May 13, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

[A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]

[B. REGULAR SESSION - CALL TO ORDER]

[C. CITIZEN APPEARANCES The Planning and Zoning Commission invites citizens to address the Commissioners on any topic not already scheduled for Public Hearing. Citizens wishing to speak should complete a "Citizen Comment Card" and return it to the table prior to the meeting. In accordance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, the Planning and Zoning Commission cannot take action on items not listed on the agenda. However, your concerns may be addressed by City Staff, placed on a future agenda, or responded to by some other course. Anyone desiring to speak on an item scheduled for a Public Hearing is requested to hold their comments until the Public Hearing on that item.]

[D. CONSENT AGENDA Any item may be withdrawn from the consent agenda and acted on separately.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.]

[1. Zoning Case #Z-1537-25. Conduct a Public Hearing and consider a recommendation to the City Council regarding a requested zone change from Single Family 10 (SF-10) to Two Family (2F) for a duplex residential development. The property is located on the far NW corner of Mockingbird Ln and E. Parkerville Rd. legally known as Park Ridge Estates, Blk 7 Lot 5 (5 E. Parkerville Rd). The applicant and owner are Asif Effendi of Effendi Holdings LLC. ]

[00:04:20]

SECTION 22 .5. D OF THE TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING REGULATIONS. A PRELIMINARY PLAT IS REQUIRED AT THE TIME OF ZONING APPROVAL FOR DUPLEX SUBDIVISIONS TO ASSESS THE DEVELOPMENT'S FEASIBILITY. HERE IS THE PROVIDED PRELIMINARY PLAT TO BE APPROVED DURING A SEPARATE APPROVAL PROCESS. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST FROM SINGLE FAMILY 10 TO 2 FAMILY FOR A DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU, MISS JORDAN WILLIAMS, FOR THAT PRESENTATION. JUST ONE QUESTION. STAFF DOES RECOMMENDED. ARE

[00:05:06]

WITHIN THE TWO FAMILY. THE. ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE LOT SIZE OR THE UNIT SIZE? YES. THE LOT SIZE, 10,000FT■S IS THE MINIMUM. SO IF WE HAVE TO MAKE A CHANGE TO THE WIDTH OF THAT. YES, MA'AM. ALLEY WOULD NOT SHRINK WHAT'S BEING SHOWN HERE? AND WILL THAT IMPACT THE REQUIRED

[00:10:02]

THANKS. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. HEARING AND SEEING NONE. WE. THE TIME IS. EXCUSE ME, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? AND DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE A PRESENTATION? YES, SIR. THE APPLICANT IS HERE. HE DOES NOT HAVE A PRESENTATION. HE IS PRESENT FOR QUESTIONS.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THE TIME IS 610 AND THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW IN SESSION. MR. CARROLL, DO WE HAVE ANY CARDS FOR THIS HEARING? NO, SIR. NO CARDS. ALL RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YES. IS HE ONLY HERE FOR QUESTIONS, OR DOES HE WANT TO ADDRESS US? HE DOESN'T. JUST QUESTIONS. JUST QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. HEARING AND SEEING NONE.

THE TIME IS 6:11 P.M. AND THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. COMMISSIONERS, AT THIS TIME, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. CHAIR, I WOULD MOVE TO FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IN THE CONCERNING Z153725 AND MAKE A MOTION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL AS PRESENTED. ALL RIGHT. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER BELL. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? SECOND BY VICE CHAIR BROOKS. IS THERE ANY NEED FOR DISCUSSION? HEARING AND SEEING. NONE. THEN ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING CASE Z153725. ACCORDING TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, PLEASE SAY I.

I. THE POSES THE SAME TIME SIGN OR THE AYES HAVE IT. IT HAS BEEN MOVED 6 TO 0. AT THIS TIME WE'LL GO INTO OUR REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS. WE HAVE TWO THIS EVENING. BOTH WILL BE PRESENTED BY

[1. Zoning Case #: Z-1514-24 Provide an update on the Hampton Road Character Code (HRCC) zoning case and discuss the public input and the Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing schedule for the rezoning of properties within the HRCC "reduced/re-envisioned" zoning boundary area from their current zoning districts to one of the five (5) new HRCC zoning districts: 1. Urban Center 2. Urban General 3. Neighborhood Services 4. Urban Neighborhood 5. Neighborhood Transition The applicant is the City of DeSoto.]

[00:15:03]

OPTION TO EXCLUDE ALL FOUR PD FROM THE REZONING BOUNDARY MAP OR EXCLUDE SOME, NAMELY PD 170.

SO THOSE WERE THE OPTIONS THAT WERE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. OKAY. AND I DO, YOU KNOW, HAVE INFORMATION WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKAGE REGARDING THE DEVIATIONS THAT CURRENTLY EXIST IN THE FOUR PD. IF YOU WOULD LIKE FOR ME TO, YOU KNOW, DISCUSS THAT INFORMATION.

MISS COLTER, WOULD YOU GO BACK TO THE LAST SLIDE THAT YOU HAD UP WITH THE OPTIONS? I'M JUST ARE YOU SAYING THESE ARE THE OPTIONS THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION COULD CONSIDER WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US FOR PUBLIC HEARING, ANY THESE ARE ANY OTHERS THAT YOU SHOULD DETERMINE. YOU WANT TO YOU KNOW CONSIDER. SO THE BALL IS BASICALLY IN YOUR COURT AGAIN.

AND YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE DESIRE OF THE COMMISSION IS, THAT'S WHAT OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, STAFF WILL WILL DO AND MAKE SURE IT HAPPENS. SO THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE CAN I, CAN I, CAN I STAY RIGHT THERE FOR JUST A SECOND, PLEASE? HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE PD. I THINK THAT THAT'S A QUESTION. IS PD 170 CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. YES SIR. THE THIRD TO THE LAST OPTION WAS PD 58 AND PD 170. I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHY THOSE TWO WOULD BE RECOMMENDED FOR EXCLUSION BECAUSE YOU HAVE WE COULD DO FOUR AND I WOULD ASSUME THOSE ARE ALL THE PD THAT ARE IN THE REDUCED BOUNDARY. CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO THEN IF WE DON'T DO ALL FOUR THEN YOU SAY WE COULD DO TWO. AND IF WE DON'T TWO WE COULD DO JUST THE ONE. AND I WAS JUST KIND OF CURIOUS WHY PD 58 AND PD 170. WHAT IS THE CONNECTION THERE? OKAY. SO PD 58 AND PD 170. BOTH THE OWNERS OPPOSED THE REZONING EFFORT AND WE DID NOT, YOU KNOW, RECEIVE SIMILAR FEEDBACK FROM THE OTHER TWO PD OWNERS. OKAY. AND ARE THE PD 58 AND PD 170 OWNERS OR ARE THEY THE SAME OWNERS OR ARE THEY DIFFERENT? THEY'RE DIFFERENT. OKAY. AND THEY BOTH EXPRESSED THIS AFTER WE MET AND VOTED. IS THAT. YES. AND I GUESS I WILL I WASN'T A PART OF THAT PARTICULAR CONVERSATION AT THE TIME, BUT I GUESS I WILL INVITE MISS JORDAN WILLIAMS TO THE TO ELABORATE. I CAN ALSO ELABORATE TOO, IF THAT'S HELPFUL. YES. YEAH. SO AS YOU KNOW, YOU'VE SEEN THIS MANY TIMES. STAFF CHANGED THEIR REQUEST TO REZONING TO THE REDUCED HAMPTON ROAD BOUNDARY, WHICH IS WHAT Y'ALL PASSED BACK IN JANUARY AFTER IT PASSED DURING JANUARY, SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE CAME FORTH TO STAFF, THOSE PD OWNERS, PRIMARILY ONE REQUESTING NOT TO BE IN IT. AND THAT WAS BEFORE COUNCIL DID THE FINAL APPROVAL. COUNCIL HAD THE OPTION TO. ACCEPT Y'ALL'S RECOMMENDATION AND MODIFY IT. SO THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO ORDINANCE PREPARED THAT ACTUALLY PULLED OUT THE PD. INSTEAD OF DOING THAT, THEY JUST DECIDED TO REMAND IT BACK DOWN TO Y'ALL TO

[00:20:05]

MISTER. MONTE. ANDERSON. YES. WHAT IS THE EXISTING USE AT PD 58? WHAT IS THAT EXACTLY? IS THAT THE DOCTOR'S. SUITE, OFFICE OR COMMERCIAL? PD 58? YEAH. PD 58. NO. I'M SORRY. OH, THIS PD 58 IS THE INSURANCE COMPANY AND WHATABURGER. OKAY. SO GOT IT. AND SO IT WAS THE INSURANCE COMPANY THAT ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, RAISED. OKAY. SO I REMEMBER MR. ANDERSON COMING IN I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS HERE OR AT COUNCIL, BUT I RECALL HIS OPPOSITION I DON'T RECALL. SO YOU NEED TO CONFIRM. DID SOMEONE FROM PD 58 COME IN OPPOSING. WELL, YES. WE GOT A LETTER FROM THEM, BUT THEY DIDN'T COME BEFORE PLANNING AND ZONING OR CITY COUNCIL, IF I MIGHT ADD. A FEMALE CAME IN REPRESENTING THE INSURANCE COMPANY STATING HIS OPPOSITION TO IT. OKAY, SO WE DID HAVE SOMEONE IN PERSON THAT PARTICULAR NIGHT. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO JOG MY MEMORY. AND THE OTHER TWO PD 42 AND 73. WHY ARE THEY INCLUDED? WHAT'S BECAUSE THEY LOOK LIKE THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT THEY'RE INCLUDED JUST BECAUSE THEY'RE PD. WE STAFF IDENTIFIED ALL THE PDS WITHIN THE REDUCED BOUNDARY. AND THIS IS JUST THE ONLY FOUR LEFT IN IT. SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE IDENTIFIED. HAS THERE BEEN ANY ENGAGEMENT WITH THE OWNERS? THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE OTHER TWO PD THAT WERE IDENTIFIED, 42 AND 73. AND IF SO, WHAT ARE THEIR DO THEY HAVE CONCERNS? OKAY. WE ACTUALLY REACHED OUT TO THEM ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS DURING THIS PROCESS. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE EVER RECEIVED ANY FEEDBACK FROM THEM, SO WE DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE IN FAVOR OF STAYING OR IN OPPOSITION OR STAYING OF STAYING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THEY THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, YOU KNOW, TO PROVIDE COMMENTS BOTH IN PERSON AND WRITTEN. AND THEY DIDN'T DO THAT. OKAY. DO WE KNOW IF THE OWNERS ARE LOCAL OR WERE THEY LISTED THEIR ADDRESS WAS LISTED AS LOCAL. I NEED. OKAY. MR. CARROLL, COULD YOU SPEAK IN THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE? THANK YOU. I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU THE INFORMATION TODAY, BUT I CAN GIVE YOU THE INFORMATION ON TOMORROW. OKAY. THANK YOU. SIR, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE LAST SLIDE? SO IF WE WERE CONSIDERING DOING NOTHING, WE WOULD STILL HAVE TO REVOTE. YES, MA'AM.

OPTION ONE. AND HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT STEP, WE WOULD BE GOING TO CITY COUNCIL. OKAY? SO JUST SINCE THIS IS DISCUSSION, COLLEAGUES.

[00:25:02]

THANKS. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES COMMISSIONER DEWBERRY THROUGH THIS WHOLE PROCESS, IT HAS BEEN MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IF THE CHARACTER CODE GOES INTO EFFECT, UNLESS SOMEBODY WANTS TO MAKE CHANGES, THEY'RE GRANDFATHERED. WHY IS THAT DIFFERENT FOR PD? THE PD, IF IT WAS TO CHANGE HANDS AND WANT TO REMODEL, THEY HAVE TO COME IN COMPLIANCE WITH CHARACTER CODE. BUT IF THEY GO BACK IN THERE AND JUST OPERATE AS IT IS, THEIR GRANDFATHER, THE PD, STAYS WITH THE PROPERTY UNTIL IT CHANGES HANDS AND IS REVOKED. THAT'S CORRECT. SO I MEAN, WHY THAT'S THAT'S THAT'S NUMBER FIVE. DON'T DO ANYTHING. LEAVE IT LIKE IT IS. NUMBER ONE. OKAY? YES, SIR. WE'LL DO IT TWICE. COMMISSIONER DEWBERRY, YOU ARE YOU ARE CORRECT. THIS. THESE PD'S WOULD BE TREATED JUST LIKE ANY OTHER LOT THAT WERE THAT WERE BEING REZONED IN. THIS REDUCED HAMPTON ROAD CORRIDOR AREA. THEY WOULD BE TREATED AS LEGAL, NONCONFORMING USES, JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THIS ZONE. AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD FOLLOW THE ORDINANCES AND LAWS IN REGARDS TO LEGAL, NONCONFORMING USES, AND ALL THOSE THINGS WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO THE PD, JUST AS IT WOULD ANY OF THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS, TWO COMMERCIAL LOTS, WHATEVER OTHER LOTS ARE IN HERE. SO YES, YOU ARE CORRECT. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES MR. BILL. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS. MR. DEWBERRY ASKED THE VERY QUESTION THAT I WAS GOING TO ASK STAFF FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON I WAS GOING TO ASK IT. AND WITH THAT BEING SAID, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH WHAT HE SAID. CHAIR RECOGNIZES MR. LEHRER MR. ATTORNEY, WHAT WOULD BE A CONCERN OF YOU KNOW, MR. DOVER'S QUESTION WHY WOULD THEY, IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION, WHAT WOULD BE THEIR CONCERN IF THE PD STAYED AS IS, UNLESS, YOU KNOW, THEY PLAN TO SELL BUT THAT WOULDN'T BE THEIR. I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE, BUT LIKE I SAID, THEY WOULD BE TREATED JUST LIKE ANY OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THIS REZONING. YOU KNOW, THEY FALL INTO LEGAL NONCONFORMING USE UNLESS THAT, YOU KNOW, LEGAL NONCONFORMING USE CEASES TO EXIST, THEN NOTHING'S REALLY GOING TO CHANGE UNTIL ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA KNOCKS THEM OUT OF LEGAL NONCONFORMING USE. THANK YOU. IF I COULD JUST SPEAK TO MR. LAURA'S QUESTION, I THINK IT IS A GAP IN UNDERSTANDING. I DON'T THINK IT WAS PROPERLY EXPLAINED OR EXPLAINED WELL ENOUGH TO SOME OF THE RESIDENTS, AND SO THEY MAY NOT COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THIS. SO I THINK THAT WE'VE GOT A LOT OF WORK TO DO WITH ENGAGING WITH THE COMMUNITY AND DOING SIDE BY SIDE COMPARISONS, IF NECESSARY, TO KIND OF GIVE THEM ALL THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE ENTIRE PICTURE OF THE PROCESS. SO I'M WONDERING ONE ONE LAST QUESTION. HAD A RESIDENT COME AFTER OUR MEETING AND EXPRESSED A CONCERN TO BE PULLED OUT OF THE HAMPTON ROAD CHARACTER CODE? WOULD WE BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION TODAY? THAT'S THAT'S THE QUESTION. DO YOU THINK IF A IF AN INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER CAME AND SAID THEY WANTED TO BE PULLED OUT, DO YOU THINK WE WOULD BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION TODAY? I DON'T THINK SO. YEAH. SO I'M JUST I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE PUTTING SO MUCH ENERGY AND PULLING PDS OUT OF THE HAMPTON ROAD. BECAUSE WHEN I LOOKED AT THE PDS, A COUPLE OF THEM FACE HAMPTON AND A COUPLE OF FACED THE ROADS WHERE I WOULD THINK WE WOULD WANT THEM TO HAVE THE CHARACTER CODE ON THE FRONTAGE.

[00:30:05]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WELL THAT AND THEN IS THE CASE WAS REMANDED BACK YOU KNOW TO THE COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION. ALL RIGHT. ANY. MR. MR. DEWBERRY, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? WELL, DO WE HAVE A CONSENSUS RIGHT NOW? ARE WE ALL ALL HAPPY WITH REZONING AND LEAVING THE PDS IN? I MEAN, THEY NEED THEY NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING TO WORK WITH. AND RIGHT NOW, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME BOAT. WELL, I THINK TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION WAS JUST TO TELL US IT'S BEEN REMANDED BACK TO US. THIS IS THE REASON IT'S BEEN REMANDED AND WE'RE JUST DISCUSSING IT. BUT I THINK THEY STILL HAVE TO BRING IT TO US, DON'T THEY? AGAIN? YES. IT'LL IT'LL HAVE TO COME BACK FOR THE REZONING. BUT THIS I BELIEVE THIS WAS STAFF. AM I WRONG? MORE OF TRYING TO GET AN IDEA OF FROM YOU WHAT YOU WANT SO THAT WE CAN DO. STAFF CAN DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO TO PREPARE THAT PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE OFFICIAL REZONING. SO I BELIEVE WHEN THIS WAS AT COUNCIL, THEY KIND OF ESSENTIALLY PUNTING IT TO Y'ALL AS TO WHAT YOU WANTED TO DO, NOT NECESSARILY PUNTING IT TO STAFF. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. THAT'S CORRECT. ACTUALLY. STAFF, YOU KNOW, MADE THEIR RECOMMENDATION KNOWN. AND SO IT WAS REMANDED BACK TO YOU ALL. SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT WITH THE PLANNING AND THE OPTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, THAT YOU'RE ASKING US KIND OF HOW WE'RE FEELING TODAY? OKAY. ALL RIGHT, THEN I THINK I CAN ANSWER THAT. WE CAN PULL WE CAN PULL AND JUST SEE. MR. DEWBERRY. WHAT? I KNOW WHAT OPTION YOU WANT. NUMBER ONE OR NUMBER FIVE.

ALL RIGHT, VICE CHAIR. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY WE HAVE NOT MADE DECISIONS AT THIS COMMISSION BASED ON LIMITED INFORMATION. WE HAD NUMEROUS PUBLIC HEARINGS, NUMEROUS INPUT FROM CITIZENS.

NUMEROUS FOLKS TOOK THEIR TIME TO COME HERE AND EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS TO THE PLAN COMMISSION, AND WE TOOK ALL OF THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BEFORE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE FORWARD TO COUNCIL. AND THAT RECOMMENDATION WAS NUMBER ONE. AND I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUE, MR. DEWBERRY, TO LEAVE IT AS IS, IF CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, THEY THAT PREROGATIVE AS THEY ALWAYS TELL US, RIGHT? CORRECT. THEY DON'T HAVE TO TAKE OUR RECOMMENDATION.

RIGHT. THAT'S TRUE. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY, OKAY. NUMBER ONE. COMMISSIONER LAURA. NUMBER ONE COMMISSIONER EDWARDS, CONCUR. NUMBER ONE, COMMISSIONER BELL, NUMBER ONE, COMMISSIONER RAVENEL. NUMBER ONE. OKAY. OKAY. DO YOU NEED ANYTHING ELSE FROM US? NO, I DON'T, SO THAT PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SCHEDULED FOR JUNE THE 24TH, BECAUSE THAT'S THE NEXT AVAILABLE. PNC DATE THAT WE HAVE WHERE WE CAN ADVERTISE. MAY I REQUIRED TIME? MAY I ASK THE ATTORNEY A QUESTION BEFORE YOU LEAVE? MR. SMITH, SINCE YOU HAVE ALREADY DONE A STRAW POLL OF THIS COMMISSION, AND IS IT REALLY NECESSARY THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN WHEN WE WANT TO STAY WITH OUR ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION? YES. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. NOW, BECAUSE IT WASN'T EVEN ADVERTISED TONIGHT AS AN ACTION ITEM. SO EVEN IF WE DIDN'T, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BRING IT BACK ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. OKAY. ALL RIGHT THEN. SO DO WE HAVE A TIMING ON WHEN THAT WOULD COME TO US? YES. JUNE 24TH. JUNE THE 24TH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT, MR. CHAIR,

[00:35:03]

YES. COMMISSIONER EDWARDS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? YOUR LIGHTS ON. OKAY, MISS COLTON, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOU PRESENTING THIS EVENING. I APPRECIATE YOU ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS. AND WE APPRECIATE THE TRANSPARENCY THIS EVENING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ARE YOU ALLOWED TO SAY SOMETHING? CAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER MARX. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR YIELDING TO ME TO SAY THIS. I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO SAY, AS THE COUNCIL LIAISON FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, I WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT WHEN THIS CASE CAME BEFORE US, I THINK THE MAJOR CONCERN WAS, AND I THINK YOU HIT UPON IT, THE OWNER OF PD 170 WAS AFRAID THAT HE WOULD LOSE HIS DEVIATIONS. AND I THINK IT GOES BACK TO THE EDUCATIONAL PIECE THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER, THAT WE NEED TO PROBABLY DO A BETTER JOB AT MAKING SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE WHEN IT COMES TO COUNCIL. THE ONLY REASON IT CAME TO COUNCIL IS BECAUSE THE OWNER OF PD 170 WANTED TO BE PULLED OUT AND AS YOU KNOW BEFORE COUNCIL DO ANYTHING, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER THE CHANGES ARE, IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES BETWEEN PLANNING AND ZONING BEFORE IT HITS COUNCIL, WE HAVE TO REMAND IT BACK TO PNC. SO THAT WAS THE MAIN REASON FOR COMING BACK TO PNC. I YIELD BACK. THANK YOU, DOCTOR MARX. WE APPRECIATE THAT.

ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE ONE FINAL ITEM ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING. THAT'S ITEM NUMBER TWO TO

[2. To discuss and determine the Planning & Zoning Commission’s top project or initiative to present at the collaborative Joint Meeting on August 20, 2025, with the City Council, DeSoto Development Corporation, Parks and Recreation Board, and the Cultural Arts Foundation.]

[00:40:03]

I'LL JUST SAY THESE TWO THINGS OR THREE. I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING TO

[00:45:06]

COMMISSIONERS CAN LIKELY REQUEST THINGS BE PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. STAFF CAN ALSO ADD THINGS TO THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS SOMETHING SUBSTANTIVE IN REGARDS TO CITY PLANNING OR PLANNING AND ZONING IS GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE ITS OWN ITEM, IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADD AN AGENDA ITEM, MAYBE BEFORE OR AFTER ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST THAT JUST SAYS BLANKET JOINT MEETING DISCUSSION TOPICS? OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE ADVERTISED? WHAT? ARE YOU JUST TRYING TO LEAVE ROOM SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS WITHOUT HAVING TO REQUEST THE SPECIFIC ITEM PLACED ON THE AGENDA? I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY ADD SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF. ITEMS TO REQUEST TO BE PUT ON THE AGENDA. BUT THAT WOULDN'T REALLY BE. WE COULDN'T REALLY DISCUSS ANYTHING. COMMISSIONERS COULD JUST ASK THAT X BE PUT ON A FUTURE AGENDA. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO ASK, COULD THE HAMPTON ROAD CORRIDOR PROJECT BE PUT ON A FUTURE AGENDA? AND THEN WE DISCUSS IT AT THAT FUTURE AGENDA AS A POTENTIAL ITEM TO TALK ABOUT AT THE JOINT MEETING? IT JUST SEEMS COMPETITIVE AND DUPLICATIVE TO ME. I'M LOOKING FOR WHAT WE CAN DO PRIOR TO THESE JOINT MEETINGS IS JUST ADD AN ITEM. YOU KNOW, REQUESTING TOPICS FOR A JOINT MEETING, AN UPCOMING MEETING, OR IF ANY COMMISSIONER REQUESTS AGENDA ITEMS FOR A JOINT MEETING. WE CAN JUST DO THAT BECAUSE THIS IS QUARTERLY, CORRECT? YES. YEAH.

PERHAPS THE MEETING BEFORE YOUR QUARTERLY MEETING, WE COULD HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM JUST REQUESTING TOPICS BE PUT ON YOUR JOINT. SO LET ME ASK THIS. DOES IT HAVE TO BE AN AGENDA ITEM? IT'S SIMPLY A DISCUSSION ON WHAT WE WANT TO BRING UP AS A TOPIC IN OUR JOINT MEETING. WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING BUSINESS. WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY DECISIONS ON THIS TOPIC. IT IS JUST A TOPIC FOR DISCUSSION FOR THAT JOINT MEETING. SO DOES IT EVEN HAVE TO BE AN AGENDA ITEM? WE CAN JUST HAVE A QUICK DISCUSSION. WHAT DO WE WANT TO BRING TO OUR OUR OUR JOINT MEETING THAT WE THINK WE SHOULD BRING UP AS A TOPIC? I'M DEFER TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY, BUT I HAVE A FEELING THAT HE'S GOING TO ANSWER. YEAH, I THINK THAT DOES NEED TO BE AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA REQUESTING JUST READ. IT WOULDN'T EVEN READ DISCUSSIONS BE REQUESTS FOR AGENDA ITEMS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YOU COULD JUST ADVISE STAFF WHAT AGENDA ITEMS YOU WANT TO ADD TO THIS JOINT MEETING. AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE DISCUSSION, BUT OTHERWISE THERE'S NOT A PLACE FOR IT IN THE MEETING. SO IT'S

[00:50:04]

THAT'S CORRECT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT ONE OF THE ITEMS IN THE COMP PLAN IMPLEMENTATION IS TO CLEAN THE CODE UP. SO YES, SIR. AND SO. WE COUNCIL PERSON MARK HAD AN IDEA OF THERE IS AN ITEM ON THE ON OUR AGENDA CITY COUNCIL UPDATES. AND SO THE LIAISON COULD ALSO PROVIDE, YOU KNOW SUGGESTIONS AS WELL. I THINK ONE OF THE ONE OF MY CONCERNS WAS TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE NOT MAKING DECISIONS HERE THAT'S GOING TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT AWARE OF, LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION MAY BE TALKING TO DEVELOPERS, ENCOURAGING THEM TO RELOCATE AND DO OTHER THINGS. THAT'S GOING TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE OUR CITY THAT THAT'S IN LINE WITH OUR VISION. OF COURSE, OUR LAND USE PLAN. WE DON'T WANT TO DENY A ZONING.

RECOMMENDATION THAT'S DIRECTLY TIED TO TALKS THAT THEY'RE HAVING WITH DEVELOPERS. SO UNDERSTANDING WHAT EVERYONE IS WORKING ON SO THAT WE'RE NOT MAKING DECISIONS THAT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THEIR ABILITY TO. ENCOURAGE BUSINESSES AND DEVELOPERS TO COME HERE WAS ONE OF MY BIGGEST CONCERNS. COUNCIL MEMBER BROOKS, I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. OH, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER BROOKS, SHE SAID, NOT YET. SHE SAID, NOT YET. CLAIM IT. I AGREE PARTIALLY WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I KIND OF HESITATE BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO GET IN A POSITION TO WHERE WE ARE RUBBER STAMPING OR GREENLIGHTING OTHER PROJECTS BECAUSE OF A THING. AS LONG AS THOSE OTHER PROJECTS MEET OUR CODE, THEY DON'T HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT. THEY COME HERE, THEY GO DO THEIR THING AND THEY'RE GOING TO GET APPROVED. IF IT DON'T, THEN WE GOT SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT AND WE DON'T NEED TO HEAR FROM THE COUNCIL OR THE OTHER BOARDS ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING BY OUR CODE NOW. WHAT MR. DEWBERRY SAID IS AN

[00:55:04]

SO I COMPLETELY AGREE. YOU'VE SERVED WITH ME FOR THREE YEARS. YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO RUBBER STAMPING HERE. JUST TRYING TO BE A LITTLE MORE PROACTIVE INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, WAITING UNTIL IT GETS HERE ON THE AGENDA. SO YEAH. YEAH, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH. ATTORNEY SMITH. YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'RE ITCHING TO SAY SOMETHING. NO, I JUST WANT TO SAY IT KIND OF ALIGNS WITH WHAT SOME OF WHAT Y'ALL ARE SAYING. IF YOU GO INTO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, IT HAS THIS LITTLE SECTION. POWERS AND DUTIES. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY IT HAS A GENERIC STUFF, YOU KNOW, HERE CASES DO PLAT AND THINGS LIKE THAT. IT ALSO HAS Y'ALL. Y'ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO REVIEW THE COMP PLAN. Y'ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO ADVISE ON ANY OTHER PLANNING MATTERS THAT MAY COME FORTH TO YOU LATER ON DOWN THE LINE IN REGARDS TO WHO CAN BRING A ZONING AMENDMENT, YOU CAN. THE ZONING COMMISSION CAN. SO SOME OF THOSE THINGS Y'ALL ARE SAYING Y'ALL ARE PERMITTED TO DO AND Y'ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO DO. SO I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT LITTLE TIDBIT OF COMFORT, I THINK, ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT Y'ALL ARE DISCUSSING HERE TONIGHT. SO. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS BELONGS HERE OR NOT. YOU'LL SLAP MY HAND IF IT DOESN'T. NO. BUT AT THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING, WE HAD APPROVED OUR RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL, A MIXED USE CASE WITH THE COMMUNITY, THE CHURCH. AND WHEN THEY PRESENTED, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE A PRETTY FAST TIMELINE THAT THEY WANT TO DO THIS WITH. AND THAT COULD ALSO BE AN INITIATIVE OR SOMETHING, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO KNOW THAT THOSE CASES WILL, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL BE COMING BACK BEFORE US AGAIN TO GET APPROVAL ON OTHER THINGS TO ADVANCE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PARTICULAR PLANT. SO I'M THINKING THERE'S IT COULD ALSO BE SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES, LIKE A HAMPTON ROAD, BUT THIS WOULD BE THE MIXED USE FOR THE CHURCH. AND THEY HAD A VERY NICE CONCEPTUAL PLAN THAT THEY SHOWED. IT DIDN'T MEET OUR SPECIFICATIONS OR. BUT YET WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO WAS REALLY NICE. ALL RIGHT. AND SO ARE WE FOR THE NEXT MEETING. WE JUST NEED ONE TOPIC. RIGHT. AND ARE

[01:00:01]

LET ME ASK ONE OTHER CLARIFYING QUESTION. SO WHEN WE WHEN THIS COMES BACK BEFORE US. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE'RE JUST GOING TO BE VOTING ON WHETHER THE PD CAN BE A PART, NOT A PART. IS THAT CORRECT? NO. I SUPPOSE YES. WHAT YOU'RE VOTING ON IS THE REZONING OF THAT WHOLE BOUNDARY AREA. ALL THOSE LOTS ARE ENCOMPASSED INTO ONE ORDINANCE. WE'RE JUST DOING A BIG BUNCH OF LOTS STRAIGHT ZONING IN ONE ORDINANCE. SO WE'RE MOVING IT FROM MOVING ALL THE SINGLE FAMILY EIGHTS THAT ARE IN THERE TO NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES. WE'RE MOVING ALL THE RETAILS TO WHATEVER THEY'RE WE'RE JUST MOVING, YOU KNOW, IT'S CURRENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION TO THE NEW ONE ALL IN ONE ORDINANCE. IT'S JUST A STRAIGHT ZONING ORDINANCE IS ALL IT IS, WHETHER WE INCLUDE OR EXCLUDE CERTAIN LOTS THAT WILL NEED TO BE DECIDED. YES, AT THAT TIME, BECAUSE THEY'D HAVE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE REZONING OR NOT INCLUDED IN REZONING. SO YES.

THANK YOU. I WAS GOING TO SAY COMMISSIONER EDWARDS HAD ANY INPUT OR MR. I GUESS I'LL EXCUSE ME. I WASN'T AT THE JOINT MEETING, THE LAST JOINT MEETING, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION AS FAR AS THE TOPIC, IF WE'RE ALREADY VOTING TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE, WHAT WOULD BE DISCUSSION POINTS OF THAT TOPIC? I THINK IT'S JUST LIKE AN UPDATE WE'RE DISCUSSING. WELL, REALLY, WE CAN'T DISCUSS ZONING MATTERS PER SE AT THIS MEETING. WE'RE JUST DISCUSSING INITIATIVES THAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT. I GUESS ANY KIND OF CODE CHANGES THAT WE FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD MAKE OR ADDRESS. NO.

PERIOD. IN GENERAL, THOSE ARE GOING TO BE HIGH LEVEL DISCUSSION TOPICS, BECAUSE WE CAN'T DISCUSS THIS BUSINESS IN THAT FORUM. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW. WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING FOR DISCUSSION? AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MR. DEWBERRY TALKED ABOUT WAS CODE CHANGES, WHICH I THINK IS A VERY GREAT IDEA. YEAH. AND, YOU KNOW, OTHER THINGS LIKE MATTERS OF COMMUNITY CONCERN, THE REASON WHY I'M SAYING THE CHARACTER CODE IS BECAUSE WE HAVE AN AUDIENCE IN THE CITY COUNCIL IN THIS MEETING, AND SO WE CAN SAY WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM THE CITIZENS ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE NOT LIKING ABOUT THE CHARACTER CODE. AND PERHAPS YOU SHOULD DO THIS TO ASSUAGE THOSE, YOU KNOW, CONSTERNATION OR TO EXPLAIN IT

[01:05:06]

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING. AND SO WE DISCUSSED POSSIBLY WHAT WE ARE CONTEMPLATING DISCUSSING AT THAT AT THAT QUARTERLY MEETING. WHEN DO WE DECIDE, DO WE DECIDE LIKE THE NEXT MEETING? BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A MEETING IN JULY. RIGHT. THERE IS ONE. WE HAVE ONE MEETING JUNE, JULY AND AUGUST. SO IF IT'S THE LAST OF AUGUST, WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION POINT IN JULY. ACTUALLY, WE HAVE TO SUBMIT OUR TOPIC BY JUNE 20TH. SO BEFORE OUR NEXT MEETING, NO, NO, JUNE 20TH WE GOT ANOTHER. WE GOT ANOTHER DAY IN MAY. WE HAVE ONE MORE MEETING IN MAY OKAY OKAY. AND SO WE WOULD DECIDE HERE WHAT THAT TOPIC OF DISCUSSION WOULD BE. NEXT MEETING. NEXT MEETING. WE HAVE TWO. WOULD YOU SAY 28. THE 28TH JUNE 20TH IS OUR DEADLINE FOR THIS MONTH. AND THE FIRST MEETING IN JULY, JUNE, JUNE, JUNE, JUNE MEETINGS OR THE FOURTH TUESDAY, JUNE MEETINGS ARE THE FOURTH TUESDAY. ISN'T THAT CORRECT? AND THEN WHAT? WE DECIDED NO, WE ONLY HAVE THE SUMMER SCHEDULE IS FOR THE FOURTH TUESDAY. SO IT'S DUE BEFORE OUR MEETING IN JUNE. YES. SO AGAIN, MY QUESTION. SO DO WE BRING OUR RECOMMENDATIONS HERE BEFORE THE BODY OPENLY TO TELL YOU WHAT THOSE, THOSE CONCERNS ARE OR INITIATIVES. IS THAT WHAT WE DO. YES MA'AM. I'LL ADD AN ITEM TO THE AGENDA. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS IT APPROPRIATE TO ASK STAFF TO BRING SOME POTENTIAL ITEMS TO US SO THAT WE COULD CONSIDER THOSE ITEMS AND WE COULD ADD IF THEY'RE NOT, WE COULD DO BOTH. YES. WE HAVE A LIST OF PROJECTS WE COULD LOOK AT. I THINK THE THING FOR THE AGENDA ITEM IS MORE OF STAFF TO MAKE A FORMAL DECLARATION THAT YOU GUYS NEED TO TALK ABOUT THIS ITEM, AS OPPOSED TO MAKING ALL THE DECISIONS OF WHAT THE ITEM SHOULD BE THERE, JUST PUTTING IT ON THERE, BASICALLY TO REMIND US THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON WHAT THE ITEM IS, AND WE'LL DISCUSS IT IN THAT MEETING, AND THEN THEY'LL TAKE THAT AND POST IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE OTHER MEETING. RIGHT.

THAT SOUND RIGHT TO YOU? YEAH. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONERS, NOW THAT EVERYTHING IS MUDDY AS WATER. SO WHAT I'M JUST TO CLARIFY, MISS COLTON, AT OUR NEXT MEETING, YOU WILL HAVE ON THE AGENDA AN ITEM FOR AGENDA FOR US TO DISCUSS AND DECIDE WHICH ITEM WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ADDED TO THE JOINT MEETING. CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. SO, COMMISSIONERS, YOU WILL BRING YOUR SUGGESTIONS AND YOU ALL MAY BRING SUGGESTIONS. TELL HER HERE'S SOMETHING FUTURE THAT'S COMING UP THAT YOU MIGHT NEED TO DISCUSS. AND VARIOUS THINGS AGAIN AM I CORRECT? YES.

ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR MISS COLTER? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOU. THANK YOU ALL. AT THIS TIME. COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE ITEMS OF

[H. 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) announcements involving an imminent threat tithe public health and safety.]