All right, good morning.

Um welcome to the Urban Design Commission meeting for Thursday, March 19th.

The Urban Design Commission requires a quorum of six members to be present and available for voting.

The following members are present today.

Commissioner Benner, Commissioner DeBose, Commissioner Halliday, Commissioner Chair Harper, Commissioner Harrier, Commissioner Hughes, Commissioner Ramsey, Commissioner Reed, and Commissioner West.

Did I miss anyone?

All right.

Staff present today are Anna Alvarez, Andres Hernandez, Laura Young, Jacqueline Ingram, Caleb Olson, Brendan Utterback, Chris Austria, and myself, Joseph Laws.

Today's meeting in Docket can be found online at WW.fortworth Texas.gov.

Speaker registration forms must have been turned in prior to the start of the meeting.

Attendees can sign up to speak by completing the paper form or scanning the QR code outside.

Today's public hearing is being documented by cable television and video conference recording, which we which will be available on the city's website.

To achieve a timely and orderly meeting, the UDC requests the following rules of procedure be respected.

Number one, each case will be called in the sequence listed on the agenda unless otherwise directed by the chair.

Number two, all ensuing dialogue shall be directed to the UDC only.

Number three, after staff presentation, the applicant and other proponents will be given a total of seven minutes to speak.

Opposition may then speak for seven minutes.

Continuation beyond the speaker's allotted time will be subject to the chair's sole discretion and approval.

Number four, all other meeting procedures will adhere to UDC adopted rules of procedure to the extent practicable.

Number five, following the official close of each case hearing, the UDC will remain an open session to discuss and vote upon the items in question.

During this time, no further public testimony or commentary will be allowed unless directed by the chair.

Number six, a closed executive session may be held with respect to the posted agenda items to enable UDC to receive advice from legal staff.

For all for additional information on any case on today's agenda, you may contact development services by calling 817-392-8000.

Thank you for your attention.

Welcome to the Urban Design Commission meeting for March 19th, 2026.

Madam Chair, will you please call this meeting to order?

Good morning.

This is my last meeting.

So oh no, I'm so sad.

I'm gonna miss y'all.

But we we moved to the country, so they won't let me come anymore.

So my address is no longer Fort Worth as of next week.

So tired of the Yeah, y'all y'all drove me out of here.

So and I'm Joseph, I think y'all will do elections next month.

Yes, we'll do elections next month.

So uh just for all the commissioners, if you're interested in uh being chair, in addition to running the UDC meetings.

We also have usually it's less than an hour call the week of UDC just to review the cases.

Um so hopefully it's it was a good experience for yeah, it was a lot of fun.

So I'm gonna miss you guys.

So on that note, um, I think all the commissioners know I'm I'm big on frames.

Oh no.

So we got a certificate, Chair Harper.

All right.

Are there any other announcements?

anybody else leaving?

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

We're our new uh we're in Rocky Creek Ranch, so we're just off 1187.

So the address is going to be Crowley.

So not far.

I'll still be all around Fort Worth bugging y'all.

So next on the uh pending any other announcements.

Next on the agenda, we have meeting minutes from uh February 19th.

My motion to approve.

We have a motion from Commissioner West and a second from Commissioner Ramsey.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Excellent.

Motion passes 90.

We'll transition to our first case of the day, UDC 2026 039, which is also UFC 2501018.

Good morning, commissioners.

I haven't actually presented one of these in a couple of years, so some of you guys are new faces.

My name's Kel Bolson.

I'm the senior plans examiner with the urban forestry team.

And this week we have one case for you, like Joseph mentioned.

Um UFC 25 0108 or Mary's Creek Force Main, sections one and two.

This is about a six-mile tract.

So getting an address and zoning and owners was very difficult, if not impossible.

This is the information we have here.

It goes through council districts seven and three, and then there are also portions of the project that are in the ETJ and the city of Benbrook.

The applicant is the city of Fort Worth Water Department.

The agent is Karen Metzler with Plumber Associates, and the request is to get a waiver of the or certificate of appropriateness from the Urban Forestry Ordinance for a 25% tree preservation requirement.

Reduce that down to zero percent.

So this is the layout of the entire project.

Section one is the section located up here.

We have I-30s on the west side of town, I-20 over here.

Um section two is this portion that spans through City, Benbrook, and then some ETJ as well.

And then section three is this section down here.

This section is not included in this request yet.

We're only dealing with sections sections one and two.

So section one would be about here and follows Mary's Creek section two, going down here all the way up until Z Boaz.

And section three continues on, but once again, that's not included in the request for today.

So in total, this would be a little different from our normal projects where we show the existing canopy and then the proposed site plans and plantings.

Um this is a pipeline project, so we're really only dealing with tree removals only.

Um as you can tell, we have a lot of segments.

I believe there are 20 segments like this one that are all match lined, as much fun as it would have been to show you all of them and get everyone lost.

Um we picked four in particular just to kind of give a representation for what the project looks like.

So generally, this is the layout of the project.

Um, if you see this blue line here, that's the actual force main that's going in.

And then typically for most of the project, there's at least a 35-foot easement that that pipeline runs through in certain portions like this one.

There's also a permanent middle easement.

This in this case it's 20 feet across the project, 20 feet for that permanent middle easement is typical.

Um, so for urban forestry, the exempt area for this section would be that 35-foot easement, and then also that 20-foot permanent middle easement.

So the portions marked in like this red-orangish color and then this yellow color.

This is all exempt area, all of the existing trees in those exempt easements for urban forestry.

They're not considered in the existing canopy calculations.

So the waiver specifically, the request specifically is dealing with trees that are in non-exempt areas.

So for this section, this would be the proposed temporary construction easement.

Um for the majority of the site, that's going to be a 20-foot easement that runs along with it.

In certain portions, it's variable width or expands.

I believe there's certain portions where it goes up to about 35 feet, but to try and minimize construction related activities with the project itself for the vast majority of the project, it's just a 20-foot temporary area.

And for urban forestry, that's really the only portion of the project we're considering because it's not an exempt areas, but it's where work is occurring.

Um so if you'll see here, all these trees are proposed to be removed except for tree number 365, I believe.

Um, you can see the tree protection.

They have done a very good job of going through this long project and highlighting trees that are good candidates for preservation, are in good locations to be preserved, and where they can still get all the work they need done accomplished using that temporary construction easement while preserving the critical root zone of those trees.

So we'll jump to a different slide here.

Um this one, more the same.

So we have the temporary construction easement, temporary middle easement, the pipeline easement.

You see here, this becomes variable width.

So this whole area is exempt.

We also have some existing easements that are cutting through here, marked in like the purple color.

Again, any trees in any of those existing easements also be exempt.

So for this portion specifically, again, we're dealing with the green section, and then you see here they've highlighted three trees here, one of which is a significant tree, this 30-inch oak here.

Um they can get the work they need to get done accomplished while preserving the critical root zones for those trees.

So they have elected to preserve it, and then I believe we have two more.

Um it is.

Whoops.

All right, so um, and then fourth one here.

This is believe it's the western portion of section two.

Same kind of setup, existing easement, more proposed area, temporary construction easements, and then areas where they have proposed some tree preservation.

So we'll get into the numbers for this project.

Like I said, it's about a six mile section that does not include portions that are in City of Pembroke or ETJ.

And then there are also portions of this project that went over city owned property.

All of those portions are not included in our permit, and they've already been permitted with the PARD forestry team.

So we're really dealing just with the temporary easements over public property for sections one and two.

So the gross site area for the project is 2,227,000 square feet.

The net urban forestry area, which is just those non-exempt easements, is 1,194,187 square feet.

Existing tree canopy area that's within the net urban forestry area is 46,101 square feet.

That's just under 4% of the net urban forestry area.

They would be required to preserve 11,525 square feet of canopy, which is 25%, and the final canopy requirement for public projects is 30% canopy coverage.

So the final canopy requirement for this site is a little bit higher than that, because they have some significant trees they're planning to mitigate with additional planting.

Um, so the requirements just under 380,000 at 379,316.

They have elected to preserve 8,816 square feet of canopy.

Those are trees that they can work around.

We've reviewed the plans.

We also agree they're good candidates for preservation.

Um they're preserving 19.1% of the canopy area.

The request is still a full waiver of preservation down to zero.

They're electing to preserve these trees.

Um we're we're big fans, and we we agree that those trees are good candidates for preservation.

Some of the two of the trees they're preserving are significant trees, which is why that provided tree canopy is a little higher than the preserved canopy.

So you get some additional credit for preserving significant trees.

Um, because it's a pipeline, obviously they're not interested in planting trees, especially the temporary construction easements.

Once the project's done, that is now someone else's property.

So they don't want to plant trees on there.

We don't want them planting trees on someone else's property for those temporary construction easements.

Um, so public projects have a unique opportunity rather than planting to meet their final canopy requirement.

They can pay into the PARD tree fund, which is just a fund that's used to give out trees for planting and do planting projects across the city.

And that is at a rate of $600 per tree with the final canopy requirement for the site.

Typically, if it was anything but a big pipeline, they would have been required to plant at least 185 large species trees because it's a public project and the nature of the work.

They have elected to pay into the tree fund rather than planting, and we believe that is the best decision.

I'm gonna go ahead.

Our recommendation is for approval to reduce the 25% tree preservation requirement for this development to zero, and we support this waiver because pipeline projects are often planned to minimize the affected area and to perform the necessary work to prevent unnecessary alterations and disruptions to the properties being affected.

A minimal temporary construction and temporary middle easement area benefits the project overall, but it reduces the ability to meet the preservation requirement.

The applicant has thoughtfully selected the trees that are proposed to be preserved, will be properly mitigating.

I'll remove significant trees, and we'll be paying a substantial amount into the pard tree fund to meet the final canopy requirement.

Like I said, we recommend approval of this request, and I'm available if you guys have any questions.

Thank you.

I do have a question.

In section two, there is a substantial pecan orchard along Mary's Creek.

Has that been taken into account?

Don't believe that's one of the sections that we have included in the presentation.

I'll let the applicant speak to that.

Um, but it would have been included, assuming it's not public property, it would have been included in their plans.

Um any significant trees that were there in those temporary easements would have been or will be properly mitigated if they're going to be removed.

It's HOA property for Mont Rocher.

So I'll let the applicant speak to it.

Okay.

Just to clarify, they're um proposing to preserve 19%, but if we grant the waiver, they're not required to abide by that.

Correct.

Okay.

Will this project have to come back for those future phases?

So section three, yes.

Section three, um, portions that are within the city of Fort Worth, they'd have to come through.

We'd have similar permit.

Wouldn't be as big or complicated, thankfully.

Um, but yeah, it would be the same, the same deal.

Okay, is the applicant here to speak?

Yes, they have representation here.

Hi, welcome.

Please state your name in the city in which you reside.

Hi there, I'm Karen Metzler with Plumber, but I live in Rome, Texas.

Um, in regards to your pecan orchard question, uh, we rerouted, and those trees will not be impacted.

Okay.

Yes.

It's really pretty.

So I'm glad to hear that.

Yeah.

Um Gareth, your question.

Yes, we are asking for a full waiver, but our intention is to preserve um the trees that, well, some of the trees that Caleb pointed out are that is our goal.

Somebody asked a question about section three.

Just when it would it would be a separate case.

It would be a separate case, and it's 10, 20, maybe even longer down the road before section three is built.

Okay.

That's why it's not included in this one because it's so far out.

All right.

Well, thank you so much.

Thank you guys.

Is there anybody else here to speak in favor of this case?

Is there anybody here to speak against?

Okay, we'll close the public portion and have discussion by the board.

Seems like a necessary project.

Seems like people who care about trees are in charge of it.

So that's the one.

Commissioner West, second.

Motion to approve has been made and seconded.

Chair Harper, how do you vote?

Aye.

Vice Chair Benner, how do you vote?

Aye.

Aye.

Chair Reed, how do you vote?

Aye.

How do you vote?

Aye.

Or sorry, Commissioner Harrier, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Hughes, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Halliday, how do you vote?

Aye.

And Commissioner Ramsey, how do you vote?

Aye.

All right.

The motion passes 90.

Thank you.

All right.

Next up we have UDC 2026, 004 at 912 East Oleander.

This is in the near South Side.

The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for new construction of a commercial studio for photography, retail, and office space with the following waivers from the near South Side standards and guidelines.

A waiver from the parking and driveway standards to allow a garage door to be located along the street frontage instead of using the rear driveway or detached garage at the rear, as is typically found in residential scale garages, and a waiver from the architectural standards to allow a 312 roof pitch where a roof pitch of greater than 112 on a single story non-residential building is not permitted.

So for a little background on this project, the owner, developer, and architect of this project is also the um owner, developer, and builder of an adjacent project referred to as Connex in the near South Side, which was kind of an innovative office project that used shipping containers as well as modern materials at the corner of Evans and East Oleander.

The applicant is looking to do a photography studio that includes a large open area, some bathrooms, a small office, and a small retail space as well.

So it's very mixed use in nature, but largely commercial.

So the zoning is NST4RN.

Here's an image on the right showing an aerial of the neighborhood.

A couple things to note.

So we have Evans here on the west.

The project proposed is what's sometimes called Marie Lulu.

That's the name of the photography business that's going in.

Connex is directly adjacent to the west and to the east and south.

There is a uh mostly residential area just south of Terrell Heights.

You see a lot of bungalows, uh, craftsman style houses, uh, pretty low density residential there.

So here's a floor plan showing the proposed uh outline.

It's it's pretty open, it's designed to be very flexible commercial photography space to be used for a variety of different shoots.

There is an existing curb cut there that they're planning to utilize, which is where the garage door will go.

However, they're not expecting it to be a high traffic uh garage door by any means.

It'll be relatively limited when they have to pull in vehicles for photo shoots.

It's not going to disrupt much pedestrian flow along that sidewalk.

Um here's uh the elevations, which give you a pretty good sense of the project.

It's a 6,400 square foot project, it's about 29 feet tall, one story throughout.

Um, it features pre-engineered sheet metal as the main facade material with accents of composite wood.

So it has a very similar material and look to the connec building to the north, and I'll show you a picture of that in just a second.

The roof pitch has a 312 roof pitch, where as the code only allows a 112 for buildings in this scenario, but the architect was trying to do a nod to some of the craftsman style homes that you see throughout other parts of the neighborhood.

And that was also some of their justification for incorporating the composite wood.

It kind of mixes some of the materials from the more historic older residential part into this parcel while also combining some of the modern materials and look of the connex development.

And the garage door you see there, again, it's intended to be limited use, but it also, since it's glass, it's going to also promote fenestration and engagement from the inside of the building to the outside.

So here are some of the side uh and rear angles of the building, and here's a color rendering that kind of gives you a better sense of the interplay with the metal, pre-engineered metal siding and the wood siding as well.

Uh today it's currently a vacant lot.

Um, so there's not much there.

Uh and here is the adjacent connex building to give you a sense of the context that this is going to sit next to.

So, given all the above, um, staff is recommending the following motions.

Uh, that the waiver from parking and driveway standards to allow a garage door to be located along the street frontage instead of using a rear driveway or detached garage at the rear as typically required, and the waiver from the architectural standards to allow a 312 roof pitch or a roof pitch greater than 112 on a single story non-residential building is not permitted, that both of those waivers be approved.

Thank you.

Are there any questions for staff?

Is the applicant here to speak?

Yes.

Good morning.

If you'd state your name in the city in which you reside, please.

Morning.

Good morning.

My name is Jessica Martinez.

I reside in Fort Worth, Texas.

You can pull that down if you want to.

Make it easier for you.

So I'm here to represent Millarch Studio for Mary Lulu, the company that's Fort Worth based and up and coming.

They're the clothing brand as mentioned.

We are hoping to request these two waivers to approve the COA.

Um the goal of the roof pitch was to be mindful of the character of this the slightly steeper roof, kind of in harmony with the residential homes.

The metal cladding, as mentioned, is referencing kind of the commercial aspect of the building in relation next door, the connex building.

Uh, it kind of serves a better aesthetic.

And then the garage door, as mentioned, the glass sunsets kind of create a transparent and inviting environment for pedestrians that are walking along the on the along the street.

And it calls out to the transparent window system used at Connex to avoid a blink wall.

It will also serve the client who owns the clothing company, which is primarily a retail store to use the display of the clothing on the windows and the creative studio to have clothing photo shoots, and as mentioned to bring in the occasional film equipment, lighting equipment, props, help out with photography videos, and setting up scenes with temporary backdrops.

And I am here to answer any questions that you may have.

It seems like a good addition.

I don't think we have any questions.

Thank you so much.

Is there anybody else here to speak in favor of this case?

Your south side.

Okay.

It's also here.

Hi, Austin James.

Uh, representing your south side.

I'd not a whole lot to say.

I think it sounds like we we all kind of agree.

This is uh we're in line with the staff here.

We talked, I think last month about the the garage doors.

We supported some last week for the say last month for the same reason.

You know, it's just not a typical single-family home, garage door.

This looks a lot nicer.

It's being treated really well.

And the roof pitch makes a nice gradient from the commercial corridor of Evans down to the neighborhood in Terral Heights and historic south side.

So we're in support as well.

Thank you, Austin.

Is anybody else here to speak in favor or against?

Okay.

We'll close the public portion and have discussion by the board.

I think the roof pitch waiver makes sense, especially because it's betting up against the A5 and tying in with the connects next door.

It looks like it'd be a really good addition.

And I don't have a problem with the garage door.

I understand why we have that, but this seems like one of the cases would be good to work with them.

I agree.

Um, I'll move for approval.

I had one question.

Yeah, before we oh, and you're good.

Is there any issue with the height of the peak?

In relationship to the single family houses.

You didn't mention so I'm so curious.

This is a one-story structure near south side, measures height in terms of stories.

Okay.

Not necessarily floor.

So this pitch will actually be more agreeable than what the guideline requires.

Yeah.

Continues first.

Commissioner Ramsey, one thing to your to your point to um adjacent, their connects is three stories.

So that was also some of the applicants' intention intention to transition that.

Is that like 24 feet?

At least.

Yeah, this is probably almost 30 feet.

Connects is eight foot tall.

Three of them 24 feet.

Yeah.

I just wanted to for my own clear clarification.

Do it again.

Move for approval.

Second.

We have a motion for approval of both waivers from Commissioner Halliday and a second from Commissioner Ramsey.

Chair Harper, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner West, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Reed, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Bose, how do you vote?

Aye.

Uh Vice Chair Benner, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Hughes, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Halliday, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Ramsey, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Harrier, how do you vote?

Aye.

Motion pass both motions or motion with to approve both waivers passes 9-0.

Good morning, Commissioners.

Your next your next case is UDC 2026 029 for 2601 Precinct Line Road.

Uh, also west of 2549 Rivers Edge Drive and south of 8933 River Trails Boulevard.

The request is a recommendation to the zoning commission and city council for approval to rezone said 5.85 acre property to the following.

From AG agricultural to TLN Trinity Lakes Farm Based Code Neighborhood Zone.

Some case background for you.

The 5.85 acre property is located approximately 150 feet south of Saranac Trail and west of the 8900 block of River Trails Boulevard.

The site is currently vacant and is part of a larger tract of unplatted and undeveloped land zoned for agricultural use.

I'll show you that.

Some zoning history.

So no recent zoning history has been found for this tract of land.

It appears actually to have been classified agricultural in several of the zoning documents noted in the cases below on the staff report.

So those are just referenced for you.

Sorry.

And under our findings and recommendations, again, the site is situated on the east side of the winding West Fork Trinity River, south of Saranac Trail, and west of River Trails Boulevard.

This property will be closely connected to planned residential communities to the east and west, which were rezoned over the past two decades.

This proposed rezoning can be viewed as an extension of the existing residential development, which aligns with the surrounding land uses R1 to the north and A5.

And the future residential development on the west, which was recently again rezoned to TLN for residential uses.

So under the analysis for land use compatibility.

Surrounding land uses consist primarily of single-family residential development to the north and east, with planned single-family residential development to the west.

Vacant mitigation land includes trees, lakes, the Trinity Trails, and the Trinity River associated with former mining property, is located to the west and south.

The proposed zoning is compatible with surrounding land uses and future access from the extension of River Trails Boulevard to the development to the west supports this use at this location.

Under the comprehensive plan map consistency analysis, the 2023 adopted comprehensive plan designates the site as open space, private park recreation.

Therefore, the proposed zoning change is not consistent with the future land use designation.

However, development patterns in the surrounding area have evolved since adoption of the plan.

Ongoing single family development north and south of Trinity Boulevard has resulted in portions of previously mapped floodplain being reclaimed and re uh removed from the FEMA map revisions.

It is possible that only a small portion along the southern boundary of the 5.85 acre track site will remain with within the floodplain, and that's kind of shown here.

Under the comprehensive plan policies, the proposed rezoning supports comprehensive plan policies for the Trinity Lakes Farm Based Code District by allowing compatible residential development as part of the Plan Trinity Lakes community.

I'll show you here the policies.

The development pattern in the area includes single-family neighborhoods integrated with a preserved open space and recreational amenities.

The comprehensive plan encourages the use of floodplain areas for agricultural or recreational uses, such as hike and bike trails, which are incorporated within the Trinity Lakes development and the Trinity Trail System along the Trinity River.

This area is also identified within the city's active transportation plan network and trail connections along the Trinity River, as well as a connection north from the river to River River Trails Boulevard and Thames Trail will be required as the property develops and the developer submits a plat for the site.

In addition, the preservation of mitigation areas, lakes, woodlands, and riparian corridors supports policies promoting the protection of sensitive natural areas while incorporating them as amenities within the new development.

And this is that active transportation plan trail network.

So you see this there, and then the connection to themes is there.

And this is the river trails.

Based on the analysis provided, staff supports the requested rezoning to TLN as it is compatible with surrounding zoning and land use patterns and supports applicable comprehensive plan policies.

Should City Council approve the rezoning request, staff will come back to the UDC with a map amendment to update the regulating plan map in the Trinity, the Trinity Lakes Development Standards, as well as the Trinity Lakes maps in Appendix B, Exhibit B.25 and B.26 of the zoning ordinance.

Given the above, staff recommends the following motion that the requested approval for of a recommendation to the zoning commission and city council of the proposed zoning change from AG agricultural to TLN Trinity Lakes Neighborhood Zone be approved.

This concludes the staff report.

Thank you.

Do you have any questions for staff?

Is the applicant here to speak?

Hi, good morning.

Please state your name in the city in which you reside.

Good morning, David Gregory, DCG Engineering Killer, Texas.

Staff did a really good job of describing this project.

We have approximately 5.8 acres that's already outside of floodplain without any work being done.

We're not proposing to modify the existing floodplain because Trade River floodplain, which was very critical.

Um as staff has put it out.

As staff has pointed out, and you can see with the exhibit, we do have single family residential A5 immediately to our east, which uh we designed in the early 2000s.

Then you've got R1 to our north that's a little older than that.

And then last year I brought forth the uh TLN to the west, and that's a development that we're in the planning and and uh design phase right now.

This would be a good connection.

It would allow us to also bring River Trails Boulevard through and provide much needed uh connectivity to the project to the west.

Uh, we respectfully request your uh nod of approval for zoning commission and city council.

Thank you.

I remember the TLN case, so I think we probably most of us do.

So y'all have any questions?

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Is there anybody else here speaking in favor of this case?

Anyone to speak against?

Okay, we'll close the public portion, have discussion by the board.

Uh I think all of us were here for that TLN case last year, just about all of us.

So it seems like it makes sense.

They're not disrupting the floodplain.

I don't have any issues with it.

You can make a motion to approve.

Oh, I deferred.

Go ahead.

Reed, Commissioner Reid makes a motion to approve.

Second.

Thank you.

We have a second by Commissioner DeBose.

Chair Harper, how do you vote?

Aye.

Vice Chair Benner, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner West, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Reed, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner DeBose, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Hughes, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Halliday, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Ramsey, how do you vote?

Aye.

And Commissioner Harrier, how do you vote?

Aye.

Motion passes 90.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh UDC 2025 305, 900 Evans Av.

Final case of the day.

Uh, it's a big one, so I'm gonna do this one a little bit different.

I'm gonna review the waiver requests.

I'm gonna talk about some context to the project and the site, and then I'm gonna focus on the specific waiver requests, and then go into more description of the overall development of the different buildings.

Just given the scale of this, I want to make sure that we can stay focused on the waiver requests.

So uh this is in the near South Side NST4R zoning.

There is a historical component that I'll talk about in just a second.

Uh the applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for new construction of a multi multi-building mixed-use development with the following waivers from the near south side standards and guidelines, a waiver from the minimum roadside with standard to allow a main street roadside width for new construction of seven feet where 15 feet is required, waiver from the streets street tree requirements to not include street trees along South Freeway, which is tech start frontage where street trees are required, waiver from the pedestrian light requirements to not include pedestrian lights along south freeway frontage.

We again tech stock where pedestrian lights are required, and then lastly, a waiver from the structured parking standards to allow structured parking along the rights of way where structured parking along rights away are not allowed.

So this is almost a three-block development.

Um the entire thing is zone NST4R, and the area gives a bit of a better perspective.

So just to set context to the west of this site, we have I-35, and then there is a service road, and then we get the the main block of the development.

The owners own all but one parcel, which kind of influences some of their design choices that you'll see later on.

And then the middle block, they own most of that, almost down to Evans Plaza, and then they own some parcels to the uh east of Evans as well.

Um, the parcels to the east of Evans are zoned historic, so those have gone under HCLC review, but we'll talk about the interconnection with this project here in just a second.

Here's a broad overview of the site plan.

Um there's 12 different buildings for this project, 180 units of housing, including affordable housing through the low-income credit, low-income tax credit program.

Uh nine of the buildings are residential, three of them are commercial.

They utilize the mixed-use height bonus to increase the height of some of the western buildings.

As mentioned before, the two buildings east of Evans, which is this one here, and this one here.

Do you have uh historic designation through the Terrell Heights Historic District?

Um, and those received approval from the HCLC with conditions on March 9th.

Our project also includes a pocket park, a paseo, and public streetscape improvements.

So here's a map showing the zoning.

As you can see here, we're focused today on the turquoise color, really, these two blocks and the streetscape.

The purples are already been considered by the uh historic cultural and landmarks commission.

So, some background to this case.

Uh, the developer is a company called Royal Capital.

Though they're they are Milwaukee-based, and in 2000 May 2025, the city entered into a redevelopment agreement with them.

Uh, and the city, as part of the redevelopment effort required that the applicant build 170 residential units with income restrictions, add 15,700 square feet of office and retail space, include adequate publicly accessible parking, and make public space enhancements.

In exchange, the developer is getting favorable landlock prices as well as some economic uh incentives.

The uh 2025 agreement also stipulated construction timelines.

So they're looking to break ground, uh, I believe this summer.

For a little bit of context to this site, some people may be familiar with this site.

Uh, it's directly north of the Evans Avenue Plaza.

The city started assembling land in this area in the 1990s.

Uh, they had unsuccessful calls for redevelopment in 2002 and 2006.

Um, in 2001, however, the city did select a developer for this site.

Uh, and then from 2021 to 2023, um, the developer worked on trying to secure his entitlements and plans and financing.

The UD they actually did receive a UDC uh administrative approval by UDC 2023 025 in October 2023 for mixed use development that included structured parking, 300 units of housing.

However, the city terminated that agreement in late 2023 after the developer failed to meet financing deadlines.

So I know that's a whole lot of context.

Um here's a quick kind of overview of the landscape plan.

There is a pocket park that uh this project has, as well as the landscaped Paseo.

So, with all of that, I know that's a whole lot.

Um, we're gonna focus in on the waivers for just a second.

The first waiver uh is for roadside width of a main street along Evans Ave.

The near Southside regulating plan defines Evan Aven Evans Avenue as a main street and thus is required a 15-foot roadside width.

So that's measured from back of curb to the front of building, and that is supposed to include a parkway with street trees, pedestrian lights, as well as some sidewalk.

The code also allows it to be entirely paved as long as there is that 15 feet there.

So here's a diagram showing a snippet of Evans where you see this issue coming about.

There is angled parking up and down Evans, so that limits the roadside width.

The city installed this angled parking uh, I think in 2000 2000, uh, as they were kind of getting ready for some redevelopment efforts in the area.

That's also when they constructed Evans Avenue Plaza, which is a local community feature that has plaques showing the history of the community and other other things.

So the streetscape's been done for over two decades.

Um, but because of the angled parking that affects their roadside width, you can see here some of the bulb outs, how that's kind of balanced with the bulb outs.

Um so at the narrowest points from the back of curb of the angled parking to the front of the building.

It's a little bit over seven feet, but at the bulb outs, it ends up increasing to over 26 feet.

So when you measure the entire western side of Evans, the uh 536 feet of that, 47% of it is at the 26-foot level.

Uh so the average roadside width is 50 is 16 feet or 15 feet is required, but it's just these kind of narrow points uh due to the angled parking.

And the applicant was really wanting to keep that configuration because that's what the community has had for quite a while, um, and they want to kind of respect that history and context.

It also allows them to maximize on street parking to make sure that folks are not parking in the community, they're parking along Evans as this project is trying to revitalize that commercial corridor.

So waivers two and three are somewhat connected, and it's for street trees and pedestrian lights along South Freeway.

So, as shown initially, South Freeway runs along the western edge of this project.

Um, so the applicant is planting uh street trees and pedestrian lights to the vast majority of this project.

Um, however, uh tech start owns the right-of-way to the west along South Threeway Service Road, and um the applicant asked TechStat if they could provide street trees and pedestrian lights, and TechStot said no.

So to try to illuminate the area, the applicant has proposed wall-mounted LED sconce lighting on the buildings to help illuminate that public realm.

And they also did some photometric analysis that showed that along South Freeway, the sconce lighting would achieve 1.87-foot candles on average, up and down that frontage.

By comparison, the Missouri Avenue corridor has an average foot candle of measure of 2.2 foot candles, and then the Evans Av corridor has an average measure of 1.27 foot candles.

And from an urban design perspective, usually you want about 1.5 to 2.5.

That's kind of the golden area with a target of about two.

So they're just shy of that two target, but within a comfortable range.

And then one thing just to note the standards do allow exceptions for spacing of street trees and pedestrian lights to accommodate mature trees, curb cuts, fire hydrants, and other infrastructure elements.

But because this is along an entire frontage of a main road we wanted to bring in in front of UDC.

It is also anticipated that South Freeway will have the lowest amount of pedestrian traffic through this entire site just because it is up against a freeway.

It's kind of the edge of the property.

And you can see here they have the pedestrian lights to the north, but then not along South Freeway.

They're also along Missouri and Evans Avenue.

There's the pedestrian lighting plan.

Here's some of the pedestrian lights styles that they have in the rest of the development.

This neighborhood has a mixture of Washington style lights and Terrell Heights style lights.

So they've done a very good job per their pedestrian lighting plan of trying to have continuous corridors with the same style of lights.

One nuance is they're trying to recycle some of the Terrell Heights lights that are existing, but the city is no longer servicing those lights moving forward.

So the city is trying to transition to the berry style of light that you see on the right.

So, but their plan has tried has endeavored to make sure that it is continuous, the same style down each street corridor.

Here's the photometric plan, and here's a detail of the photometric plan showing the average foot candles across those main uh north south streets, South Freeway, Missouri, and Evans.

Here's some a detail on the uh sconce lighting that they're proposing to attach to buildings A and B to illuminate the South Freeway public realm.

All right, last waiver, structured parking along the right of way.

Uh so buildings A and B contain podium style parking.

Building A contains 42 spaces, and building B contains 32 spaces, so it's first floor parking and then apartments above.

Um these are screened by masonry walls, so when you're driving past, you will not necessarily know that it is parking on the inside.

Um, this uh project, I showed you the one parcel that the applicant was not able to obtain uh as part of this project.

This one right here.

Um, that kind of really limits them to do structured parking.

They can't do a typical parking garage because then you run into issues of ramp space.

The previous UDC had assumed that that developer is going to be able to buy that, but I've heard that the person willing was asking a very high price for that lot.

So that impacts and limits some of their design options.

The applicant is trying to keep the bulk of the parking away from the residential area to the east, so that's why they're putting it along the freeway because again, that's expected to be a less trafficked uh corridor.

And then they've also wrapped the outside of the buildings with murals and artistic treatments to pay homage to local and historical figures from the community.

So here's some uh site photos of the site.

Today it is largely vacant.

There are some trees, an old building that will be torn down as a part of this project.

But you can see some of the streetscape with the brick and the angled parking that's been in place for quite a while.

You can see the Washington lights there that are along Evans.

Here's just some more views of the site.

Here's some additional views of the site.

You can see the sign that's up for the project.

So those are the waivers, and now I'll get into kind of what you guys are probably really wanting to look at, which is some of the buildings.

So again, there's 12 buildings.

Uh, we could spend quite a lot of time going through each one.

I'm just gonna go through all of them pretty at a pretty high level so you can see kind of what this development is gonna look like.

So this is building A, this is in the southwest portion of the property.

It's one of the multi-story buildings with podium parking on the ground floor.

The developer really tried to add a good amount of articulation, changes in facade plane to the design.

They've incorporated murals and artistic treatments that pay homage to local historical figures to try to activate that ground floor pedestrian realm.

You can see some of the units that are gonna be here, um, different elevations of building A.

Transitioning to building B.

This is the other multi-story building.

Building A and building B are both on the western side towards the highway.

The developer is trying to keep the mass of the development over on that side so it doesn't tower over the low density residential to the east.

Different elevations.

Yeah, just kind of going through these.

There is a pocket pocket park to the east of building A as well.

Building C1 and C2 are the two-story residential buildings.

So as you move from west to east along Missouri and parts of Evans, they plan some two-story buildings to still have some multifamily development, but not have it tower over the lower density single family residential to the east.

Here are some of the floor plans.

We have been working with the developer too to reduce some of the lap siding on this development.

So some of these renderings are a little bit out of date, but that will end up changing in the near future.

Here are some more renderings, kind of going through this.

Separating the buildings, there's little landscape passeo.

Um things that are very amenable to low density residential.

So I know that's a whole lot, but given the given everything we've discussed, staff is recommending the following motion that the waivers for minimum roadside width standards for new construction to allow seven feet where 15 feet is required, and the waiver for street frontage requirements to not include street trees along south freeway frontage where street trees are required, and the waiver for pedestrian light requirements along South Threeway frontage where pedestrian lights are required, and the waiver from the structured parking standards to allow structured parking along the right-of-way where structured parking along the rightway is not allowed, that all those waivers be approved.

Staff is in support of all of them.

So this concludes staff presentation.

I assume there'll be a lot of questions, so I'm ready to answer those, and the applicant is here as well.

I know we all have some commissioner Halliday.

I was just curious about the this is more of a design guideline question where we don't allow structured parking on the right-of-way.

What was the purpose of that one exactly?

So the structured parking along the right-of-way, the standard talks about both structured parking like a parking garage along a right-of-way, but it also mentions that podium parking should not be along the right-of-way.

Okay.

I believe the intent of it is to ensure that the pedestrian realm is fronted with buildings for people and not spaces for cars.

Versus this being on the service road.

Okay.

So you're not walking across an entire block of just garage, garage, garage, garage.

This is kind of unique because it is up against the service road and the highway, and the near south side code has kind of jumped east of the highway.

So that presents some design challenges for these parcels that abut that service road on either side.

So they don't require uh waivers for slope roofs on this project, but they do these are these are residential.

So they're single family residential, or they're they're the code just mentions it just distinguishes residential versus non-residential.

Okay.

Um, and then uh the building that would be what is the distance from the property line there?

How far is that set back?

I couldn't find that we pull up the site plan so I can make sure we're talking about the same.

It looked like there was some planting along there.

Um obviously there's not room for street trees.

This one right here.

Yes.

Um I believe it's less than eight.

It's pretty narrow.

Yeah.

There is a sidewalk there.

There is a sidewalk.

Oh, we'll be.

Okay.

There will be sidewalk.

There will be a planting strip.

Text dot just said they cannot plant trees within that planting strip.

And then the wedge lights on the building.

Is there any lighting on that side?

Is there the side where we allowing them not to have street lights, right?

Right.

Text dot's not gonna allow them to include the pedestrian lights.

They're proposing sconce wall lighting that will be once to the side of the building.

So the building will provide lighting for the sidewalks and like that.

That's good.

Is there any consideration for lighting on that northeast corner?

I know those lots are not uh part of this, but um in the photometric plan, that was sort of the only right-of-way that was getting rather dark.

Are we considering a waiver for the northeast corner?

I guess the building that would be east of the city.

Where HCLC saw it.

It is a little bit hard to see on this, but they do have lighting here, here, here, here, here, and here along that frontage.

Okay.

So they do have pedestrian lights all along Evans on both the east and west side.

It's just a little bit tough to see from from this.

So all of Evans has lighting, um all of Missouri has lighting, Dashwood has lighting, um, Terrell has lighting, it's just not South Freeway.

So they're complying with every other area.

Except South Freeway.

They can't because of Text out and it looked like in that report the as you come around the corner on tarot, East Terrell.

Uh yeah, uh Evans, right?

This one?

Yes.

Yeah, I don't know why they didn't include in their photometric analysis.

Um, but they do have the lights on their and the waiver request is specifically for a butting south freeway.

So if they're trying to they would have to come back if they don't want to do the correct lighting on the other spaces.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay.

I think that's it.

Uh question on if if there's a discrepancy between Text Dot and our code.

Wouldn't Text dot supersede us?

So TechSot owns the land, but according to the code, if you cannot accommodate street width or anything like that within the public right of way, then that pushes to your property, then you have to push everything back.

Oh, I see.

Okay.

Yeah, and you can see here that one lot that they don't own kind of spoils that party because then the further they push to the east, then you get connectivity issues uh as well.

Is there any planting at all uh on the uh frontage road?

Like they have landscape or anything, yeah.

They have landscape planting on the frontage road.

I know Text Dot is myself.

Uh I guess a lot they fear to do with the tight area they have.

So from what I'm looking at, it's gonna be a major upgrade with the with the space they got to work with.

Uh I'm from the south side.

And then I and I lived over there at uh uh Tucker and all of that, Missouri and all of that.

So I think it's gonna be great with the work they got with the space they gotta work with.

I think they did a good design.

Yeah, it looks good.

Okay.

Well, if we don't have any more questions for staff, is the applicant here to speak?

Yes.

Hi, good morning.

Please state your name and the city in which you reside.

Indeed.

Good morning, Commissioners Terrell Walter with Royal Capital, I'm based out of Powder Springs, Georgia.

So happy to be before you all this morning.

Uh again, Royal Capital Group, we're a real estate development firm based out of Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Uh, we're urban developers uh at our core.

Uh we are a fully integrated real estate development firm.

Uh we appreciate uh the warm hospitality that we've gotten uh you know over the last year or two um in terms of our introduction to Fort Worth and uh extremely um happy about uh working with community on the Evan Rosedale development.

Um what do you see here before you today?

And uh, you know, we did do alongside our design partners and Mick Adams and our architectural partner as well to uh make sure we were maximizing our opportunities at the site, marrying that to what we heard uh from the community engagement, uh which uh as was stated, you know, started back in the early 2000s.

Uh it's a present day to the community engagement that we've done over the time that we've uh been selected as a developer for this uh opportunity.

So we're excited uh and what we have.

We had another community engagement event um yesterday evening uh that also brought out a lot of subcontractors, local subcontractors in the community as we're looking to build this development uh, you know, with Fort Worth at the end of the day, not not for Fort Worth, but with Fort Worth.

So uh we appreciate the opportunity to be here and happy to answer any questions uh regarding the waivers before you and we appreciate uh you know your consideration um of the certificate of appropriateness around this.

Thank you.

Do you all have any questions for that?

I have one more go ahead.

How have the community uh wrap the uh around this here project?

Great question.

So as a best practice for us, um we start with community.

Uh so before we put pen and paper on the on the plan and design, we synthesize the community engagement that's been done since 2002.

But then we also hosted our community engagement event uh where we met at Shambley Library and other um Biden community in to say, hey, we got a blank sheet of paper.

Um here's what you all told community, here's what you all can communicated to the previous developers as well as the city over the last 20 years.

Um, how is that consistent with what you're looking for today?

And if not, what are some of the things that are applicable to what you all want to see in your community?

In addition to that, we did a learning lesson.

Uh, you know, what exists existed here.

Tell us all about you know, William Gooseneck McDonald and other right, um, to learn what was there before.

Um, and then we came back to community to say, hey, here's our plans.

None of this is solidified.

Uh, here's what we heard.

Here's how we can respond.

These are things we know we can deliver upon.

Here's some things we know we can't do, uh, just fully transparent uh with our approach.

And we got sign off from the community.

I want to say that was uh probably December.

It was a December meeting that we had um, you know, with community, uh made a bit might have been 2024, 2025, but uh we had a community engagement event with community where we came forth before them to show our plans and say, hey, here's what we heard, here's the end result, here's what we want to go and build.

My colleague Brian Mays is confident he's our finance director that we could this is what we can get financed um and have this development coming to life, and we got the nod from community to say that's consistent with what we want.

Um, and we understand what you can't do, uh, but we love what you can do.

And so we've continued that consistent communication.

Uh we meet with the Historic Southside Neighborhood Association on a monthly basis, just met with them again last night in their economic development uh meeting, and we share out our plans where we are on the financing path, et cetera, to make sure that we continue that open communication so that we don't miss the mark here.

The reason I asked that uh a lot of folks might look at that area and see something totally different, but it's a lot of history over there in that area.

So historic stuff in that area.

So I'm glad the community is behind you on this project.

Appreciate that.

Will the will the project be built in a single phase?

Everything will be built all at once.

Yes, we are happy to to uh announce that it will be a single phase project.

Exciting okay.

Thank you so much for being here.

We really appreciate it.

Hey, thank you for your time.

Near South Side is also here as well.

Yeah, I didn't Austin James again with Near South side.

I just want to commend these guys.

They really have gone above and beyond on working with the neighborhood, working with us.

I think sometimes you see cases where the zoning and what the community wants aren't always compatible.

That kind of happened a little bit last month.

Uh but this one they've they've embraced everything.

They've worked with everybody.

And uh I think when we first saw this submitted, there we, you know, I think Joe and I found a bunch more waivers than what you're seeing right now.

And all I think all four of these, they all have staff of support, they all have our support, and they all are kind of hard to get around for the most part.

The the first one going off the list here.

Um I I think the streetscape as it is is a great thing, and I think it's important to keep that the way it is.

So I think that that's why we support that.

B and C with those textile ones, we near South Site is uh in addition to supporting this with some TIFF money.

We're working on a project just to the south on uh the Rosedale connection, and we've had the same issues where TechSide has told us no on the for the same things for trees and lights down there.

But they've they've cited maintenance and concerns of branches and whatnot following impacts from cars and whatnot.

So that's the we're supportive of that because we know we understand it.

And again, the D option there is with the garage makes total sense for us with the being where it is, and it's it's well designed too.

It's not just a garage, it's it's properly screened.

They've incorporated the art and everything into it.

So we're supportive of all these as well.

I have a question.

Go ahead.

Austin, can you explain um the purpose of the 15 feet minimum requirement?

Is that a safety concern or for look and and keeping things nice and uh providing for some landscaping?

Yeah, it it's or you know just to have the amount of width for a sidewalk there.

If you know we all like to imagine at least two people walking side by side, and then to allow a bit of room for landscaping and and a planting strip along the curb as well, which this doesn't really allow for just because of the existing conditions of the parking spaces.

Is there a concern because it's uh just seven feet if there's freeway shut down and cars are being routed on the service road there?

Is there a concern with safety uh with that?

I think the seven feet is just on or uh Missouri is that or Evans?

Correct, it's just along Evans because Evans has that angle of parking.

I'm sorry, I missed it.

I thought it was on the service road too.

No, the the other three waivers are for the service road.

The roadside width is issue is just along Evans because they have that angle of parking there.

And it's still feet pedestrian path away from the roadway.

So it's either the seven foot is from the nose of a an angled parking space.

Okay, thank you for clarifying.

I've tried to I haven't used this actually before, but I've circled where I think the those are.

It's because we're using angle parking.

We're typically traditionally you've been using parallel parking.

Yes.

Angle parking means a lot better in this kind of development.

It makes it makes it nicer, makes it a little bit more appealing.

And uh get in and out easierwise.

It is already part of there's only three streets in the near Southside regulating plan that are designated main streets, Magnolia, Rosedale, and this portion of Evans.

Oh, and South Main, sorry, four.

Um so that's where we require those extra roadside width.

The typical standard is 10 and a half.

So Missouri has 10 and a half, Dashwood has 10 and a half, Terrell has 10 and a half, even South Freeway.

It's just Evans Aff specifically the intent is that it be a main street, similar to Magnolia in feel and pedestrian traffic.

So that's why we wanted that extra, but this angled parking kind of uh a unique circumstance to that.

Thank you, Austin.

Is there anybody else here to speak in favor or against?

Hello, please state your name in the city in which you resign.

Hi, good morning.

Lindsay Mesa, uh City of Fort Worth.

Um I work in development services uh as a facilitator.

I'm covering the Evans and Rosedale project.

Um more or less just here to um, you know, thank Josh, um, Royal Capital and uh McAdams, the engineering consulting firm, on the work that they've done on this.

Uh this project is also an economic development project that has some pretty strict deadlines and some timelines that we're working towards.

Um, but more or less to say that you know Josh's group, uh, Kevin's group with Royal Capital and Joe have been really helpful in getting all the moving pieces put together uh and development services is to committed to you know pushing this project forward um and and providing as much support as we can and and as much support as the community wants to see and the the developer wants to see as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, if there's nobody else here to speak, we'll close the public portion and have discussion by the board.

Um you know, usually we take these waivers one at a time when we're discussing them.

I do think that most of us feel pretty supportive of all four.

So if somebody wanted to, unless there's anything specific, if somebody wanted to make a motion, I'd be open to it.

I make a motion to approve all four waivers.

I'll say all right.

We have a motion to uh approve by Commissioner Ramsey and a second from Commissioner Reed.

Chair Harper, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner West, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Reed, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner DeBose, how do you vote?

Aye.

Uh Vice Chair Benner, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Hughes, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Halliday, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Ramsey, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Harrier, how do you vote?

Aye.

Motion to approve all four waivers, passes nine zero, and we're out within an hour and a half.

Hey, good job.

And I want to thank the applicant.

This is a really thoughtful project, and I love that they worked with the community, and we're so sensitive to the community.

We really appreciate that.

Thank you guys.

Thank you.