[00:00:03] GOOD EVENING. WELCOME TO THE APRIL 27TH MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THIS IS OUR CUSTOM. WE COMMISSIONERS START A MEETING WITH THE PRAYER AND PLEDGE. YOU'RE INVITED TO JOIN US IF YOU DO OR NOT. NO WAY AFFECTS THE DECISIONS OF THIS COMMISSION OR YOUR RIGHTS IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION. TONIGHT'S PRAYER AND PLEDGE BE LED BY COMMISSIONER MIRANDA. BOW YOUR HEADS IF YOU WISH TO. HEAVENLY FATHER, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING US TO CONVENE TONIGHT. WE HUMBLY ASK YOU FOR YOUR WISDOM AND GUIDANCE TO HELP US IN MAKING THE BEST DECISIONS FOR THE CITY OF GARLAND AND ITS RESIDENTS. WE ALSO ASK YOU FOR YOUR CONTINUED PROTECTION TO HELP KEEP OUR OUR CITY STREETS AND HOMES SAFE FOR ALL GARLAND RESIDENTS. IN THIS WE PRAY. AMEN. AMEN. PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. I WAS JUST ABOUT TO SAY. YES. OUT OF THE WAY. HERE. THERE WE GO. WELL, GOOD EVENING AGAIN, AND WELCOME TO OUR MEETING. IF YOU PLAN ON SPEAKING TONIGHT, THERE ARE LITTLE YELLOW SPEAKER CARDS OUT THERE. AND IF YOU'LL FILL ONE OF THOSE OUT AND HAND IT TO THE PLAN, COMMISSION SECRETARY CAN THEN CALL YOUR NAME. AND WHEN YOU COME UP, IF YOU'LL SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONES AND YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, BECAUSE WE DO NEED THAT FOR THE OFFICIAL RECORDS, APPLICANTS WILL BE GIVEN 15 MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR CASE. OTHER SPEAKERS, WE ALLOW THREE MINUTES. BUT IF YOU'RE SPEAKING FOR A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE DEFINITELY ALLOW YOU MORE TIME. AND AGAIN, NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE. GOT A PRETTY SHORT AGENDA TODAY. SO WE'LL START WITH THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA. [a. April 13, 2026 Plan Commission Minutes] ITEM ONE, A APRIL 13TH, 2020 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. IT'S THE PASSING THEREOF. LET'S SEE. I'VE GOT ALREADY. COMMISSIONER JENKINS. CARE TO MAKE A MOTION? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. AND I'VE GOT A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ABEL. IS THAT CORRECT, SIR? ALL RIGHTY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. ANY DISCUSSION? WE NORMALLY TALK ABOUT 5 OR 10 MINUTES ON THIS. SEEING NONE. PREPARE TO VOTE. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA. AND OUR ONLY PUBLIC HEARING CASE OF TONIGHT IS ITEM TWO, [a. Z 26-10 Jose Murga (District 3)] A Z 26 DASH TEN. HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING. CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF JOSE MARIA REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC USE PROVISION FOR A RESTAURANT, DRIVE THRU ON PROPERTY ZONED COMMUNITY RETAIL AND A CONCEPT PLAN FOR RESTAURANT DRIVE THROUGH THRU USE SITE IS LOCATED AT 480 WEST INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 30. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. THIS IS. I'M THE PLANNER WITH THE CITY. I'M PRESENTING THE CASE Z 2610. THE REQUEST IS FOR A SPECIFIC USE PROVISION FOR A RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE THRU USE ON A PROPERTY ZONED COMMUNITY RETAIL. THIS REQUEST ALSO INCLUDE APPROVAL OF A CONCEPT PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 480 WEST INTERSTATE HIGHWAY 30. THE APPLICANT IS JOSE MURGA AND WE HAVE A OWNER HERE AS WELL. WHO IS DAN NGUYEN? THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 0.67 ACRES AND CONTAINS AN EXISTING 2286 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL BUILDING. RIGHT NOW. THE BUILDING IS CURRENTLY NOT IN OPERATION. HOWEVER, THE SITE HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN OPERATED AS A DRIVE THRU RESTAURANT WITH PREVIOUS TENANTS INCLUDING BURGER KING, WILLIAM'S CHICKEN AND JT KOGEN SEAFOODS AND WINGS. IN THE YEAR 2000, AN SUV WAS APPROVED FOR THIS PROPERTY FOR A RESTAURANT, FAST FOOD USE FOR WILLIAM CHICKEN. FOR A PERIOD OF 20 YEARS THAT THAT SUV HAS SINCE EXPIRED AND WAS BECAUSE OF THAT, A NEW SUV IS REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSED RESTAURANT DRIVE THROUGH USE UNDER THE CURRENT GDC STANDARDS. THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP. THE SITE HAS DIRECT ACCESS FROM THE I-30 FRONTAGE ROAD, AND THE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN AN ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE LOCATION MAP ALL THE SURROUNDING LAND USE. THE PROPERTY ON THE NORTH IS PD FOR COMMERCIAL USES, WHICH IS DEVELOPED WITH A RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER. [00:05:02] AND ON THE SOUTH THERE IS A PROPERTY IS ZONED PD 1937 FOR COMMERCIAL USES AND IS DEVELOPED WITH A PAWN SHOP ON THE WEST. THERE IS A PARKING LOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE PAWN SHOP ON THE SOUTH AND AND TO THE, TO THE EAST. THERE ARE, THE PROPERTY IS ZONED COMMUNITY RETAIL AND IS DEVELOPED WITH A MOTEL SIX. OVERALL, THE SURROUNDING AREA IS PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL AND SERVICE ORIENTED ALONG THE INTERSTATE 30 CORRIDOR. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. THE COMP PLAN DESIGNATE COMMUNITY CENTER USE FOR THIS PROPERTY AND GENERALLY COMMUNITY CENTERS ARE INTENDED FOR COMPACT DEVELOPMENT, PRIMARILY NOT. RESIDENTIAL SERVES A COLLECTION OF NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THESE COMMUNITY CENTERS ARE ALSO APPROPRIATE ALONG MAJOR ARTERIALS, HIGHWAYS, CORRIDOR OR TURNPIKE CORRIDORS. AND THEY SERVE. THEY ARE SERVED BY MAJOR TRANSPORTATION CONNECTIONS AND. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMUNITY CENTERS DESIGNATION BECAUSE IT REPRESENTS THE USE OF EXISTING COMMERCIAL SITE, AND THE PROPOSAL SUPPORTS CONTINUED COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AND REINVESTMENT WITHOUT INTRODUCING A NEW OR INCOMPATIBLE LAND USE. THESE ARE THE SITE PICTURES. THE PRESENT SITE PICTURE. HERE IS A CONCEPT PLAN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT AS A PART OF THIS REQUEST. AND IN THIS CONCEPT PLAN, WE CAN SEE THAT NO EXPANSION OF CURRENT FOOT, CURRENT BUILDING FOOT FOOTPRINT IS PROPOSED, AND THE EXISTING DRIVE THROUGH CONNECTION CIRCULATION PATTERN AROUND THE BUILDING IS GOING TO BE THE SAME WAY IT IS. AND THE CONCEPT PLAN INCLUDES SEVERAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS. LIKE PROPOSED LIKE MADE BY THE APPLICANT AS A PART OF THIS REQUEST BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STAFF. FIRST FIRST AMONG THEM IS ADDITION OF A LOADING SPACE ACCORDING TO THE SECTION 4.22. ANY RESTAURANT HAVING AN AREA BETWEEN LIKE 0 TO 10,000 SQUARE FOOT LIKE REQUIRES GENERALLY A ONE LOADING SPACE. SO THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO PROVIDE THAT LOADING SPACE RIGHT NOW. AND ALSO THE SECOND. IMPROVEMENT IS RELOCATION AND REORIENTATION OF THE REFUSE CONTAINER. SO THERE IS AN EXISTING REFUSE CONTAINER FACING THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER. AND THEY ARE REORIENTING AND REPOSITIONING TOWARDS A SOUTHEAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDES LANDSCAPING, ENHANCED ENHANCEMENTS ALONG THE ROAD FRONTAGE AND ALSO WITHIN INTERIOR PARKING LOTS. BECAUSE THE, THE IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO LOADING AREA AND ALSO THE REFUSE CONTAINER RELOCATION TRIGGERS PARTIAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS AS WELL. SO, AND ALSO THERE IS A UTILITY EASEMENT OVERLAPPING WITHIN THE FRONT LANDSCAPE BUFFER. SO THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO COORDINATE WITH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DURING BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS TO DETERMINE WHETHER TREES OR SHRUBS ARE MORE COMPATIBLE OR MORE APPROPRIATE IN THAT AREA. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOR A 15 YEAR SUB. THE SUB TIME PERIOD GUIDE RECOMMENDS 8 TO 15 YEARS FOR THE REQUEST, INVOLVING PARTIAL REDEVELOPMENT OR SITE IMPROVEMENTS TO AN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOR THE MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED TIME PERIOD. FOLLOWING THE APPROVAL, APPLICANT INTENDS TO PURSUE ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE. FURTHER DEFICIT NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AS THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES IS 23, ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT GDC. WHEREAS, THE SORRY, THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES IS 23 AND WHEREAS THE EXISTING ARE 18 SPACES ITSELF. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE SUB REQUEST FOR A DRIVE THROUGH USE AND ALSO APPROVAL OF THE ASSOCIATED CONCEPT PLAN FOR A PERIOD OF 15 YEARS, AND STAFF HAVE MADE A TOTAL OF 52 NOTICES TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS, AND WE HAVE RECEIVED NO RESPONSES. WITH THIS, I'M OPEN TO QUESTIONS. [00:10:03] COMMISSIONER PIERCE. THANK YOU FOR TAKING US THROUGH THROUGH THIS CASE. CAN YOU GO TO BACK TO. I BELIEVE IT'S THE CONCEPT PLAN. YEAH. RIGHT HERE. AND I WAS ABLE TO I'M VERY WELL AWARE OF THIS, THIS SITE LOCATION. AND I ALSO WANTED TO DO A DOUBLE CHECK. AND I DID GO BY IT AND DRIVE THROUGH JUST TO BE SURE THAT I WASN'T MISSING ANYTHING. BUT I WANT TO HAVE TWO CLARIFICATIONS. I THINK I SEE IT HERE, BUT JUST TO, AND IF YOU COULD USE YOUR, YOUR MOUSE TO SHOW THE CURRENT DUMPSTERS BEING MOVED FROM THE LOADING AREA BECAUSE YOU SAID IT WAS FACING TO FRONTAGE ROAD. SO LEFT LEFT CORNER OVER TO THE RIGHT SIDE. IF YOU COULD JUST SHOW YOUR MOUSE WHERE IT HAS MOVED FROM. FROM WHAT I SAW EARLIER, IT IS CURRENTLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OVER HERE AND IT IS MOVED TO SOUTHEAST CORNER AND IT IS ORIENTED TOWARDS WEST DIRECTION. IS SHOWING. OKAY, I SEE IT HERE. I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE THAT IT WAS VISUALLY BEING SHOWN. THAT WAS ONE QUESTION I HAD. THE. ON THE PARKING. IS THERE STILL A CONCERN ON THE PARKING? SO THEY HAVE ONLY LIKE 18 SPACES RIGHT NOW? YEAH. SO THEY LIKE, ACCORDING TO THE CDC, IT REQUIRES LIKE 23 SPACES. AND THE APPLICANT WOULD BE GOING THROUGH THE ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE REQUEST PROCESS AFTER THE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. APPROVAL OF THIS SUP. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER JENKINS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. GOOD EVENING, SIR. TWO QUESTIONS FOR YOU. FIRST QUESTION, ENHANCE LANDSCAPING. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? SO SO THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ALONG THE ROAD FRONTAGE, I-30 FRONTAGE LIKE WHICH MIGHT INCLUDE LIKE CANOPY TREES OR SHRUBS OR ORNAMENTAL TREES. SO IT SHOULD HAVE TO CHECK WITH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT BECAUSE OF THE UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG THE FRONT EDGE OF THE ROAD. AND ALSO THE APPLICANT WOULD BE PROVIDING THE SHRUBS ALONG THE STOREFRONT AND ALSO WITHIN WITHIN THE PARKING AREAS AS WELL. SO THESE ARE REQUIRED AS A PART OF THE ALTERNATE, THE TRIGGER OF LIKE THE HIS THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE BY THE APPLICANT, WHICH ARE LIKE RELOCATION OF THE DUMPSTER AND THE PROVISION OF A NEW LOADING SPACE TRIGGERS THE ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LANDSCAPING. THAT'S MY SECOND QUESTION. LET'S TALK ABOUT ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE. DOES THAT MEAN. SO WHEN AN USES DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH NUMBER OF PARKING, LIKE WHEN HE'S NOT MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GDC, THERE IS A VARIANCE PROCESS THROUGH WHICH AN APPLICANT CAN LIKE PROVIDE A PARKING STUDY SHOWING THAT THE, WHATEVER THE PARKING SPACES HE HAS RIGHT NOW IS ENOUGH FOR THEIR USE THROUGH A PARKING STUDY. SO IT CAN BE, IT SHOULD BE DEVELOPED. IT SHOULD BE PREPARED BY A AUTHORIZED OR LICENSED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER. SO AND IT IS AND IT IS APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY. SO. THANK YOU. BACK TO ENHANCED ENHANCED LANDSCAPING. IT SOUNDS LIKE THE LANDSCAPING WILL JUST BE BROUGHT UP TO THE GDC MINIMUM. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE A CONDITION IN THE SUP THAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING. I KNOW THAT'S WHERE YOUR QUESTION CAME FROM. SO WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE GDC? WHAT'S BEING TRIGGERED? THEY HAVE TO DO IT REGARDLESS. SO THAT DOESN'T NEED TO BE PUT IN THE CONDITIONS. THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS. THEY HAVE TO DO IT DURING THE PERMIT PROCESS. THE REASON WE ADDED A CONDITION IS BECAUSE WE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT IT'S NOT JUST REQUIRED PARKING. IT'S MORE THAN THAT. THE REASON WE COULDN'T INCLUDE THE EXACT NUMBERS THERE IS BECAUSE THERE COULD BE SOME ENGINEERING ISSUES. SO WE JUST SAY TO THE WILL SHALL BE PROVIDED ENHANCED LANDSCAPING AND INTERIOR PARKING AREAS. SO WE IDENTIFY WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO PROVIDE THE ENHANCEMENTS AND PARKING ISLANDS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE CEO. SO STAFF HAS A LITTLE BIT OF LEEWAY THAT'S ASKING FOR MORE TO NOTE. I GUESS THE THE CONCERN IS THAT YOU'VE ALREADY KIND OF ADDRESSED IT. WE DON'T TECHNICALLY KNOW IF THEY CAN PUT SOME OF THE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING IN THE PLACES THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO PUT IT. SO IT, IT'S NOT WORTH IN DEPTH CONVERSATION, BUT ENHANCED LANDSCAPING IS REALLY BROAD AND WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT MEANING [00:15:09] WARRANTING THE CONDITION BE WRITTEN INTO THE PD AS IT IS NOW. AGAIN, NOT NOT TERRIBLY WORTH THE TIME. MY ONLY COMMENT WAS REALLY GOING TO BE PLEASE NATIVE ORNAMENTALS AS OPPOSED TO CRAPE MYRTLES. THAT'S IT. BUT BUT ALL THAT BEING SAID, NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION. NO. WE UNDERSTAND GENERALLY WE WOULD PUT IN THE NUMBERS LIKE FOR SHRUBS OR FIVE CANOPY TREES IN HERE BECAUSE WE WEREN'T TOO SURE, BUT WE ALSO DON'T WANT TO NOT PUT IT IN THE CONDITIONS BECAUSE THEN LATER WE CAN'T ASK FOR IT. AS PART OF THE SUP. WE WANT THE SITE TO BE BROUGHT UP TO AS MUCH ENHANCEMENT AS POSSIBLE. IT'S REALLY KIND OF DEALING WITH TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT I THINK THEY WILL BE ABLE TO DO SOME ENHANCEMENTS. WE'LL HAVE TO BE REALISTIC DURING THE SITE PERMIT PROCESS. WHAT'S APPLICABLE. THANK YOU. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE RISK TO THE APPLICANT. IF THERE IS UNCERTAINTY WRITTEN AND WE'RE ASKING FOR MORE THAN THEY MAY OTHERWISE ALREADY BE INCLINED TO PROVIDE, WE COULD RUN INTO A CONFLICT REGARDING ENFORCEMENT. IT, IT SEEMS LIKE OUR APPLICANT, IF THEY'RE ALREADY WILLING TO PROVIDE THE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING, DOESN'T HAVE THAT CONCERN. I'M SORRY, THIS IS NOT NONE OF THIS IS IMPORTANT, GUYS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. YOU ALL MOVE ON WITHOUT ME. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER CORNELIUS, YOU ABOUT OUT? YEAH. I ONLY HEAR ABOUT THE PARKING AND IF SNP WOULD STILL STAND. AND I THINK YOU EXPLAINED THAT. OH, OKAY. COMMISSIONER DUCKWORTH YES, I WAS GOING TO ASK ON THE PARKING. WHEN DID WHEN DID THE EXISTING PARKING BECOME INADEQUATE FOR THIS FACILITY? AFTER THE ADOPTION OF THE CURRENT GDC. OKAY, SO WE CHANGED THE GDC, WHICH MADE THE PARKING INADEQUATE FOR THIS PROPERTY. YES. THAT WAS THAT NOT KIND OF GRANDFATHERED IN IN THE GDC CHANGE. I THINK THE NEW APPLICATION SO MADE HIM COME UP TO SNUFF ON EVERYTHING. OKAY. GDC COMPLIANCE IS TRIGGER. ALL THE SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS HAVE TO COME UP TO CODE. OKAY. THERE ARE A BUNCH OF TRIGGERS IN THE GDC. OKAY. AND I AGREE WITH MR.. COMMISSIONER JENKINS WE NEED TO IF I WAS PUTTING A RESTAURANT HERE, I WOULDN'T WANT TO PUT TREES IN FRONT OF IT. I WANT PEOPLE TO SEE MY RESTAURANT. SO I THANK THE ENHANCEMENTS NEED TO BE REASONABLE AND TO MAKE IT LOOK BEAUTIFUL AND AND GREEN, BUT TO BE REASONABLE FOR THE FOR THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU. I THINK STAFF WILL TAKE OUR COMMENTS AND CONSIDERATION AND EVALUATING AND AND COUNCIL'S COMMENTS ON IS THAT RESTAURANT HAVE A SIT IN DINING AREA TO. I BELIEVE IT'S IT DOES. OKAY. SO THAT WOULD EXPLAIN THE EXTRA NEED FOR THE PARKING. AND I BELIEVE THAT PARKING CONDITION SHOULD BE PUT IN THE CONDITIONS OF THE SUP2 FOR ONE BASIC REASON. SUPPOSE THEY DO GET AN AGREEMENT TO USE A PARKING NEXT DOOR. THOSE ARE OFTEN INDIVIDUAL COMPANIES TO INDIVIDUAL COMPANIES. THE SUP GOES WITH THE LAND SAY FIVE YEARS. THEY SELL THAT AGREEMENT DIES. SO IT WOULD BE IN THERE FOR IF THEY COME IN FOR A NEW CEO, FOR STAFF TO CHECK TO SEE IF THEY'RE STILL A VALID AGREEMENT. THE REASON WE DON'T DEVIATIONS IN THE SUP IS BECAUSE WITH THE SUP WE'RE ONLY LOOKING INTO THE USE AND ENHANCEMENTS. SO THE SUP REQUEST IS NOT USED TO DEVIATE FROM ANY OF THE STANDARDS. SO THEY'RE STILL EVEN AFTER THE SUP IS APPROVED THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 23 SPACES. SO IT IS THE A C THE ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE PROCESS THAT LETS THEM TAKE CARE OF IT. IF THEY CAN SHOW THAT WHAT THEY HAVE IS ADEQUATE, WHICH IS WHY WE DON'T USUALLY PUT DEVIATIONS IN THIS. WELL, IS IT A DEVIATION? IF THEY GET AN ALTERNATE METHOD OF COMPLIANCE THEN WHICH IS IN MY MIND, OKAY, I JUST THE DEVIATION FROM THE GDC. BUT BUT THE GDC ALLOWS FOR ALTERNATE MEANS OF COMPLIANCE VIA PARKING AGREEMENTS. OF COURSE, THAT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL. IT MAY NOT BE AN AGREEMENT. IT COULD JUST BE A STUDY THAT THEY SHOW THAT, OH, FOR THIS BUSINESS, THIS MANY PARKING SPACES WORK. SO IT COULD BE AN AGREEMENT, IT COULD BE A STUDY, IT COULD BE SEVERAL OTHER THINGS. OKAY. BUT THAT'S WHY WE, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, BUT THAT'S WHY WE TRY TO STAY AWAY FROM PUTTING THINGS IN THE SUP CONDITIONS THAT ARE CONSIDERED DEVIATIONS FROM THE GDC. I WAS JUST THINKING OF IT IN THE CONDITIONS FOR NEXT TIME. IT COMES AROUND FIVE SEVEN YEARS FROM NOW. THE SUP IS STILL GOOD, BUT MAYBE THAT PARKING AGREEMENT THAT WAS IN PLACE, [00:20:03] BUILDING INSPECTION WOULDN'T KNOW AS A PRIVATE AGREEMENT THAT IT WENT AWAY. THEY WOULDN'T KNOW THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN THAT CASE. THEY SHOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AGAIN BECAUSE IF IT'S A DIFFERENT USER, THEN WHATEVER THEY SHOW DURING THE AC PROCESS TO SHOW THAT THAT THOSE MANY PARKING SPACES WORK FOR THEM, THAT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE CHANGED. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WELL, WE GOT A COUPLE MORE. I'M SORRY. COMMISSIONER DUCKWORTH AND THEN COMMISSIONER JENKINS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. QUESTION ON THE PARKING. DOES THE DRIVE IN BACKUP, DOES THAT NOT COUNT AS A PARKING AREA? BECAUSE I CAN PUT SIX CARS IN THE PARKING IN THE DRIVEWAY AND PARKING TYPICALLY. I DON'T THINK SO. THERE ARE FOUR. THERE ARE FIVE STACKING, BUT THE STACKING SPACE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T UNFORTUNATELY, WE CAN'T CONSIDER THEM AS PARKING SPACES. THOSE ARE LIKE CATEGORIZED AS STACKING SPACES FOR THE DRIVE THRU USE. SO YEAH, I MEAN, I LOOK AT THAT AS A CUSTOMER USING THE RESTAURANT AND, AND THEY'RE PARKED TO, TO BUY FOOD AND THEN TO LEAVE. SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE WHEN WE'RE DOING BANKING, WE COULDN'T COUNT THOSE EITHER. YEAH. OKAY. LEARNING CURVE FOR ME AND MAYBE SOMETHING, SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT IN THE FUTURE. I MEAN, TO ME, COMMON SENSE. THAT'S A PARKING PLACE. IF FIVE PEOPLE ARE BACKED UP BUYING FOOD. SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE JUST BELOW THOSE STACKING CARS. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S SPACE FOR MORE PARKING, BUT THEY HAVE TO HAVE AN ESCAPE LANE SO THEY CAN'T USE THAT SPACE EITHER. SO YEAH. YEAH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND COMMISSIONER JENKINS AND THEN COMMISSIONER PARIS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. QUICK QUESTION FOR THE CHAIR. WE'RE WE ARE NOT CONTEMPLATING THE VARIANCE ON PARKING. NO, IT'S NOT PART OF. OKAY. THANK YOU. THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS FOR STAFF. WHY NOT HAVE THEM RECORD THE PARKING AGREEMENT SUCH THAT BUILDING INSPECTIONS AND PERMITTING CAN DISCOVER IT AT A LATER TIME? JUST PROCEDURALLY, THAT'S NOT HOW IT'S LAID OUT IN THE GDC RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WITH THE SP, IT'S WITH THE PD, IT'S DIFFERENT WITH THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S CUSTOM ZONING. YOU'RE PROVIDING ENHANCEMENTS AND DEVIATIONS WITHIN THE PD WITH THE SUP. THE USE IS BEING CONSIDERED AND FOR. PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL TO BE COMFORTABLE WITH THE USE. ENHANCEMENTS CAN BE CONSIDERED, BUT THE SUP PROCESS DOES NOT ALLOW DEVIATIONS CONSIDERED WITH THAT REQUEST. YES, I, I MIGHT HAVE MISHEARD. I THOUGHT THAT THE CHAIR MADE A MADE A COMMENT ABOUT THE PARKING AGREEMENT THAT THEY COULD ACQUIRE WITH A WITH A WITH THE NEXT ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER. THEY COULD. AND THERE WAS A CONCERN THAT THE PARKING AGREEMENT COULD NOT BE IDENTIFIED OR LOCATED. IF THAT OCCURS BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S NOT A NORMAL PART OF OUR PROCESS TO A REQUEST THE PARKING AGREEMENT BE ADDED TO THE FILE AND BE. HAVE THEM RECORD THE PARKING AGREEMENT IN THE COUNTY RECORDS. IT WILL BE WELL SUPS DON'T GET RECORDED WITH THE COUNTY, BUT THE PARKING PARKING AGREEMENT AGREEMENT WILL BE RECORDED WITH THE SITE PERMIT PROCESS. SO THE NEXT TIME. SO THE EXAMPLE THAT YOUR YOU WERE PROVIDING, IF THERE'S ANOTHER USER LIKE THERE'S OR THIS USE COMES IN FOR AN SUP RENEWAL ONLY, FOR EXAMPLE, THEN THAT SITE PERMIT IS GOOD TO GO. THEY STILL HAVE THEIR WHOLE SITE PERMIT THERE AS BUILT AND ALL THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE RELATED MATTERS TAKEN CARE OF WITH THE SITE PERMIT REALM. BUT IF IT'S ANOTHER USER ASKING FOR THE SUP AGAIN, THEN THE THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACES WILL AGAIN BE REQUIRED. SO THEY'LL HAVE TO COME BACK AGAIN AND SHOW THAT, OH, THIS IS WHY WE CAN'T PROVIDE OR WE ARE ALLOWED TO PROVIDE LESS THAT I KNOW IT'S A STICKY SITUATION BECAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKED TO RECOMMEND ON SOMETHING, KNOWING THAT THAT MAY NEED ANOTHER PROCESS IN THE US IN THE FUTURE, AND THAT MAY BE A LITTLE WORRISOME FOR THE APPLICANTS SOMEHOW. BUT IF THEY ARE ABLE TO SHOW THAT THIS IS ADEQUATE, WE USUALLY DO NOT CAUSE DELAYS IN THAT. THAT IS DONE WITH THE SITE PERMIT PROCESS. WE TRY OUR BEST FOR THE APPLICANT OUT THERE. WE'RE JUST TALKING BACKROOM MINUTIA HERE AND HOW WE CARRY OUT THINGS. IT'S NOTHING REALLY TO DO WITH THE MERITS OF YOUR APPLICATION. OKAY. JUST SO YOU'RE NOT OUT THERE WORRYING AND COMMISSIONER DALTON, I'M AFRAID WE'RE DISCUSSING MINUTIA THAT WE DON'T EVEN NEED TO BE WORRYING ABOUT. IF YOU GO TO ANY RESTAURANT THAT HAS A DRIVE THRU TODAY, [00:25:08] YOU WILL FIND MANY CARS IN THE DRIVE THRU IN ONE PATIENT, ONE CUSTOMER INSIDE. THEY'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO USE THE 18 PARKING PLACES THEY HAVE IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY. RIGHT. AND I THINK WE'RE DISCUSSING SOMETHING THAT WE'RE SPENDING WAY TOO MANY MINUTES AND HOURS THAT WE NEED TO PASS ON. LET IT MOVE ON DOWN INTO THE NEXT PHASE, WHERE THEY DO HAVE TO AT LEAST DO SOME KIND OF AGREEMENT IF IT'S WITH THE PAWN SHOP OR WHAT HAVE YOU TO HAVE PARKING SPACE. I THINK WE NEED TO JUST MOVE ON AND THAT'S THAT'S MY FAULT. I'LL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT. BUT I HAVE A TENDENCY TO LOOK WHAT CAN GO WRONG FROM EITHER SIDE. SO THANK YOU. I THINK THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? CARE TO COME UP AND SAY ANYTHING? YEAH. I DON'T BLAME YOU. HELLO. GOOD EVENING GUYS. MY NAME IS JOSE MARIA. I'M HERE REPRESENTING DIG ENGINEERS. ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, MR. DAN NGUYEN, WHO'S WITH ME. I HAVE NOTHING REALLY TO ADD. KELLYANNE DID A REALLY GOOD JOB ABOUT EXPLAINING THE WHOLE PROCESS WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH, AND WE'VE ENSURED THAT WE'RE BEING COMPLIANT WITH THE GDC AND ADDING THESE IMPROVEMENTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING THIS APPROVED. THANK YOU. I SEE NO QUESTIONS FOR YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ACTUALLY WE DO. COMMISSIONER JENKINS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SORRY, SIR. FIRST OFF, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR APPLICATION. THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH OUR STAFF AND FOR CONSIDERING GARLAND. MY MY REQUEST IS THAT WE CONSIDER ORNAMENTAL NATIVE ORNAMENTALS AS OPPOSED TO CRAPE MYRTLES. THAT'S IT. SURE THING. YEAH, WE'LL ADD THAT INTO OUR PLANS. THANK YOU. AND THEY TAKE LESS WATER, TOO. THAT'S THE IDEA. THAT'S RIGHT. THAT CAN BE PUT INTO CONDITIONS IF YOU CARE. I, I CARE, BUT I ALSO WANT THE APPLICANT TO HAVE THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE. I FIGURED YOU'D SAY THAT. COMPETITION IS GOOD FOR THE CITY. ALL RIGHTY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. HAVE A GOOD NIGHT. GOOD NIGHT. I'LL ASK OUR VAST AUDIENCE IF THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE. SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONERS. WELL, I ALREADY HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER PATTERSON, AND I THINK COMMISSIONER JENKINS IS GOING TO LIKE WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY BECAUSE HE'S GOOD. GO AHEAD. I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE. HERE WE GO. I MOVE THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED FOR Z 26 DASH TEN. COMMISSIONER. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER PARIS TO APPROVE THIS APPLICATION AND ESSER P PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION. AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER JENKINS. A TIME ON THE GOOD CALL. THE 15 YEARS. YEAH, THE 15 YEARS. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? PREPARE TO VOTE. DOWN HERE. I'M ALREADY THERE. OH, AND APPARENTLY AT OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE VOTING ON THE SCREENS NOW. YEAH. AND THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. GOOD LUCK WITH THE RESTAURANT, SIR. WISH YOU ALL THE BEST OF LUCK. THAT WAS THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. AND A LITTLE OUR NEXT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR MAY 11TH. AND ALSO NOTE, FOR THOSE OF YOU AT HOME THAT WATCH US CONSTANTLY, WE HAVE NO MEETING ON MAY 25TH. THAT ONE'S BEING SKIPPED FOR THE HOLIDAY. SO IT IS NOW 659. SO WE ARE NOW ADJOURNED UNTIL MAY 11TH. THANK YOU. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.