Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Check, check, check, check. I can hear you. Can you hear me? Yeah, we can hear you. We're still working on a few things here. No, no problem. Ready whenever. Thank you.

Then you want to hit the record. recording in progress. There we go. Good evening and welcome to the September 25th, 2025 Lewisville, Colorado Planning Commission meeting. If we can begin with a roll call, please. Commissioner Brown Eyes here. Commissioner Choy here. Commissioner Molen

here. Commissioner Bangs here. Commissioner Mahali here. Thank you. Uh and a motion to approve this evening's agenda. So moved. Second. Thank you. All in favor? I. Motion carries. and looking for if there's anybody uh who wanted to comment for items that are not on this evening's agenda. Um can you double check?

Okay, great. Thanks. Seeing none, we'll move in to our first item of new business. Uh yeah. Um, so I'll start with the script. Yeah.

I will now open the public hearing on request for a general development plan amendment. Two of them. One of them to start with. Uh the purpose of the hearing is to receive evidence regarding the application materials and provide a public forum for all interested parties who wish to comment on this request before the planning commission. The procedure for the public hearing will be as follows. First, there'll be a presentation and testimony by city staff, followed by questions from the planning commission to staff. Next, we'll have a presentation and testimony by the applicant, followed by questions from the planning commission to the applicant. After these two presentations, members of the public who have joined this meeting in person, by computer, or telephone may speak regarding the application. Anyone who would like to speak in person is asked to complete a speaker card. Use the raise hand function if participating by computer or star 9 if calling in by telephone. Please limit your comments to three minutes per person. Two people present at the meeting may pool their minutes to allow one person to speak for up to a total of six minutes. The purpose of public comment is to receive public testimony and not a forum for debate or dialogue. Commenters are encouraged to raise pertinent issues and may ask questions for clarity. However, these questions will not be directly answered during the public comment period. The applicant and staff will then be allowed to make a closing statement. I will then close a public hearing and no further testimony or other evidence will be received unless the commission decides to reopen the hearing. The planning commission will discuss the matter, may approve, approve with conditions, deny, table, or continue to a future meeting. Public hearings are recorded for the public record. All testimony must be presented after stating your full name and address. Does anyone participating in the hearing object to the procedure I've described? Seeing no objections, can you uh let us know about proper notification, please?

Uh yes. All public notice requirements have been met for these applications. Thank you, Commissioner. Director Zakaro, can you take it away, please?

Yes. Uh, good evening. It's Chair Bronn Ice, members of the commission. I'm Rob Zucero, community development director for the city. I'm going to be making the staff presentation for this application. We've combined them together because they're really linked, but they are there are two resolutions and two amendments to general development plans that are um being requested here. Um so the applicant is PorterCare Adventist Health Systems. So they own um the property up here to the left which is the um Advent Health A Vista campus and um down to the right here in purple is the Konico Phillips campus area which is now known as Red Tail Ridge. Um they've purchased a 40acre property within that development. And so both of these applications are to facilitate future development plans to um build a new hospital campus within Red Tale Ridge. Um so as I had mentioned, what they're proposing is to simultaneously amend two general development plans. Um and there's a few different aspects of that. So I've got them bulleted here and then I'm going to go into more detail on each one. But the first one is that they want to amend them to decrease the total allowed development within the A Vista Adventist Hospital general development plan. So that's the red area. Um and then they want to simultaneously increase the development cap within the Red Tale Ridge development. So that would be amending the Kico Phillips campus general development plan. Um they also want to establish um allowed building heights and then massing standards, architectural standards um for buildings within the new hospital campus. So that would be embedded within the Konico Phillips campus general development plan. Um you might recall there was a recent ordinance amendment

that allows general development plans to establish um standards such as we call them you know yard and bulk standards. So you can establish building height standards and zoning standards in a similar way as if they were in the zoning code. Um and then they're also proposing to dedicate dedicate approximately uh a 7 and a half acre parcel um on the north side of the current hospital campus. So I'll go into each of those in more detail. Okay. So there's a lot of words up here and there's there's some there's a lot of numbers here. So, I'm going to try to make them make make sense, but um basically this is adjusting the building areas and I'll talk about the purpose of this as well, but I want to go through the numbers and see if there's any questions. So, basically within the current A Vista Adventist Hospital GDP area, there is an existing development cap um 750,000 square feet. So, the existing development um is 351,300. I'm sorry, I have them mixed up already. Um so, there's an existing development um amount in the GDP area and then there's the remaining future development that they haven't taken advantage of. Um, so they want to remove that development area, that 351, uh, 306 thou 306 square ft. Um, and and that's going to be the new cap. So that's the proposal. Um, so the new maximum would be 398,694 square ft. Okay. So they're basically just adjusting the development cap. Sorry, I didn't explain that very well, but I'll stop and see if there's any questions on that. Okay. So, yep.

Got it. And and then just to make sure I'm reading this right, and that number corresponds to what's already built. That's the existing. So, so the way it would work is, of course, they would maintain their current development there. So, there's the hospital, of course, the Centennial Peaks Hospital, and then some medical office buildings there. So, that's the total. Now, they could certainly, you know, if this were to be approved, they could demolish those buildings and still rebuild under that cap, but this would be the new maximum development cap. So I so on their parcel sorry I have a I can save the question till the end. You said that's what's built today because there's a table on page four

that shows existing and proposed with the GDB change is still larger than existing in terms of square foot. That's the net change. Is that what you're talking about between the two? Yeah, maybe we save it to later, but it it's showing 349977 as building area summary existing facilities.

Okay, I might have a typo in there. So, I'll go back and I don't have the staff report in front of me, but the the idea is that that whatever it is actually on the GDP would be the new cap. So on the Konico Phillips campus GDP, they would be adding 364,400 square ft of new allowed future development, but that would be limited to their parcel. So when they purchased the parcel, Red Tail Ridge has about a 2.5 million square foot development cap. And so they're allocated a certain amount. So they want to add this 364,400 to that for their total campus development. So that would take Red Tale Ridge from about 2 and a.5 million square feet to 2.9 million square feet approximately for the new development cap. So there is a small net increase between the swap. So we're basically swapping development area from one GDP area to the other. Um and there is a small net increase of about 13,000 square feet. So, in working with the applicant, um the purpose of this swap is to ensure that there's adequate city utilities available for the ultimate development that is planned in Red Tale Ridge as well as limit any potential new traffic impacts. These were these were big issues when Red Tail Ridge was developed and I'll go into some more detail on the utilities, but as you probably recall, there was a lot of concerns about traffic. So the concept is for them to build their new campus um and still you know limit concern about uh traffic impacts and pretty much eliminate any issues that the city would have with you um water and sewer utility infrastructure and capacity at the treatment plants um is the reason for the swap. So it's we're trying to get near a net zero increase.

So that's that's a big part of the proposal. Director Zukaro. Yes. Are you are you sharing your screen? It's not visible online. Thanks for pointing that out. I was wondering it's it's Yeah, I I also don't have video. Um which is fine. I can hear and I have the packet but um I'm not seeing if he's making a presentation which I assume he is. It's not visible to those of us online. Okay. We'll see if we can um we have to do share I don't think so. But usually automatically um usually automatically. Yeah. Why don't why don't we take a second widget box? No. But uh there we go.

Got the the Wizard of Oz behind the uh screen there coming out. Pay no attention except for except for he has real power. Yes. I I can see the presentation now. Thank you.

Okay. Great. Thanks. Thanks for putting that out. Okay. So that's the first major part of the proposal. Um within the Red Tale Ridge development, so the Kico Phillips general development plan, they are proposing to establish the zoning standards, the height standards. So there would be three different height zones being proposed for three stories, four stories, and five stories. And you can see the building there's specific building heights, heights to the parapit and height to the mechanical screen. So the fivetory would be the main hospital. The applicant of course will make a presentation. They'll probably go into more detail about this and the reasons um you know they're they would like to have these heights. Um and then there's also massing standards. So in staff working with the applicants knowing that these were fairly tall buildings. Um there's there's lots of ways that you can moderate the impact of the building massing and make sure that there's good architectural interest. Um so the applicant developed some of those standards. They include a 15t building step back for building elements that are above 45 ft limiting the building footprint above 45 ft to 50% of the base building footprint. So those upper stories, they'd be set back and they'd be smaller than the whole building footprint. There are some allowances for architectural projections and architectural elements, but they they still have some variation in depth in those requirements. And then the the rooftop enclosures would be um would have to be stepped back 10 ft unless they're architecturally integrated into the building. Um so those those are the main ones. Um, I also noted here that on

Red Tail Ridge, this is the lowest point of the development. So, even though these are these would be the tallest buildings in Red Tale Ridge, um, you know, it is the lowest point of the development, the rest of Red Tale Ridge is subject to our commercial development design guidelines and standards. Um, so that would basically allow three-story buildings unless this would be amended or they could get waiverss through PUDS. So this would be unique again to the hospital parcel. Um, so here they do have the applicant provided a massing study to show what these types of regulations would result in. Again, this isn't architecture. The buildings won't look like this exactly. Um but it shows how the stepbacks would be treated and what the overall heights could look like with five, four and threetory buildings. They also provided example architecture um within that packet for the massing study and um again they'll make a presentation to talk about this in more detail. So there's also a pro proposal to dedicate um the seven and a half acres of open space on the north side of the existing hospital campus. Uh this is a this is um designated by the open space advisory board as a high priority acquisition parcel in 2023. They came out with a list of properties that were high priority that they're interested in. Um this is adjacent to an a 10acre parcel that was previously dedicated. So there would be a 17 1/2 acre total open space area. So they're expanding that open space on the north. Um you know one of the reasons for this is since they're removing development area um there's really less need to have

future development areas. Um you know certainly they want to reserve some development areas. I think if they're going to tear down buildings and do some redevelopment. So, they don't want to dedicate everything. Um, but basically staff approached them and asked if they were willing to donate this. The last bullet here notes that really, I think you're familiar, sometimes we have code requirements for public land dedication. That happens when properties initially develop and they subdivide. There's a 12% requirement for um commercial, 15% for residential. This development's already met those obligations. So, this is really um a donation to add to the open space. It's not meeting a code requirement. When PUDs come in, sometimes additional open space can be requested as well as a public land dedication. Again, they're not proposing a PUD here. So, this is really a donation. It's not to meet a code requirement. Um the Open Space Advisory Board did hold a hearing last night to review this. Um they are recommending approval of um the dedication. They they did have a lot of discussion about you know could it be expanded? Could it be larger? Um I also wanted to mention the applicant um is asking that this parcel not have trails or trail heads or other activity in it. Um since it's so close to the hospital campus, they would like it just to be managed as open space without active open space recreation such as trails in it. Um, the open space advisory board did ask if they could enter into future discussions before the city council hearing to see if there could be trails or different management in there. Um, but they were overall um supportive of the donation and and having that incorporated into the city's open space portfolio. Um, that there is a resolution that they passed last

night. It's on the dis this evening and it's up on the board. So part of adding that open space parcel is changing the setbacks. Yes. Sorry, Director Zuko. C, can I ask a quick question on open space stuff? C. Was there a staff open space staff recommendation in like as part of this present as part of that um discussion last night? Yeah. So, open space staff did review this and they're um they're supportive of incorporating this into the open space. Okay. Okay. and and and the open space board again in 2023 has already identified this as a high priority. Okay.

Um so I think they do see value in adding the open space here. Okay. What's what kind of what specifically they did they identify as priority citywide? Yeah. So you're saying this this is one of many properties.

So yeah, let me let me slow down and kind of explain so that you can see there's a larger parcel here. this property line here. They identified basically this whole parcel as a high priority. I think they were seeing it as a buffer and contiguous to existing open space. Um there there were probably other reasons. They evaluate vegetation and things like that to determine what they want to bring in for open space. Um so based on their review in 2023, the whole parcel was identified as a high priority. Again, there's, you know, I don't know how many um, you know, probably six or eight properties that they've identified throughout the city um, and around the city for acquisition, and this is one of them.

Thanks. Thank you. Yep.

So, on the existing GDP, and I know you can't read those notes, but this was in the packet. Um so the top is the existing GDP and there are some um significant building setbacks on the north side. So there's a 50- foot setback for one and twotory buildings and a 100 foot setback for threetory buildings. And on that northwest there's a 75 foot setback for all buildings. They are requesting and that's this is the bottom image that there be a five- foot setback for parking and drive aisles and a 20 foot setback for the building. And staff is supportive of this really noting that the overall setback from the Cole Creek neighborhood to the north would increase significantly. So there would still remain a very large buffer between any future development and the residential neighborhood to the north. Okay. So, I I'll go into the analysis unless there's any questions on that last part.

Do people want to discuss the setbacks right now or as part of a larger conversation? Yep. Yeah. And and yeah, I I'll complete the analysis discussion to see if there's more questions. So,

um so general development plans, as you know, are part of the plan community zone district. These are intended to be master development plans for those developments. Um the municipal code chapter 1772 outlines the requirements for establishing those general development plans and amending the development plans. Um it talks about the purpose of the general development plans. Again, you know, I I'll often say it's to create custom zoning for that development, determine what uses you want there. Um it states that they're that the they're promoting contemporary land planning principles and coordinated community design. So I've noted some things here in the staff analysis. Um you know staff is recommending findings that this does establish appropriate design standards to address building massing and architectural design. Um that it's consistent with the building heights east of Northwest Parkway. So, this is the closest development to the hospital's new parcel is across Northwest Parkway in Broomfield. There are four and fivetory um buildings there that are similar in height to what they're proposing. So, contextually, this won't fill out of place. It's not adjacent to um you know, shorter buildings. a lot of I mean Red Tail Ridge will probably predominantly be shorter buildings but it is in within context of the Broomfield development to the east. Um it does ensure adequate city utility services and limit traffic impacts which I talked about and it does increase building buffers and setbacks for the existing campus. So those were the things that we pointed out that I wanted to reiterate that we found it consistent with um you know meeting those contemporary land planning principles and coordinated design.

So we did look at the comprehensive plan which designates this area. So it actually designates both of these GDP areas as the Philips 66 rural special district. When that 2013 comprehensive plan was developed, Konico Phillips was still planning to develop in that area. So there were some policies specific to Konico Phillips, but it doesn't mean that they wouldn't be applicable here. Um, one of the policies does state that within rural districts that taller buildings above threetory buildings could be appropriate if the development is clustered and out of viewhed. So staff notes that when the Red Tail Ridge development came in, there was a significant open space dedication, public land dedication for open space and parks um on the north and northwest sides that really resulted in clustering of this development to the south and to the east. Um there's also a large open space buffer, if you're familiar, that's actually in Broomfield immediately south of Red Tail Ridge that provides a significant buffer between US 36 in this development. So we feel together it meets the policy of the comprehensive plan. Um I also wanted to note that when Kico Phillips

sorry on that note thinking about that little triangular area there um obviously that's completely out of our jurisdiction. So potentially the Broomfield parcel. Yeah.

So it is um it it has it will have a conservation easement on it. We actually have an agreement through the Red Tale Ridge development plan that and there's other IGAs with Broomfield that call for that to become a conservation easement. So the Red Tale Ridge developer is in the process of establishing a conservation easement on that property. So we feel confident it'll be preserved. Um, so when Kof Phillips did come through in 2010 with their original approvals, they did get a preliminary PUD approved with building heights up to 95 ft in one sub area and 65 ft in other sub areas. So this is a little different, but generally consistent with some of the development that was originally planned within the Red Tail Ridge area when Kico Phillips was planning their campus. Um we did have the applicant provide a traffic study to really understand um you know how traffic patterns would change and um you know moving density to the hospital. Um you know would there be additional traffic improvements that are needed? Um I have kind of the estimated additional weekly trips and morning peak hour trips and afternoon peak hour trips. Um there's an access plan here. They do plan their main access off of Rock Crest Drive. This will all be further developed when they come in for their planned unit development approval. Uh but we did want to make sure that generally it worked and to see if there were um start working on potential improvements that might be needed. Red Tail Ridge is building that traffic infrastructure now. And so we will we would, you know, assuming this is approved, we would continue to work with um the hospital on um you know, finalizing that traffic study, really detailing what other traffic improvements need to be made in addition to what Red Tail Ridge is already building. And we're recommending a condition that when they come in for PUB

that we would enter into a development agreement with them that would identify specifically what those improvements are and that um you know they would um be responsible for contributing or making those improvements to make sure the transportation network is working adequately. The applicant's traffic engineer is here this evening as well and can answer more detailed questions. Um so water um I pointed to wastewater infrastructure here. We we did work um very closely with our utilities and public works department on making sure that the water infrastructure that's being built and the wastewater infrastructure was going to be adequate. They did provide analysis that our utilities department has signed off on. Um the biggest thing is there's a sewer lift station in the far southeast corner of Red Tale Ridge. We really wanted to make sure that the that lift station was sized appropriately for the additional development square footage and the other distribution infrastructure up to our wastewater treatment plant was adequate. And our uh our public works staff have signed off on what's being built already. So they don't feel that additional infrastructure for water and wastewater is needed with this um you know moving the additional development to the new campus area. So with that, um staff is recommending approval of both of the general development plan amendments. We do have the condition just for clarity here that when they come in for the PUD, we will work out any of those transportation improvements more formally through an agreement when the PUD comes through. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thanks. Let's open it up for questions. And Commissioner Mahaley, if you have hand raised, I can't see it anymore. So, uh, just go ahead and start talking if you choose to. Uh, I I'm good for I'll hold a few questions I'm formulating, but I'm good. Thank you. All right. Great. Thanks. Questions? Yes, Commissioner Bangs. Yeah, I got a few questions. You said transportation improvements would be reviewed at PUB. I presume that's public transport as well as cars, everything.

Right. So, the so this traffic study is really looking at vehicular traffic. I think with Red Tail Ridge, we did um focus extensively on multimodal. Um so there is a pretty robust um trail and sidewalk network that I can go into some detail that is being built within Red Tail Ridge. The red part of our agreements with the Red Tale Ridge Metro District also is to have a microtransit shuttle service that would serve Red Tale Ridge. So those are those things are in the works. We don't have RTD public transit. We're planning to meet with RTD and try to work on future plans for that as well.

Okay. Thanks. Thanks, Director Zakaro. Um Zero Carol uh my question is related to something that we've seen um also in some of the public comments this this sense of the density swap and trying to sort of guarantee I guess if you will something around that density so that um it doesn't get swapped for the reasons that we've discussed tonight but then you know subsequent approvals to the a GDP down the line pro maybe could change those. I'm just curious how Yeah. what what you how you'd respond to that.

Yeah. Yeah. So, I you know, if this were to be approved, this would set the zoning. It would set the caps and um theoretically they those could be changed. Zoning is set up so it could always be changed by a future city council. Um you know, you you never want to bind, you know, you don't know what's going to happen 10, 20, 50 years from now. So, future city council certainly, but I don't think the intent is that these would change, but we technically we're they wouldn't be precluded, but it would require an ordinance, you know, a zoning amendment or a GDP amendment in the future to do so. And then I guess um maybe just building on that for a second. Then at that point, you know, let let's say 10 20 years down the line um an applicant does propose a change potentially utility services could change and and there would be the ability of the city to to serve the area better perhaps or something. I mean would those be some of the kinds of considerations

or not? Yeah. Or not. Or not. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. I I think so. You know, when new development, especially major development comes in, we are um needing to make sure we're obligated to make sure that we conserve those developments. And that goes hand inand with all of this future planning. Our utilities department does do future planning for water and wastewater. They have planned out to a growth scenario in the future. You know, we are a landlocked community. we are working on our comprehensive plan and they they they've accounted for some future growth but if it went beyond a certain amount. I would also you know we would have to expand facilities. I would say too when development comes in we have utility system development fees that are intended you know they're they're priced to pay for expansions and water rights and all of those things. So, our utility departments always re-evaluating those fees to make sure that they can have enough water rights and the the infrastructure is adequate.

Okay. Thank you. That's very helpful for me. Um, go ahead, Commissioner Choy. Thanks, J. So, Director Z Carl talking about the A Vista um GDP. Um I know that it is it is contextualized as a public use dedication designated for open space. How long does that dedication last? Is it in perpetuity? Is it until Yes, they Yeah, they would transfer it to the city. We would take ownership. Okay. So, title would fully transfer to the city. Okay. And then and then we would zone it open space and then it would be subject to our charter provisions. We could not reszone it without a a vote of the residents to change that.

So by zoning it, it would take it out of the Vista GDP. Yes. Okay. Yep. Thanks. Um there was some question raised in public comment regarding um even use of the word swap um and that we don't have like procedures on how uh we would approach this. Uh this does seem to be a one-off. I just curious if you had any thoughts, concerns, feelings regarding

Yeah, we don't you know some communities have formal what you call transfer of development right programs. this really isn't anything close to that. I think it was a novel idea as staff was working with the hospital. Um, and knowing that there were community concerns about traffic especially and also that not that we couldn't expand our infrastructure, but we, you know, within the existing infrastructure, especially that sewer lift station, we wanted to make sure that there was adequate infrastructure for that. So, um, again with the capping the development rights, um, on the A Vista parcel, um, you know, it it made a lot of sense to do the public land dedication and transfer for all of those, you know, for all of those reasons. So, it it was more of a a negotiated concept again to address potential community concerns.

Great. Thank you. I have a quick question. So you made the statement, but I just want to be sure. You said this GDP for the new site, the new hospital um would affect or these exceptions would affect the 40 acre parcel only. It wouldn't set a precedent for the rest of the Red Tale Ridge development. Correct. Okay. And then it may be a question for the applicant, but with this increased density at the new site, is the intent to build it out to the full density in the first phase or will there be expansion in future years?

Yeah, I'll let them talk to that. They um about their initial I think it is phase, but I'll let them describe their initial and future phases that they're planning. Okay. And then on trails, you said when we dedicate this open space or if we dedicate this open space, no trail access today with the current use of the A Vista GDP. Could that potentially be changed if the use of the existing plot were to change?

Yeah, it could be renegotiated and we could amend those agreements and we we've talked to them about that. Um, and that's their preference is that it be set this way with this GDP amendment and then if the uses changed um, and future owners or users were interested then, um, we could look at amending that. Okay. Thanks.

I'm going to ask one more question here and tell me if I confuse myself or anybody else in the room. So overall, the intention is to say, hey, we have a current 750,000 square foot development cap in the A Vista GDP. We're going to reduce that by 350ish,000 square ft to result in that now new development cap that is somewhat approximate to what's built there currently. In doing so, we're also going to transfer seven plus acres to the city that's going to be dedicated open space for the for the purpose of that transition of not gaining any more land in the Red Tale Ridge development, but just increasing the development cap for the parcel that again is is owned by um the Vista Group. So it's a net gain for just land area for the city with this. My question about the A Vista property, the current A Vista property is um even though the development cap is being reduced, but it's sticking with the current built square footage and the overall then remaining parcel also decreases by 7 acres plus is the ratio of developed square footage on the remaining parcel. Does that result in a higher developed ratio than what currently exists?

Right. Yes. The the the ratio would increase. Um so, and I think maybe this is what you're getting to, maybe not. But in some developments, we have floor area ratios that set the cap, including in Red Tale Ridge. The the A Vista GDP doesn't have a ratio cap. The cap is a it was set as a square footage cap. It wasn't described as a ratio, but the but it would be a higher ratio. Do and do you know what that ratio change is? I don't know. But yeah, we we can calculate it if you would like if you're interested in knowing. It would be a good data point to have. Okay. Yeah, if possible.

Commissioner Moly, I'll get to you, Commissioner Haley, in just a moment. Oh, sorry. Uh, one quick question on open space. There's not an existing trail in the on the existing open space, nor one planned either.

Yeah. So, that's a good that's a good question. So, um there's a so there's some social trails up there and then there was even um our our golf course staff actually used to access the back side of the golf course. That was part of the social trail. I think they've stopped that practice. So the the track has gone away, but I think there are still social trails on that side, and we could build a trail on the northern 10 acres. Um the So the idea of the and there are plans and desires to build a trail through there um connecting 88 around to the US 36 trail. Um the city did some study in 2018 and there are multiple alignments that they studied for a trail to connect. Um the majority of the trail would go so some of the alignments go through the new 7 and 12 acres. There's one alignment that goes through the 10 acres to the north. All of the alignments would we'd still probably have to work with the hospital because there's still some other property connection through their property. Um, so you know, those are ongoing discussions we could have with the hospital if and when we were prepared to actually build a trail there.

Thank you. Doesn't seem to me there's any benefit to the city to accepting that uh request of not putting trails on that, right? Why would we ever I mean, don't we want the property as open space unencumbered by a restriction,

right? So, so in working with the open space staff, we have three categories of open space. Two of them allow activity, different levels of activity. There is one type of open space where um you know, no activity is allowed. So, it's not completely unusual. I think I think our um open space manager in the hearing last night said something like 30% approximately of our open space is restricted from activity in the city. So, it's not completely unusual. So, we do think there's value in just having the buffer and the habitat and so forth. Even though it wouldn't be um it wouldn't be developed, it it also doesn't mean the public couldn't walk on it. It all it just means we wouldn't be inviting the public to come onto the open space and having facilities there that would attract the public onto the open space.

Right. But in typical open space planning, wouldn't you want to have the development on the outside of that and keep the core of it? Yeah. And I think we we also think acquiring it now and then having maybe the opportunity for future discussions um is better than not getting it at all is another reason to potentially accept it now or perhaps better to get it unencumbered. Sure. All right. Yeah. Uh Commissioner Mahaley,

thank you. Um so uh question regarding campus drive for for the sake of the record and for completeness I want to make sure my my interpretation of the presentation is correct. Um so based based on the report and the traffic study that's in the packet um it seems like this amendment as proposed doesn't have a negative effect on the plans for campus drive and it it seems like it actually the the redistribution of developed area actually seems to improve the outlook for traffic flow onto campus drive. Am I interpreting that correctly?

So, um, when the applicant's traffic engineer comes up, I would like him to answer that question. Um, I think he's he's definitely best positioned to answer that question. Um, and kind of, you know, how the analysis came about because I think there was some consideration of removing the future development potential. Um, and that may be why it's showing as improved on campus drive. Yeah. and and acknowledging that that extension has been a priority for, you know, a long time, predating even, you know, my time in Lewisville. Um, it it seems like this is a step in the right direction, but just want to make sure we're interpreting that correctly.

Yeah. So, um, yeah. So, we I think they'll note that and when they come up and do their presentation, they can answer that question. Thank you. And not to make you self-aware, Commissioner Haley, but there's about a almost three-foot picture of your head on both screens here. I'm not sure. It's not going away. It's not going away when you're not speaking. So, just to warn you. How ominous. Yes. There we are. All right. Any additional questions for staff at this time? Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing none, I would invite the applicant up, please. Unfortunately, we can't scan to make sure that's only water you're drinking, but is indeed water. You'd know otherwise. Do you want to plug in now? He's going to start. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the planning commission. We appreciate the opportunity to appear before you again. Uh my name is Mark Smith and I'm the CEO of Advent Health A Vista Hospital and our address is here in Lewisville uh 100 Health Park Drive. Uh we are obviously here tonight in support uh and on behalf of Advent Health uh uh ask for resolutions 12 and 13 and recommendation of the approval of the amendments uh to the AISTA GDP and the Kico Phillips campus GDP. We are uh as Advent Health a healthcare delivery system. We have 55 hospitals in nine states uh countless ambulatory facilities and over 100,000 employees. Uh just a context of uh our organization. Uh and as you're all aware, we recently have purchased the acreage that we're talking about here tonight, the 40 acres in Redill Ridge. Our purpose in doing so is to be able to build a replacement hospital or a Vista. Uh A Vista uh is the longest continuously operating hospital in the Advent Health system. Uh and we trace our roots back uh to the Colorado Boulder Sanitarium in 1896. We've been doing business continuously since that time for 129 years. Since 1990, we have served Lewisville in our present location and we've done so during that time as its only acute care hospital. Uh we have loved being part of this community. uh in our current location caring for its health care needs uh with excellence. Uh in that time we've delivered over 62,000 babies as I think we said last time that we'd look at it as two two Lewisvilles uh that we brought into the world. Uh not surprisingly however during that period of time uh the needs of a community hospital can change over the course of a third of a century. In order to better serve Lewisville and our surrounding communities, we need both a different location and a

different building. We need better access for our patients. We need room to expand and grow. At a very practical level, we saw the challenges posed by our current location during the recent Marshall fire uh where there was only one way in and out of our hospital campus. In short, as we plan for our future, it's apparent to us that we need both a site and a structure that can meet the evolving health care needs of the communities that we're serving right now. Advent Health in conjunction with our project team who is here tonight uh is in the schematic design stages of planning our future hospital at Redail Ridge. Our design and project team is going to walk through the details here shortly of our GDP plan with the planning commission. We recognize that our PUD submission, which we'll be submitting later this year in November, is where we will address comprehensive site plans, our site access, our floor plans, elevations, number of other project specifics. But we do want to acknowledge to the planning commission tonight that while the approval of our GDP is a necessary step in the process, we fully recognize that there are design standards, city requirements that will need to be met in that PUB process uh which we will follow and that we intend to follow those channels and work with the city to demonstrate those specifics. We would like to thank the commission for consideration of our resolutions. uh we believe they represent the outcome of thoughtful discussions with the city. We appreciate the opportunity to dialogue with director Zakaro uh and how to serve our community well and also allow us to develop the access and the space needed for growth. This point tonight I'm going to turn the floor over uh to our design team and our project team. They will introduce themselves as they speak uh and do a presentation about some key aspects of our GDP that we think will be illuminating uh and then they'll be

available to take questions uh at the end of that. So with that, I'll turn that over to our project team to do their next step in the presentation. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Valerie Wilkins with Adams Management. We're the program manager and owners rep for Advent Health for the A Vista Campus Project. If we make sure you're I'm hearing you fine by speaking in the microphone because that's what goes out to the rest of the world. And uh whether you're a Lewisville citizen or not. I am not.

Thank you. was working. Okay, introduce yourself. All right, Commissioner Haley, just to double check you can see the presentation slides. Hi. Great. Yes, I can. All right, great. Hi, I'm Fsan Mccui. I'm the project manager with Smith Group, the design team on the project, and I am not a Lewisville. Thank you.

All right. Um so we're here tonight to kind of walk through um why we are proposing to go up to five stories for a hospital at the Red Tail development um and really talk through what those parameters that we put in our GDP amendment will mean and potentially what it could look like from a massing perspective and how it contextually fits in within the area around our site. Um, as director Sakaro had gone through, we do have um many provisions in our bulk um and yard setbacks and standards. When we were going through and evaluating up to five stories, we did not want to put any provisions in here that would give you a giant fivestory block on this property. We wanted to make sure that there were architectural elements that um really create the mass of the building, start to break down the scale. So when you are on campus and you're experiencing it also as you approach the campus that it is appropriate from far away you can understand where the hospital is. You have good wayinding from the highway from Northwest Parkway so you really know where you're going in case of emergency or to visit loved ones at the hospital. As you get closer to the facility um and you approach the building we start to set it back. So, um, any sort of facade that's greater than 100 ft, which we will definitely have, uh, many elevations that are longer than 100 ft and greater than 45 ft tall, we're going to step back the building. So, at that point, we are going to make sure that you're going back 15 feet um, from the face of the lower podium, that 45 foot mark. It's important to note that that setback, not only is it a 15- foot setback, it is only allowed for 50% of the building square footage. So, we really are trying to limit the amount of height that will be on the campus, but then still give us all the operational flexibility to better serve our patients and give

better adjacencies um as we're flowing through the hospital from ED to operating rooms to ICU. As you continue to step back, we do feel it is important to include roof screening for all of your mechanical units. Hospitals require a lot of mechanical units on the roof um to provide all the air flow for your facility. Um we do think it's important to make sure that that screening is incorporated architecturally so it doesn't just look like a fence on top of a roof um but actually is part of the overall massing and composition of the facility. We do recognize though that we do want to have additional setbacks. So continuing on um with that pattern. So we're doing another 10-ft set back once you're above 95 ft. Um some examples of this massing you can see on the screen. Uh starting off with the larger mass on the left, that would be your fivestory hospital. And then going down, we do have a fourstory zone and a three-story zone identified on our parcel. It's so that way we have our expansion and opportunities for a medical office building. It's important for a hospital to always have a medical office building on campus as well. So that way the physicians have direct access not only to their patients um from a day-to-day clinic but have quick access over the hospital in case of emergencies. Um so as you step back four stories would be approximately 60 ft and then going down to three stories at 45. Those are the max height for each one of those stories. It could definitely be lower but in a minute I will explain why we have to get to these um heights to serve hospitals. Here's another example of what that massing would look like on the site. So, right now you're standing on the corner of Northwest Parkway and Rock Crest Drive. Um, looking west uh northwest um back at the site.

You will also notice that with our zoning of our fivetory, fourstory, and threetory, we have pulled that back from Northwest Parkway as much as possible um to again not have a large facade right up against the the streetscape. We do want to recognize that there are a lot of hospitals, modern day hospitals that are built at least five stories. Five stories seems to be pretty average for hospital height because of those reasons of operational efficiency um and transport of patients. These are examples of a few of them um from Advent Health and other areas around town such as uh Children's Hospital North there. Do note that everything I've been talking about about the massing, the scalability, and that what it feels like to approach the site, these are good examples of how buildings are able to achieve that um as they break down the materiality, the mass, and the entry points of buildings. These are local Colorado hospitals um that are also five stories around town. Top left is Good Samaritan, not too far from here. On the right you have UC Highlands Ranch. Bottom left is St. Anthony North, also very close. And on the right is UC Health Medical Center of the Rockies. There are many examples of five-story um hospitals here in Colorado, but these are just a select few um of modern-day architecture. As we continue through, we did do some um analysis on Colorado Hospital Heights uh today. Obviously, these are not all the hospitals in Colorado, but is a good handful of them. You will see that orange line is the DATM line of facilities that are three stories or below. There's only about three of them for hospitals that are three stories. One of them being the existing A Vista Hospital. The rest of them are above.

Hospitals do have larger floortofloor heights. And that's why when you're looking at a fivetory or four story in comparison to a multifamily residential, we do have to have additional area within our floor tofloor to be able to include all the mechanical that serves a um a procedural room or a patient room. When you're in an operating room, everything's tucked away. It's very nice and neat, right? Is you're thinking about infection prevention. Everything has to have a place. But what you're not seeing is all the messiness that's happening above the ceiling to make that work. Above the ceiling, you have um many items such as structural supports when you're looking at all the boom lights, the mechanical units that come down, your med gas that needs to serve the patients. You have a specialty um air system that make sure that you provide adequate air flow around the patient to prevent uh prevent uh uh infection infection prevention. Sorry about that. Um, and then above that, as you're starting to coordinate the structure coming down, all these large ducks, dedicated exhaust, it's a maze above that ceiling. So, if you were to lower that, we wouldn't actually have room to adequately serve these building, serve these rooms, and allow the um physicians within the room to be able to perform their surgeries like they need to. Um we do want to point out some contextual heights around the site. Uh this is the map and in the next uh slide I will show you the images. So ABC are directly across from Northwest Parkway of the site. The blue box is our parcel. Um, and then as we kind of go out about a mile and a half, you start to see some other large uh facilities across the uh 36 corridor as the director Sakaro had mentioned. Directly across the street on the top line are the four and fivetory multif

family housing. Um, and then on the bottom is more of those higher uh office buildings that we see a little bit further out at that one and a half mile radius. So with that, I will turn it over to Valerie

to address the question about phasing. Uh for this parcel, we are going to do this in multi-phases. There the the number of phases is still to be determined, but currently in our PUD that you will see from us in November. We will have the hospital and we will have a medical office building as part of our phase one. There could be a future second medical office building and a future bed tower expansion. So those are the items we're still working through from a design planning standpoint. For day one though, it will be the hospital and one, one medical office building. To address the questions about the trail, uh we did obviously talk to the open space board last night and some concerns about that side. Uh from our standpoint, currently for a Vista, it's a secure medical campus, so there's a lot of risk with having additional folks on the campus. Centennial Peaks is a behavioral health hospital. Those patients have a little bit extra care. So, not trying to encourage public to be on that campus and the trails could encourage that. They could use the parking lots to access those trails. Concerned then the patients cannot have their space to park to get in to get their care further hurt that process and then just having open that area for public to come into that. There's also the liability side if someone was to be hurt on that parcel. And so just working through what does that look like from the backside. Advent Health is open to future conversations about the inclusion of of the trail if it's no longer a health campus or there's other developments as we go through. While Advent Health owns that parcel, they do not own every building on that parcel. So the the medical office building, Centennial Health or Centennial Keys, they are not owned by Advent Health. So we cannot control what their future plans are at this time. So, we'd like to have a future conversation on the the trails.

Curtis, you want to come up? Thank you.

Good evening. Um, members of the planning commission, my name is Curtis Row. I work with Kimley Horn and Associates. I'm a traffic engineer. Um, I am not a resident of Lewisville. And so to answer the question about campus drive, um that is an important street in the network and so completing that um in this study area does have uh quite a bit of benefit providing access to uh 96 street as noted. Um the roadway and the intersections as currently planned will accommodate this hospital traffic. there are no additional improvements that are needed uh with the hospital with this um planned phase full buildout including the full buildout of the entire Red Tail area. And so um the commissioner is correct looking at the traffic study. Um campus drive will work really well u very well from a traffic standpoint uh with this additional project.

So hopefully that answers that question. I'm happy to answer any others. Great. As we go. Thanks. All right. If anybody has, you can feel free to chime in now, but we can also bring them up later. I have a couple questions. Okay. Regarding traffic? No. Oh, okay. Traffic question. Yeah. All right. Um the the the traffic study was extensive. I'll have to admit I didn't read every page. Um

does the traffic study assume a certain level? I mean, we talked about a micro shuttle service. It assumes a certain proportion of traffic will be in that mode or does your study assume personal car traffic only? So it uses national average national standards for how much traffic a hospital generates. And so like in this case it would be more vehicle centric uh because the institute transportation engineers it they do data collection at hospitals all across the country and so then based on that they develop the equations that we use to calculate how much traffic is going in and out. Um and so that's the baseline. I know we know from living here that we are very in tune to multimodal um aspects of transportation and so the actual vehicle trips from a lot of the uses that we have here in Colorado that generate traffic are less lower than what the IT predictions have because nationally if you compare us nationally you can see that that we are ahead of a lot of other locations that um don't provide the multimodal um connections as we do here in Colorado.

So, does it factor in Yeah, go ahead. I know the ultimate Red Tail Ridge plan for bikeways, pathways, whatever. Have you factored that into your assessment or that will only be a benefit if it's a good trail infrastructure and people choose to use bikes, ebikes, then there'll be less traffic than you're currently modeling. Correct. Yep. It'll only be a benefit. So uh we do anticipate that traffic will use that but we provided a conservative analysis using the national equations but we do anticipate that yes there would be a traffic reduction expected but when we do our studies we follow the national standards the guidelines for that and so in essence this is a more conservative analysis. Okay thank you. Yes

I do have traffic questions now. Um, so is it is it correct in assuming that when you did your projections for the intersections adjacent to the A Vista property in Red Tale Ridge that you were also contemplating impacts from the rest of Red Tale Ridge development through those same intersections? Yes, we were. Yep. We looked at full buildout of the entire area. The entire Okay. And for the A Vista property within Red Tale Ridge, you were contemplating the healthc care use type at the full buildout of both office buildings, the full buildout with the tower expansion and the additional 350,000 ft through the swap. Correct.

Okay. So, worst case everything. Yes, sir. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Maybe next team member. That concludes our presentation. Okay. From the owner. Um, thank you. Yes. Additional questions. A couple additional questions. Yeah. Um, so thanks for throwing up these contextual uh height references in the adjacent properties in Broomfield. I know residential and hospitality floor heights are much smaller than hospitals. What is the actual height of those facilities that you're showing up there in AB and C?

Yeah, so on average you would do 10 to 12 feet per floor for residential. Um so C for example which is directly across um it's five stories which would be 60 ft and then they have a um mechanical screening above that which um we weren't able to find the exact footage but based on the scale is another 10 to 12 feet. So it's roughly 70 square 70 linear feet in height. Okay. So 70t compared to what was 120 with the top of the mechanical with the top of mechanical 105 105. Okay. And that is that a a top of the mechanical you're talking about a mechanical penthouse where everything is enclosed including kind of high velocity exhaust those types of things. Okay. So nothing

that would be the max height. Yeah. Okay. Um I'm I'm trying to figure out where the idea for the 350ish,000 addition in terms of the development cap came from. Was that driven by programming of the hospital for full capacity or and that and and that programming necessitated hey we need an additional 350,000 ft or was it hey if we do this swap we can get this high and make this big and then we can kind of build out to to be the gas that fills the volume.

Correct. It was the overall master planning of how to serve this community with the additional expanded services and the additional beds. So, it was more driven from what is the program that is needed, not let's just go try to get as much as we can. It was how many beds can we put on this campus? What serves this community? We went through the demographics, the projections, tried to analyze where this campus is headed that would fit the ultimate goal of the bed need for this campus. And then the medical office buildings that Assange referred to, we need those on-site also for physicians and to grow their businesses. So they're there to serve patients in the hospital.

Sure. Okay. And knowing that those are are you know pretty linear in terms of their association, what was the difference between the pre 350,000 foot edition in terms of number of beds and number of medical offices versus what you have now? That's a good question. Uh I don't know that we fully know that answer right off the bat. Uh the the hospital we are currently planning through schematic design we are about 373,000 square ft and we are going to include 150 beds in that version. Okay. And that would be very close to the development max that we currently have.

Okay. And just for context, how does that compare to the current a Vista in terms of number of beds? Number of beds. They're 90. They're at 90 right now. So 90 to 150 including this 350. Correct. Okay. Thanks. Additional questions for the applicant at this time? Yeah. No. Seeing none. Thank you very much.

I'll now open it up for public comment. I see we have a few people online here. Um if you want to use raise hand um then I can we can unmute you at this end if anybody wanted to speak. Um as we do so uh Jeff Hurt um do we have two addendums now or one addendum for the public comments that we've received via email?

How do you want? Right. So um the addendum um I provided on the dis. So there were a handful of additional comments um that are on the dis and up on the bulletin board. So we'll motion to enter that as addendum one. So moved. Second. Thank you. All in favor? I.

Thank you. And if anybody wanted to speak now would be the time. Please limit me yourself three minutes beginning with your name and city of residence please. Hi, my name is Cindy Bedell. I live in W 2 Lewisville. I just have a question. I think during the presentation it was said that Centennial Peaks is a separate entity from Advent Health, but I'm not sure I heard that correctly. So, I'm just curious what will happen with Centennial Peaks, if it will stay there, if it's affected by this change or not. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any additional public comment? Seeing none online. Yeah.

Well, we'll move through um and actually invite the applicant back up uh so you can either wish to address anything that's been raised by public comment or additional information that you have for us regarding it all. be happy to speak to the comment around Centennial Peaks. Uh they have a land lease which extends uh for more than 50 more years. Uh so we expect that they will be there for some time to come uh on the campus uh serving the community. So this will not uh none of our plans will affect their presence or continued operation there. and to foreshadow possible conditions. Uh how would you feel about a condition uh that requested you um reconsider uh having no trails on that open space?

I I think we would be very open to continuing the conversation. Uh we do believe uh we want to be thoughtful about the proximity of the trail, you know, to the existing medical facilities. That's our chief concern. Uh but we are certainly amendable to continuing those conversations. Thank you. Uh yeah, Commissioner Mal, maybe maybe one um slightly different question than what we've spoken about before. So any plans after you would make the move from the A Vista campus to the to the new Red Tale campus with the building that you currently own there. We're still under evaluation for exactly what our proposed use for that would be. Okay. Okay.

Uh we don't want to take anything off the table, but clearly the bulk of our inpatient activity is indeed planned to be transferred. Okay. To the new location. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. And a staff response and closing statement. Um last chance to get questions in.

Um I guess that does prompt a question. So what were the assumption? I guess it's a traffic question again. What what were the assumptions about the use of the current a Vista campus once the hospital moves? I mean if it the use and the future development obviously dictates a lot more traffic potential. Correct. Yes. So the uh future use was assumed to be the existing use medical. So we didn't we didn't adjust any of those volumes. So it maintained medical. So if it became high density residential, that would change the equation. It would. Yep. That that would be different traffic generation.

Okay. Thanks. Yes. Thank you. I don't have a closing statement, but there was an outstanding question about the floor area ratio that would result after the open space dedication. So their cap would be 398,894 square feet. So if you apply that to the existing um overall campus area, that's a floor area ratio of 14%. And um if you dedicated that open space land with that same development area, it goes to 16%. That's very approximate. I did a quick quick calc there.

Thanks. I appreciate that. Thank you. Any additional questions? Seeing none. All right. Uh I will now close the public hearing and the planning commissioners will deliberate on the evidence presented. During deliberations, no further public comment or other testimony or evidence will be received. Who's got some thoughts on their mind? Commissioner, please.

Okay. Um, thank you uh both staff and the applicant. And um I I I guess one of the things I want to say is that I really appreciate the idea of um how you've kind of come up with uh making this a proposal that that um sort of balances these things. I I really appreciate that that we're um that we looked for ways to retain this hospital. its great service to this community and figured out a way to keep it here. So, as you can tell, I'm leaning towards supporting these uh these two resolutions. Um, so I again I applaud the applicant and staff for kind of working through that and making that happen. Um, and I also I'm I'm I guess one of the things that I am looking at as a benefit is uh the the open space dedication too. you know, here's here's a piece of property that has been identified by our open space board as a as a desirable addition. It's a contiguous piece of open space to an existing one that we have. So, it builds on what we already um have. So, I think that's that's a that's a real benefit that we're getting out of this. Um, I I'm struck by the the that the massing and the height proposals, uh, they feel thoughtful to me. They feel appropriate for this use. Um, and so the standards that you've proposed in those bulk standards, um, I feel like those are are going to fit the scale of the development. They fit the context of the existing intersections and and adjacent neighborhoods there. I I look forward to seeing the the plans when you when you come in the next couple of months. So, um yeah, I'm I'm in support and and I'm

glad we're finding a way to to make this work and and that we've been able to balance all this with the the the really kind of keeping the traffic and the utility questions resolved. So, I just appreciate that. So, that's kind of where I'm coming from, I think.

Thank you very much, Commissioner Molen. I I can jump in um great because I think my position is very similar to Commissioner Molen's. Um thank you for summarizing that well. Um I'm I'm generally in favor. I I I will say I think the application uh by both Director Zukar, the presentation by Director Zukar and the application presentation by the applicant I think did um was effective in assuaging some of my fears about height. In general, I I'm less concerned about the height based on the designs that they showed and the fact that it's the low point in the area. Um I do like that we redistributed the some of the developable area to that point. You know, looking at the big picture systematically, that's where you'd want to put it. Um I don't think it'll feel particularly out of place with the current um existing development there. So, I think that's a good job of I think this application is a good job of of supporting um the hospital, which I think it's important that we we do what we can within reason to help it make make sure it stays in Lewisville. Um while also balancing needs and um I think the application did a good job of showing that and I think it'll fit in seamlessly within the developed area as it stands down in that that corner of the Northwest Parkway. So, I'm generally in favor. I appreciated the the detailed traffic study. um as as we consider in the future what what needs to happen to you know what or what what will happen with the existing a vista um parcel I mean the these will be future discussions but I don't think anything we're doing now uh sets us up negatively later and echoing commissioner Molen's comments about you know getting high priority open space you know that's already connected to existing open space um is a is a short-term uh win with long-term benefits it. So I I think this is overall very uh net positive and was well done to uh respect the concerns of the community. Um so I'm in favor. Thank you.

Thank you very much. I'm also particularly interested hearing deliberation on thoughts of whether uh what how we should approach that open space dedication trails or no trails as we discuss it. Anybody who would like to go next? Yeah, just I have nothing really to add to um to the two comments already. So, yeah, as always, appreciate the prep and the presentation and the detail. Um the the I think some of the public comment in indicated that the notion of a land swap was a little misleading, but understand the context and the need to improve or increase the density. I think we just need to be diligent and vigilant about the future plans for the existing Vista campus and what might ultimately be developed there and make sure that we don't conveniently forget or have amnesia about the commentary today about density and size and footprint. Um, and then appreciate the traffic study and I think everybody's focused on making sure that we have as many multimodal access points and routes to the campus as possible. Um, sounds like it's been conservative, but obviously it can always be less car dependent as far as possible, but yeah, generally I'm in support. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Choy.

So, thanks Director Scarl for the presentation. Also, thanks to the applicant for bringing the whole team. Um, and I I appreciate the fact that uh you and your organization have have been a good long partner of the city. Um, I had concerns about quite frankly the um buildout ratio of what would be remaining of the current a Vista parcel. Um, while I appreciate the ability of the land of the city to get another 7 acres of open space um, through the transaction, you know, I did have I did have concerns about essentially building to the boundaries um, if if that was going to be the case, but you know, your 14 to 16% rough calculation um, assuages that a little bit. So, I I think uh, that's not so much of a concern of mine. Um, I also I I really appreciate the fact that the um effort was made to properly program the new hospital facility and understanding uh and appreciating how vertical circulation really is a multiplier in terms of the effectiveness and efficiency of running a a hospital. Um I I really appreciate the fact that the consideration of the massing and the architectural um layout of what that additional square footage would be um lends itself well to efficiency rather than just spreading and you know greater footprint um for all the aspects related to some of the other things about development on otherwise undeveloped land. You know building up is better than building out. Uh and I I think that's a benefit of of looking at how this can be applied in this. So overall, um, you know, I appreciate the the, um, thoughtful consideration that went in just at this point to the, you know, working up to the SDS through the through the GDP application. I think that's a shows a great attention to

detail. Um, and I definitely look forward to reviewing what's going to be coming through the PUD, uh, where we'll get into a lot more of it. Um, but all those things considered, I'm I'm in support. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Um, so in general, I find myself in favor. Um naturally massing is a concern. It it's going to be highly visible. Um right, we've been accustomed to not having much there for quite a while now. Um and uh I do appreciate however that it is in the lower portion of the property as opposed to what had been approved previously uh which is going to be a little bit more visible and and stick out when you're considering viewshed of the mountains. Um, so I think on that level, um, I think the the, uh, stepbacks are just good design. So I appreciate that as well. Um, some of the public comments that raised questions about process and land swap and all of that. Um, I I appreciate those concerns. Um and yet I think that when we look at the whole the bigger picture kind of the whole city level uh I think we're at a pretty good place uh for how that can work. Um so uh and when you look at traffic issues and water and sewer and those issues uh I think those concerns have been addressed at this point. So thank you for looking into all of those. Um I would like to propose a condition uh that the applicant continued to work with staff uh in light of future OSAB comments uh on the whether there's trails or no trails in that additional space. I'm curious if how other people are feeling about that.

So you would maybe like if um on the dis today was a a resolution Let's see. That was that came from the meeting last night. Yes, that's correct. That's what was adopted last night. So, what was adopted last night? So, you're you're maybe looking at um adding the paragraph that was in that where the board further recommends that prior to city council hearing that the applicant meet with city staff to explore as a add to as a condition to ours. Yeah. Okay. I read that whole thing or do I need to

Why don't you read it? Uh just so we're all on the same page. Okay. Um let's see. The board further recommends the the open space advisory board.

Yes. Um, so yeah, we might have to alter that language, but the at least the way this was written is says the board further recommends that prior to the city council hearing that the applicant meets with city staff to explore if additional areas of parcel DD designated as a high priority for u by OSAP as shown on the 2023 priority acquisition map may be considered for dedication that the applicant consider allowing designation of the property as open space protected land and consider if a trail alignment could be allowed through the designated parcel at a future date.

So, here's I'm I'm not going to um pretend like I fully am the expert on all of the different open space designations, per se. Um the the way I I read what the recommendation was from the open space advisory board, there wasn't necessarily a contemplation, at least how it was presented even tonight, that indicated that that designation as an open space would come with any restrictions. But as the as the applicant has proposed, it comes with restrictions. I'm not sure that it does, though. Oh, it does

clarify that. So that there is a note on the GDP, the proposed GDP that includes the restrictions. It would restrict it to open ska open space preserved which doesn't allow activity. And then there's further notes that say no trails, trail heads or other amenities. So that note is being proposed on the GDP. That's the restriction.

So does this resolution from last night change that to open space protected land? So there yeah the the the effect was that their their condition was that there just be further conversations. They they weren't saying that this is a condition of their supporting the application overall. They just wanted to reiterate that they wanted further conversations before city council to see if we can come to an agreement to allow the different management that would allow a trail and then a potential trail in the future. Mhm. And given the timeline around when when will city council be hearing this?

Um pretty quickly I think um I don't have I think it was was it late October or November? October 7th is first reading and then yeah and then 21st. So we you know I think having further discussions with them can happen in a a very short time frame and can continue um you know through the hearing process as needed and and the three types of open space are open space preserved open space protected.

I don't know I'd have to open the charter to see yeah the charter has three. So pres preserved is the most restrictive and then protected is the middle and that starts to allow things like trails. There is a third category, I don't know the name of it, that allows even more public activity um type of management property, right, with kiosks and water fountains, fences, right?

I'll just say I'm I'm um I'm I'm happy we're having this discussion. I am I'm somewhat um respectful or not uh I don't know. I I hear what the applicant's concern is about wanting to kind of control access. um for their campus. And so I'm that that is sort of weighing on my consideration I guess a little bit but but so in particular is it is a concern that people will drive there and park there to access the trail. It's a public campus. Anybody can go there anytime they want to. Um yeah, there is no traffic restrictions right now. Yeah.

Right. So, I know that I know that when we're here deliberating items before the commission, we're wearing our commission hats and not our other hats from our previous lives or anything else. And it all counts.

It all counts. And you know I I think I think there is a good recognition that says while that area is accessible to anybody who drives their car onto the campus you know there are elements associated with it that I think of it in terms of compatible development right um and you know I I I would like to make sure that there are compatible developments especially in these adjacencies right that make the most sense in the most application you know where we already have 10 acres to the north of these seven acres that has the ability assuming that that is not director Zakaro open space preserved that original 10 acres you know I I think I think I'm I'm more hesitant to put a condition on our recommendation on what this is in terms of the impact that it has for the overall ability to develop what I would foresee the applicant coming with a PUD for the right development of a hospital inclusive of this 350,000 ft² addition. I I would be hesitant to put a condition of our recommendation for a a trail on to what this application is.

So this is more about maintaining the freedom for the city to determine what is compatible. Sure. Right. So if you look longterm um it gets sold and whoever builds something completely different. As a city, we're going to want to decide where how far away do we want the trail to be knowing that anything could happen in the future, but we want to have that we should have that freedom to decide where it goes. Yeah. Yeah, I guess my my perspective on that restrictions.

My perspective on that is you know through this entire um you know manipulation of all these different pieces. You know, there's the contemplation that says, hey, the city gets seven acres of open space by granting an additional development cap over here and whether or not that open space comes with a restriction about whether or not we might be able to have a trail on in the future or it just doesn't happen because of the whole application. To me, I wouldn't want to let perfect be the enemy of good, I guess. And yeah, no, I mean, I I don't see it as the enemy at this point. I just see it as giving us more freedom. Sure. Sure. I don't know that it will

that it'll prevent anything to an artery from happening. I guess what are the specifics around your condition then? Yeah, I guess that's my point as well. It depend what exactly depends on what the condition asking for. So, right. All we're asking for is continued discussion before they go to council. Oh, but I don't think that's a a condition though.

It Well, no, it is continued discussion. Yeah, it wouldn't be a typical um it wouldn't be a, you know, a typical condition which has to be met. Um when we worked with the open space board, I think they're struggling with exactly what you're struggling with now that they they certainly want to accept it. They recognize this is a desired parcel and um but they also just really wanted to formally encourage

the applicant to have discussions about potential use instead of just not saying anything about it at all. So, we kind of came up with this compromise. They wanted it in their resolution even though it's not a a standard type of condition. Oh, and I and I think that's part of my part of my difficulty in in contemplating this, right? If the condition is that you for have further conversations, like there's no stipulation about what the outcome of those conversations would be. No, very much so. Um, right. So perhaps

I could see it I could see it with a strong recommendation that, you know, discussion about the ability to have this, you know, trail system and, you know, enabled for the future. I think that'd be great. I think I think I have an issue maybe calling it a condition rather than a recommendation. because a condition is either something that if it's met then it conditions get passed on to city council and so this tells them that we were thinking about this and we're concerned about having this land permanently be blocked from ever having trails on it.

So so if that's the essence of the concern Director Zakaro is there is there something we can word that I think we understand the near-term limitations and concerns and why a vista would not want trail access. Can we word something that says should the land use change, should there be a new GDP submitted that we then have the ability and the right to request a change? We have to do it now.

Right. So I think so if if you're really looking at a more typical type of condition that you're used to, we would want to have a note or something on the GDP like the existing note that restricts it. We'd wanted to say that um you know if the land uses, we'd have to really think about it, but we'd probably want to say that if the land uses change or if there's no medical facilities here, that would automatically go away. Um I, you know, something like that. But again, with the the 50-year lease and all of these other things, we may be better off waiting for a new development to potentially come in um and then trying to renegotiate in the future. But that's the only thing I could think of off the top of my head is trying to change the note with the condition. And again, city council would be the final say on that. But you could come up with language that you wanted to propose that would supplement or change that note on the GDP.

I appreciate where you're coming from, Chair Bronn. The idea being that if we're going to if we're going to get a a piece of dedicated open space, it should it should come with as few strings sort of attached to it and and it should be something that the city um that it's that it has true open space value to the city and you know, not just landscaping for future buildings that could show up there, right? I I I appreciate that. So, um, yeah, I just wanted to be sure I was following your Yeah. Yeah. No, that's where I'm at. What are you sensing any condition language?

I I really wasn't trying to push it all the way, right? Say Say that again. Well, I'm not I'm not trying to push it to the point of we want to completely no strings attached. I understand that there is a discussion to be had. Sure. And that as a city, we need to be aware of those concerns. Yeah. So uh that's where I came up with this condition of discussion. Yeah. So would you still you would stick with something along the lines of what the the unless somebody kind of came up with something better. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think it's I think it's important to have something. Sure. Um because I think it has potential to be a big issue for the city.

Yeah. And I and and I actually, you know, in reading through what the OSAB put together, you know, I actually really do like and I'm not going to say condition because they say the board further recommends that the that prior to the city council hearing, applicant meets with the city staff, etc., etc., designation of the property as open space protected land. I I like that as a recommendation, right? We don't we don't have recommendation power, right? I mean, we

Yeah, I mean, ultimately, you're recommending to the city council approval or disapproval. Um, and you know, so we we talked to the So, we talked to OSAB about well, do you want to make a one of the things you could do is just make a separate motion and then say that the planning commission recommends and then you read that and then that would be put into the record. They would have that in the minutes. Um, we could even put it in the staff report that you echoed OSAB's recommendation with the formal motion and if that would pass as a motion and then you could just leave the resolution as is. That's one option to take it out of the resolution and take away that concern.

What are you feeling comfortable with? I mean, I like that. I like it. It gets it in the minutes. that memorializes it, right? But it doesn't get in the way of the recommendation to approve the resolutions. Okay, Commissioner Haley, I see you shaking your head. Yes. Yep. Agreed. Thank you. So, then uh Okay. So, we'll we'll do that as a motion to add a recommendation. I think you could just say somebody could make a motion say, you know, I make a motion to recommend to the city council and then read it and then you could just have a voice vote on that and then you can get to the formal resolution consideration.

If you're comfortable with it procedurally, yeah, I it's it's unusual, but I think you could I think you have a you can the commission can make a motion that we could reflect in the record. I think that's the best case here considering what we're working with. Okay. And are we good with the last paragraph of what OSAP put together? Is that what you just read to us? Is that last uh Yes, I believe so.

Sure. Okay. Well, then I I will I will move to have memorialized in the meeting minutes and included in the staff packet recommending this topic to council. um that the planning commission strongly supports and recommends the language presented by OSAB as a separate recommendation. I'll second that motion. Can we have a roll call vote, please? Commissioner Brown Eyes, yes. Commissioner Choy, yes. Commissioner Molen, yes. Commissioner Bangs, yes. Commissioner Mahelli, yes.

Motion carries. Thank you. Uh all right, then. Do we have any additional deliberations? Seeing none. No. All right, then. I would um Oh, should we makeot then? Yes. Motion. Okay. So, I'll I'll move approval of resolution number 12 series 2025, a resolution recommending to the city council approval of the A Vista Adventist Hospital General Development Plan, amendment number two. And Rob, I've forgotten which is your condition on which the next one. That's the next one. Okay, great. Thanks. All right, I will second that. Okay, Commissioner Brownise, yes. Commissioner Choy,

yes. Commissioner Molen, yes. Commissioner Bangs, yes. Commissioner Mahaley, yes. Motion carries. How about a motion for resolution 13? Sure. I'll move to approve uh resolution 13 series 2025 recommending to city council approval of the Kico Phillips campus GDP amendment number one with the stated uh condition that right commissioner Brise yes Commissioner Choy yes Commissioner Molen yes Mr. Bangs. Yes. Commissioner Mahaley. Yes. Thank you all. Thank you all for your time. You know, it's late nights for all your jobs. Appreciate your coming out. Thank you.

All right. All right. Why don't we take a five minute reconvene at 8:16? 16.

Thank you. Welcome back. Uh we'll now move into our third item of business. Um 811 Malnut reszoning. Reszoning. I will now open the public hearing on a request for reszoning. Um the purpose of the hearing is receive evidence regarding the application materials and provide a public forum for all interested parties who wish to comment on this request before the planning commission. The procedure for the public hearing will be as follows. First, there'll be a presentation and testimony by city staff followed by questions from the planning commission to staff. Next, we'll have a presentation and testimony by the applicant followed by questions from the planning commission to the applicant. After these two presentations, members of the public who have joined this meeting in person, by computer, or telephone may speak regarding the application. Anyone who would like to speak in person is asked to complete a speaker card, use the raise hand function if participating by computer, or star 9 if calling in by telephone. Please limit your comments to three minutes per person. Two people present at the meeting may pull their minutes to allow one person to speak for up to a total of six minutes. The purpose of the public comment is to receive public testimony, not a forum for debate or dialogue. Commenters are encouraged to raise pertinent issues and may ask questions for clarity. However, these questions will not be directly answered during the public comment period. The applicant and staff will then be allowed to make a closing statement and then close the public hearing and no further testimony or other evidence will be received unless the commission decides to reopen the hearing. Planning commission will discuss the matter and may approve, approve with conditions, deny, table, or continue to a future meeting. Public hearings are recorded for the public record. All testimony must be presented after stating your name and city of residency. Does anyone participating in this hearing object to the procedure I've described? Seeing none, uh do we have proper notification, please?

Yes. All public notice requirements have been met. Thank you. And do any planning commissioners have any disclosures? Actually, while we have everybody on board, I forgot to ask that question last round. There were no disclosures. Okay. Thank you. All right. please with your presentation. Thank you.

Uh good evening commissioners. This is Emily Klein Gibson, planner 2 with the staff presentation. Tonight's application is for resolution 14 series 2025, which is an ordinance to reszone 811 Walnut Street from residential medium density to commercial community. The property at 811 Walnut Street was platted with the Jefferson Place subdivision in 1880. The property is approximately 82 feet long and 25 ft wide and is located center on the block with Main Street to the east and Leafarge Avenue to the west. A building was constructed on the property in 1954 by the Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Company and was used as a new office for Lewisville's Switchboard Operating Center. This building was likely chosen as a new switchboard office because of its close proximity to the existing office at 913 Main Street uh which is outlined in black on the image on the screen. The subject building was constructed prior to any citywide zoning which was established later in 1962. The zoning placed the subject property in the residential R2 zone district just outside of the commercial business district also shown on the image on the screen. The subject property was outlined in blue. The R2 zone allowed for telephone exchanges as a permitted use and most other permitted uses in that zone were uh primarily residential. The property was then sold in 1975 and converted into two professional offices via a special review use certificate. A citywide resoning and updates to permitted uses occurred in 1976, which is would be the following year. uh and it would and it placed 811 walnut into the residential medium density zone which is its current zoning designation. That same year, the original SRU certificate was amended to allow a beauty salon and another SRU was granted

in 1978 for a pet grooming shop. It's unclear what criteria was being used to analyze SRU um during that time. However, present- day zoning code clearly defines the SRU review process and would not currently allow any of the previously approved SRUs in the RM zone district. All of the previously approved SRUs are considered non-conforming and must remain in operation to retain their non-conforming status. Once a non-conforming use ceases operation for at least one year, the use is no longer valid. The property is currently used as a professional office and all other approved special review uses have not remained in operation. Therefore, the professional office is the only valid SRU that was previously approved for the property. The request is to reszone the property from RM to commercial community or CC, which is the current zoning of the downtown Lewisville area. The requested reszone is so the historically commercial building could be allowed the same commercial land uses as the downtown area. As shown on the zoning map on the screen, the property is on the edge of the CC zone district which begins on the other side of an existing alley that runs along the eastern property line. At this time, the applicant does not anticipate any exterior alterations to the property, and any future exterior alterations or redevelopment would require a PUD, which would have to be approved at public hearings. A reason would not automatically place the property into the downtown overlay. However, if approved, staff recommends a follow-up action to initiate a text amendment to extend the boundaries of downtown Lewisville. And if that's the case, the property would then be subject to the design handbook for downtown Lewisville for any future exterior alterations. Staff reviewed all potential new uses that would be permitted on the subject property with the reszone that are currently not com permitted in the RM

zone. There are 23 total new uses that would be permitted with the reszone. 10 of those would be permitted by right would not rec require any additional review and the remaining 13 would be permitted as an S sur. This property is currently located in a residential zone and if reszoned it would be adjacent to residential zones. So all uses that require an SRU approval would not qualify for our administrative review procedure and must be approved at public hearings before planning commission and city council. staff finds that all byite uses are fully enclosed within a building and do not include exterior components. Any uses that may include an exterior component, such as outdoor dining um in connection with a restaurant, would require review and approval as an SRU at those public hearings. Section 174450 of the municipal code outlines four criteria for resoning requests and resonings should only be considered if at least one of the criteria is met. Staff finds that criteria two applies to this request which is stated on the screen and I'll also read it out for you. It states that the area for which resoning is requested has changed or is changing to such a degree that it is that it is in the public interest to encourage a redevelopment of the area. Staff finds the area zoning has changed over time and resulted in an underutilized commercial building. The original switchboard operating center use group no longer exists as a land use category and there are few RM uses that would work with the building's existing conditions. Additionally, all previously approved SRUs beside the office uh special review use have expired. So, the building no longer qualifies for most of its previously used uh commercial uses. While the reasonzoning would allow for a broader range of commercial uses, it does not permit a significant redevelopment or expansion of the site.

Um, as I previously mentioned, those would require a PUD, which would involve additional public hearings. Uh, the building's size and the site's physical boundaries also limit the scale and intensity of future commercial uses. So staff believes uh the change represents a reasonable extension of the existing downtown area instead of a major departure from the neighborhood character. Staff also finds that the rzone is supported by the 2013 comprehensive plan which encourages the city to support revitalizing existing downtown structures and promoting uh job creation and increased local revenues. So, with all of this, staff recommends approval of resolution 14 series 2025. Um, recommending approval of an ordinance to reszone the property at 811 Walnut Street from residential medium density to community commercial. And this concludes the staff presentation. The applicant is also here and has a brief presentation. Uh, thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Do we have any commissioner questions for staff? I just have one quick question. I see in the um use by right number 62 is our recently added natural medicine healing centers. Did staff verify that that specific location is still outside of that distance that we contemplated last it wasn't even last month I think it was at the beginning of this month that was not specifically verified. Um, however, if a natural healing center would come to us, we would verify it at that point. Okay.

Any additional questions for staff? Seeing none, thank you very much. We invite the applicant up. And if you begin with your name and city.

My name is JD Green. I'm the owner of 811 Walnut Street and I'm not a resident of Lewisville. Uh thank you Emily for the presentation and the uh uh our request to reszone from RM to CC brings the zoning into alignment with the building that has operated commercially for decades and allows for small locally owned retail use consistent with um Oldtown's walkable character. Um I'd like to bring up George Colbert with Colbert Hack Company to give a little presentation on what he wants to put in the building. Um just a small mom and pop retail shop. Um, but I think he's got a uh presentation, small presentation. Sure. Yeah, if you can introduce yourself and

we'll do it. Great. Thank you.

Um, let's see. Oh, I think this is it right here. Hi, George Colbear. Um, this is my wife, Michael and Colbear. Together, we are George Michael. Pretty hard to forget that. Uh, let me go to presentation mode here if I can real quickly from the beginning. Yeah. Um, yeah. So, we're Colbear Hatco. Let me just skip to this next thing and just tell you a little bit about ourselves. Colar Bear Hatco is a locallyowned, familyowned, high-end custom cowboy hat, cattleman, fedora, trucker hat company. That's basically what we do. Currently doing that out of our living room. Uh, well, our front room. Uh, we specialize in personalized fitting, shaping, styling experiences for uh, our customers. We're seeking our first storefront in historic downtown Lewisville. We love to tell you just a little bit about us. That's us. Uh that's us, George, Michael, um Michael and Colbert. These are our kids. We've been here in Lewisville for about six years. We've been married 25 years. These are our sons, Zach and Georgie, both in their 20s. And uh pretty proud of those guys. Uh so what do we do? We we provide a unique retail experience that uh we think will enhance the character of downtown. Uh lend to the the shopping experience in downtown Lewisville. This type of business is pretty much about 80% appointment only. It's not uh it's low impact, low traffic. This is an experience that's you know an hour or or more. uh when people come to to to do this kind of fitting, they're typically coming to town to not only get this hat, but maybe grab some dinner, go shopping in other places, that kind of stuff. It's quite frankly a destination uh type of uh retail. Um yeah, so customers would typically spend uh the rest of their afternoon or or evenings here in Lewisville. U the the uh product and services complement other retail shops that are already in town. They don't

compete, they complement. So, if you think of stores like Eleanor and Acme, those are a little bit of a higherend retail type of place. Same type of uh customer base that would be coming in. They'd likely find an outfit at Eleanor, come over and get a matching hat or vice versa. Same thing with Acme, that kind of deal. In fact, Eric over at Acme is a is a a proud owner and wearer of one of our hats. Um, what else? This also appeals to uh visitors that are coming in from out of town. Maybe they're coming in for the street fair. Here's a picture of us at the street fair with a lot of hats, a lot of momentum, a lot of enthusiasm from folks around town, but not only in our town, Lafayette, Longmont, other surrounding u municipalities where people are excited to see this get open open outside of our living room, which would be great. So, uh also this is a really popular uh type of retail or uh product for for weddings. I'm sure you're familiar with the Simon that opened recently. It's a destination spot for weddings. Um the the service that we provide is hugely popular. The guy that we use as a wholesaler taught all of us how to shave hats. He does 50 plus weddings a year. Has so much work he can't really keep up with it. So hence the 80% instore appointment only, but the other 20% is like popups, weddings, events, that kind of stuff. So we need a spot to store this type of thing. We also need some local talent that we can train to help us with that. So it would be a job creator as well. Pints in the park. We went out there, did a popup, extremely uh popular, had a lot of folks uh with a lot of enthusiasm, a lot of hats sold that day. We're also uh have just recently become NIL sponsors of a few athletes. So, these ladies on the screen here on the left is my wife and a player from the CSU Rams uh women's basketball team. We sponsor her now. And on the right hand side, you have two ladies from the CU women's basketball team. We expect uh that type of uh sponsorship and these types of athletes to increase

coming to Lewisville, taking photos, doing a lot of marketing materials in our space and in downtown Lewisville. Uh also, I was u hoping these guys would would stick around, but we're now the official Turkey Trot uh trucker hat um uh provider for the Turkey Trot. This guy on the left, Dave Benjies, he's one of the guys who started. He's one of our old neighbors. Uh you can see the Advent Health and A Vista on there. Uh so we're going to we're going to supply the hats for that. Anybody who signs up or even they don't have to sign up. Anybody who goes to the Turkey Trot website can uh link to our website and get a Turkey Trot hat and we're going to supply those as well. And also one of the big sponsors is the community food bank. Great group group of guys to work with. Uh again uh just couple last thing economic impact. It'll create jobs. It'll bring more tax dollars. It will bring through uh pull through businesses or business as people come to town, they'll spend more dollars at our spot, but also at other places. So, it strengthens our downtown retail and cultural destination, provides exclusive shopping for uh locals and visitors and attracts destination customers. I think I said destination customers multiple times. So, anyway, uh that's what we do. We thank you. Oh, one last one. Sorry. Why this building? Um, well, in case it doesn't work out, we can uh we can be phone operators, I guess. Uh, that's what it was built for.

No, it's not allowed anymore.

Okay. Sorry. Yeah, that one's that one's pulled. But, uh, we we've looked all over. Um, every spot there is just something that didn't work out. This is a perfect spot. It's a perfect layout. It's a perfect size. It's a it's a perfect setup for this appointment only model. There's a little bit of parking in the back. It's going to be low traffic. So, it really lends really well to what we want to do. Supports a revitalization. It's immediately available if we can make this happen. And from what I understand from the process, if this goes through tonight, we get through council, we could open the day after Thanksgiving, which would be critical to us getting started in the holiday season. So, we could get a nice good jump uh with our launch and that would kind of carry us through that January, February kind of lull that's expected. So, um anyhow, uh we thank you for your time. We appreciate um anything you can do for us and we would like to ask you to recommend uh approving the resoning.

Thank you very much. Yes. Any questions? Opening it up. Thank Thank you. Maybe just one um with the last slide there that you had. Sure. Uh do you anticipate any any um exterior changes to the building at this point? Yeah. I mean the only thing I mean we've looked at some signage like a really low profile something that's like this small that might hang. We haven't made any any plans to buy that but really the window space is probably enough for what we need to just get some signage in there. You know uh things either frosting or something on the on the windows but if we need to come back to ask for signage if we decide to do that then we would absolutely do that. Okay.

Any additional questions? I think the requirement is for it all to be self-contained indoors. Do you plan to use the outdoor space at all? No. I mean, the only thing we've thought about is it'd be nice to have somewhere for people to sit if we were, you know, we had uh meet, you know, appointments that were kind of stacking up or something, but we don't have any plans to do any business outside. And do you have an online business? I mean, will there be shipping to and from? Uh, we we just launched our website today. There might be a little bit of shipping. I I mean, there actually, I'll take that back. would be shipping of product from time to time, but if the wholesaler that we work with is in Denver and we we go grab that ourselves. And we're it's a IT consulting company now. We have a lot of computers coming in and out of there. So, there's a back door that the UPS just parks in the alley and brings all the stuff in through the back door there. Yeah.

Yeah. So, minimal shipping. I think it's going to be very localized to like the surrounding um zip codes, towns, that kind of stuff. Rob, I'm curious about what triggers ADA access. I'm seeing stairs and there is ADA in the back. Yes. Got it. Yeah. All right. And then as far as the occasional seating outside. Yeah. I don't think that would trigger anything. So, we don't allow outdoor sales. Right. So, I think, you know, if they had c, you know, if they put some chairs out there and they weren't um, you know, doing the work out there or displaying goods out there and they just had chairs out there for customers that were waiting, that would not trigger um the SRU.

And what are the rights of the people who live in the house behind there as far as noise, potential noise complaints or something like that? Right. So, um, you know, what the only thing we have in our municipal code is what we call unreasonable noise. So we don't have like and again this would so there's nothing other than if somebody was out there playing music or doing something I'd anticipate maybe a complaint that would be valid but somebody out there having conversations that's okay great and as far as the property owning as far as you're concerned the condition that it then become a subject to the is it the CDDSG

no it would be the downtown Yeah. Oh yes, thanks. Right. The overlay. Yes. Uh thank you for the question. Yeah, it would be the uh downtown overlay. Um so so currently our municipal code has a very specific definition for what's considered downtown Lewisville. It has boundaries, right? Um this is outside of those boundaries. And just to to stay consistent with the overall downtown area, I think staff's recommendation would be to initiate a text amendment just to modify the definition of what downtown Lewisville is. that would be included then include the property into the design standards for downtown Louisville

and and this would be in the transition area um which when you're adjacent to residential the transition area has architectural standards to make sure that any new buildings or building additions are appropriately transitioned to the residential area support that I do I have another property on Main Street that I own and I completely support the the design standards that go with that. So, so would that going back to our previous item, would that would that be a a condition to amend the text of the of the downtown or of the Oldtown overlay?

You know, we decided not to make it as a condition because I think this zoning could go through and I think staff would initiate that amendment um to include it. Um, you know, we do intend to, you know, the property owner supports it, would hopefully support that. We haven't really gotten into the detail about that with them yet, but the city could initiate that. We would like to do it with the support of the property owner. We would intend to ask, but we think it's appropriate and don't think it but don't think it needs to be a condition. Okay, great. Thanks. Thanks. Any additional questions? Commissioner Mahaley. Uh, I I'll hold my comments for deliberation.

Okay, great. Thank you very much. All right. Uh, I will now open up for public comment. Can you pop over and check attendees if there's nobody online? No raised hand. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. All right. Um, seeing no public comment. Um, we actually it's when we jump to applicant closing and response, but probably not much to add to that. Thank you. Staff uh closing statement. I have uh no further statements here. Thank you.

Thank you. I will now close the public hearing and planning commissioners will deliberate on the evidence presented. During deliberations, no further public comment or other testimony or evidence will be received. Who would like to begin? Sure.

Um I I think in my book this is a pretty easy one. you know, non-conforming for 75 years. Um, right. I think it's a little bit easier and better to bring it into the fold. I do appreciate staff's recommendation or in uh indication that you know there wants to be an adjustment to the actual language around what is the the uh oldtown overlay and or downtown overlay and you know make this further integrated into that um definition about what would happen in the future if exterior modifications were um to occur to to you know take advantage of its proximity to that transition point. So, um, overall I I think this is this is good. I'd like to bring it into the fold.

Great. Thank you, Commissioner Mahaley.

I'm I'm generally in I I I agree with Commissioner Choy um about bringing it in the fold and I'm I'm generally supportive of supporting the the small businesses. That being said, you know, and we touched on this earlier about, you know, how this would conform to the previous, you know, few I think two weeks ago discussion about natural um medicine centers. I I'm I'm generally in in favor of this. However, I do have a reservation regarding that. And I'm looking specifically at table one. um you know given that it and my concern is really rooted in the fact that it's immediately adjacent to you know an established neighborhood and immediately you know half its neighbors everything to the west is a neighborhood and so um the fact that this zoning would allow at least without considering the the language for for distances you know natural medicine healing center does give me pause for concern um I'm not sure what we could do about that um but that that really is my hang-up um in terms of being fair to the the existing neighborhood and you know and bringing this into conformance but um this is sort of a new wrinkle for an existing neighborhood. So just wanted to acknowledge that um

great thank you very much Mr. M. Sorry I'd like to just jump in um please briefly because technically we're closed. Oh, sorry. So, I just wanted to clarify that the natural medicines um it would be within that thousand foot buffer and there would be no um killing center allowed. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate that. That's a thank you. That addresses my concern. Thank you. Yeah, I think um not not much to add. It's a pretty good um I guess confirmation of the use case of the past many decades. So, I'm I'm generally supportive. It's uh hopefully it'll be a huge success.

Great. Yeah. Likewise, I'm going to be in support of this as well. So, I'm tempted to say yeeha, but that would be um I don't know.

All right. Excellent. Thank you much. I also find myself in support of it for the reasons as mentioned by my fellow commissioners. So, thank you all. With that, I would entertain a motion. I will Yes, a motion, please. I can uh move approval of planning commission resolution number 14 series 2025. Resolution recommending approval of a draft ordinance approving a request for a reasonzoning of lot 1 and 5 ft alley adjacent on North Block 3 Jefferson Place located at 811 Walnut Street from the residential medium density RM zone district to the commercial community CC zone district.

Second. Thank you. Roll call, please. Commissioner Brownise, yes. Commissioner Choy, yes. Commissioner Bangs. Yes. Commissioner Molen, yes. Commissioner Mahaley, yes. Motion carries. Wham. There we go. You're the first one to get them. All right. Thank you very much. Uh, yep.

All right. Great. Uh, do we have any planning commission comments regarding any other issues? you I am going to be absent on the October 9th meeting. All right. I will not I will not be here. Okay. As as will I. I will also be absent on October 9th. I'll be flying back to the states. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And I know we haven't developed our docket yet for um were we going to have a second meeting in October? As of now? No. Okay. Okay, it's it's it is possible that could emerge, but as of now, no. Okay, great. Thanks. Let you know as soon as possible. Certainly.

Just based on the potential of something coming up on the docket, can I ask I know we have standard language around when we do have a conflict. Um, yeah, you can work with Seth on that offline. Yeah. Yeah, we'll send that to you. Just send that to me, please. Thanks. All right. Any additional commission comments? Staff comments. Do we have anything you wanted to add in in closing? Seeing none, thank you all. Appreciate it. Uh with that then I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second. All in favor? Hi. Hi. Hi. Thank you.