Download Transcript
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.
[00:00:09]
EVERYBODY TO THE JUNE 16TH, 2026, MEETING OF THE RICHARDSON CITY PLAN COMMISSION. WE'VE GOT SIX COMMISSIONERS PRESENT, SO WE HAVE A QUORUM, AND I'LL DISPENSE WITH THE REGULAR INTRO INTO THE MEETING. SINCE WE'VE GOT A SHORT AGENDA TONIGHT. AND WE HAVE NO GUESTS IN THE AUDIENCE. BUT JUST TO KEEP IN LINE WITH OUR AGENDA. FIRST THING IS PUBLIC COMMENTS. AND I'M ASSUMING WE HAVE NONE. SEEING THAT THERE ARE NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM ONE.
[1. Approval of the minutes of the regular business meeting of June 2, 2026. ]
THAT'S APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF JUNE 2ND, 2026. ANY COMMENTS? CORRECTIONS. MODIFICATIONS. IF NONE, I'LL MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR. AND THAT PASSES
[2. Zoning File 26-07 – First Call Automotive Appearance: Consider and act on a request for a Special Development Plan, a Special Permit for a Motor Vehicle Repair Shop (Minor), and a Special Permit for a Car Wash on 0.4 acres at 400 Bishop Avenue and on 0.2 acres at 406 Bishop Avenue, and a Special Development Plan and Special Permit for a Motor Vehicle Storage Lot on 0.2 acres at 404 Bishop Avenue, on the east side of Bishop Avenue, north of Jackson Street, south of Davis Street, and currently zoned PD Planned Development Main Street/Central Expressway Form Based Code (Interurban Sub-District). Owner: Stephen Graham, Simple Development Partners. Staff: Derica Peters. (Public hearing continued from June 2, 2026, meeting; requesting additional public hearing continuance indefinitely.) ]
UNANIMOUSLY. ITEM TWO IS ZONING FILE 26-07 FIRST CALL AUTOMOTIVE. AND THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING FROM JUNE 2ND, WHICH WE OPENED. BUT THE APPLICANT REQUESTED A CONTINUATION TO TONIGHT, JUNE 16TH. AND WE'VE GOT ADDITIONAL UPDATES WHERE THEY'VE NOW REQUESTED A CONTINUANCE INDEFINITELY. SO PERHAPS, STAFF, COULD YOU JUST ENLIGHTEN US AS TO WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THIS DELAY? YEAH. SO THE APPLICANT IS IS TAKING SOME TIME TO WORK ON THEIR APPLICATION SOME MORE. AND SO AND GIVEN SOME OTHER THINGS THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER IS WORKING ON, GIVEN, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE THE DIRECTION THAT THEY WANT TO GO WITH THEIR, WITH THIS APPLICATION AS WELL AS SOME OTHER APPLICATIONS THAT THEY HAVE, THEY ARE WANTING TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM INDEFINITELY. AND SO WHENEVER THEY ARE READY TO PROCEED, STAFF WILL RE NOTICE THE CASE TO LET THE PUBLIC KNOW OF THE NEW DATE WHENEVER THEY'RE READY TO PROCEED. OKAY. SO JUST PROCEDURALLY. YOU KNOW, I, I GUESS I'M QUESTIONING HAVING THIS BE INDEFINITELY CONTINUED, WHICH COULD MEAN POTENTIALLY YEARS. DO WE DO WE HAVE A, YOU KNOW, MORE CERTAIN KIND OF TIME FRAME? LIKE, DO WE DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS? OR IS IT SOMETHING LONGER? CAN YOU TELL? SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE REQUEST COULD BE CONSIDERED WITHIN THE NEXT 90 DAYS. OUR RECOMMENDATION TO THE APPLICANT WAS ACTUALLY GIVEN, GIVEN THEY'RE TRYING TO WORK ON SOME OF THEIR OTHER AGENDA ITEMS THAT THEY HAVE HAPPENING IN THE AREA THAT WE JUST REQUEST THE CONTINUANCE INDEFINITELY. AND SO THAT WAY WHEN THEY ARE READY TO PROCEED, THEN WE WILL GO AHEAD AND RE NOTICE WHEN GIVEN THAT WE'VE ALREADY CONTINUED THE REQUEST ONCE FROM JUNE 2ND TO TONIGHT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD CONTINUE IT TO ANOTHER DATE INTO THE FUTURE. THE APPLICANT COULD POTENTIALLY BE READY OR NOT READY BY THAT TIME, AT WHICH TIME THEN THEY WOULD ALSO THEN PROBABLY REQUEST ANOTHER CONTINUANCE. SO IN ORDER FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC, INSTEAD OF CONTINUING FROM DATE TO DATE TO DATE TO DATE, AND HAVING TO KEEP UP WITH ALL OF THOSE AGENDAS, HENCE WHY WE RECOMMEND JUST POSTPONING IT INDEFINITELY OR CONTINUING INDEFINITELY, BECAUSE THEN WE WILL HAVE TO THEN RE NOTICE WHEN THEY'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD. SO THERE'S ACTUALLY A VALUE TO OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE AREA FOR US TO BE ABLE TO RE NOTICE AND SEND THEM A LETTER IN THE MAIL TO LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS NOW READY TO PROCEED, INSTEAD OF THE PUBLIC HAVING TO KEEP UP WITH ALL OF OUR MEETING AGENDAS AND, AND THE OUTCOME OF THE MINUTES. SO HENCE OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THE THE CONTINUANCE TO BE INDEFINITELY. OKAY. AND JUST IF WE WERE I'M JUST THINKING, I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE HERE. SO OTHER THAN CONTINUING IT INDEFINITELY, WE COULD WE COULD CONTINUE IT TO A DATE, CERTAIN. WE COULD ALSO PUT A LIMIT ON THAT TIME FRAME. IT COULD BE INDEFINITELY, BUT NOT TO EXCEED A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD. I WOULD NOT RECOMMEND THAT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR THE PUBLIC TO KEEP UP WITH THAT. SO YOUR OPTIONS ARE YOU COULD CONTINUE TO A DATE CERTAIN, AND WE COULD PROVIDE YOU WITH A DATE IN THE FUTURE. NOT SURE IF THAT DATE WILL WORK FOR THE APPLICANT BECAUSE SINCE THE REQUEST WAS REQUEST FOR INDEFINITE. BUT AGAIN TO A DATE CERTAIN FOR A FUTURE MEETING THAT THE COMMISSION HAS IS AN OPTION. THE SECOND OPTION WOULD BE THE REQUESTING IT BE[00:05:04]
CONTINUED INDEFINITELY TO YOUR CONCERN REGARDING, YOU KNOW, IT MIGHT BE A YEAR OUT IF WE HAVE AN APPLICATION THAT'S SITTING OUT THERE WITH NO ACTIVITY ON IT NEARING 180 DAYS, THEN WE PROACTIVELY REACH OUT TO THE APPLICANT AND SAY, WHAT'S THE STATUS? IF THEY'RE NOT INTENDING TO MOVE FORWARD, THEN WE HAVE THEM FORMALLY WITHDRAW THE CASE SO THAT ACTION COULD SUBSEQUENTLY OCCUR. IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THIS, JUST POTENTIAL HANGING OUT THERE FOR A YEAR OR MORE TIME. RIGHT. AND OKAY. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT JUST IF WE WERE NOT TO CONTINUE IT? THEN WHAT WOULD HAPPEN? WE WOULD JUST HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT AND THEN TAKE ACTION. OR I KNOW YOU'RE NOT READY TO PRESENT THIS TONIGHT. WELL, GIVEN THE ABSENCE OF A STAFF REPORT, FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO RENDER ANY ANALYSIS AND DECISION BASED UPON THE REQUEST, I WOULD ADVISE NOT TO DO THAT OPTION. YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, IS THERE NOT SOME PROCESS FOR JUST WITHDRAWING IT NOW SINCE THEY'RE ALREADY GOING TO HAVE TO RE NOTICE IT? IS THERE SOME REASON WHY WE WOULDN'T JUST HAVE IT WITHDRAWN AND THEN THEY COULD, I GUESS, GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AGAIN AND HAVE IT RE NOTICED WHEN THEY'RE READY. SO IF THEY WITHDRAW IT THEN THEY'RE BASICALLY HAVING TO START OVER FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, PAY ANOTHER APPLICATION FEE AND ALL OF THAT. SO WE TRIED TO WORK WITH OUR APPLICANTS. WHEN AN APPLICATION IS NOT READY TO MOVE FORWARD, THEN, YOU KNOW, AND WE TRY TO WORK WITH OUR APPLICANTS IN GETTING THEM SCHEDULED ACCORDINGLY. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN THIS CASE, THEY THEY THOUGHT THEIR APPLICATION WOULD BE READY TO PROCEED, GIVEN THAT THEY HAVE SOME OTHER APPLICATIONS THAT ARE PENDING. WE WERE TRYING TO WORK WITH THEM, AND HENCE WHY WE OFFERED THIS OPTION, WITHDRAWING IT JUST REQUIRES THEM TO PAY ANOTHER APPLICATION FEE. THERE'S MORE WORK ON OUR SIDE FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE STANDPOINT. SO HENCE OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS JUST TO REQUEST YOUR YOUR PUBLIC HEARING TO BE POSTPONED INDEFINITELY WHEN WE'RE READY TO HAVE THAT SCHEDULED, MAKING SURE OUR MEETING AGENDAS CAN ACCOMMODATE THE DATE THAT THEY'RE DESIRING TO GO TO. WE WOULD SEND OUT THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES ACCORDINGLY IN, IN GET THE ITEM READY FOR THAT DATE. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR ARE WE GOOD WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO POSTPONE THIS INDEFINITELY? YEAH. SO MAKE A FORMAL MOTION TO TO DO THAT. SO MOTION TO APPROVE ZONING FILE 2607 FOR CONTINUOUS AND PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUING INDEFINITELY.SECOND, AND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ALL
[3. Staff report on pending development, zoning permits, and planning matters. ]
RIGHT. FINAL ITEM NUMBER THREE IS STAFF REPORT ON PENDING DEVELOPMENT, ZONING PERMITS AND PLANNING MATTERS. ANDREW. YES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. SO WE'VE HAD TWO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS SINCE YOU LAST MET. SO JUST TO UPDATE YOU ON THOSE CASES. SO THE SPECIAL PERMIT REQUEST FOR BACK NINE AT COYOTE AND CAMPBELL THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY COUNCIL WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. THE SPECIAL PERMIT REQUEST FOR SOLO GARAGE FOR THE. THE AUTO REPAIR AND AUTO STORAGE USES ON INTERURBAN STREET, AS WELL AS THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THAT ENTIRE PROPERTY THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY COUNCIL WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS, PLUS A FOUR YEAR TIME LIMITATION ON THE SPECIAL PERMIT, AS WELL AS A REQUIREMENT THAT THE STORAGE OF VEHICLES SHALL BE LOCATED INSIDE THE SCREENING FENCE AND SHALL NOT BE STORED OUTSIDE THE SCREENING FENCE, WERE VISIBLE FROM THE ADJACENT RIGHT OF WAY, AND ALSO COUNCIL DIRECTED THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT RELATED TO ADDITIONAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS ALONG INTERURBAN STREET TO IMPROVE WALKABILITY. HOWEVER, THIS WAS NOT A CONDITION OF THE ORDINANCE. AND THEN AT THE MEETING LAST NIGHT ON JUNE 15TH, COUNCIL HEARD ALL OF THE AMENDMENTS THAT YOU HAVE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. SO THE ZONING PROTESTS AND THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY, THAT ITEM WAS TABLED TO JULY 13TH. WE RECEIVED SOME CORRESPONDENCE FROM A RESIDENT AND. AND THEN GIVEN THAT AND AS WELL AS GIVEN THE ABSENCE OF ONE OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS, THE COUNCIL WANTED TO TO HAVE SOME MORE TIME FOR STAFF TO WORK WITH OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO, TO, TO REVIEW AND RESPOND TO THE CONCERNS THAT WERE MADE. AND THEN FINALLY, THE HOME OCCUPATIONS.AMENDMENTS THAT WAS APPROVED 4 TO 2, WITH THE CONDITION THAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE REAR YARD PARKING FOR A NO REAR YARD PARKING LIMITATION FOR A NO IMPACT HOME BASED BUSINESS
[00:10:04]
BE RESTORED. SO THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF. A COUPLE OF COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREED WITH CPC'S RECOMMENDATION, AND THEN THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREED WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. SO THAT'S WHERE THEY LANDED ON THAT ONE. AND THEN UPCOMING ON JULY 7TH, WE TENTATIVELY HAVE THREE ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. WE HAVE MAIN STREET CENTRAL CODE AMENDMENTS AS IT RELATES TO FLAGS ADMINISTRATION, AS WELL AS A ADJUSTMENT TO THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ADJACENT TO ALLEYS AND THE MAIN STREET SUBDISTRICT, AS WELL AS A SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 500 NORTH INNER URBAN TO ALLOW FOR A SIX BUILDING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. AND THEN FINALLY, A PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND SPECIAL PERMIT REQUEST FOR MAJOR AUTO REPAIR FOR A EXISTING BUILDING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BUCKINGHAM AND PLANO. GREAT. THANK YOU. SO THAT WILL BE A BUSY NIGHT ON JULY 7TH. SO WE LOOK FORWARD TO THAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. SO WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THERE WAS SOME TYPE OF A ZONING OR A CODE CHANGE THAT HAPPENED WHILE WE HAD SOMETHING POSTPONED INDEFINITELY THAT MAY OR MAY NOT IMPACT, WHICH I RECOGNIZE IS NOT THE CASE. BUT JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, IF WE HAD A CASE THAT WE MADE A CHANGE, THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY IMPACT THAT, IS THAT A GRANDFATHERED IN SITUATION OR IS THAT A THEY THEN HAVE TO GET THEMSELVES BACK INTO COMPLIANCE. SO AN APPLICATION BECOMES VESTED WHEN IT'S SUBMITTED. SO THE RULES THAT WERE IN EFFECT WHEN THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED WOULD BE THE RULES THAT WOULD STILL APPLY. OKAY. DEPENDING UPON THE NATURE OF THE CHANGE, WE'D PROBABLY STILL WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO SEE IF THEY WANTED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE CODE CHANGE, ESPECIALLY IF IT WORKED TO THEIR ADVANTAGE. BUT BUT THEY WOULD BE VESTED BECAUSE OF WHEN THEY SUBMITTED THEIR APPLICATION. OKAY. THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT THEN WE STAND ADJOUR* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.