Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the City of Farmers Branch Planning and Zoning Commission study session. It is presently 645 on Monday, July 27th, 2026. As always, I'd like to begin by thanking the commissioners for their service. And this evening we have a particular thanks to our two new alternates. Gentlemen, would you mind just to introduce yourself, say your name?

David Moore. David Merritt.

Thank you kindly. And also a congratulations to Brianna, who is now our full member in place three. Thank you all again for your service. Up next, we'll discuss regular agenda items. That takes us to item C1, consider approval of the July 13th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes and take appropriate action. Commissioners, any... Errors, typos, issues? All right. Seeing none, we will move on to our regular agenda item D1, conduct a public hearing and consider a request to amend Plan Development District Number 18 to allow for multifamily and single-family dwelling units on approximately 6.1 acres located at 12150 Medical Parkway and take appropriate action. And commissioners, just a note, we do have a letter in front of us that was introduced, so just to consider that in addition to your packet as we may bring this up or discuss if you have any questions for staff during our study session. Any questions, things to discuss during study session? Yes, Pat.

Just clarification on the mechanics of, when we come to voting on, do we go through all the machinations of it, or do we just have somebody proposes a motion to address this particular issue up or down when we get into the general meeting?

That's a good question. I think it's still relevant for us to potentially discuss if we deem that necessary, and it is an item on our agenda. We may have people who are signed up to speak for that, and if so, we will want to give them that opportunity to ensure that their voices are heard because they showed up to do so. But certainly we'll receive whatever motion the council members or the commissioners choose to make and I think we'll proceed thusly. I think that works for legal. Yes, thank you. Okay, thank you. All right. Additional questions, concerns, thoughts for study session. OK, well, with that, we will move then to item a two to discuss agenda items for future planning and zoning commission consideration. And for that, I do have a couple of notes from staff that they wanted to ensure that we were informed of upcoming training opportunities. So of those one that's upcoming this week, quite soon, the 29th and 30th of July at the North Central Texas Council of Governments, there is. meeting their opportunity for training in planning and zoning. Before we had an opportunity in North Richland Hills that's occurring next Friday but I believe that has filled and so that's just on a waiting list at this juncture but you may recall that announcement sometime in the past and then finally an excellent opportunity coming up in October is for the APA State Texas Conference that will be held next door in Las Colinas. So if you haven't been to one of the state APA conferences, I personally have been and have found them very edifying and that's an excellent opportunity to register and attend locally.

Do you have the dates for that in October?

I don't have that in front of me. Can you remind me, Brian, do you remember the date? or you might have the precise date in October.

Tara Bradley, planning manager. So APA Texas 26 will be October 14th through the 16th and it will be in Irving, Texas.

Thank you so much.

14th through the 16th. 16th through the 18th. 16th through the 18th. Okay. Well, we will clarify it. Make sure that you have the right date when you're signing up.

Okay. So around that second week in October, it sounds like. All right. Thank you so much. All right. Any additional items for future Planning and Zoning Commission consideration to add?

I have two.

Okay. We'll start here. We'll go there. Okay.

One I had brought up previously, which was looking at some kind of land use financial analysis tool. There's Urban 3. There's a company out of Dallas called, I think, Verdunity that does something like this. I'm not familiar with all of the... brands that are out there, but I think that would be beneficial for us to look at as a planning commission and also for council to review. And then the second one that I had was, I saw that Flower Mound had introduced a shared parking agreements. So I thought that could be something that we could look at in a limited fashion. Currently, if we want to look at PD 86, Four Corners, or perhaps the east side where there's a mix of apartment and office, I think those are land uses that could be applicable there. So those two things.

Thank you. And I know you had one to add.

Yes, I wanted to add. I just noticed that there was a uptick with a lot of cottage bakers and things like that. And I'm wondering if there was any like zoning for those people who maybe wanted to sell from their porch.

Okay, so the home-based businesses, especially baking or food preparation. Okay, just a consideration from staff on a future item to help clarify that. Any questions from staff? Did you get the items?

I got the memo just letting you all know that we'll look into it for cottage and bakery, just from allowing the use from... individual homes right or apartment yeah if it's allowed is there a zoning rule for it or something like that and then also to present probably presentation on this request okay thank you thank you so much anything further for our future

All right, well, with that, that will conclude our study session at 6.53. We will have our regular meeting at 7 p.m. Thank you all. Good evening and welcome to the City of Farmers Branch Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. I'd like to begin by thanking the commissioners for their service. On our regular agenda items, up first we will hear the citizen comments. This agenda item provides an opportunity for citizens to address the Planning and Zoning Commission on any matter that is not posted on the agenda. Anyone wishing to address the commission should complete a citizen comments registration form and submit it to the chair prior to the starting of the meeting. There is a three minute time limit for each citizen to speak with a reasonable limitation on speakers on any one topic or item with a maximum of 15 total minutes on the same topic item. Anyone wishing to speak shall be courteous and cordial. The Planning and Zoning Commission is not permitted to take action on any subject raised by a speaker during citizen comments. And when called, please approach the podium and state your name and address prior to the beginning. I do have a number of public comment forms, but I feel as though they are for our public hearing later in the agenda. Just if there is anybody for citizens comments unrelated, just make sure I'm aware of that. Okay, I see none. Thank you all. Okay, so then we'll proceed to our regular agenda items, beginning with item C1, consider approval of the July 13th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes and take appropriate action. Commissioners?

I move to approve the minutes as drafted. Thank you. Second.

Any further discussion on the item? Seeing none, we'll move to a vote. All those in favor to approve the minutes. All right, thank you all. Up next on our agenda is item D1, conduct a public hearing and consider a request to amend plan development district number 18 to allow for multifamily and single family dwelling units on approximately 6.1 acres located at 12150 Medical Parkway and take appropriate action. As this public meeting was closed previously, I would request, just before we start our discussion, if we could have a motion just to reopen the public hearing.

Sure. I'd like to make a motion that we reopen the public hearing.

Thank you.

I'll second.

Thank you. Any further discussion on that item? Seeing none, all those in favor to reopen the public hearing? Okay. Thank you all. So with that, we are now in public hearing and we'll begin maybe with just an indication that we have received from the applicant a request to postpone this item until the August 10th planning and zoning meeting. That is in order to accommodate an upcoming community meeting that will be held on August 3rd, 2026, 6 p.m. here in the council chambers. And then I will open it up just with that note to any of our commissioners for questions for staff. Any questions from staff?

Questions for staff about the postponing it?

Any piece, we are open in a public hearing, so it can be for any aspect of the case as I understand it.

Okay, yeah, so I do have a... I wanted to get a clarification on something. Sure. In the... I think it was the presentation where it talks about this being not consistent with the comprehensive plan. It talks about recommended uses, large footprint, commercial development, shopping centers, and high-intensity office, and therefore it's not consistent. And then in... and the staff write up, it has that same language, but then it goes on to say, but it can also include a mix of complimentary residential, commercial office and recreational uses. And given that this property is, I don't think any large-scale development would ever go in there. There's no room. It's landlocked. It has a hospital on one side and something on the other side. It just makes me wonder whether this is, in fact, really not consistent with the 2045 comprehensive plan, since it does mention complementary residential. So I don't want to put you on the spot, but I just maybe just put that back as something maybe to consider. whether this could one interpretation actually be consistent with the 2045 plan.

Yes. And I will share that the prior adoption of the PD was done prior to the adoption of the comprehensive plan as it is today. So that's where that framework on the last paragraph in there that is still consistent with the PD, but with the new adoption of the comprehensive plan, that's a guiding tool. we'll say that that would be best suited for regional commercial.

Thank you for that. Any further questions for staff?

Yep. Yeah, and I'm not sure if this one is better for staff or if this is for legal. When the initial notifications were put out, there was an indication in the packet that we had received zero responses to the initial set of notifications. I think further down in the packet currently, there's an indication that we've received 105 responses. But then as you go through the table, it just lists like no response, no response, no response, no response. So I guess, how are we counting that in an official capacity? What effect does that have on the this getting to council, like have we reached that super majority level of landowners in the area? And is there a method or date by which citizen response has to be received in order for it to be counted amongst that kind of super majority vote?

I'm gonna start with one of the other question, I'll ask legal if you can assist me with this as well. It has not reached the supermajority vote yet, which is 20 percent of the property owners that own land in there. That's what will trigger that three fourth majority right now. And sorry, they're in the 200 foot buffer. We send out the notices and I'll start from the beginning. We send out the notices to property owners within 300 feet and 200 feet. What was provided in the packet is a list of those individuals in the 200 and 300 foot area. They have some have sent back in there, but they haven't met that 20 percent threshold. So and then I'm going to go to June 22nd when we had our. The first hearing. We did not receive anything until the day of the actual meeting. So that's why there's zero. We post our agenda technically almost a week ahead of time. So that's where that language is in there. So when we came on June 22nd, we provide the update to you all. And then in that time that we have has lapsed, there has been protests that provided in a one hundred and that came out to eighty eight notice notices and then oh, sorry, protests, documents and then The rest were individuals that sent back their actual protest letter that was sent in the mail to the 200-foot radius area, and also emails that were sent as well, too, that encompassed those that were sent on June 22nd, a few hours prior to the actual meeting. Does that answer everything for you, any other?

Yeah, I think so. I mean, to me, it begs the question of, you know, how many respondents or how many notifications have we received back from within that 200 foot bubble? And what percentage are we at currently? I think.

Yeah. Last check. I don't know the exact number. I'd have to get back to you on that. But it was about five. four to 2% where we were on that one. And just want to remind, it's individuals within that 200, property owners that own the land that are in the, and it's basically like one person per the property, not a wife and husband submitting a protest.

And then I know that there was a community meeting separate to this August 3rd date. I don't know if we had city staff present. I think one council person was able to make it. Do we have any sort of aggregated feedback from that meeting?

Unfortunately, we don't. Planning staff was not at that meeting. Okay.

Thank you. And then just a clarification from legal. My understanding is it's 20% of the land area within that 200 foot buffer area. Is that correct?

Correct. Yeah. It's land area, not land owners.

Thank you for that clarification.

Yep.

Thank you. All right. So I'm sorry. So just to clarify, you're saying that two to four percent of the 20 percent. I have we have you're saying I guess we have not reached the 20 percent required for supermajority. Is that correct? Correct. And we are how close to that? Like, what's your estimate as far as how close we are to reaching that?

If if it's 20 percent of and then right now I see two to four percent. and we would need to do the update as well too to confirm those numbers, then that's where we are. It's kind of out of the control of staff.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Great, thank you all. Any further questions from the coaches?

I think what would be great is if we could see a table that had what the... commissioners asking for that said, you know, it's, it's a hundred landowners or 10 landowners or whatever the number is. And we're at two and that gets to the 2%. Without that, it feels like we're not being transparent. And at some point we're going to have to be transparent, whether it's through this commission or the city council. So I would recommend that staff put together the numbers. And of course it will be outdated the minute that they do it. But if we can get some statistics, then at least we'd have some answers.

That is something that we can note and take note of and bring back forward to you, depending on tonight's decision.

Thank you. Any further questions for staff? All right. Well, this is a public hearing and we do have a number of folks signed up to speak. Just a reminder, you'll have those three minutes and just introduce yourself.

In process with the current applicant, because in the sub districts A, B and C, the current applicant does not have access to sub district C. where 67 units originally were going to be built. So all of the buildings and units that are going to now be on sub-district B will increase that density by more than 20%. And if you look at the ordinance number 3556, then that is something that is restricted in that ordinance is for the density to be increased. I ask that you consider all of these factors and not just listen to what the applicant is going to bring to you in regards to whether or not it is viable to remove the age restriction, but that you keep in mind the other distinctions that are being made on the site plan, including access from Morningstar and not being restricted to an emergency only access. As I finish these comments, I want to remind you that we are here to improve the quality of life of the residents of Farmer's Branch, and that is the goal that all of us have who choose to make comments to you. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Thank you. Up next, Yadria Sedry.

Hello, Yadira Serda, 3205 Damascus Way. I'm back again. I will just say briefly that I am still opposed to the removing of the restriction, but I will defer my further comments for the next meeting as well. Thank you. Thank you.

Up next, Kells Koch.

I'm Kells Koch, 3247 Brandcrest Drive. I disapprove, I'm a new homeowner, but for now I'll defer until the next meeting.

Thank you. Next up, Arturo Ortiz.

Good evening, Arturo Ortiz. I'm 12123 Brisbane Avenue. I want to begin by saying that I'm not opposed to any of the development. I understand that Farmers Branch continues to grow, and I support thoughtful development that benefits our community. My concern is with the specific request change to remove the age restriction and change the project from a senior living center into a conventional apartment complex. Three years ago, my family and I, we moved here from Oak Cliff, and we love many things about where we lived, but we're different for our family. We specifically chose Farmer's Ranch because it represents exactly what we were looking for, for a safe, quiet, family-oriented community. We're also excited about the opportunity for our children to attend the German International School, since my wife is from Germany, and safety and quality of life were the primary reasons why we invested in this community. When we purchased our home in 2023, we did so with the understanding that the property would be a 55 and over living center community. That mattered to us. It gave us confidence that the development next to our neighborhood would be a quiet, low impact neighborhood. Had we known that the property could later become unrestricted apartment complex, it's very well that we might have influenced our decision on purchasing that property. Like I mentioned, we are the closest family on the street with two young children. And like any parents, our greatest responsibility is protecting our children and giving them the safest environment possible. My concern that removing the age restriction could bring more traffic activity and Impacts what we originally planned for the site what were originally planned for the site I recognize that housing is important and and the developers have goals not asking this property remain undeveloped. I simply believe that Originally improved senior living community is much better fit for the location and more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood I respectfully ask that you consider the families who choose to invest in this neighborhood based on the original vision for this property so Please deny this zoning request. I know we're going to defer it, but ask that preserve the plan so that many of us who relied on choosing to make Farmer's Branch our home. And thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next up, Leslie Osboltson.

Hello. Leslie Oswald-Eston, 3151 Burncrest Circle. I'm happy to defer. I'd just like to say that I'm not opposed. I think that something needs to be there. I drive by it every day. It's sad, depressing. I would love for it to be a place where I could have somebody that's 55 and up. But if not, then let's get some young families in there and get some life into my neighborhood. I would love to see people walking my streets, and I would love to see some sort of business there instead of just urban blight. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Robert Burke.

I don't believe was fully set at that point in time. But as a homeowner with a young family choosing to be in Farmer's Branch, it is something that I'm against in changing the restrictions to this plan to move it from what would be 55 and up, which is where we could see hopefully us going into one day or something similar to it in the community that we did choose to live in, Farmer's Branch. I do oppose. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. And the last name on my list is Joe Dingman.

Good evening to you. I'm Joe Dingman. I live at 13223 Gladeckers Drive. I'm sort of confused. I'm normally pretty clear-eyed. It's my understanding that you have a request to delay. Is that mandatory on your part that you must delay? Are we to presume that you're going to? So you're not going to answer the question, I guess. I'm opposed to the change and the use restriction. I'm opposed to the increase in density. I think a deal is a deal. This was fully litigated when zoning was granted in the first place. There's really been no change that affects the city that changes the rationale for approval or not approval. So bottom line is I'm opposed to it.

Thank you much. And is there anyone that's on speak whose name I didn't get? Yes. Did it really? I'm so sorry. And here you are again. And I swear, I think I'm shuffling these as I'm up here. So I apologize.

No problem. Thank you so much. Lucy Gore, 12254 Brisbane Avenue. I am going to defer my comments for the next meeting. Thank you so much.

All right, so with that, thank you and apologies. That does, we've heard from our folks in the public hearing. A reminder, it is a public hearing. We can have further discussion, we can close the hearing, still have further discussion, so.

I'll make a motion to close the public hearing.

Thank you.

I'll second.

All right, any further discussion on the item? All right, seeing no move to vote. All those in favor to close the public hearing. All right, so that closes the public hearing and I'll now entertain a motion on the item.

Yes, I guess just the point of order. What is it that we what is the technical description if we delay it? What are we actually doing?

to postpone the agenda item until the August 10th meeting.

Okay, well then I would make a motion to postpone the agenda item till the August 10th meeting.

I'll second.

Any further discussion on the item? Seeing none, likely see you back on that date. Thank you all for your attendance and comments, and you're always welcome at our meetings, so please do come again. And with that, that adjourns our meeting. It is presently 7.29 p.m., and thank you all.