Mar 24, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting

[A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]

[00:00:13]

STAND. THANK YOU FOR STANDING AND JOIN US FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY COMMISSIONER DEWBERRY. PLEASE JOIN ME. 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. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. IT IS 6:00 AND THE REGULAR SESSION OF THE PLANNING

[B. REGULAR SESSION - CALL TO ORDER]

[D. CONSENT AGENDA Any item may be withdrawn from the consent agenda and acted on separately.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

WERE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES COMMISSIONER'S. SEEING NONE, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. I MOVE TO. SORRY, I MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS IS. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, SAY I. YES, YES. ANYONE IN OPPOSITION? NONE. THE MINUTES HAVE BEEN

[E. PUBLIC HEARING]

[00:05:05]

SO PROPERTIES IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE SUBJECT SITE ARE CURRENTLY DEVELOPED OR CURRENTLY, EXCUSE ME, PARTIALLY DEVELOPED IN ZONED AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 20, WHICH DOES HAVE A BASE ZONING DISTRICT OF GENERAL RETAIL PROPERTIES IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THE SUBJECT SITE ARE NOT LOCATED IN CITY OF DE SOTO CITY LIMITS. IT'S ACTUALLY CONSIDERED CITY OF LANCASTER CITY LIMITS. SO THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS WERE NOT NOTICED. PROPERTIES IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS ZONED AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 20 AS WELL, WHICH AGAIN HAS A BASE ZONING DISTRICT OF GENERAL RETAIL. THIS AREA IS ALSO PARTIALLY DEVELOPED AND THEN AREAS TO THE WEST ARE CURRENTLY ZONED AS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 12,000 OR SF 12 IN THIS AREA IS DEVELOPED. SO HERE IS OUR PROPOSED SITE PLAN. IT SHOWS THE CONFIGURATION OF THE LOT, AS WELL AS THE PROPOSED OR THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENCE INN HOTEL, AND YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY WILL BE TAKING ACCESS ALONG THE THE HIGHWAY. NEXT UP ARE OUR PROPOSED ELEVATIONS PER. THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE. THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT ARE OUR. EXCUSE ME, OUR APPLICANT IS MEETING THE ELEVATION REQUIREMENTS AND THIS IS OUR LANDSCAPE PLAN AND IT GOES THE SAME FOR THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. THE APPLICANT IS. WELL, THIS. THIS ENTIRE PLAN DEVELOPMENT WILL BE RESTATED, BUT THE APPLICANT IS MEETING ALL THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS AS WRITTEN IN THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT 20 ORDINANCE. SO THIS SLIDE PRETTY MUCH SUMMARIZES THE LIST OF DEVIATIONS FROM THE EXISTING PLAN DEVELOPMENT LANGUAGE. THE FIRST ONE, THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT LANGUAGE, CURRENTLY SPEAKS OF FOR OR THE THE CURRENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT LANGUAGE AS IT SPEAKS TO THIS PLOT OF LAND THAT IS 4.153 ACRES. IT REQUIRES THAT THERE MAY BE. THERE MUST BE 128 ROOMS. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 120. THE SECTION OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT ALSO REQUIRES THAT A RESTAURANT BE ON SITE INSTEAD OF THE RESTAURANT. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THAT EACH GUEST ROOM WILL HAVE A KITCHEN AND COOK AREA, AND THEN THE LAST DEVIATION THAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS THE REMOVAL OF BUILDING MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS AS CONSISTENT WITH HOUSE BILL 2439. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBILITY. SO THE 2024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH HOUSES THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, DOES DESIGNATE THIS AREA AS DESIGNATION MIXED USE PER THE PER THAT DESIGNATION. STAFF CAN SUPPORT THIS REQUEST BECAUSE IT DOES ALIGN WITH WHAT WE'RE

[00:10:03]

FIRST QUESTION DID THIS COME BEFORE US RECENTLY OR IS. I BELIEVE IT HAS. OKAY. WHEN WAS THE PD APPROVED FOR THIS SPECIFIC RESTAURANT? THIS FOR THIS SPECIFIC LOCATION? YES.

CAN YOU PULL UP THE PD ORDINANCE 2018? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND I CAN ADD IS THE APPLICANT HERE TODAY. DO YOU KNOW WILL THE APPLICANT BE HERE. OKAY. HAS THE APPLICANT GIVEN STAFF ANY SPECIFIC REASON ON WHY THEY WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THE RESTAURANT? SO WITHIN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE, THERE IS LANGUAGE THAT IT SPEAKS TO THE FACT THAT IF YOU ARE IN LIEU OF NOT PROVIDING A RESTAURANT, YOU CAN PROVIDE KITCHEN OR COOK AREAS FOR EACH ROOM. AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE PROVIDING. SO THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT ALREADY, THE ORDINANCE ALREADY ALLOWS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, BUT INSTEAD OF JUST WORKING WITH THE ALLOWANCE, WE'RE REMOVING THE RESTAURANT REQUIREMENT OUTRIGHT. OKAY. SO CAN YOU SPECIFICALLY TELL ME WHAT'S NOT HAPPENING THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE CURRENT PD? WHAT IS BEING CHANGED? SO IT'S THE REMOVAL OF THE RESTAURANT. IT'S THE IT'S THE REMOVAL OF THE LANGUAGE THAT SPEAKS TO THE RESTAURANT REQUIREMENT. OKAY. HOWEVER, THE PD ALLOWS IN LIEU OF A RESTAURANT, YOU CAN DO KITCHEN IN EACH OF THE ROOM. THAT'S CORRECT. WILL THERE BE A KITCHEN, A COMMON AREA KITCHEN AT THE RESTAURANT? IT WILL BE A KITCHEN IN EACH ROOM, BUT NOT A KITCHEN AREA. I'M. I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I'LL ASK IF THAT'S. YEAH, I THINK THE APPLICANT CAN SPEAK MORE TO THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL MY QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH. IS IT TRUE? WAS ALSO CHANGING THE AMOUNT OF ROOMS. SO IS THERE LANGUAGE OR A DEVIATION FROM THE INITIAL PD OR IS THIS JUST AN OUTRIGHT CHANGE? YES. THERE'S LANGUAGE IN THE PD THAT REQUIRES FOR THIS OBJECTIVE 4.153 ACRES THAT IT REQUIRES THAT THE HOTEL HAS 128 ROOMS. SO WHAT THEY'RE DOING, THEY'RE PROVIDING LESS ROOMS, BUT THEY'RE THEY'RE GOING TO BE LARGER. OKAY. AND THEN DO WE HAVE A COUNT OF HOW MANY OPERATIONS OR HOW MANY RESIDENTS WERE SUBMITTED AFTER THE FACT? OR I THINK BEFORE THE MEETING, I BELIEVE IT'S TWO ADDITIONS TO THE TWO MORE THAT WE HAVE. SO WE HAVE FOUR TOTAL. THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. DO WE KNOW THOSE ARE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION? OPPOSITION OR OPPOSITION. AND CAN YOU CALL OR ANYBODY ON THE COMMISSION BOARD, WHAT'S THE NUMBER OF THAT. THIS TAKES A LARGER VOTE OF IF WE HAVE ENOUGH RESIDENTS, THE PERCENTAGE BE 20%, 20%. WE'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO THAT. WILL BE FOUR OUT OF FOUR OVER 13, 24 OVER 13, 24 RESIDENCY, 24 LETTERS, RIGHT? SO IT'S CLOSE TO 20%. IT'S NOT OVER, BUT ONLY TWO ARE IN OPPOSITION. THE OTHER TWO, FOUR IN OPPOSITION OR IN OPPOSITION OR OPPOSITION. CAN WE GET COPIES OF OR WELL, LETTERS WE DON'T HAVE. ALL WE HAVE IS THE ORIGINAL SO WE CAN PASS THOSE AROUND. ARE THEIR COMMENTS SPECIFICALLY WHAT THEY'RE OPPOSING? I BELIEVE SO, OKAY. YEAH, IF YOU CAN PASS THOSE AROUND, WE'LL READ THEM WHILE WE'RE ASKING QUESTIONS, IF YOU DON'T MIND. THEN ONE MORE. SORRY, CAN YOU GO TO THE ADDRESS? I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT SLIDE THAT WAS ON THE ADDRESS OF THE LOCATION. YES, MA'AM. I THINK THERE WAS A I THINK IT'S SLIDE TWO. SHOULD GO BACK TO SIDE TWO. IT'S 101307. YES.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER, IS THIS THE SLIDE YOU'RE REFERRING TO? IT'S NOT. I'LL COME BACK TO IT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ALEXIS. IS IT ON? OKAY. HOW MANY LETTERS WERE WITHIN THE 200FT RADIUS OF OPPOSITION? SO OPPOSITION CAN ONLY BE SENT IN BY RESIDENTS WITHIN THE 200

[00:15:06]

THANK YOU, MISS JORDAN. THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, WE WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ZONING CASE Z154225. THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS ANYTHING? MAKE A PRESENTATION. GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR CITY OF RESIDENCE, PLEASE. CAN YOU TURN THE MIC ON? OH, SORRY. MY NAME IS KEVIN PATEL. I'M WITH THE TRIANGLE ENGINEERING. I'M THE ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR THIS PROJECT. MY ADDRESS IS 1782 WEST MACDERMOTT DRIVE, ALLEN, TEXAS, 75013.

GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. FIRST OF ALL, LET ME START WITH INTRODUCING THIS PARTICULAR BRAND. THIS RESIDENCE INN IS A PRODUCT OF MARRIOTT FAMILY. IT'S NOT A PRODUCT OF HILTON OR IHG. IHG STANDS FOR INTERCONTINENTAL GROUP, WHICH HAS THE HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS AND CANDLEWOOD SUITE TYPE OF HOTELS. THIS IS ON A HIGH TIER EXTENDED STAY KIND OF HOTEL. IT HAS.

EACH ROOM WILL HAVE THE KITCHEN, SO MOST OF THE CORPORATE CLIENTS STAYING OVER THERE, THEY. IF THEY WANT TO WARM UP THE FOOD, IF THEY WANT TO COOK THE FOOD, THEY CAN. THEY CAN COOK THE FOOD AT RESIDENCE INN IS DESIGNED TO TARGET CORPORATE GROUPS AS WELL AS THE. IF THERE IS A CONVENTION GOING ON IN THE CITY OR A NEARBY CITY, IT ATTRACTS THE CROWD FROM THAT KIND OF EVENTS. I HAVE A FEW MORE POINTS. I'M GOING TO BRING IT TO YOUR ATTENTION. RESIDENCE INN BY MARRIOTT IS A PART OF MY MARRIOTT ECOSYSTEM, BRINGING NATIONAL CORPORATE ACCOUNTS, LARGE EMPLOYERS, INDUSTRIAL AND MANUFACTURING BUSINESS BUSINESSES. IT'S A LOYALTY DRIVEN BRAND. IT HAS THE PROGRAM MARRIOTT BONVOY PROGRAM. SO IT'S BASICALLY LOYALTY DRIVEN BRAND. SO IT CONSISTS HIGH QUALITY DEMAND. IT'S THE ADR, WHICH IS AVERAGE DAILY RATE IS HIGHER THAN THE NORMAL SUPER EIGHT MODEL EIGHT, HILTON GARDEN HILTON OR ANY OTHER PRODUCT. SO IT KIND OF IT'S DESIGNED TO TARGET THE CORPORATE CORPORATE CUSTOMER AS WELL AS THE SOMEONE IS PASSING BY ON I-35 HAS THE MARRIOTT BONVOY MEMBERSHIP. THEY WANT TO STAY OVER THERE OVERNIGHT AND TRAVEL WHEREVER THEY WANT TO TRAVEL NEXT MORNING. BENEFITS TO THE CITY. IT BASICALLY IS STRONG, STABLE OCCUPANCY, TAX REVENUE, BUSINESS TRAVEL, DEMAND, SUPPORTING THE LOCAL ECONOMY, ALIGNMENT WITH THE QUALITY GROWTH AND A BRAND STANDARD. THESE ARE KIND OF HIGH LEVEL BENEFITS. IT HAS THE THE PROJECT DOES INCLUDE A FOOD AND BEVERAGE COMPONENT. BASICALLY, WE'LL HAVE A SMALL BAR INSIDE AND HAVE A FINGER FOOD INSIDE IN ADDITION TO THE. EACH. EACH ROOM HAS THEIR OWN KITCHEN. IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE HAVE A BAR LOUNGE. WE SERVE THE LIGHT FOOD, SMALL PLATES, FINGER FOOD TYPE OF STUFF. WE DO OFFER THE BREAKFAST IN THE MORNING, SO WE DO HAVE A COMMON KITCHEN WHERE WE OFFER THE BREAKFAST FOR THE CUSTOMERS. ACCORDING TO. BUT I'M NOW GOING BACK TO THE PD. PD ALLOWS, AND I'M GOING TO PULL OUT THAT PARTICULAR LANGUAGE FROM THE PD. I'M SORRY, I HAVE TO DO BACK AND FORTH WITH THE FEW NOTES HERE, BUT PD DOES ALLOW A RESTAURANT WITH MINIMUM SIZE OF 15FT■S, SQUARE FEET PER GUEST ROOM A IF IT. COMPLETE COOKING FACILITIES ARE PROVIDED IN EACH ROOM. EACH GUEST ROOM. NO RESTAURANTS IS REQUIRED FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE. WE DO HAVE A KITCHEN IN EACH. EACH ROOM THAT SHOULD CONSIST OF THE COOKTOP AS WELL AS THE

[00:20:04]

COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YES. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING.

REGARDING THAT NATURAL BUFFER, I NOTICED THAT YOU HAVE A LOT OF VEGETATION AND SHRUB. IS THERE A RETAINING WALL GOING UP BETWEEN THE RESIDENTS AND THAT LOT, OR IS IT JUST A SCREENING WALL? YES. NOT THAT I AM AWARE ABOUT IT AT THIS TIME, BUT I THINK THERE IS A NATURAL TREE BUFFER ALONG THE ENTIRE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE. AND IF YOU GO BACK ON THE AERIAL PICTURE, PLEASE, THAT THAT KIND OF SHOWS WHERE THE TREES ARE. YEAH. IF YOU SEE THAT ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE, THERE ARE EXISTING TREES OVER THERE. AND WE DID SUBMIT THE TREE PRESERVATION PLAN, AND IT SHOWS THAT ALL MAJORITY OF THOSE TREE IS BEING PRESERVED. THEY'RE BEING PRESERVED. YEAH. MAJORITY OF THOSE TREES ARE BEING PRESERVED. YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW MUCH DEPTH IS BETWEEN OF TREES. OH, IT'S ABOUT 50 PLUS FEET. 50FT. OKAY.

THAT ENTIRE GREENBELT AREA IS ABOUT 50 PLUS FEET. AND BUILDING IS ALMOST ABOUT I MEAN, I THINK SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING IS ABOUT 100, 110FT FROM THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.

NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING IS ABOUT CLOSE TO 200FT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

OKAY, SO THERE IS A NATURAL BUFFER BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND THE HOTEL. AND THEN I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. CAN YOU CONFIRM THE ADDRESS, THE MEETING MINUTES AND THE RECOMMENDATION SLIDE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT ADDRESSES. CONFIRM ADDRESS FOR WHAT? FOR THE HOTEL.

RIGHT NOW. I THINK BASED ON MY PLAN, IT'S 1307 NORTH I 35. THAT'S WHAT IT SHOWS ONE OKAY.

I THINK STAFF I THINK THAT'S RIGHT ON THE MEETING MINUTES RECOMMENDATION SLIDE IS INCORRECT. YES THAT'S CORRECT. YES. CAN CAN WE GO BACK ON THE TREE PRESERVATION PLAN. I WANT TO SHOW THEM THE TREES BEING PRESERVED. COMMISSIONER. ALL THOSE TREES ON THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE WEST OF THE PARKING LOT. ALL OF THOSE TREES BEING PRESERVED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, THERE ARE FEW TREES ENCROACHING INTO THE PARKING LOT. THOSE TREES NEEDS TO BE GONE, BUT WE ARE MITIGATING THEM ON SITE AS WELL. OKAY. ON THE OTHER SITE PLAN YOU HAVE A PARK. IS THAT STILL GOING THERE OR? I THINK IT IS. SLIDE FIVE. IT SHOWS A PICNIC AREA BEHIND THE PARKING LOT. IS THAT STILL PART OF THE PLAN? AT WHICH CORNER, SIR? THE I BELIEVE IT'S THE NORTHWEST CORNER. YEAH. THAT'S A DETENTION AREA OVER THERE. THE RETENTION DETENTION AREA. YEAH. WILL MINIMIZE THAT DETENTION AREA WITH HAVING ADDITIONAL TREES AROUND IT AND HAVING A FEW BENCHES AROUND IT. OKAY. IF SOMEONE WANTS TO SEE IT. I MEAN, IT'S NOT AN IDEAL SITUATION BECAUSE IT'S A DRY RETENTION POND. IT WILL NOT BE A WET DETENTION POND. YOU PROBABLY, YOU PROBABLY HAVE SEEN IN A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY WITH THE WET DETENTION POND, THAT'S WHERE YOU PROBABLY WANT TO PUT THE AMENITIES. WITH THE DRY DETENTION POND, YOU DON'T SEE THE WATER IN THE DRY DETENTION POND. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I HAVE A QUESTION. YES,

[00:25:05]

OKAY. MISS JORDAN, DO WE HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING? DO WE HAVE ANYTHING? NO. WE DO. CAN YOU BRING YOUR COMMENT CARD UP, MA'AM? GOOD EVENING, MISS HILL. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? YES. COME ON UP.

GOOD EVENING. IF YOU COULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. JOYCE HILL, DESOTO, TEXAS. I'VE BEEN MISSING YOU ALL. HOPEFULLY YOU'VE BEEN MISSING ME. I'VE MISSED YOU. THANK YOU. YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK, MA'AM. SURE. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. COMMISSIONERS. DE SOTO IS GROWING PEOPLE WISE. WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP UP. AND WHEN I THINK ABOUT KEEPING UP, NOT ONLY RENOVATING HAMPTON COURT OR NOT ONLY BUILDING HOTELS, NOT ONLY BUILDING HOMES FOR FAMILIES AND SINGLE PEOPLE, NOT ONLY FOR THE LOW TO MODERATE INCOME FAMILIES, NOT ONLY FOR CORNER STORES WITH SLOT MACHINES, NOT ONLY FOR 304 STORY APARTMENT UNITS, WHICH I THINK IS COMING IN THE FUTURE NOT ONLY FOR WAREHOUSES, BEAUTY SHOPS AND STORES. SO I COULD GO ON AND ON AND ON. AND IN THAT LIST, YOU DID NOT HEAR ME MENTION GROCERY STORES, RESTAURANTS, MALLS, ENTERTAINMENT CENTERS, STREET REPAIRS, SCHOOLS, OR EVEN A DOG PARK. SO RESIDENTS IN IT IS A NICE HOTEL. IT'S USUALLY A THREE STAR, HAS A THREE STAR RATING. MARRIOTT ITSELF HAS A 3 TO 5 STAR RATING, WITH THE MAJORITY OF IT FALLING BETWEEN A FOUR STAR CATEGORY. SO BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING REGARDING A HOTEL, WE, IN MY OPINION, WE NEED TO GET RID OF THE EYESORE THAT PEOPLE SEE BEFORE THEY GET TO THIS PROPOSED HOTEL, WHICH WOULD BE THE OLD I STILL CALL IT HOLIDAY INN AND THE. THE WEBSITE FOR DESOTO SAYS LOVE, LIVE AND PLAY. IT'S WHAT'S ON THE WEBSITE. SO HOW CAN YOU BE HAPPY IN A DESERT? SO TO ME, DESOTO IS A DESERT AND IT HAS TO CHANGE. WE HAVE A LOT OF HOTELS ON I-35. I THINK I COUNTED LIKE TEN AND WOULD BE 11 WITH THIS ONE. AND OFF OF I-35 WE HAVE FAIRFIELD IN COMFORT INN AND. THE ANOTHER HOTEL. SO HOTEL SEEMED TO BE WHAT DESOTO IS LEANING TOWARD. NOT TO SAY THAT WE DON'T NEED HOTELS BECAUSE WE DO, BUT IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHERE THEY ARE. DESOTO IS KIND OF BOXED IN, SO I DON'T THINK WE CAN GO FURTHER NORTH. WE HAVE TO GO FURTHER SOUTH. SO BUT BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE RESIDENTS THAT CALL ME, THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE RETAINING WALL WHERE THEY LIVE. THEIR PROPERTY BACKS UP TO THIS

[00:30:03]

THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS ZONING CASE? YES, SIR. COME ON UP. GRAB A COMMENT CARD AFTER YOU SPEAK. NO, YOU CAN COME UP. YOU CAN DO IT AFTER YOU SPEAK. LET ME GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR CITY OF RESIDENCE, AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. WELL, GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS GARY WOODS. I LIVE AT 1320 BLUFFVIEW DRIVE. I WAS ONE OF THE RED DOTS THAT WAS UP THERE ON THE SCREEN MOMENTARILY AGO, BUT I'M IN OPPOSITION OF THIS PARTICULAR ESTABLISHMENT BECAUSE I, ALTHOUGH A A LONG TERM. RESIDENCE HOTEL IS FINE IN CERTAIN AREAS. WE HAVE BEEN HOMEOWNERS THERE, MANY OF US OVER 30 YEARS. AND THERE WAS ONCE SOMETHING SUPPOSED TO GO IN THAT AREA ONCE BEFORE THEY CLEARED OUT, TOOK OUT ALL THE VEGETATION. A LOT OF THE WATER DRAINED DOWN INTO THE CREEK THAT'S COMING BEHIND THERE, AND HAD CAUSED THAT TO BECOME A FLOODPLAIN. SO NOW SOME OF THAT AREA, SOME OF THE RESIDENTS, WHEN RAIN COMES, A HEAVY RAIN, IT CAUSES A PROBLEM. ANOTHER PROBLEM IS I'M SURE THAT A HOTEL OR SOMETHING THAT COULD BE THERE WOULD BE A BUFFER FOR THE THE NOISE THAT WE HAVE NOW, BUT THE NOISE IS COMING FROM THE FREEWAY, WHICH WAS WIDENED AND THERE WAS NO BARRIER WALL PUT UP. AND THIS FREEWAY WAS RAISED A LITTLE BIT. SO NOW ALL THE SOUND COMES OVER. ANOTHER THING IS THERE WAS ANOTHER HOTEL THAT WENT IN RECENTLY, AND AT THE BACK OF THE HOTEL, THERE'S LIGHTING THAT SHINES INTO THE NEIGHBORS BACKYARDS.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS NOTHING MENTIONED ABOUT LIGHTING ON THE BACKSIDE OF THIS PARTICULAR ESTABLISHMENT. SO WE DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S GOING TO BE LIGHTING COMING THROUGH THE TREES INTO OUR BACKYARDS OR WHERE OTHERS WHOSE ELEVATION IS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN THE HOMES CLOSEST TO THE HOTEL WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE. SO THAT'S MY COMPLAINT, AND I'M IN OPPOSITION. THANK YOU, MR. WOODS. IF YOU CAN GRAB A COMMON CORE AND FILL IT OUT AND RETURN IT TO THE FRONT DESK. THANK YOU SIR, ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION? YES, MA'AM. COME ON UP. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS MARIA DIAZ. I'M RIGHT AT 1308 BLUFFVIEW DRIVE, DESOTO, RIGHT BEHIND WHERE THE NEW PROPOSITION IS PLANNING ON. MY CONCERN IS WITH THE NEW BUILDING BEING ESTABLISHED, THERE IS FOUNDATION PROBLEMS, RUNOFF PROBLEMS. LANDSLIDING. WE ALREADY HAVE THAT ISSUE WITH THAT CREEK RIGHT BEHIND OUR PROPERTY. AND LIKE OURSELVES, WE'VE ALREADY LOST OVER TEN FEET OF LAND IN THE BACK. WE'VE BEEN GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH THE CITY REGARDING THIS. EVEN A CLEANUP ON THE CREEK. NOTHING'S EVER BEEN DONE. AND I FEEL WITH THIS NEW BUILDING COMING IN, WE'RE OUR PROBLEM IS JUST GOING TO GET BIGGER. SO I MEAN, I'M OPPOSING TO IT FOR THAT REASON BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO GET MORE PROBLEMS THAN WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE. OKAY. IN THE BACK. THANK YOU MA'AM. THANK YOU. AND DID YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE FOR THE RECORD? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU.

AND I'M RIGHT BEHIND WHERE THE NEW PROPOSITION IS. I'M AT 1308 BLUFFVIEW. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION OF THIS ZONING CASE? SEEING NONE. I'LL CALL YOU AFTER WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SIR. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME, IT IS 6:34 P.M.

[00:35:04]

SO WE'RE VOTING ON THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. OKAY. THAT'S A QUESTION ALONG THE LINE. I HAVE IF WE DO NOTHING TONIGHT OR DO NOT MOVE THIS FORWARD, THE APPLICANT STILL HAS THE RIGHT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE 128 ROOMS AND BUILD THE HOTEL WITH A RESTAURANT. IS THAT CORRECT? AND WHAT WAS THE THIRD DEVIATION? THE THIRD ONES ARE IT'S THE REMOVAL OF THE BUILDING MATERIALS REQUIREMENT. AND THAT'S DUE DUE TO THE HOUSE BILL 2439 PER STATE LAW. WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO REGULATE THAT. OKAY. I KNOW THERE'S A RESIDENCE IN IN CEDAR HILL. I BELIEVE IN NEARBY. IS IT COMMON NOT TO HAVE A RESTAURANT IN THIS TYPE OF HOTEL? I'M ACTUALLY NOT SURE I CAN GET WITH THE APPLICANT TO SEE IF THEY CAN KIND OF GIVE ME THAT ANSWER. COMMISSIONER, DO YOU HAVE. I'VE STAYED IN RESIDENCE IN MANY, MANY TIMES. THEY'RE DESIGNED FOR LONG TERM STAY AND ALL OF THEM HAVE A KITCHEN IN THEM. OKAY. AND SOME OF THEM EVEN HAVE FIREPLACES IF IT'S DIFFERENT LAYOUT. OKAY, BUT IT'S A HIGH CLASS PROPERTY AND IT WILL GENERATE A LOT OF HOTEL AND MOTEL TAX FOR THE CITY. GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I DO WANT TO ALLOW MR. PATEL TO COME BACK FOR A MOMENT. I KNOW I CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING, BUT I'LL ALLOW HE HAS A QUESTION. I APPRECIATE THAT. SO WE DO HAVE A KITCHENETTE KITCHEN INSIDE THE EACH GUEST ROOM. BUT IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE DO HAVE A SMALL BAR AND LOUNGE AREA. THAT'S WHAT WE'LL HAVE A DRINKS AS WELL AS THE FINGER FOOD. SO FOR THE CUSTOMER, IT'S NOT TYPICAL, BUT WE ARE DOING IT FOR THIS PROJECT. NOW, GOING BACK ON GENTLEMAN'S QUESTION ABOUT THE LIGHTING, THERE IS AN INNER BUFFER BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND OUR PARKING LOT. PLUS WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE SHIELD THE LIGHTS AND HAVE A ZERO FOOT CANDLE ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE OR ANYWHERE WE ARE ABUTTING TO THE STATE RIGHT OF WAY OR THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. WE'LL HAVE A ZERO FOOT CANDLE OVER THERE. THAT MEANS THERE IS NO LIGHTING SPILLAGE OVER ANY OTHER PROPERTY. OKAY, ANOTHER CONCERN WAS THE NOISE. DID YOU ALL DO ANY TYPE OF NOISE STUDY? NO, WE HAVE NOT DONE THE NOISE STUDY BECAUSE HOTELS GENERALLY DON'T GENERATE THE NOISE BECAUSE THE CUSTOMER PLANS FOR ANY TYPE OF SCREENING OTHER THAN THE EXISTING FOLIAGE THAT'S THERE. IF WE PLACE A WOODEN FENCE OR MASONRY FENCE ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE, THAT MEANS WE ARE ENCROACHING. WE WILL HAVE TO BUILD IT RIGHT AT THE PROPERTY LINE. OKAY, THAT THAT WILL PROBABLY MAKE US REMOVE THE NUMBER OF TREES ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.

THERE IS A NATURAL BUFFER BETWEEN THESE TWO. PROPERTY OF HAVING A GREEN BELT, AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO PRESERVE THAT. HAVING. RATHER THAN HAVING THE EYESORE WALL, BECAUSE ONCE WE BUILD THE ICE WALL OVER THE PERIOD OF TIME, I THINK IT WILL NEED SOME MAINTENANCE. THIS ONE IS JUST A NATURAL BUFFER TREE IS GOING TO GROW AND EVENTUALLY IT'S. THERE IS A ZERO VISUAL VISUALS FROM THE RESIDENTS AND I BELIEVE THERE ARE EXISTING WOODEN FENCE ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. THANK YOU SIR. I WANT TO ADDRESS ONE MORE CONCERN ABOUT THE EROSION PROBLEM ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS. WE. WE PLAN TO PROPOSE THE DETENTION POND ON THIS PROJECT. THAT MEANS WE WILL. WE WILL DISCHARGE ONLY PRE-DEVELOPED CONDITION RUNOFF. SO THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT WILL NOT GENERATE AN ADDITIONAL FLOW TO THAT CHANNEL OR CREEK GOING ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE. SO THAT SHOULD NOT BE ANY CONCERN AS FAR AS THE ENGINEERING GOES. WE'LL WORK WITH THE ENGINEERING STAFF AT THE CITY AND WILL ENSURE THAT THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL RUNOFF GOES TO THAT CHANNEL AND CREATE THE EROSION PROBLEM. ADDITIONAL EROSION PROBLEM.

THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU. MR. MR. JONES, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? MR. JONES? OKAY, MISS JORDAN, CAN YOU PLACE THE SLIDE ON THE SCREEN WITH THE DEVIATIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR OUR CITY ATTORNEY OR FOR YOU? EITHER ONE. MY QUESTION IS IN REGARDS TO DEVIATION NUMBER

[00:40:01]

BUT IT WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE THE LANGUAGE, STILL HAVE TO BE AMENDED. THE LANGUAGE WOULD.

BUT THE BILL KIND OF DESIGNATES THAT THE BUILDING MATERIALS CAN BE REMOVED. CORRECT. BUT THE ORDINANCE WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE AMENDED. OKAY. SO TECHNICALLY WE ARE LOOKING AT TWO DEVIATIONS, THREE WITH THE LANGUAGE. IF WE'RE CONSIDERING THE LANGUAGE. AND I WANT TO ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE OF THE SIX THING, THE SIX COMMENT CARDS THAT WERE RETURNED IN OPPOSITION, ALL OF THEM LIST IN OPPOSITION OF THE ZONING. AND I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT, AGAIN, ACCORDING TO STAFF AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MISS JORDAN, THE ONLY CHANGES TO ZONING WE'RE DOING IS APPROVING THESE DEVIATIONS FROM 128 ROOMS TO 120 AND REMOVAL OF A RESTAURANT. HOWEVER, THERE WILL BE A SMALL BORE AND FINGER FOODS IN THE AREA OF THE HOTEL.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT COULD ALSO BE WRITTEN INTO THE ORDINANCE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS, OR IS THAT SO? IF WE APPROVE OR IF THESE PLANS OR THE SITE PLAN AND ELEVATION AND LANDSCAPE GO FORWARD. SO THEY'LL HAVE TO THE APPLICANT WILL BE THEY'LL BE RESTRICTED TO THE PLANS. SO IF IT'S SHOWN ON THE PLANS, IT SHOULD BE FINE. IT IT IS OKAY. SO IT IS SHOWN ON THE PLAN. SO THEY SHOULD BE FINE THERE THE BOARD AND WAIT, WAIT WAIT. WE DON'T GET TO DECIDE THAT. WE ONLY DECIDING WHAT PROPOSING THIS AMENDMENT. WE CAN'T STEP OUTSIDE OF THAT.

WHEN WE ARE ASKED TO AMEND THESE TO ONE AND TWO. SO ADDING SOMETHING IS NOT SOMETHING WE WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO. YEAH, WE'RE NOT ADDING. BUT. HOWEVER, IF HE'S SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN WITH THAT ON THE PLAN, THAT'S WHAT'S GETTING APPROVED. AND TO. YES, JUST TO REITERATE, THE APPLICANT WITH THE AS THE SITE PLAN IS PRESENTED TODAY, THAT'S WHAT YOU ALL WILL APPROVE OR DENY. AND IF IT IS APPROVED, THEY'LL HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD. SO THEY'LL BE RESTRICTED TO WHAT'S SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN. RIGHT. AND HE'S INDICATING THAT IT IS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.

MR. COMMISSIONER JONES I'M NOT ASKING HIM TO ADD IT TO THE SITE PLAN. HE INDICATED THAT IT IS ASK IF WE COULD ASK IF THEY COULD CHANGE IT. AND I'M SAYING THIS IS WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DO. CORRECT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THEN I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DID RIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONER, I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY. I BELIEVE WE HAVE REACHED THAT 20% THRESHOLD. SO THIS IS APPROVED TONIGHT. WILL THIS STILL NEED A SUPERMAJORITY AT CITY COUNCIL? I WOULD. SO THE THRESHOLD IS 20% OF THE LAND AREA. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE. GO BACK TO THE THE PUBLIC NOTICE PAGE. I'M SORRY. SO WE HAVE 24 WERE SENT OUT. AND WHAT WE HAVE UP HERE ARE ACTUALLY FIVE LETTERS FROM RESIDENTS WITHIN THAT AREA. AND SO THAT IS OVER THE 20% THRESHOLD. IT WOULD BE 20% OF THE LAND AREA. THE TOTAL LAND AREA. TOTAL LAND AREA. OKAY. SO NOT RESIDENTS. THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. IS THAT IS THAT CORRECT? CITY ATTORNEY I WAS I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT 20% OF THE RESIDENTS. SO IF YOU HAD ONE RESIDENT IN A CERTAIN AREA, HE HAS YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE THE IF THEY VOTED, THAT WOULD BE ABOVE YOUR 20% THRESHOLD. I CAN DEFINITELY DOUBLE CHECK THAT, BUT I DO BELIEVE IT IS THE 20% OF THE LAND AREA AND THEY HAVE TO CALCULATE IT PRIOR TO TODAY. OKAY. BUT WE CAN GET THAT IF YOU GUYS WANT TO, TO RECESS AND CONFIRM. AND I ALSO WANTED TO ADD IN THAT ALL THE LETTERS, ALL I THINK IT'S 4 OR 5. THEY WERE RECEIVED TODAY. SO THEY WERE ALL RECEIVED AFTER THE DEADLINE THAT WE HAD TYPED ON THE LETTER. THANK YOU FOR THAT. COMMISSIONER DEWBERRY. IF THAT IS THE FACT, THEN WE CAN ONLY CONSIDER THE TWO THAT ARE OPPOSED. WAS THE DEADLINE TO SUBMIT TODAY? YEAH, IT WAS MARCH 18TH. GOT IT. SO IT'S ALREADY PAST THE DEADLINE TO EVEN CONSIDER. GOT IT. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU, MISS JORDAN. COMMISSIONERS, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? COMMENTS FOR STAFF? YEAH, I DID HAVE A QUESTION JUST WITH THE PD IN GENERAL, IS THERE A REASON WHY IT DOESN'T

[00:45:03]

ANY OPPOSED? SAY NAY. WE HAVE FOUR EYES AND I WANT TO CALL MR. DEWBERRY. MR. COMMISSIONER DEWBERRY. COMMISSIONER JONES. YES, CHAIR. BROOKS IN FAVOR. OKAY. FOUR, TWO. THE ZONING CASE PASSES 4 TO 2. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER E TWO. IT IS ALSO A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST TO RESTATE PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 58 RELATING TO A SITE PLAN THAT PROPOSES THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF LOT ONE BLOCK A SOUTH MEADOWS OFFICE PARK. NUMBER THREE ADDITION CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 0.8609 ACRES, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF EAST PLEASANT RUN ROAD AND NORTH CHETTY ROAD AND ADDRESSED AS 400 EAST PLEASANT RUN ROAD, DESOTO, TEXAS. THE APPLICANT IS IKE NWOSU AND THE OWNER IS ZIKA ENTERPRISES LLC. ZONING CASE SP69926. AND I APOLOGIZE IF I BUTCHERED THE APPLICANT'S NAME, MISS JORDAN. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. THIS EVENING I BRING FORWARD FOR YOUR. I BRING FORWARD A REQUEST FOR YOU ALL TO DISCUSS AND CONSIDER MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST TO RESTATE PLAN DEVELOPMENT NUMBER 58. SPECIFICALLY SPEAKING, THE APPLICANT, MR. IKE NWOSU, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER, EZEKIEL ENTERPRISES LLC, ARE REQUESTING THAT THE DESOTO PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVE THE RESTATEMENT OF PLAN DEVELOPMENT 58, WHICH IS PROPOSING A SITE PLAN TO DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN AN OFFICE CENTER, WHICH IS A USE PERMITTED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT OF PLAN DEVELOPMENT 58, WHICH IS CURRENTLY OFFICE ONE PER SECTION. D SUPPLEMENTAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLAN. PLAN DEVELOPMENT 58 ORDINANCE. A DETAILED SITE PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED AT A PUBLIC HEARING PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE. THE SITE OF THE SITE IS CURRENTLY JUST UNDER AN ACRE, COMING IN AT 0.8609 ACRES, AND THE ADDRESS IS CURRENTLY 4 OR 400 EAST PLEASANT RUN ROAD. PROPERTY IS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT SITE ARE ALSO ZONED AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 58, WHICH HAS THE BASE ZONING DISTRICT OF OFFICE ONE. THESE AREAS TO THE NORTH ARE PARTIALLY DEVELOPED.

PROPERTIES TO THE EAST ARE CURRENTLY ZONED AS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 58 AS WELL. THESE PROPERTIES ARE DEVELOPED PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH ARE CURRENTLY ZONED AS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 9000 OR SF NINE. THIS AREA IS DEVELOPED AS WELL AND THEN PROPERTIES TO THE WEST ARE ALSO CURRENTLY ZONED AS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 9000 OR SF NINE AND ARE CURRENTLY DEVELOPED. SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN. IF YOU SEE. OKAY, SO THE SUBJECT SITE IS PLANNING TO TAKE ACCESS OFF OF EAST PLEASANT RUN ROAD. IT DOES HAVE FRONTAGE OFF OF NORTH ROAD, BUT IT WILL NOT BE TAKING ACCESS OFF THAT ROAD. SO THIS SUBJECT SITE CAN ONLY BE ACCESSED FROM EAST PLEASANT RUN ROAD. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBILITY. SO PER THE 2024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH HOUSES THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, THE AREA OF THE SUBJECT SITE IS DESIGNATED AS NEIGHBOR. EXCUSE ME, IS NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE? MY APOLOGIES IN NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE CURRENTLY DOES, OR WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING IS SUPPORTED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION SO STAFF CAN SUPPORT THIS REQUEST. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. WITH ALL THINGS

[00:50:07]

COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER JONES? I'M JUST LOOKING HERE. TURN YOUR MIC OFF. SORRY, MR. COMMISSIONER. NO. NO PROBLEM. SO THIS IS A ANOTHER REINSTATEMENT. SO THIS WAS, I GUESS, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. IS THERE A REASON WHY IT'S BEING REINSTATED AND OR WAS IT PULLED OR WHAT HAPPENED TO IT. NO, IT WASN'T PULLED. SO THERE'S LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE. MISS PATEL, IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO SLIDE TWO. YES. SO UNDER SECTION D, WHICH IS TITLED SUPPLEMENTAL REQUIREMENTS OF PLAN DEVELOPMENT 58 ORDINANCE, IT SPEAKS TO THE FACT THAT BEFORE ANY BUILDING PERMIT PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED, THE APPLICANT WHEN IT'S A SITE PLAN REVIEW, THEY HAVE TO. THE SITE PLAN HAS TO BE APPROVED AT A PUBLIC HEARING. SO IT'S. THE CASE IS BEING BROUGHT TO YOU ALL TODAY BECAUSE OF THE LANGUAGE ORDINANCE. LANGUAGE. OKAY. AND THE ZONING IS ALREADY WITHIN, I GUESS, OFFICE ONE ZONING. SO IT'S ONLY BECAUSE OF THAT LANGUAGE. IT'S ONLY BECAUSE OF THE LANGUAGE. THAT'S RIGHT. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND AT THIS TIME IT IS 652. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS ANYONE HERE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION? COME ON UP, MA'AM. THIS IS THE APPLICANT, BY THE WAY. OH, OKAY.

COME ON UP. THANK YOU. IF YOU WILL GIVE US YOUR NAME, BOTH OF YOU AND YOUR CITY OF RESIDENCE.

AND YOU'LL HAVE O. NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE TIME OFF. THIS IS THE APPLICANT. CAN YOU TURN YOUR MICROPHONE ON, MA'AM? THAT SHOULD. THERE SHOULD BE A BUTTON. YES. THANK YOU. OKAY.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. GOOD EVENING, MISS JORDAN AND TEAM. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR GIVING US THIS OPPORTUNITY TODAY. MY NAME IS NGOZI NWOSU AND THIS IS MY HUSBAND MOHSEN.

AND WE'RE BOTH APPLICANTS AND OWNERS OF ENTERPRISE. CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR CITY OF RESIDENCE PLEASE? WE BOTH RESIDE IN CITY OF GLENN HEIGHTS. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES. YOU'RE WELCOME. WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO SHARE A LITTLE BIT OF OUR STORY WITH THE WHOLE COMMISSION ON THIS.

EXCUSE ME, CHAIR BROOKS. THE APPLICANT HAS A DOCUMENT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE READING OFF OF. IS IT OKAY IF I PASS THIS OFF TO YOU? OKAY. YES, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO WE WE LIVE IN NEARBY CITY OF GLENN HEIGHTS, BUT OUR STORY IS ROOTED DEEP IN DESOTO. TO START WITH, MY PARENTS HAVE BEEN LIVING IN DESOTO FOR AT LEAST 30 YEARS. THOSE ARE MY WONDERFUL PARENTS. DOCTOR PIUS AND FELICIA IS RIGHT THERE. SO WE HAVE BEEN LIVING HERE FOR A LONG TIME. OUR THREE CHILDREN ARE THE PRODUCTS OF DESOTO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, STARTING FROM KINDERGARTEN ALL THE WAY THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL. OUR SON, WHO'S AN ALUMNUS OF DESOTO HIGH SCHOOL JROTC AND GRADUATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS, WHERE HE OBTAINED A DEGREE IN ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY IN EMERGING COMMUNICATION. OUR. THE. HIS YOUNGER SISTER, WHO WAS A STAR ATHLETE IN TRACK AND FIELD VOLLEYBALL AND BASKETBALL AT DESOTO HIGH SCHOOL AND SHE GRADUATED FROM CORNELL UNIVERSITY WITH A DEGREE IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING. THE BABY. THE YOUNGER SISTER. SHE WAS A DESOTO VARSITY DRILL TEAM FOR MANY YEARS AND SHE'S CURRENTLY AT TCU MAJORING IN CHEMISTRY IN FORT WORTH. I

[00:55:02]

IF YOU DON'T TAKE OUR WORD FOR IT, JUST GOOGLE US. WE HAVE REPEAT CUSTOMERS AND REFERRALS USUALLY FIND US. FIND US ON GOOGLE UPS WEBSITE, ALSO WEBSITE OUR WEBSITE. WE HAVE A BROAD CUSTOMER BASE THAT COMES FROM FAR AND WIDE. THEY INCLUDE POLITICIANS, TEACHERS, TRUCK DRIVERS, SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS, DESOTO RESIDENTS, A LOT OF THEM RESIDENTS FROM NEIGHBORING CITIES. SOME OF OUR CUSTOMERS COME ALL THE WAY FROM THAILAND, PALESTINE AND OF COURSE, CANADA.

THE BULK OF OUR REVENUE COMES FROM OUR WELL ACCLAIMED AND WELL-RUN PRIVATE MAILBOXES, OUR QUEST TO PURCHASE THE LAND AND BUILD OUR ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY OWNER OCCUPIED OFFICE SPACE DID NOT START RECENTLY. ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO, OUR STORE WAS FLOODED OUT DUE TO A PIPE BURST AT THE DOOR BUSINESS NEXT DOOR TO US, AND OUR INSURANCE COMPANY REFUSED TO COVER IT.

AND WHEN WE SPOKE WITH THE OWNER, SHE WAS LIKE, IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, YOU CAN GET OUT.

SO WE TOOK HER WORD FOR IT. SO WE DECIDED THEN TO PUT IN A PLAN TO EXPAND OUR BUSINESS, AND WE REACHED OUT TO THE CITY OF DESOTO AND MET WITH THE CITY MANAGER, THEN BRANDAN WRIGHT AND MR. CAMERON, AND INQUIRED ABOUT BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES, MORE BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES IN DESOTO. SINCE THEN, WE'VE HAD SERIES OF MEETINGS WITH THE CITY OFFICIALS, INCLUDING A MEETING WITH THE CURRENT CITY MANAGER, MR. MAJID, AND THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.

WE ALSO INQUIRED ON BUYING VACANT LOTS, BUT AT THAT TIME THE CITY DIDN'T HAVE ANY. FAST FORWARD NOVEMBER 2025, WE PURCHASED THE LAND AT 4400 EAST PLEASANT RUN. EXCUSE ME, AND COMMENCED ON PLANS TO DEVELOP THE LAND INTO A BUILDING THAT INCORPORATES ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY MATERIALS THAT HELP REDUCE OUR CARBON FOOTPRINT. WE MAY HAVE STARTED THE JOURNEY WITH THE GOAL OF EXPANDING OUR BUSINESS, BUT OUR BIGGEST SUPPORTERS, WHO HAPPEN TO BE OUR CUSTOMERS, HAVE SHOWN US THAT IT CAN BE MORE THAN THAT. THIS DEVELOPMENT IS YET ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY AND BRING ATTENTION TO THE CONNECTIONS AND RESOURCES THAT IMPROVE OUR ENVIRONMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN DESOTO. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS? SEEING NONE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, SIR. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION OF THIS CASE? SEEING NONE, MA'AM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK? COME ON UP. YOU CAN FEEL YOUR COMMON CHORD OUT AFTER YOU SPEAK. BUT AS YOU APPROACH, GIVE US YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. OKAY. GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY.

OKAY. MY NAME IS FELICIA WEISER. THAT'S MY HUSBAND OVER THERE. I LIVE IN, I'VE BEEN LIVING IN THE CITY SINCE 1996. AND ALL MY CHILDREN, ALL OF THEM WENT TO SCHOOL OVER HERE IN THE CENTRAL

[01:00:01]

[F. REGULAR AGENDA]

COMMISSIONERS. THIS DISCUSSION WILL BE LED BY OUR CONSULTANT, MR. DAVID. GOOD. TURN YOUR MIC ON. MR. GOOD EVENING, MR. KASSAM. IT'S NOT ON YET. THERE YOU GO. OKAY. GOT TO SEE THE RED LIGHT MEANS GO. I GUESS WE'RE HERE TODAY JUST TO DISCUSS A POSSIBLE CODE AMENDMENT TO ADDRESS CHILD CARE FACILITIES, SPECIFICALLY CHILD CARE FACILITIES THAT WOULD BE LOCATED WITHIN INSTITUTIONAL USE, SUCH AS A CHURCH. MOST COMMONLY. PROBABLY, BUT ALSO OTHER INSTITUTIONAL USES THAT ARE ALLOWED CURRENTLY WITHIN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, EITHER BY RIGHT, SUCH AS OUR SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES, OR BY S, U, P AS CERTAIN OTHER USES ARE.

SO IF WE COULD GO TO THE FIRST SLIDE HERE. SO CURRENTLY CHILD CARE ARE RESTRICTED AND NOT ALLOWED AT ALL WITHIN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS REQUIRE S, U, P AND MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS AND IN OFFICE DISTRICTS, BUT ARE ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN MOST RETAIL AND COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS, BUT NOT ALLOWED IN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS. THEN THE NEXT SLIDE WILL GIVE US THE CURRENT DEFINITION OF A CHILDCARE FACILITY. PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. THE YOU SEE THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN JUST BASICALLY TO DIFFERENTIATE IT FROM THE OTHER CHILDCARE TYPE USES, WHICH THEN APPEAR ON THE NEXT PAGE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO A FAMILY HOME IS REALLY FOR SIX OR FEWER CHILDREN. AND THAT IS ALLOWED BY RIGHT AND SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS. IT'S BASICALLY TREATED AS A HOME OCCUPATION USE. YOU'RE JUST CARING FOR NOT MORE THAN SIX INDIVIDUALS. A GROUP DAYCARE HOME IS LARGER THAN THAT. UP TO 12 CHILDREN. AND THAT CAN BE ALLOWED BY A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT. AND SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS TODAY. SO THE PROPOSAL WE'RE LOOKING AT IS TO UPDATE THE EXISTING DEFINITION OF CHILDCARE CENTER. AND REALLY THAT'S JUST TO CLARIFY THAT IT'S A LICENSED FACILITY AND SUBJECT TO STATE ALL THE STATE REQUIREMENTS. BUT THE SECOND PART OF THIS IS TO LOOK AT WAYS THAT WE CAN MORE EFFICIENTLY

[01:05:03]

REQUIRE ON SITE MANEUVERING AND QUEUING FOR PICKUP AND DROP OFF. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT OUR PUBLIC WORKS STAFF AND PLANNING STAFF COULD REVIEW TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE NOT CREATING NEGATIVE IMPACTS RELATIVE TO TRAFFIC WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, THAT THE QUEUING WOULD HAVE TO TAKE PLACE ON SITE, ALLOW FOR SHARED PARKING WITH THE OTHER USE IN ORDER NOT TO HAVE TO PAY ADDITIONAL PROPERTY, PARTICULARLY IF IT'S UNDERUTILIZED PARKING AREAS THAT THAT THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND ALSO REQUIRE THAT THE ASSOCIATED INSTITUTION USE BE ACTIVE. IN OTHER WORDS, THERE'S NOTHING THAT MAKES A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY GO AWAY ONCE YOU ONCE IT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THAT LAND, IT'S, IT'S THERE UNTIL SOMEBODY COMES IN AND ASKS FOR A NEW ONE. SO THE IDEA IS WE JUST, WE DIDN'T WANT A SCENARIO WHERE SOMEBODY CAME IN AND GOT A C O FOR CHURCH, REALLY WASN'T USED FOR CHURCH, BUT THEN LOCATED A DAYCARE THERE. THE THE INTENT IS REALLY TO, TO, TO CO OCCUPY A PARTICULAR FACILITY. SO AGAIN, THE RATIONALE FOR THE PROPOSAL IS A, THAT THERE'S REALLY LIMITED LAND USE IMPACTS THAT WE SEE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS USE, PROVIDED IT'S ON SOMETHING LIKE A OTHER INSTITUTIONAL USE THAT HAS SUFFICIENT GROUND AREA TO, TO SUPPORT THE USE. IT ALSO PROVIDES US GREAT UTILIZATION OF EXISTING FACILITIES. AGAIN, WE THINK PROBABLY ONE OF THE PRIMARY CANDIDATES OR CHURCHES WITHIN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS THERE. YOU TYPICALLY HAVE A SITE THAT IS UTILIZED MAYBE TWICE A WEEK, FREQUENTLY SUNDAYS AND WEDNESDAYS, SOMETIMES ONLY SUNDAYS. IT ALSO PROVIDES COMPLEMENTARY SERVICES TO EXISTING USES. SO IF YOU HAD A PRIVATE SCHOOL LOCATED, YOU COULD EASILY ALSO ACCOMMODATE A DAYCARE THAT SERVES THOSE FAMILIES. AND OF COURSE, IT PROVIDES ADDITIONAL CHILDCARE OPTIONS. AND WE KNOW THAT CHILDCARE IS SOMETHING THAT'S IN GREAT DEMAND. NOW, THIS WON'T RESOLVE THAT ISSUE. CHILDCARE ISSUES LARGELY RELATE TO FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS. IF PEOPLE COULD BE STAFFED AND THEY COULD MAKE MONEY, THERE'D PROBABLY BE ENOUGH CHILDCARE TO GO AROUND. BUT THIS DOES PROVIDE ADDITIONAL OPTIONS AND PERHAPS A WAY TO MITIGATE SOME OF THOSE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE BY ALLOWING FOR CO-LOCATION. WE DID SURVEY SOME SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES IN TERMS OF HOW THEY'RE CURRENTLY ADDRESSED. OUR SISTER, NEIGHBORING CITIES TREAT IT A LOT LIKE DE SOTO CURRENTLY TREATS IT. CITY OF DUNCANVILLE. CITY OF LANCASTER DON'T CURRENTLY ALLOW IT IN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS. THE CITY OF MESQUITE IS THE SAME. THE CITY OF DALLAS DID AMEND THEIR CODE

[01:10:08]

WE'LL JUST OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSIONS. BUT JUST TO SUMMARIZE QUICKLY, WE FEEL LIKE IT'S A REASONABLE PROPOSAL, AT LEAST TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSION. IT DOES UTILIZE SOME SOME FACILITIES THAT CURRENTLY GO UNDERUTILIZED, OR IT PROVIDES A WAY TO HAVE COMPLEMENTARY SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN A USE THAT'S ALREADY LOCATED IN A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT. SO IT SEEMED LIKE A REASONABLE IDEA TO LOOK AT. IT'S COME UP MAYBE ONCE OR TWICE WITH EXISTING CHURCHES THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO, TO LEASE OUT FOR, FOR THIS TYPE OF USE.

BUT THERE'S, THERE'S NOT ANY ONE THING DRIVING IT, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT THE DEPARTMENT WANTED TO BRING TO THE COMMISSION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. WITH THAT, I'LL JUST OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION. BE HAPPY TO RESPOND TO ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, MR. KASSIM. I HAVE A QUICK JUST A STATEMENT ON SLIDE SEVEN. CAN YOU PULL SLIDE SEVEN? SURE. IT SEEMS IT MAKES A GREAT CASE FOR SUSTAINABLE SHARED USE OF EXISTING FACILITIES. BUT THEN ON SLIDE SIX, IF I'M INTERPRETING THIS CORRECT ON THE THIRD BULLET, ARE WE SAYING THAT IT WILL REQUIRE AN ON SITE MANEUVERING AND QUEUING? YES. SO EVEN IF WE ALLOW THIS AT RESIDENTIAL HOMES, THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE SOME OTHER SPACE. AGAIN, THIS WOULD NOT ALLOW THE CONVERSION OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO THIS USE. IT'S ONLY IF IT'S OCCUPIED IF IF THE FACILITY TODAY IS A CHURCH OR A SCHOOL OF SOME SORT, THEN IT WOULD ALLOW THAT LOCATION TO HAPPEN. BUT THIS DOES NOT BROADEN IT TO TO MEAN THAT SOMEBODY COULD OPEN UP A DAYCARE AND AN ADJACENT SINGLE FAMILY HOME. OKAY, SO IT'S A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, NOT A

[01:15:05]

BUT THAT THAT'S THE CAVEAT. YES, SIR. SO IS THAT I GUESS FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THE ONLY INSTITUTION THAT'S REALLY BENEFITING FROM THIS IS THEY WON'T HAVE TO GO GET AN S, U P TO OPERATE LIKE A PRIVATE SCHOOL OR I BELIEVE, UNIVERSITIES. YOU ALSO SAID THEY REQUIRE S U P. YEAH. WELL, A IF IT ALREADY EXISTS WITH AN S U P TODAY, THEN A CHILD CARE COULD BE ADDED BY RIGHT WITHOUT HAVING TO AMEND THAT C P THEY DON'T HAVE S P THEY JUST HAVE TO GO GET ONE. RIGHT? RIGHT. IF YOU'RE ONE OF THOSE OTHER USES, WE'RE REALLY JUST ADDRESSING CHILDCARE FACILITIES WITH THIS, NOT THOSE OTHER USES. SO I GUESS WE'RE NOT ADDRESSING, I GUESS THE CHURCHES BEING ABLE TO IN A RESIDENTIAL OR. OKAY, WELL, CHURCHES ARE ALREADY ALLOWED PRIVATE SCHOOLS. YES, THAT'S A GOOD EXAMPLE. SO PRIVATE SCHOOL CURRENTLY, AS IT STANDS TODAY, THEY HAVE TO HAVE AN S U P. NOW, TO ME, A PAROCHIAL SCHOOL SEEMS LIKE A PRIVATE SCHOOL. BUT THE WAY DE SOTO'S ORDINANCE IS, IT'S DEFINED AND TREATED THE SAME AS A PUBLIC SCHOOL. AND DO WE KNOW THE AVERAGE COST OR TIME FRAME OF THAT'S U P. I WOULD DEFER TO, YES. THE FEE FOR ALL CPS THAT COME THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING ARE $3,000 IN. THE TIME FRAME IS TWO AND A HALF MONTHS TO THREE MONTHS. SO ESSENTIALLY THIS WOULD ALLOW THESE INSTITUTIONS TO BYPASS THAT. AND IT WOULD ALLOW A CHILDCARE LOCATED IN LOCATED WITHIN THE INSTITUTION TO BYPASS THAT PROCESS. YES, SIR. AND I JUST HAVE ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION. I THINK ON SLIDE SIX, YOU MENTIONED THAT THE INSTITUTION HAS TO BE THE PRIMARY AND ACTIVE USE. HAS THAT DEFINED AS THAT BY LIKE TIME FRAME IN THE BUILDING, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR CHURCH MAINLY HAS SERVICE ON SUNDAYS, BUT THEN THEY OPERATE. I THINK IT'S REALLY SINCE SINCE DE SOTO DOESN'T LICENSE BUSINESSES, THAT IT REALLY IS A BIT OF AN ENFORCEMENT QUESTION, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT CLEAR UPFRONT THAT THE ANTICIPATION IS THAT THAT WILL BE AN ACTIVE USE, THAT THAT'S IT'S IT'S NOT A COVER, IF YOU WILL. OKAY, I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER EDWARDS. YES. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD EVENING. COULD YOU GO BACK TO SLIDE SEVEN? I JUST NEED FOR YOU TO JUST TO GIVE ME JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY ON GREATER UTILIZATION OF BULLETS TWO AND THREE. JUST PROVIDE ME A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY ON THOSE.

THANK YOU. SURE. YOU KNOW, I, YOU KNOW, SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, PART OF OUR RESPONSIBILITIES AS

[01:20:08]

THIS IS JUST FOR ZONING. CORRECT. SO THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO AND GET THE CORRECT PROPER LICENSES FROM THE STATE. ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. IN FACT, OUR PROPOSAL IS TO AMEND THE DEFINITION TO SPECIFICALLY TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE LICENSURE BY THE STATE. THEY CLEARLY FIRE CODES WOULD HAVE TO BE COMPLIED WITH. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE THEY TYPICALLY WOULD FALL UNDER THE SAME TYPE OF USE CLASS OR FIRE CODE CLASSIFICATION AS MOST OF THESE INSTITUTIONAL USES. BUT FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU'RE CARING FOR CERTAIN AGED KIDS, THEN YOU'VE GOT SPECIAL EXITING REQUIREMENTS. FIRST FLOOR, ONLY THOSE TYPE OF THINGS WOULD WOULD BE LOOKED AT. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS, I HAVE ONE. DO WE KNOW WHAT THE ZONING IS? WHERE THE ARK SITS? IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT'S AGRICULTURAL IS THE CURRENT ZONING. BUT I CAN DOUBLE CHECK. OKAY. WHICH WOULD BE RESIDENTIAL, BASICALLY, YES. IT'S OUR LARGEST RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, BUT I'M DOUBLE CHECKING. OKAY, SO FOR REC CENTER OR SOMETHING SITS IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATION, OPERATING AN AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM OR SOME OTHER TYPE OF CHILDCARE DAYCARE WOULD REQUIRE, WOULD CURRENTLY REQUIRE, IT WOULD BE CHALLENGING IF IT WAS CONDUCTED. FOR INSTANCE. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT CURRENTLY DOES WITH RECREATION CENTERS, BUT CERTAINLY AN AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM IS JUST FINE THERE TODAY. IF IT'S ZONED IN A RESIDENTIAL. NOW, IF THEY WERE TO CONTRACT OUT WITH A CHILDCARE PROVIDER TO PROVIDE KIND OF A 8 TO 5 SERVICE, THEN THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION, I THINK. OKAY. SO IT'S ONLY FOR THE THE 8 TO 5 SERVICE, NOT FOR LIKE A 3 TO 6 P.M. OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. OKAY. I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU? ALL RIGHT. SO REALLY, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING THIS FORWARD TO THE COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION. WE CAN HAVE MORE DEBATE. AT THAT TIME. IT WOULD BE NOTICED IN THE NEWSPAPER AS WELL. AND OBVIOUSLY INCLUDE A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE INPUT THAT WAY. I JUST GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY, BUT IF THAT'S AGAIN, ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING TO THE COMMISSION FOR GUIDANCE ON WHETHER WE SHOULD PURSUE THIS. FOLLOW COMMISSIONER EDWARDS COMMENTS THAT US UNDERSTANDING THE IMPETUS FOR THIS AND UNDERSTANDING IF THIS HAS BEEN AN ISSUE, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO DO THINGS JUST FOR THE SAKE OF DOING STUFF SOMETIMES.

[01:25:01]

COMMISSIONERS. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. KASSIM. OUR NEXT ITEM ON THE

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

PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE 551.0415. NUMBER ONE EXPRESSIONS OF THANKS, CONGRATULATIONS OR CONDOLENCE. NUMBER TWO INFORMATION REGARDING HOLIDAY SCHEDULES.

NUMBER THREE A RECOGNITION OF AN INDIVIDUAL. FOR A REMINDER ABOUT AN UPCOMING PLANNING AND ZONING EVENT. FIVE ANNOUNCEMENTS INVOLVING AN IMMINENT THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. THE FIRST ITEM OF COMMUNITY INTEREST IS THE FISCAL YEAR 2027 BUDGET. IT IS GOING TO BE HELD TOMORROW VIRTUALLY FROM 530 TO 630, AND YOU CAN SCAN THE QR CODE THAT'S THERE AND YOUR YOU WILL BE MORE THAN WELCOME TO SHARE FEEDBACK THAT WOULD HELP THIS SORT OF SHAPE THE FUTURE. IF YOU FLIP THE PAGE OVER, THERE IS THE NEXT ITEM OF COMMUNITY INTEREST THAT IS A CELEBRATION OF VIETNAMESE VETERANS DAY 2026, AND YOU'RE ALL INVITED TO JUST JOIN TO PAY TRIBUTE TO THEM. IT IS GOING TO BE HELD ON MARCH 27TH AT THE DESOTO CIVIC CENTER. AND THE LAST ITEM OF COMMUNITY INTEREST IS THE DESOTO BATTLES OF THE BOARDS ROYAL, AND THAT IS ON APRIL 25TH FROM 9 A.M. TO 2 P.M. AND IT IS GOING TO BE HELD AT THE ARK. THESE ARE THE THREE ITEMS THAT I HAD FOR YOU FOR TODAY. THAT CONCLUDES FROM MY END. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY ITEMS OF COMMUNITY INTEREST? I WILL SAY KEEP MAYOR PRO TEM. SHE WAS NOT HERE. SHE HAD A FAMILY EMERGENCY. SO KEEP HER IN YOUR PRAYERS TONIGHT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM IS ADJOURNMENT H ADJOURNMENT. IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR,

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.