Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, will you please call the meeting to order?

Welcome, everybody. Go ahead and write this day down, 8-12. We are starting the meeting right on time, right at 1 o'clock. Officially call this meeting to order August 12, 2026. Welcome, everyone. Thank you for being here. Hopefully none of you stayed the night last night. Went till midnight last night from what I hear. So if you're just waking up, welcome back. Glad you're here.

Welcome to the August 12th, 2026 Zoning Commission meeting and public hearing. Today's meeting agenda can be found online at www.fortworthtexas.gov. Speaker registration forms must have been turned in prior to the start of the meeting. Today's public hearing is being documented by cable television and a recording will be available on the city's website. Cases heard at this public hearing are to be heard at the September 15th city council hearing unless otherwise stated on the agenda. To achieve timely and orderly meeting, the Commission requests that the following rules of procedure be respected. Each case will be called in the sequence listed on the agenda unless otherwise directed by the Chair. All ensuing dialogue shall be directed to the Commission only. After staff presentation, the applicant in support will be given a maximum total of five minutes to present their case. Opposition may then speak for a maximum total of seven minutes. At the conclusion of the opposition, the applicant will be provided two minutes for rebuttal. Those that are not able to speak today are encouraged to submit comments or sign up to speak at City Council. Sign-ups to comment or speak at City Council begin the Friday before the scheduled hearing date. Continuation beyond the speaker's allotted time will be subject to the chairman's sole discretion and approval. All other meeting procedures will be adhered to board adopted rules of procedure to the extent possible. Following the official close of each case hearing, the commission will remain in open session to discuss and vote upon the item in question. During this time, No further public testimony or commentary will be allowed unless directed by the chair. A closed executive session may be held with respect to the posted agenda items to enable the commission to receive advice from legal staff. For additional information on any case on today's agenda, you may contact the Development Services Department by calling 392-8028. Mr. Chair, the first order of business is roll call. The zoning commission requires a quorum of six members to be present and available for voting. Please be advised that it takes six members to approve a zoning case. The following members are present today. Chairperson Raines, Commissioner Welch, Commissioner McCoy, Commissioner Edmonds, Commissioner Robinson, Commissioner Pierce, Commissioner Rogers, Commissioner Wurman, and Commissioner Castro. There are a total of nine out of 11 commissioners present. Mr. Chair, we do have a quorum. The next item on the agenda is the approval of the previous month's minutes.

All right, at this time we are open for a motion to approve the minutes from July 8th.

Mr. Chairman, I move approval.

Second. We have a motion to approve by Commissioner Edmonds and a second by Commissioner Robinson.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Commissioner Raines?

Aye.

Commissioner Welch? Aye. Commissioner McCoy? Aye. Commissioner Edmonds? Aye. Commissioner Robinson? Aye. Commissioner Pierce? Aye. Commissioner Rogers? Aye. Commissioner Wurman? Aye. And Commissioner Castro?

Aye.

With a vote of 9-0, the minutes are approved. Next case on the agenda, ZC-26-070. The address is 2115 Bell Avenue. The applicant is CareBridge Health Services LLC, Yuzo Ishii and Eleanor Anukum. The request is from CF Community Facilities to PBE plan development for all uses in E neighborhood commercial excluding ambulance. dispatch station, hospital, golf course, restaurant, and convenience store with a development standard for fencing in a projected front yard setback, site plan included.

Welcome. Hello again. Okay, so let me... Should have said welcome back. Right, right.

Well, good afternoon. I hope I'm doing this correctly.

Okay, applicant presentation. Here we go. freshen up what was going on was I had come in earlier and I had put in for E. And so then we switched it to PDE. And I think based on my previous site plan, there were some notes that you had last meeting. And so I've made those adjustments. And so do I have to go? Okay, let me just go through this. I think I'm jumping the gun here. So it's the Old Masonic Lodge. The purpose of this is to revitalize the building. It's vacant, been vacant for several years. And the commitment is to turn it into a three-room event space that would enrich the community from weddings, quinceaneras, birthday parties. baby showers. This is what it currently looks like. This is the proposed layout, upgraded parking. There'll be no additional doors except for emergency doors, so we don't have to worry about noise or even lights. Enhanced landscape, updated parking, ADA parking, a new modern fence. This is what it's going to look like inside. You have adequate parking. And this is the waiver request that was requested last time. And so I hope this suffices. I think that's it. That's the end of it.

All right. Thank you very much. We don't have anybody here signed up to speak in opposition of your case. So, Commissioner, is there any questions for the applicant?

Can you go back to the waiver slide?

To the, sorry.

To the slide that had the waivers?

Oh, yes. Okay. Please.

Thank you.

And I've gone door to door to all my neighbors, and they're all in, all in. Oh, wait. How do I get to the, am I doing this? Wait. Nope, nope, nope, nope, sorry. Oh, gosh. Okay, thank you. There we go.

Thank you.

Beth, I'm going to ask, does that answer your question?

I just want to read them again, refresh my memory.

Yes, I've met with neighborhood associations that govern that area. They're all, they sent in letters. There's not been any opposition from any, the neighbors or the associations. I think I've covered all my cases.

What year was the building built? Good question. 1940s or 50s?

That's a good question. Let me quickly Google that.

I think it was the 50s.

The 50s?

Start if you want.

Any questions?

I'm in favor of this project mainly because, for several reasons. I don't think this is going to be any kind of an impact on the neighborhood because, number one, it's been an event center since the 1950s. Number two, diagonally across the street from this is a three-block factory, if you will, or distribution center or something like that that has on this particular street has 18-wheeler bays for them to load and unload on the same street that this is on.

Yes.

Literally, what, 150 feet? Diagonal from this building. I think this building is a beautiful building Also across the street all of the homes the residential has been torn down and there's a gas Well that is on the same side of the street next door to this building It's not like this is I just don't see this as being optimal land for a residential development down the line Thank you Beth and there's no opposition from the neighborhood as well the other questions for the applicant I

Okay, if not, we'll close the public hearing. Thank you very much for coming back for the third time. And we'll leave it open for some more discussion or a motion. And this would go to Trujillo, but he's absent today, so someone else will have to take that.

Mr. Chairman, seeing no other discussion, I agree with my colleague, and I believe I want to make a motion on ZC26070 for approval. Second.

We have a motion by Commissioner Edmonds and a second by Commissioner Rogers to approve.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Raines?

Aye.

Commissioner Welch?

Aye.

Commissioner McCoy? Aye. Commissioner Edmonds? Aye. Commissioner Robinson? Aye. Commissioner Pierce?

Aye.

Commissioner Rogers? Aye. Commissioner Wurman? Aye. And Commissioner Castro?

Aye.

With a vote of 9-0, motion passes. Next case, ZC-A. 26-071, the address is 1297 to 1309 Odds, Cantrell-Samson Road. The applicant is MC and Janet Brister, Hopewell Development II LP, Kimley Horne and Associates, and Brandon Middleton. The request is from F, General Commercial, and K, Heavy Industrial, to PDF, plan development for all uses in F, General Commercial, plus assembly of... pre-manufactured parts except for vehicles, trailers, airplanes, or mobile homes, bottling works, milk or soft drinks, food processing, no slaughtering, furniture or cabinet repair or construction, machine shops, monument, marble works, finishing and carving only, monument works, stone, sheet metal shop, warehouse or bulk storage, and wholesale office or sample room, site plan included. Welcome back.

Good afternoon. Brandon Middleton with Kimley Horn. We were hoping to come to the commission today seeking a vote. Earlier this week, about midday on Monday, we did receive opposition. So our official request would be one more 30-day continuance so we can be respectful of the neighbor's and meet with them one-on-one and address some of the current concerns that we heard. Just as a reminder, we did submit letters and have a public meeting with both the Alexandria Meadows HOA and the crossing at, or the fossil crossing, excuse me, crossing at Fossil Creek. And we, all neighbors within, I think it was like 500 feet, we sent letters. We did have a public meeting on June 3rd um generally there were there was no opposition uh so this additional opposition a little bit surprising but we want a continuance so we can reach out to them i'm happy to go through their their comments or just address it next month

I think it's okay to leave it there. No one has signed up to speak in opposition. Did Ms. Durham want to speak as well? Okay. You had no one signed up to speak in opposition. I realize there were, I think we had 11 letters of opposition. And it seemed like a lot of them were related to a lot of the manufacturing, some of the more higher intense uses, the K uses. But during our work session, we discussed how a lot of those uses, if you were to actually go forward with any of those, you'd have to change your site plan, add more parking, you'd have to come back to us to get that approved. Can you speak to that at all? Why not just, I'm curious, why not just remove those uses? If really it's just set up for warehouse.

I was in work session, so that was a little bit of a surprise to me. I went back and just double-checked the requested uses they were requesting. And every use on Table A is allowed in I, light industrial. There were a couple like machine shops and sheet metal shop. Those are K. It has supplemental setback. And I'll double-check. What I saw earlier after the work session, those are allowed in light industrial. Our intent was not to have any heavy or medium uses in this area, so we're happy to remove those if they are truly heavy industrial uses. That was not our intent. And then a lot of them have supplemental setbacks. Our building's about 300 plus feet from the residential, so we felt like we were accommodating those pretty.

I appreciate you wanting to go back to the residents and address their concerns. Does anybody else have a different take on it?

I agree with that because I'm looking at some comments. One says no final sign plan was provided. The added use list was long and vague but no clear picture of actually what's being built next to our homes. Those are the questions they're responding to or saying here from these comments. Just some info I have for you to When you talk to them, you'll have some idea what you're getting into here.

Yes, sir. Absolutely.

All right. Well, at this time, we will close the public hearing. Thank you for coming. And again, no one signed up to speak in opposition, so we will leave it up for more discussion or a vote.

If there's no discussion, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion on ZC 26071 for a 30-day continuance. Or until our next meeting.

Second. All right. We have a motion to continue to our September meeting by Commissioner Edmonds and a second by Commissioner Robinson.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Raines.

Aye.

Commissioner Welch. Commissioner McCoy. Aye. Commissioner Edmonds. Aye. Commissioner Robinson. Aye. Commissioner Pierce. Aye. Commissioner Rogers. Aye. Commissioner Warman.

Aye.

And Commissioner Castro.

Aye.

With a vote of nine zero, motion carries. Next item on the agenda is ZC-26-073. The address is 2001-2005 Jensen Road. The applicant is VG7 Holdings Limited.

Nehemiah Development?

Yes. Yes. And the request was from A-10-1 Family Residential to A-5. However, this case has been withdrawn and no public hearing will be held. Next case, ZC-26-084. The address is 2800 Cleburne Road. The applicant is FW Triple Net No. 2, 8th Ave, LLC, Quick Trip, Ben Williams, Westwood Professional Services, Jonathan Schindler, and the request is to add a conditional use permit in E neighborhood commercial for an automated car wash site plan included. All right, Mr. Williams, are you present?

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. 23 letters in opposition yesterday. So we'd like to ask for continuance today so we can better evaluate our site plan and make sure that we're covering everyone's concerns and come back with the best product that we can offer.

Okay. All right. Any questions, commissioners? All right, thank you very much.

Just one quick observation. Did I read where in the case of you have so many centers in the Metroplex and Fort Worth that you're actually locating some of these car washes on different sites?

Say it one more time. I'm sorry, I missed the first part.

But in coordination with an existing site?

So there's going to be some in existing sites, some standalones, and some will be with new sites as we acquire them. So it's going to be a good mix of them.

Thank you very much. At this time, we do have two people signed up to speak in opposition. If I call your name and you wish not to speak based on what was just said, feel free to let us know. Rick Garcia.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Rick Garcia. I'm vice president of the Pasco Neighborhood Association. We respectfully ask you to deny the CUP ZC 26084. We do not oppose redevelopment, the convenience store gasoline sales. Our concern is whether this particular car wash is compatible with nearby residents. We believe it is not. The city identifies residents within 200 feet, including multi-story units, extending above the proposed wooden screen fence. Staff acknowledges the car wash equipment and vacuums are likely to have a moderate neighborhood impact. The applicant provided noise testing from other locations, but the important question is what residents will experience at this location, particularly on the upper floors, and whether the proposed wooden fence has been demonstrated to provide effective noise mitigation. The traffic impact analysis also raises concern. It shows the westbound canty approaching reaching level of service F with more than 100 seconds of delay during the AM build condition. QuickTrip's own material states it facilitates car wash more than 100 cars per hour, yet the TIA does not appear to elevate internal stacking under that level of operation. Compatibility requires ensuring the site can safely contain this operational intensity of the proposed units. Let me repeat that again. Compatibility requires ensuring the site can safely contain this operational intensity of the proposed use. Commissioners, meeting minimum development standards is not the same as demonstrating compatibility for this conditionary CUP. Based on information provided, we do not believe the applicant has demonstrated this car wash is compatible with this location. For these reasons, we respectfully ask you to deny the CUP. Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments. Next, we have Caitlin Hine. Welcome.

Hey, thank you. Good afternoon. I brought some additional materials. What would be the best way to share them during my?

We can show them. We have a little overhead projector type thing, like some of us remember from high school. Just to make you aware of time, you've got about four minutes.

Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Caitlin Hine, and I am the HOA President of the Addison Townhomes, which are directly adjacent to the CUP site shown previously. We're a community of 36 individually owned townhomes. We're zoned UR, but function very much like single family. We have over 100 residents that are directly adjacent to this CUP and will be impacted by this site daily. We respectfully ask you to consider denying and imposing the CUP, and our top three concerns are the huge number of cars that will be serviced, the extreme noise generated, and the light impact completely altering the day-to-day life and quality of life in our community for our neighbors. Directly from Quick Trip's presentation, they anticipate washing upwards of 100 cars an hour. The queue alone holds 21 cars, which will contribute exhaust fumes, idling music, honking, et cetera, related to cars getting in line for the car wash. That 100 cars an hour comes out to washing a car every 36 seconds that they have the capabilities to do. So by QT's own calculations, the dryers will never shut off. Exit signage at the 28th Street location actively promotes unlimited monthly memberships that QT has in exchange for discounted gas. The blowers and the car wash will be constantly operational for 13 hours a day with these memberships and the ability to wash over 1,300 cars a day. This is a large-scale operating system, and the privacy fence that was erected with our neighborhood was never erected with the intention of noise prevention. As mentioned by Rick, the bedrooms and the living areas of the Addison townhomes are located on the second and third floors, well above the fence line. Our daily living and sleeping habits will directly be changed with this excessive noise and potentially light. It's also no surprise that we're located near the rail line. Everyone who has purchased or currently rents a home does so with due diligence and intention for being in the area. Most neighbors consider the train noise to be insignificant, and like I mentioned, actively choose to live here with the train and with the surrounding businesses. At most, the train comes two to three times a day. It blows for approximately 60 seconds. Some days it does not come at all. While the train is loud, it's short, lasts about two to three minutes, and that's nothing compared to 13 different operating hours throughout the day. We know no project is the same, but the best current comparison we have is the QT on 28th Street. I recently visited on a Saturday around 11 a.m. I received permission to play the following two videos. One is approximately from 100, excuse me, 75 to 100 feet. The other one is from approximately 100 to 200 feet to demonstrate the significant noise levels that can be heard outside of the exit of the car wash. Sorry if that was a little loud, but the dryers and the noise never stopped the full 20 minutes I observed the site of the current car wash that QT is proposing. As a community, we cannot imagine that level of noise outside our front doors for 13 hours a day. As mentioned, there's approximately 100 people that will be very close to that. 15 minutes earlier, you'll see on the slide that shows the green light and the red box, I took some of the same readings inside of our neighborhood and community. The green line represents what is currently present in our community. The red box represents the numbers I recorded outside of the QT car wash. As you can see in the box, the red outline demonstrates an OSHA requirement for hearing protection. Another element is the light pollution, which we know represented from the photos show three different views of the Addison townhomes in the evening around the area where the CUP is proposed. So in conclusion, we respectfully ask to maintain a level of quality to the Pasco neighborhood, specifically the Addison townhomes. We believe there's a great mix of residential, single-family, multi-family, and commercial. We are in support of development, but we believe that the space is not compatible with a car wash, and it has not been demonstrated by the applicant that it will not jeopardize the quality of life for over 100 residents and more across the neighborhood. We respectfully ask the zoning department and related city officials to deny the CUP to preserve the quality and integrity of our neighborhood and maintain responsible growth without the car wash and CUP. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thanks. I have a question real quick, Jeremy. Yep. Yeah, go ahead.

Ma'am. I'm sorry. One of the commissioners would like to ask you a question.

I apologize, yes. I'm sorry if I didn't see it. Did you take any readings from the entrance of the tunnels as well?

The first reading that should be on one of the pages is approximately 50 feet away from the front entrance. I didn't want to go too close given the fact that they were operating at the time. 50 to 100 based on my... That one, correct.

That's the exit? Yes, that's the- Near the entrance?

Oh, I'm sorry, no, I did not go near the entrance, no.

That's all, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I have a question.

Oh, we got another one.

Have you taken account of how many car washes are near this proposed site?

Yeah, I also visited them. There's one within a quarter mile that is coin operated and has significantly lower level noise. And I also went to the car wash on University, or excuse me, I think it's called University Car Wash, and spoke with the manager there. He gave me permission to do a reading at the exit. I have those. I just didn't know if those were relevant for today with the time.

Meaning like, you know, critical mass of car washes. I can think of one that's directly across the street. Yeah. Separated building from the Texaco. It's behind the Texaco.

Yeah, technically there's three that are all within less than a half mile, maybe even less than a third of a mile. Thank you.

Any other questions? All right. Thank you very much. Now we need to give time to our applicants. Mr. Williams, you do have two minutes, if you'd like it, to rebut anything you've heard.

At this time, I don't have any rebuttals. We'd like to spend more time on the site plan and look at the noise levels and do some more research on our end. Okay.

All right. Thank you very much. Any questions for the applicant before we close the public hearing? Okay. Seeing none, we will close the public hearing and move on to discussion or a vote. What are you thinking, Commissioner?

I'm a big fan of reaching out to the community and having conversation. And so based upon that, I feel like to go forward today would be to truncate the whole process. So I'm ready to make a motion for a 30-day extension on the ZC2. Before I do that, is there anyone that has a comment? OK. So on ZC26084, I move to have a 30-day continuance.

I second.

All right, we have a motion from Commissioner Rogers and a second from Commissioner Welch to continue this case to our September meeting.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Raines?

Aye.

Commissioner Welch?

Aye.

Commissioner McCoy? Aye. Commissioner Edmonds? Aye. Commissioner Robinson? Aye. Commissioner Pierce? Aye. Commissioner Rogers? Aye. Commissioner Wurman? Aye. And Commissioner Castro?

Aye.

With a vote of 9-0, motion passes. Next case. ZC-26-085. The address is 2717 to 2725 Odds, Wabash Avenue. The applicant is Texas Christian University, Dunaway Associates, Stephen Cook. The request is for a conditional use permit in CF community facilities for an accessory use on a non-residential lot, construction trailers, and outdoor storage for two years with a development waiver for screening fence material. Site plan included. Welcome, Mr. Wells.

Thank you. My name is Justin Wells. I'm with Dunaway Associates speaking as the applicant and also on behalf of TCU. This CEP in particular is in full support of the Ed Landreth Hall. You can see that just off to the right across the street. TCU is undergoing a major renovation on the interior, a little bit of exterior to Ed Landreth to really enhance all of its facilities to greatly benefit the experience, not only for the students, but also for the public through activities and events from School of Medicine, Fine Arts, Dance, and Theater. As you can imagine, the area is very congested, and so the construction space required for such an extensive renovation is very limited. And in order to accommodate that, we have the CPU request for the contractor to expand. their construction office and staging area across the street onto some additional property that TCU owns. And so this will allow them to have the proximity and the space needed to adequately construct and complete their renovation. The CUP does have a term limit of two years. So after the renovation to Ed Landreth is complete, the site will be restored to the existing condition of the vacant lot, the existing trees and everything. I believe there was also a question around the residential properties immediately to the north. Those are owned by the Baptist Church, which is to the west of this site. It is not a current residential property or used in a residential capacity. It's actually used right now as a Bible study event venue in coordination with the church. I also wanna mention that TCU did reach out to the Neighborhood Association adjacent to all of this, gave them a heads up of the proposed CUP. We also did the same when we went before you all for the zoning change, I wanna say about four months ago. The Neighborhood Association did respond without any concerns with the proposed use for the CUP. Kindly ask for your approval and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you for addressing our comments during the work session. And yeah, we did receive that letter of support. We received one letter of opposition that wasn't really specific to this case. It was more vague in nature. Any questions, commissioners?

I would just point out that the letter we got in opposition, if I were TCU, I would read that and make sure that I'm aware of what my neighbors feel about TCU's position in the community.

Yes, sir. Thank you.

All right. I'm a Baylor guy, so I have no...

The truth comes out. Yeah, truth comes out. All right. There is no one signed up to speak in opposition of this case. So at this time, we will close the public hearing. Thank you again for being here. And we'll move on to discussion or a motion by Commissioner Rogers.

I'm ready to make a motion unless someone has a comment they'd like to make. Okay. On ZC 26085, I move approval. Second.

We have a motion to approve by Commissioner Rogers and a second by Commissioner Worman.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Raines. Aye. Commissioner Welch. Aye. Commissioner McCoy. Aye. Commissioner Edmonds. Aye. Commissioner Robinson. Aye. Commissioner Pierce.

Aye.

Commissioner Rogers. Aye. Commissioner Wurman. Aye. And Commissioner Castro.

Aye.

With a vote of 9-0, motion passes. Next case is ZC-26-089. The address is... 693 to 1021 odds of the blocks of Avondale-Hazlitt Road. The applicant has beaten Path Development, Nance Ranch, LLC, LJA Engineering Inc., Paxton-Sandage. The request is from UR Urban Residential and MU1 Low Intensity Mixed Use II. Track one, 40.09 acres to A5, one family residential. And track two, 4.97 acres to E, neighborhood commercial.

Welcome, Landon King.

Well, good afternoon, commissioners, and thank you for Allow me to speak today. So I'm Landon King with LJ Engineering. I'm speaking on behalf of the applicant as well as beaten path development. And so your synopsis was correct. This is going from a mixed use to an A5. And while the Feel strong that the use is compatible. That's what's surrounding us as a single family detached. Product both to our South and to our East is also recently has that zoning and while I understand it's not consistent with the comprehensive plan and talking to the folks in the area and understanding this area, particular traffic is. probably top of the top of mind for everybody. I've had a chance to also go over this with Councilman Jamieson. I think he understands the concerns of the area as well. There's a couple of things this does. This is actually a down zoning regarding some of the traffic concerns. What is there today is a very intense use, the MU1 use, and also TDS is also in the middle of upgrading Avondale-Hazlitt Road, which also will help the area as well based on the 2018 bond program. I'm happy to answer any questions you guys might have. And so thank you again for allowing me to speak.

Thank you very much. We have no one signed up to speak in opposition for this case. So commissioners, leave it up to you to ask questions of the applicant. Mr. Worman is giving us the nod if we have questions.

You don't have an end user in place? No, sir.

Yeah.

Do you have any idea, kind of in your mind, how this fits into the future zoning that's already attached to the area, especially to the north, with additional residential units planned?

Yeah, what's immediate to the north, I believe, is also continuance of some high-density mixed use with some industrial. I would say my opinion is that the acreage of some of those is probably off. My suspicion is going to go under some zoning change, although I have no recollection of it or no knowledge of that now. But in terms of immediate adjacent, you know, you've got to the south, you have alley-served, detached, single-family product, and immediately, It's shown as purple on this right screen or pink. It's really A5 as shown on the left screen there. So from a compatibility issue, we're asking for what's immediately next door to us.

We are losing commercial space, which is very limited inside this triangle. And there's not at least a plan that I'm aware of that shows more coming online. i understand a mixed use where you're going to get more or less a 60 40 split one way or the other but this one being i mean you're talking about a you know a 40 and a five and it doesn't support the 10 to 20 000 rooftops that are there i know there's other sites coming online closer to 114 to the north but they're still not accessed that way so it feels like it's it's adding more on top of an area that is saturated with single family

Sure, that's a valid concern. In fact, this actually decreases the number of people that could live at this space. MU1 with structured parking allows up to 80 units per acre from a density standpoint. We won't achieve any more than five and a half with an A5 plan.

I think our biggest concern, and I kind of share what my fellow commissioner is getting at, is when we lose commercial space in the city, we rarely get it back. And I know this area is lacking those kind of community amenities that people want that you're offering in five acres. But that split is very different than URMU1. Um, so I think that that's a bigger concern than the amount of rooftops because we know that Avondale hassle, it's going to be, it's going to be widened. So some of those traffic concerns while very valid right now will will be alleviated in some way for that. So I think that's the planning for the future, which is I know why the city is recommending their denial. or staff, excuse me, is recommending denial because it doesn't follow the comp plan. But I think that's my biggest concern as well is that the commercial aspect goes away and then the people that live in this area don't have access to that.

I mean, there's not commercial property. If we zoom outside this 1,000-foot view we have here, it just doesn't exist.

Immediately across the future, so Wagley-Robinson is on our, I guess, western boundary, and it's going to go south and eventually north. But on the west side of Wagley-Robinson is a nine-acre commercial piece that is actively getting developed. And then, of course, this will be five. And I would just say, again, that MU1 doesn't guarantee you any commercial necessarily. It certainly gives the option. There's the intentionality there. This is guaranteeing you five acres of commercial where, you know, MU doesn't quite give you that. Thanks.

Any other questions for the applicant? Appreciate your time, and thanks for answering our concerns. Thank you. All right, at this time, we will close the public hearing and open it up for some more discussion. And I should say, we do not have anybody signed up to speak in opposition. We'll leave it up for discussion or a motion by Commissioner Worman. I don't really have anything to add other than what I just said. There is the concern that we lose that ability to have that commercial. And I do appreciate his point about there's no guarantee of commercial the other way, but it's the opportunity to loss.

Partial guarantee. I mean, it's a coin flip, but it's better than a nine-sided high roll.

Exactly, yeah.

Because we're locking it into five acres. And the last time this happened up here, I think it was about four years ago, we, that particular commission was convinced to split a site and it all became residential. Every single part of it. Because the split off piece was now too small and no longer viable. The commercial property he's referencing is all E. You know, it's strip center level stuff with, there's also space nearby for I think hopefully at some point city services from a library, satellite library, fire department, police substation, things like that. And so an urban village is probably not the right fit, but I don't know that knocking off 40 acres of potential commercial development makes the most sense when there is no other development nearby. This is inside of two sets of railroad tracks. Everybody not familiar with it. There's no way in or out if the trains are locked up at their three mile lengths until we finish the rest of the infrastructure projects, getting us in and out of here. I do think like in my head, less than 40 acres is probably doable half, maybe 20 and preserving the rest makes sense, but that's not what they're here for. Unless anybody else has any other comments. Okay. For ZC26-089, I move for a denial.

Second.

All right. We have a motion by Commissioner Wurman for a denial and a second by Commissioner Welch.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Raines?

Aye.

Commissioner Welch?

Aye.

Commissioner McCoy? Aye. Commissioner Edmonds? Aye. Commissioner Robinson? Aye. Commissioner Pierce? Aye. Commissioner Rogers? Aye. Commissioner Wurman? Aye. Commissioner Castro? Aye. The vote of 9-0. Motion passes. Next case on the agenda, ZC-26-092. The address is 2157 Avondale-Haslett Road. The applicants, A.G. Haslett, R.E. Holdings, LLC, Guggenheim Development Services, Kurt Overmeyer, J.M. Civil Engineering, Andrew Sudiano. Request is to amend PD-827 to add automotive repair oil change facility to the list of uses, site plan included. Kurt, are you present?

Welcome to the Zoning Commission. When you all hear your case called, you're welcome to walk up to the mic.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Commissioners. I'm Kurt Overmeyer with Guggenheim Development Services. I represent the applicant. I'm hoping to develop a Jiffy Lube at this site and requesting an amendment to the PD to allow this use. And I'd be happy to attempt to answer any questions you have.

Right, just so the commission's aware, no one has signed up to speak in opposition of this case. At this time, leave it open to questions from you all. Okay, looks like we are good. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

At this time, I will close the public hearing and leave it open for discussion or a motion by Commissioner Worman.

Chris, I have a question for you. Considering everything to the north isn't the DJ like they talked about in the work session. Should we take any of that into consideration and our deliberation? So we don't it doesn't matter about them. Just making sure. Thank you.

I think even if we're, well, we don't have any obligation to being as though this is a big thoroughfare and that's a large lot right across the street. The actual house is pretty far away from where the actual footprint where they're putting this Jiffy Lube. And if they move the orientation, now it's affecting the residential that's already there, part of the city. So I think the orientation they're doing, it really is the better of the two options. And it's, again, it's a pretty fair distance. I don't know what the exact distance is. Staff, do you all have that by chance? It looks like it's several hundred feet door to door. About 200 feet is what staff is saying.

Well, considering I just gave this lovely soliloquy about losing commercial property, I'd be a bigger jackass than normal to not appreciate the fact that this is at least taking some multifamily off the board. And it feels like a corner where that would be appropriate. In my mind, it's probably one more lot over, and there's a gas station there, but there's a gas station 800 feet to the west. So I don't really have any problem with this.

Anybody else?

All right. For ZC26-092, I move for approval.

Second. We have a motion for approval by Commissioner Wurman and a second by Commissioner Rogers.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Rains.

Aye.

Commissioner Welch. Aye. Commissioner McCoy. Aye. Commissioner Edmonds. Aye. Commissioner Robinson. Aye. Commissioner Pierce.

Aye.

Commissioner Rogers.

Aye.

Aye. And Commissioner Castro.

Aye.

The vote of 9-0, motion passes. Next case on the agenda, ZC-26-093. The address is 6350 Bridge Street. The applicant is Bridge Street Real Estate, LLC, Tarman Deep Tour. The request is from AG Agricultural and G Intensive Commercial, 2G Intensive Commercial.

Welcome to the zoning commission.

Hello. My name is Dharmandeep Toor, and I'm the owner of this property. And I think this request is just to clean up. There was a little strip zoned AG. In the past, it was for, like, water facility. But I got it removed last year. It was not in use. So this request is just to have the G zoning across the whole parcel.

All right, thank you very much. There is no one signed up to speak in opposition for this case. So anybody have any questions for the applicant? No, okay. Did you have one?

Just to clean up, really. I'm very familiar with the site, drive by it all the time. And it seems like this is a reasonable request to me, so I'll make a motion. to approve ZC26093.

We have a motion by Commissioner Edmonds to approve and a second by Commissioner Worman.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Rains?

Aye.

Commissioner Welch? Aye. Commissioner McCoy? Aye. Commissioner Edmonds? Aye. Commissioner Robinson? Aye. Commissioner Pierce? Aye. Commissioner Rogers? Aye. Commissioner Wurman? Aye. And Commissioner Castro?

Aye.

With a vote of nine zero, motion passes. Next case, ZC-26-094. The address is 2624 East Berry Street. Applicant is Darwood Berry Partners LP, Alveline LLC. and Kristen Prescott. The request is to amend PD 720 to add automotive repair, oil change facility, site plan included.

Welcome to the zoning commission.

Afternoon commissioners. My name is Doak Ralston and we are the owner of this land on this case and we'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.

All right, thank you very much. There is no one signed up to speak in opposition for this case either. So commissioners, any questions regarding this case? Commissioner Pierce, any questions?

I don't have any. Fellow commissioners, do you have any questions, comments?

I just had a quick question. It looked like a CUP was denied in 2021 for a car wash by city council. Is there anything amended that would make it more appropriate to a oil change facility now?

Want me to answer that? Sure. No, I think in terms of auto uses, what we're proposing is a very low impact, much, much less than a car wash. We're talking about possibly on average 100 cars per day. And then also... The noise is inside the building itself. There's no tire changes. There's none of that. And then also what we did was face the bays away from the residential across Berry Street. And then obviously the facade of the building will match the existing area and the existing shopping center.

Thank you.

Yeah, looking at this, very minimal impact. I'm surprised at how small the building you put on the size lot, but it's good for the affected neighbors to the north. If there are no more questions, we will close the public hearing and leave it open for more discussion or a motion by Commissioner Pierce.

All right. Thank you, Chairman. I move to approve ZZ26094.

Second. I'm sorry, who's the second? Was that you, Commissioner Robinson? Both did it. All right. We have a motion to approve by Commissioner Pierce and a second by Commissioner Robinson.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Rains. Aye. Commissioner Welch. Aye. Commissioner McCoy. Aye. Commissioner Edmonds. Aye. Commissioner Robinson. Aye. Commissioner Pierce. Aye. Commissioner Rogers. Aye. Commissioner Wormley. A vote of 9-0, motion passes. Next case on the agenda is ZC-26-095. The address is 217 and 219 Adrian Drive. The applicant is David Iterate Garcia, Townsite in Maryknoll Pool. The request is from B2 Family to UR Urban Residential. Good afternoon and welcome, Maryknoll.

Good afternoon. Commissioners, Mary Newell-Poole, Townsite, 2918 Wingate, here in Fort Worth. I'm here today representing the owner of the property who would like to develop luxury townhomes. The property is currently zoned B2 Family, and we would like to rezone to UR. This site is located on Adrian Drive, which is a short street anchored on both ends with commercial and duplex townhomes in the middle. This may look familiar to you because I was here last October with a similar case that was approved. This area of Linwood is at the beginning of major redevelopment with the Westside Village at the top of the map above the Westside Drive, which will include multifamily hotel, shops, and restaurants. Audubon, with all of its umbrella dealerships, has announced plans to relocate to a site near Clear Fork. The expectation is the Range Rover site bordering Adrian will be redeveloped in the future as high density mixed use. With the MU1 office building and the two commercial buildings on the southern border, Adrian is a true mixed use street. This slide gives you a clear view of how the townhomes would be incorporated into the street. You have the paved drive for the townhomes above which the new townhomes would face. They abut the storage facility for the office building to the south and set directly across the street from the MU1 parking lot. Due to the configuration of the site, the townhomes are nestled into the parcel and are largely behind the building line of the existing townhomes. You can also see the existing screening fence along the driveway. There is no direct view into the property. As you can see on the site plan, the driveway on the townhomes is off Adrian and in the rear of the property. These townhomes will not be accessing the existing townhome driveway. There's a problem in Lynwood with residents using their garages for parking. Many of the garages won't accommodate a truck or an SUV. These garages, as you see, are deeper and wider than most of the townhomes in Lynwood and will accommodate a truck or an SUV. There's a five-foot sidewalk in the front of the townhomes. With a 20-foot driveway, there's a 30-foot separation from townhome to townhome. These townhomes are the same design as those approved last fall and are cohesive in design to the existing townhomes. They are three-story with a cantilevered balcony on the second floor, which provides cover to the front door. There's no rooftop deck. These design elements create better living spaces and give the higher-end design features sought in UR. Here you have the rear of the buildings which shows the clean design and quality features. I did reach out to the Linwood Neighborhood Association. Though they don't oppose or support the project, I believe we have addressed concerns about the parking issue with larger garages and the site must meet all floodplain and building requirements in order to get a permit. The focus on Linwood development and the flooding issue is strong at the City of Fort Worth. I would ask for your approval and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Mary Nell. Any questions, commissioners? We have no one signed up to speak in opposition. Commissioner Edmonds has a question for you, Mary Nell.

Yes, sir. Did you say this is not in the high water area?

It is in one of the city's recommended areas that it could see water. I literally, I office in the office building that's to the south, and I've been there for over 20 years, and we've never flooded on that end. There is flooding across Templeton and north of us, but we've never had any flooding at our office building.

On this property, would you make a notation on the deed that it's in a high water area?

I'm sure that they're required to. I'm not a realtor, but I'm assuming that they do require that when they are. Okay. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mary Nell. Commissioners, any other questions? All right. At this time, we will close the public hearing and leave it open for more discussion or a motion by Commissioner Rogers.

On ZC26095, I move approval.

Second.

We have a motion to approve by Commissioner Rogers and a second by Commissioner Welch.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Raines?

Aye.

Commissioner Welch?

Aye.

Commissioner McCoy? Aye. Commissioner Edmunds? Aye. Commissioner Robinson? Aye. Commissioner Pierce? Aye. Commissioner Rogers? Aye. Commissioner Warren? Aye. Aye. And Commissioner Castro.

Aye.

The vote of nine zero, motion passes. Next case, ZC-26-096. The addresses 2766 and 2840 Keller Hicks Road, 3600 to 4100 odd blocks of Golden Triangle Boulevard. The applicant is Keller ISD and Trans Western Development. with Denton Walker, GM Civil, Ryan Spears. The request is from CF Community Facilities to PDI plan development for all uses in iLight Industrial excluding Correctional Facility, Probation or Parole Office, Gas Lift Compressor Stations, Gas Line Compressor Stations, Wastewater Sewage Treatment Facility, Water Supply Treatment or Storage Facility, Massage Parlor, Sexually Oriented Business, Liquor Package Store, Retail Smoke Shop, Tattoo Parlor, Data Center, with development standards for a maximum of 80 feet height for cold storage facilities, eight foot solid fence required adjacent to one or two family districts, increased setbacks adjacent to one or two family districts, additional tree plantings outside the supplemental setback between parking, loading, and buildings adjacent to one or two family districts, and no drive connection to Keller Hicks Road except emergency access site plan waiver requested. Welcome, gentlemen.

Yeah, thank you, Commissioner Raines. And thank you, Commissioner Wurman. And thank you all for allowing us to be here. My name is Denton Walker. My address is 2801 Hanover, Dallas. And I want to say thank you for allowing us to be here today and good afternoon. We're here also in partnership with Keller ISD. And the first thing we did At the very beginning, after talking with Keller ISD, we met with the community and the neighborhood associations. And the neighborhood associations were as follows. Barbara Bauer with the Village of Willard Springs. Jennifer Samuels and Brian Black with Heritage. Claudia Sharp with Sunset Hills. Gennady Traeger with Sanctuary of Bear Creek. Lisa Hanson with Crawford Farms. Rusty Fuller with North Fort Worth Alliance. And then also Lisa Cower with FS Residential. Not all of those individuals attended, but we met with all of them on June 22nd. But the purpose of the meeting was to listen and hear from the neighborhood associations. That was number one. And feedback we received was several. One was that the development that we proposed, they were willing to listen to what we would be willing to propose also. So we met with the staff and we agreed on a planned development PD. And the purpose of a PD in this case for us was to establish the development standards, high standards, with increased setbacks, additional landscaping buffers, screening, and also limitations on the uses. And the limitations on the uses y'all are aware of, obviously number one is tattoo parlors, data centers, sexual-oriented businesses, and so forth. So we excluded all of those uses and we proceeded with the PD submittal to the staff and the staff will comment on some of the reasons that the staff turned down our proposal. But what we are committed to doing is basically a Class AA business park. The business park would be tilt wall assembly and for light manufacturing. And the reason I mention that is because a lot of the companies we're talking to today that are moving to Dallas-Fort Worth are Cigna, Mercedes-Benz. The companies that are looking to move here are for light manufacturing, not just distribution. So the number of jobs we're looking to create are 500 to 1,000 new jobs. We would be increasing the property value of the area. We also would be looking at Increasing the values of the areas given what's to the south of us to the south of us is. We show you a few pictures here that you can see what is surrounding the property. So this is just some. Photos of what surrounds our property on the south. Looking right across the street. I just wanted you all to see an example of what our plan is. Our plan is to listen to the homeowners in the community. Our plan is to listen to y'all, the commissioners, because we did attend the work session and we did get some feedback from y'all in the work session and we're completely prepared to talk to you about the site plan approval and we're also completely prepared to remove the 80 foot height. That's not our intent. Our intent is to build a quality development that increases the value of the neighborhood We also are prepared to work closely with TxDOT and do all we can to direct our traffic on Golden Triangle. We wouldn't even be near the single family residences. We would be on Golden Triangle to I-35. So our goal is to listen to y'all, the commission, and to listen to the neighborhood. We met with the neighborhood on June 22nd. A couple of things we've done to the site plan.

You're out of time. Just final thoughts, and then we'll let you come back up here after we hear from the opposition. Yes, sir. Give us some more feedback.

After getting feedback from the homeowners and the community, here's some things we've done to the site plan. We've increased the landscape buffer from 30 feet to 150 feet. We've increased the front yard setback from zero to 200 feet. We've increased the side yard setbacks from zero to 60 feet. We've increased the rear yard setbacks from 50 to 75 feet. We've added the eight-foot solid fence at the back of the property. And the other thing I've noticed, too, on the north end where there is the only area where there is residential, we have a trailer park to the right, and then we have the tattoo parlors and the SOBs on the south and storage on the left. Some of the residential areas are used for businesses also, Commissioner. So... We appreciate the opportunity to be here and we're listening and we want feedback from y'all and we're prepared to accommodate a site plan that works for the city of Fort Worth and for Keller ISD.

Okay, appreciate it. Before we get the opposition up here, are there any questions immediately? Okay.

Just real quickly, so you're saying that you'd be willing to submit a site plan showing a three-story building instead of an eight-story building?

We're not planning on an eight-story building.

I didn't quite answer my question, but... Would you be willing to... What are you planning on building?

We're planning on building Class AA industrial warehouse. Yes, sir.

And what height?

The maximum height of the warehouse would be 55 feet.

55 feet?

Yes, sir. We're okay with being within the typical light industrial standard. Okay.

And that's what you presented to the neighborhoods and the alliance?

Yes, sir.

It was 55 feet.

Yes, sir. We hadn't heard the concerns about the 80 foot until the last couple of days.

Very good. Thank you all very much. And at this time, I need to clarify one thing because it's not noted on here. Sherry, are you here? Sherry O'Brien? Are you signed up to speak in opposition? No. Okay, questions. Got it. That's fine. That's fine. All right. And I do have four people signed up to speak in opposition. And just as a reminder, as Dave said at the beginning of the meeting, it is seven minutes for the entire opposition. So just be mindful that there are people that want to speak behind you. And if someone has already made a point, maybe just try and give us new information to help us with our recommendation. So Sherry, I'll let you come first. So if you'll just try and keep it to a couple of minutes, that would give your other folks behind you.

We're just residents at 2830 Keller Hicks Road. So we're on the north side. My husband had the house built in 55 years ago. So we've looked at that 100 acres. That's our nature, you know. And I knew that that's going to turn into something someday. But I just want to make sure that I'm wanting to know how far to the north those buildings are going to be. Now, Encore just put in all those power lines that have now taken over, I think, 50 feet. And so I'm just wanting to know where is that eight foot fence going to be? Is it going to be way far to the south where we wouldn't see it? The other thing is, you know, well, how close are those buildings to those power lines and who is going to mow and maintain that? Because, and they need to make sure that there's fire hydrants because we've seen two fires back there. And so the voluntary fire department just has to bring in water and put out. So my main concern is just, taking care of us to the north, even though we're just a few little, you know, it's 13 houses. Okay?

I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Next, we'll have Lisa Hanson. Welcome, Lisa.

Hi, my name's Lisa Hanson. I'm actually the president of the Crawford Farms Homeowners Association. I had a big speech prepared, but I feel I could have a little bit more information. If you look at the bottom right-hand corner, the southeast corner, that's Crawford Farms. I know the developer showed all these pictures of tattoo parlors and things like that. But just to your right there, those are $500,000 homes. And people bought in that neighborhood knowing that it was going to be owned by Keller ISD. It was going to be a school or community use. And now all of a sudden it's going to be light industrial. And if you look just to the north, that's Villages of Woodland Springs. This does not really feel like a neighborhood issue. Yes, I know we have those tattoo parlors and things like that on the south side, but those have been there forever. There's been all this development around which has led to community use, not schools. Industrial warehouse use kids drive past that school past that to school every single day. And it does not fit. I've talked to all of my homeowners in our homeowners association through Facebook and they are desperate to not let this go through. They don't want the noise. They don't want the traffic. They don't want. you know, industrial area next to their homes. I've lived there for 18 years and I thought Keller ISD was gonna build a school there one day and now we're getting a warehouse. And I represent 1,072 homes and we do not approve.

Appreciate your comments. Next, we'll bring up Marilyn Gresson. Welcome, Marilyn.

I am not so much in denial, though kind of I am, but really I'm asking more for a pause. I've been sort of upset about a number of things. It was such a short notice to us. I live in the community, the mobile home community, that borders where this property will be. And I just was disappointed that we were not included or given more information Earlier, I like it that some of you have said, like, you like to hear that there's communication between residents and people applying, and I just wish we'd had more of it because it raised a lot of concerns for me. Also, in the process, there is a church also bordering on that property as well. I don't know if they're here today or not. And my landlady did send the holdings from my company. They did send a letter of opposition But there is something else I found out sort of you know I just had searched different things and there's an oil well or an oil gas line or something That's underneath the property. I don't know whatever but anyway that was kind of interesting to find out and But I just do hate to see if Keller ISD was going to have a school there. I understand that they really thought perhaps they could have an aquatic area for children or something like that for children, which would be great. But, you know, it's a strong neighborhood from Crawford Farms on into Golden Triangle, and you kind of hate to introduce the industrial use right off the bat to people as they come in, let alone all the traffic or noise that may be produced. I tried to think, what would I rather have in place of it? And I don't even know if that can be a question. I think a park, a restaurant, even a gas station, whatever. But I'm not so happy about the fact that it would be an industrials complex, because you never know how that turns out. I've also been concerned, if we deny it, can the... thing turn worse can we get go for something worse so i don't want to do that all kinds of questions roll and there's i haven't known exactly where to turn to get the answers um so i guess i'm just asking for a pause maybe so that we can have more information and be more happy about what might be happening okay appreciate your comments thank you uh and last we've got uh barbara brewer

Just so you have a heads up, Barbara, you've got about a minute and a half.

Basically, yes, we did meet with the developer, amazing developer, I wish all of them were like this, very transparent. Unfortunately, we were not given any kind of layout, what the plan was, how big the building was gonna be. He met with HOA directors, but not the community. I prefer that they make a meeting and invite the residents to give feedback. Basically, you've heard most of the concerns. We have a brand new school being built on Riverside Drive. These trucks will not go on Golden Triangle. You guys know this. We have Heritage Trace. The Kroger trucks go down Heritage Trace, no matter what you say, no matter what you do, what kind of signs. These trucks are going to go down Riverside with those brand new schools. There's residential all around it. Yes. Is there a sex shop on Golden Triangle? Yeah. Doesn't change the fact that there's residents that live on Riverside right next to this. They also, Keller SD did get offers for residential. I think that would have been a better place for that. Thank you.

All right. Appreciate your comments. At this time, we'll invite the applicant back up. You have a couple of minutes to comment on that, answer some of those concerns.

Yes, thank you, Barbara, and thank you to the commission. Thank you, Jeremy.

And I'm going to – if it's okay, Jeremy, I'm going to ask one of our – Yeah, you had all three of you signed up to speak.

Hello, everybody. I'm Corey Wilson. I'm the superintendent of Keller ISD. So what you guys have talked about as far as your comprehensive plan when you're talking about your commercial base versus your residential base, all those were considerations for us as well. We are predominantly in Keller ISD. About two-thirds of our district is in the North Fort Worth area. We believe that we're good partners with Fort Worth, and we've worked very hard over the last year and a half to make that a reality. Our district has dropped about, our enrollment has declined about 5,000 kids. This property was purchased by the district around 1998. Originally, it was for a second stadium. It was for facilities. We have no need for facilities. In fact, we've closed three schools for next year. And so the number of seats we have are shrinking. We are not in a place to add additional housing. We have additional housing going on, the multifamily over by Hillwood, and then we have some down across where Prologis is putting in another similar project right across from Vista Ridge. right off of 35. And so for us, we did get offers for residential, but for your school district, that has shed $70 million in the last five years. The difference between residential, which again, for us, doesn't fit in our comprehensive plan, because we don't have the seats anymore. Not only does it not fit, for us, that's a $30 million difference. And so the position that puts our school district in is a strong financial footing, and it makes us the trajectory for the future very, very strong. I'm familiar with the community. I've actually lived across the street in Crawford Farms before. I don't live there now, but I did for many, many years, and I was driving that road when it was a one-lane road, and my commute was sometimes 45 minutes. We chose these folks not only because they're the highest bid, certainly, but we also had confidence that they were going to work and make this an asset for our school district and the residents around there, which they have shown to us that they will do. We have confidence in that. But this is a big thing for our school district, for the community of North Fort Worth. And I understand the concerns, but I do believe that these guys are going to be responsible developers. And this does fit into the overall comprehensive plan for Keller ISD. And it adds commercial property and a commercial tax base to us because we are predominantly outside of the north of the Alliance corridor. We are predominantly residential. All right.

Appreciate that very much. That is your time. At this point, we will open it up for questions for my fellow commissioners.

Superintendent, you were saying I was writing, trying to write it down. How many, you said your enrollment has dropped. How much again? You said 5,000? 5,000, yeah. Over what time period?

Five years. Since 2021 school year to now, we're actually about 6,000. This morning was our first day, successful first day. 28,800, we had been at 35,200. So we've dropped significantly. which when you drop, the way the funding works is you also lose per pupil allotment or money from the state.

Thank you. I've got a question. Superintendent, so I know, I understand you're trying to offset your losses with the state not getting funding, but I'm looking at some of these emails, especially in Crawford Farms, where this one resident said, we just moved here two years ago, and now we're dealing with industrial problems. situation here so i'm just going to just put it out there maybe you as a superintendent and the developer meet with these folks at crawford farms and these other residents and ask for a continuum i'm just going to put it out there ask for the continuous meet with these folks and and get the buy-in and explain to you what's going on with keller isd financially

Yeah, I can promise you we've had the financial conversation within our district multiple times. These are great communities. All these communities that are here today are great, great communities. They have great kids, and we're lucky to have them in Keller ISD. But again, we do feel strongly that this is the right use of this property. Whether the continuation is on, that's a decision by the developers. We're simply the the folks that are partnering in this with them.

I've got a question for the developers. So what kind of timeline are y'all on right now with this project?

So in terms of timeline, the zoning would probably run, Commissioner Toole, probably October, maybe November. We would be in for permit plans first quarter and start construction seven to eight months. Six to seven, eight months from now. And delivery would be second quarter of 2028, roughly.

And I ask that because, and I appreciate your open openness to working with us on some of the concerns that the neighbors had. Yes, sir. And it sounds like a lot of it, and I have some of the same questions and concerns, is just the lack of clarity of what this will actually look like and not having the site plan waiver kind of leaves it pretty wide open and it's it's hard for us to get a vision of it and it's hard for the community to understand what that's going to look like how their houses are going to be impacted what's it going to kind of look like i know you showed us some nice graphics today but nothing's tied to any of that right now Um, so I'm curious if you would be willing, uh, to come back, um, whether it's 30 days, 60 days and come up with a site plan and, uh, would you be willing to be tied to a site plan and then remove, um, stuff like the 80 foot cold storage facility, things like that?

Absolutely.

Okay. All right. Any other questions, commissioners? I know Commissioner Wurman is going to have a question or two. Maybe 30.

Yeah, that's okay. We want to work with you all. That's really our goal. And we've developed two other projects in Fort Worth that we're very proud of and we're excited about that we can share with you about. One's just down on I-35. We call it Cowtown Crossing, which is a great success. And another one over at East Fort Worth.

So in looking at this, without taking into consideration anything to do with student enrollment, funding declines, which I'm sensitive to. I live very close to this, I'm in Northwest ISD, and I'm on all of the committees, so I'm a nerd. I got nothing better to do but learn this stuff. There are very few industrial sites east of Riverside that were not here 25 years ago. And over the past several years, several months, this body, council, it's been hard to put industrial on an infill, even though this is a really large space. And it has gone through a lot of different iterations with the district. The stadium idea fell out when they built Timber Creek High School, and that's the auxiliary stadium site now. Working with textile, seeing all the right things. Let me just get that out of the way. I just don't, in my mind, see this fitting in because of the constraints of the 35W corridor. Getting on and off that road, the setbacks are so minimal right now and they have built a commercial property all the way to the edge. I would love to see a site plan for what your ideas are. More than that, I feel like if you were going to put industrial on this site, you almost have to wedge it as far west as you can to kind of let it be along the corridor. Because as you go down Riverside, you're getting plenty of industrial mixed in. But it just, you know, even with that, it still feels wrong given the neighbors that are nearby. But I do think, you know, the willingness to bring a site plan is a big one. And that's something I would like to see, you know, before just saying, no, we can't do this because you're willing to do that job. But as far as getting end users in line and things like that, those are all things that can be very beneficial to us. Bring back as much restriction as you can, the more the better, because it makes it easier, at least I think for us and for the people that live there, to know what can happen next. And I mean, I can certainly appreciate the reasoning behind wanting to work with these guys over a residential developer while residential may bring more dollars back to the school district ultimately. How long is it gonna take? Who's gonna do it? We don't know that yet either. And we'd like to maybe take some time to do some of that legwork on my own to understand the difference. Is there, I mean, is this really like a one way in, one way outside when you look at it from the top down where it's, you're in and out on Golden Triangle not using Riverside at all and there's one main thoroughfare? Or is it gonna need a way in on Golden Triangle, a way in on Riverside to be able to accommodate 100 acres?

The property only has frontage on Golden Triangle and Keller Hicks, so that was part of the reason for the PD. was to restrict access to Keller Hicks. That's one of the restrictions.

You don't have any contact with the other property owners?

We don't have any frontage on Riverside, so the current access, the idea behind it is to line up with the existing median breaks on Golden Triangle. It would be our desire to put in a signal as well at one of those median breaks to help with traffic concerns. Obviously, we'd have to prove that up through a TIA, but it's something that TransWestern is willing to do.

There's no, like, zero contact with anybody on Riverside. And I ask for very specific reasons. Zero.

Zero. I mean, we can't control where the cars, trucks go after they leave the site, right? Right. But there's no connectivity to Riverside.

Right. I just don't, I don't want you to have to come back in six months and be like, hey, guess what? I just bought all these lots. Now we can fix this. No, that's how certain other projects got out of hand. So I appreciate, like, that's the info I want to hear. It's things that are not always readily available and apparent to us. But that's all I have for right now.

So if we were to offer a continuance, how much time do you think you need to be able to come up with a site plan, take a hard look at what you could still restrict?

Yeah. Yes, sir. We would just work with the commission on when you would invite us back. We'll be back next week or we'll be back in 30 days?

We'd invite you back in 30 days if that's enough time and enough time to, you know, if you wanted to reach back out to the community, you know, have time to show them your new plan, get feedback from them. I don't know if that's going to take 60 days, 30 days. We're trying to give the community that lives there and you all the most optimal to have some success.

know win-win is what we're looking for so we appreciate it and we definitely want to win-win as well so when we start with 30 days and then we'll see if we can get everybody together okay and we'll go see commissioner worman well it's let's not just say 30 days let's get the real date it's september the 9th so it's two days after labor day is that really enough time that's really only three weeks

So staff has just given me some good information. In order for you to make that September meeting, you'd have to have a site plan submitted next week. So is that too quick? Yes, sir. Okay, then let's go with the October meeting if we're going to delay. Would you be okay with coming back in October?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Any other questions, commissioners? Not for, no. All right, well, thank you all very much for your presentation. Thanks for your willingness to work with us and your neighbors. And at this time, we will close the public hearing and leave it open for some discussion or a motion by Commissioner Wurman.

Y'all know I don't want to continue this case. But the fact that they're this willing, like I have, you have to give them a shot. I do have concerns. about the location and the access and the egress and all of the things that come with this stuff this far away from the transportation network. I also want to make sure, though, that we give as much information as possible and be as open as we can with this particular community in North Fort Worth. They don't necessarily feel like they're getting all the notices they need to get these days. one person who spoke in opposition who lives in the mobile home park there. For reference, the notification line is only the first block of the neighborhood on Peninsula. So anybody who lives on the other side of our past Peninsula would not have gotten a notice in the mail because the way that it's noticed from the city. Only 300 feet. So again, I encourage everybody, if you're listening or you're here, please sign up for zoning notices in your district through one of the portals on the website. I can't remember today. Community engagement. So that you will know before your HOA does or before your nosy neighbor who knows everything knows. You'll get the emails the same time as everybody else. You don't get extra emails. You don't get signed up for Publishers Clearinghouse. You literally get an email if there's a case in your district that month. And it really helps kind of spread the word and make sure that developers who are willing to come to the table can meet with as many residents as possible. And it doesn't mean it's always going to work out, but it's the best way to stay intact. I don't know what's going on. Yes, sir.

Before you make your motion, I just want the applicant to know that I agree with you on this particular case. When you look at an aerial view and you see the proximity to neighborhoods and you think about this being an industrial site, and particularly the access problem to the freeway coming down... Golden Triangle, which I think would be their only access. It's a real hard make, I think.

Well, and at the end of the day, it's going to become Riverside, too, to some degree, because that's access from 170. That's the trucking corridor through here. It's one of the other pieces of it. And just being able to understand how we're going to do this, because the developments around it, particularly Woodland Springs, were developed with the idea that this would become something that it did not become. I mean, there are subbed out streets still up there that are supposed to connect to a road that's never going to exist because of a developer who didn't understand what they were doing when they were doing it. And we're giving ourselves, I think, that right opportunity to make sure we don't pay for the sins of our fathers

The reason I wanted to make that comment before you left was I didn't want you to think that Commissioner Worthington's concerns were restricted to one member of the commission. I think there's no automatic answer here. If you come up with a great site plan, I don't know that that's going to change everyone's mind. I didn't want you to leave with the impression that this was coming in in your favor yet.

How long has this land been sitting vacant?

It's been vacant since before we purchased it, which was in, I believe, 1998.

The land's been vacant since 1998? Yes.

Okay.

In my professional opinion, the land's been sitting vacant. And if Keller ISD, you know, humbly, professionally, if they want to come and develop it and create and bring value and tax revenue and jobs, I don't see what the problem would be. But I do agree with the continuous to engage your neighborhoods. But if this land, you know, oftentimes we see these neighborhood associations come out, and they're well within their right taxpayers. But the land has been sitting vacant. That's almost 20 years. It's been sitting there. So eventually somebody's going to develop something on that land. And considering the type of businesses, like you say, Sins of the Fathers, that are around it, I wouldn't be, in my humble opinion, comfortable with residential, with those type of businesses that are already there. In my opinion, they're bringing light industry, they're gonna bring jobs, it's gonna create revenue for the city of Keller and city of Fort Worth, has to. I say we move for approval, but again, I'm also a continuance as well.

And yeah, that I get 100%, except for on the other side of the naughty shops that I've seen some of you at out here. Don't act like I haven't seen you over there when I drive past. You just admitted to going yourself. Wow. Hey, look, we all got to get our hookahs, you know, we got to do our thing, whatever. But just beyond those, there's housing right behind them that we put on the ground two years ago as a way to create a buffer between single family and these types of business we put in a cottage community. And it was kind of a creative way to do infill where we went from kind of heavy use, you know, and kind of like blended it into the next. And I'm with you on that. It's sat there forever and ever. The only caveat I would add to that, it sat there forever and owned by a school district. And so people developed next to it as if it was going to be a school district site, except for the shops in the north, because those were all out there forever and ever ago. But I don't disagree with you. Something needs to happen. They're at the point where they want to divest themselves of the property. And this is the first one to come up to bat and really pitch a solid idea to see if it makes enough of the community groups happy, makes the school board happy, makes Woodland Springs, Crawford Farms, any of the neighborhoods that are within a half a mile of here that know this site, that if we can get more support and it seems like it makes the most sense to all of us, then yeah, let's go. And if it doesn't, it doesn't. We wait for the next iteration.

All right.

Ready to make a motion? I'm ready. Yeah, for ZC26-096, I move for a continuance to the October zoning commission hearing.

Second. All right, we have a motion by Commissioner Wurman and a second by Commissioner Robinson to continue to the October zoning hearing.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Rains. Aye. Commissioner Welch?

Aye.

Commissioner McCoy? Aye. Commissioner Edmonds? Aye. Commissioner Robinson? Aye. Commissioner Pierce? Aye. Commissioner Rogers?

Aye.

Commissioner Wurman? Aye. And Commissioner Castro?

Aye.

With a vote of 9-0, motion passes. Next case is ZC-26-097. The address is 5009 through 5033 Odds of Jacksboro Highway. Applicants, Progress Land Development, LLC, Jean Crook and Kevin Carlson. The request is from E, Neighborhood Commercial, A51 Family Residential, PD1035, Plan Development for ER Neighborhood Commercial Restricted plus Funeral Home Excluding Certain Uses, Site Plan Waived, to E, neighborhood commercial. Welcome to the zoning commission.

Afternoon, commissioners. Name's Jordan Marlia. I'm standing in for Kevin Carlson today, as well as the owner of Progress Land Development. I want to first thank the planning staff for expediting this case. We originally thought that the original use for this property was going to work, but staff unfortunately kind of misled us. And we're working to expedite this case and have it heard at city council at the end of the month as well. So I want to thank you guys for expediting that. To my knowledge, I don't think we have anybody in opposition, but I'm here to answer any questions to the best of my ability if you guys have anything.

Very good, and you're correct. There is no one signed up to speak in opposition. So at this time we will open it up to questions by the commissioners.

Before he leaves, I'll be making the motion and I just want to make sure you understand that if we approve this, that the training will have to be done within the building.

Yep, that's correct.

Any other questions? All right. At this time, we will close the public hearing and leave it open for some more discussion or a motion.

If there's no discussion, I'll make a motion on CC-26097 to approve. Second.

We have a motion to approve by Commissioner Edmonds. Just one second. The motion needs to state actually that the training will be done in the building itself. It does?

I was told that it didn't need to include that.

If that is the intent of the board to make sure it's memorialized, unless it's going to be stated somewhere, my recommendation is that it. Okay. All right.

My apologies. I gave you bad information. We will restate the motion. Thank you, Chris.

Chris, I asked that question in the workshop and they didn't think it was needed, but I'll restate the motion. I make a motion in ZC26097 to approve with the understanding all training will be done within the building.

Second.

Motion is made by Commissioner Edmonds and a second by Commissioner Rogers to approve with all training being done within the building.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Raines?

Aye.

Commissioner Welch?

Aye.

Commissioner McCoy? Aye. Commissioner Edmunds? Aye. Commissioner Robinson? Aye. Commissioner Pierce?

Aye.

Commissioner Rogers? Aye. Commissioner Wurman? Aye. And Commissioner Castro?

Aye.

The vote of nine zero, motion carries. Next case, ZC-26-098. The address is in the Trinity Lakes form-based district. The request is an ordinance amending the comprehensive zoning ordinance of the city of Fort Worth, being ordinance number 21653 as amended, codified as appendix A of the code of the city of Fort Worth, by amending chapter 4 district regulations article 13 foreign-based district section 4.1307 trinity lakes district subsection 4.1307 d other development standards by updating the Trinity Lakes Development Code to add regulating plans amending Appendix B maps of the Code of the City of Fort Worth to revise Exhibit B.25, Trinity Lakes District, and Exhibit B.26, Trinity Lakes District character zones.

Welcome, Joe. I can answer any questions.

Nothing new to add from the work session? Okay, no one signed up to speak in opposition. Commissioners, questions for Joe? Okay, we'll close the public hearing and leave it open for a motion or discussion. Commissioner Edmunds?

Is there any discussion? Mr. Chairman, I wish to make a motion to approve ZC26098. I think it's been well thought out and is adequate to move forward.

Second.

All right, we have a motion to approve by Commissioner Edmonds and a second by Commissioner Welch.

Commissioners, how do you vote? Chairman Raines?

Aye.

Commissioner Welch? Aye. Commissioner McCoy? Aye. Commissioner Edmonds? Aye. Commissioner Robinson? Aye. Commissioner Pierce?

Aye.

Commissioner Rogers?

Aye.

Commissioner Wurman? Aye. And Commissioner Castro?

Aye.

With a vote of 9-0, motion carries.

We are officially adjourned at 2.36 p.m. Thank you all for your service, and thank you all for watching and coming.

And we didn't last until 1 a.m. Are you sure there's nothing else we can discuss for the next three and a half hours?

Sir, we are adjourned.