL AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANTS,
AND ASK FOR THE SUPPORT OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER COX. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          YEAH. I WON'T BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THE MOTION. THERE,
I'M SURE, ARE PROPERTIES IN THE CITY THAT DESERVE TO BE CARVED OUT OF OUR PARKING ORDINANCE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE EXCEPTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OR COMPLEX CONTEXT. 
          THIS PROPERTY IS NEITHER. THIS IS A ORDINARY STRIP CENTER RETAIL PROPERTY ON PRESTON ROAD, A STATE HIGHWAY, AND I SEE NO RATIONALE FOR CARVING OUT AN. 
          THE. IN SETTING ASIDE THE PARKING ORDINANCE THAT SO MANY OF US WORKED SO HARD ON FOR SO
MANY YEARS. 
          THIS IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF PROPERTY THAT WE PASSED THE PARKING REFORM FOR,
TO MAKE IT A MORE PROSPEROUS PROPERTY, A MORE A PROPERTY WITH MORE FLEXIBILITY ON ITS DEVELOPMENT. 
          1 TO 300 IS HIGHLY ARBITRARY. NUMBER SERVES NO PURPOSE WHATSOEVER. 
          I THINK STATING THIS AS A COLLABORATIVE PROCESS IS AN OVERSTATEMENT. 
          THE NEIGHBORS WERE PASSIVE. THEY, THEY WERE PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH A A REFORMING OF THIS PD, AND THEY DID NOT COME WITH THE 1 TO 300. THAT WAS SOMEONE ELSE'S IDEA. 
          SO I COULD FULLY SUPPORT CRAFTING THIS PD ON AYE UPDATING THE THE LANGUAGE OF THE PD,
BUT TO GO HALFWAY THERE AND PLACE SOME ARBITRARY PARKING RATIO ON THE PROPERTY JUST SEEMS UNNECESSARY AND SEEMS TO BE A REALLY POOR PRECEDENT TO SET. 
          AS WE ATTEMPT TO ACCRUE THE BENEFITS OF OUR NEW PARKING ORDINANCE. 
          THANK YOU. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. I'M GOING TO WEIGH IN AS WELL,
I SEE IT. 
          DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING. GO AHEAD. YEAH. THE ONLY THING I'D SAY ABOUT THIS CASE IS I FIND
IT A LITTLE TROUBLING THAT THERE'S SO MUCH FOCUS ON WHAT THE COUNCIL MEMBER WANTS. 
          THE COUNCIL MEMBER GETS A CHANCE TO DO WHAT HE WANTS OR SHE WANTS. 
          AT COUNCIL. AND IT'S ACTUALLY A VIOLATION OF OUR RULES FOR THE COUNCIL PEOPLE TO TELL US
WHAT TO DO. 
          WE ARE AN INDEPENDENT BODY AND THOUGH WE MAY BE ONLY A RECOMMENDING BODY,
YOU LOSE SOME OF THAT INDEPENDENCE WHEN IT IS YOU'RE CONSTANTLY REMINDED. BUT HEY, LOOK, THE COUNCIL MEMBER REALLY WANTS YOU TO DO THIS. 
          IN THIS CASE, AND I THINK THAT. WAS MADE CLEAR IN THIS CASE,
AND THAT BOTHERS ME. 
          THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. MR. CHAIR,
I'D BE HAPPY TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION, IF IT'S APPROPRIATE. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR. OKAY. 
          I MY AMENDMENT WOULD SIMPLY BE TO REPLACE THE PARKING REQUIREMENT IN THE IN THE PROPOSED
PD WITH THE CURRENTLY ADOPTED CITY PARKING STANDARDS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT,
FOR YOUR MOTION. 
          COMMISSIONER SIMS, FOR YOUR SECOND DISCUSSION. 
          I WILL HOP IN THERE MYSELF SINCE MY COMMENTS WERE GOING TO BE ON THE PARKING RATIO. 
          I THINK COMMISSIONER COX MADE A GOOD POINT WHEN HE SAID,
IT'S THIS COMMISSION'S RESPONSIBILITY TO EVALUATE WHAT PARKING IS APPROPRIATE IN A PARTICULAR AREA. AND HE WENT ON TO SAY IT'S,
YOU KNOW, NOT STAFF SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THIS UNILATERALLY. 
          AND I, I AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK WE DO NEED TO EXERCISE OUR INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT HERE. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, WE ALSO NEED TO EXERCISE OUR INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT WHEN AN APPLICANT OR
COMES TO US WITH A 
          [02:05:05]
REQUEST OR RECOMMENDATION ON PARKING, OR EVEN WHETHER THERE'S APPARENTLY AN AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND A COUNCIL MEMBER OR THE APPLICANT, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE NONE OF THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO CAME OUT TO THAT MEETING
IN JUNE RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT THE PARKING RATIO, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY KIND OF ACQUIESCE TO THAT. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, AGREEMENT IS ONE IMPORTANT THING TO THINK ABOUT. 
          BUT I THINK WE DO NEED TO EXERCISE OUR INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT AS A PLAN COMMISSION. 
          WHEN A, YOU KNOW, APPLICANT COMES IN TO US AND SAID,
YOU KNOW, WE INITIALLY CAME IN AT, YOU KNOW, GO TO BASE CODE, BUT WE ARE AGREEING TO GO TO 1 TO 300. 
          WHAT IS THE BEST RESULT HERE FROM A LAND USE PERSPECTIVE? AND IN MY VIEW, AS COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT SAID,
THIS SITE IS NOT UNIQUE. 
          IT'S ALONG A STATE HIGHWAY ACROSS FROM A FORMER MALL SITE THAT IS,
YOU KNOW, VERY YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT MUCH GOING ON THERE NOW, BUT QUITE A BIT COULD BE GOING ON THERE IN THE FUTURE,
IT SOUNDS LIKE. 
          AND THIS SEEMS LIKE THE PERFECT SITE FOR OUR CITY WIDE PARKING STANDARDS TO APPLY TO. 
          I DON'T SEE ANYTHING UNIQUE HERE. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER SITES THAT ARE VERY
SIMILAR TO THIS THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVE THEIR BACK TO A, YOU KNOW, SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND THERE ARE WAYS TO PREVENT SPILLOVER PARKING IN THOSE AREAS,
WHETHER IT'S NO PARKING OR RESIDENT ONLY SIGNS. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, PDS ARE AN IMPORTANT TOOL WHEN WE NEED THAT CUSTOM TOUCH. 
          I DON'T SEE THAT THERE WITH THE PARKING, FRANKLY,
I WOULD HAVE BEEN PRETTY MUCH OKAY WITH A CR HERE AND MAYBE SOME DEED RESTRICTIONS NIBBLING AROUND THE EDGES. BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO ON THE PARKING FRONT TO
HONOR OUR POLICY ON PARKING WHEN IT MAKES SENSE. 
          RATHER THAN GO TO CUSTOM RATIOS ON INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS OR PDS WHERE,
YOU KNOW, IT'S A PRETTY MUCH RUN OF THE MILL AGING SHOPPING CENTER. SO I AM GOING TO SUPPORT THE MOTION HERE AND APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT
FOR MAKING IT AND LOOK FORWARD TO FURTHER DISCUSSION. 
          COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. YEAH, I WOULD JUST ADD A POINT THAT WE DISCUSSED IN THE BRIEFING
THIS MORNING THAT BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS NOT PLATTED AS A SINGLE PROPERTY, AND WE HAVE THESE INTERNAL PROPERTY LINES. REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS CENTER COULD GET HUNG UP
IN IN PERMITTING BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE CORRECT RATIO BY PARCEL. AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A REAL SHAME. 
          THIS IS THIS IS WE DON'T NEED TO BE MAKING THINGS HARDER AT PERMITTING THAN THEY ALREADY
ARE IN SLOWING THINGS DOWN MORE THAN THEY ALREADY ARE SLOWED DOWN. 
          AND I THINK PLACING, AGAIN, THIS ARBITRARY RATIO ON A PROPERTY LIKE THIS IS ABSOLUTELY THE
WRONG THING TO DO. 
          COMMISSIONER SIMS, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, AND I SECONDED COMMISSIONER HOUSE MOTION BECAUSE
I WAS THINKING ABOUT SOMETHING. 
          COMMISSIONER COX SAID THAT THE IDEA OF THIS BEING A WALKABLE OR TRANSIT ORIENTED
NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          AND, MR. CHAIR, AS YOU NOTED, THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF DEVELOPMENT SOON TO COME NEAR THIS
SITE. 
          AND I THINK INCREASING THE POTENTIAL FOR WALKABILITY IS A GOOD THING. 
          AS WE THINK ABOUT WHAT A PLAN IS, AND PARKING SPACES ARE CLEARLY NOT ADDING TO
WALKABILITY. 
          COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONER COX. JUST AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION,
I DON'T THINK I EVER SUGGESTED THAT THIS LOCATION WAS WALKABLE. 
          IT'S OFF OF A MAJOR HIGHWAY. CLEARLY NOT WALKABLE WHEN VALLEY VIEW IS DEVELOPED. 
          IT'S STILL NOT GOING TO BE WALKABLE WITH RESPECT TO THIS LOCATION ALONG PRESTON ROAD. 
          IN FACT, YOU'VE GOT APARTMENTS THAT ARE BEING BUILT AS WE SPEAK,
ACROSS THE STREET ON THE WEST SIDE OF PRESTON ROAD. 
          THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE OF THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER SERRATO. THE ANSWER TO THIS MAY NOT MATTER. 
          BUT WHY, WHY, WHY WAS THE NEW RATIO LIKE WHAT WAS THE MOTIVATION BEHIND THE NEW RATIO
BESIDES IT COMING FROM ACCOUNTS? I MEAN, I OBVIOUSLY CAN'T READ HIS MIND AND UNDERSTAND WHY,
BUT LIKE I ALWAYS, I WOULD ALWAYS LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THE WHY BEHIND SOMETHING LIKE WHY THE NEW NUMBER? WHY NOT JUST GO WITH CODE? LIKE WHAT? WHAT SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THAT IS WHY IS IT BEING BROUGHT UP? LIKE, AGAIN, THE ANSWER TO THAT MIGHT NOT MATTER. 
          MAYBE NOBODY KNOWS THE ANSWER TO THAT, BUT IT WOULD HELP ME UNDERSTAND A LITTLE MORE. IS
THIS A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT OR THE COMMISSIONER WHO MADE THE MOTION? IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT CAN ANSWER IT, I DON'T KNOW. 
          DO YOU KNOW? IF SOMEONE HAS A PHONE RINGING,
IF THEY COULD PLEASE SILENCE IT. 
          AFTER THE COMMUNITY MEETING, COUNCIL MEMBER ROTH ASKED US TO REVIEW THE CR USES,
COMPARE THEM WITH THE LR USES AS WELL AS THE PARKING. 
          AND. AND THAT'S WHY WE DID IT BECAUSE I BELIEVE HE BELIEVES THAT A PARKING RATIO IS
NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          [02:10:08]
SO WE WERE JUST TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING, A PARKING RATIO THAT WOULD BE SATISFACTORY TO
OUR CLIENT. 
          PRESERVE SOME PARKING WOULD BE A WIN WIN. THANK YOU. 
          DID YOU HAVE OTHER DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS? NO,
I DON'T THINK THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION. 
          WHY? BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR RESPONSE. BUT. YEAH. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. OH, NO. 
          WE'LL GO TO YOU THEN, COMMISSIONER HALL. THANK YOU. 
          QUESTION FOR MR. HUTSELL. I THOUGHT I UNDERSTOOD IN YOUR COMMENTS THAT YOU HAD ALSO REVIEWED AS A PROPERTY OWNER THE PARKING RATIO AND THAT THE 1
TO 300 MET WHAT YOU UNDERSTOOD WAS NEEDED FOR THE SITE. 
          IS THAT DID I HEAR THAT CORRECTLY? YEAH. WE WE INITIALLY EMBARKED ON THIS AND IT WAS
BEFORE VALLEY VIEW WAS ANNOUNCED OR ANY OF THOSE OTHER THINGS. 
          WE JUST KNEW WE HAD A JUNKY OLD PD THAT NEEDED TO BE FIXED. 
          AND SO OUR INITIAL THOUGHT WAS JUST TO GO TO BASE C R ZONING,
LET EVERYTHING FLOW THROUGH, GET RID OF THAT EXCESS PD. THAT'S PROBABLY NOT NEEDED. 
          BUT AS MISS MURPHY STATED, THE COUNCILMAN EXPRESSED SOME CONCERNS AROUND NOT HAVING SOME
PARKING RATIO. 
          SO WE TRIED TO COME UP WITH ONE THAT WOULD STILL PROVIDE SOME RELIEF RELATED TO OUR
CURRENT PARKING RATIO OF ACTUAL BUILDINGS AND SPACES AND USES. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT CONTEXT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. 
          COMMISSIONER HALL. MAY I ASK DOCTOR HASHIMI A QUESTION? YES. OKAY, DOCTOR HASHIMI, AND PARDON ME IF I MISSED THIS FROM THE BRIEFING. 
          THE PD THE MOTION REFERS TO A 1 TO 300 PARKING RATIO. 
          WHAT WOULD WHAT WOULD BE THE PARKING RATIO PER THE 2025 PARKING REFORM? FOR MOST OF THE USERS, LIKE OFFICE RETAIL, IT'S GONNA BE ZERO. 
          AND FOR RESTAURANTS OVER 2500. I DON'T HAVE IT ON TOP OF MY MIND,
BUT IT'S ONE SPACE PER 200, I BELIEVE, AND FOR THE REST IS ZERO. 
          SO HOW MANY PARKING SPACES EXIST RIGHT NOW? DID I HEAR 500? 520. 20. YEAH. UNDER THE THE NEW PARKING POLICIES OF THE CITY OF DALLAS. 
          HOW MANY WOULD BE REQUIRED? I AM NOT SURE. WE HAVEN'T CALCULATED THAT. 
          OKAY. BUT IT'S GOING TO BE LESS THAN 520. OF COURSE. 
          OKAY. AND AT AT 1 TO 300, WHAT WOULD IT BE? IT'S 323,
I BELIEVE. 
          323. 320. OKAY. AM I RIGHT IN ASSUMING THAT THEN 1 TO 300 IS MORE THAN WHAT THE NEW PARKING CODES WOULD BE? IT IS. OKAY. WE JUST DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER. 
          YEAH, BUT BASED ON MY OBSERVATION AND THE EXISTING USES AND BUILDING SITES,
I THINK. 
          OKAY. IT IS MORE. MAY I ASK THE THE OWNER A QUESTION? OKAY. SO YOU HEARD THAT. AND SO BY THE NEW DALLAS PARKING REVISIONS THAT WERE PASSED LAST
YEAR, YOU WOULD END UP LET'S JUST, I, I DON'T KNOW,
LET'S SAY 290. 
          WOULD THAT BE SUFFICIENT FOR YOU? YEAH. AND I THINK IT WAS COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT
POINTED OUT SOMETHING THAT'S A NUANCE FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT'S IMPORTANT. 
          WHICH IS IT IS MULTIPLE SEPARATE PARCELS. AND SO WHEN YOU HAVE A PARKING REQUIREMENT THAT
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SITE, THE PD AS A WHOLE SEEMS LIKE SIGNIFICANT RELIEF. 
          INDIVIDUAL PARCELS CAN BE MUCH TIGHTER, AND THAT RATIO APPLIES TO EACH INDIVIDUAL PARCEL,
REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER PRIVATE AGREEMENTS WE COME UP WITH TO SHARE PARKING AND THINGS OF THAT SORT AS WELL. AND FOR THIS PD TO WORK MORE HOLISTICALLY. 
          BUT YEAH, AT THE ONE PER 300, THE REDUCTION,
IT WOULD PROVIDE RELIEF AND GIVE US SOME ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY. 
          OBVIOUSLY, GOING TO THE PARKING REFORM RATIOS OF LET THE MARKET DECIDE AND NOT GET HUNG UP
IN PERMITTING AROUND PARKING AND THINGS LIKE THAT WOULD PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY IN OWNERS TEND TO PREFER THAT. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. WE ALSO TRY TO BE COLLABORATIVE WHEN WE CAN. 
          I DO HAVE ONE OTHER THING THAT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I MENTION ON THE RECORD. 
          [02:15:02]
AND THIS MAY BE A QUESTION, BUT, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL OF US SPENT MEETING AFTER MEETING AN
HOUR AFTER HOUR TALKING ABOUT PARKING REFORM AND ALL THAT. 
          I JUST DO WANT TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE CLEAR FOR SOME OF THE NEW PEOPLE IN THIS BODY THAT WHAT
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS PARKING MINIMUMS REQUIRED BY THE CITY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A PARKING RATIO, THIS APPLICANT, IF WE WENT TO THE YOU KNOW,
CITY, YOU KNOW, BASE REQUIREMENTS, WHICH ARE, YOU KNOW, SOME FOR SOME RETAIL AND RESTAURANT OR SOME RESTAURANT AND,
YOU KNOW, OTHER USES DON'T REQUIRE PARKING THAT DOESN'T GET RID OF A PARKING REQUIREMENT SITE,
A SPOT ON THIS SITE. 
          IT JUST MEANS THAT THERE'S NOT A MINIMUM THAT THE CITY IMPOSES. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, WITH WHAT WE'VE SEEN SO FAR IN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF,
I HAVE NOT SEEN, YOU KNOW, TONS OF PARKING GO AWAY TO THE POINT WHERE, YOU KNOW,
ANYTHING DISASTROUS HAS HAPPENED. 
          SO I DO JUST WANT TO, YOU KNOW, CONTEXTUALIZE THIS BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE TALK ABOUT RATIOS
AND WE'RE NOT CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THOSE RATIOS ARE. 
          THROUGH NO FAULT OF ANYONE. BUT YOU KNOW, THOSE OF US WHO'VE BEEN DOING THIS A LONG TIME,
JUST SORT OF TALK ABOUT IT CASUALLY. 
          BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS A CITY SET MINIMUM PARKING. 
          IT'S NOT PREVENTING, YOU KNOW, ANY PROPERTY OWNER FROM PROVIDING AS MUCH PARKING AS THEY
WANT AND THINK THEY NEED ON THEIR PROPERTY TO, YOU KNOW, SERVE THEIR CUSTOMERS, THEIR RESIDENTS. 
          ET CETERA. ET CETERA. SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WE,
YOU KNOW, SET THAT SORT OF, YOU KNOW, FRAME OF DISCUSSION BEFORE WE MOVE ON HERE. 
          ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE HOUSE? RIGHT AMENDMENT. 
          ALL RIGHT. WHY DON'T WE TAKE A RECORD VOTE ON IT? IT IS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT TO GO TO BASE PARKING FOR THE PD CITY BASE
PARKING. 
          MISTER CHAIR. PARDON ME FOR INTERRUPTING. WOULD YOU BE VERY CLEAR ON WHAT COMMISSIONER
HOUSE WRITES? HIS IS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. IT'S NOT FRIENDLY. 
          IT'S NOT ACCEPTED BY THE OFFER. SO WE ARE TAKING A RECORD VOTE. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. DISTRICT ONE. YES. DISTRICT TWO. 
          NO. DISTRICT THREE. YES. DISTRICT FOUR. YES. DISTRICT FIVE. 
          YES. DISTRICT SIX. NO. DISTRICT SEVEN. YES. YES. 
          DISTRICT EIGHT. YES. DISTRICT NINE. YES. DISTRICT TEN. 
          YES. DISTRICT 11. DISTRICT 12. DISTRICT 13. DISTRICT 14. 
          YES. AND PLACE 15. YES. THE MOTION CARRIES. SO WE'RE BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION,
AS AMENDED. 
          FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM. OKAY. WE HAVE A AMENDED MOTION. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER. ACTUALLY,
LET'S TAKE A BREAK BEFORE ITEM 16. 
          LET'S TAKE FIVE MINUTES AND BE BACK AT 144. ALL RIGHT,
EVERYONE, IF YOU COULD PLEASE TAKE YOUR SEATS. 
          WE CAN GET THIS MEETING MOVING AGAIN. IT IS 1:53 P.M.. 
          AND THIS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION IS BACK ON THE RECORD. 
          [16. 26-2669A An application for 1) an amendment to Planned Development District No. 800 and for the creation and expansion of new subdistricts therein for specified non-residential uses and 2) a new Specific Use Permit for a pedestrian skybridge on property zoned Planned Development No. 800, on the southeast line of Cadiz Street, between Riverfront Boulevard and the Union Pacific RR and the north and south lines of Riverfront Boulevard, northwest of Corinth Street. Staff Recommendation: Approval of 1) an amendment to PD 800, subject to a development plan, amended Exhibit 800A and 800B, and amended conditions and 2) a new Specific Use Permit for a pedestrian skybridge, subject to a site plan and conditions. Applicant: Therme Dallas LLC Representative: Victoria Morris, Suzanne Keron [Jackson Walker LLP] U/A From: July 23, 2026. Planner: Martin Bate Council District: 2 Z-25-000094]
IF WE COULD READ IN CASE NUMBER 16. 
          I THINK WE FINISHED. WE JUST DID 15. SO WE'RE ON 16. 
          ALL RIGHT. AND WE'RE SENDING AROUND JUST A LIST OF THESE CONDITION CHANGES HERE. 
          ITEM 16 IS CASE Z 2500009 FOR AN APPLICATION FOR ONE AN AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT NUMBER 800 AND FOR THE CREATION AND EXPANSION OF NEW SUBDISTRICTS THEREIN FOR SPECIFIED NONRESIDENTIAL USES AND TWO A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGE
ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 800 ON THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF CATO STREET BETWEEN RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD AND THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD AND THE NORTH AND SOUTH
LINES OF OR FROM BOULEVARD NORTHWEST OF CORINTH STREET. 
          STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF ONE. AN AMENDMENT TO PD 800,
SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH CHANGES AMENDED. 
          EXHIBIT 800 A AND 800 B, AND AMENDED CONDITIONS WITH CHANGES AND TWO A NEW SPECIFIC USE
PERMIT FOR PEDESTRIAN SKYBRIDGE SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. AND I'LL READ THOSE CHANGES INTO THE RECORD NOW,
I THINK IS THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT. 
          SO GET COMFY. SO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO STATE THAT FOR THE SOUTHEASTERN AND
SOUTHWESTERN PORTIONS OF REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS, THE USES MUST INCLUDE A WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER. 
          [02:20:04]
AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO STRIKE PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE FROM OPEN SPACE IN SECTION 108,
SUBSECTION B, ADD CONTRACTORS MAINTENANCE YARD IS A USE ACCEPTED FROM PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USE
REQUIREMENTS AND STRIKE PROVISIONS, ALLOWING AN SCP TO MODIFY PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USE REQUIREMENTS. 
          THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS IN SECTION 110 IN SUBSECTION B,
PARAGRAPH ONE ADD CONTRACTORS MAINTENANCE YARD IN SUBSECTION B, PARAGRAPH TWO IN SUBPARAGRAPH B, STRIKE SCP EXCEPTION AND IN PARAGRAPH E,
ADD CONTRACTORS MAINTENANCE YARD IN SUBSECTION E, PARAGRAPH TWO. SUBPARAGRAPH A ADD CONTRACTORS,
MAINTENANCE YARD OR COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT OUTSIDE AND IN ROMANET TWO OF THAT PARAGRAPH STRIKE THE SCP EXCEPTION IN SUBSECTION E, PARAGRAPH FOUR CHANGE 50FT TO 40FT. 
          IN SUBSECTION I AMEND PARAGRAPH ONE TO APPLY ONLY TO A REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS. 
          IN SUBSECTION J. ADD PARAGRAPH THREE, STATING THAT THE LOCATION OF THE PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE SHOWN ON THE REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 
          DELETE REFERENCE TO OPEN SPACE BEING PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE IN SUBSECTION K AND HAVE THE
SUBSECTION K OPEN SPACE APPLY ONLY TO A REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS IN SECTION 111, SUBSECTION D, PARAGRAPH TWO, SUBPARAGRAPH A CHANGE 14FT TO 16FT IN SECTION ONE. 
          ONE, TWO. SUBSECTION B, PARAGRAPH THREE. CHANGE RUMBLE STRIP TO TACTILE DIRECTIONAL
INDICATOR AND SIDEWALK AND PLANTING ZONE TO SIDEWALK AND BICYCLE LANE IN SECTION 115, SUBSECTION C, PARAGRAPH TWO REPLACE. 
          HAVE A MATCHING FACADE APPEARANCE WITH BE ARCHITECTURALLY SCREENED AND REQUIRE THE
SCREENING IN THE SECOND SENTENCE TO BE SOLID SCREENING IN SECTION ONE, SUBSECTION C, PARAGRAPH THREE. STRIKE DESERT WILLOW AS A RECOMMENDED TREE SPECIES IN
SECTION 120, SUBSECTION B, PARAGRAPH TWO IS A LONG ONE. REPLACE ALL TEXT WITH. 
          EXCEPT FOR A REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS. FOR SUBDISTRICT ONE,
THE MINIMUM BLOCK LENGTH IS 200FT, MEASURED ALONG THE INNER EDGE OF EACH STREET,
RIGHT OF WAY FROM THE POINT OF ONE BLOCK BREAK TO THE POINT OF THE NEXT BLOCK BREAK AND SUBDISTRICT ONE MUST BE DIVIDED BY A MINIMUM OF ONE BLOCK BREAK,
CONSISTING OF AN INTERNAL STREET, A SECONDARY STREET, A MEANDER, OR A PEDESTRIAN TRAIL. 
          FINALLY, IN SECTION 120, SUBSECTION B, AMEND PARAGRAPH THREE TO READ FOR A REGIONAL
WELLNESS CAMPUS. 
          NO MINIMUM BLOCK LENGTH AND NO BLOCK BREAKS ARE REQUIRED,
AS SHOWN ON THE REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT PLAN. ALL RIGHT. 
          THANK YOU, MR. BATE. DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT ON ITEM NUMBER 16? OKAY THAT I CAN FIGURE OUT. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS JOHN ALSCHULER. 
          I'M THE EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN OF THERMA US. MY MISSION IN THAT POSITION IS TO GUIDE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF TEN THERMOS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES. 
          OUR DECISION ABOUT WHICH I'LL SAY MORE LATER,
IS TO BUILD OUR FIRST IN DALLAS, TEXAS. 
          MY ADDRESS IS 110 GREEN STREET. BEFORE I TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR PROPOSAL,
LET ME EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO THE STAFF THAT PROVIDED A VERY THOUGHTFUL AND CAREFUL REVIEW OF OUR SUBMISSION. 
          AND TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, WHOSE ENGAGEMENT WITH US OVER THE LAST MONTH HAS
SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED OUR SUBMISSION THAT YOU ARE CURRENTLY REVIEWING. 
          SO WE ARE APPRECIATIVE TO BOTH STAFF AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. 
          SIR, IF YOU COULD SPEAK A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE. IS HOW'S THIS,
MR. CHAIR? GREAT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IT'S RARE THAT MY VOICE NEEDS TO GET LOUDER,
BUT I APPRECIATE IN THIS INSTANCE. 
          I WILL DO IT. WE LIVE AT A TIME IN WHICH OUR CITIES ARE UNDERGOING SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES. 
          DALLAS, LIKE MANY CITIES, SEEKS TO FIND WAYS TO REJUVENATE ITS URBAN CORE AND TO FIND NEW
FORMS OF SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          WE USED TO COME DOWNTOWN TO SHOP. WE USED TO COME DOWNTOWN TO GATHER IN A VARIETY OF CIVIC
EVENTS IN DALLAS AND ELSEWHERE. 
          THOSE KINDS OF ACTIVITIES INCREASINGLY ARE DISPERSED ACROSS A MUCH BROADER URBAN AREA. 
          CITIES SEEK NEW WAYS TO PROVIDE CLASSIC EXPERIENCES OF BRINGING COMMUNITY TOGETHER,
FINDING WAYS THAT CUT ACROSS INCOME, CUTS ACROSS GEOGRAPHY, CUTS ACROSS RACE,
AND FINDS WAYS FOR CITIES TO DO WHAT THEY ARE BRILLIANT AT DOING, WHICH IS CREATING COMMUNITY. THURMAN'S MISSION IS TO CREATE AN IMPORTANT PART OF SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN DALLAS, TEXAS. ARE WE, PARTICULARLY IN A POST-COVID ENVIRONMENT WHERE
PUBLIC HEALTH OR 
          [02:25:08]
HUMAN HEALTH OR WELL-BEING IS INCREASINGLY A PRIORITY OF INDIVIDUALS,
FAMILIES AND GOVERNMENTS? WE PROVIDE A HEALTH AND WELL-BEING ENVIRONMENT THAT SERVES EVERYBODY. 
          WHAT HAPPENS IN A THERMA ARE THREE THINGS. ONE IS THERMAL BATHING. 
          IT'S REALLY QUITE DIFFERENT THAN A SPA, WHICH TENDS TO BE AN INDIVIDUAL AND ISOLATED
EXPERIENCE. 
          I THINK THE ROMAN BATHS THINKS THE BATHS OF CARACALLA THINK THE BATHS OF DIOCLETIAN. 
          WE WILL HAVE 3 TO 7000 PEOPLE AT A TIME IN OUR BUILDING WILL SERVE UP TO 2 MILLION PEOPLE
A YEAR, AND WE DO SO AT AFFORDABLE PRICES. SO ALL THE RESIDENTS OF DALLAS AND YOUR REGION CAN
ATTEND. 
          THEY'LL DO THREE THINGS. THEY'LL THERMAL BATHE,
THEY'LL INVOLVED IN SAUNA, VERY DIFFERENT KIND OF SAUNA EXPERIENCE THAN MOST OF US ARE USED TO. AND WE HAVE A PLAY ZONE. ALL THAT IS A SOURCE OF JOY FOR CHILDREN OF ALL AGES,
INCLUDING MINE. 
          THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. A MAJOR EXPANSION OF. 
          WE. THAT'S YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT'S YOUR TIME. 
          YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK, AND THAT CONCLUDES YOUR THREE MINUTES. OKAY. 
          CAN I JUST SAY ONE THING QUICKLY, SIR? EVERYONE GETS THEIR THREE MINUTES. 
          BUT I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. 
          LET ME TURN IT OVER TO MY COLLEAGUE, PHIL GARBE. 
          WE REPRESENT OF SUB DISTRICT ONE FILL WITH MATHEWS OF IS THE ENTITY SEEKING TO APPROVAL
FOR DISTRICTS TWO, THREE AND FOUR. MY NAME IS PHILIP GABE. I'M A SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, MATHEWS. AND MY ADDRESS 66406 TIFFANY DRIVE IN DALLAS,
TEXAS. 
          FIRST, I WANT TO THANK EVERY ONE OF YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND YOUR TIME ON THIS COMMISSION.
I KNOW IT'S REALLY HARD SOMETIMES AND YOU REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE, ESPECIALLY FOR RESIDENTS LIKE ME. SO WE CONTROL THE PARTNERSHIP THAT OWNS ALL THE LAND IN
PA 800. 
          WE'VE ALSO SPENT THE LAST THREE YEARS WORKING WITH THERMA TO GET HERE. 
          THEY ARE THE RIGHT PARTNER FOR THIS GROUND AND THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          I WANT TO MAKE TWO VERY QUICK POINTS TO YOU FIRST. 
          THE CEDARS MATHEWS HAS BEEN INVESTING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 30 YEARS. 
          WE'VE BEEN STEWARDS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND A STEADY PARTNER FOR THE CITY,
AND WE'RE GOING TO BE HERE FOR ANOTHER 30 YEARS. 
          THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE IS PRETTY INCREDIBLE. 
          THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE WHERE JERRY WORLD WAS SUPPOSED TO BE BUILT IN 2008,
PP. 
          800 WAS SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE THOUSANDS OF APARTMENTS AND A RIVERFRONT DISTRICT DEVELOPED BY
A MAJOR APARTMENT DEVELOPER. 
          IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AN OBSERVATION WHEEL, WHICH WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A BIG ATTRACTION FOR
THE CITY AND AN OFFICE BUILDING. 
          WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU IS DIFFERENT. IT'S A DESTINATION BUILT TO BE USED BY PEOPLE WHO
LIVE NEARBY. 
          IT'S AN ACCESSIBLE HEALTH AND WELLNESS AMENITY THAT WILL BECOME PART OF OUR SOCIAL
INFRASTRUCTURE, AS JOHN ARTICULATED. 
          AND IT'S GOING TO BE A DAY ONE ATTRACTION FOR VISITORS. 
          IT'S GOING TO, YOU KNOW, ENCOURAGE OUR SUBURBAN NEIGHBORS TO COME DOWN TO THE CITY,
AND IT'S GOING TO SUPPORT THE CITY'S VISION TO EXPAND THE CONVENTIONEERS ENTERTAINMENT OPTIONS. THIS HAS BEEN AN INDUSTRIAL AND VACANT LAND SITTING BETWEEN A GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD
AND ITS RIVER FOR A VERY LONG TIME. 
          THIS IS THE FIRST STEP TO CHANGE THAT. SECOND,
YOU'RE PROBABLY ALL WONDERING WHAT KIND OF COMES NEXT AFTER THIS. 
          THIS AMENDMENT CREATES A FRAMEWORK TO ENABLE THERM TO HAPPEN,
BUT IT ALSO GIVES MATTHEWS ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY, BUT ALSO ENOUGH DIRECTION FROM YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ADDRESS THE PUBLIC REALM
CORRECTLY. 
          THE FIRST FIRMS, THE FIRMS, THE FIRST PHASE IS NOT THE LAST ONE. 
          WE OWNED ALL THE SURROUNDING ACREAGE, AND WE'RE WORKING ON A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
COMPLEMENTARY USES RETAIL, HOTEL, APARTMENTS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE EVEN OFFICE,
I DON'T KNOW. 
          WE'LL SEE WHAT THE MARKET SAYS. THAT PLAN INCLUDES PUBLIC SPACE ALONG THE OLD TRINITY
RIVER THROUGH THE WATER COMMONS. 
          AND WHAT'S INTERESTING, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN,
IT USES ALL OF THIS AS AN AMENITY. 
          IT DOESN'T TRY TO HIDE IT. WE'LL BE BACK IN FRONT OF THIS COMMISSION TO TALK ABOUT OUR
FUTURE PLANS AT ANOTHER AT ANOTHER DATE. 
          BUT THERME IS THE CATALYST, ONE THAT BRINGS ADDITIONAL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INVESTMENT JOBS, VITALITY OF THE CEDARS. AND WE'RE ALL WILLING TO BE HELD TO THE STANDARDS OF THIS FORM
BASED CODE. 
          IN CLOSING, I AGAIN WANT TO ECHO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON'S EFFORTS OVER THE LAST MONTH. 
          SHE HAS DONE YEOMAN'S WORK IN TERMS OF GETTING US TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY. 
          AND I ALSO WANT TO JUST SAY WE'VE HELD THIS LAND FOR A LONG TIME. 
          WE'RE HERE FOR THE LONG TERM AND WE'RE EXCITED TO BRING THERM TO DALLAS. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER IN SUPPORT. 
          HELLO, MY NAME IS KIRK JORDAN. I AM THE IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT OF THE CEDARS
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. 
          [02:30:03]
I LIVE AT 1615 SOUTH ERVAY STREET HERE IN DALLAS. 
          SEVEN FIVE. 215 I LIVE CATTY CORNER PROUDLY TO CITY PARK. 
          WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS, AS A NEIGHBORHOOD LEADER,
I SUPPORT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IT OFFERS OPPORTUNITY TO BRING MEANINGFUL INVESTMENT, JOBS AND NEW AMENITIES TO THE AREA THAT HAS NOT ALWAYS BENEFITED FROM THE FULL
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES. 
          WE AND THE CEDARS ARE ACTIVE IN MAKING THAT CHANGE WITH OUR INVESTMENTS AND OUR ACTIONS. 
          THERMA IS A STRONG FIT FOR THE RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD. 
          THE PROPERTY'S PROXIMITY TO DOWNTOWN. THE NEW CONVENTION CENTER,
THE TRINITY RIVER, MAKES IT WELL SUITED FOR A DESTINATION FOCUSED ON WELLNESS, RECREATION AND HOSPITALITY. THE PROJECT COULD ACTIVATE THIS SITE WHILE CREATING STRONGER
CONNECTIONS AMONG DOWNTOWN, THE RIVER AND NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS, SPECIFICALLY THOSE SO ADJACENT TO LIKE THE CEDARS FAIR
PARK, OAK CLIFF AND SOUTHERN DOWNTOWN FOR RESIDENTS. 
          THIS MEASURE, THIS MEASURE OF PROJECT'S SUCCESS WILL BE WHETHER ITS BENEFITS EXTEND BEYOND
THE PROPERTY ITSELF. 
          I ENCOURAGE THEM TO PRIORITIZE LOCAL HIRING,
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMALL AND MINORITY OWNED BUSINESSES, ACCESSIBILITY PROGRAMS, AND CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT WITH THE CEDARS AND SURROUNDING
COMMUNITIES. 
          IN PARTICULAR, I WOULD LIKE TO ADVOCATE FOR ACCESSIBILITY TO OUR TEACHERS,
FIREFIGHTERS, POLICE AND FIRST RESPONDERS, SAFE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS, RESPONSIBLE TRAFFIC PLANNING,
AND IMPROVED ACCESS TO THE TRINITY RIVER SHOULD REMAIN CENTRAL TO THE DEVELOPMENT. 
          WITH THOSE PRIORITIES IN PLACE, THERMA CAN BE MORE THAN A VISITOR ATTRACTION. 
          IT CAN BE A PLACE WHERE DALLAS RESIDENTS GATHER TO RELAX. 
          IT CAN BE A STRONG COMMUNITY PARTNER AND A SOURCE OF PRIDE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE AND
WORK NEARBY. 
          I RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST. 
          THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR RUBIN AND COMMISSIONERS. 
          MY NAME IS CRAIG DAVIS. I AM THE PRESIDENT AND CEO OF VISIT DALLAS. 
          I LIVE AT 1218 NORTH WINNETKA AVENUE IN DALLAS. 
          OUR TEAM ENTHUSIASTICALLY SUPPORTS THE PROPOSED THERMA DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE DALLAS NEEDS
DISTINCTIVE ATTRACTIONS THAT GIVE PEOPLE NEW REASONS TO VISIT, STAY LONGER, COME BACK AND CONTINUE TO SPEND MONEY IN OUR BUSINESS. 
          AS PHIL HAD REFERRED TO, THIS IS CALLED A FIRST DAY ATTRACTION. 
          AS VISITORS CRAVE EXPERIENCES THEY CAN'T GET IN THEIR OWN BACKYARDS AND THERMA IS EXACTLY
THAT THERMA. 
          EUROPEAN LOCATIONS, PARTICULARLY IN BUCHAREST AND NEAR MUNICH,
HAVE ESTABLISHED A POWERFUL TRACK RECORD. 
          THESE ARE NOT SMALL OPERATIONS, AND THERMA BUCHAREST WELCOMES NEARLY 2 MILLION VISITORS
ANNUALLY AND ANCHORS AN ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          THE FACILITIES ARE LEED CERTIFIED, EMPLOY THOUSANDS AND GENERATE SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC
ACTIVITY ACROSS HOTELS, RESTAURANTS, RETAIL AND CULTURAL VENUES. THEY'VE DONE THIS CONSISTENTLY YEAR AFTER YEAR. 
          THE SITE THEY'VE SELECTED IS PERFECT. LOCATED IN THE CEDARS NEIGHBORHOOD,
IT WILL SERVE AS AN AMENITY FOR MILLIONS OF VISITORS WHO COME TO DALLAS EVERY YEAR AND WILL BE INCREDIBLY CONVENIENT TO THE NEW KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON CONVENTION CENTER THAT OPENS
UP IN 2030, THEREBY COMPLEMENTING THE SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT THAT HAS BEEN MADE IN THE CONVENTION
CENTER. 
          SO HERE'S WHAT MATTERS THERMA BRINGS SOMETHING. 
          WE DON'T HAVE A WORLD CLASS WELLNESS DESTINATION CAPABLE OF ELEVATING DALLAS INTERNATIONAL
PROFILE, SUPPORTING SUSTAINED JOB GROWTH AND STRENGTHENING OUR COMPETITIVE POSITION AS A PREMIER
DESTINATION FOR LEISURE, TRAVEL AND CONVENTIONS. WE ASK YOU TO SUPPORT THIS. 
          THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER IN SUPPORT. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSION. MY NAME IS EVAN SHEETS,
VICE PRESIDENT, PLANNING AND POLICY. 
          I DON'T THINK THE MICROPHONE'S ON. TRY THAT ONE. 
          YOU GOT ME NOW. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN. 
          MY NAME IS EVAN SHEETS, VICE PRESIDENT, PLANNING AND POLICY FOR DOWNTOWN DALLAS,
INC.. 
          AS ADVOCATES FOR DOWNTOWN DALLAS, D SUPPORTS THE PROPOSED THERMA DEVELOPMENT AS IT
ADVANCES SEVERAL KEY IMPORTANT PRIORITIES FOR DOWNTOWN. 
          ATTRACTING PRIVATE INVESTMENT, CREATING A MORE VIBRANT MIX OF USES AND FURTHER
STRENGTHENING CONNECTIONS TO NEIGHBORHOODS, ESPECIALLY TO THE SOUTH. THERMA IS ESPECIALLY WELL SUITED TO THIS SITE ON RIVERFRONT
BOULEVARD. 
          IT'S WELLNESS, RECREATION, HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM OFFERINGS WOULD COMPLEMENT THE NEW
CONVENTION CENTER, GIVE RESIDENTS, CONVENTION ATTENDEES AND OTHER VISITORS ANOTHER COMPELLING REASON TO COME
TO THE CORE OF OUR CITY. 
          BY ACTIVATING AN UNDERUSED PROPERTY WITH YEAR ROUND DESTINATION,
THE PROJECT COULD GENERATE ADDITIONAL ACTIVITY FOR DOWNTOWN HOTELS, RESTAURANTS OR RETAILERS AND OUR CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS. 
          DOWNTOWN NEEDS AMBITIOUS PROJECTS THAT BUILD ON PUBLIC INVESTMENT,
BROADEN OUR APPEAL AND CONTRIBUTE TO A MORE CONNECTED AND DYNAMIC URBAN CENTER, 
          [02:35:04]
INVITING THE REGION TO EXPERIENCE WHAT THE CORE OF DALLAS HAS TO OFFER. 
          THERMA HAS THE POTENTIAL TO DO EXACTLY THAT. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK YOU TO SUPPORT THIS
REQUEST TODAY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. AND I JUST WANTED TO NOTE ONE THING ON THE RECORD THAT I
DIDN'T NOTE EARLIER IS COMMISSIONER WHEELER IS RECUSED ON THIS CASE, SO SHE'S NOT PARTICIPATING IN ITS CONSIDERATION. 
          NEXT SPEAKER IN SUPPORT. 
          VICTORIA MORRIS WITH JACKSON WALKER, 2323 ROSS AVENUE,
SUITE 600, IN DALLAS. 
          MR. CHAIR. COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE VERY EXCITED TO BE HERE TODAY WITH A TRULY TRANSFORMATIVE, TRANSFORMATIVE PROJECT FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS. 
          AS YOU RECALL, WE WERE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AGENDA FOR KPCC'S CONSIDERATION IN JULY,
AND SINCE THEN WE HAVE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH COMMISSIONER HAMPTON AND CITY STAFF TO REFINE OUR REQUEST TO MAINTAIN THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE PD,
WITH PARTICULAR FOCUS ON THE PUBLIC REALM AND THE STREET LEVEL EXPERIENCE, INCLUDING ENHANCED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE WELLNESS AND EDUCATION CENTER,
THE THERMA AND THE BROADER REGIONAL WELLNESS CAMPUS. 
          A FEW KEY HIGHLIGHTS INCLUDE A MINIMUM OF 250,000FT² FOR THE WELLNESS AND EDUCATION
CENTER. 
          AN ADDITIONAL 5% OF OPEN SPACE FOR A TOTAL OF 10%,
WITH AN ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON RIVERFRONT BOULEVARD. 
          KEY SUSTAINABLE DESIGN FEATURES HAVE ALSO BEEN INCLUDED. 
          WATER SAVING IRRIGATION METHODS, BIRD PROTECTION STRATEGIES FOR THE EXTERIOR FACADES,
GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE STRATEGIES, AND NATIVE PLANT SPECIES. ADDITIONAL PLANTING AND AMENITIES ZONES HAVE BEEN INCLUDED ON
HOTEL STREET. 
          WHEN THERE IS SURFACE PARKING, PARALLEL ON STREET PARKING AND A MINIMUM GROUND FLOOR
HEIGHT FOR A PARKING GARAGE TO ACCOMMODATE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED USES. ARCHITECTURAL COMPATIBILITY FOR THE FACADE,
SCREENING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PARKING GARAGE AND LOADING AREAS, AND, OF COURSE, PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE TRAILS TO PROVIDE CONNECTIVITY TO THE TRINITY RIVER
WITH INCREASED SIDEWALK WIDTHS ALONG THE MEANDERS. 
          AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS AN EXTENSIVE LIST AND WE'RE AGAIN,
VERY APPRECIATIVE APPRECIATIVE TO COMMISSIONER HAMPTON FOR HER THOROUGH AND THOUGHTFUL REVIEW OF THIS REQUEST. AND OF COURSE, AGAIN TO CITY STAFF. 
          WITH THAT, I WILL PASS IT TO MY COLLEAGUE SUZANNE FOR THE FINAL REVISIONS. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE DALLAS CITY PLAN COMMISSION. SUZANNE CAROLYN 2323
ROSS AVENUE. 
          WE'RE EXCITED TO BE HERE TO YOU WITH YOU TODAY. 
          WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE COMMUNITY, A LOT OF THE COMMUNITY,
BUSINESS LEADERS AND THE SUPPORTIVE STAFF, AND HOPEFULLY OUR COMMISSIONER AS WELL, AND YOU ALL AS WELL. 
          THIS IS A COMPLICATED SITE. AS YOU SAW IN THE BRIEFING,
WE'RE TRYING TO UNIFY THREE SPECIFIC THREE INDEPENDENT TRACKS INTO ONE USING THINGS SUCH AS OCCUPIABLE FLOOR AREA TO SPAN A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. 
          WE ARE EXCITED ABOUT WHERE WE ARE TODAY. I JUST THERE'S THREE THINGS I'D LIKE TO FOCUS ON
IN OUR FINAL FINAL REVISIONS. 
          THE OCCUPIABLE FLOOR AREA, WE DID REDUCE THAT AREA AGAIN FROM 50 DOWN TO 40FT. 
          WE INCLUDED HIGHER GARAGE HEIGHTS FROM 14FT TO 16FT,
AND WE HAD SCREENING OF THE GARAGE AND THE VEHICLE HEADLIGHTS. 
          WE NOW HAVE SOLID SCREENING. WE ARE SO THANKFUL AND APPRECIATIVE TO BE HERE TODAY. 
          WHAT I'M MOST EXCITED FOR AND EXCITED FOR THIS CITY IS THAT IT'S THE FIRST IN THE UNITED
STATES, THE FIRST IN TEXAS, THE FIRST IN DALLAS, THE FIRST SOUTH OF DOWNTOWN,
AND THE FIRST PROJECT IN THE CEDARS. 
          SO WITH THAT, I SEEK YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN SUPPORT? SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? I DO,
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. IN THE MATTER OF Z-25-000094, I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE
REQUEST OF AN AMENDMENT TO PD 800, SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT. REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDED EXHIBIT A,
800 A AND 800 B AN AMENDED MENDED CONDITIONS AS READ INTO THE RECORD,
INTO A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A PEDESTRIAN SKY BRIDGE, SUBJECT TO SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONS. THANK YOU. 
          COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER,
FOR YOUR SECOND. 
          ANY DISCUSSION AND JUST BRIEF COMMENTS? I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT TEAM. 
          YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'VE BEEN ENGAGED FOR PROBABLY 18 MONTHS AS THEY'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH
THEIR REVIEW PROCESS. 
          THAT HAD ROBUST REVIEW BY THE URBAN PEER REVIEW PLAN COMMITTEE,
WHICH REALLY FORMED THE BASIS OF ALL OF OUR CONVERSATIONS, AS YOU HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT TEAM ADDRESSING THE PUBLIC REALM IMPROVING CONNECTIONS TO
THE TRINITY, 
          [02:40:02]
WHICH IS AN AMAZING RESOURCE FOR OUR CITY AND PROVIDING FOR THE PROJECT AND THEIR
FLEXIBILITY THAT THEY NEED AS THEY CONTINUE THEIR DEVELOPMENT OR REALLY THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES. AND I THINK WE HAVE STRUCK A GOOD BALANCE IN GIVING THEM THE FLEXIBILITY THEY
NEED, WHILE CARING FOR THE CORE DESIGN PRINCIPLES THAT WERE EMBEDDED IN THE PD. 
          SO I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES WILL SUPPORT THE MOTION,
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THE NEXT STEPS ON THE PROJECT. 
          THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON,
I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. 
          HOW DOES THE BIRD PROTECTION WORK? HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT. 
          ONE SECOND. OH, YOU CAN ANSWER FROM THE APPLICANT SIDE AS WELL,
IF YOU'D LIKE, OF WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING. 
          BUT FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC LET ME NOT GET AHEAD OF MY WORDS HERE. 
          THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC CONDITIONS IN THERE REGARDING CLADDING AND OTHER MATERIALS THAT
WOULD BE REQUIRED ALONG ANY GLASS STRUCTURES AND WHATNOT, WHICH I THINK IS THE CRUX OF THE BIRD PROTECTION. 
          BEYOND THAT, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE STANDARDS FROM THE US GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL,
WHICH WOULD BE, I THINK, A USEFUL SOURCE FOR REVIEW AS TO COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE CONDITIONS. 
          BUT IT'S PRETTY OPEN ENDED. OUTSIDE OF THAT. BUT THE CLADDING REQUIREMENT IS PRETTY
ENFORCEABLE IN MY OPINION. 
          OKAY. WHERE IS THAT GOING TO BE LOCATED ON THE STRUCTURE? LIKE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW A BIG GLASS STRUCTURE LIKE THAT,
I CAN SEE WHERE IT WOULD CREATE ISSUES FOR BIRDS. 
          AND SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. I SAW THAT THERE ARE PROTECTIONS FOR BIRDS IN THE
NEW LANGUAGE, BUT I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GET ANYBODY TO EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THAT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO WORK. 
          UNDERSTOOD. AND I'M PULLING UP THE CONDITION IN HERE AS WELL. AND I DON'T KNOW IF FROM THE
APPLICANT TEAM THEY MIGHT HAVE SOME MORE INFO FROM THEIR ARCHITECT. SURE. 
          SO VICTORIA MORRIS THE BIRD PROTECTION STRATEGIES ARE ON THE EXTERIOR FACADES AND
INCLUDING THE OCCUPIABLE AREA OVER RIVERFRONT, SO THOSE WILL BE EXPLORED. AS MR. BATE EXPLAINED,
THERE ARE CLADDING AND SCREENING CAPABILITIES TO HELP PROTECT THE BIRDS THAT ARE IN THE AREA AND THEIR THEIR MIGRATION PATH. 
          SO WE WILL BE EXPLORING OPPORTUNITIES TO DO THAT ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. 
          OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT. 
          YEAH. IF I MAY, I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION OF ONE OF THE APPLICANT TEAM. 
          I BELIEVE IT WAS MR. JACOB, IF YOU COULD COME DOWN. 
          I JUST WANT TO START BY SAYING I FULLY SUPPORT THE PROJECT. 
          I THINK IT'S VERY CREATIVE LAND USE, VERY CREATIVE DESIGN,
ETC.. 
          SO WHAT MY GOAL IS, IS TO MAKE SURE WHEN YOU ALL LEAVE HERE,
YOU'VE GOT THE GREATEST CHANCE OF SUCCESS. 
          AND SO YOU MADE A COMMENT THAT I THOUGHT WAS WAS SIGNIFICANT. 
          IT CAUGHT MY EAR. IT WAS THAT SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT THAT THIS PD IS FLEXIBLE FOR YOU AS
AN APPLICANT. 
          IS THAT WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY? CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME NOW? THERE'S TWO TYPES OF FLEXIBILITY THAT WE WERE SEEKING WITH THIS PD. 
          THE FIRST FLEXIBILITY IS FOR THERMA SPECIFICALLY,
WHICH WAS A PROCESS WHERE THEY TOOK THIS CONCEPTUAL DESIGN WORK TO SEE HOW IT COULD INTERACT WITH THE PD AND REALLY CREATE THE SORT OF DESIGN CONSTRAINTS TO BE ABLE TO BE
CREATIVE AND FIND THAT BALANCE BETWEEN SORT OF THEIR NEED TO OPERATE AND SORT OF THE CITY'S NEED TO SORT OF HAVE A PUBLIC REALM ON THE MATTHEWS SIDE OF
THE EQUATION. 
          YOU KNOW, I THINK WHAT'S NICE ABOUT THE WAY THE PD ENDED UP IS THAT IF THERM DOESN'T
HAPPEN, THERE ARE STATEMENTS IN HERE ABOUT MINIMUM BLOCK LENGTHS,
CERTAIN THINGS THAT HAVE TO SORT OF, YOU KNOW, BE DONE TO MAKE SURE YOU KEEP THE INTEGRITY OF THE PD. 
          BUT THEN IF THERM HAPPENS, WE'VE GOT SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR DESIGN FOR LARGER BLOCK LENGTHS
AND ADDITIONAL PUBLIC REALM IMPROVEMENTS TO START ENVISIONING AND MAKING SURE THAT WE CREATE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT IS COMPLEMENTARY TO THERM. 
          SO FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, FROM THE MATTHEW'S PERSPECTIVE,
WE THINK THAT WHERE WE ENDED UP WAS A REALLY GREAT NEGOTIATED RESOLUTION TO GIVE US THE FLEXIBILITY TO BE CREATIVE, BUT ALSO THE CONSTRAINT TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THE PUBLIC'S
INTEREST IN MIND ON THE PUBLIC SPACE. 
          OKAY. WELL, THAT'S ENCOURAGING TO ME BECAUSE I'VE READ A FEW PDES. 
          THIS ONE WAS MIND BOGGLING. IT'S 48 PAGES LONG. 
          WE'VE GOT ONE A COUPLE OF SLOTS DOWN IN THE DOCKET TODAY. 
          THAT'S 12 OR 6 SIX. AND THEN WE HAD A DIFFICULT CASE TWO WEEKS AGO THAT WAS 12 ON THE PD
AND THIS WAS 48. 
          SO I'M GOING TO I THINK YOU TAKE IT AT FACE VALUE THAT YOU THINK IT'S FLEXIBLE AND THAT
YOU CAN WORK WITH IT BECAUSE YOU'RE THE ONE THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO LIVE WITH IT. BUT AND 
          [02:45:02]
A LOT OF THIS HAS TO DO WITH THAT HISTORY OF THAT SITE. 
          I MEAN, THIS WAS A APARTMENT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. 
          THAT'S WHAT THIS PD WAS SUPPOSED TO BE, YOU KNOW,
15 YEARS AGO. 
          YEAH. AND SO OVER THE 15 YEARS OF THE LIFE OF THIS PD,
IT'S GOTTEN MORE FLEXIBLE. 
          BUT I THINK WITH THIS NEW REVISION, IT'S GOT ENOUGH WHAT I'LL CALL PUBLIC REALM
ORIENTATION TO SORT OF MAKE SURE WE DO IT RIGHT. 
          BUT THE FLEXIBILITY TO MAKE SURE WE CAN DO SOMETHING PRETTY INCREDIBLE FOR THE CITY. 
          YEAH. OKAY. WELL THANK YOU. NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. 
          ANY ONE ELSE, COMMISSIONER HALL? I HAVE A COUPLE. 
          IF YOU COULD COME BACK DOWN, SIR. I'M SORRY. I WANT TO GO BACK TO SOMETHING I BROUGHT UP THIS MORNING FOR YOUR REPS. IS MY CONCERN ABOUT FLOODING FLOODING ISSUES. 
          I ASSUME YOU'VE DONE SOME STUDIES ON THAT. YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO BE SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY
ON THIS AND HAVE IT FLOOD OUT, YOU KNOW? BUT WOULD YOU JUST CONFIRM THAT OR TELL US HOW YOU VIEW IT? SURE. SO WE'VE ACTUALLY BEEN ENGAGED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER UTILITIES FOR PROBABLY
FIVE YEARS ON THIS SITE BECAUSE A LOT IT'S I DON'T THINK I THINK THE SITE'S OUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN. THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE. IT'S MORE THAT WHEN THE PONDS START TO FILL UP,
YOU HAVE EQUALIZATION PIPES TAKING WATER FROM THE NORTH POND TO THE SOUTH POND. 
          AND THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THOSE PONDS HAVE TO OPERATE WITHIN THE DALLAS FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM, WHICH IS THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE. BUT THEN AT THE SAME TIME,
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A GRANT FOR THE WATER COMMONS THAT RELATES TO BEAUTIFYING THAT AND USING IT AS A PUBLIC AMENITY, NOT JUST A FLOOD CONTROL IMPROVEMENT. 
          SO IN OUR SORT OF DESIGN CONVERSATIONS WITH THERMA,
WE HAVE IDENTIFIED A HOST OF DIFFERENT THINGS FROM THE HEIGHT OF THE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE FOR THE GARAGE AND MAKING SURE THAT IT DOESN'T CONFLICT WITH A HIGH PRESSURE SEWER LINE TO
WORKING WITH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ON AN EQUALIZATION PIPE. 
          SO WE HAVE EXTENSIVELY STUDIED THE FLOOD CONTROL ISSUES AS IT RELATES TO THE SITE,
AND WE THINK THAT WE'RE FINDING SOLUTIONS WITH THE CITY THAT WILL WORK FOR THE CORPS, FOR THE CITY, AND FOR THERMA. DID YOU CONSIDER ANY LET'S JUST CALL THEM HISTORICAL FLOOD
SCENARIOS. 
          100 YEAR FLOOD, 500 YEAR FLOOD, 1000 YEAR FLOOD OF THE TRINITY RIVER. 
          I THINK WE DID, BUT I CAN'T I CAN'T SORT OF SPEAK SPECIFICALLY. 
          I WANT TO SAY THIS IS DEFINITELY OUTSIDE THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND MAYBE EVEN HIGHER
THAN THAT, GIVEN WHERE ITS LOCATION NEXT TO THE LEVEE. YEAH. 
          AND I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR, I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROJECT. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND THESE ISSUES LIKE FLOODING AND THINGS WILL BE REALLY REVIEWED,
NOT BY US, BUT BY IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS, BUT SOMETHING THAT WAS A CONCERN TO ME BECAUSE WE'RE
SEEING MORE AND MORE EXTREME WEATHER. 
          NO, ABSOLUTELY. AND LIKE WE'RE SITTING RIGHT NEXT TO TWO IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE NECESSARY,
THOSE PONDS. 
          SIX AND I THINK IT'S THREE THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR THAT ENTIRE FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM TO WORK
ALONG THE OLD MEANDER OF THE TRINITY RIVER, AND THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WITH THIS PD,
AS WELL AS WITH THE CURRENT DESIGN. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MISS KEDRON,
IF I MAY. 
          SURE. AND LET'S DO TRY TO KEEP IT TO STUFF WITHIN OUR PURVIEW. 
          IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, PERMITTING OR ENGINEERING STUFF THAT'S DOWNSTREAM FROM US. 
          NO, NO, NO PUN INTENDED. SO WE'RE JUST FOCUSED ON THE LAND USE HERE TODAY. 
          IT'S JUST MY SCIENTIFIC CURIOSITY. MISS KEDRON,
YOU MENTIONED NOT MISS. 
          MISS, YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS WILL BE THE FIRST SUCH DEVELOPMENT FOR THE THERMA COMPANY
HERE IN THE UNITED STATES. 
          YES, SIR. THEY'VE ANNOUNCED OTHER PROJECTS, BUT WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN GET THEM SHOVELS
IN THE GROUND. 
          AND THE PROJECT BUILT BEFORE, SAY, WASHINGTON,
DC. 
          BUT YOU WORD ON THE STREET IS YOU'VE ACTUALLY HAD THE GOOD FORTUNE TO DO A FIELD TRIP TO
VISIT A THERMAL FACILITY IN IN BUCHAREST, I BELIEVE. WE HAVE COMMISSIONER. IT'S A VERY IMPRESSIVE LOCATION. 
          THE SLIDES DON'T DO IT JUSTICE. YOU KNOW, EVEN I,
WHEN I WENT THERE AT FIRST, I WAS LIKE, I KIND OF SCRATCHING MY HEAD. AND WHEN WE LANDED,
EVERYBODY SAID, YOU HAVE TO GO THERE FIRST. 
          AND I SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, I JUST GOT OFF OF A LONG FLIGHT. I WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO BRING
MISS MORRIS WITH ME AS WELL. 
          AND THEY SAID, NO, NO, NO, YOU HAVE TO COME TO THERMAL FIRST BECAUSE IT'S VERY
REJUVENATING. 
          AND YOU KNOW, IT REALLY GOES TO YOUR WELLNESS. 
          AND WE DID. AND I GOTTA TELL YOU, IT WAS SUCH AN AMAZING EXPERIENCE. 
          THEY HAVE INDOOR AREAS THAT ARE PRIMARILY FOR CHILDREN. 
          THEY HAVE OTHER AREAS THAT ARE MUCH MORE REFLECTIVE IN NATURE,
AND THEN OTHER AREAS THAT ARE MORE REACTIVE YOU KNOW, ACTION ORIENTED. SO IT REALLY ALLOWS KIND OF FOR A MULTI-GENERATIONAL EXPERIENCE. 
          SO IT WAS, IT WAS QUITE THE PLACE. SO I'M GOING TO ASSUME YOU CAME AWAY FROM THAT
EXPERIENCE THINKING THIS WOULD BE A VERY POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CITY OF DALLAS. 
          [02:50:01]
YES, SIR, I DID. ABSOLUTELY. YES, SIR. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU, THANK YOU. 
          ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONER SERRATO? YEAH. 
          I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP THE POINT THAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER BROUGHT UP ABOUT BIRD
SAFETY WITH THE FACILITY. 
          I KNOW I'M SUPPOSED TO BE STAYING ON TOPIC WITH YOU KNOW,
THE SPECIFIC ZONING THINGS, BUT I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE IF THIS WAS TO MOVE FORWARD AND THE DEVELOPER WERE TO CREATE THIS, TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO PARTNER WITH THE TRINITY RIVER AUDUBON
CENTER THAT, YOU KNOW, THE NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY HAS A FIVE YEAR FIGHT PLAN BECAUSE WE'RE,
WE'RE IN THE PLANE OF A MAJOR MIGRATION FOR BIRDS THAT COME THROUGH FROM NORTH AMERICA ALL THE WAY TO THE TIP OF SOUTH AMERICA. THOUSANDS OF BIRDS FLY THROUGH TEXAS. 
          SO IT'S I THINK IT'S PRETTY ESSENTIAL FOR, FOR YOU GUYS TO CONSIDER HOW YOU CAN,
YOU KNOW, REMEDY THAT WITH THE AUDUBON CENTER HERE IN DALLAS. 
          ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THANK YOU FOR THAT. I THINK IT'S A GREAT LOCAL RESOURCE,
WHICH, AS YOU CAN TELL, OUR CLIENTS ARE HERE. THEY WILL HEAR THAT. THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT I ASKED SPECIFICALLY
ASKED WHEN WE WERE IN ROMANIA AS WELL. AND IT'S PART OF THEIR ETHOS WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT THEY DO AS FAR AS EVEN WATER RECYCLING THEIR LANDSCAPE AND THEIR INTERNAL HABITATS AS
WELL, THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I RAISED. AND WHEN WE DID THE SITE TOUR,
THAT WAS SOMETHING I ASKED. AND THAT IS SOMETHING THEY DO STUDY SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT. AND NOW, THANKS TO THE COMMENTS, IT IS ALSO INCLUDED IN THE PD AS WELL. 
          ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? WE HAVE A VERY DETAILED MOTION OR DETAILED AMENDED PD CONDITIONS AND A MOTION BY
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SORRENTO. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR,
SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED, SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 17. THANK YOU. 
          [17. 26-2670A An application for an amendment to Specific Use Permit No. 2576 for an alcoholic beverage establishment limited to a bar, lounge, or tavern and commercial amusement (inside) limited to a dance hall, on property zoned Planned Development District No. 619 with H/48 Harwood Historic District Overlay, on the southwest corner of N. Harwood Street and Pacific Avenue, [AKA 1930 Pacific Avenue]. Staff Recommendation: Approval for a ten-year period, subject to amended conditions. Representative: Deborah Kelley-Hill / Club Vivo U/A From: July 23, 2026. Planner: Liliana Garza Council District: 14 Z-26-000118]
ITEM 17 IS KZ26000118. AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC USE PERMIT 2576. 
          FOR AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENT, LIMITED TO A BAR,
LOUNGE OR TAVERN AND COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT INSIDE. 
          LIMITED TO A DANCE HALL ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 619 WITH
HISTORIC 48 HISTORIC HARWOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF NORTH HARWOOD STREET AND PACIFIC AVENUE,
ALSO KNOWN AS 1930 PACIFIC AVENUE. 
          STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED FOR A TEN YEAR PERIOD,
SUBJECT TO AMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          THANK YOU, MISS GARZA. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ITEM 17? OKAY. SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER KINGSTON, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF Z 26000118? I MOVE THAT WE HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND MOVE THIS TO THE SEPTEMBER 3RD DOCKET. 
          GREAT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON,
FOR YOUR SECOND, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES ITEM 18. 
          [18. 26-2671A An application for a new Specific Use Permit for a bar, lounge, or tavern on property zoned Planned Development No. 269 Tract A, the Deep Ellum/Near East Side District, on the northeast corner of Elm Street and N. Malcolm X Boulevard, [AKA 2901 Elm Street]. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a site plan and staff’s recommended conditions. Applicant: Off the Cuff / Ross Hines Representative: Audra Buckley / Permitted Development LLC Planner: Oscar Aguilera Council District: 2 Z-26-000152]
ITEM 18 IS AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR A BAR,
LOUNGE OR TAVERN ON A PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 269 TRACK A THE DEEP ELM NEAR EAST SIDE DISTRICT,
LOCATED ON THE NORTH EAST CORNER OF ELM STREET AND NORTH MALCOLM X BOULEVARD, ALSO KNOWN AS 2901 ELM STREET. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SITE
PLAN AND STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. THANK YOU, MR. AGUILERA. 
          IS THERE ANYONE HERE ON ITEM NUMBER 18? OKAY. 
          NO SPEAKERS. COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, YOUR MOTION. 
          THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND THE MATTER OF Z-26-000152. 
          I MOVE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE REQUEST,
SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN AND APPLICANT'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR A ONE YEAR PERIOD. 
          THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HAMPTON, FOR YOUR MOTION. VICE CHAIR HERBERT,
FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. IS THERE A NO. OH I OKAY. 
          IT WAS JUST A DELAYED I. ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION CARRIES. 
          ITEM 19. ITEM 19 IS CASE DASH 26-000140. AN APPLICATION FOR A NEW SUB DISTRICT 
          [19. 26-2672A An application for a new subdistrict for O-2 Subdistrict uses, and standards on property zoned O-2 Subdistrict within Planned Development No. 193, the Oak Lawn Special Purpose District, on the west corner of Carlisle Street and Bowen Street, [AKA 3109 Carlisle Street]. Staff Recommendation: Approval, subject to a development plan and staff’s recommended conditions. Applicant: Ken Reese / 3109 Carlisle LP Representative: Suzan Kedron / Jackson Walker, LLP Planner: Liliana Garza Council District: 14 Z-26-000140]
FOR ZERO TWO SUBDISTRICT USES AND STANDARDS ON PROPERTY ZONE OH TWO SUBDISTRICT WITHIN PD. 
          193 THE OAK LAWN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT ON THE WEST CORNER OF PEARL STREET AND BOWEN
STREET, ALSO KNOWN AS 3109 CARLIS STREET. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED,
SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. 
          [02:55:04]
THANK YOU, MISS GARZA. GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN. SUZANNE KEDRON. 
          2323 ROSS AVENUE. ANOTHER CASE THAT I'M EXCITED ABOUT BECAUSE IT'S IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AS
WELL. 
          IT'S ON THE CORNER OF BOWEN AND CARLISLE. THIS PROJECT WILL BE BROUGHT TO YOU BY HILLWOOD, WHO'S HERE IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY, AND BOCA, THE ARCHITECTURAL FIRM DESIGNING THE PROJECT. 
          IT'S A SMALL BOUTIQUE OFFICE ABOUT EIGHT LEVELS WITH SIX LEVELS BELOW GRADE PARKING,
AND WE'RE EXCITED TO BE HERE TODAY. 
          I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, MISS KATHERINE. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM? ANYONE OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER KINGSTON,
YOUR MOTION IN THE MATTER OF Z 26000140. I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE,
SUBJECT TO A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND GO WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST ON PARKING INSTEAD OF STAFF CONDITIONS. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION, MR. KINGSTON. 
          VICE CHAIR HERBERT, FOR YOUR SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? I HAVE A FEW THINGS TO SAY. PRIMARILY, I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE APPLICANT. 
          THIS APPLICANT HAS A HISTORY OF BEING VERY PROTECTIVE AND RESPONSIVE TO THE KATY TRAIL AND
THE ECOLOGICAL IMPACT THAT THEIR BUILDINGS CREATE IN RELATION TO THE TRAIL AND THE CREEK AND
OTHER THINGS THAT OPERATE IN THAT PART OF THE CITY. 
          AND THIS PROJECT CONTINUES THAT HISTORY BY BEING VERY SENSITIVE TO THE TRAIL AND THE
EXISTING NATURAL ELEMENTS THAT EXIST ON THE SITE. I ALSO I WANT TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR CREATING
A DESIGN THAT ADDRESSES A COUPLE OF THE THINGS THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT IN THIS COMMUNITY. ONE IS BELOW GRADE PARKING AND
TWO IS BURYING THE POWER LINES. 
          THIS PARTICULAR SITE WAS MORE DIFFICULT THAN SOME TO BURY THE POWER LINES,
BECAUSE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES HAD DEVELOPED AND PUT ALL THEIR POWER INFRASTRUCTURE ON THIS SITE, WHICH LEFT THIS SITE AS SORT OF THE LAST MAN STANDING IN ORDER TO DO THAT. 
          AND I KNOW THAT IT WAS A TRICKY AND EXPENSIVE PROPOSITION TO DO THAT,
BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE OAK LAWN COMMITTEE AND THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE AROUND HERE GOING TO MAKE THIS AREA MORE WALKABLE AND MORE USEFUL FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE, ARE USING THE SPACE WITH SOMETHING OTHER THAN A CAR WHETHER THAT BE A SCOOTER,
A BICYCLE, A WHEELCHAIR, WHATEVER. SO I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR THOSE THOUGHTFUL
CONSIDERATIONS IN THIS PLAN. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER KINGSTON. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. 
          ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. 
          THE MOTION CARRIES. WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR SUBDIVISION CONSENT DOCKET. 
          [SUBDIVISION DOCKET - Consent Items]
IN CONNECTION WITH THAT, WE HAVE A ANNOUNCEMENT FROM MR. BOARD BOARD. GOOD AFTERNOON. CHAIR REUBEN. GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          COMMISSIONERS. I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE TO YOU MY NEW SENIOR PLANNER WITH SUBDIVISION,
MR. WILLIAM CASTELO. HE LIKES TO BE CALLED ALEX. ALEX. 
          BEING WITH THE CITY FOR 12 YEARS. WHICH FOUR YEARS OF IT HE'S BEEN AS A ZONING STAFF WITH
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, AND HE'S JUST FINISHING HIS SECOND MONTH WITH SUBDIVISION. 
          I AM HAPPY TO HAVE HIM ON MY TEAM. GREAT. THANK YOU. 
          WELCOME ABOARD. I'LL LET HIM GO THROUGH THE DOCKET,
PLEASE. 
          THANK YOU. MOHAMMED. THE CONSENT AGENDA. I'M SORRY. 
          THE CONSENT AGENDA CONSISTS OF TWO ITEMS TODAY. 
          ITEM 20, PLOT DASH 26-00194, AND ITEM 21-26-000195. 
          ALL CASES HAVE BEEN POSTED FOR A HEARING AT THIS TIME AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL
SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET AS AMENDED AT THE HEARING. 
          GREAT. THANK YOU. THERE'S NO ONE HERE IN THE ROOM LEFT TO SPEAK FOR THE PUBLIC,
SO WE WILL GO TO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR A MOTION IN THE MATTER OF THE SUBDIVISION CONSENT DOCKET ITEMS 20 AND 21. I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND FOLLOW STAFF
RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE DOCKET. GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR MOTION. COMMISSIONER HOUSEWRIGHT FOR YOUR SECOND.
ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. THE MOTION CARRIES. IT IS 2:34 P.M.. 
          AND THIS CITY PLAN COMMISSION MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.