Jun 17, 2025 Planning &amp; Zoning Commission

UM, SO QUESTION FIRST, JUST OUTTA CURIOSITY, WHAT'S THE BUILDING OCCUPANCY, UH, PERCENTAGE WISE? YEAH.

, MY ISSUE WITH THE PARKING'S PROBABLY OUT THE DOOR WITH THAT IN THERE.

UH, DO ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR CORY? DO WE KNOW WHAT THE FOCUS OF THAT LOCATION IS? I'M PRETTY LOUD.

DO WE KNOW WHAT THE FOCUS OF THAT LOCATION IS AS IT RELATES TO THE DIFFERENT SERVICES? OR, OR RIGHT THERE, LICENSED VOCATIONAL NURSING, ALLIED HEALTH IT SUPPORT AND CYBERSECURITY, BEAUTY AND BARBERING AND BUSINESS ENTREPRENEURSHIP.

UM, THEIR APPLICATION STATED ALL OF THEM.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY.

YEP.

WAS THAT A YES? YES, SIR.

WHAT? THAT WAS A NO.

UM, YOU SAID THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE, SO ANY CARDS FOR PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY.

HAVING HEARD, SO I HAVE TO OFFICIALLY OPEN IT UP.

I'LL OFFICIALLY OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

HAVING SEEN NONE, I WILL OFFICIALLY CLOSE FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

AND CAN I HAVE A MOTION FROM ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS? MOTION TO APPROVE.

READ THE PARAGRAPH PLEASE.

OH, I HAVE TO, YEAH.

UH, NUMBER TWO, PARAGRAPH TWO, CORRECT.

UH, HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING PRESENT, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ACTION ON THE REQUEST OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 39 39 BELTLINE ROAD, SUITE FIVE 40 AND FIVE 50, THAT IS CURRENTLY ZONED PLAN DEVELOPMENT.

THIS ORDINANCE, UH, THROUGH ORDINANCE NUMBER 0 8 5 DASH 0 2 0 TO ALLOW THE EDUCATIONAL TO ALLOW AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION CASE NUMBER 1 9 3 5 DASH U SLASH 39 AT 39 39 BELTLINE ROAD, SUITE FIVE 40 AND FIVE 40.

UH, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE, THAT A SECOND.

I SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? HAVING SEEN NONE.

MOTION CARRIES.

[3. Hold a public hearing, present, discuss, and consider action on a request to rezone a 4.7± acre property generally located north and east of Landmark Boulevard, boarding the Addison town boundary on the west and the Dallas North Tollway to the east, addressed as 14651 Dallas Parkway, from Planned Development (PD) to a new Planned Development (PD) district to allow for a development comprised of 400 multifamily dwelling units and associated private open space and common areas, through the approval of development plans and standards. Case 1925-Z/The Princeton. ]

NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING.

PRESENT, DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ACTION ON A REQUEST TO REZONE 4.7 ACRES.

ACRE PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTH AND EAST OF LANDMARK BOULEVARD.

BOARDING THE, UH, THE ADDISON TOWN BOUNDARY ON THE WEST AND THE DALLAS TORT NORTH TOLLWAY ON THE EAST.

ADDRESS OF 1 46 51 DALLAS PARKWAY.

FROM PLAN DEVELOPMENT PD TO A NEW PLAN DEVELOPMENT PD DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR A DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF 400 MULTIFAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN ASSOCIATED PRIVATE OPEN SPACE AND COMMON AREAS THROUGH THE APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND STANDARDS.

CASE NUMBER 1925 DASH Z SLASH THE PRINCETON LESLIE KNIGHT, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES.

UM, THE, THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, ITEM THREE IS, UM, REQUESTED TO BE, UM, POSTPONED UNTIL THE AUGUST 19TH, 2025 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING BY THE APPLICANT.

UM, THE APPLICANT, OR THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS STAFF, IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS PROPOSAL, UM, TO POSTPONE UNTIL THE AUGUST 19TH MEETING.

UM, IF YOU CHOOSE TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM, STAFF WILL RE-NOTICE, UM, AND GO THROUGH THE NOTICING PROCESS FOR THE AUGUST 19TH MEETING TO ENSURE THAT ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS ARE AWARE OF THE CHANGE OF OF DATE.

I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? DOES THE APPLICANT CHOOSE TO SPEAK? NO.

IT UP FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

UM, DO I HAVE TO OPEN A HEARING? YES.

WITH THAT, I'LL GIVE IT, OPEN

[00:10:01]

IS ANYONE PRESENT, LIKE TO SPEAK? HAVING SEEN NONE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

UH, SO ACTUALLY WE'RE GONNA KEEP IT OPEN AND POSTPONE IT TO THE DATE CERTAIN, UM, WE DO NOT NEED TO, SINCE WE'RE GOING TO RE-NOTICE ANYWAYS.

OH, I MISSPOKE.

IT'S OKAY.

UM, HAVING SEEN NONE, WE'RE GONNA CLOSE THE OPEN PORTION.

AND DO I HAVE A MOTION FROM ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.

I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE POSTPONE THE PRINCETON CASE NUMBER 1 9 2 5 DASH Z CASE NUMBER 1 9 2 5 DASH Z, THE PRINCETON, UNTIL THE AUGUST MEETING, OR UNTIL ANOTHER TIME, AS NOTICED BY STAFF AND THE CITY OR TOWN.

SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST PRESENT AND DISCUSS AND CONSIDER ACTION ON THE ADOPTION OF A NEW ZONING DISTRICTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE UDC, INCLUDING CHANGES TO THE TOWN OF ADDISON'S LAWS AND REGULATIONS REGARDING ZONING DISTRICTS, SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION, AND TO ADOPT NEW ZONING DISTRICTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UDC.

ANY OPPOSED? HAVING SEEN NONE, THE MOTION CARRIES ONTO OUR NEXT ITEM.

[4. Hold a public hearing, present, discuss, and consider action on the adoption of new zoning districts in accordance with the Unified Development Code (“UDC”), including changes to the Town of Addison’s laws and regulations regarding zoning districts, subdivision and development, and building and construction and to adopt new zoning districts in accordance with the UDC.]

I'LL TURN THIS OVER TO LESLIE FOR STAFF PRESENTATION.

LESLIE AND I, DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES FOR THE TOWN.

UM, SO THIS PARTICULAR ITEM IS, UM, THE PROPOSED ZONING MAP, UM, APPROVAL TO ALIGN WITH THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.

UM, THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE WAS, UM, WENT THROUGH A VERY LONG PROCESS, AS SOME OF YOU MAY RECALL, UM, KICKED OFF IN 2018 AND WAS, UM, THE CODE ITSELF WAS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL MARCH 25TH, 2025.

UH, SO WE CURRENTLY HAVE, UM, AN EXISTING CODE AS WELL AS, UM, SPECIFIC ZONING DISTRICTS THAT ARE OUTLINED AND HAVE BEEN APPROVED.

UM, THE EFFECTIVE DATE IS SET FOR SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2025, WHICH THESE NEW, UH, THE NEW UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ALL OF THE NEW STANDARDS WILL TAKE EFFECT.

SO THIS IS, UH, WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE COULD HAVE DONE A ONE STEP PROCESS, WHICH WAS ADOPTING THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, AS WELL AS UPDATING THE MAP AND ONE STEP, UM, STAFF AS WELL AS THE, IN COLLABORATION WITH OUR LEGAL COUNSEL.

AND THE CONSULTANT CHOSE TO SPLIT IT INTO TWO STEPS, AS IT WAS A VERY, UM, BIG LIFT TO TRY TO DO ALL OF THAT IN ONE SWIFT MOTION.

SO THIS, UM, THINK ABOUT THIS, UM, AS STEP TWO OF THAT ADOPTION PROCESS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.

UM, WHEN THIS PROCESS FIRST BEGAN, UM, THE CONSULTANT IN COLLABORATION WITH THE STAFF AND AS WELL AS OTHER, UM, TEAM MEMBERS FOR THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE BEGAN BUILDING THE NEW DISTRICTS FOR THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE BASED UPON OUR EXISTING CODE, OR EXCUSE ME, OUR EXISTING ZONING DISTRICTS, WHICH ARE SHOWN ON THE TOP HERE.

THE, THE NEW ZONING DISTRICTS ON THE UDC ARE SHOWN ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE.

IT WAS VERY INTENTIONALLY CREATED TO LIMIT NON-CONFORMITY AND TRANSITION OUR OLD DISTRICTS INTO NEW DISTRICTS.

IN SOME CASES, IN MANY CASES, COLLABORATE, OR EXCUSE ME, NOT COLLABORATE, CONSOLIDATE DISTRICTS.

UM, WE HAVE SEVERAL DISTRICTS THAT ARE REMAINING AS IS.

SO WHAT THAT IT MEANS IS THEY DID NOT CHANGE WITH THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND THEY'RE NOT PROPOSED TO CHANGE ON THE MAP EITHER.

WE HAVE FOUR OF THOSE, UM, THREE LEGACY DISTRICTS, APARTMENTS, UH, PD, CONDOS, CONVERSION, PD, TOWN HOME CONDOMINIUM, AND OF COURSE JUST OUR PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS.

UM, I WILL NOTE THAT THE M THREE DISTRICT IS A NEW DISTRICT THAT WAS CREATED WITH THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.

AND, UM, THERE ARE NO PROPOSED, SO THERE ARE NO PROPOSED PROPERTY THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE M THREE ON THE MAP, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

UM, HERE IS JUST A BEFORE AND AFTER, UM, STAFF DID CREATE A, UM, A TOOL.

IT'S AN ONLINE INTERACTIVE MAP THAT HAS A SLIDER BAR.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE BEFORE AND AFTER THAT IS POSTED ON THE PROJECT WEBSITE.

IT WAS ALSO INCLUDED IN THE EMAIL THAT WAS SENT OUT TO YOU ON FRIDAY WITH THE PACKET.

SO YOU CAN VIEW THAT UP CLOSE.

YOU CAN ACTUALLY SELECT SPECIFIC PROPERTIES AND IT WILL TELL YOU THE DETAILS OF THOSE.

UH, IF YOU WANT A LITTLE CLOSER LOOK AT EACH OF THEM.

UM, SO JUST SOME BIG HIGH LEVEL CHANGES.

YOU'LL SEE KIND OF ON MIDWAY, WHICH IS ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE AIRPORT, YOU'LL SEE THERE WAS A LOT OF DIFFERENT COLOR, PURPLE SHADES OF PURPLE BEFORE A LOT OF THOSE DISTRICTS, WHICH WERE VARIOUS INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS, BECAME ONE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.

SO YOU'LL SEE ON THE NEW MAP, THOSE ALL BECAME LIGHT PURPLE BECAUSE THEY ALL GOT CONSOLIDATED INTO THE SAME DISTRICT.

UM, THIS IS OUR EXISTING DISTRICTS AND EXISTING DISTRICT MAP.

UM, AND THEN HERE ARE THE PROPOSED, OR EXCUSE ME, THE APPROVED DISTRICTS AND THE PROPOSED MAP.

THERE WERE SOME AREAS OF INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE CONVERSION MATRIX.

UM, THIS MAP HIGHLIGHTS THE AREAS HIGHLIGHTED IN RED ARE PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT WERE

[00:15:01]

PROPOSED TO NOT FOLLOW THE COM, THE STRAIGHT CONVERSION MATRIX DUE TO SOME INCONSISTENCIES.

THE GREEN SHADED AREAS OR GREEN HIGHLIGHTED AREAS ARE ALSO IN THAT SAME CATEGORY.

HOWEVER, THOSE ARE PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTY THAT'S OWNED BY THE TOWN.

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE THERE.

SO THESE ARE ALL OF THE VARIOUS PROPERTIES THAT WERE INCONSISTENT AND VARY FROM THE STRAIGHT MATRIX CONVERSION.

UM, I'M GONNA, WE WENT THROUGH THESE IN DETAIL DURING THE WORK SESSION, SO I'M GONNA FLIP THROUGH THESE A LITTLE BIT MORE QUICKLY.

FEEL FREE TO ASK ME TO SLOW DOWN IF NECESSARY.

UM, THIS PARTICULAR CONVERSION, UH, WAS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

WE'RE PROPOSING COMMERCIAL GENERAL, THIS IS A SIMILAR SITUATION, OFFICE BUILDING, BUT WAS THE MATRIX CONVERSION WOULD BE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

WE'RE PROPOSING COMMERCIAL GENERAL, THE SAME SCENARIO FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

UM, IN THIS GENERAL SA, SAME AREA AT LANDMARK AND QUORUM, UM, IT WOULD BE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

WE'RE PROPOSING COMMERCIAL GENERAL.

ALL OF THESE ARE OFFICE BUILDINGS, WHICH WOULD BE A PERMITTED USE WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT.

THE NEXT PROPERTY IS THE, UM, US POST OFFICE, WHICH IS LOCATED OFF AIRPORT PARKWAY.

WITH THE MATRIX CONVERSION.

IT WOULD BE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

UM, STAFF IS PROPOSING COMMERCIAL GENERAL ONCE AGAIN TO BE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREAS.

AND THIS MAP WITH THE CONVERSION, IT, IT'S C TWO.

UM, TODAY THE CONVERSION WOULD MAKE IT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREAS AND PROPERTIES.

STAFF IS PROPOSING COMMERCIAL GENERAL.

OKAY, MOVING ON.

WE ARE TRANSITIONING NOW TO THOSE WERE ALL THE PRIVATE PROPERTIES.

WE ARE NOW TRANSITIONING TO THE, UM, UM, EXCUSE ME, LIKE THE PUB, WELL, I TAKE IT BACK.

THE DART RIGHT OF WAY IS PRIVATE OWNED.

I APOLOGIZE.

THIS IS THE NEXT SLIDE.

WE'RE TRANSITIONING .

SO THE DART, UM, RIGHT OF WAY.

WE ARE PROPOSING TO BE A, UM, TWO DIFFERENT ZONES.

IT WOULD BE THE M1 MIXED USE ZONE, AND THEN THE, IN THE AREA SURROUNDING ADDISON CIRCLE, IT WOULD BE M FOUR TO ALIGN WITH THE ADDISON CIRCLE ZONING DISTRICT, UM, THAT IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO.

IT'S THE REAL NAME IS URBAN CENTER.

AND NOW WE ARE OFFICIALLY TRANSITIONING TO PUBLIC OWNED PROPERTY OR TOWN OWNED PROPERTY.

SO THESE ARE A VARIETY OF VARIOUS, UM, WHAT CURRENTLY EXISTS AS PARKLAND OR TOWN FACILITIES THAT ARE ZONED PARKS, WHICH IS ACTUALLY DOES NOT EXIST AS A, A ZONING DISTRICT IN OUR OLD CODE.

UM, AND A PARKS DISTRICT, OR SOMETIMES PEOPLE REFER TO IT AS LIKE PUBLIC DISTRICT OR UTILITY DISTRICT.

THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT NAMES IT CAN TAKE.

UM, ONE OF THOSE WAS NOT CREATED IN THE UDC.

SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS THIS IS OUR POOL OF ZONING DISTRICTS THAT WE HAVE TO CHOOSE FROM TO APPLY TO THIS.

UM, THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY AND ALL OF THE PROPERTIES ON THIS MAP, WE, AT THIS STAGE, WE ALREADY HAVE THE CODE AND THE ZONING DISTRICTS.

SO WE DON'T HAVE, UM, THROUGH THIS CURRENT PROCESS, WHICH IS STEP TWO OF THE PROCESS, WE CAN'T, WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY AT THIS STAGE TO CREATE NEW ZONING DISTRICTS.

UM, SO THIS PARTICULAR, UM, UM, PROPOSAL IS FOR R TWO.

THIS IS, UM, BELTWAY PARK, OR COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS SAM'S CLUB PARK.

THE PROPOSED, UH, ZONING DISTRICT IS R TWO, THE SAME WITH THE AREA, UM, THE ADDISON ATHLETIC CLUB AND SURROUNDING AREA.

THE PROPOSED DISTRICT IS R TWO, WHICH ALIGNS WITH, UH, THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ADJACENT.

THE, UH, WHAT IS REDDING TRAIL AND DOME PARK IS PROPOSED TO BE R TWO AS WELL.

THE, UH, RAWHIDE PARK AND TRAIL IS PROPOSED TO BE R TWO.

THE QUORUM PARK ON QUORUM DRIVE IS PROPOSED TO BE R TWO.

THE, UM, PARKS, UH, THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE ADDISON CIRCLE DISTRICT ARE PROPOSED TO BE, UH, REZONED TO ALIGN WITH THE ADJACENT ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS, UM, M FOUR.

AND THAT WAS A DIRECT CONVERSION FROM THE CURRENT URBAN CENTER DISTRICT OR ADDISON CIRCLE ZONING DISTRICT, AS PEOPLE COMMONLY REFER TO IT AS.

UM, THE TOWN HALL BUILDING, WHICH IS THIS, WHERE WE'RE LOCATED TODAY, 5,300 BELTLINE ROAD, UM, IS PROPOSED TO BE OUR, OUR TWO, UM, VARIOUS AREAS THAT ARE, UM, TOWN OWNED PROPERTY ALONG WYNWOOD AND CELESTIAL DRIVE.

THAT INCLUDES CELESTIAL PARK, THE, UH, WHITE ROCK TRAIL TRAIL HEAD, UM, AND THE CELESTIAL PUMP STATION ARE PROPOSED TO BE, UM, R ONE, THE,

[00:20:01]

UH, SURVEYOR WATER TOWER AND, UM, PUMP STATION, AS WELL AS THE ADJACENT ENCORE EASEMENT ARE PROPOSED TO BE R TWO.

AND THAT CONCLUDES ALL OF THE VARIOUS PROPERTIES THAT WERE NOT, UM, DIRECTLY FOLLOWING THE MATRIX CONVERSION THAT WAS ORIGINALLY, UM, OUTLINED AT THE, TOWARDS THE BEGINNING OF THE UDC PROCESS AS THE DISTRICTS WERE CREATED.

UM, I DID WANT TO NOTE THAT, UM, STAFF DID PROVIDE NOTICE, UH, NOTICE WAS PROVIDED TO EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN ADDISON, UM, INFORMING THEM OF THIS PROCESS AS WELL AS IT WAS BEEN PUBLISHED IN THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS, UM, TWICE IN ANTICIPATION OF, OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING.

UM, STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY RESPONSE OR FEEDBACK TO, FOR THIS PARTICULAR PUBLIC HEARING ITEM.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR LESLIE? YEAH, I'VE GOT A COUPLE THAT WE DIDN'T GET TO IN THE WORK SESSION.

UM, SO BASED ON MY READ OF THE ZONING MAP, I WASN'T SURE IF THERE ARE ANY PLACES WHERE ADUS OR SAY DUPLEXES WOULD BE ALLOWED EITHER BY RIGHT OR BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING MAP.

ARE THERE ANY SPOTS? I KNOW THERE'S ONE SMALL R THREE, BUT THAT'S ALREADY GARDEN APARTMENTS.

ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE PROPOSED OR EXISTING? UH, THE, THE PROPOSED, THE NEW ONE.

UM, WELL, GIMME A SECOND.

I'M GONNA HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CODE NO PROBLEM.

BECAUSE I DON'T RECALL THAT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

UM, SO THAT IS UNDER ACCESSORY USES AND ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.

UM, THERE ARE, SO, UM, PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE ARE, UM, USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS, RIGHT? SO JUST BECAUSE IT'S IDENTIFIED AS A PERMITTED USE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT'S PERMITTED EVERYWHERE.

IT MUST COMPLY WITH SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS.

BUT, UM, WHAT'S CURRENTLY, UM, APPROVED IN THE UDC ALLOWS ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AS AN ACCESSORY USE IN THE R ONE, R TWO, R THREE AND M1 DISTRICTS.

OH, EXCUSE ME.

OKAY, VERY COOL.

SO, UM, YEAH, ANY, ANY PROPERTY THAT'S OWNED THAT THERE ARE SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS, WHICH IF YOU GIMME A SECOND I CAN IDENTIFY.

UM, SO JUST, UH, SOME OF THE USE SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR ADUS, UM, IT ONLY, IT'S ONLY ALLOWED AS AN ACCESSORY USE.

SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PRINCIPAL DWELLING UNIT AS THE PRIMARY USE.

SO YOU CAN ONLY HAVE A MAXIMUM OF ONE PER LOT.

UM, THEY CANNOT HAVE MORE THAN ONE BEDROOM.

UM, THE PARKING MUST BE PROVIDED ON THE LOT OR PARCEL.

IT CAN'T BE ON STREET PARKING AS AN EXAMPLE.

UM, CANNOT EXCEED 40% OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PRINCIPAL DWELLING UNIT AND, UH, CANNOT HAVE A SEPARATE ENTRANCE FROM THE PRINCIPAL DWELLING UNIT.

WHICH SHALL HAVE A SEPARATE, HAS HAS A SEPARATE EXTERIOR ENTRANCE FROM PRINCIPAL DWELLING UNIT AND MAY CONTAIN SEPARATE COOKING, SLEEPING, OR SANITARY FACILITIES.

OKAY, PERFECT.

SO, SO, SO THIS STUFF IS USABLE.

R ONE THROUGH R 1 23 AND M1.

SO, OKAY.

'CAUSE I HAD CONCERNS THERE ARE, I, I HAD MISREAD THE, THE DOCUMENT, I THOUGHT IT WAS ONLY ALLOWABLE IN R THREE AND I SAW ALMOST NO R THREE, BUT THERE IS AN ENTIRE PAGE OF SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS FOR ADUS.

SO OUTSTANDING.

THEY'RE ON PAGE 1 52 OF THE UUD C.

THOSE.

THANK YOU.

UM, OKAY.

I THINK THAT THAT ADDRESSES THE BIG ONE.

WAIT, YOU'RE RIGHT.

ACCESSORY.

YES, BUT, UM, DUPLEX WAS ALSO ONE OF THEM.

YOU'RE CORRECT IS OKAY.

AH, YEAH.

SO, SO I GET TO ASK MY SECOND QUESTION.

SORRY.

NO, YOU'RE SO, SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, A LOT OF THE MORE DENSE SINGLE FAMILY IS, IS PD.

SO I'M NOT GONNA TOUCH THAT.

BUT THERE WAS ONE THAT WAS DESIGNATED R TWO RIGHT BEHIND THE ATHLETIC CLUB, I BELIEVE, KIND OF SOME OF THOSE PLOTS.

IS THERE ANY REASON WE STUCK WITH R TWO HERE? UM, OVER, DO YOU MEAN HERE? YEAH.

THE ONE RIGHT BEHIND THE ATHLETIC CLUB THERE.

SO THAT, UM, SO THIS IS THE CURRENT ZONING MAP ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE.

IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED MXR.

YES.

THE MXR OR THE R TWO W WAS CREATED FROM THE MXR.

I SEE.

SO, SO IT'S A FUNCTIONAL NOTE, NO CHANGE.

SO, SO THE INTENT OF, SO THE MXR, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE READ IT, IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING, BUT IT ALLOWS TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOME.

IT ALLOWS ZERO, IT ALLOWS PATIO HOMES, UHHUH, , AND ZERO LOT LINE HOMES.

THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR.

UM, IN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, HOW THEY ARE, UM, ALLOWED, THERE'S VERY, VERY SLIGHT SETBACK DIMENSIONAL STANDARD DIFFERENCES.

AND SO THE, WE TOOK THE MXR AND IN SOME WAYS SIMPLIFIED IT AS FROM A USER PERSPECTIVE, CREATED THE R TWO DISTRICT.

SO IT'S MEANT THE R TWO DISTRICT IS MEANT TO ACCOMMODATE THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN SO THAT THESE HOMES DID NOT BECOME NON-COMPLIANT OR NONCONFORMING.

RIGHT.

CONCE THE, THE INTENTION OF KIND OF BEING CONSERVATIVE WITH THESE CHANGES HERE.

'CAUSE THAT MAKES MORE ISSUES UPFRONT.

SO, YEAH, NO, I GET IT.

I, I, I KINDA

[00:25:01]

SO, UM, GOOD.

AND I THINK WE ADJUST EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE WORK SESSION.

UH, SO WE'RE ALL GOOD.

THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS? HAVING SEEN NONE? I OPENED THIS UP FOR PUBLIC PORTION OF OUR MEETING OR THIS AGENDA ITEM, COREY, ANY ONLINE? OKAY.

HAVING SEEN NO APPLICANTS FOR, OR, UH, PEOPLE WANTING TO SPEAK FOR PUBLIC PORTION? I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC PORTION.

DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE COMMISSIONERS? I HAVE A MOTION.

IF YOU'LL PLEASE BEAR WITH ME.

FOR THE SAKE OF FURTHER PROTECTING OUR PARKS.

UH, IN THE FUTURE, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE OR MOVE THAT WE TABLE THIS VOTE UNTIL A TIME WHICH ALLOWS STAFF TO INVEST OR RATHER INVESTIGATE AND RECONSIDER CREATING A PARKS DISTRICT OR ZONE FOR THE PARKS, INCLUDING NORTH ADDISON PARK, BELTWAY PARK, ATH, UH, THE ATHLETIC CLUB, LES LAKES, LINEAR PARK, DOME PARK, RAWHIDE PARK, AND TRAIL QUORUM PARK, ADDISON CIRCLE, PARK TOWN HALL, CELESTIAL PARK, WHITE ROCK CREEK PARK SLASH TRAIL, AND CELESTIAL PUMP STATION.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

ALL, ALL IN NOT IN FAVOR.

NAY, NAY, NAY MOTION DOES NOT PASS.

A VOTE NEEDS FOUR VOTES.

DO I HAVE ANOTHER MOTION FROM ANY OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS? OH, SHOOT, I'M GONNA HAVE TO READ THAT WITH MY THROAT TODAY.

UM, JUST THE CASE NUMBER OR THE, JUST THE CASE NUMBER.

THE, NOT THE ALL, JUST THE BACK HALF OF WHAT YOU'RE, OKAY.

PERFECT.

SO I MOVE TO APPROVE, UH, READ THAT SHORT STATEMENT.

RIGHT? PERFECT.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE, THE PROPOSED ZONING MAP.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

ALL OPPOSED? OPPOSED? OPPOSED.

UH, THAT'S THREE IN FAVOR TO OPPOSE.

UH, YOU, WE HAVE TO HAVE FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES IN ORDER, ORDER, NEED TO DO NEXT ORDER TO PASS SOMETHING.

WE, WELL, I THINK TOM'S IT'S DEEMED WELL, I MEAN, IT'S DEEMED FAILED.

IT'S BEEN, IT'S FAILED.

SO THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR ANOTHER MOTION.

NOT SURE QUITE SO I WOULD MOTION THAT THE TOWN PRESENT, UM, OPTIONS AS TO ADDRESS WHAT IS PERCEIVED AS A DEFICIENCY AROUND PARK, UM, AND PRESENT A NUMBER OF OPTIONS THAT THEY THINK MIGHT BE AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE EXISTING.

UH, I I'M SORRY, CAN WE, CAN WE PAUSE JUST FOR THE RECORD TO KEEP IT CLEAN? SO, UH, COUNCIL OR THIS COMMISSIONER WAS MAKING A MOTION.

UH, IF, IF YOU DON'T MIND JUST LETTING HIM FINISH THE MOTION AND THEN IT, AND THEN YOU CAN DISCUSS IF, IF THAT WORKS FOR EVERYBODY.

I'M NOT SURE IF THIS WOULD BE REDUNDANT AS TO WHAT'S SAID.

I'D LIKE TO RETURN, I, I'D LIKE TO RETURN THIS TO STAFF AND REQUEST THAT THEY DELIVER ALTERNATIVES FOR DEALING WITH PARK ZONING, UM, THAT THEY THINK MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE.

UM, AND NOT SIMPLY USE SURROUNDING ZONING, UH, AS A DEFAULT.

UH, DENISE, IS THERE ROOM FOR DISCUSSION HERE BEFORE WHAT? UM, I DON'T, UH, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS A MOTION.

WHAT, OR WAS THAT, I GUESS THAT WAS A MOTION.

A MOTION TO TABLE INDEFINITELY.

MY MOTION WAS TO RETURN IT TO STAFF AND ASK THEM TO PRESENT ALTERNATIVES FOR, UH, HANDLING THE PARKS.

SO, JUST TO CLARIFY, IT WOULD BE TO TABLE THE ITEM TO GIVE DIRECTION TO STAFF.

BACK STEP IN REGARDS TO, TO THIS, THIS INFORMATION.

AND THEN TO, TO MAKE A FURTHER MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE THAT.

SO, UM, OH, SORRY.

I'LL OF THE MOTION.

NO, IT'S ALL GOOD.

ARE WE ALLOWED TO SPEAK TO IT BEFORE WE SECOND THAT? YEAH, THAT.

DO WE HAVE SOME QUESTIONS? CAN WE DO THAT NOW OR DO WE HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT MOTION FIRST? 'CAUSE I THINK THERE'S SOME CLARITY ABOUT WHAT HE, HIS MOTION, UM, FROM YOU.

I THINK, I GUESS I WOULD CALL FOR A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? WELL, YOU CAN DISCUSS IN BETWEEN THE VOTE.

OH, OKAY.

YEAH, LET'S DISCUSS.

OKAY, GO AHEAD.

UM, SO WE, WE APPROVED THIS U-D-C-A-A COUPLE MONTHS BACK WITHOUT THE PARKS DISTRICT.

I JUST CORRECT.

SO, SO WE, WE, WE SAID WHAT WE HAVE IS OKAY.

CORRECT.

SO THIS DOES KIND OF, KIND OF MAKE THE COMMISSION KINDA HAVE A BIT OF A

[00:30:01]

UM, THIS COULD COST THE TOWN SOME TIME, SOME MONEY, UM, FOR A CONCERN THAT IS NOT ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THE TOP 50 OF MY CONCERNS FOR ADDISON AS FAR AS, UH, SELLING OF PUBLIC LANDS FOR REDEVELOPMENT.

AND IN THE WORST CASE THAT SOME DEVELOPER BUYS OUT EVERYTHING, OR MONTY BENNETT WANTS TO MOVE INTO THE OLD FINANCE CENTER, YOU, YOU'RE GETTING ONE HOUSE OR STUFF THAT IS ALREADY IN CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I DON'T THINK OUR PARKS ARE IN ANY DANGER HERE.

I'M OKAY WITH THE MOTION AS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN, UM, AND THE ZONING MAP AS PROPOSED.

UM, I'D LIKE TO CHIME IN, LESLIE, IF WE, IF WE DO VOTE TO TABLE THIS, PROVIDE, I WOULD ASSUME THAT YOU GUYS WENT THROUGH AN IN-DEPTH STUDY AS FAR AS WHAT, WHAT YOUR OPTIONS WERE TO ZONE THIS PROPERTY.

YOU SAID YOU WENT AROUND IT FIVE TIMES OR SO? WELL, UH, YES.

DURING THE, THE CREATION OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS, WE WENT BACK AND FORTH AND DURING THAT WHOLE TIME THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, THE FORETHOUGHT OF HOW ARE WE APPLYING THIS TO REAL PROPERTY IN ADDISON.

WHAT WAS THE TIMEFRAME OF THAT? WAS THAT ONE MEETING OR IS THAT MULTIPLE, OR IS THAT, THAT WAS OVER THE COURSE OF THREE AND A HALF YEARS.

THREE AND A HALF YEARS.

AND THEN IF IT IS TABLED TONIGHT, UM, WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE TIMETABLE FOR THE TOWN AND, UM, SHEPHERDING THIS ACROSS? SO I THINK THE, THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE HERE IS THAT, UM, AND TYLER BRIEFLY POINTED THIS OUT, IS WE ALREADY HAVE A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT'S BEEN APPROVED.

SO WE HAVE THE CODE, NOW WE'RE APPLYING THE CODE TO THE ZONING DISTRICT.

SO WE DO NOT HAVE A PARKS DISTRICT.

IT DOES NOT EXIST.

HERE'S, THIS IS OUR POOL OF ZONING DISTRICTS THAT WE HAVE TO CHOOSE FROM.

THAT IN A PARKS DOES NOT EXIST RIGHT? TODAY.

UM, AND SO IN ORDER TO CREATE A PARKS DISTRICT, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REOPEN THE UDC.

UM, THAT MEANS RE NOTICING THE ENTIRE TOWN AGAIN.

THAT ALSO MEANS, UM, GOING BACK THROUGH THE PROCESS, WHICH PROBABLY RE-ENGAGING A CONSULTANT TO DO THAT, WHICH ALSO MEANS PROBABLY HAVING TO GO GET ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO DO THAT AS WELL.

AS FAR AS TIME TABLE, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, BECAUSE THAT COULD BE, THAT COULD BE AS SHORT AS FOUR TO SIX MONTHS.

OR IF THERE ARE OTHER ITEMS THAT GET, I'M GONNA SAY REASSESSED THAT COULD BE MUCH LONGER.

AND THEN THE EFFECT, LIKE WE WOULD, SO THE OTHER THING TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT IS THE EFFECTIVE DATE FOR THE UDC IS SEPTEMBER 1ST.

IF WE DO NOT HAVE PROPERTY THAT IS ZONED TO MATCH THE ZONING DISTRICTS WITHIN THE UDC SEPTEMBER 1ST, WE DO NOT HAVE ZONING.

PROTOCOL IN, I DON'T THINK, BUT THINK YOU ONLY HAVE A PARTIAL MAP IS WHAT YOU'VE TOLD ME.

SO IN SUMMARY, THE BOAT SAILED.

WE HAVE A DOCUMENT THAT WE DON'T HAVE A PARKS, UM, UH, ZONING.

ZONING MM-HMM .

AND SO THEREFORE WHAT STAFF DID IS APPLIED THE BEST CASE SCENARIO AS FAR AS PROTECTING THAT LAND WITH THE ADJACENT LAND.

I, I'M CLEAR.

THANK YOU.

SO IS THERE A, THERE'S CURRENTLY A TABLE AND A SECOND TO POSTPONE, UM, OR EXCUSE ME, TO TABLE FOR FUTURE RECONSIDERATION.

UM, IS THERE A, IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE ZONING TOOLBOX THAT THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD BE OKAY WITH AS FAR AS REZONING THIS THAT MIGHT ALSO MINIMIZE POTENTIAL ISSUES? SO LIKE AN R THREE SITUATION FOR THE PARK, OR THAT WAY NOBODY'S GONNA WANT TO TRY TO FIGHT TO BUILD TWO HOMES ON ADDISON CIRCLE PARK, RIGHT? SO THAT EVEN FURTHER DISINCENTIVIZES.

SO MY, MY QUESTION IS THIS, CAN THE ZONING THAT YOU'VE APPLIED TO ALL OTHERS, THE, THE ONLY ISSUE HAS BEEN FOR WHAT IS CURRENTLY TOWN OR PARK INDICATED.

SO FOR THOSE RESIDENTS THAT HAVE BEEN HERE FOREVER, YOU LOOKED AT THE ZONING MAP.

THERE'S A, THERE'S A PARKS ZONE THAT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED, ACCEPTED AS THE NORM.

UM, CAN ALL OF THE OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED IN THE UDC AND HAS BEEN PROPOSED IN THIS.

SO COULD WE ADOPT THIS ZONING MAP ABSENT THOSE PARK ZONES TO ALLOW YOU TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BULK AND THE MAJORITY AND TO, UM, SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING FOR ZONING TO BE REMOVED FROM ANY PUBLIC OWNED PROPERTY? IS THAT I'M, I'M ASKING FOR THE ZONING TO BE HELD IN ABEYANCE FOR THOSE PARK, THOSE, THOSE PROPERTIES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY MARKED AS PARKS UNTIL SUCH TIME AS A PLAN COULD BE PUT TOGETHER FOR HOW TO ZONE THEM AS SUCH.

SO YOU COULD APPLY EVERY OTHER ZONING IN YOUR, YOUR AREA.

SO WE, SO HE'S ASKING FOR PARTIAL, PARTIAL MAP ZONING

[00:35:01]

SO I'M NOT CHANGING THE STATUS QUO.

YOU'VE TOLD ME THAT THOSE, THOSE ZONES DON'T EXIST.

YOU'VE SAID THERE'S NO ZONING CODE FOR THE PARKS.

RIGHT.

BUT THAT THE ZONING MAP THAT'S, THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING HAS A CODE ON, I MEAN, HAS A ZONE ON THEM.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO APPROVE.

SO, SO I, SO IT'S, IT'S A WHOLE MAP THAT WE'RE EITHER APPROVING SHE CAN'T BREAK IT UP.

WELL, SO I MEAN, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT SHE CAN DO.

LAWYERS, SORRY.

FROM, FROM WHAT I, SO I THINK THIS IS WHAT I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE SAYING.

I'M JUST GONNA REPEAT SO I, TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR, YOU'RE ESSENTIALLY SAYING REC POTENTIALLY RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE MAP AS IS SANDS ANY ZONING APPLIED TO PUBLIC PROPERTY? I, THAT'S, I'M ASKING IF THAT'S POSSIBLE.

I DON'T, I'M NOT, I'M NOT PROPOSING ANYTHING.

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE COULDN'T.

IF YOU ALREADY HAVE A ZONING MAP MM-HMM .

THAT HAS PARKS THAT YOU SAY DON'T EXIST AS A ZONE DON'T EXIST IN, IN CODE THAT HAD BEEN IN PLACE FOR AT LEAST OVER 10 YEARS.

YES.

OVER 10 YEARS.

UH, UM, THAT WE WOULD SIMPLY SAY THAT IS NOT PROPERLY ADDRESSED AS YET.

IT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.

BUT WE, WE ADOPT EVERY OTHER ZONE.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

SO, LESLIE, DIDN'T YOU SAY THAT THERE'S NO, IN THE CURRENT, UH, ZONING, THERE'S NO PARKS, THERE'S NO CORRECT.

IT'S A DESIGNATION THAT GOT ADDED ON OUR ZONING MAP, BUT THERE'S NO DESIGNATION TODAY IN OUR, IN OUR ZONING CODE.

IN, IN THE NEW, IN THE NEW ONE AND IN THE NEW ONE AS WELL.

SO TECHNICALLY, I MEAN, I'M GONNA HAVE TO CON DEFER TO LEGAL, BUT TECHNICALLY WE COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH A MAP THAT DID NOT APPLY ANY ZONING TO PUBLIC PROPERTY, I BELIEVE, WHICH IS THE SAME AS WHAT WE HAD, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU HAVE REPRESENTED.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TODAY.

WELL, YEAH.

YES AND NO.

WE HAVE ZONING.

WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.

A, A, A DISTINCTION WITHOUT DIFFERENCE.

, .

UM, SO I'M NOT ASKING TO CHANGE THE STATUS QUO.

I'M ASKING TO ALLOW YOU MM-HMM .

LOOK, I RECOGNIZE A LOT OF WORK HERE.

I RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS NOT AN EASY PROCESS.

I RECOGNIZE THAT ALL THE HISTORY IS NOT CLEAR.

UM, I'M ASKING FOR MORE TIME TO CONSIDER WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE PARKS.

UM, BUT I DON'T, I I ALSO DON'T WANT TO BE AN IMPEDIMENT TO THE PROCESS MOVING FORWARD SINCE 99% OF THIS, UM, IS, IS FINE.

I'M, I'M NOT QUESTIONING THE MAJORITY OF IT.

SO I WOULD LIKE A BETTER PLAN AROUND ZONE AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.

SHORT OF SAYING FINE.

IF YOU, IF THERE'S NO OTHER WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THAT, THEN GO BACK AND FIGURE IT OUT BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT.

BUT I'M HAPPY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE, BUT VAST MAJORITY OF THIS, IF THERE'S A WAY WE COULD FIGURE TO DO THAT.

DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, SARAH? I BROKE MY BRAIN.

UM, I, NO, IT'S, I I HAVE TO SAY IT'S A QUESTION I'VE NEVER HEARD BEFORE AND I WANNA MAKE SURE I FULLY UNDERSTAND IT BEFORE I START ANSWERING ANYTHING.

SO WHAT YOU, WHAT, WHICH I'M ALSO GONNA POINT OUT, THIS IS NOT THE MOTION ON THE TABLE, BUT WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH VOTING ON IS YOU WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE ANY ZONING DESIGNATIONS FROM THE AREAS THAT ARE PARKS.

DOES EVERYONE AGREE TO THAT TODAY? DESIGNATION WOULD THEN APPROVE THIS AND, AND, AND WHAT WOULD WE BE DOING WITH THEM? WE WOULD GO BACK AND LOOK AT HOW TO EITHER CREATE A ZONE OR ADDRESS THOSE DIFFERENTLY THAN ADOPTING THE ZONINGS THAT WE HAVE THAT ARE, ARE.

SO I'M JUST GONNA PAUSE YOU RIGHT THERE.

I DUNNO.

SO IF, IF, IF THAT WERE POSSIBLE, WOULD THAT NOT PUT YOU GUYS BACK IN THE SAME PLACE THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF CHANGING THAT? 'CAUSE THE ZONING HAS BEEN PUT THERE CURRENTLY.

AND SO IT WOULD BE REOPENING DOING ALL OF THE THINGS THAT YOU PREVIOUSLY STATED.

CORRECT.

BUT, UM, I THINK IS WHAT ALAN YE YES.

BUT WHAT ALAN HAD MENTIONED IS THAT THAT WOULD NOT HINDER ANY OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES.

IT WOULD ONLY TECHNICALLY APPLY TO THOSE THAT REMOVED THE DESIGNATION.

BUT I GUESS THE, THE OTHER THING IS, THIS IS MY UNDERSTANDING, THIS IS WHERE THE ATTORNEY NEEDS TO, TO CONFER, IS IF YOU REMOVE ZONING, THERE ARE NO RULES.

YES, I WOULD, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

IT'S A RISK.

I I UNDERSTAND.

BUT WHAT YOU'VE TOLD ME IS THERE'S NO RULES TODAY.

I'VE NOT AT WHAT YOU HAVE TOLD ME IS YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE ZONING IS ON THOSE PROPERTIES THAT ARE TOWN OWNED.

A ZONING BOARD, I, I THINK WE CAN APPLY ZONING IN PART OR IN WHOLE.

SO, AND THAT YOU AND THAT HAVE BEEN UNDERSTOOD, IF YOU WILL, AN IMPLIED CONTRACT WITH THE RESIDENTS OF ADDISON THAT THEY'RE PARKS THAT, AND THAT ZONING MAP HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR DECADES.

I'M SAYING BEFORE WE CHANGE THAT AND SAY NO ADDISON RESIDENCE, THOSE AREN'T PARKS MM-HMM .

THEY'RE NOT ZONED AS PARKS THAT WE HAVE A BETTER EXAMINATION OF SOLELY THAT ISSUE.

I DON'T KNOW.

WE, AS

[00:40:01]

I DON'T THINK WE ARE RESTRICTED FROM SAYING, UH, WE DO THIS ALL THE TIME.

WE SAY WE'RE GONNA ZONE THIS PARCEL OR GIVE A PD OR THOSE.

SO WE'RE ZONE, WE'RE WE'RE APPLYING THE ZONING MAP TO 99% WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WHAT HAS BEEN HISTORICALLY DESIGNATED AS PARKS MM-HMM .

AND THAT WE WILL GO BACK AND EXAMINE THAT ISSUE.

SO THIS STILL, THIS REMOVES THE TIME PRESSURE FOR THE ZONING MAP IF IT'S HYPOTHETICALLY POSSIBLE.

BUT THE COSTS AND ALL THE ASSOCIATED PROCESSES WOULD STILL REMAIN CORRECT.

AND, UM, LET'S, AND I THINK THERE, I, I DON'T THINK IT ACTUALLY, I THINK IT SOLVES A VERY SHORT TERM PROBLEM OR ISSUE, BUT NOT LONG TERM.

BECAUSE IF IT HAS NO ZONING, THEN IT HAS NO REQUIREMENTS.

SO IF, LET'S SAY LIKE VERY HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO, THIS, THIS MAP AS PROPOSED, GETS APPROVED SAND ZONING ON ANY PARK OWNED PROPERTY.

SO WE REMOVE ZONING DESIGNATION AND THEN WE, IT GETS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL AND THEN WE GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO TRY TO CREATE A PARKS DISTRICT OR TRY TO IDENTIFY SOMETHING ELSE.

AND NOTHING EVER COMES OF THAT.

AND THOSE DON'T HAVE ZONING FOR MANY YEARS OR A YEAR, DOESN'T MATTER THE TIME PERIOD.

AND CITY COUNCIL SELLS THEM.

WHOEVER BUYS THEM THEN HAS NO RESTRICTIONS AND CAN DO ABSOLUTELY WHATEVER THEY WANT.

AND SO FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, THAT WOULD BE WHAT I'M HEARING FROM BOTH OF YOU GUYS IS THE IMPORTANCE OF PROTECTING A PAR A PARK.

IF YOU REMOVE THE ZONING, THE LEGAL, THE LEGAL LIABILITY IS GREAT.

AND THIS YEAH.

YOU ESSENTIALLY SAY WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ANY RULES THEN.

AND ITS SO IN TERMS OF RISK, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED TO BE AWARE OF THAT, IS THAT THE MOTION ON THE TABLE? NO, NO, NO.

THOSE ARE MY LEGAL COMMENTS.

THE, THE MOTION.

I CAN'T MAKE MOTIONS.

WE'VE GONE OFF FOR TIME.

THE SO TO BE, TO BE CLEAR, AND I DID, OH, SO SORRY.

THE MOTION ON THE TABLE, UM, ALAN, EXCUSE ME, UM, MADE THE MOTION TO TABLE FOR FUTURE RECONSIDERATION OF THIS ITEM.

AND YOU, UM, JAMIE HAD SECONDED THAT AND THERE'S BEEN NO VOTE ON THAT PARTICULAR, WELL, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE COUNCIL IF WE MOVE TO TABLE IT? CAN THEY DISCUSS IT IN THEIR AGENDA? UM, AND TO PROVE IT? NO.

SO IT HAS TO, THERE HAS TO BE SOME ACTION BY, WELL, IT HAS, IT HAS TO BE A, UM, A RECOMMENDATION FROM P AND Z.

AND SO, UM, WE'RE IN A BIT OF A STALEMATE HERE.

'CAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOUR, UM, AFFIRMATIVE VOTES IN ORDER TO PASS A MOTION.

UM, AND SO THERE WERE, WE'VE HAD TWO ON BOTH SIDES OF THE, OF THE ISSUE.

TWO TO THREE AND THREE TO TWO.

UM, RIGHT ON.

SO, SO NOW IF WE SAY HYPOTHETICALLY VOTE ON A MOTION AND APPROVE IT TO NOT RECOMMEND AS IT WERE, THAT WOULD MOVE FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL AS WE DON'T RECOMMEND IT AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO OVERRIDE IT WITH A STRONGER MAJORITY.

CORRECT? UH, Y SO IF, I MEAN, I'M GONNA RESTATE WHAT YOU JUST SAID.

SO IF A MOTION TO DENY THIS MAP SURE.

GETS APPROVED BY A, IN THIS CASE, A FOUR TO ONE VOTE, UM, IN THIS PARTICULAR SCENARIO, OR A FIVE TO ZERO VOTE, DOESN'T MATTER.

UM, THEN IT WOULD YES, GO TO CITY COUNCIL AS A RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE IT, WHAT IS IT? FIVE OR SIX? THE SUPER MAJORITY? YES.

SO I BELIEVE SUPER MAJORITY SIX, CORRECT.

SIX OF SEVEN.

AH, OKAY.

UH, OKAY, LET'S TAKE A VOTE ON, UH, THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE TABLE.

UH, THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE.

THOSE OPPOSED NA NAY.

THREE TO FIVE MOTION FAILS.

MOTION FAILS.

SO DO WE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION? SO I HAD, I HAD ASKED A QUESTION MM-HMM .

WHICH I DON'T THINK, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD DO THIS, BUT COULD WE ADOPT, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S, IF WE THINK IT'S, COULD WE ADOPT THE MAP SANS THE, UH, ADJUDICATION OR I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY IT.

UM, DETERMINATION OF HOW TO ZONE PARKS.

COULD WE DO THAT? I AS A, I BELIEVE THAT IS A POSSIBLE THING TO DO, BUT THAT IS POSSIBLE.

I THINK THE CONVERSATION RELATED TO THAT IS THAT POTENTIALLY OPENS IT UP FOR MUCH GREATER LIABILITY THAN ANY, LIKE THEN ANY OTHER, I DON'T SAY ANY OTHER SCENARIO, BUT THEN ANY OF THE OTHER MOTIONS OR SCENARIOS WE'VE HAD ON THE I UNDERSTAND TABLE.

HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN DESIGNATED AS PARK.

THE SAME PROTECTIONS THAT, THAT ARE BEING ARGUED FOR ADOPTION WOULD APPLY IN THIS PLACE.

YOU WOULD STILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE CITY COUNCIL TO SELL THE LAND.

YOU'D STILL HAVE ALL, ALL THAT OTHER PROCESS THAT WOULD NOT ALLOW THAT LAND TO GO INTO PRIVATE HANDS ANYWAY.

WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE, THE LAND OWNED BY ADDISON.

SO MY MOTION WOULD BE TO ADOPT THE ZONING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF TOWN OWNED LAND THAT

[00:45:01]

AND IT WOULD HAVE NO, NO ZONING.

IT WOULD HAVE THE SAME ZONING IT HAS TODAY.

UH, WE CANNOT DO THAT.

'CAUSE WE DON'T, IT DOESN'T EXIST.

WE DO NOT HAVE A DISTRICT THAT'S OKAY.

SO THEN, SO THEN WITHOUT ZONING TO BE DETERMINED AT A FUTURE DATE, THAT'S NOT A BINDING THING THOUGH.

WE CAN'T, CAN, CAN WE SAY, OH, THEY BETTER DO IT IN THE FUTURE.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? IF NO SECOND, THEN THE MOTION FAILS.

I HEAR NO SECOND MOTION FAILS.

LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT.

I, I, UH, I THINK WE'VE GOT THREE, ACTUALLY, I FOUND IT.

WE'VE GOT THREE ISSUES HERE, RIGHT? SO EITHER SCENARIO ONE, WE APPROVE THIS, UM, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT PARKS COULD BE REDEVELOPED AND SOLD IF SOLD BY THE TOWN.

A VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY SMALL ONE.

TWO, WE APPROVE IT WITH THE NO ZONING.

SOMEBODY COULD BUILD A MULTIPLEX ON THE OLD FINANCE BUILDING.

UM, MAYBE I CAN GET THE MAYOR TO SELL IT TO ME FOR $5 AND, YOU KNOW, WORK IT OUT.

OR THREE IF WE DO IT, UM, IF WE DO THE, FIND US A WAY TO SET UP THE PARKS DISTRICT THING THAT COSTS TIME, TAXPAYER MONEY, ET CETERA.

UH, THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN A SIX YEAR THING.

UH, I THINK I, I THINK WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH, WITH PRETTY GOOD CONFIDENCE THAT THIS IS, THIS IS AT, AT THE VERY LEAST, THE LEAST WORST WAY WE COULD GO ABOUT THIS.

IF WE JUST APPROVE IT AS IS THE PARKS WILL BE PROTECTED BY PEOPLE LIKE US AND THE FUTURE PEOPLE WHO HAVE STEWARDSHIP OVER THE TOWN.

WELL, THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS, IS IT REALLY UP TO US TO SAY THAT YOU CAN NEVER DO ANYTHING WITH THIS PROPERTY EXCEPT HAVE A PARK ON IT.

I MEAN, REALLY FOREVER.

I, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WHERE THE, IF THE CITY COUNCIL DECIDED AND THE, AND THEY WOULD'VE TO GO, I WOULD ASSUME THEY WOULD FOLLOW, UM, THE, THE, UH, UH, VOTES OF THE, UH, THE TOWN THAT IF THEY WANTED TO SELL IT AND THE THE TOWN WAS READY TO SELL IT, THEN THEY WOULD SELL IT.

BUT OTHERWISE, WHILE THERE'S A DESIRE FOR PARKS, IT'S GONNA STAY.

A PARK DOES.

THE TOWN DOESN'T HAVE TO GET APPROVAL FOR SELLING.

THAT'S IN THE POWER OF THEM.

THEY DON'T COME BACK FOR ANY KIND OF A VOTE TO SELL PROPERTY.

I MEAN, IF THEY CORRECT.

FOR, FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, NO.

FOR TOWN OWNED LAND, THEY CAN SELL IT AT ANY TIME.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME FOR APPROVAL FOR THAT.

UM, NO.

ANY PUBLIC, ANY PUBLIC LAND THAT'S DISPOSED MY UNDERSTANDING OF STATE LAW IS ANY DISPOSAL OF PUBLIC PROPERTY REQUIRES A, YOU CAN, I CANNOT CONFIRM OR DENY THAT.

UM, IT DEPENDS.

WELL, AGAIN, I, I I THINK THE PROTECTION IS, IS THAT AS LONG AS THE TOWN WANTS IT TO BE A PARK, IT'LL BE A PARK.

AND THEN THE PROTECTION OF THE SURROUNDING, UH, OWNERS IS THAT IF THE, IF THE TOWN DECIDED, WELL, WE WANNA SELL THAT PART TOMORROW, THEY DECIDED FOR WHATEVER REASON THEY WANT TO OR HAVE TO, THEN THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS ARE PROTECTED BY THE ZONING THAT'S THERE.

I, I GUESS, AND I AGREE WITH YOU, AND I GUESS THAT'S WHY I WOULD OPEN IT UP TO THESE GUYS TO, TO EXPLAIN TO ME THE APPREHENSION OF, IN THE EXAMPLE OF THIS BUILDING, WHAT'S THE HESITATION WITH WHY YOU AREN'T OKAY WITH R ONE AT THIS PROPERTY? I, I'M, I'M NOT, IF THE QUESTION IS, TO ME I'M NOT OPPOSED OR TO ANY PARTICULAR PROPERTY, THE ANSWER IS WHY WOULD I WANT TO ZONE, FOR EXAMPLE, ADDISON CIRCLE AS M FOUR THREE OR FOUR, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH THE NUMBER IS.

WHY WOULD I, WHY WOULD I CHOOSE TO, TO DO THAT? PARTICULARLY WHEN WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF REDEVELOPING ADDISON CIRCLE.

AND I DON'T KNOW ALL OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF THAT.

SO IN GOOD CONSCIENCE, REPRESENTING WHAT I UNDERSTAND THE TOWN RESIDENTS WANT, I DON'T THINK IF I WENT AND ASKED THEM AGAIN IN ISOLATION, WE'RE GOING TO REZONE ADDISON PARK AS MULTI-USE.

THAT'S, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING.

AM I CORRECT? THAT'S WHAT THIS PROPOSAL WAS? CORRECT.

AND IF YOU LOOK IN THE, THE LAND USE TABLE, IT ALLOWS PARKS BOTH PASSIVE AND ACTIVE PARKS.

AND THERE'S DEFINITIONS FOR THOSE IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS.

SO A PARK IS STILL A PERMITTED USE.

UM, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT JUST BECAUSE IT'S ZONED MIXED USE, IT NEEDS TO BE MIXED USE.

I THINK WHAT HE'S SAYING IS THE TOWN SELLS ADDISON PARK.

DOES THE DEVELOPER HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING FOR APPROVALS? OR DO THEY HAVE RIGHT.

TO BUILD

[00:50:01]

IT? I MEAN, IT DEPENDS.

ARE THEY ZONING UNDER THE M FOUR THEN THEY COULD POTENTIALLY DO IT BY RIGHT.

IF THEY MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS.

YEAH, THAT'S, I MEAN THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S HIS BIG CONCERN WITH THAT ONE.

THAT'S WHAT I MEAN OUTTA YOUR STATEMENT THERE.

I WILL, I WILL SAY IT'S NOT, UM, LIKE FARMER'S BRANCH DOES NOT HAVE A PARKS DISTRICT.

SO THEY, THEY OPERATE SIMILAR TO WHAT'S PROPOSED IS THEIR PARKLAND OR CITY HALL, FOR EXAMPLE, IS ZONED AS ONE OF THEIR BASE DISTRICTS.

IT'S NOT, SO IT'S NOT UNCOMMON.

I JUST, I'M JUST POINTING OUT, IT'S NOT UNCOMMON FOR CITIES TO HAVE A PARKS DISTRICT, BUT IT'S ALSO NOT UNCOMMON FOR THEM NOT TO.

SO LET ME THROW SOME POTENTIAL COMPROMISES OUT THERE TO ASK QUESTIONS.

SO R ONE IS PROBABLY THE THING I THINK ALL OF US WOULD BE RELATIVELY COMFORTABLE WITH.

WHAT IS THE RAMIFICATIONS OF ADDISON PARK IF YOU MAKE IT AN R ONE? SO VERSUS THE M FOUR.

SO IN THAT PARTICULAR INSTANCE, THERE IS, UM, SO THERE IS WHAT'S CALLED IN THE UDCA NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION ZONE.

AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS YOU HAVE A BASE SETBACK IN ALL, IN ALL OF YOUR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

YOU KNOW, UM, I BELIEVE IT'S LIKE 20, 25 FEET IN SOME OF THE, LIKE R ONE, ET CETERA.

WELL, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION ZONE WAS CREATED AS A, THINK OF IT AS A STAIR STEP.

SO THE TALLER YOUR BUILDING, THE GREATER YOUR SETBACK.

'CAUSE WE WANNA PROTECT OUR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE THIS BIG BUILDING APART, ESPECIALLY, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS TYPES OF USES.

IT COULD BE AN OFFICE BUILDING, IT COULD BE AN APARTMENT BUILDING RIGHT ON TOP OF YOUR SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

SO WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION ZONE, ONCE AGAIN, THE TALLER THE BUILDING, THE GREATER THE SETBACK.

SO IF WE WERE TO HYPOTHETICALLY REZONE THIS ADDISON CIRCLE PARK, UM, BECKERT PARK, UM, ANY, ANY OF THESE AREAS, UM, THE NEW TOWN HALL BUILDING OR THE FORMER CONFERENCE CENTER TO AN R ONE, R TWO OR R THREE DISTRICT, REGARDLESS OF IF THEY ARE A RESIDENTIAL OR REGARDLESS IF THEY ARE USED AS A RESIDENTIAL HOME, THEY'RE ZONED R ONE, R TWO, R THREE, THAT NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION ZONE APPLIES.

AND THAT MEANS THAT ALL OF THE SURROUNDING BUILDINGS HERE, HERE, HERE ALL BECOME NON-CONFORMING.

WHICH IN THIS SCENARIO WOULD INCLUDE A TOWN OWNED BUILDING.

THE NEW EVENTUAL TOWN HALL, THE CONFERENCE CENTER WOULD NOW BE NON-CONFORMING.

SO WE WOULD BE FREE, UH, NOT IF, NOT IF WELL, IF IT WAS AN R ONE IN THIS SCENARIO THAT YOU JUST SAID NOT, UM, PROBABLY NOT, JUST BECAUSE IT'S ONLY LIKE REALLY, IT'S LIKE ONE AND A HALF STORIES.

SO I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE, 'CAUSE I THINK YOU'RE ALLOWED UP TO LIKE A CERTAIN HEIGHT, BUT IS IT ONLY HEIGHTS AND NOT LIKE SETBACKS? SO IT'S HEIGHT RELATED TO SETBACK.

SO YOU'RE, SO IF YOU HAVE, UM, THANK YOU.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, ANY UM, ANY BUILDING, ANY PORTION OF THE BUILDING WITHIN 50 FEET OF A PROPERTY ZONED R ONE, R TWO, R THREE, OR IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS WITH RESIDENTIAL USES, UM, IT ESSENTIALLY REQUIRES ANY BUILDING OVER TWO STORIES THAT LIKE INCREASES THE SETBACK, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE A RESIDENTIAL.

CORRECT? CORRECT.

IT'S THE ADJACENT, CORRECT.

WHICH IS WHAT I WAS GETTING AT IS ARE WE CREATING PROBLEMS FOR OURSELVES BY, I'M COMING UP WITH A, IF WE WOULD CHANGE THIS INSTEAD OF TO THE, SO THAT WOULD EVERY ONE OF THE ONES YOU'RE REZONING TO AN R ONE, INSTEAD OF MOVING THIS ONE TO AN M FOUR, HOW MANY OTHER PROBLEMS DOES IT CAUSE IN YOUR LITTLE SCENARIOS? YEAH, SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF UM, THIS WAS ZONED R ONE, R TWO, R THREE, AND WE TRIED TO BUILD A SIX STORY OFFICE BUILDING RIGHT HERE, UM, IT WOULD LI IT WOULD NOT COMPLY.

UH, THE LANGUAGE THAT I HEARD YOU SAY, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WAS A RESIDENTIAL USE, A RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTY OR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH RESIDENTIAL USE.

SO JUST, JUST SAYING THAT, BUT, AND SPECIFICALLY I DID BRING UP WHY, WHY DON'T WE HAVE THIS MAP? AT THE TIME WE DID THAT AND THE QUESTION WAS, DON'T WORRY, IT'S ALL THE SAME.

SO, AND RES, AND I JUST WANNA CLARIFY RESIDENTIAL IN THIS CONTEXT IS R ONE, R TWO, R THREE, RIGHT? SO, SO WE CAN'T DO ANY OF THAT.

SO YOU'RE, I MEAN, TO TAKE IT TO THE MOST BASIC, YOU'RE CREATING MORE PROBLEMS. YOU ARE, YES.

YOU ARE CREATING MORE NONCONFORMING.

I MEAN, I MEAN THERE'S NO, I'M NOT DISAGREEING.

SO, SO I MEAN, I THINK THE ONLY QUESTION WE REALLY HAVE ON HERE IS THEY'VE DONE FOR THREE AND A HALF YEARS, THEY, THEY CHOSE NOT TO COME UP WITH A PARK ZONING.

SO I, I FIND IT REALLY HARD TO BELIEVE WE'RE GONNA GET THAT CHANGED NOW.

PLUS WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS WHOLE UDC THING AND WE'VE GOT APPROVED AND, AND PERSONALLY I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED THAT POINT, OR IT WAS, THE DECISION WAS MADE NOT TO ADDRESS IT AT THAT POINT.

I, I, I JUST DON'T SEE A POINT OF POSTPONING THIS.

I MEAN, I, I DON'T SEE IT GOING ANYWHERE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT I SEE THERE'S ANY BENEFITS TO IT, AND I'M HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE BIG CONCERN IS.

SO MY, MY MAIN CONCERN, AND MR. WRIGHT, I APPRECIATE THAT IT'S NOT IN YOUR TOP 50 PRESERVING THE PARKS.

IT'S IN MY TOP 10.

UM,

[00:55:01]

OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

I, I'M PARAPHRASING, BUT AGAIN, ALL I'M DOING IS TRYING TO PRESERVE THE PARKS.

ALL I'M SAYING OR ASKING FOR IS, LET'S GO BACK AND JUST SHARPEN OUR PENCILS ON THIS DEAL AND SEE IF WE CAN COME UP WITH A PARKS ZONE FOR, FOR THESE, FOR THESE PARKS THAT I NAMED AND, AND, AND THE OTHER ONES THAT ARE IN THE TOWN.

THAT'S ALL I'M SUGGESTING.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? CAN WE DO RE I I, CRAP, I, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE ZONING MAP AS PROPOSED.

I SECOND THAT IF I ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

DID YOU SAY AYE, DOWN THERE? YES.

ALL OPPOSED.

OPPOSED? OPPOSED.

OKAY, SO WE'RE IN A STALEMATE.

SO WHAT HAPPENS NOW? WELL, I I WANT TO ASK ONE MORE QUESTION.

OKAY, GO AHEAD.

SO IN AGAIN, IN THE INTEREST, THEY'RE TRYING TO FIND A WAY, COULD, COULD THESE PARKS BE DESIGNATED WITHIN PDS? COULD EACH ONE BE TAKEN AND COULD WE DO A PD FOR THEM? YES.

UM, THERE WE DO, WE DO NOT HAVE PDS FOR THEM TODAY.

THEY DON'T EXIST.

SO, SO, BUT SO YOU'RE DOING THE SAME THING ULTIMATELY? YEAH.

I MEAN, IT'S THE SAME PROCESS OF CREATING A PARKS DISTRICT THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO ALL THE SAME WORK.

IT'S NOT A QUICK FIX.

WELL, IT, IT KIND OF DEPENDS.

SO, SO I GUESS THE, I, THIS IS MY INITIAL RESPONSE TO THAT.

SO I, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD SHAKE OUT, BUT IS SO, AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WE DID NOT PURSUE A PARKS DISTRICT, OR ONE OF THE REASONS WE DID NOT END UP KEEPING THE PARKS DISTRICT AS A ZONING DESIGNATION IS BECAUSE WE'RE ESSENTIALLY GOING TO END UP, UM, I'M GONNA USE ADDISON CIRCLE AS THE, AN EXAMPLE, CREATING A PD TO MIMIC OR BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE M FOUR DISTRICT.

AND THEN WE WERE GOING TO CREATE ANOTHER ONE HYPE, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR THE FINANCE BUILDING TO MIMIC THE R ONE DISTRICT AND SO FORTH.

SO IT, WE WERE, WE WERE GONNA HAVE A SCENARIO WHERE WE EITHER JUST USED THE DISTRICTS WE ALREADY HAD, OR WE CREATED A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT PARKS DISTRICT THAT HAD DIFFERENT LEVELS OF INTENSITIES TO ONCE AGAIN PROTECT THE ADJACENT LAND USES.

AND SO, SO WHAT'S, UH, WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO DEFEND HERE? COULD WE EVEN SAY THAT IN A PD THAT WE, WE CAN SAY IN THIS PD YOU CAN'T SELL THE PARK.

LIKE THAT DOESN'T EVEN NECESSARILY PROTECT THE LAND RIGHT? FROM BEING SOLD? UH, NO.

CAN'T, YOU CAN'T, THAT'S NOT HIS OWN, THAT'S NOT A ZONING ZONE.

YOU CAN'T PUT, LIKE, THAT WOULD BE LIKE A DEED RESTRICTION.

GOT IT.

WELL, AND I WILL SAY THAT THERE'S ALSO A DEED RESTRICTION ON ADDISON CIRCLE PARK THAT WE CAN ONLY USE IT FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE.

SO RIGHT ON , SO THAT ALSO CREATE SOME OTHER, SO THE TOWN COULD DRAFT DEED RESTRICTIONS IF THEY SO CHOSE, THERE'S ALREADY DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT EXIST FOR ADDISON CIRCLE PARK.

SO WHEN WE, SO WE WERE, THE TOWN WAS GRANTED ADDISON CIRCLE PARK AS A LAND DEDICATION, AS A PART OF THE POST PROPERTIES DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WAS ADDISON CIRCLE.

AND SO THAT IS, UM, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THE MULTIFAMILY IS NO LONGER BEING PROPOSED AT THE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IT IS VERY SPECIFIC IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT IT MUST BE FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE, OR LIKE, IT EITHER HAS TO BE A PARK OR FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE.

SO WAIT, LET SAY IF, IF YOU WERE GOING TO TAKE ONE OF THE PARKS AND, AND PUT A ZONING OR SOME KIND OF, UM, UH, UH, TOOL ON IT TO PROTECT IT, WHAT WOULD YOU DO FROM PROTECT IT? FROM WHAT? PROTECT IT FROM BEING SOLD.

PROTECT IT FROM BEING WELL, YOU CAN'T PROTECT IT FROM BEING SOLD.

IT CAN ALWAYS BE SOLD.

RIGHT? RIGHT.

DO FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE THAT COULD PRO EVEN PROTECT A PARK.

AND SO IF YOU WANT IT TO ALWAYS BE A PARK, HOW DO YOU MAKE IT ALWAYS A PARK? AND I'M, SO, I MEAN TO, TO PUT IT PLAINLY, WE CAN'T, 'CAUSE THAT'S NOT UP TO, WELL, THAT'S NOT UP TO STAFF AND THAT'S NOT EVEN IN THE PURVIEW OF THE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND OR EVEN, I MEAN, IN MOST, IN SOME OR MOST CASES, RESIDENTS, RIGHT? THAT IS LIKELY GOING TO FALL DIRECTLY ON CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.

SO TECHNICALLY THERE'S LIKE L THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT WE CAN

[01:00:01]

UM, AND SO LIKE, HI, HYPOTHETICALLY, I THINK WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT SOME DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.

IF CITY COUNCIL WANTED TO REZONE, OR EXCUSE ME, UM, SELL ABSENT CIRCLE PARK AND REDEVELOP IT, THEY COULD SELL IT AND THEN SUBMIT A ZONING ACTION.

AND EVEN IF P AND Z RECOMMENDS DENIAL, THEY COULD STILL APPROVE IT BY SUPER MAJORITY.

SO, SO THERE'S REALLY NO WAY TO GUARANTEE THAT A PARK'S GONNA BE A PARK.

CORRECT.

SO ISN'T IT BETTER THAT WE PROTECT THE ADJACENT LANDOWNERS AND WITH THE IDEA THAT WE, WE HAVE THE FAITH OF THE TOWN THAT IT, IT IS A PARK.

WE ALL WANT THE PARKS.

I MEAN, I, ME, I LIVE RIGHT JUST DOWN THE STREET FROM ONE, I WANT IT TO BE A PARK, BUT I ALSO LIKE THE IDEA OF IT BEING ZONED SO THAT IF ONE DAY I WAKE UP THE TOWN HAS DECIDED, HEY, WE'VE GOTTA SELL THIS FOR WHATEVER REASON, I'M PROTECTED.

I'M STILL PROTECTED AS AN R ONE.

SO THAT'S WHY I'M IN FAVOR OF, OF THIS THING.

NO, I AGREE.

AGAIN, I, YOU KNOW, I, I'M SUPPORTING A MOTION AND I'VE PRESENTED SEVERAL DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT PEOPLE HAVE SAID MIGHT BE WORKABLE, WHICH IS WE COULD CONSIDER PDS AND WE COULD WRITE A PD.

SHE SAID IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THE M FOUR.

THE PD WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE SIMILAR TO M FOUR.

IT COULD BE WHATEVER WE SAY.

'CAUSE IT'S A PD, WE COULD SAY THERE CAN BE NO COMMERCIAL.

WE COULD SAY WHATEVER IT IS.

SO I THINK, I THINK THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES THAT, THAT ARE NOT THAT DIFFICULT, THAT DOESN'T, THAT DOESN'T REALLY PROTECT IT.

'CAUSE IT'S AS EASY TO CHANGE THAT AS IT IS ANYTHING ELSE, RIGHT? NO, IT'S, IT, IT'S ANOTHER STEP THAT YOU HAVE TO GO IN IT.

YOU CAN'T HAVE THE ARGUMENT BOTH WAYS.

YOU CAN'T SAY, WELL, IT'S ZONED R ONE, BUT I CAN'T CHANGE IT WHEN YOU COULD BE ZONED R ONE AND CHANGE IT OR IT'S PD AND YOU CAN CHANGE IT.

SO IT, IT WORKS BOTH WAYS.

UM, SO THAT, AGAIN, THAT'S, THAT'S MY PERSPECTIVE AND WHICH IS THAT WE UNDERSTOOD THESE PROPERTY.

I, I'M, LOOK, I'M JUST TELLING YOU, IF I GO TO MY RE IF I GO TO THE RESIDENCE AND I SAY WE'RE GONNA REZONE ADDISON PARK AS M FOUR, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, WITH THAT STATEMENT.

I, THEY'RE LIKE, NO, WE WANT THIS TO BE A PARK.

I AM TRYING TO REPRESENT WHAT I THINK IS THERE AND IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED ISSUE TO SAY, OH, IT CAN'T BE BECAUSE OF THE STEP DOWN AND ALL OF THAT OTHER STUFF.

AND, UM, I I I'M TRYING TO, TO REPRESENT WHAT I THINK PEOPLE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF OUR PARKS ARE OUR PARKS AND THEY SHOULD STAY AS PARKS AND THEY SHOULD BE ZONE JUST PARKS.

I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO SAY IT.

I MEAN, BUT I'M LOOKING FOR WAYS TO GET THERE.

BUT, BUT I THINK YOU HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND OUR POSITIONS.

WE DO NOT HAVE CONSTITUENTS.

SO YOU HAVE TO BE MAKING INDEPENDENT DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT'S BEST FOR THE TOWN AND WHAT'S BEST FOR THE ZONING FOR THAT PROPERTY.

OKAY, THAT'S FINE.

IF YOU WANT TO STATE THAT YOU DON'T WANT M FOUR THERE, BUT TO SAY, TO, 'CAUSE YOU DON'T WANNA WORRY ABOUT YOUR NEIGHBORS, THAT, THAT'S NOT YOUR ROLE AS A COMMISSIONER.

I'M SORRY.

I MEAN THAT'S CITY COUNCIL AND THEY HAVE TO TAKE INTO FACTOR CONSTITUENTS WHEN THEY MAKE THEIR DECISIONS.

BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT A COMMISSIONER IS, SHOULD BE VOTING ON.

WELL, I I COULD READ YOU WHAT A COMMISSIONER IS IF YOU WANT.

I'M JUST SAYING YOU DON'T HAVE CONSTITUENTS, I WITH YOU WHAT? IT'S RIGHT.

WHICH IS PRESERVE PLACES AND AREAS OF HISTORICAL CULTURE AND ARCHITECTING REPORTS.

INSIGNIFICANCE.

THAT'S ONE OF MY PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES.

THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO.

THAT THAT'S FINE.

I'M JUST SAYING AS, AS LONG AS THAT'S YOUR OPINION, THAT'S FINE.

BUT I THINK YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT CONSTITUENT COMMENTS OR YOU KNOW, OTHERS OUT THERE.

SO LESLIE, WHAT ARE OPTIONS? UM, YEAH, I MEAN IT APPEARS THAT WE'RE A BIT OF A STALEMATE, SO, UM, I WOULD, SO THEN IT WOULD JUST BE THAT NO ACTION HAD BEEN, TA WOULD BE TAKEN BECAUSE MOTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE.

THEY'VE ALL FAILED.

SO IT, IT WOULD BASICALLY, I, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IT MOVE TO COUNSEL WITH ZERO INPUT RECOMMENDATION.

FROM, FROM THE BOARD.

SO IS THAT FUNCTIONALLY THE SAME AS IN AS A RECOMMENDATION FOR DISAPPROVING? NO.

SO THEY COULD JUST VOTE IT THROUGH THE SIMPLE MAJORITY? YEAH.

AT THAT, AT THAT POINT I, I WOULD SAY THAT THE DECISION IS IN THEIR HANDS.

YEP.

I CAN LOOK AT THAT.

CITIZEN'S COMMENTS OR DO I NEED TO DO ANYTHING, DROP UP THIS ITEM? UH, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, SO WE WILL NEED TO OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING.

RIGHT, THAT'S I'M SAYING CITIZEN COMMENT.

ANYTHING SARAH, DO I NEED TO DO ANYTHING WITH THIS ITEM? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.