Oct 08, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

[A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]

[00:00:07]

GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THE TIME IS NOW 6 P.M. I WANT TO WELCOME YOU OUT TO THE TUESDAY, OCTOBER EIGHT, 2024, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. WE'LL START OFF WITH A PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. YOU MAY BE SEATED. WE'LL PROCEED WITH THE AGENDA AS PRINTED. SO

[C. CONSENT AGENDA Any item may be withdrawn from the consent agenda and acted on separately. Approval of the Consent Agenda authorizes the approval of each item in accordance with Staff Recommendations.]

HEARING AND SEEING NONE. THE RECORD WILL REFLECT THAT WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKERS THIS

[1. Conducting a Public Hearing to consider Zoning Case Z-1529-24 for the applicant's request to amend the development regulations of PD-116, with a base zoning of Single Family Residential District – 10,000 (SF-10), to permit the use of Electrical Substation (High Voltage Bulk Power) and create and permit a use for Battery Energy Storage System applicable to the development and use of a 23.77± acre tract of land in the Thomas Bernard Survey, Abstract 114. The property is generally located on the west side of S. Westmoreland Road, south of W. Belt Line Road and north of W. Parkerville Road. The applicant is Parker Hills of Emerald Hill Energy Storage LLC and the property owner is Ahmad Khatib. (Case #Z-1529-24). The application for this case was withdrawn by the applicant on September 27, 2024.]

ITEM E1 IS CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A ZONING CASE. Z-152924 FOR THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF PD 116 WITH A BASE ZONING OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 10,000 SF TEN TO PERMIT THE USE OF ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION, HIGH VOLTAGE BULK POWER AND CREATE A PERMIT AND PERMIT A USE OF A BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM APPLICABLE TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF 23.77 ACRE TRACT OF LAND IN THE THOMAS BERNARD SURVEY. ABSTRACT 114. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF SOUTH WESTMORELAND ROAD, SOUTH OF WEST BELTLINE ROAD, AND NORTH OF WEST PARKERVILLE ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS PARKER HILLS OF EMERALD HILL ENERGY STORAGE, LLC, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS AHMAD KHATIB.

AND AGAIN THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z DASH 152924. THERE'S A NOTATION FROM STAFF. THE APPLICATION FOR THIS CASE WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT ON SEPTEMBER 27TH OF 2020. FOR STAFF UNDERSTANDING THAT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SAY ON THIS AGENDA ITEM BEFORE WE MOVE ON? WELL, THERE'S NO ACTION GOING TO BE TAKEN AT ALL ON TONIGHT. JUST LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT. ALSO, THE PREVIOUSLY ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER THE 19TH WILL ALSO

[2. Conduct a Public Hearing to consider making a recommendation to the City Council regarding the applicant's request to amend PD-193 with base zonings of SF-8, SF-9 and SF-10 with deviations to a new PD-193 with base zoning of Single-Family 8 (SF-8) with deviations. The property consists of 5 tracts of land and is legally described as being Tracts 6, 8, 9 and 10 in the R.T. Bandy Survey, Abstract 115 and part of Lot 1A in Block 1 of the First Southern Baptist Church Amendment Addition. The property is located at the northeast corner of S. Polk Street and E. Parkerville Rd. The property consists of approximately 50.35 acres of land and is addressed as 800, 803, 811, 819 and 901 E. Parkerville Rd. The applicant is John McKenzie of M&A Devco and the property owner is Legacy Grove Development LLC. (Case # Z-1530-24) Staff is requesting that this item be tabled to the October 22, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting in order to allow the applicant time to clarify and stipulate the deviations that are being requested with this PD-193 amendment request.]

THE PROPERTY CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 50.35 ACRES OF LAND, AND IS ADDRESSED AS 800, 803, EIGHT, 11, 819 AND 901 EAST PARKERVILLE ROAD. THE APPLICANT IS JOHN MCKENZIE OF M&A DEVCO AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IS LEGACY GROVE DEVELOPMENT LLC. THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z-153024. THERE'S ALSO A NOTATION WHERE WITH RESPECT TO THIS PUBLIC HEARING, STAFF IS REQUESTING THAT THIS ITEM BE TABLED TO THE OCTOBER 22ND, 2024 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING IN ORDER TO

[00:05:04]

SO WHAT WE'LL DO, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM E TWO. AT THAT TIME, IF THERE'S ANY INTERESTED PARTY WHO WISH TO COME FORWARD TO SPEAK, YOU CAN.

YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO DO SO AFTER ANYONE AND EVERYONE HAS SPOKEN ON ITEM E TWO. WE WILL THEN ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO TABLE THIS PUBLIC HEARING TO OCTOBER 22ND. SO WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THIS PUBLIC HEARING. IT IS NOW 6:06 P.M. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM E TWO, WHICH IS ZONING CASE Z DASH 153024, IS NOW OPEN. I DO BELIEVE I HAVE ONE COMMENT CARD. THE LAST NAME IS TILLIS JUNIOR.

IF YOU ARE IN ATTENDANCE AND YOU'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM WHILE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN THIS EVENING, YOU CAN. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY WELCOME TO COME FORWARD IF YOU DO WISH TO SPEAK. IF YOU WOULD, SIR, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND JUST YOUR CITY OF RESIDENCE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS. AND THEN AGAIN, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. HI, MY NAME IS JOHN THOMAS. MY NAME IS JOHNNY TILLIS JR AND I'M A RESIDENT OF DESOTO. AND I'M JUST TRYING TO ASCERTAIN SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE CHANGES THAT ARE WANTING TO BE MADE WITH REFERENCE TO THE ONGOING. OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME CHANGES THAT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPERS REQUESTING, AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE WHAT THOSE ARE. IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO. FROM. THE VARIANCES IS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR AND WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO. SO I'D LIKE TO BE MORE GET MORE INFORMATION ON THE DETAIL ON THE VARIANCE, WHAT HE'S ATTEMPTING TO DO IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS. TO MAKE THESE CHANGES, WHETHER IT WILL IMPACT OUR OUR COMMUNITY OR NOT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU, SIR, FOR YOUR COMMENTS. NO, THIS IS JUST AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO ADDRESS US. WE CAN'T ENGAGE IN QUESTION AND ANSWER, BUT I CAN ASSURE YOU, WITH THIS BEING TABLED TO ANOTHER DATE. SO WHAT WILL BE THE PROCESS FOR THAT TO HAPPEN? THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR, MISTER BREWER. I CAN COMMUNICATE THAT AT THIS POINT. MISTER TILLIS, IF YOU WOULD DEFINITELY GIVE YOUR NAME AND TELEPHONE INFORMATION TO BERNARD AT THE FRONT DESK, WHO WILL PERSONALLY GIVE YOU THAT CALL BACK TO GIVE YOU WHAT? THAT INFORMATION IS, AND THEN WE CAN GO INTO DETAIL OF WHAT THOSE DETAILS ARE AT THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING, STAFF WILL GIVE A REPORT THAT TRULY DETAILS WHAT THOSE REQUESTED DEVIATIONS ARE, BUT WE WILL COMMUNICATE THAT TO YOU AFTER THIS MEETING. WELL, MISTER CHAIR, WHAT WHAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE GET TO THE NEXT MEETING ON THE 22ND, THAT THIS JUST DOESN'T GO THROUGH WITHOUT THE INFORMATION BEING OUT THERE. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. WE'RE TABLING IT. BRING IT BACK, AND THEN JUST TO ACT ON IT WITHOUT WITHOUT WITHOUT THE INFORMATION BEING THERE, WE NEED WE NEED PUBLIC RESPONSE BECAUSE THIS IT APPEARS IT'S SOMETHING'S GOING ON WITH THE CHANGING OF OUR OF HOW WE DO BUSINESS HERE IN DESOTO AND HOW THE REGULATIONS ARE. WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS I DON'T WANT IT TO GET GET TO THE 22ND, AND WE JUST DON'T HAVE AND THE CITIZENS DON'T HAVE A CHOICE WITH THE VARIANCES. THAT'S ALL. I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS IS. THAT'S ALL I'M TRYING TO FIGURE. FOR YOUR NAME AND NUMBER, WE'LL GIVE YOU A CALL TOMORROW. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SIR, FOR YOUR COMMENTS. AND THANK YOU, MR. BURROW, FOR YOUR FOLLOW UP. IS THERE ANY OTHER INTERESTED PARTY? ANY OTHER CITIZENS WHO'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM? ALL RIGHT. I'LL ASK AGAIN. IS THERE ANY OTHER INTERESTED PARTY? ANY OTHER CITIZENS WHO'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? OKAY.

HEARING AND SEEING NONE. COMMISSIONERS, YOU'VE HEARD THE REQUEST OF STAFF IS THERE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS PUBLIC HEARING? Z-1530-24 TO OUR NEXT MEETING OF OCTOBER 22ND OF 2024.

IS THERE SUCH A MOTION, CHAIRMAN PUGH? YES, SIR. FOR IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE

[00:10:01]

[3. Conduct a Public Hearing and consider making a recommendation to the City Council for the applicant's request for zoning change from Single Family 10 (SF-10) to Single Family 8 (SF-8). The property is legally described as being Tract 13 in the Curtis Parks Survey, Abstract 1124 (409 E. Parkerville Road). The property is generally located at the northeast corner of E. Parkerville Rd and Terrace Drive. The applicant is Brandon Paredes and the property owner is Israel Garcia. (Case # Z-1531-24) The applicant is requesting that this item be tabled to the October 22, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting in order to allow the applicant time to ensure that their Concept Plan adheres to the City's Zoning Ordinance regarding alleys.]

[4. Conduct a Public Hearing and consider making a recommendation to the City Council for the applicant's request to amend Planned Development-120 (PD-120) in order to allow for site layout and building amendments to the Site Plan for the undeveloped Phase 2 portion of the Assured Hampton Addition, Block A, Lots 1 and 2 (803 and 811 S. Hampton Road). The applicant is Trenton Robertson with Master Plan and the property owner is Extra Space Properties Two LLC. (Case No. Z-1532-24)]

THIS IS CASE NUMBER Z. DASH 153224. GOOD EVENING, MISS MUNYARADZI. AND MAY WE HAVE A STAFF REPORT, PLEASE? YES. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS WITH THE PLANNING DIVISION. THIS IS A REQUEST TO AMEND PD 120 TO ALLOW FOR SITE LAYOUT AND BUILDING CHANGES ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE OF THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST PARKVIEW ROAD AND SOUTHAMPTON ROAD, AND IT CONSISTS OF 1.86 ACRES OF LAND. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED PD 120 WITH GENERAL RETAIL AS THE BEST ZONING. THE PROPERTY IS ACCESSED FROM SOUTHAMPTON ROAD AS WELL AS EAST PARKVIEW. ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS THE AREA THAT SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THIS SITE. SO THIS WHOLE PROPERTY IS PD 120. SO THEY WANT TO AMEND THAT PD TO IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THIS PORTION THAT IS IN RED. SO THE CURRENT THE CURRENT PROPERTY IS VACANT AND TO THE NORTH ARE EXISTING STORAGE FACILITY THAT IS ZONED PD 120. TO THE SOUTH IS A CONVENIENCE IS A CONVENIENCE STORE WITH GASOLINE SALES ZONED COMMERCIAL ONE. TO THE EAST IS VACANT LAND ZONED GENERAL RETAIL AND SINGLE FAMILY TEN, AND TO THE WEST IS A CHURCH AND VACANT LAND ZONED SINGLE FAMILY TEN. THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN IDENTIFIES THIS SITE AS SUITABLE FOR DESTINATION MIXED USE. THEREFORE, THE PROPOSED MAIN WAREHOUSES ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN OF THE 2024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS PD, THE PD 120, WAS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED IN 2014 AND AT THAT TIME IN 2014, THE LAYOUT THAT WAS PROVIDED TO THE CITY IS THIS ONE THAT HAD FIVE BUILDINGS ON THIS LOWER PORTION, WHICH THEY ARE NOW PROPOSING TO CHANGE, AND THERE WAS A STIPULATION IN THAT PD THAT SAID THAT LAND WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THIS SITE PLAN, BUT NOW THE APPLICANT IS CHANGING THAT SITE PLAN THAT IS THE REASON WHY THIS SPEED IS COMING BEFORE YOU, BECAUSE THEY ARE CHANGING THE BUILDINGS AS WELL AS THE LAYOUT. SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A BUILDING SIZE THAT IS SMALLER

[00:15:04]

AS I SAID AGAIN, THESE ARE PROPOSED MINI WAREHOUSES IN CONFLICT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN OF THE 2024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UNDER THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, IT CALLS FOR DESTINATION MIXED USE. AND IN SUMMARY, THE DESTINATION DESTINATION MIXED USES A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES. OPEN SPACE, AND A VARIETY OF AMENITIES TO CREATE A DESTINATION THAT ENCOURAGES PARKING, WANTS AND WALKING EXPERIENCE. THERE IS ALSO A RECOMMENDATION ABOUT THREE UNDERGO NUMBER ONE ON THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN THAT ENCOURAGING THAT ENCOURAGES THE REZONING OF PDS SUCH AS PD ONE 2120 TO ENCOURAGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF THIS HEARING WAS PUBLICIZED ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, 2024, IN DAILY FORECAST, NEWSPAPER AND STAFF MAILED 12 NOTIFICATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 AND 400FT OF THIS SUBJECT SITE. THERE WERE NO LETTERS THAT WERE RECEIVED IN SUPPORT OR IN OPPOSITION TO THIS APPLICATION. THIS IS THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND THIS IS THE PROPOSED ELEVATIONS. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE PD 121 AMENDMENT REQUEST TO ALLOW MINI WAREHOUSES, AND THIS IS BECAUSE IT IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE. THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION THAT THEY WANT TO MAKE TO THE COMMISSION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. MOON. MR. RAVENEL. GOOD EVENING, MR. MOON. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. AS I WAS LOOKING OVER THE INFORMATION THAT WE RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I DID HAVE SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING THEM WANTING TO DO THE SAME THING, BUT DO IT DIFFERENTLY. GO FROM FIVE DOWN TO THREE. AND I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, POSSIBLY DENYING THIS PARTICULAR CASE. AND I WANT TO SHARE SOMETHING WITH YOU THAT I READ AND JUST MAKE SURE THAT I'M COMPREHENDING WHAT I READ.

AND UNDER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, UNDER SECTION 34, NUMBER FIVE, IT SAYS THAT IF SOME PORTION OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT IS NOT STARTED WITHIN TWO YEARS, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL MAY REVIEW THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT TO ENSURE ITS CONTINUED VALIDITY. IF I'M CORRECT, WHAT I NOTICED ON THE SITE PLAN FOR PHASE TWO WAS THAT THAT DATE WAS MAY 2014. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. SO SINCE THE TWO YEAR PERIOD HAS LAPSED, THE PLANNING AND ZONING AS WELL AS THE CITY COUNCIL, WE CAN THEN QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF WHETHER THAT THIS IS OKAY, DEPENDING ON SUCH THINGS AS THE FUTURE LAND USE, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BEING UPDATED, AND NOW IT DICTATES THAT THIS LAND SHOULD BE USED DIFFERENTLY. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MISS BROOKS, GO AHEAD. GOOD EVENING, MISS MUNYARADZI. CAN YOU GO BACK TO SLIDE NUMBER? I BELIEVE IT

[00:20:03]

RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, I'M COMMISSIONER OR VICE CHAIR, I APOLOGIZE. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU STATED THERE, BUT YOU KNOW, OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS IS A BY RIGHT PRODUCT. AND, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO CHANGE IT. BUT FROM WHAT WE SEE IS THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO BUILD. YOU KNOW, IF WE WERE TO DENY THE CASE. SO WE DON'T WANT TO DO THIS PRODUCT, THIS ISN'T SOMETHING WE WANT, BUT I KNOW IT'S BEEN PRESENTED EARLIER THIS YEAR THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE COMP PLAN WAS UPDATED IN JANUARY. AND THIS IS A MIXED USE SITE WHERE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT THE CITY WANTS. BUT WE'VE BEEN WE'VE ACTUALLY SHOPPED THE SITE AROUND. WE'VE TALKED TO A COUPLE DIFFERENT PEOPLE. IT'S DIFFICULT BECAUSE THEY WANT US TO HANDLE THE RETENTION. THEY WANT US TO FIX THE SITE SO THEY COULD DEVELOP IT. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH PUTS US AT A NET NEUTRAL BREAK, EVEN WHERE THE COST TO REDEVELOP THE SITE AND MAKE THE ENGINEERING WORK, THE DRAINAGE WORK, THAT'S A CONCERN FOR US. AND THE COST THAT IT'S GOING TO BE GOING INTO THE SITE. AND THEN WE'RE BASICALLY GIVING THE LAND TO FREE, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT FOR FUTURE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. SO THAT'S A CONCERN ON OUR SIDE WHERE WE WANT TO KEEP IT. WE WANT TO BE AT THIS SITE. WE'RE AT 96% CAPACITY RIGHT NOW. SO THAT IS WHY WE'RE BUILDING THESE NEW BUILDINGS NOW. THAT'S USUALLY THE NUMBER. IT'S USUALLY AROUND 95, 96% IS WHERE WE REALIZE THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE BUILDINGS, THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE STORAGE FOR OUR TENANTS. AND IT IS A USED SITE. THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST PERFORMING SITES, ACTUALLY.

I THINK S EXTRA SPACE STORAGE HAS IN THEIR PORTFOLIO RIGHT NOW WITH THE NUMBERS THAT THEY'RE SEEING AND THEY'RE WANTING TO IMPROVE ON THE SITE. SO THIS IS THE PROPOSED NEW SITE PLAN, WHERE IT'S THREE BUILDINGS. YOU KNOW, THE ACCESS IS TO THE EXISTING ENTRANCE OFF OF HAMPTON, AND WE'RE LOOKING JUST TO KIND OF CONTROL THAT ACCESS A LITTLE BIT BETTER. PEOPLE ENTER OFF OF HAMPTON, THEY CAN DRIVE UP TO THEIR UNIT AND QUICKLY YOU KNOW, FILL IT UP, TAKE IT THINGS OUT. CHRISTMAS, SPORTING GOODS, ALL THE GOOD STUFF THAT YOU HAVE TO KEEP THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO KEEP IN YOUR HOUSE OR IT'S SEASONAL AND ALL THE BUILDINGS ARE PULLED AWAY. SO IF YOU KIND OF GO BACK BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A BUILDING RIGHT ON THE FRONT OF THE STREET, NOT A LOT OF SETBACK THERE. AND THEN THIS ONE, OBVIOUSLY A LOT MORE SETBACK, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT BETTER. WE THINK VISUALLY FOR THE RESIDENTS THERE NEARBY. AND OBVIOUSLY IF YOU'RE JUST DRIVING PAST. SO THEN HERE'S THE TWO NEXT TO EACH OTHER RIGHT NOW. AND WE'RE LOWERING THE SQUARE

[00:25:03]

SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS WHEN YOU PRESENTED YOUR ORIGINAL SITE PLAN TO THE CITY AND YOU SAID, THIS IS YOUR FINAL SITE PLAN, DID YOU NOT KNOW THAT THERE WERE DRAINAGE ISSUES AT THAT TIME? THERE WERE DRAINAGE ISSUES AT THE TIME. AND THAT'S WHY WE BUILT WHAT WE BUILT RIGHT NOW.

SO THAT WAS THE FIRST PHASE OF THE PROJECT. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO REVISIT THE SECOND PHASE. AND I THINK THAT'S DUE TO THE RETENTION AND THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE RENTED OUT EACH MONTH. AND SO OBVIOUSLY WE'RE KIND OF AT THAT PEAK POINT OF 96, 97%. THAT'S KIND OF THE DRIVER HERE FOR WHY WE NEED TO ADD THESE MORE UNITS. AND SO WE WERE AWARE THAT THERE WERE DRAINAGE ISSUES BEFORE. AND THAT WAS KIND OF A HINDRANCE FOR US. BUT IT'S REALLY THE UNIT PERCENTAGE RENTALS THAT KIND OF DRIVE THE NEW DEVELOPMENT FOR THE SITE. SO WHAT DROVE THE SITE PLAN IF YOU KNEW THAT THERE WERE DRAINAGE ISSUES WHEN YOU WERE BUILDING THAT SITE PLAN, HOW DID YOU DETERMINE FIVE BUILDINGS WOULD FIT ON THAT PARTICULAR SPACE? THAT WAS REALLY JUST THE NUMBER THAT WE, YOU KNOW, AND HONESTLY, THIS IS THAT WAS TEN YEARS AGO. SO I THINK A LOT OF THINGS HAVE BEEN UPDATED AND CHANGED IN THAT TIME. BUT BASICALLY THAT WAS WHAT WE ENVISIONED FOR THE SPACE TEN YEARS AGO. IT WAS A WHILE BACK, BUT NOW WE'RE SEEING THAT THERE ARE SOME CHALLENGES WITH THE SITE. WE'RE LOOKING AT OTHER OPTIONS, AND WE FOUND THAT THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE DONE OVER THE PAST COUPLE MONTHS IS WE'VE KIND OF EXPLORED BOTH AVENUES, AND I'M GOING TO LET A REPRESENTATIVE FROM EXTRA SPACE STORAGE PROBABLY JUMP IN. HE KNOWS A LOT MORE ABOUT THE ENGINEERING WOES THAN I DO. THIS IS STUART HANLEY. YES, MY NAME IS STUART HANLEY. I'M WITH EXTRA SPACE STORAGE. DO YOU NEED MY JUST CITY OF RESIDENCE RESIDENT? SO LEHI, UTAH. OKAY, SO I JUST WANT TO CORRECT REAL QUICK THERE WASN'T DRAINAGE PROBLEMS. THE SITE WAS INSUFFICIENTLY DESIGNED FOR DRAINAGE. SO FOR THE ORIGINAL BUILDINGS THAT ARE EXIST RIGHT NOW, THAT EXISTING DRAINAGE WAS DESIGNED FOR THOSE EXISTING BUILDINGS AND THE PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS ROAD SCAPE AND FEATURES OF THE SITE. SO THIS NEW PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED IS NOT THAT EXISTING DRAINAGE DETENTION POND IS NOT DESIGNED FOR ANY ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT. SO IF WE WERE TO IF ANYONE WERE TO BUILD ANYTHING ON THAT PROPERTY, THE EXISTING DRAINAGE IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR ANY ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT. SO IT'S NOT THAT THE EXISTING DRAINAGE IS BROKEN OR NOT WORKING, IT'S THAT WE JUST NEED TO MODIFY THE EXISTING DRAINAGE OR ADD NEW DRAINAGE TO THE SITE. HOPE THAT THAT HELPS. DOES THAT HELP CLARIFY THAT? YEAH. OKAY. MISS BROOKS, I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, AND I THINK MR. HOBLIT SAID IT, BUT I DIDN'T CATCH IT IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE EXISTING WHAT'S APPROVED FOR THE EXISTING

[00:30:04]

THERE IS A DRAINAGE TRIBUTARY THAT COMES OUT OF THAT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO THE SOUTH UNDERNEATH PARKVILLE. AND CONTINUES IN THAT DIRECTION. THIS ENTIRE AREA, INCLUDING THE DRAINAGE FROM WALMART, THAT'S ON THE WEST SIDE, GOES THROUGH THAT SUBDIVISION. AND THEN GOES UP TO THE NORTH. SO PART OF THE DIFFICULTY IS ALSO BECAUSE THAT SECTION OF PARKVILLE, OTHER THAN THE INTERSECTION, IS NOT BUILT TO ITS CAPACITY, WHICH WOULD HAVE AN UNDERGROUND STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM AS WELL AS CURB AND GUTTER. SO THAT'S A PART OF A DIFFICULTY THAT A DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE COME IN TO SEEN FOR THAT CORNER THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO ADDRESS. BUT THE REASON TO EXPAND EITHER THE EXISTING ONE OR INCREASE IT TO A NEW ONE IS BECAUSE OF OUR MANDATE TO ENSURE PRIVACY VERSUS POST-CONSTRUCTION RUNOFF. WHEN IT RELEASES FROM THAT PROPERTY, WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T FLOOD DOWNSTREAM. SO JUST TO FOLLOW U, IN MY TERMS OF THINKING WHAT I HEARD, IF I INTERPRET THIS RIGH, ALLOWING, NOT ALLOWING AND FORCING THEM TO BUILD WOULD CAUSE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORS TO THE EAST. NO, AS FAR AS FLOODING, NO, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO FLOOD BECAUSE WE AS STAFF ARE GOING TO MAKE SURE THROUGH THE ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS THAT THE RUNOFF IS DISCHARGED FROM THIS PROPERTY EVEN NOW OR AFTER DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE NO GREATER THAN ITS CURRENT CONDITION. OKAY. GOTCHA. THANK YOU. OKAY, MR. GRAHAM, I JUST WANT TO GET SOME CLARITY. SO FIRST VICE CHAIR MADE A STATEMENT AND IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT DUE TO IT BEING AND THIS IS FOR STAFF, DUE TO IT BEING APPROVED IN 2014, IT WOULD BE

[00:35:07]

FOR SOME PORTIONS OF THE CONCEPT PLAN, IF A PARTIAL SITE PLAN IS NOT SUBMITTED WITHIN SIX MONTHS, THE CONCEPT PLAN IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. CITY COUNCIL, AND THIS IS THE SECTION I BELIEVE THE COMMISSIONER WAS REFERRING TO. IF SOME PORTIONS OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT IS NOT STARTED WITHIN TWO YEARS, THE PLANNING AND ZONING AND CITY COUNCIL AND I SEE THE WORD MAY, WHICH MAKES IT OPTIONAL, MAY REVIEW THE CONCEPT PLAN TO ENSURE ITS CONTINUED VALIDITY IF THE CITY DETERMINES THE CONCEPT IS NOT VALID, A NEW CONCEPT PLAN MUST BE APPROVED PRIOR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT. FOR ANY PORTION OF THE PD DISTRICT STAFF DOES AGREE WITH THEIR POSITION THAT DEALING WITH THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED IN 2014. AT THAT TIME, THE CITY EXTENDED APPROVAL TO DEVELOP LOT FOUR AS A STORAGE WAREHOUSE AREA. THEIR PROPOSAL IS ACCEPTABLE TO STAFF. OUR RECOMMENDATION HAS TO BE BASED THAT WE HAVE TO GO WITH THIS NEW 2014 COMP PLAN. WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT PLAN IS A PLAN. IT'S A VISION. IT'S A DIRECTION YOU'RE TRYING TO GO. WE ARE OKAY WITH THE PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED, BUT OUR RECOMMENDATION, WHILE WE HAVE TO BE ROBOTS IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THAT IS WHY WE'RE MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE ARE. BUT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE DOING. AND AGAIN, WHEN YOU SPECIFICALLY LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE THAT WAS WRITTEN, IT IS ALSO BECAUSE HOW IT WAS WRITTEN, ORDINANCE NUMBER 1991, DASH 14, SECTION E STATES SITE PLAN. THE PROPERTY SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SITE PLANS ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN AS EXHIBIT B FOR PHASE ONE AND EXHIBIT E FOR PHASE TWO. AND BECAUSE OF HOW THAT IS WRITTEN, IS THE REASON STAFF, WHEN IT WAS EVEN FIRST PRESENTED BACK IN FEBRUARY, WAS SAYING, IF THIS IS SAYING WHAT IT HAS TO BE DESIGNED TO, THAT WAS WHAT WE WAS FOLLOWING. FIVE BUILDINGS STILL FOLLOWING THE LANGUAGE. NOW UNDERSTAND THE DEVELOPERS DON'T WRITE THESE ORDINANCES. THESE ORDINANCES ARE WRITTEN BY OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. SO WE ARE UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE INTENT WAS. BUT WE WERE NEEDING TO FOLLOW THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN. I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE CONFUSED YOU. THANK YOU, MR. BUREAU. SO I'M GOING TO GO A LITTLE MORE FOR MORE CLARITY. AND SIMPLE STAFF IS AGREEING OR IN RECOMMENDATION AGREES WITH THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION IN 2014. WE AGREE WITH ASHLEY. BOTH THE ORIGINAL IN 2014, WHICH WAS WRITTEN. WE'RE ALSO AGREEING WITH THIS NEW CURRENT DAY CONCEPT PLAN, BUT OUR POSITION IS WE AS CITY EMPLOYEES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE FOLLOWING A COMP PLAN THAT WAS JUST COMMITTED. SO THAT'S WHY THE WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION SAYS RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL. BUT WE OKAY, I UNDERSTAND IF THIS IS DENIED, WILL THEY HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OR COMMISSION AGAIN TO START CONSTRUCTION ON THEIR ORIGINAL PLAN? NO. OKAY. AND AGAIN, YOUR POSITION IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION. YOUR RECOMMENDATION DICTATES HOW THE CITY COUNCIL WILL VOTE IF THE RECOMMENDATION IS DENIED HERE, THEN THAT WILL TRIGGER THE NEED FOR A SUPERMAJORITY VOTE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT ARE PRESENT. IF YOU DENY, THEY'LL HAVE TEN DAYS TO SUBMIT AN APPEAL, ASSUMING THAT WILL COME TO US, IT WILL STILL GO TO THE COUNCIL ON. I BELIEVE IT'S THE 19TH WHEN IT GOES TO THAT COUNCIL, THEN THEY WILL HAVE TO ACT ON IT. ASSUMING THEY DON'T GET A MAJORITY VOTE, THEN THEY WOULD STILL HAVE A RIGHT TO COME TO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, APPLY FOR A BUILDING PERMIT SHOWING THE FIVE BUILDINGS, AND WE WOULD CERTAINLY ISSUE IT BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN APPROVED. ZONING STAYS WITH PROPERTY. IT JUST DOES NOT GO AWAY BECAUSE OF TIME. OKAY. THANK YOU I APPRECIATE THAT. SO I HAVE A QUESTION. CAN YOU TELL ME THE IN SUMMARY, THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE FROM THE FIVE BUILDINGS TO THE THREE. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT THE DRAINING WOULD BE BETTER IF WE GO WITH THIS NEW

[00:40:04]

THAT'S NOT COMPLETELY APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE. THE ORDINANCE IS A LITTLE WEIRD. THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS A LITTLE WEIRD IN HOW THINGS ARE THE OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE TO APPROVE. PDS, YOU CAN EITHER APPROVE A CONCEPT PLAN, WHICH IS VERY VAGUE. YOU KNOW, VERY HIGH LEVEL, OR YOU CAN JUST GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE SITE PLAN WHEN YOU DO A CONCEPT. PLAN APPROVAL. THAT'S WHAT THIS 34 FIVE SECTION IS TALKING ABOUT. YOU HAVE TO GO IN AND APPROVE THE ACTUAL INDIVIDUAL SITE PLANS THAT ARE MORE SPECIFIC. WE TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, USUALLY AND WITH THIS ONE, APPROVE THE SITE PLAN JUST RIGHT OFF THE BAT, WHICH WAS WHICH WAS WHAT WAS DONE IN THIS CASE. SO THAT THAT'S NOT COMPLETELY APPLICABLE TO THIS CASE HERE. AND LIKE EVERYONE HAS BEEN SAYING, THEY CAN GO IN AND BUILD THIS STORAGE UNIT JUST LIKE, YOU KNOW, WAS ALREADY IN THERE. THIS ISN'T A REZONING, REALLY. IT'S JUST WE'RE AMENDING THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. WE JUST HAVE TO DO IT VIA A FULL AMENDMENT TO THE PD, BECAUSE IN THE ORIGINAL PD, WE APPROVED A SITE PLAN, NOT A CONCEPT PLAN. KIND OF. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MISS SMITH. AND, SIR, YOU MAY CONTINUE. SURE. I JUST HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I'M GLAD WE CLEARED THAT UP. THAT'S OKAY. YEAH. MISS CESAR, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH, VERY BASIC QUESTION, MR. HOBLIT. DID I GET THAT RIGHT? YES, YES. EXCELLENT. ALL BUILDINGS ARE ONE STORY, CORRECT? CORRECT? YES.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? AND, SIR, I SEE YOU FEEL THAT COMMENT CARD, CORRECT? YES. SO YOU ARE IN FACT IN FAVOR OF THE. SURE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I WAS I WAS REGISTERED TO SPEAK. ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE HAVE THAT. YES. ALL RIGHT. HEARING AND SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS. IF YOU WILL JUST REMAIN AVAILABLE. BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE ONLY OTHER AGENDA, THE ONLY OTHER COMMENT CARD. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I HAVE ON THIS AGENDA ITEM. AND IF OTHERS WANT TO SPEAK TO MY LEFT, YOUR RIGHT IS MISS JORDAN WILLIAMS. IF YOU'LL FILL OUT A COMMENT CARD, YOU CERTAINLY WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM. BUT RIGHT NOW, THE ONLY OTHER CARD I HAVE IS FROM MISS ANNA WILLIAMS. MISS WILLIAMS, IF YOU WANT TO COME FORWARD AND BE HEARD. AND MISS WILLIAMS, IF YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE AND YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES. ANNA WILLIAMS, DESOTO, TEXAS 34 YEARS LIVING HERE. OH, I TOOK PICTURES OF THE WHOLE SITE AND IT'S HORRIBLE WHERE YOU SEE THE DRAINAGE THERE. THE ESTHETIC OF A BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY IS NOT GOING TO LOOK GOOD. WE ARE TIRED OF THE OLD SOUTHERN DALLAS LOOK. DESOTO IS BETTER THAN THIS. THE CITIZENS OF DESOTO DEMAND AND EXPECT MORE. AND WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS GRASS HIGH, THE WEEDS I MEAN, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN LOOK AT IT, THE DITCH ROUND HERE WITH THE IT'S HORRIBLE LOOKING AND WE

[00:45:01]

IS THERE ANY OTHER RESIDENT OR CONCERNED CITIZEN WHO'D LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM? I'LL SAY AGAIN, IS THERE ANY CONCERNED CITIZEN OR INTERESTED PARTY WHO WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM? HEARING AND SEEING NONE. WE'LL TAKE OUR OPPORTUNITY AT 6:47 P.M. TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? MR. BURROW, I DO KNOW THERE WAS ONE QUESTION I BELIEVE MR. RAVENEL HAD IN TERMS OF COMMENT CARDS, WHEN WE SEND IT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM, THE STAFF RECEIVED ANY CARDS BACK, EITHER IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION OF THIS AGENDA ITEM. NO, NO. OKAY. I DO HAVE ONE QUICK. ALL RIGHT, MR. GRAHAM, GO AHEAD FOR STAFF. JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION. THERE IS IN SIMPLE THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO TO STOP THIS FROM BEING BUILT. CORRECT. THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD EITHER ONE OR THE OTHER. CORRECT. JUST FOR CLARITY. THANK YOU. OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING AND SEEING NONE. IS THERE A MOTION, MR. DEWBERRY. MR. CHAIRMAN, IN REGARDS TO CASE 153224I MOVED TO APPROVE THE CASE WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO AMEND THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT 120 AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR PROJECT. OKAY. THERE'S BEEN A MOTION TO APPROV.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. OKAY. IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED BY MR. DEWBERRY. IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY MR. BELL. ANY UNREADINESS HEARING AND SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? RIGHT. UNREADINESS. MR. RAVENEL, GO AHEAD, MR. BREWER. AND MISS MUTARAZI. I'M TRYING TO REALLY GET A GRASP ON OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND WE SPEND. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY THE CITY SPENDS TO DO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND THEN YOU BRING IT TO US AND YOU SAY, THIS IS GOING TO GUIDE OUR FUTURE, AND THIS IS WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE. FOR ME, I FEEL LIKE I'M GETTING A DIFFERENT I'M GETTING ONE THING FROM ONE STAFFER AND SOMETHING ELSE FROM ANOTHER STAFF TODAY. AND TO ME, IT MAKES MY POSITION HARD TO MAKE A DECISION IF THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE RELYING ON TO GIVE US INFORMATION. IT APPEARS THAT ONE PERSON HAS ONE POSITION AND ANOTHER PERSON HAS ANOTHER

[00:50:07]

THAT'S KIND OF MY QUANDARY HERE. THIS EVENING IN MY VOTE. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY OTHER UNREADINESS. ALL RIGHT. AND AGAIN, MR. BREWER, JUST TO CLARIFY THE RESPONSE YOU GAVE MR. GRAHAM, EVEN IF THIS GETS DENIED BY THIS COMMISSION AND IS SUBSEQUENTLY DENIED BY CITY COUNCIL, THE APPLICANT IS ALREADY APPROVED TO BUILD THE FIVE BUILDINGS. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. SO IF WE DENY IT, THEY CAN STILL BUILD THE FIVE BUILDINGS AS OPPOSED TO THE THREE THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING TONIGHT. IS THAT CORRECT? YES. OKAY. MR. GRAHAM, I, I KEEP GETTING CONFUSED. SO I SO WHEN DID WE DO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THERE. THERE'S EVERYONE THAT'S IN PART OF CREATING THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS AWARE OF EVERYTHING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.

RIGHT. BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO WHAT WHAT I'M CONFUSED AT IS IF THEY KNEW THAT WE COULDN'T GO AGAINST THEM BUILDING THIS, WHY WOULD THEY? WHY WOULD THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STATE THAT IT'S FOR MIXED USE OR SOMETHING ELSE, OR RESIDENTIAL? THE PLAN WHICH THE PLAN, WHICH WAS STARTED THE PROCESS IN 2023 HAD COMMITTEES TO MEET AND DISCUSS AND TO CREATE THAT VISION THAT IT PROJECTED. AND AT THAT PARTICULAR INTERSECTION, ALL FOUR SIDES WERE IDENTIFIED WITH IT BEING FORECAST AS A FOUR LANE IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAY AS THAT DESIGNATION, MIXED USE AS BEING THAT PROJECTED BEST USE. AND I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT. I THINK THE CONFUSION I HAVE IS IF WE'RE HOW DO WE MAKE THAT A MIXED USE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? KNOWING THAT WE CANNOT CHANGE SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE TEN YEARS AGO? THAT'S HOW A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS DONE. IT'S A VISION. WE CAN'T GO CHANGE. WELL, THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO CAN CHANGE ZONING OF PROPERTY IS EITHER THE CITY COUNCIL ON THIS ORDER, THE P AND Z ON THIS INITIATION OF IT, OR THE PROPERTY OWNER. WHATEVER THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY IS, IT'S IS IF THE CITY ELECTED THAT SURE IT WANTED TO GO REZONE EVERY PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THE CITY TO COMPLY WITH THE PLAN, IT WOULD HAVE TO UNDERTAKE THAT DIRECTION ITSELF. I'M SORRY GUYS, SO YOU SAID THE CITY COUNCIL CAN CHANGE IT. SO BUT IN THIS SITUATION, IF ONCE THIS GOES TO THE CITY COUNCIL, WHETHER WE APPROVE OR DENY, ONCE IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL THAT IT WILL BE THE SAME SITUATION WHERE IT'S EITHER THE THREE OR THE FIVE TO THEM AS WELL. RIGHT? CORRECT. NOW, WHEN I SAY CITY COUNCIL CAN CHANGE IT, WHEN I SAY ORDER, THEY ARE NOT AUTOMATICALLY CHANGING. THEY ARE DIRECTING THE INITIATION OF THE PROCESS TO BEGIN. SIMILAR TO WHAT WE WENT THROUGH EARLIER THIS YEAR WITH THE HAMPTON ROAD CHARACTER CODE. BUT THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE ZONING IT STILL HAS TO GO THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING AND RECEIVE THAT INPUT. P AND Z MAKE ITS RECOMMENDATION. COUNCIL WILL MAKE THE FINAL VOTE. I'LL ASK MR. RAVENEL IF WE CAN GO BACK AND PARDON ME, BECAUSE MY MEMORY IS ESCAPING ME RIGHT NOW. BUT THEY CAME TO US AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR. IS THAT CORRECT? AND WE APPROVED THE FIVE BUILDING, AND THEN IT WENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL, AND IT WAS DENIED. CAN YOU TELL ME, WAS THAT DENIAL BASED ON THE FIVE BUILDINGS, THE DRAINAGE? FROM WHAT I RECALL, IT WAS MAINLY THE 2024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEN ONE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, I REMEMBER THAT VERY CLEARLY THAT THEY SAID WE JUST ADOPTED A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. HOW DO WE TURN AROUND IN A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME? BECAUSE THEN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS ADOPTED ON 6TH FEBRUARY, AND THIS CASE WAS SOME TIME, SAME, SAME SAME MONTH FOR THAT WHEN IT CAME BEFORE YOU OR YOU ALL APPROVED IT. BUT WHEN IT WENT TO CITY COUNCIL IN MARCH, AFTER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAD BEEN APPROVED IN FEBRUARY, COULD SOME OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THEY NEED TO TURN AROUND AND APPROVE SOMETHING THAT IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? AND JUST FOR INFORMATION, I LOOKED AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WAS BEFORE THIS ONE, BEFORE THE 2024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT HAD THAT PROPERTY IS A HIGH DENSITY

[00:55:03]

LET ME ALSO ADD JUST JUST FOR THE CLARIFICATION, WHEN THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONDUCTED BEFORE THE PNC ON FEBRUARY 13TH, THE MOTION WAS MADE TO APPROVE AND IT RESULTED IN A VOTE OF 4 TO 2 WHEN THE PUBLIC HEARING WENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON MARCH, THE FIFTH, THE MOTION WAS MADE TO DENY, AND THE MOTION PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 3. THANK YOU. NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER UNREADINESS OKAY. HEARING AND SEEING NONE. WE'LL GO BACK TO THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR. MOTION MADE BY MR. DEWBERRY TO APPROVE OR MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS AGENDA ITEM, SECONDED BY MR. BELL. I'LL ASK ONCE AGAIN ANY UNREADINESS.

OKAY. HEARING AND SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED DO THE SAME AND SAY NAY. NAY. MOTION PASSES 5 TO 2. WE'LL MOVE

[1. Consider a request for approval of the Final Plat of Parkerville Meadows Phase 4A, Blk. M Lots CA-1, 31-63 and Blk. N Lots CA-2, 13-28. This property is legally described as being in both the Elisha Chambers Survey, Abstract 240 and William A. Forgy Survey, Abstract 464 (210 Vincent Cemetery Rd.) This property consists of approximately 11.22 acres and is generally located south of W. Parkerville Road, east of S. Westmoreland Road and west of Hampton Road. The applicant and owner is Keith Davis of Parkerville LP. (Case #FP-1254-24).]

[01:00:04]

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM. ALL RIGHT. HEARING AND SEEING NONE. IS THERE A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM. AGAIN THIS IS AGENDA ITEM FP DASH 1254-24. IS THERE A MOTION TO. SHE'S GOING TO GO AHEAD. MISS BROOKS. IN THE CASE NUMBER FP DASH 125424I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE PLAT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. CONDITION ONE REMOVE LOTS TEN THROUGH 31 AND 41 BLOCK G FROM WITHIN THE TITLE BOX. NUMBER TWO RELOCATE THE SIGNATURE BOX FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FROM PAGE ONE TO PAGE TWO. AND THE THIRD CONDITION AS BUILT ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION PLANS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO STAFF WITHIN 30 DAYS. MOTION'S BEEN PROPERLY MADE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND? OKAY. MISS KEYSER HAS A SECOND. IS THERE ANY UNREADINESS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING IS SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND SAY AYE. AYE. THOSE OPPOSED DO THE SAME. SAY NAY. THE AYES HAVE IT. SEVEN

[2. The City of DeSoto recognizes the dedicated service and contributions of Chair Theo Peugh and Commissioner Coffey Caesar, who have completed their terms on the Planning and Zoning Commission. Their commitment to the community and tireless efforts in fostering growth and development in DeSoto have made a lasting impact. This agenda item proposes the presentation of plaques to honor their achievements and express the city's gratitude for their leadership and service.]

WHERE ARE WE? HERE? FG2. THE CITY OF DESOTO RECOGNIZES THE DEDICATED SERVICE AND CONTRIBUTIONS OF CHAIR THEO PUGH AND COMMISSIONER COFFEE CAESAR, WHO HAVE COMPLETED THEIR TERMS ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THEIR COMMITMENT TO THE COMMUNITY, AND TIRELESS EFFORTS IN FOSTERING GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT IN DESOTO HAVE MADE A LASTING IMPACT. THIS AGENDA ITEM PROPOSES THE PRESENTATION OF PLAQUES TO HONOR THEIR ACHIEVEMENTS AND EXPRESS THE CITY'S GRATITUDE FOR THEIR LEADERSHIP AND THEIR SERVICE. MR. BREWER IS VICE CHAIRMAN. I NEED TO ASK, CAN WE PLEASE HAVE COMMISSIONERS CAESAR AND PUGH TO COME DOWN FRONT? OKAY.

AND PLEASE ALLOW ME TO READ THIS, PLEASE. TOGETHER WE GATHE, GATHER TO HONOR AND RECOGNIZE TWO OUTSTANDING INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THIS COMMUNITY.

CHAIRMAN THEO PUGH AND COMMISSIONER COFFEE CAESAR, DURING YOUR COMBINED 12 YEARS, EACH OF DEDICATED SERVICE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND THE CITY ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, YOU HAVE EXEMPLIFIED WHAT IT MEANS TO BE COMMITTED PUBLIC SERVANTS, YOUR LEADERSHIP AND VISION HAVE POSITIVELY IMPACTED DESOTO, HELPING TO SHAPE OUR COMMUNITY'S GROWTH AND ENSURING THAT OUR PLANNING PROCESSES REFLECT THE NEEDS AND DESIRES OF OUR RESIDENTS.

THROUGH YOUR HARD WORK AND UNWAVERING DEDICATION, YOU HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO NUMEROUS INITIATIVES THAT HAVE STRENGTHENED THIS CITY. AS YOU CONTINUE YOUR TERMS. EXCUSE ME AS YOU CONCLUDE YOUR TERMS, WE WANT TO EXPRESS OUR HEARTFELT GRATITUDE FOR YOUR SERVICE AND COUNTLESS HOURS YOU HAVE INVESTED IN MAKING THE CITY OF DESOTO A BETTER PLACE FOR ALL.

IT IS MY HONOR AS THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND MY STAFF, TO PRESENT TO YOU WITH THESE PLAQUES AS A TOKEN OF OUR APPRECIATION FOR YOUR EXEMPLARY SERVICE. WE ALSO HAVE JOINING US

[01:05:04]

HOWEVER, I DID NOT WANT THIS EVENING TO PASS WITHOUT THANKING COMMISSIONERS PUGH AND CAESAR FOR YOUR HONORABLE SERVICE THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN TO THE ALL-AMERICA CITY OF DESOTO. AS YOU KNOW, IT'S VITAL EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE DONE JUST KNOW THAT WE DON'T TAKE IT LIGHTLY. WE KNOW THAT BALANCING THE NEEDS OF GROWTH, SUSTAINABILITY, AND CERTAINLY THE INTEREST OF THE RESIDENTS HERE IN DESOTO, WE KNOW THAT IT'S NOT A SMALL TASK, BUT YOU YOUR COMMITMENT, YOU ENSURED THAT ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT WAS RESPONSIBLE. IT WAS A RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT.

SO WE WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT IT HAS NOT GONE UNNOTICED. SO THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR ALL OF YOUR YEARS OF SERVICE. COMMISSIONER PUGH, THANK YOU FOR HOLDING IT DOWN AND MAKING SURE THAT THOSE MEETINGS RUN SMOOTHLY. WE DO APPRECIATE YOU, COMMISSIONER CAESAR. THANK YOU FOR ALL THAT YOU DO. THANK YOU FOR BEING THERE. WE APPRECIATE YOU. HAVE A WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL REST FROM FROM COMING TO THESE MEETINGS. BUT CERTAINLY WE KNOW THAT THAT YOU'RE STILL HERE IN THE COMMUNITY. AND DON'T BE SURPRISED IF WE REACH OUT TO YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. YES. MISS WILLIAMS, YOU NEED TO BE IN THE PICTURE TOO. YES, YES, YES. I KNOW I CAN'T DO THIS. I DON'T I DON'T WANT TO JUST KEEP ON LIKE THIS. ALL RIGHT? THIS IS NOT LIKE THAT.

NO, NO, YOU HAVE TO COME ON UP. YES YES YES YES. GIVE ME YOUR MILLION DOLLAR SMILES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. GREAT. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. MR. CHAIR. AGAIN I ASKED YOU. I ASKED YOU TO GET IN. WHY? YOU'RE PUSHING ME OUT. THAT WAY? YES. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. I DON'T KNOW, OKAY. THANK YOU. OH, YOU GOT ANOTHER ONE, DON'T YOU? OH, WAIT. I'M GONNA GET YOU TO COME TO ME. SAT IN THAT CHAIR FOR ME. SO EVERYONE OKAY? SOMETIMES ONE. MORE. MR. PUGH AND MISS CAESAR, SINCE YOU'VE GIVEN ME, I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE PEOPLE. SAY ANYTHING BEFORE YOU LEAVE THIS EVENING. SO THEY GET THREE MINUTES, DON'T THEY? YEAH. LET ME SEE. MISS CAESAR. I THINK IN 12 YEARS I'VE SAID ENOUGH. OH, OKAY. ALL RIGHT, WELL, AS WE PREPARE, I

[G. ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST Discussion will be limited to the following pursuant to Gov’t Code 551.0415: (1) Expressions of thanks, congratulations, or condolence; (2) information regarding holiday schedules; (3) a recognition of an individual; (4) a reminder about an upcoming Planning & Zoning events; (5) information regarding a social, ceremonial, or community event; and (5) announcements involving an imminent threat to the public health and safety.]

[01:10:05]

DEWBERRY, COMMISSIONER. GRAHAM, COMMISSIONER BROOKS, VICE CHAIR. RAVENEL. COMMISSIONER. CAESAR, COMMISSIONER BELL AND ALL THE COMMISSIONERS. I'VE EVER SERVED WITH. I WANT TO THANK YOU. IT HAS BEEN AN ABSOLUTE PLEASURE TO SERVE WITH YOU IN WHATEVER CAPACITY, WHETHER IT'S BEING COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR OR CHAIR. IT HAS BEEN AN ABSOLUTE PLEASURE. AND TO OUR INCOMING COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU'RE WATCHING, I HAVE A LITTLE UNSOLICITED ADVICE. NUMBER ONE, REMEMBER, YOU KNOW, NO ONE CAME KNOCKING AT OUR DOOR SAYING, YOU'RE GOING TO BE A COMMISSIONER. WE ALL HAD TO APPLY. WE WENT THROUGH A PROCESS. AND SO REMEMBER, WE ALL MADE A COMMITMENT TO BE OUR ABSOLUTE BEST AND DO OUR ABSOLUTE BEST TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION. THAT'S NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, REMEMBER, EVERY APPLICANT, EVERY CITIZEN WHO COMES BEFORE US DESERVE OUR RESPECT, DESERVES OUR ATTENTION, AND DESERVES OUR INVESTMENT IN THEIR CASE. THAT'S FOR EACH AND EVERY PERSON. SO REMEMBER THAT. AND THEN NUMBER THREE REMEMBER THIS THAT YOU HAVE TO VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THERE ARE SIX COMMISSIONERS WHO VOTE ONE WAY AND YOU'RE THE SOLE VOICE WHO'S VOTING THE OTHER WAY, ALWAYS VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE. AND SO THAT'S JUST SOME UNSOLICITED ADVICE I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE TO OUR TWO INCOMING COMMISSIONERS. I'D ALSO BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T THANK STAFF MR. CARROLL, MISS JORDAN WILLIAMS, MR. BREWER, MISS MUNOZ, MR. SMITH AND ALL PREVIOUS STAFF MEMBERS. I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE AND I'LL SAY IT AGAIN. WE CANNOT DO THIS WITHOUT YOU, WITHOUT YOUR INFORMATION, WITHOUT YOUR DIRECTION, WITHOUT YOUR GUIDANCE. SO THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU AGAIN TO YOU ALL WHO ARE PRESENT AND TO OUR FORMER STAFF. I ALSO WANT TO THANK CITY COUNCIL, THOSE PRESENT OR CURRENT AND FORMER CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO VOTED FOR ME TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION, AS WELL AS THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. THANK YOU AGAIN. AND I WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT BACK TO DOCTOR MARKS BECAUSE DOCTOR MARKS IS A VERY COMMITTED COUNCIL PERSON AND SHE'S VERY COMMITTED AND SUPPORTIVE OF THIS COMMISSION. SO THANK YOU, DOCTOR MARKS, I WANT TO THANK EVERY APPLICANT WHO'S COME BEFORE US, WHETHER THE COMMISSION VOTED IN FAVOR OF YOUR AGENDA ITEM OR NOT, OR WHETHER I PERSONALLY VOTED IN FAVOR OF YOUR AGENDA ITEM OR NOT. IT WAS AN HONOR TO HEAR YOUR CASE. IT WAS AN HONOR TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION WHILE YOU WERE MAKING THE CASE FOR WHY YOUR APPLICATION SHOULD BE APPROVED, I WANT TO THANK EVERY CITIZEN OF DESOTO FOR ALLOWING ME TO SERVE IN THIS APPOINTED CAPACITY AND FOR ALSO COMING HERE TO VOICE YOUR OPINION OR TO SIMPLY BE IN ATTENDANCE. AND LET ME JUST SAY THIS IT'S IMPORTANT CITIZENS OF DESOTO, IT'S IMPORTANT. I'VE BEEN A CITIZEN OF DESOTO FOR TWO DECADES MYSELF, AND IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO STAY INVOLVED IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND IT FILLS MY HEART WHEN THIS ROOM IS PACKED, WHEN THERE IS AN AGENDA ITEM OF THAT CITIZENS CARE ABOUT, AND THEY COME AND THEY ATTEND THESE MEETINGS, LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD. LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD.

LET YOUR PRESENCE BE FELT. THERE ARE LADIES RIGHT HERE TO MY LEFT, WHETHER THEY SPEAK OR NOT, THEY ARE HERE. AND YOU KNOW. AND SOMETIMES I MAY FORGET YOUR NAMES, BUT I KNOW YOUR FACE. YOU ARE HERE. AND SO AGAIN, I APPRECIATE YOU LADIES. SO AGAIN, TO ALL THE CITIZENS OF DESOTO, YOU KNOW, LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD, LET YOUR PRESENCE BE FEL. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, I WOULD BE REMISS. AND, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO SLEEP WELL TONIGHT. AND I WANT TO HAVE PEACE IN MY HOUSE. SO THE BOTTOM LINE IS, I HAVE TO THANK MY WONDERFUL WIFE, AND I HAVE TO THANK MY CHILDREN FOR ALLOWING ME TO SERVE, BECAUSE WHEN YOU SERVE IN ANY CAPACITY, I DON'T CARE WHAT CAPACITY IT IS. AND WHEN YOU SACRIFICE YOUR FAMILY SACRIFICES WITH YOU. AND SO THANK YOU TO MY WIFE AND THANK YOU TO MY CHILDREN. AND SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, THOSE ARE MY EXPRESSIONS OF THANKS. SO THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN. NOW, WITH THAT BEING SAID, MR. BREWER, YOU GOT YOUR LIGHT ON. GO AHEAD.

YES. JUST A NOTE. NEXT MEETING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ELECT NEW OFFICERS CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.

ALSO NOTE THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A THIRD MEETING THIS MONTH, ON OCTOBER THE 29TH IS THE TIME OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CAN PROVIDE THAT MUCH NEEDED TRAINING FOR EVERYONE. SO WE CAN'T CANCEL NEXT MEETING BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED FOR THE 22ND.

SO WE NEED TO HOPEFULLY HAVE YOU IN YOUR ATTENDANCE ON THE 22ND AND THE 29TH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. 22ND, 29TH. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS OF

[01:15:05]