[Plan Commission Pre Meeting] [00:00:08] GOOD WELCOME TO THE APRIL 10TH MEETING OF THE GARLAND PLAN COMMISSION. THIS IS OUR WORK SESSION PORTION WHERE WE HEAR BRIEFINGS FROM STAFF. ONCE THAT'S DONE, WE WILL TAKE A BREAK AND COME BACK AT SEVEN O'CLOCK FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION. LET ME GO AHEAD AND MAKE A QUICK ANNOUNCEMENT FOR ANYBODY WHO'S WATCHING. THERE'S ONE CASE THAT HAS DRAWN A LOT OF ATTENTION THAT I WANTED TO LET THEM KNOW. IN CASE WE'RE THINKING OF COMING DOWN. ITEMS THREE A AND THREE B APPLICATION OF PAPER DOT AND ENGINEERS AND THAT'S THE FACILITY. UH THE DPS FACILITY AT GEORGE ON LONG HALLWAY. THEY HAVE WITHDRAWN SO WE WILL NOT BE HEARING ANYTHING ABOUT THAT CASE TONIGHT. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT ANNOUNCEMENT. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. FIRST I'D LIKE TO GO OVER THE CONSENT AGENDA. THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THAT. BUNCH OF PLANTS. NO QUESTIONS. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE 22 80. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES 100 AND 10 UNITS FOR SENIOR INDEPENDENT LIVING DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS PHASE TWO OF THE PRESERVE AT SPRING CREEK SENIOR LIVING HERE'S THE CASE INFORMATION. THE ACREAGE IS APPROXIMATELY 12.8 ACRES AND THE EXISTING ZONING IS PLAN DEVELOPMENT 21-1. HERE'S THE CITYWIDE LOCATION MAP. THE RED STAR SHOWS THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND HERE'S THE LOCATION MAP THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES OUTLINED IN THE TEAL BLUE COLOR. AND THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH IS OWN AGRICULTURAL IS CURRENTLY VACANT AND TO THE EAST ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT 16 13 PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT 21 OH ONE. AND PLAN DEVELOPMENT 20-37. THERE ARE TWO APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT ARE EXISTING AND THEN TO THE WEST IS ON AGRICULTURAL AND TO THE SOUTH IS ON PLAN DEVELOPMENT 21 OH, ONE, AND THIS IS PHASE ONE OF THE SENIOR LIVING, WHICH IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE EVENING. GARLAND PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY AS COMPACT NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THE DENSITY TO BE 8.59 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE AND THE RECOMMENDED IS BETWEEN SIX OR 12 12 UNITS BREAKER. THEREFORE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. HERE ARE SOME OF THE SITE PHOTOS. THE TOP LEFT IS VIEW OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND YOU CAN SEE THE PHASE ONE CONSTRUCTION. TOP RIGHT IS EAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE APARTMENT COMPLEX. BOTTOM LEFT IS SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THOSE ARE THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN THE BOTTOM RIGHT IS WEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. HERE IS THE OVERALL SITE PLAN, WHICH SHOWS PHASE ONE AND THAT WAS APPROVED BACK IN 21 IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION, AND THIS IS PHASE TWO. THIS IS PHASE TWO SITE PLAN, AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES 100 AND 10 INDEPENDENT LIVING COTTAGE UNITS. AND 108 OF THEM ARE DUET STYLE COTTAGE, AND THOSE ARE DUPLEX STYLE, AND TWO OF THEM ARE SINGLE COTTAGES, AND THOSE ARE SINGLE FAMILY STYLE. AND THESE ARE FOR RESIDENTS THAT ARE 55 UP. UM THIS IS PHASE TWO, IS A LOW DENSITY INDEPENDENT LIVING IN A DUPLEX AND SINGLE FAMILY STYLE CONFIGURATION. AND THE EXCESS WILL BE FROM ARAPAHOE ROAD, AND THAT WILL BE THROUGH PHASE ONE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE TWO ACCESS POINTS, WHICH WILL BE THROUGH PHASE ONE. EACH UNIT HAS A COVERED PARKING AND TANDEM SPACES ARE COUNTED AS PARKING SPACES OF ALL THOSE ARE FOR VISITORS, AND THERE ARE SOME PARALLEL SPACES FOR VISITORS AS WELL. HERE IS THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND IT DOES COMPLY WITH THE SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING STANDARDS FOR THE G D. C THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SIX FT ORNAMENTAL FENCE WITH MASONRY COLUMNS AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY WITH THE LANDSCAPING AND THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE. AND HERE ARE THE AMENITIES. UM THE G D. C REQUIRES A TOTAL OF 11,000 SQUARE FOOT INDOOR OPEN SPACE FOR SENIOR LIVING FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A CLUBHOUSE WHICH IS 3622 SQUARE FEET AND, UM, THAT CLUBHOUSE INCLUDES A SPORTS PUB. FITNESS ROOM, SHOWER ROOMS AND MEETING ROOM. IN ADDITION, THE APP CAN PROPOSES THIS OUTDOOR SWIMMING POOL. UM, A EMPATHY ATTAR AND A PICKLE BALL COURT. AND THEN ON THIS ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THERE IS GAZEBO FOR [00:05:07] SEATING OPTION AND THEN THE DOG PARK AS WELL. TO MAKE UP FOR THE INDOOR AMENITY SPACE. HERE ARE THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THREE DIFFERENT STYLE. UM AND THEY ARE FOLLOWING THE NEW MULTI FAMILY. ZERO UM, DESIGN STANDARDS, WHICH IS THE UM, WHICH CONFORMS TO THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS AND THEY'RE COMPLYING. SO THIS IS STILL A THIS IS STYLE B. AND THIS IS STYLE. SEE? AND THIS IS THE SINGLE UNIT. AND THIS IS THE BUILDING LAYOUT JUST TO GIVE A CLEAR PICTURE OF, UM HOW THE UNITS ARE DISTRIBUTED. SPEAK GUARDHOUSE ELEVATION. THE CLUBHOUSE ELEVATION. AND HERE ARE THE DEVIATIONS. THE FIRST ONE IS FOR THE INDOOR COMMON AREA REQUIRED AS 11,000 SQUARE FEET AND PROPOSED IS 3622 SQUARE FEET AND PHASE TWO IS BEING TREATED AS A DUPLEX AND SINGLE FAMILY CONFIGURATION FOR SENIOR RESIDENTS, RATHER THAN A TRADITIONAL INDEPENDENT LIVING. THE AMENITY CENTER CONSISTS OF A SPORTS PUB. FITNESS ROOM, SHOWER ROOMS, LEASING SPACE COPY ROOM AND MEETING ROOM. THE APPLICANT ALSO STATES EACH, UM, HOME WILL HAVE ITS OWN GATHERING SPACE. AND I DID FORGET TO MENTION THAT THEY WILL HAVE ACCESS TO PHASE ONE AMENITIES. AND THE SECOND ONE. THE SECOND DEVIATION IS FOR BUILDING PLACEMENT, SINGLE STORY BUILDINGS, NOT EXCEEDING 30. FT. IN HEIGHT MUST BE SET BACK. A MINIMUM OF 50 FT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF IN A BUDDING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. THIS IS A REQUIREMENT SPECIFICALLY FOR AN ELDER CARE, INDEPENDENT LIVING. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THEY FIXED 15 FT. YOUR SETBACK ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WHICH IS THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT STATES. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS A COMBINATION OF LOW DENSITY DUPLEX AND SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED STYLE CONFIGURATION AND ONE LOT OF RECORD. THERE WERE SETBACK NOT ADJACENT TO A STREET AND A TWO FAMILY DISTRICT AND SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT IS 10 FT. AND THE ELDER CARE. INDEPENDENT LIVING MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 20 FT APART, AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES 10 FT. THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE IN ONE LOT OF RECORD AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THE NEW MULTI FAMILY ZERO DISTRICT BASED ZONING. AND THE MULTI FAMILY ZERO DISTRICT ALLOWS THE BUILDINGS TO BE 10 FT APART. IN ADDITION, THE MULTI FAMILY DISTRICT REQUIRES YOUR SETBACK OF 12 FT, NOT ADJACENT TO THE STREET. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO PD 21. OH ONE TO ALLOW ELDER CARE INDEPENDENT LIVING BASED IN THE MULTIFAMILY ZERO DISTRICT. AN APPROVAL OF THE DETAILED PLAN FOR ELDER CARE, INDEPENDENT LIVING. AND WE SENT OUT NINE LETTERS AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSES. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER ART AND COMMISSIONER JENKINS. GOOD EVENING. IT WAS A GREAT PRESENTATION. I WAS WONDERING, UH, THE LOOPING TRAIL THAT'S WITH WITH PHASE ONE. THEY HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO THAT, OR DO THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH, YOU KNOW, GO OUT ACROSS THE SIDEWALK TO GET TO THE LOOPING TRAIL. YES THERE ARE DOORS, UM, WITH THE GATES SO THEY WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THAT TRAIL. UM ANOTHER QUESTION ONE OF THE SIDES SHOULD A FUTURE PICKLEBALL. AH, COURT. IS THAT. IF THE PEOPLE WANT TO HAVE PICKLEBALL, OR I MEAN, I THINK THE WHOLE PROJECT LOOKS VERY NICE, BUT IT IS ODD TO SEE A FUTURE AMENITY, NOT THE ACTUAL AMENITY THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO BUILD IT. GOOD QUESTION IS JUST TO CLEAN UP THAT THEY NEED TO DO, BUT THEY WILL WILL BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE SAME TIME , OKAY. AND LAST QUESTION IS, I THOUGHT THERE'S A GUARD HOUSE. IT'S ON THIS IS THAT ACTUALLY SOMEBODY ACTUALLY GOING TO BE IN A GUARDHOUSE? OR IS THIS JUST A MORE OF A PROP? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT WILL BE SOMEONE THERE, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF THAT PERSON WILL BE AVAILABLE. 24 7. OKAY, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER JENKINS. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. GOOD EVENING, MA'AM. UM, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU THE FIRST TIME. CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE WASTE DISPOSAL? UM RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE WRITTEN INTO THE BEAUTY ? SURE UM, SO THE REASON WHY THE SANITATION DEPARTMENT WANTED THAT RESTRICTION WAS BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO DEAD ENDS HERE. AND BECAUSE OF THEIR DEBT DOES DEAD ENDS. THE SANITATION TRUCK [00:10:06] WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ACCESS THOSE. SO UM, THEY WANTED THOSE TOTALS TO BE PLACED IN AN AREA WHERE THEY CAN ACTUALLY ACCESS THOSE, UM, VINCE. OKAY THANK YOU. UM AND I GUESS THIS RELATES TO EMERGENCY RESPONSE VEHICLES, NO CONCERN WITH HIM GETTING ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY AS WELL WITH THOSE, OKAY? UM, NEXT QUESTION. THE HAS THERE BEEN SOME SORT OF MEASURE OF THE ADEQUATE LIGHTING THAT WILL BE PROVIDED ON THE PROPERTY FOR SECURITY PURPOSES. I DIDN'T SEE ANY ANY WRITING THAT WAS INDICATED NOW. ON THE DETAILED PENCIL. I WAS JUST KIND OF CASE ABOUT THAT. THEY WILL COMPLY WITH THE LIGHTING PLAN LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS PER THE G. D. C. OKAY? UM. FINAL QUESTION AND THEN COMPLEMENT THE UNDERLYING ZONING MF ZERO. UM THE TENSION BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL BE A MULTI FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND THE REST OF THE PROPERTY, I GUESS. HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE REQUIREMENTS ELSEWHERE. SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OVERALL APPLICATION OF A MULTIFAMILY MULTI FAMILIES OWNING FOR A PIECE OF THE PROPERTY AS OPPOSED TO THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, WHAT IS THE WHAT IS? HOW DOES THAT COMPARE? CONTRAST ETCETERA, ETCETERA. THE MULTI FAMILY ZERO IS ONLY FOR THE 12 ACRES, SO IT DOESN'T AFFECT PHASE ONE IN ANY WAY OR ANY OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS AND THE REASON WHY THEY'RE PROPOSING THIS MULTI FAMILY ZERO IS BECAUSE NOW THE GDC OFFERS THIS BACK IN 21. WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT OPTION OR THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT OPTION EITHER. SO THEY FIGURE THAT THIS IS MORE OF A LOW DENSITY. UM SINGLE FAMILY DUPLEX CONFIGURATION, WHICH BETTER ALIGNS WITH THE MULTI FAMILY ZERO DISTRICT. THANK YOU . FINAL COMPLIMENT REALLY APPRECIATED YOUR SUMMARY. REGARDING THE COMPATIBILITY FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WAS SHORT AND TO THE POINT AND, UH, THERE'S SOMETHING THAT MADE IT EASY FOR ME. SO THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE THIS IS I THINK WE'RE GOING TO START SEEING MORE PROJECTS LIKE THESE MORE INNOVATIVE PROJECTS AND DOESN'T FIT THE MOLD OF WHAT WE'VE SEEN BEFORE. BUT I LIKE THE IDEA OF IT. IN THE PAST, WE'VE PUT THE 55 AGE RESTRICTION IN THE PD AND MAY BE APPROPRIATE TO PUT IT THERE BECAUSE THE GDC DOES CHANGE FROM TIME TO TIME. BECAUSE I QUITE QUESTIONED IT. I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WAS REQUIRED OR NOT. SO YOU MAY CONSIDER THAT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. ALRIGHT THE SECOND CASE TONIGHT IS A Z 23 OH, THREE. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PROVISIONS FOR A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DRIVE THRU SERVICE USE ON A PROPERTY ZONE COMMUNITY RETAIL. THIS SITE IS 0.685 ACRES, AND IT IS OWNED COMMUNITY RETAIL. THIS IS WHERE THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY. AND THIS IS THE SITE AND THE GENERAL AREA. AS YOU CAN SEE , IT'S COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY COMMUNITY RETAIL, UM, DIRECTLY TO THE NORTHEAST AS A DDS DISCOUNTS AND OTHER STORES IN THE AREA ARE RETAIL RESTAURANT, ANOTHER FITTING USES WITHIN COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS THIS AREA AS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS. NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS PROVIDE A MIX OF RETAIL SERVICES AND COMMUNITY GATHERING PLACES. THE PROPOSED USE IS GENERALLY COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. THESE ARE THE PHOTOS OF THE SITE. AH, UM IT IS CURRENTLY AN EMPTY LOTS AND, UM IT WAS PREVIOUSLY ZONED AN S U P FOR A RESTAURANT DRIVE THROUGH USE, WHICH WAS NEVER CONSTRUCTED. HERE IS THE SITE PLAN FEATURES THREE DRIVE THROUGH LANES. AND, UM, THE DUMPSTER FOR THIS SITE WILL BE AN OFFSITE DUMPSTER. ACTUALLY RIGHT HERE IT IS. THE PROPERTY OF DEEDS DISCOUNTS, AND THEY ARE THE ONES SELLING THE LAND TO FROST BANK. UM, FOR IT TO BE CONSTRUCTED. UM THANKS. DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A DUMPSTER. THEY COULD OPT OUT TO DO THE, UM BINS BUT INSTEAD CHOSE TO DO THE OFFSIDE DUMPSTER. AND THIS WAS AGREED UPON WITH A MUTUAL OFFSIDE DUMPSTER AGREEMENT AND WAS ENDORSED BY OUR AWS DEPARTMENT. HERE'S THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. UM THE SITE PLAN ALSO COMPLIES WITH THE GDC AS WELL AS [00:15:10] THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS. THERE WILL BE NO DEVIATIONS REQUESTED. AGAIN NO DEVIATIONS ARE BEING REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT DOES REQUEST APPROVAL OF AN INDEFINITE DURATION FOR THE SPECIFIC USE PROVISIONS. UM HOWEVER, THE S C P TIME PERIOD GUIDE RECOMMENDS 25 TO 30 YEARS FOR DRIVE THROUGH BANKS OR ATMS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PROVISIONS FOR A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DRIVE THRU SERVICE USE ON A PROPERTIES OWNED COMMUNITY RETAIL DISTRICT AND APPROVAL OF A PLAN FOR A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DRIVE THRU SERVICES USED. IN ADDITION, THE PLAN COMMISSION MAY CONSIDER FOLLOWING THE S U P TIME PERIODS GUIDE RECOMMENDATION OF 25 TO 30 YEARS. WE RECEIVED ZERO RESPONSES TO OUR NOTIFICATION LETTERS. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS? WELL THIS IS MORE FOR STAFF. IT'S GOOD TO SEE THE CO SHARING OF DUMPSTERS. THE MORE WE CAN DO THAT, THE BETTER WE ARE, AND EVEN IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. NOT EVERYBODY HAS TO HAVE A FULL DUMPSTER, AND IT JUST MAKES IT EASIER FOR EVERYBODY. AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF ABOUT THREE. CHICKEN RESTAURANTS THAT WE ZONE DOWN THERE. AND DURING A CERTAIN PERIOD AND THEY OBVIOUSLY DID THEIR MARKETS STARTING GOOD THREE. MAYBE TOO MUCH, AND IT'S GOOD TO SEE FROST BANK REVITALIZED THAT AREA. IT NEEDS IT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S EVERYTHING. I'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT. THE FINAL ZONING CASE TONIGHT, Z 23 10, THE APPLICANT REQUEST APPROVAL OF A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE SITE IS LOCATED AT 64. OH, ONE LIONS ROAD. IT'S A 10.76 ACRE SITE AND IS CURRENTLY ZONED AGRICULTURAL. THIS IS WHERE THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY. THIS IS WHERE THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE GENERAL AREA SO YOU CAN SEE IT'S SURROUNDED BY AGRICULTURAL AND SINGLE FAMILY. SEVEN ZONING UM, ALL THE EGG SITES ARE EITHER VACANT CONTINUE SINGLE FAMILY HOME OR A CHURCH, WHICH IS DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH. THERE'S A NEW SUBDIVISION THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING CONSTRUCTED TO THE SOUTHWEST. AND THERE ARE OTHER SINGLE FAMILY PDS IN THE AREA. THIS FALLS WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOODS SECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND UM TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOODS OFTEN FEATURE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES LIKE THIS, UM, SO SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE WOULD FALL WITHIN THIS. THEY PROPOSED USES GENERALLY COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE G D. C REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF TWO ACRES AND THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 33,000 SQUARE FEET AND THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE IS 30,000 SQUARE FEET. UM THE REQUEST IS TRADITIONAL ZONING WITHOUT THE FORMATION OF A PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. YOUR PHOTOS OF THE SITE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE DISTRICT. WE RECEIVED ZERO RESPONSES TO OUR NOTIFICATION LETTERS. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NOPE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I THINK THAT WAS THE LAST ITEM SO WE WILL GO INTO RECESS AND TILL SEVEN O'CLOCK WHEN ARE PUBLIC HEARING. YES. OH YEAH, WE DO HAVE ONE MORE ITEM. NEVER MIND. YEAH CONSIDERATION AMENDED PLAN COMMISSIONED BY LAWS. HOW ARE YOU? I THINK WAS THEIR PRESENTATION DONE THE LAST MEETING. OKAY? FOR YOU. LAST MEETING. CIRCULATED THEM NOW 72 HOURS OF MEETINGS, AND THEY ARE RIGHT TO BE CONSIDERED BY ALL AND THESE LOOK FAIRLY TECHNICAL TO KIND OF CLEAN UP OUR. YEAH NOTHING MAJOR, JUST TECHNICALITIES TO MAKE ONE SECTION COEXIST WITH THE OTHER AND BRING US WITHIN THE LAW CURRENTLY. AW THE BYLAWS WERE I . WE CAME FORWARD WITH THE G D. C. AND SO THERE IS REFERENCES TO THINGS THAT PREDATED THE G, D. C [00:20:07] AND SOME OTHER CHANGES STATE LAWS THAT WE'RE BRINGING THE BYLAWS CURRENT WAY. OKAY? IN COMMISSIONER JENKINS AND THEN COMMISSIONER ROSE. QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THAT ABOUT THE PROPOSED CHANGES. EXCUSE ME. WE'VE GOT ON SECTION SECTION 66 P, SPECIFICALLY AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PLANT COMMISSION GENERALLY WHEN IT MAKES AN APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OR RECOMMENDATION FOR RECOMMENDATION WITH RECOMMENDATION WITH. RECOMMENDATIONS. UM, IT SAYS ON B THREE UPON WRITTEN REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT WHERE PERTINENT FACTS ARE SUFFICIENT FOR THE PLANT COMMISSION DETERMINED THAT A NEW HEARING IS WARRANTED IF IT'S NOT BEING PRESENTED. MY QUESTION IS WHO IS MAKING THE DETERMINATION THAT SPECIFIC FACTS ARE WARRANTED? SO I KNOW THERE ARE PREVIOUS PROVISIONS THAT PERMIT THE CHAIRMAN OR TO THE PLANT COMMISSIONERS TO MAKE , YOU KNOW SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS OR FINDINGS. MY QUESTION IS, IS IT CLEAR ENOUGH HERE TO INDICATE THAT THANK CONDITION YOU KNOW, BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED WILL BE MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU. I THINK THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS DONE IN THE PAST AS IT CAME BEFORE US, AND WE MADE THE DECISION WHETHER WE'RE HERE OR NOT. YEAH. NOTHING IS DONE IN THE VACUUM. I KNOW LEGAL WON'T ALLOW IT, AND I DON'T LIKE THAT EITHER. CORRECT. BUT LET ME GET THERE YOU GO. I'M SORRY. THE RECOMMENDATION TO REVIEW A NEW APPLICATION AFTER THE SIX MONTHS, I GUESS, UH, TIME FRAME OR WITHIN THE SIX MONTH TIMEFRAME IT SAYS, YOU KNOW, A BASED UPON SUFFICIENT FACTS. THE PLANT COMMISSION WILL THEN DETERMINE TO HERE IT IS THIS A WORK SESSION ITEMS SO IN AFRICAN IS DENIED IN THE SIX MONTH PERIOD. THE ADMIT THE STAFF MAKES THE PRESENTATION THAT INCLUDES ALL FACTS REGARDING THE APPLICATION. AND THEN THEREAFTER, WE WILL WE WILL CONCLUDE IN MASS THAT THE APPLICATION COULD BE REVIEWED AGAIN. YEAH THAT'S THAT'S THE PROCESS. I THINK STAFF WOULD BRING ANYTHING FORWARDS SHOULDN'T APPLICANT REQUESTED IF THEY DON'T MAKE THE DECISION, WHETHER IT'S GOOD ENOUGH TO PRESENT TO US, RIGHT? ULTIMATE DECISION, AND I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE A PUBLIC CARING ITEM. WELL. IT MIGHT NOT BE A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM, BUT IT IS USUALLY HELD DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING TIME, BUT NO PUBLIC INPUT. EVERY THINK AND. WE CAN WORK ON THAT. YEAH. GOOD QUESTION. THANK YOU. IS THAT IT? OKAY, COMMISSIONER ROSE THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE PLACED IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT. ARE THE VERY SAME AS IT WAS GIVEN TO US TWO WEEKS AGO. THERE'S NO CHANGES. THAT WOULD BE MY HOPE. I BELIEVE THAT TO BE THE CASE THAT WASN'T HERE AT THE LAST MEETING, BUT THAT WAS THAT'S THE INTENT. AND I BELIEVE THAT TO BE CORRECT, OKAY, GOOD. THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND TO BE THE CASE, TOO. ALREADY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. COOL. ALRIGHTY. SO UNTIL SEVEN O'CLOCK WE ARE IN RECESS. [Call to Order] GOOD EVENING. WELCOME TO THE APRIL 10TH MEETING OF THE GARLAND PLAN COMMISSION TO PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF IT. COMMISSIONERS ARE MEETING WITH THE PARENT OF PLEDGER INVITED TO JOIN US, WHETHER YOU JOIN US OR NOT. NO WAY AFFECTS THE DECISIONS OF THE COMMISSION, OR YOUR RIGHTS NEVER HAS NEVER WILL. TONIGHT'S PRAYER AND PLEDGE TO BE LED BY COMMISSIONER ROSE. HAVE ANY FATHER. WE GATHER HERE IN THIS EVENING REPRESENTING THE CITY OF GARLAND AND I ARE IN OUR DISTRICTS. WE ASK THAT YOU GUIDE US AND MAKING DECISIONS FOR THE CITY. WE ASKED THAT THE YOU WATCH OVER ALL OF OUR FIRST RESPONDERS. AND KEEP THEM SAFE. WE ASK THIS IN YOUR NAME. AMEN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THE REPUBLIC, WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GROUND, INDIVISIBLE LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. WELL GOOD EVENING AND A COUPLE OF THINGS. FIRST OF ALL I'D LIKE TO COMMISSIONER JENKINS FOR CHAIRING THE LAST MEETING. HE DID A WONDERFUL JOB HERE IN CENTER SEAT. AND I THANK YOU FOR [Items 3A & 3B] IT, SIR. YEAH. AND ANOTHER ITEM, WHICH MAY AFFECT SOME OF YOU IS ITEM THREE A AND THREE B. THE [00:25:09] DPS CASE ON THE TALL ROAD, THEY HAVE WITHDRAWN THAT CASE. AND THAT MEANS WILL NOT BE COMING BACK UNLESS THEY RE APPLY, BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THAT WILL BE HAPPENING. SO IF YOU'RE HERE TONIGHT, FOR THAT CASE, WE WILL NOT BE HAVING ANY CONVERSATION ON HIM. ALREADY. OKAY? UM. WE ASKED THAT ANYBODY SPEAKING TONIGHT IN THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. WE GIVE APPLICANTS 15 MINUTES. OTHER SPEAKERS. WE ALLOWED THREE. IF YOU'RE SPEAKING FOR A GROUP, LIKE A HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION WOULD DEFINITELY ALLOW MORE THAN WE ASKED THE APPLICANTS BACK UP TO RESPOND AFTER THE PUBLIC INPUT AND AGAIN, PLEASE STATE YOUR [CONSENT AGENDA] NAME AND ADDRESS. WE'RE GOING TO START OFF WITH OUR CONSENT AGENDA. CONSENT AGENDA ARE ITEMS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE REVIEWED AND WILL BE VOTING ON IN ONE MOTION TO APPROVE. I WILL READ THROUGH THE LIST OF ITEMS AND ANY COMMISSIONER OR ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WANTS ONE REMOVED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. JUST LET ME KNOW, AND WE WILL DO THAT. CONCERNING AGENDA ITEM ONE. A CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES FOR THE MARCH 27TH 2023 MEETING. ITEM TWO A 23-8 STONE HAWK GARLAND EDITION FINAL PLAN ITEM TO BE PLAT 23-9 NORTH GARLAND. COMMONS NUMBER TWO CONVEYANCE PLAN. ITEM TWO C. 23-10 S D. C. SEVEN EDITION REPLANT. ITEM TWO D 23-11 DIGITAL REALTY FINAL, PLATT. ITEM TWO E PLAT 23-12. CRESCENT HEIGHTS TOWN HOMES, PRELIMINARY PLAN AND ITEM TO F 23-13 ZAKI HOME EDITION FINAL PLAN. ANYBODY IN THE COMMISSIONER IN THE AUDIENCE WANT AN ITEM IT CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY. NONE. CHANNEL ENTERTAINING MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, MR CHAIR. COMMISSIONER JENKINS MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER JENKINS AND I BELIEVE I HEARD THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER PAIRS. SERIOUS QUOTE. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THERE ARE EIGHT OF US HERE. COMMISSIONER JENKINS VOTES YES TO YOUR VOTE DIDN'T REGISTER CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT I GET FOR READING NUMBERS. ALRIGHTY. AS I MENTIONED ON INTERNS, ZONING CASES, ITEMS THREE A AND THREE B. THERE WILL BE NO PUBLIC HEARING NO PRESENTATION BECAUSE THAT CASE HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. ALRIGHTY. NEXT ONE IS A TWO PARTER. IS THREE C AND THREE D [Items 3C & 3D] THREE. C. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION JERRY HANDY, REQUESTING APPROVAL AMENDMENT TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. 21 DAYS 01 TO ALLOW ELDERLY CARE INDEPENDENT LIVING USE IN THE MULTI FAMILY ZERO MF ZERO DISTRICT. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED 2055 ARAPAHOE ROAD. AND ITEM TWO D CONSIDERATION. THE APPLICATION OF JURY HANDY REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A DETAILED PLAN FOR ELDER CARE, INDEPENDENT LIVING DEVELOPMENT, SAME LOCATION. ALRIGHT. IS THE APPLICANT HERE. WOULD THEY LIKE TO GIVE ANY KIND OF PRESENTATION OR JUST ANSWER QUESTIONS? HELLO MY NAME IS STEPHEN BALLET WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL FIRM OF JEFFREY DAHMER AND ASSOCIATES. I'M HERE TO REPRESENT THE APPLICANT AND I KNOW THERE WAS A PRESENTATION BY STAFF EARLIER. WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE OR TO CLARIFY ANYTHING THAT YOU MAY NEED TO HAVE CLARIFIED. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS. I THINK NOT. YOU DID A GREAT JOB THERE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALREADY I'LL ASK IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE HERE AND THAT CASE. MM ANYBODY BEHIND THE COLUMN THERE? OKAY? COMMISSIONERS I SEE NO INPUT FROM ANYBODY SO MOTION DISCUSSION. COMMISSION, DALTON. MR CHAIR, MY COMMOTION. WE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE. BOTH PART A OR C AND D. FOR THIS PARTICULAR AS PRESENTED, OKAY? MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DALTON AND BELIEVE I HEARD A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ROSE TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION ITEMS CND PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION. DO YOU KNOW DISCUSSION? AND THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT, UM [Items 3E & 3F] [00:30:10] ANOTHER TWO PARTER PART TO EAT CONSIDERATION APPLICATION AWARE AND ASSOCIATES REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PROVISIONS FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DRIVE. THRU SERVICE USE ON PROPERTIES OWNED COMMUNITY RETAIL. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED 31 50 BROADWAY BOULEVARD. AND ITEM THREE F CONSIDERATION THE APPLICATION OF WEAR AND ASSOCIATES INC. REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A PLAN FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DRIVE THROUGH USE. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE SAME LOCATION. IS THE APPLICANT HERE. CARE TO SAY ANYTHING, OR. AND NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS PRE ACHARYA WITH WEIRD AND ASSOCIATES. UM WE ARE THE CIVIL ENGINEERS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT. I SEE NONE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. LET ME CHECK IN THE AUDIENCE. SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE. WE SHOULD SPEAK ON THIS CASE. SEEING THEN COMMISSIONERS. UP TO YOU NOW. APPROVED. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS TO APPROVE ITEMS THREE E AND THREE F ESPECIALLY USE PROVISIONS AND THE PLAN. BUT HERE SECOND. COMMISSIONER PARIS'S LIGHT IS ON. ARE YOU A SECOND? YEAH OKAY, SECOND, OKAY. ALREADY IN MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS SECOND BACK COMMISSIONER PARIS TO PROVE THESE ITEMS ANY DISCUSSION. YES. HMM INDEFINITE APPLICATION OF THE S U P TIMEFRAME SO THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED ANY POINT IN THE FUTURE TO COME BACK BEFORE, UH, PUBLIC REGARDING THIS AND FOR THAT PARTICULAR REASON ON THAT BASIS ALONE. I WOULD VOTE AGAINST THE CURRENT MOTION WITHOUT THE EXTENSION OF WITHOUT THE OPPORTUNITY, I SUPPOSE FOR THE HEARING IN 20 YEARS. OKAY UM , SO YOU'RE FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF 25 TO 30 YEARS? YES, SIR. OKAY, UH, LET ME ASK IF THAT'S OKAY. DAVID'S IN THE FORM OF A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION. YEAH I DO IT A LITTLE DIFFERENT IS THE MAKER OF THE MOTION WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? YES. FAST. THANK YOU, OKAY. ALRIGHTY WE HAVE AN AMENDED MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR THE 25. YOUR PERIOD. AND BY COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS AND SECOND, CONCURRED. ALTHOUGH SHE'S GOT SOMETHING TO SAY, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER PEARS RAISED WAS POINT OF CLARITY. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION HAD 20 OR 20. AT 25 TO 30 YEARS. 30 SO, ACTUALLY LIKE WE WANT TO BE SURE WE GIVE A RECOMMENDATION OF THE ACTUAL POINT IN TIME. SO IS IT 25 OR IS IT 30 THAT YOU ARE? RECOMMENDING I WOULD RECOMMEND IT TO BE AT THE MEDIUM AVERAGE OF 25 YEARS. OKAY I KNOW WE'RE KIND OF MANGLING THE MOTION HERE, SO LET ME GO AHEAD AND RESTATED CONSIDERATION THE APPLICATION OF WHERE ASSOCIATES REQUEST. I'M SORRY, UM, APPROVAL OF ITEMS. THREE THE APPLICATION FOR THE S U P E AND THREE F THE PLAN FOR THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTION APPROVED FOR A 25 YEAR PERIOD. AND COMMISSIONED. JENKINS. DID YOU HAVE SOME INPUT? OKAY? ALRIGHTY. ANY DISCUSSION. PLEASE VOTE. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHTY. ZONING CASE ITEM IS CONSIDERATION THE APPLICATION OF AS QUIZ ENGINEERING [3G. Consideration of the application of Vazquez Engineering, LLC., requesting approval of a Change of Zoning from Agricultural (AG) District to Single Family-Estate (SF-E) District. This property is located at 6401 Lyons Road.] REQUESTING APPROVAL OF CHANGING ZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO SINGLE FAMILY ESTATE DISTRICT IS PROBABLY LOCATED AT 64 01 LIONS ROAD. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS OUT HERE. GOOD EVENING CHAIRMAN COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS JUAN VAZQUEZ WITH VASQUEZ. ENGINEERING 1919 SOUTH, SHALLOW ROAD. GARLAND, TEXAS. 75042 HE REPRESENTING THE OWNER WHO LIKE TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM AG, TWO SF ESTATES, YOU COULD GO AHEAD AND BUILD THIS HOME. ALRIGHTY. ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I'VE SEEN NONE. IS THERE. ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS [00:35:06] THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER JENKINS MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM MUST PRESENT IT. WHO DID THE SECOND OKAY MOTION BY COMMISSIONER JENKINS AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ROSE TO APPROVE THE CHANGE IN ZONING. ANY QUESTIONS? ANY DISCUSSION? PLEASE VOTE. AT PASTOR UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU, [4A. Consideration of amended Plan Commission Bylaws.] EVERYBODY. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE ONE LAST ITEM IN OUR AGENDA CONSIDERATION OF THE AMENDED PLAN COMMISSION BYLAWS. THESE HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION THERE A LOT OF LITTLE TECHNICAL THINGS TO BRING. OUR BYLAWS IN LINE WITH THE GDC AND STATE LAW. ANY DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS CHIME IN. JUST SAYING NONE. DO I HEAR A MOTION? OKAY, UM. PROBABLY IS THE AMENDMENT AFTER THAT. THERE WE GO. THERE WE GO. MOTION BACK COMMISSIONER ALVIN TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENTS, AS PRESENTED AND THE SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS. ANY DISCUSSION. PLEASE VOTE. AND IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY . THAT WAS THE LAST ITEM IN OUR AGENDA. SO UNTIL OUR MEETING OF APRIL 24TH WE ARE ADJOURNED. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.