Richardson City Plan Commission Meeting May 6th, 2025
Five of the seven regular commissioners are present, Chairman Marsh, Commissioner Roberts, Commissioner Keller, Commissioner Beach, and Commissioner Schascheck. Both alternates are also present and will participate. Vice-Chair Thomason and Commissioner Quirk are absent.
Minutes of the previous two meetings are approved unanimously.
The only item on tonight’s agenda is a public hearing on ZF 25-08. This is a major modification request for a restaurant, La Salsa Verde Taqueria, at 1250 W. Spring Valley Rd. This site is located within Sub-District G of the West Spring Valley PD. This sub-district allows for commercial uses, including restaurants. The Future Land Use Plan designates this area as Neighborhood Mixed-Use. (The agenda packet includes a typo referring to this as Community Commercial. Development Services staff have assured me that this is simply a typo. This land is designated as the Neighborhood Mixed-Use placetype.) The Neighborhood Mixed-Use placetype calls for mixed-use and multifamily residential as primary uses and sees retail/restaurant as an appropriate secondary use. This requires a major modification request because the zoning calls for buildings to have a minimum of two stories and requires an upper floor to have either residential or hotel/office uses. This request is for a single-story building with only a restaurant use. A mezzanine and façade will be installed to aid with the appearance of a second story.
Staff presents a background of the request. This request will include public right-of-way that will allow for a 12-ft. sidewalk and a 10 ft. landscape zone that will include trees. Staff notes that three pieces of correspondence have been received opposing the request. This apparently equates to 39% of the notification zone opposing the request. Because of this, the request will require a supermajority of Council to approve it. One letter in opposition is included in the agenda packet. It includes a simple message from the owners of 8220 Spring Valley Rd. (Nayebcorp) stating that this will decrease their property value.
Chair Marsh asks about the intent of this sub-district. Staff answers that the Future Land Use Plan sees restaurant use as an appropriate secondary use. The existing zoning designates restaurant use as an appropriate primary use but requires a mix of uses within the building. Commissioner Poynter asks for more details on the 12 ft. sidewalk. Staff explains that this is a requirement of the street cross section depicted in this West Spring Valley Corridor Planning District.
The applicant steps forward to present their request. Chair Marsh notes that one of the opposed letters refers to access through the adjoining property to the west. They are concerned about traffic flow. Chair Marsh asks for the applicant’s comments on the traffic flow. The applicant states that there are multiple ways to access this site. Most patrons will likely access the site from Spring Valley. They will work with customers and neighboring developments to ensure that traffic into the site won’t cause issues for neighbors. Signage is also something the applicant is willing to put up. Commissioner Beach asks if any communication between the business owner and neighbors has taken place. The applicant answers that communication has taken place, but the neighboring business owner was not very open to cooperating with them to come to a mutual resolution regarding traffic concerns. Chair Marsh asks if this business will acquire a liquor license. The applicant is not aware of any plans to obtain a liquor license. Hours of operation will be 7 am – 11 pm seven days a week.
One speaker is present for this hearing. Gabriel Nuñez represents the neighboring Pediatric Clinic of Richardson. He expresses concern about traffic access and how that will interact with the foot traffic for his clinic. He asks for a median or pylons to protect pedestrians.
The applicant returns and states that this shouldn’t have more activity than a regular shopping center. He doesn’t think this site needs any special consideration. Chair Marsh asks if they could move the building and driveway to the east. The applicant answers that this isn’t feasible due to the small site. Staff also notes that having two driveways next to each other would not be ideal for the vision of this district. Commissioner Purdy asks if any other traffic control devices have been explored. The applicant answers that they have not considered traffic control devices. The CPC unanimously recommends approval, and the meeting adjourns.