* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:04] UM, WE'LL CALL [1. Call Meeting to Order] THE MEETING TO ORDER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WHILE EVERYBODY PLAYS AROUND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE FIVE STATES OF AMERICA, THE REPUBLIC, THE FIRST [1. Consider action to approve the minutes from the May 18, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.] THING ON OUR AGENDA IS A FREEHOLD. THE MINUTES. ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS NOT GOING TO HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL ALL IN FAVOR. SAY AYE. MOTION CARRIES. [2. PUBLIC HEARING Case 1830-Z/4551 Beltway Drive. Public hearing, discussion, and take action on a recommendation regarding an ordinance changing the zoning on a 1.17 acre property located at 4551 Beltway Drive, from Local Retail (LR) to Commercial-1 (C-1) District.] OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS PUBLIC HEARING CASE 1830 Z AT 4 5 5 1 BELTWAY DRIVE, PUBLIC HEARING DISCUSSION AND TAKE ACTION ON A RECOMMENDATION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE. CHANGING THE ZONING ON A 1.17 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 45 51 BELTWAY DRIVE FROM LOCAL RETAIL TO COMMERCIAL ONE DISTRICT. WE HAVE THE STAFF REPORT PLEASE. CAM GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER'S KEN SCHMIDT, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES FOR THE TIME. LET ME PULL UP MY PRESENTATION. WE CAN START. I WAS MOVING TOO FAST FOR YOU. SORRY ABOUT THAT. NO WORRIES. ALL RIGHT. SO THE REQUESTS BEFORE EIGHT TONIGHT IS A REQUEST TO READ DOWN A, A 1.17 ACRE PROPERTY. THAT'S LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BELTWAY DRIVE, UH, 350 FEET SOUTH OF BELTLINE ROAD. UH, THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM LOCAL RETAIL TO COMMERCIAL ONE DISTRICT. SO THIS PROPERTY, UH, DID HAVE AN SEP APPROVED FOR IT. UH, BACK IN 1995, THAT WAS FOR A RESTAURANT USE, UH, WITH ALCOHOL SALES FOR ON-PREMISE CONSUMPTION. I, AND ALSO PREVIOUSLY HAD A CEO, UH, APPROVED FOR OFFICE USE ON THAT SITE, UH, AROUND, UH, 2006, 2007 TOWN TIMEFRAME. UM, THE PREVIOUS STRUCTURES THAT EXISTED ON THIS SITE WERE DEMOLISHED TO INCLUDE ALL OF THE PAVED AREAS AS WELL. SO AT PRESENT, WE HAVE A VACANT LOT. UH, THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS TO REZONE TO SUPPORT, UH, MEDICAL OFFICE USE AND THE APPLICANT ELIZA SOLON THERE HAVE SOLD THEIR HOME. A REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE, UH, IS, UH, PROPOSING, UH, THAT REZONING AS WELL AS AN ASSOCIATED CONCEPT PLAN FOR THAT MEDICAL OFFICE USE FOR SPECULATIVE USE. BUT SO, UH, WHEN WE EVALUATE A REZONING REQUEST, FIRST THING THAT WE DO IS EVALUATE IT IN RELATION TO THE TOWN WITH THE LONG RANGE PLANNING POLICY. SO THE FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT POLICY THAT WE LOOK AT IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UH, SPECIFICALLY, UH, HOW THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UH, UH, EVALUATES TO TRUE LAND USE, UH, FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, UH, WITH THE TOWNS 2013 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UH, IT APPLIED A ATTRIBUTES OF SUCCESS. JOANNE USE ANALYSIS TO THE TOWN AND, UH, SELECTED, UM, PARTICULAR TRACKS TO PROVIDE FOR A MORE IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS. TYPICALLY IN THESE TRACKS, UH, WERE DEVELOPED PROPERTIES THAT WERE EXPERIENCING, UH, SOME, UH, FORUM DECLINE. UH, SO GIVEN THAT THIS PARTICULAR SITE IS VACANT AND IT IS, UH, ADJACENT TO A CORRIDOR THAT, UH, WAS IN NEED OF REINVESTMENT. IT WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UH, WITH THAT SAID, UH, I DID LOOK AT THOSE ATTRIBUTES OF SUCCESS AND HOW IT COULD BE APPLIED TO THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST, REZONING FROM THE LOCAL RETAIL DISTRICT TO THE COMMERCIAL ONE DISTRICT, AND FOUND THAT, UH, UH, PARTICULAR ATTRIBUTES, UH, OF COMP COMPETITIVENESS AND FUNCTIONALITY, UH, WOULD BE BEST ADDRESSED OR BETTER ADDRESSED BY THIS PARTICULAR REZONING REQUEST. UM, IF THIS SITE WERE TO DEVELOP MORE CONVENTIONAL RETAIL AND RESTAURANT TYPE USES THAT WE SEE MORE IN A SUBURBAN CORRIDOR LIKE BELTLINE, THE LOCAL RETAIL DISTRICT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE, BUT BECAUSE THIS IS OFF THE BELTLINE AND IT DOES NOT HAVE THE ACCESS, THE AMENITIES AND THE VISIBILITY OF A TRADITIONAL RETAIL USE GIVEN WHERE WE ARE [00:05:01] IN THIS REGION FOR RETAIL AND RESTAURANT, WHERE WE LIKELY HAVE AN OVER SUPPLY. AND WE FEEL THAT, UH, ALLOWING THIS, UH, COMMERCIAL ONE, DO YOU USE TO ALLOW FOR A BROADER RANGE OF COMMERCIAL USES WOULD, UH, BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ACTUALLY IMPROVE THE, UH, VIABILITY AND ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS OF THIS PARTICULAR SITE. AND THE NEXT MASTER PLAN, UH, WE LOOKED AT IS THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN. UH, THIS IS THE TOWN'S, UH, LONG RANGE PLANNING POLICY FOR ITS THOROUGHFARE NETWORK. A BELTWAY DRIVE IS CLASSIFIED AS A COMMERCIAL COLLECTOR STREET IN THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN, UH, GIVEN THE, UM, LOWER IMPACT NATURE OF THIS COMMERCIAL ONES, ZONING DISTRICTS, WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE, THE RANGE OF NON-RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS THAT THE TOWN HAS, UH, WE FEEL THAT THIS, UH, THE USE IS PERMITTED IN THAT DISTRICT WOULD NOT, UH, BE IN CONFLICT WITH THAT COMMERCIAL COLLECTORS SECTION. AND THERE'D BE SUFFICIENT CAPACITY, UH, TO, UM, UH, ADDRESS ANY TRAFFIC GENERATED BY THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE AS THE THIRD, THE COMMERCIAL ONE ZONING DISTRICT, UM, WITH THIS PROJECT, IF IT WERE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH DEVELOPMENT, UH, THEY WOULD BE RIGHT AWAY, UH, EVALUATION THAT WOULD OCCUR AS PART OF THE CIVIL SITE DESIGN AND PLANNING PROCESS. SO ONCE AGAIN, TOM DOES ALWAYS, BUT TOWN STAFF DOES BELIEVE THAT THIS REQUESTS COMPLIANCE WITH THE MASTER TRANSPORTATION OR THE NEXT MAP IS THE PLAN LOOKED AT THAT WAS THE PARKS RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN. UH, GIVEN THE NATURE OF THIS SEGMENT OF THE BELTWAY CORRIDOR, UH, YOU CAN EXPECT THAT, UM, OPEN SPACE OR PARK AND RECREATION FEATURES WAS NOT, UH, PROGRAMMED PER THAT PLAN, UH, INSTEAD, UH, WHAT THAT PLAN ENVISIONED WAS, UH, A, UH, UH, TRAIL SECTION ON BELTWAY, DRY PROVIDING PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY THROUGH THIS AREA TO OTHER, UH, PARTS OF THE TOWN. SO, UH, WITH THE PROPOSED, UH, UH, COMMERCIAL ONE USE, UH, ZONING DISTRICTS, WE FEEL THAT, UH, THAT, UM, PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY COULD CERTAINLY BE ACCOMMODATED WITH THAT REASON. SO IT DOES COMPLY WITH THE PARKS MASTER PLAN AS WELL. THEN FINALLY, YOU LOOK AT THE TRAIL MASTER PLAN, WHICH WAS RECENTLY ADOPTED BY THE TOWN FOR THE TRAIL MASTER PLAN. UH, THE BELTWAY DRIVE IS CATEGORIZED AS A BIKE BOULEVARD. SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT THAT MEANS IS THE TRAVEL LANES ARE SHARED BETWEEN BICYCLISTS AND, UH, VEHICLES, UH, THAT CERTAINLY CAN BE ACCOMMODATED IN THE CURRENT CONDITION AS WELL AS FUTURE CONDITION. AND THEN THE, UM, PLAN ALSO, UH, ACCOUNTS FOR A WIDE SIDEWALK WITH BUFFER, UH, IN THE BELTWAY CORRIDOR. AND SO ESSENTIALLY THAT MEANS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE BELTWAY DRIVE CORRIDOR WOULD HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE AN EIGHT FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK WITH A SEVERALLY SIZED BUFFER BETWEEN THE STREET AND SIDEWALK. AND THAT CAN BE ACCOMMODATED WITH ZONING DISTRICTS, AND IT IS ACCOMMODATED WITH THE ASSOCIATED CONCEPT. NEXT THING WE LOOK AT WITH REZONING IS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE EXISTING LAND USE PATTERN, AS WELL AS THE EXISTING ZONING FOR PROPERTY SURROUNDING THE TRACT. SO TO THE NORTH OF THE TRACKS, UH, YOU HAVE, UH, RESTAURANT AND SERVICE USES. UM, MOST OF THE RESTAURANTS FROM BELTLINE, YOU DO HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL SERVICE USES OFF THE FRONTAGE OF BELTLINE DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH OF THIS TRACK, AND THEN TO THE NORTHEAST, AND YOU HAVE A LARGER OFFICE BUILDING ON THE EAST SIDE OF, UH, BELTWAY DRIVE, UH, TO THE EAST OF THE TRANQ, UH, WITH THE COMMERCIAL ONE ZONING, YOU HAVE MORE OF A FLEX, UH, SERVICE SHOWROOM TYPE OF LAND USE PATTERN. THE BELTWAY FRONT END IS VERY MUCH OFFICE IN CHARACTER. AND IF YOU, UH, AS YOU GET OFF THE BELTWAY FOR ON EDGE, IT HAS MORE OF THAT SHOW CHARACTER. AND THEN TO THE SOUTH, YOU HAVE, UH, MORE, UH, SIMILARLY DESIGNED OFFICE, UH, AS TO WHAT YOU HAD TO THE EAST, BUT A BIT LESS INTENSIVE, DEFINITELY HAVING THAT SIMILAR OFFICE CHARACTER AT THE BELTWAY, DRY FRONTAGE, AND THEN TO THE WEST, YOU HAVE A PROPERTY THAT ACCOMMODATES A LIMITED SERVICE HOTEL, UH, ADJACENT DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE SITES. UM, WE FEEL GIVEN THE NON-RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL NATURE OF THESE USES A PROPOSED COMMERCIAL ONE ZONING DISTRICT WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS LAND USE HAVE, AND THEN LOOKING AT YES, ZONING. UH, YOU, YOU HAVE A SIMILAR DYNAMIC AS THE EXISTING LAND USE. UH, THE MAJORITY OF THIS AREA, PARTICULARLY TO THE SOUTH AND TO THE NORTH IS ZONES LOCAL RETAIL LIKE THIS CURRENT TRACK, AND THEN TO THE EAST, YOU HAVE COMMERCIAL ONE ZONING, AND THEN [00:10:01] FOR THE WEST, YOU HAVE PD ZONING TO ACCOMMODATE SEVERAL HOTELS SITE. CAN YOU HEAR US? UH, YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU. WELL, WELL, LET ME SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING. I NEED ADVOCATES ON THE CALL. CAN YOU HEAR US OKAY? YEAH. NOW WE CAN'T, WE HAVE NOT HEARD ANY OF THE PRESENTATION. OH, I'M SORRY. THAT, UH, THAT THE PRESENTATION WAS, IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS MUTED ON THE ZOOM. APOLOGIES FOR THAT. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'LL PICK UP WITH, UH, THE ZONING AS I WAS, UH, AS I MENTIONED, THE, UM, TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY, THERE IS A COMMERCIAL ONE ZONING, SIMILAR TO THE REQUEST, UH, SURROUNDING PROPERTY TO THE NORTH END OF THE SOUTH. YOU HAVE LOCAL RETAIL ZONING AND TO THE WEST, YOU HAVE THAT PDS. I DON'T MEAN TO ACCOMMODATE THE HOTEL USE ONCE AGAIN, THE USE IS PERMITTED IN THOSE DISTRICTS ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS COMMERCIAL ONES ZONING REQUEST. AND JUST FOR YOUR AWARENESS, THIS IS ACTUALLY FOR THE NEXT ITEM, BUT THIS IS THE CONCEPT PLAN THAT'S PROPOSED. THIS WOULD NOT BE ADOPTED AS PART OF THE ZONING ACTION. IT WOULD BE A SEPARATE APPROVAL PROCESS BY THE COMMISSION, BUT THIS IS WHAT WAS PROPOSED TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH THIS COMMERCIAL ZONING REQUEST. STAFF DID NOTIFY ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH TOWN AND STATE REQUIREMENTS, NINE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS RECEIVED NOTICE. UM, WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSES AS AT THE TIME OF THIS, UH, COMMISSION MEETING, THE STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST. UH, THE USES PERMITTED IN THE COMMERCIAL ONE DISTRICT IS, UH, ARE COMPATIBLE AND COMPLIMENTARY FROM THE SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN AND ZONING APPLY TO THE SURROUNDING AREA. AND THE PROPOSAL REQUESTS DOES COMPLY WITH ALL TOWN, UH, LONG RANGE PLANNING POLICIES. WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE APPLICANT, OTHERWISE IT'S ALL ON THERE WITH SOLANDER HALL. UH, REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE IS ON THE CALL, UH, AS IN SEVERAL FOR CONSULTANTS, ROB BALDWIN, WITH BALDWIN ASSOCIATES, AND THEN KAREN FRESHER OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE, ANSWERING QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE AS WELL. CAN I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS ABOUT IT JUST IN THE TRACK? ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY INTEREST IN THIS PROPERTY SINCE 1995 OR 2007, THE TWO LANDMARK DATES I CANNOT SPEAK TO THE INTEREST THE APPLICANTS MAY, BUT KEEP IN MIND THAT THEY ARE NOT REPRESENTING, UH, UH, THERE THEY ARE THE BUYER, UH, SIDE OF THE, UH, THIS PARTICULAR, UH, TRANSACTION, BUT THEY MAY HAVE A LITTLE MORE, UM, CONTEXT THAT THEY COULD ADD BASED ON THEIR ENGAGEMENT WITH THE CURRENT OWNER. YOUR OTHER QUESTION, TOM? SO THE APPLICANT OR ANYONE ONLINE, HE'S NOT THE CURRENT OWNER IN HIS DRIVE, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY. CAN I HAVE ANOTHER QUICK QUESTION ON THE CONNECTIVITY? I KNOW YOU TOUCHED ON IT. SO THERE'S A, THERE'S AN EXISTING SIDEWALK. THAT'S NEWER ON THE SOUTH OF THAT PROPERTY, RIGHT. THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE. AND THEN WITHIN THE WEST, I'VE DRIVEN IT A THOUSAND TIMES. AND I CAN'T REMEMBER, IS THERE AN EXISTING SIDEWALK THERE AND OUT OF THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY? SO W WHEN YOU SAID THAT THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT LIKE THE SO ON THE, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF BELTWAY THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. LOOKING AT THE AERIAL. IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE REQUIRED AT 10 FOOT. IS IT EIGHT OR 10? SO THEY'RE, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO DO THE SIDEWALK ALONG THEIR FRONTAGE. UM, IF THE PROPERTIES OF THE EAST WERE TO REDEVELOPED, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL A SIMILARLY SITUATED SIDEWALK, OR IF THE TOWN DID A CAPITAL PROJECT, UM, THE SIDEWALK CAN BE ACCOMMODATED, UH, THROUGH THAT MEANS OFF YOU SAY, THERE IS THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT, ONE TRIGGER THAT THE REQUIREMENT TO CONSTRUCT A SIDEWALK [00:15:01] TO THE EAST OF THIS PROPERTY FOR SONY, THAT ACTUALLY GETS TO THE NEXT CASE. IS THAT CORRECT? IT IS, BUT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO ANSWER NOW. SO THEIR REQUIREMENT TO INSTALL A SIDEWALK WOULD APPLY TO THEIR FRONTAGE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CAUSE WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE TO SPEAK THAT WE KNOW OF OR ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? BECAUSE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE 1830 Z SLASH FOUR OR 5, 5, 1 AS WRITTEN. UM, I EVER SAY, AYE, ALL OPPOSED, NO MOTION CARRIES. OUR NEXT [3. Case CP2021-001/4551 Beltway Drive Medical Office. Concept Plan for medical office use on one lot on 1.17 acres comprising part of Tract III of the Beltway Office Park Addition, generally located at the northwest corner of Beltway Drive, 350 feet south of Belt Line Road. Zoned: Local Retail (LR).] ORDER OF BUSINESS THEN IS CASE CP 2021 DASH ZERO ONE, UH, LOCATED AT 45 51 BELTWAY DRIVE MEDICAL OFFICE CONCEPT PLAN FOR MEDICAL OFFICE USE ON ONE LOT OF 1.17 ACRES COMPRISING PART THREE OF THE BELTWAY OFFICE PARK ADDITION, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BELTWAY DRIVE 350 FEET SOUTH OF BELTLINE ROAD ZONE TWO. WHAT RETAIL CAN, CAN WE HAVE YOUR STAFF? THANK YOU. KEN SCHMIDT, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, EDISON. UH, SO THIS REQUEST IS, UH, WAS SUBMITTED, UH, WITH THE PREVIOUS CASE OF THE REZONING. AND, UH, THIS REQUEST, UH, IS A CONCEPT PLAN, UH, FOR MEDICAL OFFICE, UH, ONE LOT ON 1.17 ACRES. ONCE AGAIN AT THE, UH, NORTH WEST CORNER OF BELTWAY DRIVE, UH, 350 FEET SOUTH OF BELTLINE ROAD. UH, THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST IS TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED COMMERCIAL ONES, ZONING DISTRICT, AS WELL AS OTHER TOWN CODE THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS COUNCIL PLANNER. UM, SO THE MEDICAL OFFICE USE PROPOSED FOR THIS SITE IS ONE BUILDING, UH, 3,200 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE. AND THE MEDICAL OFFICE USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT. AND THE COMMERCIAL ONES. I MEAN, DISTRICTS THEN A PROPOSED BUILDING IS A SINGLE STORY AND IT COMPLIES WITH ALL BUILDING SETBACKS, UH, REQUIREMENTS IN THE COMMERCIAL ONES THAT WHEN THE DISTRICT, UH, THE PROPOSED DUMPSTER, WHICH YOU SEE AT THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE SITE, UH, IT IS, UH, INCLUDED IN AN ENCLOSURE. AND THEN IT'S ALSO SCREENED BY THE BUILDINGS AND DOES COMPLYING WITH THE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS OF THE COMMERCIAL ONES ON THE DISTRICT. UH, THE FACADES PROPOSED, UH, DO YOU, UH, PROVIDE FOR MATERIALS THAT ARE, UH, PERMITTED? UH, MY, THE BUILDING CODE AND THE APPLICANT HAS APPROPRIATELY TREATED THE STREET FACING FACADES TO PROVIDE FOR A STRONG ENGAGEMENT OF THE, UH, STREET FRONT, UH, THROUGH ADDITIONAL TRANSPARENCY IN THE FORM OF WINDOWS AND DOORS. AND THEN ALSO HAVING, UM, IS MORE PROMINENT, UH, MATERIAL TREATMENT, ALMOST THE SIZE AS WELL. UH, THE APPLICANT ALSO DID APPROPRIATELY PROVIDE FOR A SIDEWALK CONNECTION, UH, TO THE STREET TO PROVIDE FOR ME PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY THROUGH THE SITE. UM, THE ROOFTOP MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IS SCREENED, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH TOWN REQUIREMENTS, AS WELL AS YOU CAN SEE THAT THE BUILDING FLOOR PLAN, UH, IN THIS IS A SMALL OFFICE SPACE. UH, THERE ARE FOUR, UH, EXAMINATION ROOMS, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE SPACE AND OTHER CONSULTATION SPACES. UH, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU HAVE OR A SMALLER GENERAL MEDICAL OFFICE, NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD SEE TYPICALLY, UH, FOR, UH, A SURGICAL OR AMBULATORY USAGE WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED UNDER THIS USE. UH, PARKING IS, UH, ACHIEVED ON THIS SITE, UH, PROVIDING 17 PARKING SPACES. THE PARKING RATIO THAT'S APPLIED TO MEDICAL OFFICE DECENCY. ONE DISTRICT IS ONE SPACE FOR 200 SQUARE FEET IN FIRST FLOOR AREA. SO, UM, I PROVIDING THOSE 17 PARKING SPACES EXCEEDS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS BY ONE SPACE. AND THEN, UH, WITH REGARDS TO OPEN SPACE, UH, GIVEN THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE, UH, IT IS WELL IN EXCESS OF THE 20% OPEN SPACE PART BY THE CODE, AS WELL AS THE 5% PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE, UH, UH, THAT IS ACQUIRED BY THE CODE. UM, STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED THROUGH NEW PLANTINGS AS WELL AS, UH, PRESERVATION OF EXISTING PLANNING'S AT THE BELTWAY, UH, FRONTAGE. UH, IF THIS PROPERTY [00:20:01] WERE TO DEVELOP FURTHER IN THE FUTURE, PERHAPS AT A SECOND PHASE IN THE SOUTHWEST ITEM IN THE SITE, THEY WOULD NEED TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN MINIMUM OPEN SPACE ON LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS, UH, COMPLYING WITH ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SITE. SO WITH THAT, UH, THIS, UH, CONCEPT PLAN DOES COMPLY WITH THE COMMERCIAL ONE DISTRICT, AS WELL AS OTHER TOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS. AS A STAFF RECOMMENDS, UH, APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTS, UH, WITH THE CONDITION THAT, UH, CITY COUNCIL ULTIMATELY APPROVES THE ASSOCIATED ZONING REQUEST. WE HAVE ANSWERED ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE AND APPLICANT IS ON THE CALL AS WELL. I HAVE A QUESTION IN REGARD TO, YOU MENTIONED THE SCREENING FOR THE DUMPSTER AREA, WHAT ARE THOSE REQUIREMENTS? UM, THE REQUIREMENT, AS IT STATED IN THE CODE, IS IT SIMPLY NEEDS TO BE SCREENED FROM YOU FROM, UH, SOMETHING TO WOULD EFFECT IN THE PUBLIC WAY. UM, OFTENTIMES YOU'LL SEE CITIES HAVE MORE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS, UH, LIKE IT NEEDS TO BE BEHIND THE BUILDING. UM, A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION, UH, FOR THIS CONCEPT PLAN AND THE WAY IT ULTIMATELY LANDED WAS THOSE DEEDS AND THE LOCATION OF THE DUMPSTER AND THE WAY THEY HAVE IT SITUATED. NOW ISN'T THE BEST APPROACH IN THAT? NOT ONLY IS IT SCREENING BY AN ENCLOSURE, BUT IT ALSO IS SCREENED BY THE BUILDING. SO IT HAS THE LEAST AMOUNT OF IMPACT ON THE STREET. YEAH. I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THERE WAS, IF THERE HAD BEEN ANY OTHER OPTIONS, UM, ANOTHER LOCATION, ANOTHER ORIENTATION, BECAUSE AS WE ALL KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES THOSE DOOR CLOSURES DON'T GET CLOSED AND YOU HAVE DIRECT VIEW FROM, FROM THE DISTRICT, IT AT THIS SITE, IT'S CHALLENGING YOU AND ME IN A CORNER LOT. UH, I THINK THIS WOULD, UM, YOU COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE IT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THAT PARKING LOT, SO YOU COULD ESSENTIALLY FLIP IT. MY THOUGHT WOULD BE THAT IT WOULD BRING IT CLOSER TO THE STREET, EVEN THOUGH YOU'D BE SEEING MASONRY. UM, I THINK IT'S, I CAN SEE VALUE IN, IN, IN EITHER DESIGN AND, BUT TO ME IT WOULD BE LESS PAVING AND KEEPING THE DUMPSTER FURTHER AWAY FROM THE STREET AND ALSO PRESERVING POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT, UH, UH, UNDEVELOPED TRACT. AND IF YOU DID HAVE ANOTHER BUILDING THERE, THEN THAT WOULD COMPLETELY SCREEN THAT BUILDING THAT DUMPSTER. RIGHT. OKAY. SO CAME BACK IF THIS IS APPROVED TONIGHT, IT WOULD NOT, UM, PROVIDE ANY, ANY, UH, EXCLUSION FOR THE SECOND TRACK CRASH IN TERMS OF THE LANDSCAPING. BUT IF I'M LOOKING AT IT, ANY BUILDING OF ANY SIZE ALMOST, UM, WOULDN'T COME AS A LARGE PART OF THAT. SO MY QUESTION TO YOU IS OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, YOU MAY NOT HAVE NOTICED, BUT DO YOU KNOW MUCH EXCESS LANDSCAPE, THERE IS SUCH THAT, THAT A BUILDING COULD OR COULD NOT ACTUALLY BE BUILT THERE? I THINK IF THEY WERE TO PROVIDE A SUMMARY SIZE BUILDING, WHICH IS KIND OF WHAT THEY'RE LIMITED TO ANYWAYS, BASED ON THE SIZE OF THAT AREA, UM, I DO BELIEVE THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO COMPLY BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPE TO THE NORTH OF THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED BUILDING, AS WELL AS THE PARKWAY ALONG BELTWAY. SO I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE AN ISSUE, BUT CERTAINLY THE, THE DESIGN TEAM, UH, FOR THIS PROJECT WOULD PROBABLY BE ABLE TO SHED ADDITIONAL DETAIL ON THAT. AND CAN YOU REFRESH ME ON WHAT THE ADA SAYS AS FAR AS REQUIRED AND PARKING? UM, MOST OF MY EXPERIENCE WITH MEDICAL FACILITY IS THEY TEND TO GO OVERBOARD. SOMETIMES I'M ONLY SEEING ONE YEAR. UM, SO WHAT IS THE REQUIREMENT VERSUS WHAT IS, WHAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD JUST HAVE ME DO THAT IN THE GOODNESS OF THEIR HEART? UM, THAT IS SOMETHING I WOULD NEED TO DO A MORE RESEARCH ON, UH, KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS IS A CONCEPT PLAN, ANY PERMIT APPLICATION, ADDITIONAL SITE PLANNING DOCUMENT, THEY WOULD NEED TO MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS FOR FREE PARKING. SINCE YOU'RE SAYING THAT THIS CONCEPT COULD BE CHANGE CODES FROM ME, MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING OR SOMEBODY ELSE FROM THAT STANDPOINT, THEY COULD, UH, AND TO SPEAK TO, UH, VICE CHAIR, SOURS COMMENT AS WELL WITH REGARDS TO ADDING A BUILDING, IF THEY WERE TO DO THAT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION WITH A REVISED CONCEPT PLAN. SO, UM, WITH THE UDC PROJECT, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING IN THE COMING MONTHS IS LOOKING AT OUR [00:25:01] PROCEDURES FOR HOW APPLICATIONS GO THROUGH THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE REALLY NEED TO FIRM UP IS WHAT NEEDS TO GO TO COMMISSION, WHAT NEEDS TO GO TO COUNCIL, IF WE ARE TO LOOK AT LESS PDS, LESS SEP, IS THAT, UH, I KNOW IT'S BEEN A CONCERN OF THE COMMISSION THAT YOU LIKE LOOKING AT THAT, AND IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMISSION. AND I AGREE WITH THAT. UM, SO IF THERE'S GOING TO BE CHANGES ALONG THOSE LINES, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU STILL GET THE C THE, THE CONCEPT PLANS, THE SITE PLANS. SO I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE COMMISSION MORE BUSY REVIEWING THOSE, THESE CONCEPT PLANS AND SITE PLANS. CAUSE I, I THINK IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK AND EXPERTISE IN REVIEWING THOSE APPLICATIONS. IT, CANADA'S KIND OF A GOOD SEGUE INTO MY LAST QUESTION. HOPEFULLY, UM, THE APPLICANT AND THEIR DEVELOPERS IS THIS THEIR FIRST SHOT AT A MEDICAL FACILITY, OR HAVE THEY DONE THIS IN OTHER AREAS? I BELIEVE THAT THE OTHER MEDICAL FACILITIES, THIS IS THE ONLY ONE I KNOW OF HERE IN NAS AS A FOLLOWUP TO THAT. I NEVER SAYS THE SPEC, BUT DO YOU HAVE SOMEBODY IN MIND THAT YOU ARE PITCHING THIS TO, IF THERE'S SOMEBODY THAT HAS EXPRESSED INTEREST, IS IT IT'S JUST RIGHT NOW IT'S GENERAL MEDICAL USE AND WE'RE JUST MAKING IT SUITABLE FOR OUR 10 OR COULD POTENTIALLY NEED FOR A BUYER FINISHED. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR KEN OR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT. WELL, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANY MORE IN THAT CASE, WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT. ALRIGHT. UM, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CP 2,401 DASH 0 0 1 SUBJECT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REZONING REQUEST. IS THERE A SECOND, SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE, ALL SAYS NO MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. UM, THE OTHER THING [4. Present, discuss, and consider action on proposed updates to the Planning and Zoning Commission Rules, Regulations, and Procedures.] ON OUR AGENDA THEN IS TO REVIEW THE RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. AND I KNOW IN OUR WORK SESSION, WE HAD ONE MORE QUESTION THAT WAS RAISED. SO TAD, WOULD YOU, UH, ADDRESS FOR US ON PAGE SEVEN? IT IS, UM, THE, IN PART DATE DISQUALIFICATION FROM VOTING, WE HAD SUGGESTED THAT WE WANTED TO HAVE THAT LAST PHRASE DELETED. CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT? SURE. THANK YOU. MADAM CHAIR. UM, I WOULD SUGGEST CHANGING THAT FINAL CLAUSE BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME OTHER DISQUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS AND CHAPTER 1 70, 1 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE. I WOULD SUGGEST HAVING THAT LAST CLAUSE READ OR WHERE THEIR ABSTENTION FROM VOTING IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW. ONE MORE TIME, OR WHERE ON THAT, JUST THAT LAST CLAUSE HAVE AGREED OR WHERE THEIR ABSTENTION FROM VOTING IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW CRASH COURSE ON STATE LAWS. WHAT IS IT? IS IT LENGTHY? IS THAT APPROPRIATE TO INCLUDE THAT SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK AND REFERENCE IT? YEAH, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS EITHER. THE LAW IS STABLE HAS ALREADY STATE LAW. SO, I MEAN, YOU COULD RECAP YOU, YOU COULD RESTATE IT IF YOU WANTED TO. UM, IT WOULD BE SOMEWHAT LENGTHY, UH, THE LONG AND SHORT OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT AREN'T ARE NOT INCLUDED IN HERE THAT, UH, ARE INCLUDED IN ST. LAW AS, FOR EXAMPLE, DISQUALIFICATION DUE TO FAMILIAR OR HAVING A FAMILY RELATIONSHIP WITH SOMEONE WHO'S APPLICANT, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. UH, CAN, I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT ENOUGH DISTINCTION TO MAYBE CALL IT OUT AND TO LISTEN. I CAN CERTAINLY TAKE A, A STAB AT REDRAFTING THAT PROVISION AND JUST MAKING IT CONSISTENT WITH CHAPTER ONE SENTENCE. OKAY. EITHER IN THIS DOCUMENT OR AS AN ATTACHMENT INDEX OR SOMETHING I THINK IS WORTHWHILE FOR FUTURE PERMISSIONS, THEY HAVE SOMETHING THEY REFER TO. OKAY. YEAH. I CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT. OR WE COULD, YOU COULD DO IT EITHER WAY. YOU CAN SPELL IT OUT IN THESE REQUIREMENTS OR YOU CAN JUST MAKE REFERENCE TO CHECK THEM OUT. HOWEVER YOU IT'S REALLY HOW THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE IT. WOULD YOU LIKE IT SPELLED OUT PERSONALLY? I WOULD [00:30:02] PERSONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE JUST REFERRED TO THE STATE LAW STATE LAWS CAN CHANGE AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO COME BACK AND REDO ALL OUR PAPERWORK. THAT'S TRUE TOO, ACTUALLY, BEST TO MAKE THAT REFERENCE AND THEN PROVIDE A HYPERLINK, RIGHT. PEOPLE CAN GO AND EXPLORE AND DIVE DEEP IF THEY, MAYBE IF THEY AGREE, IF THERE'S PARTICULAR COMPONENTS OF THAT, THAT THE COMMISSION IS, IS, WANTS TO BE AS CLEAR AND INCLUSIVE. THOSE AS THOSE ELEMENTS AS POSSIBLE. MAYBE WE CARVE THOSE OUT, BUT JUST IN GENERAL, A LINK TO THE STATE LONG AND SUPPLIES. YES, THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S HOW I WOULD NORMALLY DO IT IS I WOULD REFERENCE THE STATE LAW AND HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY THEN GOES TO THE LINK. HOPEFULLY. YEP. WHAT WE CAN DO IS WE'LL SHARE THE, UH, STATE LAW. THAT'S AFFABLE WITH YOU AFTER THE MEETING, LET Y'ALL REVIEW IT AND WE'LL COME TO THE NEXT MEETING WITH TAD'S PROPOSED SOLUTION. BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING BEYOND THAT, THAT YOU FEEL YOU NEED TO ADD, GIVEN YOUR REVIEW OF THE STATE LAW. AND THEN SECONDLY, DO THAT ONCE AGAIN, IT'S BEEN 16, 17 YEARS SINCE WE UPDATED IT. SO ANOTHER GOAL TO GET IT RIGHT IS OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE IT UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING? ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A SECOND ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED. NO MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OR MAYBE IT WAS A JORDAN. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.