[1. Call to Order of the Edmond Planning Commission.]
[00:00:04]
ALL RIGHT, WE'RE GONNA CALL TO ORDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF TUESDAY, JANUARY 20TH, 2026.[2. Consideration of Approval of Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes: January 06,2026.]
ITEM CALLED ORDER SECOND.AGENDA ITEMS LOOKING FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE JANUARY 6TH, 2026, MEETING IF WE HAVE ANY CHANGES.
IF NOT LOOKING FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION TO APPROVE.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE SECOND, AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO THAT IS APPROVED.
[A. Case No. SP25-00021; Public Hearing and Consideration for a Site Plan for Kuykendall Dermatology, located at 1135 E 9th Street, just west of Bryant. (Red Prairie Design Group; Ward 1) Said Consideration to Include Consideration of Approval of the Following Variances to Title 22, Zoning Ordinance, of the Edmond Municipal Code: A Variance to Section 22.6.1(E)(4)(b) which requires 150 feet between points of access; A Variance to Section 22.6.1.C(8)(a) which requires a 10 foot perimeter buffer when parking is located in a street yard; A Variance to Section 22.6.1.C(8)(c) which requires terminal parking lot islands to be 200 square feet; and A Variance to Section 22.6.1.C(8)(c) which requires terminal parking lot islands to be 12 feet wide.]
DOWN TO THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS, WE'RE LOOKING AT AGENDA ITEM THREE, A CASE NUMBER SP TWO FIVE DASH 0 0 0 2 1 PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION FOR A SITE PLAN FOR KIRKENDAL DERMATOLOGY LOCATED AT 1135 EAST NINTH STREET, JUST WEST OF BRYANT.AND MR. BRYANT, PLEASE PRESENT.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THIS SITE PLAN IS APPROXIMATELY 1.2 ACRES.
THE MAP SHOWS THE SPECIFIC LOCATION ON THE NORTH SIDE OF NINTH STREET, ABOUT HALFWAY BETWEEN BRYANT TO THE EAST AND PINE OAK DRIVE TO THE WEST.
THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING DETAILS, ONE BUILDING APPROXIMATELY 6,000 SQUARE FEET.
ONE POINT OF ACCESS IS PROPOSED, WHICH WILL BE A FULL ACCESS DRIVE ON NINTH.
THE ELEVATIONS SHOW THE BUILDING TO BE ALMOST 21 FEET TALL AT ITS HIGHEST POINT, AND THE FACADE WILL CONSIST OF STONE VENEER AND EFIS.
THE SITE PLAN INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING VARIANCE REQUESTS A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE DRIVEWAY SEPARATION FROM THE 150 FOOT STANDARD TO APPROXIMATELY 105 FEET ON THE EAST AND APPROXIMATELY 125 FEET ON THE WEST.
THIS CONFIGURATION IS REQUIRED BASED ON THE EXISTING CONSTRAINTS AND SITE DIMENSIONS, A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE WIDTH OF THE PERIMETER LANDSCAPE BUFFER FROM THE 10 FOOT STANDARD TO APPROXIMATELY SIX POINT OR SIX AND A HALF FEET IS ALSO, UH, REQUESTED THE TWO VARIANCES RELATED TO PARKING LOT ISLANDS NUMBERED THREE AND FOUR ON THE AGENDA ARE NO LONGER NEEDED.
BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE, UM, A QUICK CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT TO CONFIRM, UH, THAT WE HAVE THE CORRECT, UM, UPDATED SITE PLAN THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
AND THEN I WOULD FURTHER NOTE THAT THREE VOTES ARE REQUIRED, A RECOMMENDATION FOR EACH VARIANCE, AND THEN FOR THE SITE PLAN ITSELF, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE VARIANCES.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
AND I'M GONNA HAVE THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THOSE, UH, QUESTIONS REGARDING VARIANCES THREE AND FOUR AND THE NEED FOR NO LONGER ASKING FOR THOSE.
I'M AN ARCHITECT HERE IN EDMOND.
UM, SO FIRST AS A RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION, MR. BRIAN, UH, YOU DO HAVE THE CURRENT PLANS THAT ARE BEING PRESENTED HERE.
UH, THEY WERE PRESENTED FOLLOWING THE, UH, THE LAST REVIEW AND OUR INTENT WAS TO ADDRESS AS MANY VARIANCES AS WE COULD BEFORE WE CAME TO THE MEETING.
WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO TALK ABOUT THE VARIANCE? UH, ONE AND TWO, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO YOUR PRESENTATION, GO FOR IT.
THE FIRST VARIANCE, UM, IS THE DRIVE THAT WAS MENTIONED.
WE'VE HAD THE DRIVE EVERYWHERE FROM THE CENTER OF THIS LOT, UH, TO WHERE YOU SEE IT NOW.
AND OUR ONLY REASON FOR MOVING IS WE WENT THROUGH THE ENGINEERING REVIEWS.
THEY KNEW THAT WE COULD NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENT, UH, NO MATTER WHERE THE DRIVE WENT TO ACCESS THIS PROPERTY.
AND SO THE PREFERENCE FROM ENGINEERING WAS TO HAVE IT LOCATED WHERE YOU SEE IT NOW, BUT IF THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH IT AND IT'S ALRIGHT WITH ENGINEERING, WE CAN SHIFT IT TO THE RIGHT IF WE NEED TO, WHICH WOULD BE EAST.
UH, THE SECOND VARIANCE IS THE, UM, BUFFER.
WE HAVE IT AT SIX AND A HALF FEET BECAUSE THIS SITE HAS A LOT OF, IT'S AN INFILL SITE.
UM, A LOT OF THE PROPERTIES WE WORK ON IN EDMOND ARE INFILL SITES, AND THERE'S JUST A LOT OF DEMANDS ON THE PROPERTY AND THE DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO BETWEEN THE REQUIREMENTS FOR STORM WATER DETENTION ON THE NORTH AND THE EAST, UH, REQUIREMENTS TO ACCESS THE DUMPSTER, FIRE ACCESS, UM, DRIVES PARKING COUNT AND EVERYTHING WE HAD ON THIS PROPERTY, WE WERE RUNNING A LITTLE BIT SHORT ON THE BUFFER, BUT IN ORDER TO MAKE UP FOR THAT ON AN INFILL SITE, WE INCREASED, UM, ISLAND SIZES, PARTICULARLY THE ISLAND YOU SEE IN THE MIDDLE.
THERE'S A LARGE ISLAND WITH TWO TREES AND ONE KIND OF ODD PARKING SPACE TO THE LEFT.
WE INCREASED THAT SUBSTANTIALLY SO THAT THERE WOULD BE A BUFFER BETWEEN THE ROADWAY, LIKE VISUAL BUFFER, UH, AND THE BUILDING INSTEAD OF THAT FRONT BUFFER, WHICH HAS BEEN, UH, MINIMIZED.
AND, AND THEN LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE A LOT OF BUFFER AROUND THE SITE ALREADY BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE OTHER DEMANDS WE HAD, LIKE STORM WATER DETENTION, BUT
[00:05:01]
WE TRIED TO SCATTER THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT WE WERE MISSING ON THE FRONT TO OTHER PARTS OF THE SITE.ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD TO YOUR PRESENTATION? PERFECT.
JUST TO ANSWER, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR OF CITY STAFF OF THE COMMISSIONERS AT THIS TIME? I HAVE ONE QUESTION.
DO YOU ALL YOU TURN YOUR MIC ON.
DO YOU ALL SEE THE LOCATION OF THE DRIVEWAY BEING A PROBLEM WITH STACKING? WHENEVER SCHOOL'S LETTING OUT, I, I TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY TO DRIVE BY THERE TODAY AND THE TRAFFIC WAS STACKED BACK ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT, HALFWAY ACROSS THAT PROPERTY.
SO YOU, UH, CAN SEE TO THE RIGHT, THERE'S A PRIVATE DRIVE THAT GOES TO WILL ROGERS.
WHAT YOU CAN'T SEE IN THIS IS THERE'S ANOTHER PARCEL TO OUR WEST AND PAST THAT PARCEL IS ANOTHER DRIVE.
YOU COULD SEE IT IF WE HAD AN AERIAL AND THAT DRIVE GOES TO A PRIVATE SCHOOL.
UH, I THINK ANYWHERE THIS DRIVE IS LOCATED, THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO TIMES THE DAY THAT THERE'S A LOT OF CONGESTION THERE.
THE MORNING OF MORNING AND THREE THE MORNING, UH, DROP OFF IN THE AFTERNOON PICKUP.
SO FOR THAT REASON NOW I, I KNOW, I KNOW THE VARIANCE WE'RE REQ WE ARE REQUESTING HAS, UH, THE MOST OBVIOUS THING YOU CAN SEE IS TRYING TO GET ENOUGH DISTANCE FROM THAT PRIVATE DRIVE TO THE EAST.
BUT WHEN THE COMMENT CAME UP FROM ENGINEERING, THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT A DRIVE THAT YOU CAN SEE.
UM, AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE.
THIS LISTED EXISTING PRIVATE DRIVE KIND OF IN THE CENTER.
I DON'T, IF YOU WERE TO ZOOM OUT AND IT MIGHT, IT MIGHT SHOW, THERE WE GO SEE THAT PRIVATE DRIVE GOING DOWN OFF THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE.
UH, WHEN WE HAD OUR DRIVE SHOWN IN THE CENTER OF OUR PARCEL, THERE WAS CONCERN THAT THERE WOULD BE, UM, TRAFFIC CONFLICT BETWEEN THAT EXISTING DRIVE TO SOUTH AND OUR DRIVE, WHICH WOULD BE FAIRLY CLOSE TO THAT EXISTING DRIVE.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO, WE'RE TRYING TO FIND THE, THE EASIEST LOCATION THAT WOULD CAUSE THE LEAST AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC DISRUPTION DURING A NORMAL PART OF THE DAY.
BUT DURING THOSE TWO TIMES A DAY, REALLY ANY DRIVE LOCATION IS GOING TO BE A, A CHALLENGE.
A QUESTION ON THE, I ASSUME THE VARIANCES FOR THE, UH, THE PARKING LOT ISLANDS EARS ARE SMALLER THAN THE, THAT'S DUE TO THE VARIANCE.
THAT'S WHY YOU'RE ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE.
OH, ACTUALLY THE ONE THAT HAD TO DO WITH A SMALLER ISLAND IS NUMBER THREE.
THAT NO LONGER EXISTS ON THIS SITE.
OR ARE LARGER THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED.
ANY OTHER, UH, QUESTIONS OF CITY STAFF OR OF THE APPLICANT OF THE COMMISSIONERS AND KIND OF FOLLOWING UP ON COMMISSIONER HO'S COMMENT ABOUT THE DRIVE AND HIS, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT'S COMMENT ABOUT MATCHING UP TO, I KNOW SOMETIMES WE ARE, A LOT OF TIMES WE LIKE TO HAVE THE DRIVES TO BE THE SAME SPOT AS THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET.
CAN YOU TALK JUST A HAIR ABOUT THAT IF YOU DON'T MIND? YES, SIR.
WE LIKE TO LINE 'EM UP RIGHT ACROSS FROM EACH OTHER WHENEVER POSSIBLE BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE CARS COMING OUT OF BOTH SIDES MAKING LEFT TURNS, IT MAKES IT EASIER FOR 'EM TO SEE 'EM.
IF WE CAN'T GET 'EM LINED STRAIGHT ACROSS FROM EACH OTHER, THEN WE LIKE TO GET 'EM OFFSET ENOUGH SO THAT IF TWO CARS ARE COMING OUT FROM THE OPPOSITE SIDES MAKING LEFT TURNS, THEY HAVE GOOD VISIBLE DISTANCE TO SEE EACH OTHER INSTEAD OF, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A VERY SMALL OFFSET, THEY MAY TAKE OFF NOT REALIZING THE OTHER ONE DOES AND IT LEADS TO TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS.
AND THIS IS WHERE YOU GUYS RECOMMENDED IT TO BE, CORRECT? YES SIR.
THEY WORKED WITH US AND THAT'S WHERE WE RECOMMENDED IT AND THAT'S WHERE THEY'VE GOT IT PROPOSED.
I BELIEVE THE DRIVEWAY FOR THE SCHOOL COMING OUT FROM THE SCHOOL, THE ONE THAT'S IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST IS A RIGHT TURN EXIT ONLY IS WHAT THE SIGN SAYS, ALTHOUGH I'M SURE PEOPLE IGNORE THAT ON A REGULAR BASIS.
ALL RIGHT, ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM CITY STAFF OR OF COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
AS A REMINDER, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT FOR OR AGAINST THIS, PLEASE ADDRESS THOSE TO ME, THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE.
WE'LL GATHER ALL THE QUESTIONS AND TRY TO GET YOU ANSWERS AFTER EVERYBODY'S HAD THEIR CHANCE TO SPEAK.
SO IF THIS TIME, IF ANYBODY WISHES TO COME UP AND SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS, PLEASE COME ON UP.
WOULD'VE BEEN REAL CLOSE TO THIS DRIVE LIKE THIS RIGHT HERE.
LAST CHANCE SEEING NO PUBLIC COMMENTS, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE CLOSED.
UH, WITH THAT WE WILL LOOK FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND FROM THE COMMISSIONERS.
WE'RE GONNA DO, UH, VARIANCE NUMBER ONE FIRST.
SO WE ARE NOW VOTING ON, WE HAVE A MOTION, WELL, LET ME, LET ME REPEAT MYSELF.
[00:10:01]
TO MAKE A MOTION FOR A VARIANCE TO SECTION 22.6 0.1 E FOUR B, WHICH REQUIRES 150 FOOT BETWEEN POINTS OF ACCESS, THIS IS THE FIRST ONE THAT WE WOULD LOOK FOR A MOTION ON.WE HAVE A MOTION SECOND AND A SECOND BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO.
VARIANCE NUMBER ONE IS APPROVED.
MOVING ON TO VARIANCE NUMBER TWO, A VARIANCE TO SECTION 22.6 C EIGHT A, WHICH REQUIRES A 10 FOOT PERIMETER BUFFER WHEN PARKING IS LOCATED IN A STREET YARD.
SO THAT'S THE ONE WE ARE NOW LOOKING FOR A MOTION ON.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE SECOND AND A SECOND BY A PHOTO VI FIVE TO ZERO THAT, UH, VARIANCE IS APPROVED.
NOW LOOKING FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE CASE NUMBER SP TWO FIVE DASH 0 0 0 2 1.
WE HAVE A MOTION SECOND AND A SECOND BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO.
UH, AGENDA ITEM THREE A IS APPROVED AND MOVES ON TO CITY COUNCIL.
[B. Case No. Z25-00017; Public Hearing and Consideration for a Rezoning from “A” Single Family Dwelling District to “PUD Z25-00017” Planned Unit Development, located at 2525 West Covell Road. (First & Last Trust, LLC; Ward 4) ]
ITEM THREE B, CASE NUMBER Z TWO FIVE DASH 0 0 1 7 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION FOR A REZONING FROM A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT TO PUDZ 25 DASH ZERO SEVEN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 25 25 WEST COVE ROAD.MR. BRIAN, UH, PLEASE PRESENT BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THIS ZONING MAP AMENDMENT IS APPROXIMATELY 17.7 ACRES.
THE MAP SHOWS THE SPECIFIC LOCATION AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF COVELL AND SANTA FE.
NEARBY ZONING IN USES INCLUDE TO THE NORTH ZONED AND DEVELOPED A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST ACROSS SANTA FE.
AS MITCH PARK TO THE SOUTH IS ZONED D ONE RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL AND IS UNDEVELOPED TO THE WEST, IS ZONED FOR RESIDENTIAL AND IS UNDEVELOPED IN ORDER TO INCLUDE NEW NON-RESIDENTIAL USES.
ALONG WITH THE EXISTING USES, THE PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IS BEING PROPOSED.
THE PUD DESIGN STATEMENT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING DETAILS.
THE ALLOWED USES WOULD BE EXPANDED BEYOND WHAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED TO INCLUDE COUNSELING OFFICE AND COMMUNITY SERVICE.
THE LOT AND BUILDING DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS ARE UNCHANGED FROM WHAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED.
IF ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION IS PROPOSED, IT WOULD BE BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE CITY'S CODES IN PLACE AT THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT.
THE ADMIN PLAN CATEGORIZES THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS S TWO SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS PLAN CATEGORY CAN ACCOMMODATE SMALL SCALE, LOW IMPACT COMMERCIAL AND CIVIC ACTIVITIES THAT SUPPORT NEARBY AREAS.
THE PROPOSED PUD CONFORMS TO THE PURPOSE AND ATTEND OF THE S TWO PLAN CATEGORY AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO ADD TO MR. BRIAN'S PRESENTATION? I WOULD.
MARK ZZA WITH JOHNSON AND ASSOCIATES ADDRESS IS ONE E SHERIDAN AVENUE, UH, BEFORE YOU IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MORE UNIQUE PUDS YOU'D SEE.
UH, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T BELIEVE WHAT WE'RE HERE ASKING FOR IS TRULY A COMMERCIAL USE.
WE'RE HERE AFTER A YEAR LONG EFFORT WITH THE STAFF, WHICH WE GREATLY APPRECIATE THEIR TIME.
UH, OUR CLIENT HERE, UH, IS VERY ACTIVE IN HIS CHURCH AND THEY DO COUNSELING FOR SOME OF THE YOUTH AND THERE'S A SUBJECT BUILDING LABEL ON THERE.
IT'S AN EXISTING BARN THAT THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO USE TO HAVE THAT COUNSELING.
NOW YOU ARE ALLOWED TO BE A, UH, HOME OCCUPIED BUSINESS IN THE CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT.
UH, WHAT TRIGGERS THE REASON FOR THE PUD IS TO HAVE ANOTHER COUNSELOR COME IN THAT ISN'T LIVING ON SITE, UH, THAT TRIGGERS YOU FROM A HOME OCCUPATION INTO A A FULL OFF ISSUES.
THERE'S NOT A LOT OF GRAY IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO.
THAT'S WHAT LED US TO WORKING WITH STAFF TO DRAFT THIS PUD.
SO WHAT MAKES THIS A BIT UNIQUE, UH, IS EVEN IF YOU APPROVE THIS PUD, THIS DOES NOT MEAN OFFICE BUILDINGS CAN COME BE BUILT, THAT OTHER COMMERCIAL SERVICES CAN BE BUILT.
IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT IT, I BELIEVE IT'S ON PAGE FIVE.
UH, THERE'S A SECTION 3.14 HOME OCCUPATION REGULATIONS AND WITHIN THAT IT SAYS WHAT IS ALLOWED AND WHAT IS NOT ALLOWED.
WE TRIED TO FURTHER THAT FROM THE CODE JUST TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO ALLOW LARGE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT ON THIS TRACK.
SO WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU WALK THROUGH THAT, IT SAYS THE HOME OCCUPATION SHALL BE CONDUCT CONDUCTED ENTIRELY WITHIN THE MAIN DWELLING OR AN ACCESSOR, AN ANCILLARY BUILDING LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY.
THE OCCUPATION SHALL BE CLEARLY INCIDENTAL AND SECONDARY TO THE PRINCIPAL USE OF THE DWELLING, WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL
[00:15:01]
BUSINESS SHALL BE CONDUCTED BY NO MORE THAN FOUR EMPLOYEES AT A TIME THAT DO NOT RESIDE ON SITE.THE OCCUPATION SHALL NOT AFFECT THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY AND GOES ON TO TALK ABOUT SIGNAGE, HOURS OF OPERATION DELIVERY VEHICLES.
OUR CLIENT STILL LIVES ON THIS PROPERTY.
THEY DO NOT WANT THIS TO BE AN INTENSE COMMERCIAL USE.
REALLY WHAT LED US HERE WAS IF WE SOUGHT TO ALLOW THESE, UH, COUNSELORS, VOLUNTEERS TO BE IN THAT BUILDING, WE WOULD'VE HAD TO BRING IT UP TO A COMMERCIAL STANDARD, WHICH MEANS LARGER DRIVES, PARKING AREAS, MORE LIGHTING, AND WE DID NOT WANT TO DO ANY OF THAT, WHICH IS HOW WE ENDED UP HERE ASKING FOR WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE A VERY NARROW HOME OCCUPATION USE TO THE PUD.
SO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, UM, BUT I KNOW STAFF HAS REVIEWED IT, FOUND IT IN CONFORMANCE AND HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.
DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS OF CITY STAFF OR OF THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENTS.
DOES ANYBODY WISH TO, UM, SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PROPERTY? IF YOU DO, PLEASE COME STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS 'EM TO ME AND WE'LL TRY TO GET YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED AFTER EVERYBODY'S HAD THEIR CHANCE TO SPEAK.
HI, I'M BRIAN WHITE AND UH, I LIVE IN FALLBROOK NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS JUST TO THE, UH, WEST AT THE END OF COVE AND WESTERN.
AND, UH, FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD PERSPECTIVE, UH, THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THIS IS, IT'S GREAT.
THE ONE THING THAT WAS NOTICED BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION BOARD IS IN THE WORDING IT LISTED THAT THERE'S AN INTENT TO NOT DEVELOP BEYOND, UH, THE STATED REQUEST, AN INTENT NOT TO MOVE TO A MULTI-DWELLING SCENARIO IN THE FUTURE.
UM, AND THERE'S NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE, THE CURRENT OWNERS HAVE ANY INTENT TO DO THAT.
THE PROBLEM BECOMES IF THAT, UH, LAND WERE TO CHANGE, UH, HANDS IN THE FUTURE, AT SOME POINT THE WORD INTENT MIGHT LEAVE, UH, OPEN THE OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO DEVELOP INTO SOME OTHER SORT OF SCENARIO, MULTI-DWELLING OR OTHERWISE.
THAT'S THE ONLY CONCERN THAT WE HAVE AS A NEIGHBORHOOD IS THAT WORRYING OF INTENT.
ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS EVENING? UH, TREVOR RANDALL, I REPRESENT THE NEIGHBORHOOD OAK CREST ASSOCIATION THAT'S JUST TO THE NORTH, UM, OF THIS PROPERTY.
AND I GUESS SOME OF THE QUESTIONS WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT IS WHAT PARTICULAR TYPE OF COUNSELING IS GONNA BE DONE.
UH, WE'VE BEEN, SOCIAL MEDIA HAS PROVIDED ALL SORTS OF RUMORS ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH, UH, THIS BEING A MENTAL HEALTH FACILITY AND THAT HAS SOME CONCERNS THAT THEY LEAD TO BELIEVE THAT IT MIGHT BE JUST ONE TO TWO PEOPLE AT A TIME, BUT ANY FACILITY THAT WILL ALLOW FOUR EMPLOYEES TO BE THERE AT ANY ONE TIME, ASSUMING THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO MANAGE MORE THAN ONE TO TWO PATIENTS AT A TIME.
SO WE HAVE SOME CONCERNS FOR GROWTH, UM, IF THE FACILITY GROWS WITH ITS OCCUPANTS AND, UM, BEING THAT CLOSE TO A BUNCH OF RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY THAT THEY HAVE SOME CONCERNS THERE.
ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS PROJECT? SEEING NONE PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE CLOSED.
MR. ZZA, THE TWO QUESTIONS I HEARD IS THE INTENT AND THE WORDING OF THE PUD AND THEN ALSO REGARDING THE TYPE OF COUNSELING AND, UH, I DON'T SEE THAT IT ALLOWS FOR OVERNIGHT STAYS INSIDE THAT FACILITY, BUT MAYBE YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.
SO, UH, WE'RE HAPPY TO CHANGE THE WORD INTENT.
ULTIMATELY THE REGULATIONS IN THE PUD ARE, ARE WHAT GOVERN THIS.
SO IF, IF OUR OWNER DID SELL THIS TO SOMEBODY ELSE, I DO NOT SEE HOW THEY COULD CONSTRUCT OR DO ANYTHING MORE THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST BASED ON THE LANGUAGE IN HERE.
THEY'D GO BACK THROUGH A REZONING JUST AS ANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNER WOULD.
UH, AND THEN IN TERMS OF TYPE OF COUNSELING, I MEAN THIS IS LIKE A ONE-ON-ONE COUNSELING.
THE MATTER OF WHICH THEY'RE COUNSELING SOMEONE ON, I, I CAN'T SPEAK TO, IT'S NOT AN OVERNIGHT FACILITY.
IT'S NOT FOR SOMEONE GOING THROUGH WITHDRAWALS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S ANY, ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER MENTAL HEALTH PROVIDER.
YOU MEET FOR AN HOUR WITH AND YOU SIT THERE AND YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION, THEY LEAVE AND THE NEXT PERSON COMES IN.
SO IT'S AN OUTPATIENT STYLE, NOT A OVERNIGHT RESIDENCY OR ANYTHING PROLONGED EVEN STAYS THERE? CORRECT.
IS THAT WRITTEN IN THERE IN THE PUD THAT IT'S NOT OVERNIGHT? I THINK IT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY IN THIS TO ALLOW IT.
YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY REQUEST IT IN THE PUD OKAY.
TO ALLOW THAT TO BE AN OVERNIGHT FACILITY.
THERE ARE SEPARATE USE UNITS AND KEN MIGHT SPEAK TO THIS BETTER,
[00:20:01]
BUT THERE ARE UH, UH, I THINK A SLEW OF OTHER TYPE OF GENERAL MEDICAL USES THAT WE WOULD'VE HAD TO STATE TO EVEN ALLOW OR CONTEMPLATE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO OCCUR.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
LOOKING FOR A, A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THIS AGENDA ITEM.
SECOND, WE HAVE A SECOND BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO THAT IS APPROVED AND MOVES ON TO CITY COUNCIL ON FEBRUARY 9TH, 2026.
[C. Case No. Z25-00026; Public Hearing and Consideration for a Rezoning from “G-A” General Agricultural to “PUD Z25-00026” Planned Unit Development, located on the east side of Air Depot Boulevard, south of Danforth Road. (HPS Investments, LLC; Ward 2) ]
ON TO AGENDA ITEM THREE C, CASE NUMBER Z TWO FIVE DASH 0 0 0 26 PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION FOR A REZONING FROM GA, GENERAL AGRICULTURE TO PUDZ TWO FIVE DASH 0 0 0 26.PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF AIR DEPO BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF DANFORTH.
IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES.
AND MR. BRIAN, YOU WANNA PRESENT? THANK YOU.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THIS ZONING MAP AMENDMENT REQUEST IS APPROXIMATELY 16 AND A HALF ACRES.
THE MAP SHOWS THE SPECIFIC LOCATION AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DANFORTH AND AIR DEPOT NEARBY ZONING AND USES INCLUDE NORTH ACROSS DANFORTH IS ZONED E ONE RETAIL GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND CONTAINS A SINGLE RESIDENCE AND A PRIVATE NATURAL SURFACE TRACKER.
TRAIL TO THE EAST IS ZONED FOR PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AND IS CURRENTLY BEING DEVELOPED AS A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION.
SOUTH IS ZONED GA, GENERAL AGRICULTURAL AND IS DEVELOPED WITH A SINGLE RESIDENCE WEST ACROSS AIR DEPOT IS ZONE FOUR AND DEVELOPED WITH RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS EDMOND'S.
CURRENT DEVELOPMENT CODE ACCOMMODATES MULTI-USE PROJECTS SUCH AS THIS WITH THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
THE PROPOSED PUD DESIGN STATEMENT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING DETAILS.
TRACK ONE IS APPROXIMATELY 2.3 ACRES DIRECTLY AT THE ARTERIAL INTERSECTION AND WOULD ALLOW COMMERCIAL AND CIVIC USES SUCH AS RETAIL, RESTAURANT, MEDICAL, CHILDCARE, HOTEL, AND SEVERAL OTHERS.
LUMBERYARD AND MEDICAL MARIJUANA COMMERCIAL GROWER WOULD BE EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED.
TRACK TWO IS THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
IT'S APPROXIMATELY 14 ACRES AND WOULD ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES IN SUPPORTIVE NEIGHBORHOOD FACILITIES SUCH AS PARKS OR SCHOOLS.
THE MINIMUM LOT, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN TRACK TWO IS 2000 SQUARE FEET WITH A MINIMUM WIDTH OF 20 FEET.
THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN TRACK ONE, THE COMMERCIAL TRACK IS THREE STORIES.
THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN TRACK TWO IS 35 FEET.
EACH TRACK MAY HAVE UP TO TWO POINTS OF ACCESS.
THE EDMUND PLAN CATEGORIZES THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS S TWO SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOOD BASED ON THE PROPOSED USES AND INTENSITIES INCLUDING COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY ON THE HARD CORNER, A SIGNIFICANT TREE PRESERVATION AREA AS A BUFFER AND A TRANSITION TO MODERATE INTENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THE PROPOSED ZONING MAP AMENDMENT APPEARS TO MEET THE INTENT OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
I'M GLAD TO TRY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
MARK, DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING TO THE PRESENTATION OF CITY STAFF? I WOULD MARK SIT OUT WHEN HE SHARED AN AVENUE.
UM, SO YOU'VE SEEN THIS PROJECT BEFORE, UH, THE LAST TIME THIS COMMISSION HEARD IT? UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS ALMOST UNANIMOUS.
I THINK ONE PERSON VOTED AGAINST IT.
IT'S SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT BASED ON CONVERSATIONS WITH, WITH COUNSEL, UH, AFTER THE CITY COUNCIL HEARING.
SO WHAT YOU HEARD INITIALLY WAS A DUPLEX APPLICATION WITH COMMERCIAL ON THE HARD CORNER.
WE HAVE REFILED IT TO BE TOWN HOMES BASED ON CONVERSATIONS AND WHAT WE HEARD.
I THINK IT'S WORTH NOTING THE SNEADS THAT OWN THIS PROPERTY TODAY OWN THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH.
THEY HAVE OWNED THIS PROPERTY SINCE ABOUT THE LAND RUN AND THEY WERE THE LANDOWNERS WHO SOLD TO CALEB MCKAY WHO'S BUILDING THE REST.
SO THE HOLDOUT OF THIS PORTION FOR THE SNEADS WAS ALWAYS WITH THE INTENT TO DEVELOP WHAT THEY BELIEVE WILL BE A NICE HIGH-END PRODUCT ADJACENT TO THEIR FAMILY HOMESTEAD.
SO WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I WOULD IF WE COULD MAKE AN AMENDMENT JUST TO ENSURE WE, WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE THAT THE HEIGHT AND TRACKED ONE, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WAS STILL AT THREE STORIES GET BROUGHT DOWN TO ONE TO ONE STORY TO ONE STORY IN THE COMMERCIAL TRACK.
THERE WAS, THERE'S NO REASON FOR THE, THE THREE STORIES THERE.
SO, SO ON 2.2 0.2, BUILDING HEIGHT TRACKED ONE, THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FOR TRACKED ONE SHALL BE ONE STORY.
OUTSIDE OF THAT IT WOULD BE AN ALMOST IDENTICAL APPLICATION EXCEPT WE'RE DOING TOWN HOMES INSTEAD OF DUPLEXES.
SO WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS OF THE COMMISSIONERS OF CITY STAFF OR OF THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME? I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION.
UM, I DON'T REM ACTUALLY I DON'T REMEMBER VOTING ON THIS THE FIRST TIME, BUT, UH, WELL I DO FOR THE RESIDENTS DID YOU HAVE HOTEL AND MOTEL IN THERE?
[00:25:01]
CAN WE STRIKE THAT OR IS THAT A BIG DEAL? NO, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT IN THERE.I DON'T BELIEVE THE SITE'S LARGE ENOUGH FOR THAT.
IT IS JUST IN, UH, PART OF ALL THE USES.
WHERE DO YOU SEE THAT AT? I WANNA MAKE SURE WHEN WE GO TO VOTE WE HAVE EVERYTHING CORRECT.
DO YOU SEE THAT CHIP? THAT'S IT'S ON PAGE FOUR OF THE PAGE FOUR DESIGN STATEMENT.
SO I THINK WHAT'S STRIKING THE STRIKE CHANGING IT FROM THREE STORIES TO ONE STORY THAT KIND OF YEAH, YEAH.
WE WE'RE HAPPY TO ELIMINATE THE HOTEL MOTEL USE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR OF CITY STAFF? I THINK THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE, WE KIND OF, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LOT SIZE AND HOW, YOU KNOW, WE LIKE TO TRY TO MAKE IT SIMILAR TO STUFF AROUND THERE.
THIS IS PRETTY SMALL COMPARED TO WHAT'S AROUND THERE.
CAN YOU COMMENT ON THAT A LITTLE BIT FOR ME? HELP ME GET THERE WITH THAT.
SO WE'RE DOING A TOWN HOME PRODUCT, WHICH I BELIEVE WHAT IS, WHAT THE PLAN CALLED FOR IS MAYBE A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES.
UH, IF YOU LOOK AT BISON RIDGE MM-HMM
BISON RIDGE DOES HAVE REAR LOADED SMALLER LOT, UH, UNITS AND A PORTION OF IT, THE WAY WE'VE CHOSEN TO BUFFER THIS TO HELP AID IN THE COMPATIBILITY IS OUR TREE PRESERVATION AREAS ARE ALONG THE STREET AND ALONG KIND OF THE BACKSIDE OF THE NORTH SIDE.
AND SO THE GOAL THERE WAS WHEN YOU WERE DRIVING DOWN AIR DEPOT, YOU ARE NOT SEEING A SUBDIVISION FENCE AND YOU ARE NOT SEEING THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT ARE BACK BEHIND THERE.
SO EFFECTIVELY YOUR VIEW DRIVING DOWN AIR DEPOT WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED.
THERE WILL BE A HEAVILY WOODED BUFFER AREA, SO YOU WON'T KNOW WHAT'S BACK THERE UNLESS YOU PULLED IN.
BUT, WHICH THEN WE'LL SEE, WE'LL SEE THAT SITE PLAN OBVIOUSLY.
AND THEY'RE LEAVING TREES, THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE GONNA LEAVE THE TREES, THEY'RE NOT GONNA REPLANT.
IN THE PUD WE HAVE COMMITTED TO ADHERING TO THE, UH, TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE.
AND FOR US, JUST THE SITE IS LONG AND IT IS NARROW.
WE THINK THE, ASIDE FROM THE ADDED BENEFIT OF OF KEEPING AIR DEPOT LOOKING TREE AND LOOKING RURAL, THAT'S THE MOST PRACTICAL SPACE AND SPOT TO DO IT BECAUSE JUST THE DIMENSIONS OF LOTS AND A STREET, IT'S WHAT YOU HAVE LEFT.
AND SO I I THINK IN THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION WE'RE ACTUALLY SLIGHTLY EXCEEDING THE TREE PRESERVATION MINIMUM.
HOW CLOSE WOULD YOU SAY IS THE NEAREST SIMILAR SIZE? LOTS TO THIS, WOULD THAT BE THE ARBOR? UH, ARBOR CREEK? THE, THE PORCHES AT ARBOR CREEK IS, IS PROBABLY THE MOST SIMILAR AND THAT'S SECOND STREET GOING NORTH BETWEEN SECOND.
AND BISON, UH, RIDGE, WHAT SIZE ARE THOSE LOTS.
DO YOU REMEMBER THE SMALLEST OR REAR LOADED ONES? MAYBE 4,500.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS OF THE APPLICANT OR OF CITY STAFF? OKAY.
UH, ANYBODY HERE WISH TO, UH, DISCUSS OR FOR OR AGAINST THIS PROJECT? PLEASE COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND WE'LL TRY TO GET YOUR ANSWERS, YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED.
SEEING NO PUBLIC COMMENTS, PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE CLOSED.
MOVING ON TO A MOTION AND A SECOND IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A MOTION.
THERE WAS TWO THINGS THAT WERE PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT STRIKING 2.2 0.2 BUILDING HEIGHT ON TRACT ONE.
THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FOR TRACT ONE SHALL BE ONE STORY, NOT THREE.
AND ALSO ON PAGE FOUR, THE DESIGN STATEMENTS STRIKING THE HOTEL USE AS ONE OF THE POTENTIAL USES OF THE SITE.
SO THOSE TWO WOULD BE ON THE TABLE AND LOOKING FOR A MOTION FOR THAT.
SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION TO PROVE AND A SECOND BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO THAT IS APPROVED AND WILL MOVE ON TO CITY COUNCIL ON FEBRUARY 9TH, 2026.
MOVING ON TO CITIZENS' COMMENTS.
THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ANY CITIZEN TO COME UP AND ADDRESS AND, AND, AND NON-RESIDENTS TO, UH, ADDRESS PLANNING COMMISSION ON PLANNING COMMISSION RELATED ITEMS. ARE THERE ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK IN THE PUBLIC COMMENTS RIGHT NOW? SEEING NONE, NO PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE CLOSED.
ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR OR MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION? I HAVE NONE.
WE SEE NO COMMENTS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX AS ADJOURNMENT.
SO I NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION.
WE HAVE A MOTION SECOND AND A SECOND BY A VOTE OF FIVE TO ZERO.