[Music] I am James Bell and tonight I'll be serving as chair of the planning and zoning commission meeting for July 10th, 2025. The first matter of business is citizens comments. Any citizen wishing to perform a regular meeting of the planning and zoning commission regarding any matter posted on the agenda was to sign up no later than 6 pm on the day of the meeting. If anyone signed up to speak, they will have three minutes to speak. Staff will time each citizen and provide a warning when they have 30 seconds left. We had two people sign up. I'll call first Miss Mary Kits. Can you hear me now? >> Okay, perfect. Well, like I said, technology is great till it's not. My name is Mary Kitz and my address is 46178 Street. I'm here to summarize the opposition to UDC amendment 31 which proposes a carveout for larger signage on select parking garages. The concerns are one the content that citizens could be subjected to since the state law says the city cannot control what put is put on signs. This request is permanent and it goes with the building for all for all time, no matter who the owner is. So, do you want your children or future grandchildren to potentially see this across from tech? Or how about this two? In West Texas, a deal's a deal. In 2012, the Raider Park garage owner said that the ZBA's seven-year reapproval condition was more than fine with him. That's straight from the minutes. The city should not change the UDC to appease one owner while disregarding all other businesses and Lex citizens. As you know, your purpose as a PNZ commission is Levik's orderly development. According to case law, FAR versus Tippet, Texas 1981, this amendment would be preferential treatment which defeats a pre-established comprehensive plan and is essentially peacemeal zoning. It would be a failure to regulate signage in a uniform consistent manner. Per the Texas Local Code section 211.004, zoning regulations must be adopted in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This amendment fails to abide by any uniform strategy for signage. Instead, it carves out a special exception for a garage without justifying why it's entitled to special treatment. The love citizens opposed to to this do so out of concern for our city. We have nothing to gain. Is an increase in signage area for a parking garage in improvement for the 272,000 people who live here. It does not. Leach is a pro business city and that's a good thing. But this appeasement is really anti- business. It's anti- business because it's an unfair monopoly to one business owner and a disadvantage to all the other businesses. It does not serve a good citywide purpose. We urge you to reject this unfair and ill-conceived amendment. Thank you and thank you for your service. >> Thank you, Miss KZ. Next speaker we have is Stephen Faulk. Good evening. Uh my name is Stephen Faulk. I reside at 12112 Savannah Avenue here in the city. Uh, very nice to know that we're not going to be dodging tornadoes tonight. Um, I want to reiterate things you've already heard. Um, and and bring up a couple that that you may not have heard. This issue's gone in front of the ZBA upwards of three times, each time being rejected by members like yourself who have served on that that board. It was rejected by the city council as a variance at least one time voted down. This is not a wall sign by define by the UDC. Those are billboards. Wall signs deal with the tenants inside the building. I don't believe at the moment that HB or Gene Messer or whoever's on that sign are attendants in that building. Those are billboards. billboard, I believe, is is relegated to no more than 750 square feet. Trust me, those signs are substantially bigger. Their billboards, in fact, one has been removed except the backing on it on the east side has not been removed. So, technically, it's still a sign. It's still a thing that's up there. I want to remind you for oh, let me back up. A variance was was brought to the ZBA for financial reasons. That is not a legitimate reason for a for a variance to be granted. A variance is when you cannot use the property uh in any shape, form or fashion, and it's the minimum amount of relief to make it work. Buildings built. I would like to remind you uh last time when Councilman Gordon Harris mentioned that he lost a very good acquaintance who died on the March Straw Freeway below that parking structure. The concern is people focusing on those billboards going essentially 90 ft per second. In 5 seconds they're going to go over the length of a football field. If their gaze is up there, they're not going around a curve. It It needs to be You need to take care of the health, safety, and welfare of not one person that is wanting to put those signs up there, but all the thousands of people that are going by on that freeway every day in the morning, in the evening, throughout the entire week. That's really y'all's responsibility to take care of the health, safety, and welfare of the general public. Don't let just one person prevail in this matter for financial reasons. Let all the citizens of Leach Texas that go by there that may be focused on those signs take care of their health, safety, and welfare so they can go home to their friends and their family in the evening. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Faul. Next matter of business is the approval of the minutes for the following meetings. the June 5th, 2025 regular planning and zoning commission meeting. Do we have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor, please say I. I. All oppose. Nay. >> Motion carries. Eight to nothing. Have to count. Next up are the zoning cases. When we call up your zone case, these steps will be followed. The chair will call the first case and will invite city staff to make their presentations on the case. The board may ask questions, but board comment and debate should not occur. The chair will open the public hearing on the case. The chair will call the applicant representative to provide any additional comment. The applicant will need to clearly state their name and address for the record and briefly explain their case. After the applicant has spoken, the chair asks for anyone in opposition of the item to speak. Those speaking in opposition should give their name and address and then speak to the board. The chair will then ask for anyone in favor of the item to speak. Those speaking in favor should give their name and address and then speak to the board. After the public comments, the chair will close the public hearing. Once the public hearing is closed, we will not hear any further comments from the public. First case that we have is let me get my sheets put up here is zone well zone case item 3.1 zone case 3094D the Oh, come on. There we go. >> There we go. Good evening, board. I'm Jamie McGar with the planning department and this is zone case 3094D. The applicant is Jade Honeyut for Despenus LLC. This is a request for zone change from office district to medium density residential district. 50 notification letters were sent out and we received no responses. The property is located west of Cypress Road and north of Loop 289. Here's an aerial view showing a mix of single family and duplex residential properties to the north and northeast, single family homes to the east, and light industrial properties to the south and west of the subject property. The current land use map shows lowdensity and medium density residential zoning surrounding the subject property on the north and east with light industrial zoning across loop 289 to the south and west. The future land use map designates this property for commercial use. Here's a picture of the subject property facing south as well as views to the north, east, and west. Although the future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses, the proposed zone change to medium-density residential is compatible with current land use and its proximity to residential neighborhoods. The proposed zone change is compatible with the zoning ordinance and will be appropriate at the proposed location. The property is currently bounded by residential zoning districts to the north, northeast, east, and southeast. Although light industrial property is to the west and south, they are separated by the from the subject property by North Loop 289, which is a freeway. The property's location within an established residential neighborhood contributes to the proposed zone change being compatible with the character of the properties in the area. The subject property is located on Twain Street in North Loop 289. The master thoroughfare plan 2018 designates to lane street as the local street and north loop 289 as a freeway. Local streets typically provide access to smaller destination oriented areas such as neighborhoods, subdivisions, or local business districts. Freeways are intended to move high volumes of automobile traffic at relatively high speeds over long distances. Staff has no objections to the request. I can take questions at this time. Does anyone have questions for staff at this time? >> Thank you, Jamie. >> Is the applicant or his or her representative here and wish to speak? >> If you'd please state your name and address for the record. >> Hi, thank you city council for seeing us this evening. My name is Jade Honeyut. I'm representing Despinous LLC. Um we are proposing to change this office garden track to a residential due to um the surrounding areas also being residential. The adjacent lots are all single family residents about 1500450 to 1500 square ft. Um we are proposing to build a single family home that's 1350 ft² on this land. Um and so that is why we are going for the uh change of the zoning is just because we are trying to get the uh we can submit for permits under the residential. Sorry, I'm a little nervous. This is my first time at city council. So, um, but yeah, that that is what we want to do. Is there any questions that y'all might have for me? >> Anybody have any questions for her? >> Okay. Okay. With no questions, thank you. >> Thank you. I appreciate it. >> Is there anyone here wishing to speak in opposition to this request? Okay, seeing none, is there anyone wishing to speak in favor? Okay, seeing none, we'll close the public hearing and open the matter up for discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Make a motion to approve. Second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? >> So, I mean, this is my neighborhood, but I'll I mean, I don't know what else they'd really put there. I don't see a business going in on that little spot of land um just because of the convenience and how hard it is to get to there. So, I don't really have an issue with this. >> I think not. I think it's like one when I think when they developed it first, they had every residential and they left that one one spot thinking to do something else, but I guess they found something better. So, is there any other questions, comments? Okay, y'all ready to call the vote? >> Okay. All in favor, please say I. >> I. All opposed. >> Motion carries eight to nothing. This will be going to the city council for the first reading on July 20, excuse me, this one will be July 22nd at 2:00 p.m. Next item is uh zone case number 3.3 uh number 3529. >> Good evening, chairman and members of the commission. My name is Shane Spencer and this is case 3529. The applicant is Hugo Reed and Associates for Red Spike Development LLC and they're requesting a zone change from lowdensity single family district SF2 to Heavy Commercial HC. The subject property is located north of 130th Street for future loop 88 and west of Slide Road. We have sent out 38 notifications and received back four in favor and one in opposition. Here's that notification map. The one letter in opposition did not elaborate on their reason for opposition. Here's the aerial map. There are homes to the north and east and vacant land to the south and west. Here's the zoning map. Surrounding properties are zoned auto urban commercial district AC and SF2 to the east, SF2 to the north and southeast, AC to the south across 130th street and city limits border to the west and north. The future land use map designates this property for both lowdensity residential and commercial land uses. Here are photos of the subject and surrounding property. And here is an exhibit provided by the applicant. The future land use map designates this area for both lowdensity residential and commercial land uses. And this request conforms to this designation and would be appropriate considering the existing adjacent zoning districts and land uses as well as the proximity to future loop 88. Therefore, this request is in complete conformance of the comprehensive plan principles. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and the proposed zone change is compatible with the surrounding area. It will not change the character of the existing development. Location is along slide road and 130th street which is also future loop to uh loop loop 88 uh which uh which are designated as a principal arterial and freeway. Staff has no objection to this request and I can take any questions at this time. Is there any questions for staff at this time? Okay. Thank you, Shane. We'll now open the public hearing. Is the applicant or his or her representative here? When you come forward, please state your name and address for the record. Good evening. I'm Terry Hullman with Hugo Reeden Associates. We're at 1601 Avenue in. This is a property that is had been sort of partially sporadically developed over the decades, most of it prior to annexation. Since annexation, there's really been no real activity on this site. Our request is to basically set up what we all know of as the retail node there at Loop 88 and Slide Road. Um, uh, Mr. Spencer noticed that this was the future Loop 88. You drive out there, it is loop 88. It's construction is well underway out there. And I I can't wait to see the activity that's bound to come along when that highway gets a little bit further down the road. Nonetheless, uh we feel like heavy commercial is a great zoning for this location given its proximity to a major highway and one of more major arterial corridors, which is Slide Road. Um I wish we could zone the entire corner. We can only zone what we own at the time. That's why there are these little gap areas left out. We just don't control that at this point. Um there's no specific project on the books at this point. We just want to get this property teed up for what we think will be a large retail center at some point uh in the future. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Any questions for Mr. Holman? >> Thank you, Terry. Is there anyone here to speak in opposition to this request? If so, please come forward. Okay, seeing none, is there anyone wishing to speak in favor? Okay, seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing for matter discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Discussion. >> We're going to see a lot of these along future loop 88. >> 88. >> And you're also going along slide road there, too. So, I can I can see that. I think it's a one to come in. I just wish it wasn't so spotty with all the in and out, but I think it's going to would be a good one to go. Any other discussion? >> Nope. >> Okay, we'll go ahead and call the vote. All in favor, please say I. I. All oppose? Nay. >> Motion carries 8 to zero. Next up is item 3.4, for zone case number 3525. >> Good evening. This is zone case 3525. The applicant is AMD Engineering LLC for T-arket properties LLC series 5. They were originally requesting a zone change from office district lowdensity single family SF2 and highdensity residential HDR to neighborhood commercial. As of today, they have since changed their request and they would like a zone change uh to neighborhood commercial on the front half of this property and office district of F to the west. Information on this uh requested change has been printed off and included in your packet. We have sent 54 uh notices. This project, this property is located west of Quaker Avenue, south of 124th Street, but we've sent 54 notices. We've now received back three in favor and six in opposition. Here's that notification map. There are currently three properties in favor, six in opposition. The the five uh actually the six properties in opposition were concerned with traffic, privacy, noise, and commercial uses. And currently we are past that 20% margin. So when this goes to city council, it will have to have a supermajority vote. Here is the aerial map. You can see the two properties, the property to the east and the property to the west. The property to the west, they were requesting uh office office district and the property to the east, they are requesting neighborhood commercial. There are homes to the west, south, and north along with commercial buildings to the north and garden offices to the east. The zoning map here shows HDR to the south and north with further SF2 to the north and to the west. To the east is auto urban commercial and further of office district. The future land use map designates this property for low density residential land uses. Here are photos of the subject and surrounding property. Here's an exhibit provided by the applicant. Here's an an additional exhibit provided by the applicant showing proposed buffer yards. The future lane use map designates this area as low density residential. Although the proposed zone change to neighborhood commercial and office district is not fully consistent with this designation, it is in moderate conformance due to it being adjacent to existing commercial uses and its frontage along both an arterial and a collector street. Additionally, the office district request would be acceptable in close proximity to surrounding residential zoning. The proposed zone change request is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and the proposed zone change is compatible with the surrounding area would not change the character of the existing development. The proposed resoning locations are along Quaker Avenue and 124th Street. The master thoroughare plan 2018 designates Quaker Avenue as a principal arterial and 20 124th Street as a collector. Staff has no objections to this request at this time and I can take any questions. >> Just to clarify, I know that previously when it came up and they were doing for the retail, whatever they were going to do, >> that was one that staff was had objections to, correct? But as far as going to the office, there's not the concerns with that. >> Yes. As you can see with the the presentation and everything, we we were in opposition to the the west western portion of the property because they're requesting office instead of neighborhood commercial. We are we have no objection to the request in its entirety. >> Okay. And even though they changed that, it will still go since the original objections were over the 20%, it will have to have the super majority. >> That's my understanding. What was it that made the objections go away like from neighborhood commercial to office? >> Because office is a lower intensity uh district, lower intensity uses, it's more appropriate to be used as a buffer between commercial and residential uh zoning districts. >> Thank you very much. >> The office still allows them to do what they were trying to do with the neighborhood commercial >> possibly. Any other questions for Mr. Spencer? Okay. Thank you very much. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is the applicant or his or her representative here? If you'll please state your name and address for the record. >> I'm Corey Dulan with AMD Engineering. Uh 651568th Street. I'm pinch hitting for Will Stevens out on vacation. So, I know a little bit about this, but not nearly as much as he would. But just wanted to say that um uh appreciate everything that was presented before. One thing that I'd like to point out, I'm going to go back a couple of slides. We've increased the uh buffer yard here along the residential area u to to 20 ft. And so, I think that was maybe a concession based on some feedback from the neighbors. And um other than that, I don't have any other things to add. If you've got any questions, I'll be happy to answer them best way I can. >> Cory, I know you don't know this case very well, but the question of will they be able to do what they want, I don't think this lets them do what they wanted to do originally. They've kind of changed yours completely. >> Yeah, there one of the things that they were looking at doing back there was building a gym a gym and that's no longer in the cards. So, that's been pulled. That's another reason for the the late change. Do you know what's going to be back there or No, >> it's just speculative right now. >> Office. So, >> okay. So, the the front half is what are you asking for in the front? Is it >> neighborhood commercial? >> Neighborhood commercial and the back half is office. >> Okay. Any other questions? Thank you very much. Is there anyone here to speak in opposition to this request? Please come forward and state your name and address for the record. >> Susan McIntyre Dylan. I own and reside 4405, 4407, and 4409 124th Street. There is a little new information here this evening I've not been privy to. So let me just go forward please. To me planning and zoning indicates plans for something and then zoning to accommodate that project. At this point the first part is missing. There are no plans. Mr. Too good and I did have a discussion and he's thinking of potential uses for this tract of land. And now I understand that moves forward a little bit to Quaker frontage I assume, but I don't know what the dimensions are. Um, at any rate, why would we agree to a zoning of NC which would allow for liquor stores or bars or drivein or three facilities, restaurants, just to name a few, whatever Mr. Too Good might decide to fit in that space. Even worse, if he if the zoning is changed and a potential buyer uh might build on this property, it lies that boundary directly on the boundary lines of our property. I can hear I'm hearing now that that might be changed somewhat there. But anyway, currently we live on 124th Street, which he was mentioning that street specifically. And it's home to several senior couples, our neighbors. Uh we've live they've lived on this property uh street for decades and we enjoy our quiet little community. The zone change could turn our lives upside down dramatically increasing traffic volume, lights, noise and odors potentially 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The current zoning is the SF2 single family of office district which is fine and he was just mentioning right close to us the the office um district and HDR highdensity residential and and that allows for the garden offices like the ones on the east side of Quaker um that attractive uh group of bu buildings starting with the love national bank building then going to the south with um the garden offices the high-end edition residential edition of Brook Heights, that that entrance there, more garden offices, and finally, Maverick Bank, which is currently under construction. Our vision, even if we're talking Quaker frontage, has been the use of that land that looks like across the street across across Quaker from us that I just described. All of those garden offices appear to be occupied. So, we can assume that that garden office space is a good fit and would likely do very well. In conclusion, it has been brought to my attention that hightra businesses like fast food restaurants might bring in a few extra dollars per square foot to the developer over the and above the garden offices would. But what about the cost of those businesses to us, the seniors that made the choice years and years ago to live in this neighborhood? This could significantly impact our ability to enjoy our property and our outdoor spaces, especially during the evenings and weekends. Please do not allow the negative impact this zoning would have on the quality of our lives. We urge you to reject this request. Requested zoning change. Thank you for your time. [Music] >> Anybody? Excuse me. Does anybody have any questions for her? >> Miss McIntyre, >> do you >> if you could come back up, please. >> With with the changes that they've made as of today uh in visiting with Mr. too good before the last meeting before we went through the tornado that was I I thought what y'all requested was office in that back is that not >> that is true >> and so that's what he's changed it to >> actually it's not changing to that it it is already zoned to those office buildings in that so in that back area the the part that is the L that white building that is our our our property >> yeah I knew that was yours >> um so so I'm I'm I'm I'm unclear because what we were talking about is the whole thing to be changed to that um the other zoning. >> So if you look at this picture, the green is high density residential. They're trying to change it all to office >> rectangle. >> I think just the I think it's just the other way. >> L shape will still be neighborhood commercial >> right up in the front. >> Yeah, the L shape would still according to what I'm hearing >> in the front would be neighborhood commercial. back would change to be >> I believe I believe but I'm not sure I'm >> I think it would have been really smart if Keith would have came and talked to you before tonight >> would have been nice >> so the other question I have for staff is >> she did talk to me by the way >> if she if she waves her like if she says it's okay does they still have to get the majority at city council >> if we receive written um if you resend your opposition in writing to bring it below the 20% it would not require got a super majority. >> Okay. I mean, that's it. I just want to make sure you understand. He was kind of trying to get where you wanted to get. At least that's what he told me. >> True. And he and I have had that that the discussion. I think >> he just forgot. >> I think I'm I'm very unclear at this point. What amount what we're talking about? What what >> we could go ahead. >> Cory, let Cy I think Corey can help a little bit. >> See this right here? >> This rectangle. >> Can you show us on the screen? Yes, certainly. >> Of course. >> So, this right here, this section right there is going to be your your office. That box. >> Okay. I see. I see. Okay. Thank you. >> And then this L shape here with frontage on the Quaker will be the neighborhood commercial like that there. >> You know, I I got you. I don't know what that distance is, though. You see, I don't know the yellow. I don't know how wide that is. I don't know how close that neighborhood commercial comes to to our property though. >> It runs right beside It runs I think runs right beside your house. It runs right beside your house. >> Yeah, >> that that's where this uh >> Well, and the office is fine. It's already zoned that way for the office. >> Well, the southern portion. >> Okay. Thank you. >> That that's where you've got the additional buffer that was added uh landscaping buffer between your east property line and the back side of that neighborhood commercial. So the neighborhood commercial would would start here >> would include this piece >> to here. >> I see. >> And then this part portion back here would be would be office. >> What is so get there? You see where that was right? What is that going to be right there? >> A driveway. Wait, which one? >> Or or what is it zoned right there where that 20 foot shows? But what I see that's above or uh oh, sorry. >> No, I did that. You did that. So this is currently this is currently SF2 here. This is currently office. This is neighbor commercial and this is you know apartment zoning here and this is residential. So the plan is to make this blue and make basically this entire rectangle here red. Does that make sense? >> Yeah. It still is right on my property line. >> It is. Yes. >> Paint pink paint. Cy pink. >> I am still negative. Did I say the wrong color? >> You said red. It's pink. >> Sorry, I'm color blind. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Well, >> I think I think >> I mean they can change it before she gets to council, she can change, >> right? I mean, I think I think if we go ahead and proceed with it and we have it, then they can have more discussions to get their spots because I think >> what city council does and what they end up deciding doesn't alter what we decide. >> I would assume Cory I'd assume Cory will guide Keith to come talk to you between now and the city council meeting. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Is there anyone well else wishing to speak in opposition? Seeing none, we'll ask is there anyone wishing to speak in favor? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing for matter of discussions. Do we have a motion? >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> We have a motion and second. Any discussion? >> Uh I have a question to the city. the west rectangle. Um, is that landlocked? Like if nothing happens, you know, with these two adjacent properties, how do they get is there easements or anything like that to get to that west rectangle or no? >> The west tract of land. >> I couldn't say off the top of my head. I don't have a >> It'll just depend on how they choose to plat it. If they plat it in a manner similar to what's on your screen, they will be required to access easements. Okay. Any other questions or discussion? I mean, there there's a lot of growth on South Quaker. Anybody who's been in love for a meaningful amount of time has noticed South Quaker has changed quite a bit and is becoming more and more intensive throughout the years. I think the concession going to office there directly to the south of the residential home is a good option and has been demonstrated in the city I think in other places similar to this that has been approved in the in the past. And so I think this was a smart move and I think um moving forward it makes sense to approve it. >> That's why I was asking about the ements because if you know that a west tract is not joined with the east tract that is currently owned by two good I feel like that west tract will just stay empty for a long time just because there's no really access to it. So it makes sense for it to all be one project. through through platting it would be required to have access some sort of access easement uh to the front there. I don't nec >> but they're owned by the same person at this point. So like he's good. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And I don't believe they are necessarily separate properties. They're just separate >> zones >> meets and bounds that are being zoned differently within a facility. his his intent is to keep it all. And if you look at coming in where you see the driveway, that house is no longer there. Got tore down and moved across the street and he's going to cut back across there. >> He kind of got the idea he was going to lose and so he switched all this up just at last minute. They just didn't. >> And just to clarify, right now it is consider if they were to plat it as one track. Yes. But if they ever decided to plat it as two tracks, that's where the access easement would have to be. So good. >> Thank you very much. Any other questions or discussion? Okay, if y'all are ready to vote, we'll go ahead and vote. All in favor, please say I. >> I. All opposed? Nay. >> Nay. >> Motion carries 7 to one. If I'm correct, Kristen, this one will be going to the city council on August 12th. >> That's correct. If it still requires the super majority. >> Okay. Thank you. Next item is item 3.5 5 zone case number 2993A. Good evening. This is case 2993- A. The applicant is Mountaintop Engineering for the Worship Center requesting a zone change from neighborhood commercial to auto urban commercial. The subject property is located east of Upland Avenue and south of 82nd Street. We have sent 23 notices and received back one letter in opposition. Here's that notification map. The one letter in opposition was concerned about traffic and parking. Here's the aerial map. There are commercial properties to the north, west, and east. to the south are single family homes. I'll correct that. There is a church to the north. The zoning map shows auto urban commercial zoning to the west with SF2 to the north and south and office district to the east. The future land use map designates this property for commercial land uses. And here are photos of the subject and surrounding property. Here's an exhibit provided by the applicant as well. The future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses and this request conforms to this designation and would be appropriate considering the existing adjacent zoning districts and land uses. Therefore, this request is in complete conformance with the comprehensive plan principles. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and is compatible with the surrounding area would not change the character of the existing development. The location is along 82nd Street and 83rd Street which are designated as a principal arterial and a local street respectively by the master thoroughfare plan. Staff has no objections to this request and I'd be pleased to answer any questions at this time. >> Are there any questions for staff at this time? Okay, thank you Shane. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing as the applicant or his or her representative here. Good evening, plan zoning commission. I'm Tommy Harms with Mountaintop Engineering. I'm here on behalf of the worship center. So, currently the current zoning designation does not allow for a parking lot to be constructed here. That's why we're switching from NC to AC. And uh I've been coordinating with the city of Lok engineering department and the traffic engineering department. So all access points are going to be off of 82nd Street. There's a 6ft high brick wall to the south of the property. So there will be no added traffic to 84th Street to the south. And then the other thing I'd like to mention is we're going to have a a pedestrian crossing. That's why I've been coordinating with the traffic engineering department installed just to make sure that pedestrians will be across the street safely from because they're trying to get to the church to the north because they currently don't have adequate parking. >> Great. That was the main question I was going to ask because that was one of the biggest questions was about parking, what the intent was. So, thank you very much. Any questions? Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Is there anyone here to speak in opposition to this request? Please come forward and state your name and address for the records. Thank you. >> You saw the settlement. >> My name is Keith Sumner. Uh I live at 8302 Saratoga. That's the corner of 83rd in Saratoga. Um I talked to some of my neighbors, Dr. Johnson, uh he lives at 8302 Trenton on the last hearing and he had me he told me he mailed something in on the last hearing. I don't know if he knew he was supposed to mail something in on this one also, but he said that he mailed something in against it. Uh but I don't know that he knew that he had to mail me it in on this one. Um, and I think the person behind me, Rod Bird, also told me that he had on the last one, he had melled in against it. I didn't mail in because I come down here and I was going to talk on the last one and then we get we had the tornado and the the bad weather and we we dispersed. But I'm I'm going to go real quick because I've got limited time. I understand. Um, we built our house there about 23 years ago. When we built it, Milwaukee wasn't even in existence. It was from Frankfurt to Upland. It was uh at that time that building where the worship center is was a skating ring and back behind the childc care place was a swimming pool. They closed down at some point and another church came in called Experience Life and it's just like the worship center. After they were there for just a little bit, they outgrew the center. They had people parking in all the adjoining businesses just like it is now. like uh on sun and this just isn't on Sunday morning. Sunday morning they have two or three services where there's hundreds of people there and you have people coming and going for each service and you they're already parking in all the parking lots over there in the bank uh even across Upland. At one point they changed uh there was a vacant lot at 82nd in Upland. They turned it into a parking lot. At some point they they closed in the swimming pool. They turned it into a parking lot. Right now on the corner of 82nd in Saratoga used to be Armtech and then they they uh changed to another crop insurance place and now it's Truno. That parking lot gets full. The bank gets full. The dirt parking lot that they're wanting to turn into a parking lot gets full too. It's so busy that they have to have law enforcement out there to go from the dirt parking lot to the church and they're stopping traffic. It interferes with the traffic flow at 8 82nd and upland because of the the stopping the traffic there, but they're only stopping it right there. The people that's parking in all those other businesses, they're crossing just wherever they're parking going straight across from south to north. It isn't. If y any of y'all have been to the fair on fair week where the people are parking west of Avenue and then they're crossing to the fair. It's similar to that. They do have law enforcement down there stopping people where I'm assuming that they're talking about the crosswalk going, but it's not. It's that they still cross wherever they're parking at. It is very chaotic. And it's not just on Sunday morning, but on Sunday morning it is. I think they have three services and so you've got people leaving from one service, people coming to another service. Uh it's really hard just to get in and out of our neighborhood, especially with the construction now that they're rebuilding Upland. They're changing it to a bigger thoroughare and it's really bad right now because they've got traffic choked down to two lanes on 82nd Street right there. But even then, and that's going to be another two to three years, but Experienced Life did the same thing. They outgrew the facility. Now what they did is they went down upland and built on a big facility and they become part of the Trinity Church. We have three other churches there in the area. There's a Pentecostal church to the north of this. They have a big area, big parking lot. They have no problem. Uh there's another Pentecostal church at 82nd and Quincy. Same thing there. They have a big area, big parking lot, no no traffic. And then there's the synagogue at the end of 83rd Street. He referenced 84th. It's actually 83rd. My property at the back of my property. It's just caddy corner to where the parking lot's going to be. When they have their meetings, it's not just Sunday morning. They have meetings through the week in the evenings. And it varies in time. They have events on Saturday. It's not unusual that they have half a dozen food trucks out there, people parking on both sides of the street, and law enforcement isn't there to direct traffic. Then you got people tr crossing 82nd Street. And if any of y'all have tried to do that, I've done it a few times just out of necessity. It is, it's like the old video game Frogger. Uh it's very dangerous. Now, I'm I'm older than I was 23 years ago, but it's it's hard to get across. And it's even hard to get across at the intersection, but I it's just not a good situation to have a big area on one side and a parking lot across the street. Turning Point Church had the same thing that that Experience Life did. They outgrew their facility. They moved to movie 16. Uh the worship center has already outgrown their facility even with this parking lot. If they turn that that that into a parking lot, they're already using it as a parking lot. It's just a dirt parking lot right now. And it is just like like I said, it's it's not like what you would think is a church service. It's more similar to fair week. when they are having their worships in the middle of the week, they have their music turned up so loud that the bass is so loud in my kitchen. I can hear the bass boom boom boom for a while. I could hum the tunes that they played that it was so loud and it it's just somebody's eventually going to get seriously hurt or injured crossing 82nd Street. It's it's just not a a good recipe. That will probably be their largest parking lot. They have a lot of peace mill parking lots uh around the church and they're using other businesses parking lots, but it's just not a good recipe. They they build that big nice parking lot. Even if they put a crosswalk there, you know, the speed limit there, I think it's 45 miles an hour. uh and even with law enforcement there, that doesn't preclude them from crossing anywhere in the next two blocks to the east or two blocks to the to the west. They've outgrown their facility and they haven't realized it. So, if we change it to the to the higher one where they can put, you know, different things there. uh when they changed it from what it was for Armtech to go in there uh a friend of mine was the mayor uh Tom Martin and he told me that that was going to provide 300 jobs to that area when it turned into arm techch I was one of the primary people that was going to be against it and he said we really need these 300 jobs so we went from I think it was garden offices to the what it is now so they could build the Armtech building armch's long gone the other crop insurance company's gone. Now Truno's there. The same thing's going to happen to the worship center that that it did for Experience Life. Even after they build the parking lot, they're going to realize this still isn't big enough. This is a danger to get our people that's going from the church that's parking on the south side of 82nd to the other. It's it's it's not going to work. But there is an increase on the traffic on 83rd right now. I don't it and it some of it is with the church where they're going down 83rd and pulling into the Truno parking lot then going to the church but some of that's probably caused because of the the construction which is still going to be there for another two years is what uh Dr. Johnson told me. He's a friend with the one of the supervisors that's that's putting in the road on on Uply. They tell him that there's probably at least two to three more years of construction. And so, you know, it's once they decide, yes, we have outgrown this facility, they'll leave and it'll be us that's living behind there that'll be stuck with the looser zoning, you know. Uh, and I can already see what it's going to be because they're already using it for that zoning. Now they're parking in the dirt lot and I'm I'm not talking it's, you know, the when we had the skating ring there and it was like 50 people. Uh, we're talking about hundreds of people. I don't know how many people go to their service on Sunday, but it it's probably easily close to what Indiana Avenue has. And I I think some of theirs is 3 to 600 people's per serving service and and they you know the people's coming there's people going people coming and people going and it's just it's it's not what you would think like when I compare it to the fair that's more what it reminds me of people crossing 82nd Street a bunch of people crossing where the law enforcement has it stopped but when the people down the street see that they've got it stopped a block way they shoot across the street. Shoot across the street. So when we're leaving on Sunday morning to go to church, we're having to like watch make sure that nobody's shooting out in front of us or cars pulling out. Uh they the cars leaving the parking lot of Truno. Now they don't stop before entering a lane of traffic. They get there and boom, if the law enforcement has it shut down for pedestrian, they're shooting out of the parking lot and and it's just the traffic is chaotic. And I do, even though they say there was only one person opposing it, I think the other ones mailed stuff in on the prior hearing. So, that's pretty much all I've got to say, though. If any of y'all have questions, I'll be welcome to answer them. I I would say what what would be great is if y'all could go out there sometime when that's going on before y'all voted, but you can't do that. And I didn't bring any I was going to take pictures and video and I thought I'm not going to do that. I'm just going to get up here and speak my mind, but any questions? And the main thing there is even if they change it to the parking lot, once they figure out that that's not going to work for them, they're going to move. And then us that's living right there behind it. And the parking lot's just like right on the other side of the fence. It's not going to say a parking lot. It'll be something else. And it's just like Hobby Town. Uh, it was supposed to be off garden offices and now I've got Hobby Town that's caddyy cornered to my front yard where they have drones flying over my residence and remote control race cars racing up and down 83rd in Saratoga. So, you know, my concern is more once they come to a realization that they they have outgrown it, what's going to happen then with the looser zoning? And and it w it was originally like the garden office stuff. And the way Tom Martin explained it to me, it's like the area around the United at 82nd in Boston, the offices to the north of that was what that was all supposed to be zoned as. But then they went to where Armtech could come in there and it's zoned even for what it is now. So if we go even looser than that, no telling what it could be. But do y'all have any questions? >> Yeah, I've got a question for you. So you talked about food trucks and other things going on on the property now? >> Yes. >> Can better describe Could you more completely describe what you've seen that they're doing with the property currently? The Saturday after we had the the hearing, we all had to leave. They had a car show out there and they had all these cars out there and then they had food trucks. >> The the church did. >> The church did. >> Okay. >> And that was on the Saturday after the last hearing. I think it was the Saturday after, but that's not unusual that it they have events and I don't know what they are because I don't go to the church, but they have events throughout the week where there will be food trucks because they have not only the parking lot where the worship center is. They bought South Plains Electric Co-op, which right to the west of them, they've got that parking lot. Then they've got the parking lot on the corner of 82nd upland. And they have law enforcement stopping the traffic on 82nd. But they have church members, I'm sorry, they have church members in the parking lots. They do have with traffic vest on out there directing traffic. You got people stopping going and uh and then they've got the parking lot behind the nursery which used to be the swimming pool. But they also have people parking. They don't park in Hobbytown because I think Hobbytown doesn't, you know, they run everybody off. But they are parking in what used to be some sort of sports thing, baseball training facility. They fill that parking lot up, which is next to the storage buildings. They fill up the daycare parking lot. They fill up the Truno parking lot. They fill up the dirt lot. And the dirt lot's not all the way full, but it's pretty close to it. They fill up the Happy Bank parking lot. They fill up the parking lot on the corner of 82nd. And at the same time, we have those other churches that's also meeting that there's traffic going to and from the church on Sunday mornings. But through the week, the there there's not a problem on any of that. But like I said, it's there's stuff it's not just Sunday morning and it's not just Wednesday evening. Sometimes it's Saturday, sometimes it's Friday, sometimes it's Wednesday. >> So you said you said food trucks, bands, car shows. >> Yes. Yes. >> All kinds of stuff. >> Yeah. It's >> they use it at an outdoor event. >> Yeah. >> For for the Wait, let's clarify though. The church does are on that dirt parking lot cuz the only thing we're concerned about >> No, no, no. But >> But wait a minute. The only thing we're concerned about is that one parcel of property. We don't care about all the other stuff. >> They have the event where they're at now. People are still parking on the dirt parking lot now going across there. >> Okay. I I'm misunderstanding. I thought you said that there food trucks on the dirt parking lot. >> No, no, no. The food trucks are over on the church parking lots, >> uh, you know, where where it is now and the corner of 82nd Upland, but they currently >> parking the dirt parking lot, which is the proposed >> I was just missing. I was trying to clear that up. I thought you were saying that they were already using the dirt parking lot for >> for events and other things up. >> They're doing that now and they're still using it. It's been used as a parking lot. And when that stuff's going on, law enforcement isn't out there to stop the traffic. You got people just >> Okay, got you. That that that makes >> Yeah, it sure does. Thank you so much. >> Any other questions? >> Any other questions? >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you all. >> Is there anyone else wishing to speak in opposition? Okay. Anyone wishing to speak in favor? Okay. We'll close the public hearing for matter of discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Move to approve. I'll second. >> Have a motion and a second. Discussion. >> Yeah. I you know we had we had a number of citizens in here a couple weeks ago expressing great concern about students running across the street from an apartment building complex to tech. This one we've got even more people running across the street doing the same thing. So, I see this as if they if they turn it into a parking lot, I can see where they would use it as an outdoor event venue. More food trucks, more bands, more car shows. I I think it I just I just don't think it's a great idea. Can I approach >> sir? The public hearing's closed at this point. >> I I mean it what I I guess what I'm saying is the things that they're doing across the street >> street. Could they move it across? >> They'll move it into the empty parking lot. It's going to be it's going to be an open space that they can use for literally anything. >> So Kristen, do they have to change the zoning to have it as a parking lot? >> Yes, because a commercial parking lot as a primary use of a property. It requires the AC zoning and since this property is across the street, it's not even a budding where we could consider it as a development lot. It is standalone, it needs to zone change. >> Okay. So, what else can be built on AC besides a parking lot? >> Sure. Um, many of the same uses as it's currently zoned, neighborhood commercial, so retail, restaurant, that type of use. AC would allow additional uses like automotive uses. Um, vehicle sales, car wash, things of that nature. >> Car wash. >> It's our old C3. >> Huh? >> It's our old >> old C3. >> Gotcha. >> The thing is like they're using it as a parking lot already >> as it is right now. So, I feel like when it turns into a parking lot, that's less dirt. So, it's almost a positive uh until they get up and move uh to a bigger facility and the future land use is commercial. So, >> yeah, >> even if it doesn't become a parking lot now, they sell the land, it comes in as a whatever zone case, that's the future land use for that track. >> Okay. And I I see what you're saying. I see what they're saying. It's kind of a >> it's it's not an ideal situation as it is, but I could see it at some point. >> Yeah. I I guess what I'm saying is is if we're going to if we're going to change zoning on this, well, I don't think you need to change the zoning on it because you can build what you need to build for that for that development there. You I guess what I'm saying is you can build what should be there under the current zoning. I don't think you need to expand the zoning to build what we had planned on or what the city had planned on on uh developing that. But I just I see it opening up problems. >> Kristen, that's my pick. >> Sure. No, I just want to clarify. So, in the unified development code, a parking lot as the primary use of a property. No other use, no other structure requires AC zoning. >> So, they could not just go and pave it and use it as a commercial parking lot today. >> Right. >> Okay. So, so, >> so what what keeps them from keeping using it as a commercial parking lot as it is right now? >> They should not be because it is not paved. It is not developed. >> So, okay. >> You cannot park on unpaved property. >> Okay. So, let's say they leave it as the zoning. They've got build a small commercial building over there for storage of golf carts >> and >> that would not be a permitted use. >> Okay. Again, you have to think of it as its own standalone property because it's not. It is completely separate and apart from the church property. So, yes, if they built something that was a permitted land use in the neighborhood commercial district and paved the rest of it, >> met the landscape requirements, everything, that would be fine. >> Well, landscape requirements are required for >> if it's a parking lot. >> Yeah. Um so the unified development code not only takes into consideration um the total area of the property and gives assigns a percentage probably 10% of the area of the property has to be landscaped. There's also a point system. So in this case though it would just be the percentage 10% of the lot. Any other discussion? >> Okay, I have a question. So, right now it is neighborhood commercial, right? >> Yes. >> So, what can it be as far as neighborhood commercial? >> Um, so many of your light commercial uses, retail uses, a shopping center, a a restaurant could be constructed here, a church, a daycare. So even if we changed it to AC, if I'm correct, >> they could still use it with the food trucks. Am I correct? >> Yes. Food trucks are allowed in the AC district. They are not allowed in the NC district, >> but they would be doing almost the same thing >> just with different zoning, right? >> Well, but they're using the food trucks on the other side. But I see what you're saying. But yeah, >> this property is being moved. >> So if you change it to AC and allow them to build a parking lot, now you can put food trucks there >> and food trucks. And is that accurate? >> Well, yes. Yes and no. Yes. Um, I should have clarified. Food trucks are allowed in the AC district. There are separation requirements from residentially zoned property. So, it is too close to the residential property. They could not put the food trucks. >> So, they can't put food trucks. >> You're correct. >> Okay. But a restaurant could be built there right now. >> Yes. But a food truck could not be >> right. >> Okay. I just wanted to make sure I was clear. >> So, okay. So, different buffer yards for parking lot versus >> 10%. >> So, there would be the 10%. The point system is based on gross square footage of a building. So, if there's no building there, that does not apply. A buffer yard would apply to the southern property line adjacent to the residential or I believe as Mr. Harms stated they're going to do the masonry wall in lie of the land Oh, it's already gone. In lie of the landscape buffer yard, which they're allowed to do. >> Okay. >> It's just a traffic nightmare. >> The future land use map just calls for commercial up and down 82nd Street, which neighborhood neighborhood commercial fits into that designation as autom >> urban commercial would as well. So it's conforming with the f future land use plan as it is currently and it would be if we took it to AC >> it would be >> you know there's there's good argument for for both uh keeping it neighborhood commercial uh due to it being adjacent to office as that would be sometimes a uh buffer between the auto auto urban commercial further to the west but there's also argument to turn it to AC because of the auto urban commercial to the And there's a lot of auto urban commercial up and down 82nd Street. And so I I could see an argument for both of these zoning districts staying here. With that being said, I I kind of wish I didn't know it was going to be turned into a parking lot. >> Frankly, um I think I would have if I just took it at face value of just land use, um I'd be more in favor of turning it to AC. But knowing it's going to be just a parking lot um right there, not on the hard corner, so the traffic control is a little more challenging, uh gives me some more concern. >> I mean, if they would have if they would have come in and said, "We're going to build we're going to we need it to be AC. We're going to build something on it." And then get the AC and then go, "Yeah, you know what? We're not going to build a parking lot now." >> Yeah. I would have gone. Well, >> bad on us. >> Yeah. Well, you can't see everything, but >> Yeah. That's one of the things we go, we never really know. We have to kind of go on what they're telling us at first when we go. >> Mhm. Robert, >> might not want me to speak because I'm just going to call the question. >> Good. >> Okay. Got call the question. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> All opposed. >> I I So, show of hands. All in favor? Okay. Motion fails. 2-6. This will go to the city council on June 22nd. >> July 20th. >> July 26th. >> Yeah. I'm trying to get a month behind. Okay. Thank you. Next case is item 3.6, zone case 3058H. [Music] That's a button. Sorry, guys. I haven't had to turn that thing on before. It's kind of interesting. Uh this is zone case 3058HH. The applicant is Hugo Reed and Associates for Red Spike Development LLC. Uh this is a request for zone change from medium density residential district and neighborhood commercial district. 36 notification letters were sent out and we have received zero in favor and 13 in opposition. 11 of the opposition letters are outside of the notification boundary. The property is located west of Pontiac Avenue and north of 50th Street. Here's the notification map showing the two in opposition within the notification boundary. Here's an aerial view showing undeveloped land to the north, east, and west with a single family homes to the south. Although not shown on the map, the land to the north and west is currently being developed with an apartment complex. The current land use map shows medium-density residential zoning to the north and west, neighborhood commercial zoning to the east, and lowdensity residential to the south. The future land use map designates this property for lowdensity residential use. Here's a picture of the subject property facing north as well as views to the south, east, and west. Here's an exhibit provided by the applicant showing the proposed neighborhood commercial zone. The future land use map designates this area for lowdensity residential land uses. Although the proposed zone change to neighborhood commercial district is not in conformance with the resident res residential designation is proximity to 50th street a principal arterial street makes a zoning change to commercial use appropriate. The proposed zone change is compatible with the zoning ordinance and will be appropriate at the proposed location. The property is located along an arterial and the requested zoning district is appropriate adjacent to nearby commercial land uses. Although the property is currently bounded by lowdensity residential zoning on the south and medium density residential zoning on the north and to the west, it is adjacent to neighborhood commercial zoning to the east and it fronts 50th street street which is a principal arterial street. The property's 50th street frontage contributes to the proposed zone change being compatible with the character of other commercial properties in the area with similar frontage to 50th Street. The proposed zone change is along 50th Street which is designated as a principal arterial and west of Pontiac Avenue which is designated as a local street by the master thorough plan 2018. Staff has no objection to the request. I can take questions at this time. >> Can you remind me the definition of a principal arterial? >> Uh it's I believe 60 foot width four lanes. So arterials are typically five to seven lanes. >> Currently it's only three. >> Correct. Correct. >> Three. Three. >> Is it? >> No. >> That stretch of 50 is not currently improved to that arterial map. >> Maybe it's only two. >> I can't say. >> It's only two. >> I got I got some experience at farms. >> Yeah, me too. So during the construction of Pontiac Avenue, which we won't go into, part of that project was that the proponent wanted a stoplight right there. Pretty much mandatory. We have to have one. And now he wants to change this to commercial with no stoplight. >> I wasn't aware of any stoplight proposal. >> Okay. >> Any other questions for staff at this time? Okay. Thank you very much. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is the applicant or his or her representative here? >> Good evening. I'm Terry Hullman with Hugo Reed Associate 1601 Avenue in. This is uh what we've been developing with our company as a Westmont development. Our client owns this uh small remnant piece of frontage on 50th Street at the intersection of 50th and Pontiac Avenue. Pontiac is a collector. Uh it connects to the Friendship School to the north and it winds around ultimately through the residential neighborhood all the way over to Upland Avenue. So there's no question at some point in time it's going to be a typical signalized intersection like you would see at any thoroughare and collector 98th in Memphis, 82nd in Memphis, so forth. So, we believe that this is a great candidate location for um some form of neighborhood retail. Uh also recall that the comp plan while the the map doesn't show commercial along all of the thoroughare from node to node, it does make reference to the that the commercial is uh an expected use along the thoroughares between the nodes. Lighter commercial like the NC that we're asking for tonight. Um, also I'd like to I was not aware there was any opposition until I happen to just go through the backup that was posted online today. Uh, I'd like to show you one thing if I can get going the right direction here. Yeah, this this help helps explain it a little bit. Yes, there is apartments that's being developed to the north and west of us. Um, the residential that we were purposeful in how we set this up. the the residential to the south. Uh you'll notice our requested area extends far enough to the west away from Pontiac such that the only residential to the south of us south of 50th Street uh backs into 50th Street and is insulated from 50th by way of a little landscape strip and a nice barrier fence. So, uh, we wanted to point out that we we while we have residentially zoned property south of 50th across the street from us, it physically does not look at us in any sense. It's completely blocked off. So, they uh when we did this phase of the residential development, we we wanted to not have those residences have, you know, connectivity to 50th at that location. So, yes, there is NC zoning to the east of us and Katakorner to the southeast of us. Uh, we feel like this rounds out this corner. Um, it it will be lower level neighborhood residential. I'm sorry, lower level neighborhood commercial. Um, that I think fits well at a location like this on 50th Street. 50th is not five or seven lanes today. The day will come um when traffic warrants uh tell us to do so. Those will be expanded to five or seven lanes. So, we're trying to tee this property up for sort of midmile retail use where there ultimately will be a signalized intersection. I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Hey, Terry, in your project, are you planning on setbacks sufficient to allow for five to seven lanes? >> Uh, the rideway is already dedicated, so that decision is already made for us. >> Okay. Yes, sir. And and you can't I can't tell from the photos and from the aerial map. Is is Pontiac finished? >> It's under construction as I recall. >> Construction. Yes, sir. >> Yeah. I didn't get a chance to drive out there and so >> and I'm I'm embarrassed to say that I can't give you a a firsthand account. It's been a while since I've been out there myself. >> Yeah. >> It's open. >> Is it Is it open? I mean, you can drive down it, but it's not done not. Gotcha. >> Thank you. >> All right. Planning Commission member knows more about my project than I do. >> Thank you, Terry. >> Thanks. >> Is there anyone here to speak in opposition to this request? Okay, seeing none, anyone wishing to speak in favor? Okay, we'll close the public hearing for matter discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Move to approve. >> I'll second. >> Have a motion and a second. Discussion. Robert, what were you saying about the traffic light? >> Well, so where Pontiac goes back to the Friendship High School during the negotiations of all that. There was u words and promises of a stoplight. We're not going to make that commercial. There's too much going on right there. And it's ironic to me that we built apartments all around this without using that spot. And I thought about it when I was watching it go up that we're leaving a corner for a reason. So here we are looking at it. So I u there's going to be a lot of traffic when that school opens coming out of there and it's two lane currently. So nothing I mean that's not the proponent's problem that it's two lane >> but it if they throw something down there right now it's going to get hectic in a hurry. And I also think that running down 50th Street when you come across the railroad track that's all residential on that side. Those are all 10acre residential people at LS Farms. So I don't foresee any more commercial till you get to Upland. >> Right. And I think we've already looked at Upland and 50th. >> I think 50th and Upland is a 5acre commercial track. Yes, >> that's correct. I mean commercial, you've got commercial completely bordering the east east boundary of all this stuff. future plan. >> So >> yeah, East along the railroad track, >> right? >> Yeah, between between Pontiac and the railroad. >> It's all well future future plan for commercial. >> Any other discussions? >> No question. Ready question? >> Question. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Uh we'll go ahead and take the vote. All in favor of item 3058H say I. >> I. >> All opposed. >> I >> Okay, let's do it by hand. All All in favor? Okay, it's two. All opposed. Six. Motion fails. Two to six. It will be going to the city council on July 22nd at 2 p.m. Next item of business is item 3.7, zone case number 3523. Good evening board. I am Sam Bryen with the planning department and this is zone case 3523. The applicant is Keller William Williams Commercial for William Jean Spurgeon. They are requesting a zone change from low density single family district SF2 to light industrial district LI. The property is located south of 134th Street and west of Chicago Avenue. 18 letters were sent out and we have received one in favor and three in opposition. Here's the notification map showing written opposition from property owners within the 200 foot notification boundary exceeding 20% of the land area which will require a supermajority vote of six out of seven city council members in order to be approved. These opposition letters cited reasons such as traffic and noise. The aerial map shows a storage facility outside of city limits to the north, a residential dwelling outside of city limits to the east, and manufactured homes to the south and west. The zoning map shows this property zoned low density single family district SF2. This rounding properties are zoned SF2 to the west and south with the north and east being outside of city limits. Here's a map indicating the proximity of similarly zoned areas such as LI, heavy commercial, HC, and industrial park IP. The future land use map designates this area for lowdensity residential land uses. Here's a view of the subject property as well as views to the west, east, and north. Here is an exhibit provided by the applicant. Here is another exhibit provided by the applicant. The future land use map designates this area for lowdensity residential. Although the request does not conform to this designation, it would be appropriate considering the existing adjacent land use to the north and the LI zoning to the west along Frankfurt Avenue. The existing existing development of this property is currently a non-conforming use and this request would allow development that aligns with future land use. Therefore, this request is in conformance with the comprehensive plan principles. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and will be appropriate at the proposed location. The proposed zone change is compatible with the surrounding area and will not change the character of the existing development. The location is along 134th Street which is designated as a local street by the master thoroughfare plan 2018. Staff has no objection to the request and I can take any questions at this time. >> Why is the uh current use non-conforming already on the site? >> It has uh the manufactured Um, I think it's I believe it's a couple of manufactured homes there and uh in current UDC those those are not allowed. >> This was probably one of those ones that got put into the city before and changed from transitional to SF2. Am I correct? >> Yes. This property would have been annexed in 2016. >> That's the hodge podge. >> Yes. >> You could you go back to the slide of the objections? >> Thanks. Thanks. >> Okay. Any other questions for staff at this time? Thank you very much. Is the applicant or his or her representative here? if you'll please state your name and address for the record. >> Good evening, board. Jeremy Steen, 10210 Quaker Avenue. Just want to give you a little context about the proposed project and answer any questions you have. Uh like he said, this is an area of town that has a kind of a patchwork of some city, some county, and it's got some commercial mixed in with residential, and it's just kind of a hodge podge area of town. They're currently on this property is five deteriorated um buildings, mostly trailer homes. And the uh I represent the buyer and he's intending to scrape these buildings and build four to five smaller uh warehouses that would be he's uh he's a car guy and he he has this vision of like a high-end nice garage for cars in this nicer area town. And if you'll look at the uh the six page in the packet I put in front of you, there's a cleaner version of what he's in intending to put and how he's uh intending to set this up. You'll also notice on there that we put the setbacks. This does have a 100 foot setback to the side and to the to the rear for any abudding residential use. And there's also a 15t buffer yard that will be required. >> Thank you. Is there any questions for the applicant? >> Agree. Set back. >> Yes. So, how what's Oh, it's 140 ft from the >> That's how he has it planned. It's not a required setback, but that's his current plan. And the required setback would be 100 ft from the rear. >> So, >> okay. So, like I mean I've seen some of these popping up in other cities and they're like it's like basically a garage where you park a exotic car or a a classic car or something. >> Yeah. His intent was to build a bit of like a small community there. Um, not to say that some point there might be a small shop or something, but this is not a heavy manufacturer, heavy industrial use at all. It' be a very lightly use. >> Okay. Will anyone live there or? >> No, sir. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Stain. Is anyone here to speak in opposition to this request? Yes, sir. Please come forward and state your name and address for the record. >> My name is Les Batty and I live at 5602 138. I'm representing Ben Manino who lives at 5601 134. David Dominguez that lives at 5516 138. And myself I live in 5602 138. Those pink squares are us. And they're wanting to put a a storage unit right there in the middle of us. And on the road 134th is solid storage units all the way from one end to the other. And almost all the way to 1585, which is loop 88 now. And uh we we've lived there for 30 years. We don't want storage units up next against us. Uh it's it's our right. I mean, this land was veteran land when I moved there, and there's not very many veterans out there anymore, but still, we have the right to uh have our own property and not be put upon by storage units. Um we lived out there for all of us for over 30 years. And uh it's not like we're not taking care of the place. If you look at the place, uh it's, you know, it's not high-end and they're they're trailer houses, but they're our trailer houses and they're nice homes. All of them are. So, uh I just said, you know, I talked to all the other neighbors out there. ever a bigger circle around there would all say no. So, uh, that's where I'm at. Got any questions? >> No, I think we understand where you're coming from. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> One quick question for you. I'm sorry. Have you spoken to the applicant at all? >> All the applicants. Oh. To the to the guy with the green dot there? >> Yes, sir. >> No, sir. He done live in there. And >> not the green dot. Not the green person who proposed the stuff. >> Huh? >> Mr. Stein's representative. >> Oh, well, he's the one that owns the storage units. >> Of course. [Music] >> Sorry. Is there anyone else wishing to speak in opposition? Okay, seeing none, is there anyone wishing to speak in favor? Okay, we'll close the public hearing for a matter of discussion. Do we have a motion? I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> Have a motion in a second. Discussion. >> I mean, what the drawing that's proposed looks like it's going to be a nice place. It's got trees all around it. >> Big step back. A little more lost >> than what's there now. >> Just because you >> Just because you see a picture doesn't mean it. I know >> that's true. Light industrial is is light industrial >> or I'm sorry. Yes, light industrial. >> Industrial is light industrial. >> Yeah. >> Kristen, can this be put on anything other than light industrial? >> So, warehousing and storage is a limited use in the heavy commercial district, which means there's additional regulations they would need to abide by. Um, I can check and see what those are. It could be that for some reason this property cannot meet those additional regulations and therefore needed a district where it was permitted by right. >> So what's the required setback for up against residential >> 100 ft? >> Okay. And it's a type C buffer yard. Is that right? >> That's correct. 15 ft. >> There's only one more intensive buffer yard, right? >> That's correct. >> So this is the second to most intensive. >> Mhm. So the additional regulations in the heavy commercial district require that all all operations be conducted completely within a building um outdoor storage must be screened things of that nature. So it's depending on what their plans are for the property. you know, if it was strictly warehousing and storage and they planned to conduct everything indoors, um, and if they had any outdoor storage, it was screened, they could potentially request heavy commercial district. It could be that they would prefer the light industrial. Maybe there's additional uses they may want in the future, >> but it's also giving them stricter. >> It is. Okay. So, >> it's kind of a double-edged sword going to lot industrial in it. Are you going to have storage outside? Like do you plan on having anything like that or no? >> Uh there's no plans to have storage, but but again these this is a small project and they would have a little yard and so but there could potentially be a little shop that would have a yard, but that would require some fencing and stuff. >> So with no storage, you can come back with a commercial zone rather than light industrial. Well, we when we initially started the project, we met with some representatives of planning and zoning and went over what we were looking at and they we all thought that this would be the best zoning and even though they understood that there is some really stringent setbacks and that we have to have these buffer yards to anything that's single family. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Any other questions at this time? Ready to vote? >> Ready to move. >> Y'all ready to vote? >> Okay. Okay. We'll call questions on uh the case. All in favor, please say I. I. I. >> All opposed? Nay. Nay. >> Okay. Let's do hands. All in favor? two three. >> All opposed. Motion carries 5 to three. This will go to city council on July 22nd, >> August 12th. >> August this Oh, because it's the >> super. >> Thank you. I'm sorry. Okay. Next zone case is item 3.8 number zone case 3524. Technical difficulties. All right. So, this is 3524. The applicant is CMS Properties for United Sky Capital LLC. This is request for zone change from office and low density residential district to neighborhood commercial district. The property is located east of Avenue and south of 98 street. >> 60 notification letters were sent out and we have received one in favor and two in opposition. >> Jamie, I think your mic went off again. >> Thank you. >> There we go. >> Man, I'm batting three for three tonight. [Laughter] All right. So, here's the notification map showing the one in favor and two in opposition. Here's an aerial view showing single family and duplex residential properties to the north, single family homes and undeveloped property to the east, developing multifamily properties to the south, and undeveloped land to the west. The current land use map shows lowdensity and medium density residential zoning to the north, commercial and single family zoning to the east, highdensity residential zoning to the south, and commercial zoning to the west. The future land use map designates this property for commercial use. Here's a picture of the subject property facing south as well as views to the north, east, and west. Here is an exhibit provided by the applicant showing the proposed neighborhood commercial zone. The future land use map designates this area for commercial and residential land uses. The proposed zone change to neighborhood commercial district is compatible with the commercial designation and its proximity to 98th Street, a principal arterial street, makes a zoning change to commercial use appropriate. The proposed zone change is compatible with the zoning ordinance and will be appropriate at the proposed location. The property is located along an arterial and the requested zoning district is appropriate adjacent to nearby commercial land uses. Although the property is currently bounded by residential zoning districts to the north and south, it sides auto urban commercial zoning to the west and it fronts 98th Street which is a principal arterial street. The property's 98th Street frontage contributes to the proposed zone change being compatible with the character of other commercial properties in the area with similar frontage to 98th Street. The proposed zone change is along 98th Street which is designated as a principal arterial street by the master thoroughfare plan 2018. The staff has no objection to the request. I can take questions at this time. >> Is there any questions for staff at this time? Okay, thank you very much. Is the applicant or his or her representative here? >> Thank you. If you could please state your name and address again. >> Jeremy Steen, 10210 Quaker Avenue. I just wanted to give you guys a little context of this and answer any questions you have. So, the owner of this land also owns the adjacent auto urban commercial land and we're getting this one zoned and after they met with uh planning and zoning, they decided to lower this to the neighborhood commercial since it does abut up to the single family. This does have 20 foot rear setbacks to that single family and a 15 foot setback to the side. >> Okay. Thank you. Is there any questions for the applicant? >> Have y'all met with the the ones that objected? You know, their main concern was that they just don't understand what the parcel is going to be used for and how it's going to affect them. >> Yes, ma'am. I was able to reach one of two of them and did they had some concerns about how the alley would work in traffic and was able to answer those questions. I don't I'm not sure if they're here or not. >> Excellent. Okay. >> Thank you very much. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Stein. Thank you. Is there anyone here wishing to speak in opposition to this request? Okay. Seeing none, anyone wishing to speak in favor? >> Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing for matter of discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> Have a motion in a second. Discussion. >> So, reading this, it says it's next to an assisted living facility. Primrose. >> That's primrose. >> It's there on the southwest corner >> adjacent to the side. >> Primrose with no windows. >> Cut the windows off. >> So, I will say at least going to commercial. They're going down to neighborhood commercial which is lower than the others. I think that there was a concession on that part it looks like. >> And I think at the position it is it's not a bad location. Okay. If there is no other questions, we'll go ahead and call the vote. All in favor, please say I. I. >> All oppose, say nay. Motion carries eight to nothing. It will go to city council July 22nd. Next case is item 3.9, zone case 3526. This is zone case 3526. The applicant is AMD AMD Engineering LLC for Christian LS LLC. They are requesting a zone change from lowdensity single family district SF2 to Auto urban commercial district AC. The property is located north of 114th Street and west of Milwaukee Avenue. 13 letters were sent out and we received one back in favor. Here is the notification map showing one in favor. The aerial map shows vacant land to the north, an assisted living center, and vacant land to the east, vacant land to the south, and an equestrian center to the west. The the zoning map shows this property zoned lowdensity single family district SF2. The surrounding properties are zoned auto urban commercial district AC to the north, neighborhood commercial NC and SF2 to the east, AC and NC to the south and SF2 to the west. Future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses. Here is a picture of the subject property as well as views to the west, south, and east. Here's an exhibit provided by the applicant. The future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses. The request conforms to this designation and would be appropriate considering the existing adjacent zoning districts and land uses. Therefore, this request is in complete conformance with the comprehensive plan principles. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and will be appropriate at the proposed location. The proposed zone change is compatible with the surrounding area and will not change the character of the existing development. The location is along Milwaukee Avenue which is designated as a principal arterial street and 114th Street which is designated as a minor arterial street by the master thoroughare plan 2018. Staff has no objections to this request and I can take any questions at this time. >> Any questions for staff? Okay. Thank you very much. Is the applicant or his or her representative here? If you please state your name and address for the record. >> Corey Dulan, AMD Engineering, 651568th Street. I don't have anything else to add uh to the presentation. Be happy to answer any questions. >> Don't think we have any. Is there anyone here wishing to speak in opposition to this request? Okay, seeing none, anyone wishing to speak in favor? Okay, we'll close the public hearing matter discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> We have a motion in second. Any discussion? >> Thank you. It's at a commercial node location. A good one for it. So, >> there's no questions. We'll go ahead and call the vote. All in favor, please say I. >> All oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. Eight to nothing. Next case is item 3.10. 10 zone case 3528. This is zone case 3528. The applicant is Hugo Reed and Associates for SWLLD. They're requesting a zone change from lowdensity single family district SF2 and auto urban commercial district AC to heavy commercial district HC. The property is located south of 130th Street and west of Frankfurt Avenue. 18 letters were sent out and we've received zero back. The aerial map shows vacant land to the north, south, and east with a commercial business and a residential dwelling to the west. The zoning map shows this property zoned lowdensity single family district SF2 and auto urban commercial district AC. The surrounding properties are zoned SF2 to the west, south, and east with the north being AC and heavy commercial HC. The future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses. Here is a picture of the subject property as well as views to the west, east, and north. Here's an exhibit provided by the applicant. The future land use map designates this area for commercial land uses. The request conforms to this designation and would be appropriate considering the existing adjacent zoning districts and land uses. Therefore, this request is in complete conformance with the comprehensive plan principles. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance and will be appropriate at the proposed location. The proposed zone change is compatible with the surrounding area and will not change the character of the existing development. The location is along 130th Street which is future loop 88 which is designated as a freeway by the master thoroughfare plan. Staff has no objection to the request and I can take any questions at this time. >> Any questions for staff at this time? >> Thank you very much. the applicant or his or her representative here. I'm going to ask you to repeat your name and address even though I don't have it memorized. >> Uh good evening. I'm Terry Holman with you go read and associates 1601 Avenue N representing SWLLD LLC on this particular case. Um this is a little similar to the loop 88 and Slide Road case we asked about earlier. uh it's a much smaller piece of property. It's not a we don't see it as a big retail node, but nonetheless, we see this as a candidate location for HC zoning given that it's on Loop 88 frontage. Uh we all know that Loop 88 is well underway out there. So, the thing that makes HC work here in my view is to kind of help see it in context a little bit. Most of the yellow, well, all of the yellow zoning is yellow because it was annexed and just hadn't been developed yet, right? Um you saw the the comp plan uh showing all this as commercial. The area to the north which shows is 130th Street here is Loop 88. Um the the white area is rightway which is now been acquired and and currently loop rightway. little small chunk of commercial that dips down into that um was some old zoning which now has been acquired as loop 88 rightway. So, but if you'll notice north of that there is HC zoning in place on the north side of the highway here. So, we felt like sort of both similar zoning on both sides of loop 88 made sense at this location. Uh it's pretty straightforward I believe. With that being being said, I'd be happy to answer questions. >> Any questions for Mr. Hullman? Thank you, Terry. >> Thank you. >> Is there anyone here to speak in opposition to this request? Seeing none, anyone else to speak in favor? Okay, seeing none, we'll close the public hearing for matter of discussion. Do we have a motion? >> I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> Have a motion and second. Any discussion? >> Pretty cut and dry again. Me too. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, go ahead and call the vote. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> All oppose. Same side. >> Motion carries 8 to zero. This will go to the city council on July 22nd. Last zone case we have is item 3.11, zone case 1 1893, GG. Good afternoon board. I'm Jose Lovas with the planning department and this is zone case 1893 GG. The applicant is 17 Services LLC for Wag 2.0 LLC. They're requesting to reszone from heavy commercial to neighborhood commercial. The property is located north of Fourth Street and west of Homestead Avenue. 27 letters were sent out and we received zero back in favor and zero in opposition. Here's the aerial view of the property. There is undeveloped land to the north, east, and west. To the south are single family residents. Farther north there is Shadow Hills Golf Course. The current land use map shows the property to the east is zoned heavy commercial and to the north, west, and sound south zoned lowdensity single family SF2. Farther to the west there is also highdensity residential HDR. Future land use map designates this property for residential low density. Here's the picture of the sub subject's property as well as the views to the west, south, and east. Here's some documentation that has been supplied by the applicant. The future land use map designates this area for lowdensity single family land uses. Although the the proposed zone change to neighborhood commercial district is not in conformance with the residential designation, its proximity to Fourth Street combined with the undeveloped city of Levik property serving as a buffer makes a zoning change to neighborhood commercial use appropriate. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the zoning ordinance. The property is located along fourth street and is appropriate adjacent to nearby commercial land uses. The proposed zone change is compatible with the surrounding area and will not change the character of the exist existing development. The property has access to Fourth Street which is designated as a minor arterial by the master thoroughare plan 2018. Staff has no objection to the request and I can take any questions at this time. Any questions for staff? Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Is the applicant or his or her representative here? Please state your name and address for the record. >> Good evening. My name is Jeremy Bamman. I'm an architect with 17 Services located at 1500 Broadway. Uh we're just seeking a downgrade in the zoning from heavy commercial to neighborhood commercial um for the intent of building some garden offices. I'm here to answer any questions that you guys have. >> Thank you. Always lock down zones. They're always easy. >> Always easy. >> Yep. >> Any questions? Okay. >> Is there anyone here wishing to speak in opposition to this request? Seeing none, anyone wishing to speak in favor? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing for matter of discussion. Do we have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> We have a motion and second. Is there any discussion? >> No. Okay, we'll go ahead and call the vote. All in favor, please say I. >> All oppose. Same sign. Motion carries 8 to zero. We'll go to city council on July 22nd before we go to our next item of business for consideration of the UDC amendments. We are going to take a break until 8:00 and we will see you back then. [Music] It's 8:02 and we'll go back in session. The next item of business and the last item is item 4.1 is consideration of amendments to the UDC. This is not a public hearing and we will will not be a asking for any input for the citizens. This will be basically a discussion amongst the board members and you taking it. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman, um if you recall, the joint public hearing between the planning and zoning commission and city council was held May 22nd where we reviewed the proposed staff recommended amendments. You also heard from citizens regarding some additional amendments they would like to see added. I can go through the staff recommended list of amendments if you would like for me to or if there are just certain ones you would like to discuss or ask questions about, whatever you would prefer. Commission members, what are y'all's thoughts on this? I know that we can take them all at once or we can take them individually. I know that there is one of them that I don't want to vote on. >> Okay. >> Together with it, that's number 31, which is a sign ordinance. I don't know if anybody else has anything else >> that they want to pull out and consider separately. >> Possibly the industrial one. Um, >> the setbacks. >> Yes. Yeah. Were those ones proposed by a citizen? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> I think that was section 390.6F-2 per the applicants or the uh citizens recommendation. Lastly, I think one other item that I don't know if ever got settled. that had to do with the single family cottage definition, >> which would be section 39.10.02. >> Did that fix itself with the new state law? >> It did, but if the board wanted to go ahead and approve the amendment discussed to correct the UDC, that would be fine. And there was one additional citizen amendment. Um the couple who proposed it is here today in regards to the highdensity residential district which currently prohibits multif family uses on the same block face as single family residential or across the street from single family residential. So their proposed amendment was to remove that prohibition only within the highdensity residential district. >> Okay. And was there not >> on the Drew on the on the cottage deal, the state law September 1st is going to allow for 3,000 foot lots anyway. So, I think it's kind of irrelevant. We can just leave it in and it's going to take take its own course. >> It the state law will correct it. You're correct. We'll have to allow 3,000 foot lots, 70% lot coverage. Today, the unified development code limits the total square footage of the home to,300 square feet in the definition. So that was the proposed amendment to remove that from the definition and just state that a cottage is a lot that is less than 5,000 square feet. >> So if if we move to change it would our changes actually get into effect and enforce before the state law change >> only. It would only remove the it would not meet the state law definition or change >> timing >> timing wise September be approved 5 days before So, we're saving somebody 5 days. >> You're correct. >> Okay. The thing is they're still a little bit different because when we take it off completely the way it was proposed here, then we can build like almost 3,000 square foot home on like a 4,999 foot lot because now it still counts as a cottage. Um, so because it it you can put like 55% or 65% coverage on anything below 5,000 square feet, right? >> That's correct. You still have to meet the required setbacks as well. >> Yep. So it it makes it to where like it's big lots or I mean but you can put huge houses on smaller lots which >> covers cottages and then some. >> So it does make a difference. >> Yeah, it will. >> So should we pull it out and talk and vote on it separately then? Would that be smart? >> It is not on the list. It is the definition of a single family cottage and it would be to amend the definition to remove the maximum square footage of the home and instead state that a cottage is a lot that is less than 5,000 square ft. And the intent of that is so you don't have someone with a 20,000 foot lot calling it a cottage taking advantage of the reduced setbacks and the higher lot coverage. Okay. their their main issue was also the coverage. They didn't know if it was, you know, including garages or not including garages. >> Um, so I have, I guess, a proposition for that one that would kind of cover that but not open it to where like it's open-ended, >> right? You're still going to have a maximum lot coverage. You're still going to have setbacks. You're just removing the maximum floor area, >> but the allowed maximum coverage would be pretty big. Like for for me, I wouldn't want more than 2,000 square foot cottage, you know, on a on a lot that's less than five 5,000 square foot. >> So, um I understand what you're saying. Garden homes today are basically the equivalent of a cottage just shifted over to the zero lot line. And today a garden home is allowed 65% lot coverage. So it's essentially the same product. You just shift it to the middle of the lot where you have the five foot setbacks on either side. >> Okay. >> And and as we stated, state law is going to increase it to 70% lot coverage September 1st. >> Okay. >> So how how do we proceed? Do we >> Yeah. Can we vote on on the ones that we want that's in there except for the ones that we just discussed? >> Sure. You can have multiple motions and votes depending on how you want to divide it up what you want to vote on. So if you want to vote on the entire list son's number 31 or whatever number you want to pull out, you're welcome to do that. And then if you need to have discussion on some of the citizen proposed ones or any from the list. >> So >> you have the others out of the way. Why don't we look at the list right now and figure out I know we're talking the numbers, but if we go to the list according to what the numbers were and say we want to pull those to discuss separately, >> that'd be great. >> And then vote on the others. So I know I had number 31. I'm not sure. >> That's the only one I had. That's all I had was 31. What was yours, Drew? >> I'm working on it. I think that's be easier if we all can look at the one instead of going 39.02 blah blah blah blah >> see the item number. >> Mine's 31. [Music] >> Maybe you could help me Kristen is 39.02.06. Is that actually in here >> in regards in regards to >> that would be the setbacks for the industrial? >> That is not on the staff recommended list. >> Okay. So, that'd be a separate one regardless. >> So, how would we pull? >> We can vote on that separately. >> That's correct. >> So, we're going to just vote on the staff recommended. Okay. >> So, we got for the staff recommended, the only one we're pulling is item 31. Is that correct? >> You're not pulling the cottages. It's not in. >> So if we're >> And the block face is also not in staff. >> Okay. >> Recommendated. Correct. >> So first off, we can knock off the ones from staff recommendations. Is that correct? >> Yep. >> Okay. >> I I'd like to make a motion >> to approve staff's recommendation for the amendment to UDC except for item 31. >> Second. >> So that is items 1 through 56 except for 31. Is that correct? to make sure we got it in the records to be able to go for that. Yes. >> Okay. >> All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> All oppose, nay. >> Motion carries 8 to zero. So, I guess we go ahead and move to item 31 since that was >> that'd be great. Sure. >> 31 staff recommendations. >> And you're so good. Thank you for being so quick on that. I will go ahead and start and say I'm opposed to this. I think it's opening up too many different things. I think it's one that is more looking to be spot zoning to cover one specific entity. And I think that entity has had their chances. I think it's gone through CBA. I think it's gone through council and it's all been turned down. And I see no reason now to come back and change it to benefit one group is my personal opinion >> and that's my opinion. >> I agree. >> Agreed. >> I agree. So for clarification, if we don't accept this amendment then >> it stays at 20. >> It stays at 20%. >> It doesn't eliminate the signs. It stays >> That's correct. >> So >> but don't they have aren't they've already had to leave part of it? Correct. >> I'm sorry. So it doesn't eliminate it, but doesn't it limit what they have? Because didn't ZBA say their exception >> current? Yeah, they're currently operating under a variance. And so you got on, if I remember correctly, the signs that are facing to, and Kristen, correct me, the signs that are facing back to the east, the sign that's facing to the south, those have already gone through. The variances have expired and they're currently out of compliance. The sign's facing to the west, the HB sign is their variance doesn't come up for a little bit of time. It's coming up quickly, but that's when that one will come up. If it's if that variance then is expires then they have to come in compliance with whatever the code is at the time. So that means if this doesn't change then it would come in to 20%. >> What is the variance percentage right now? >> I believe it's 35. >> Okay. >> And that would be >> so they basically become smaller >> if we don't approve the amendment today >> if they were to comply. That's correct. Going from the 20% which is currently allowed to the 35% would mark a 75% increase in the allowable surface area of that sign. That's a meaningful meaningful increase. And uh if we look at 20% on what the the face of that wall would be already, it's already almost 2,000 square ft uh sign that's allowed currently if it's 108 ft tall and about 100 ft wide. So it's already pretty good sized in my opinion. >> Now on the and the 20% would be for all four sides. Correct. >> That's right. I believe they >> so you could put one on the north for whatever reason you wanted. There's nothing there now. >> I think the 20% right now that they're putting is coverage that includes the north side if I'm not mistaken. That 35% >> it's for each facade. >> Correct. >> Per facade. >> Yeah. Okay. >> 20% on each each facade. >> Gotcha. Gotcha. >> My question is is it a sign or is it a billboard? >> So we do not regulate the content now. No, but I'm saying I'm just saying a sign or a billboard because generally a sign you look at is advertising a business that's in the facility. A billboard's not. >> Mhm. >> Right. And that's so that in order to read to determine whether the sign is talking about a business that is actually located there or not, you actually have to read the sign. And that's we can't >> regulate the content of a sign. So >> it's just a sign. >> Yeah. It's a gotcha. It's a catch 22. >> So when you say you can't regulate the content of the sign >> unless it's something that is illegal. >> Miss put up a colorful uh proposal for uh advertising businesses. Is that would that be allowed if they wanted >> I mean is that actually possible >> unless unless it's something that is actually illegal like pornography then that that is that is something that could be regulated but just advertisement of an adult business would not be >> would not be illegal. >> No. >> Okay. >> Any other discussions? Okay, we will. Now, I guess I guess we got to do this because since we're supposed to be voting in the affirmative, >> if we vote for this, that means we're allowing the third increase to 35%. Correct. >> Correct. So, we would prefer a motion to approve the amendment. You can still vote however you want if you motion and second on it and then vote accordingly. >> Okay. >> Move to approve. >> So, you get that. If we're against it, we make the motion to approve it, but then we vote against it. >> Are we done with discussion? >> If you are, >> I guess if you got some what you just said. >> I like science. I don't have a problem with science, but the variance is out. That's that. So, >> yeah. I mean, >> I don't But science, that's what a lot of people I I don't know if they realize the sun's going to be there. It's not I mean, you may change your size, >> but but it's not going away, >> right? Well, and I get that too. >> So, the distraction to drivers is still going to remain, >> right? But you're going from a size we have now >> to I mean, well, the the laws of the law, the rules are the rules, and we need to go back to the rules. >> Great. >> Okay. Just wanted to say that somebody >> move to approve. >> Second. >> Okay. Okay. So, we're moving. Okay. Got it. A move to approve. We have the second. All in favor, please say I. All oppose say nay. >> Nay. >> Motion fails. 8 to zero. This will also go to the city council on August 12th. >> August 12th. You're correct. Sorry. >> Okay. So, now we need to discuss to the ones that were citizens recommendations >> if you would like to. Yep. >> I guess because I'm I guess questions y'all. We can pick them up one by one I guess. >> Yeah. Which one would you like to say? >> So let's start with the >> I don't know the cottage one. >> Cottage. Okay. So again the cottage current definition of cottage is limiting the maximum area of the residential structure. So staff's interpretation of that is the primary structure including the garage, anything attached to that main home um is limited to 1300 square feet. And so rather than having to come back and amend it every single time you have 1350 square feet or 1400 square feet, we would prefer to remove that requirement, let the lot coverage dictate and then um just put in that a cottage is less than 5,000 square feet is a lot that is less than 5,000 square feet. >> And at that point, anything can be put in, you know, from 1300 to up to, you know, a garden home shifted, which is the 65%. >> Correct. until the state law changes and becomes 70. >> 70. Mhm. >> Okay. Makes sense. Questions, discussion? >> Move to approve. >> Second. >> Okay. We have a motion in a second. Any further discussion? Okay. All in favor of the amendment to allow up to 5,000 square feet >> to allow a cottage home to be the definition of a cottage to be amended to remove the maximum area floor area and instead require it that it be on a lot less than 5,000 square feet. >> Great. I just wanted to make sure we had it on the record instead of what we were talking about. Gotcha. Okay. >> All in favor, please say I. I. >> All opposed. same time. Motion carries 8 to zero. >> Okay. >> Setbacks. >> Setbacks. So I believe well unless Mr. Gray wants to discuss it. I believe you received a handout at the public hearing that listed um a proposed amendment to the setbacks in the LI district as well as to monument signs in the LIGI and IP districts. And in regards to loading spaces, >> yeah, I uh I don't know if I fully understand the the signage component of the request. >> Mhm. >> Quite honestly, um whether I agree or disagree, I I don't fully understand it, frankly. And I know Mr. Wilkerson is I don't think he's here tonight. Um but I know he did uh present the setbacks as it relates to this is light industrial setbacks as it relates to the minimum side setback when it is adjacent to a residential use if I'm reading that correct. Yep. >> And I think that uh he's recommending that that side setback go down from is it 100 ft to 20 ft. >> That's correct. That is his request. >> And to a non-residential use to zero feet. >> Correct. So within the light industrial district, the current minimum side setback requirement adjacent to a residential use is 100 ft and 20 ft adjacent to non-residential. Same setbacks for a rear setback. And the proposal was to change the 100 ft setback to 20 for a side, zero adjacent to non-residential for a side, and then rear from 100 to 10. and then 20 to zero. >> So, what's important to understand is we had a case that would that involve this directly tonight, right? Um where we talked about that 100 foot setback, it would go down to 20 ft, which is a a meaningful decrease compared to what we were expecting this evening. Um and then and then if it was adjacent to a non-residential use, it would go to zero feet, which would mean at the lot line. Uh I don't know if I agree with that level of decrease. Frankly, I think that there needs to be something that is more that's a compromise between maybe the 100 foot and uh this this 20 foot that's been proposed. I'm open for discussion or thoughts on that if there's something. But I think Mr. Wilkerson was bringing up more of an infill property that he had. He provided some side plans that I think all of us maybe looked at where I think it was an infill property kind of on the east side of uh I27 where there were some old homes there that he was adjacent to that he was talking about really makes this property hard to develop for him. So I don't know if that's just really a case by case basis in that situation. >> I'm not I'm not sure you want anything on the zero lot. >> Yeah, I agree. >> I think that's a lot case today. >> I'm saying 100 ft's a lot. 100 beats a lot. Zero is zero. >> Yeah, there's somewhere in the middle, right? >> So, what's the what's the protocol and if we choose to is there time for us to discuss this before it goes to council or is this it till next time there's an amendment. >> So, >> this needs a little homework. >> Yeah. So, so this particular section and I was not here when Mr. Wilkerson presented it. What section number would this actually be in the UDC that would be amended? >> Um >> 39.02.06. >> Okay. So, did we in our notice have 39.02.06? Which one? >> It's not on this right here. What we have today? >> As far as our notice that we sent out to everybody, it was not on there. So, it would be We did. >> Okay, there it is. There it is. 69 39.02.006F related to setback requirements and required off street building facilities in the L1 zoning district. Okay. So then what then what you can you can do you can actually take um no action on it at all as far as the recommendation and bring a different recommendation back to city council at a f at a future time. It sounds to me based on what y'all are talking about the changes that you're talking about specific changes you're talking about it does might need some more homework. Um and actually probably I might need its own hearing um so that proponents and opponents can come and discuss um that and so probably go through a different notice um as opposed to there's no requirement I think that you actually do anything for it today if you do not want to >> I think that'd be my recommendation too I think I think I don't want to make a snap judgment and try to come up with a compromise that's our compromise without say >> interesting stakeholders. Yeah, I agree. >> That's fine. I just want to give one more comment. And if I could just make one more comment that may help with your discussion on this. Um especially if it if his concern is infill development number 23. We currently have a provision in the UDC for residential infill to allow contextual front and rear setbacks. So it wouldn't make a difference on the side setbacks, but our proposal is to amend this section so that it could be used in any district for those contextual setbacks. So that may assist him in some of these infill developments. >> So basically he has adjacent properties next to it. >> Then he can match that >> match that. >> Correct. >> That would that would fix a lot of those problems right there. >> And for the site, he can still go to DBA if for whatever reason he needs to change that side setback. He could if if he could prove a hardship related to the property. >> So if we if we punt this, when would it be able to come back up? >> Well, I mean, y'all you can this is an advisory body for any type of zoning change. So you can do it on your own. You still then after say y'all decide to come up with your own change, then you would still go through the notice process, the public hearing process, and it basically it comes right back through to you and then it goes back to city council. So you can initiate it yourself. >> Okay. >> Um but we still need to provide notice when you do any type of amendment to the zoning code and have your public hearings and then so y'all y'all always have the ability to initiate your own changes to the zoning. >> Okay. >> Because the way we've been doing it is this this these changes come up, amendments come up annually, semianually. >> We don't do it I mean we do it on a regular schedule. >> Yeah. and and all this stuff is I mean as Kristen I'm sure has talked to you all about and other people have talked about a lot of these stuff where as we're going through such the massive change to the UDC that we see things citizens bring things to us developers builders bring things to us that yeah we recognize that we need to make those changes so that's what most of these changes that have come to you have been are those types of things but that doesn't prevent this body from coming up with their own changes that they would recommen recommend to the zoning code on your own >> at any time. >> At any time. You just put it on an agenda and y'all discuss it. >> Okay, that sounds good. >> Okay, thank you. Is there any other discussion on that one? I >> think we just leave. >> So, we decided to table that >> table that until we figure it out >> formally a deal, right? Is there any other ones we have? >> I think the last one is the HDR, >> the block base. >> Correct. So currently in our residential districts, the the residential uses are limited with the requirement that if you're locating a two family, multif family apartment use on a block face that has only single family homes or is across the street facing single family homes. Um that is Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. doesn't have one straight wall straight variety. What level variety of blocks do you have the situation? Can you describe [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. [Music] [Music] Heat. Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] How many things? [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music]