The document discusses a pre-submittal meeting scheduled for a property located at 3161 Broadway Boulevard in Garland, Texas. The prospective developer, John Rose, will be represented by his engineer consultant, Scott Caruthers. City staff provide background on previous discussions with Rose about entitlements, including recommended solutions for ingress/egress and questions about signage, landscaping, and setbacks. Staff encourage rezoning the property to a Planned Development district to expedite the application process and provide more flexibility given potential variances needed. Rose has not decided whether to fully or partially demolish the existing building.

1. GARLAND
August 18, 2015
Maxwell Fisher
Masterplan - Land Use Consultants
900 Jackson Street, Suite 640
Dallas, Texas 75202
TEXAS MADE HERE
Re: Texas Public Information Act Request
Dear Mr. Fisher:
MARK E. DEMPSEY
Assistant City Attorney
(972) 205-2380
(972) 205-2389 FAX
I received your letter, a copy of which is attached, requesting certain information pursuant
to the Texas Public Information Act (the "Act" or "TPIA"). Specifically, you request written
correspondence received from or sent to the City of Garland pertaining to the property located at
3161 Broadway Boulevard, excluding any correspondence between the City and the property owner
or prospective tenant. You indicate that what you are seeking is correspondence between any elected
or appointed City officials and City staff.
Enclosed please find the information responsive to your request, to the extent it is presently
maintained by the City.
Please call me with any questions or if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
~Mil.Mark E. Dempsey
Assistant City Attorney
cc: Garland Police Records Department
CITY OF GARLAND
PO BOX 469002 GARLAND . TX 75046 · 9002
972 · 205 · 2000
WWW GARLANOTX . GOV

2. Fields, Shawna
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Good morning Shawna,
Dowl, Rene
Wednesday, August 05, 2015 6:44 AM
Fields, Shawna
FW: Open Records
This is a follow-up to his original email.
From: Maxwell Fisher [mailto:maxwell@masterplanconsultants.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 1:38 PM
To: Dowl, Rene
Cc: dallas@masterplanconsultants.com
Subject: RE: Open Records
Ms. Dowl,
GCA15-0527
As a point of clarification, "written correspondence" would include electronic mail messages.
Maxwell
From: Maxwell Fisher [mailto:maxwell@masterplanconsultants.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 1:34 PM
To: 'rdowl@garlandtx.gov' <rdowl@garlandtx.gov>
Cc: dallas@masterplanconsultants.com
Subject: Open Records
Ms. Dowl,
~ - -- ,_ -
I-
Let this email serve as a request for any written correspondence received from or sent to the City of Garland pertairling
to the property located at 3161 Broadway Boulevard. Please exclude any correspondence between the city and the
property owner or prospective tenant. The goal is to obtain correspondence between any elected or appointed city
officials and city staff.
We would direct this search for information to the following departments:
• Planning and Community Development
• Building Inspection
• City Manager's Office
• Economic Development
Feel free to email or call me if you have any questions.
Regards,
Maxwell
Maxwell J. Fisher, AICP
1

3. Masterplan -1- Land Use Consultants
900 Jackson Street, Suite 640
Dallas, TX 75202
(0): 214.76i.9197 (C): 214-470.3972
t>
2

4. Gwin, David
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
David:
Williams, Councilman BJ
Friday, January 30, 2015 4:50 PM
Gwin, David
Williams, Councilman BJ; Montgomery, Neil
Re: Status of the Former Kmart Facility
I appreciate your followup and feedback. As discussed, I continue to committed to working with this owner to develop
and implement a "win-win"'strategy to ensure the highest quality development at this prime commercial site. Please
keep me posted re: further contacts and discussions with this owner.
Thanks!
Councilman B. J. Williams
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 30, 2015, at 4:04 PM, "Gwin, David" <DGwin@garlandtx.gov> wrote:
Good afternoon, Councilman Williams:
Just wanted to send you a quick update on the status of the former Kmart facility.
Per our conversation, I met with the owner at the site and toured the facility. We discussed where he
has been with the project and where we need to go to make the project a win-win for everyone. I
stressed to him that we very much want to be part of the solution, but that an acceptable use was
critical if that was to happen. I have committed to take a look at how we might further assist in the
project and he agreed that the best potential uses of the facility are those that are currently allowed by
right. While he is playing his cards extremely close to his vest right now, I am confident that he
understands where we need for the project to be ... especially if we are to consider assisting with an
incentive. I believe he needs for us to be able to help so that should help our position. I will continue to
work with him and I'm sure that together we will move this project forward . Just let me know if you
would like to further discuss our exchange. Thanks for your support and engagement.
Thanks,
David
David Gwin, AICP, CEcD
Director of Economic Development
City of Garland
800 Main Street
Garland, Texas 75040
Phone: (972) 205-2462
FAX: (972) 205-2474
<imageOOl.jpg>

5. Gwin, David
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Neil:
Williams, Councilman BJ
Monday, March 30, 2015 7:51 AM
Montgomery, Neil; Gwi n, David
Glenn, Martin; Neighbor, Brad
Old K-Mart Property Space - (Broadway @Centerville)
The old K-Mart building (Centerville@Broadway) now has a temporary banner sign attached to the building "Plaza
Broadway". I have received several complaints recently that the space is now being leased out for a "Flea Market" on
weekends. Please have Building Inspections visit and inspect this property immediately to determine if these complaints
are valid. Also, contact the owner(s) and re-emphasize that we have discussed before, such a use totally unacceptable
and must cease. I drove the site around S:OOpm Sunday (yesterday), after receiving a second phone complaint from a
constituent who reported steady in and out pedestrian traffic at this site on Saturday. Doors were locked (chained}, bu~
there were several people sitting outside on the curb directly in front of this building.
1. Have the owner(s) filed any kind of application(s) with the City?
2. Have there any kind of pre-submittal discussions?
3. Has the City issued a CO for this building? If so, for what type of business?
4. Has this temporary banner signage been formally requested by the owner(s} and approved?
Please review and advise.
Thanks!
Councilman B. J. Williams
Please
Sent from my iPad

6. Fields, Shawna
From: Maguire, Christine
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 7:53 AM
De la Vega, JosueTo:
Cc: Allen, Chasidy
Subject: FW: Garland TX - project entitlement inquiry
Attachments:
Good morning, Josue:
SC_zoning.pdf; PD District.pdf; Requested information - Garland project - installment l ;
Centerville and Broadway Grocery Store Site
I understand that you have the honor of handling the 3161 Broadway pre-submittal conference today at 3 PM. I believe
you will be meeting with Scott Caruthers, the engineer consultant hired by the prospective developer/owner (John
Rose). Unfortunately neither Rose nor I will be able to attend so I want to get you up to speed on the conversations
we've had with them prior to the pre-submittal. We have had several meetings over the last two months related to the
entitlements on the property at fairly general level except for transportation issues, which have been a real sticking
point.
• Paul and Thuan have sent to them a recommended solution for ingress/egress issues (see attached email).
• I've sent to them a slew of information (attached email). They have issues/questions related to signage,
landscaping, setbacks
• At the meeting they would like confirmation as to what ROW takings might occur to the property if any (l'v~ sent
Thuan a heads up but will remind him before t he meeting)
• At the meeting they have asked for confirmation that our building codes merely adopt the 2009 IBC. If the Oity
has any unique amendments they would like to know what they are
• Because they may be asking for a number of variances, the email below is my most recent communication
encouraging them to rezone to PD. This may expedite their application given that the variances may require
Board of Adjustment and Plan Commission approval. Also, they may be seeking incentives so this will give the
City leverage over the appearance of the property, currently zoned SC. This meeting would be a good
opportunity to enforce this message.
We we've talked to them, they have not decided on whether they will demolish the building entirely or just a portion of
t he building. This pre-submittal will help them determine what a full demolition would trigger verses some partial
demolition. I'll be interested in knowing how t hey portray that direction. From an incentive standpoint, we would
much prefer the demolition of the building in favo r of a building with a smaller footprint, more energy efficient and
better tailored to the site. So just a heads up that they are determining based on a number of factors what direction
they'll go for the redevelopment.
I'm free before 11 this morning if you would like to discuss.
Thanks,
Christine
From: Maguire, Christine
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 5:11 PM
To: John Rose III (rose.john@heb.com) (rose.john@heb.com)
Cc: Scott Caruthers (scott.caruthers@sbcglobal.net); Montgomery, Neil
Subject: Garland TX - project entitlement inquiry
1

7. John:
Thanks much for your call yesterday regarding a variance from the 60' setback requirement from our SC-Zoning District
regulations. We do have a variance process through the Board of Adjustments.
Given that there are now several issues that might need to be addressed through our variance processes (Plan
Commission and Board of Adjustment), we believe that rezoning the property in a PD will be the best way to go. It
would comprehensively address all of signage, landscaping and setback issues for the property at one t ime by our Plan
Commission. It would alleviate the need to go through Board of Adjustment. A PD would give site planning flexibility for
this important redevelopment project given all of the moving parts.
Please let us know if you have any additional questions.
Thanks,
Christine
CHRISTINE MAGUIRE
Redevelopment Administrator
City Department of Economic Development
800 Main Sb·eet IGarland, Texas 75040
phone:972.205.2462 / Jax: 972.205.2474 / mobile: 817.676.5293
CMaguire@garlandtx.gov I www.garlandtx.gov
"Men did not love Rome because she was great.
She was great because they had loved her."
- G. K. Chesterton
GARLAN D
fC..1A'I MAO I HCAE
2

8. SECTION 24
SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT (SC)
24-100 Purpose of District
The Shopping Center District provides for the establishment of
convenient retail and personal service activities by grouping compatible uses in a
single center which is designed in an integrated manner according to an overall
site plan. The Shopping Center District accommodates shopping center
development having a neighborhood or community service area. Planned
Development (PD) zoning is recommended for shopping centers or malls
requiring a site of twenty acres or more.
24-200 Permitted Uses
Any uses indicated as permitted in this district on the Schedule of
Uses, Section 10-200.
24-300 Lot Requirements
No requirements for minimum lot area , depth, or width are set forth.
24-400 Yard (Setback) Requirements
24-410 All portions of main buildings or structures shall be set back
from all property lines to provide the following minimum yards. Every part
of a required yard shall be open and unobstructed as set forth in Section
11 except that an ordinary projection of window sills, belt courses and
other similar architectural features may not project more than one (1) foot
into required yards. Ordinary projections of cornices, roof overhangs,
unsupported canopies and other architectural features may not project
more than five (5) feet into required yards.
24-420 Gasoline service station pump islands and canopies may not
be located within twenty (20) feet of a lot line adjacent to a street,
measured to the nearest point of the island or canopy.
24-430 Yards Adjacent to Streets
24-431 Yards adjacent to streets shall be measured from the
existing right-of-way line of adjacent streets or the proposed right-
of-way line of adjacent streets as provided for on the approved
current thoroughfare plan , whichever requires the greater setback.
A minimum right-of-way of sixty (60) feet shall be used to compute
the yard setback adjacent to a street.
24-432
Feet
Minimum Front, Side, and Rear Yards: Sixty (60)

9. 24-440 Yards Not Adjacent to Streets
24-500
24-441 Minimum Side and Rear Yards
No side or rear yard is required except where a
permitted use abuts a residential district boundary line in which
event a minimum twenty (20) feet side or rear yard shall be
provided adjacent to such residential district.
Maximum Lot Coverage
Buildings or structures or parts thereof shall not be erected, altered ,
or placed so as to cover more than forty (40) percent of the lot.
24-510 Maximum Floor Area Ratio
The maximum floor area of all structures above ground shall
not exceed eight-tenths (0.8) square feet of floor area for each one (1)
square foot of site area (.8:1 ).
24-600 Height
Buildings or structures or parts thereof shall not be erected, altered ,
or placed so as to exceed a maximum height of thirty (30) feet.
General Exceptions: The height regulations contained in the District
Regulations shall not apply to spires, belfries, cupolas, television antennas, water
tanks, ventilators, chimneys, solar screens or collectors, skylights, elevator
towers, cooling towers, mechanical equipment rooms (not exceeding 50% of a
typical floor area) or other appurtenances usually required to be placed above
the roof level and not intended for human occupancy except as noted in various
districts.
24-700 General Requirements
The provisions of Section 11 (General Development
Requirements), Section 12 (Parking), and Section 37 (Site Plan Approval) shall
apply.
24-710 Truck Parking and Loading
No truck shall be parked closer than twenty (20) feet to any
Agricultural or residential district boundary. Loading docks shall be not
less than fifty (50) feet from any lot line, not adjacent to a street. If such
lot line is adjacent to an Agricultural or residential district boundary the
setback shall be increased to seventy-five (75) feet.

10. Uses Permitted in the SC (Shopping Center) District
Animal Clinic
Antenna, Commercial Type 1
Antenna, Commercial Type 2*
Antenna Private
Arcade*
Athletic Club/Instruction, Indoor Facilities
Athletic Club/Instruction , Outdoor Facilities*
Automobile Repair, Minor
Batching Plant, Temporary
Bingo Hall*
Car Wash
Care of Alcoholic, Drug Dependent or Psychiatric Patients - Institutionalized*
Charitable Boarding , Temporary*
Charter School*
Church
Civic Club/Fraternal Lodge
College or University*
Commercial Amusement, Indoor
Commercial Amusement, Outdoor*
Commercial School
Convenience Store
Convention Facility
Custodial Quarters*
Drug Store/Pharmacy
Dry Cleaner
Electric Generating Plant*
Electric Substation*
Equipment Leasing, Indoor
Financial Institution
Firewood Bulk Sales*
Flea Market, Indoor*
Furniture &Appliance Sales
Grocery/Supermarket
Home Improvement Center
Kindergarten, Preschool or Childcare Center
Landscape Nursery
Laundromat
Library
Massage Therapy
Medical and Surgical Appliances
Medical Laboratory
Medical Office/Clinic
Mining*
Movie Theater/Theater
Museum or Art Gallery
Neighborhood Assistance Center
Office Equipment Sales, Repair and Maintenance*
Office, General
Optical Dispensary
Parking Garage or Lot, Commercial
Pet Sales and Grooming
Printer, Small Scale

11. Uses Permitted in the SC (Shopping Center) District
Page 2
Reception Facility*
Repair and Service Shop
Restaurant
Restaurant, Drive-Through*
Retail Sales/Personal Service
Retail Sales with Gas Pumps*
Sanitary Landfill*
School, Public or Private
Sewage Treatment Plant*
Shooting Range, Indoor*
Stadium, Arena, Athletic Field*
Tattooing/Body Piercing Establishment*
Tire Dealer, No Outside Storage
Used Goods or Products Collection Point, Temporary*
Water Reservoir or Well, Public*
Water Treatment Plant*
Wind Generator*
Wrecker Service (one)
* Allowed by Specific Use Permit only.

12. Fields, Shawna
From:
Sent:
To:
Luedtke, Paul
Tuesday, February 11, 2014 3:29 PM
Justin Whitman; Larry Miller; jason@catalystcommercial.net; John Rose; Marrocco Marc;
Huynh, Thuan; Maguire, Christine; Jahn Brian
Subject: Centerville and Broadway Grocery Store Site
John,
The City of Garland Transportation Department has reviewed the analysis report provided by the
DeShazo Group regarding the left turn access from Centerville Road onto the proposed site
development. We concur with the assessment that modifications to the existing median opening and as
well at the signal operation at the Centerville and Broadway intersection are necessary in order for the
left turn access from Centerville to work. We approve the left turn access from Centerville Road with the
following conditions:
• HEB is responsible for 100% of the cost of construction and installation for full hooded left turn
bay at the median opening for the proposed site. The hooded left turn bay shall consist of a
minimum of 60' of storage length for the southbound Centerville Road. This will require the
reduction of the left turn storage length to 150' for northbound Centerville at Broadway which
the developer will be 100% responsible for payment.
• HEB and the City agree to a 50/50 cost-sharing in the modification of the signal at Centerville and Broadway.
This includes equipment, materials and installation cost necessary to convert the signal operation from a
protected only movement to a protected/permissive movement on Centerville Road.
Let me know if you have any question or comment.
Paul
1

13. SECTION 32
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PD)
32-100 Purpose of District
The Planned Development District allows for greater flexibility
in the type, design and layout of land uses than do the standard zoning
districts. Its purpose is to promote more efficient use of land and public
services, encourage creative and innovative site design, and provide an
increased level of amenities and aesthetic enhancement. Planned
Development Districts are individually designed for a specific site in order
to more appropriately address the unique physical and locational features
associated with the property. Permitted uses and development standards
are established by the Planned Development ordinance and may include
just one, or a broad range of activities. Each Planned Development
District is designed according to a detailed site plan which must be
approved as part of the Planned Development ordinance.
32-200 Permitted Uses
Any use shall be permitted if such use is specified in the
Ordinance granting a Planned Development District. The size, location,
appearance, and method of operation may be specified to the extent
necessary to insure compliance with the purpose of this Ordinance.
32-300 Development Requirements
32-310 Development requirements for each separate Planned
Development District shall be set forth in the Ordinance granting the
Planned Development District and MAY include, but may not be
limited to; uses, density, lot area, lot width , lot depth, yard depths
and widths, building height, building elevations, coverage, floor area
ratio, parking , access, screening, landscaping, accessory buildings,
signs, lighting , management associations, and other requirements
as the Council may deem appropriate.
32-320 The Ordinance granting a Planned Development District
shall include a statement as to the purpose and intent of the
Planned Development granted therein.
32-330 Planned Development District shall conform to the
requirements provided for in Sections 11 , 12, 13, and 37 of this
ordinance unless different requirements are set forth in the granting
ordinance. Applications shall state all requested variances from the
standard requirements set forth throughout this ordinance.
32-340 In addition to the requirements of Section 34, an
application for a Planned Development District shall include a
complete list of development conditions and uses which may be
incorporated into the ordinance, if approved, as set forth in Section
32-310. A development plan may be included with the application.
If no development plan is submitted and the Plan Commission or

14. Lpns ·+uB:::>!idde aLJ+ lq pamwqns S! ue1d +uawdo1aAap
B l!+un pa1qe+ aq llBLJS Janew all+ lJessa:::>au auo SPU!J l!:::>uno8 Al!8

15. development plan shall not be approved or recommended for
approval until it has been reviewed and a report submitted as set out
in 32-500.
32-400 Development Program and Plans
The Council may require development in conformance with a
development plan as further specified herein.
32-410 Development Plans
The Council may require submission and approval of
development plans showing the nature and character of the planned
development, which may include location of uses, buffering and
screening devices, traffic circulation, schematic area drainage map,
curb cuts, utilities, refuse storage and collection, and other features
necessary to depict the development. These development plans
may consist of a Land Use Plan, a Concept Plan, and/or a Detail
Plan. When a development plan is required, the approval of a Land
Use Plan or a Concept Plan shall be deemed as incomplete for
development and no development shall begin until a Detail Plan is
approved for that portion for which a building permit is sought. Land
Use Plans, Concept Plans, and Detail Plans shall be as set forth
herein. These provisions shall apply only when development plans
are required.
32-411 General Requirements
Land Use, Concept, and Detail Plans shall be
accurately drawn to an appropriate legible scale and shall include
title, north arrow, scale, date drawn, and necessary references to
accurately locate the property. Copies in sufficient quantity and at
an appropriate size for review purposes shall be submitted by the
owner, applicant, or their representative.
32-412 Land Use Plan
A Land Use Plan may be approved only on large
Planned Development areas, generally 100 acres or more, where
development is not expected to take pface within three (3) years on
at least eighty (80) percent of the Planned Development area. A
Land Use Plan shall be accurately drawn indicating boundary lines
of the Planned Development area covered , proposed use areas,
topography, wooded areas, streams, lakes, ponds, existing
roadways, existing utility lines and easements, general location of
future roadways and utilities shown on the current approved
thoroughfare and utility plans, general location of future parks and
open space, schools, and other public facilities.
The Land Use Plan, or development conditions, shall indicate
the approximate size of each separate use area, proposed uses,
approximate density of residential uses, approximate gross floor area of
non-residential uses, parking ratios, general building heights and other
information required to describe the proposed development. Photographs,

16. sketches, or drawings may accompany a Land Use Plan to illustrate the
type and nature of tfle proposed development. When a Land Use Plan is
approved, a Concept Plan shall be approved on all or a portion of the
Planned Development area prior to or in conjunction with the approval of a
Detail Plan.
32-413 Concept Plan
A Concept Plan may be required for any Planned
Development district when determined necessary by the Council. A
Concept Plan includes all of the area of a Planned Development
district, except that a Concept Plan may cover only a part of the
Planned Development District if a Land Use Plan has been
approved or is being approved in connection with the Concept Plan.
All of the features required in a Land Use Plan shall be included in a
Concept Plan and in addition thereto the Concept Plan shall indicate
all proposed streets, alleys, drives, buildings, parking areas,
landscaped areas, screening, uses of buildings and land, building
heights, topography, and other features of the proposed
development. A Concept Plan shall be construed to be an
illustration of the development concepts only and not an exact
representation of the specific development proposed. No building
permits shall be issued based on an approved Concept Plan. Prior
to issuance of any building permit, a Detail Plan shall be approved
on that portion of the area of the Concept Plan for which a building
E
ermit is sought. A Concept Plan shal be in conformance with a
and Use Plan if one has been approved for the Planned
Development District.
32-414 Detail Plan
When a Development Plan is required, a Detail Plan
shall be approved prior to development, and development shall be in
general accordance therewith . A Detail Plan shall show the features
which the Council deems need regulation. Features which the
Council deems need no regulation may be shown for informational
purposes but shall be presented in a manner to distinguish them
from those being regulated.
32-500 Procedures
The procedures for granting, modifying, amending, or revising
a Planned Development District or any of the development conditions,
Development Plans, or permitted uses shall be the same as for any zoning
district as set forth in Section 34, except as set forth herein. The
application shall include: a description of the property, a drawing showing
the various use areas within the proposed Planned Development area 1f
more than one use area is expected; proposed regulations, a list of any
requested variances from standard requirements of the Zoning Ordinance;
and any proposed development plans. When a Development Plan is being
considered, a written report from the City Manager discussing the impact
on planning, engineering, water utilities, electric, sanitation, building
inspection, tax, fire, and traffic; and written comments from the applicable
public school district; and from private utilities shall be submitted to the

17. Plan Commission prior to the Commission making any recommendations
to the Council. In the event written comments are not forthcoming in a
reasonable amount of time, the Commission may at its discretion make a
recommendation to the Council.
32-510 An application for a Planned Development District may
be submitted only for the following use groups and on the specified
minimum acreage unless said acreage 1s specifically waived by the
Plan Commission or City Council.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
M.
Residential - 35 acres
Office or Health Services on 5 acres
Retail or Commercial sales and service on 10 acres
Industrial or salvage yards use on 100 acres
Shopping centers on 20 acres
Public uses on any acreage
Parking on any acreage
Mobile home park on 35 acres
Historical district on any acreage
Complex for elderly on any acreage
Governmental facilities on any acreage
Business park on 10 acres
Any combination of A-M above when meeting the respective
minimum acreage requirements
32-600 Continuation of Existing Planned Development
Ordinances
32-610 Prior to adoption of this ordinance, the City Council had
established various Planned Development Districts, some of which
are to be continued in full force and effect. The conditions,
restrictions, regulations and requirements which apply to the
respective Planned Development Districts shown on the Zoning Map
at the date of adoption of this ordinance are carried forth in fulr force
and effect.

18. Martinez, Rosalinda
Subject: FW: Old K-Mart Property
-----Original Message-----
From: Williams, Councilman BJ
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 10:02 AM
To: Montgomery, Neil
Cc: Neighbor, Brad; Stanley, Councilman Stephen; Olk, Jim; Martinez, Rosalinda
Subject: Re: Old K-Mart Property
Neil:
Stephen and I would like to meet with you and Jim on this next week. Please have
Rosalinda schedule. I am available anytime Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning.
Thanks!
BJ
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 23, 2015, at 5:20 PM, Williams, Councilman BJ <BJWilliams@garlandtx.gov>
wrote:
>
>Jim:
>
> Appreciate the update. Please note:
> 1. There are major differences between the footprint of Saigon Mall and the old K-
Mart property.
> 2. Per the draft floor that you shared, let's make sure that the "Retail Sales" by right
provision, is not used as a cover for a flee market, trader's village or Vikon Village type
business at this critical location.
>
> Along with Councilman Stanley, I would like to meet with you, Neal, and Brad, to
review/discuss final plans, before COs are issued. Getting this project right, is
absolutely critical to constitutes for longterm economic viability along two intersecting
major corridors (Broadway@Centerville Rd.) in South Garland.
>
> Councilman B. J. Williams
>
1

19. > Sent from my iPhone
>
>>On Jul 23, 2015, at 3:59 PM, Olk, Jim <JOlk@garlandtx.gov> wrote:
>>
>> Councilman Williams,
>> I started to draft a reply then I got bogged down with drafting a response based on
the current GDC regulations. However, this proposed use was submitted prior to the
GDC and because they have vested rights we have to review the plans based on the
Zoning Ordinance that was in place when they submitted.
>>
>> When they submitted the property was zoned Shopping Center (SC) the SC zoning
district allowed uses like churches, commercial schools, indoor athletic facilities, indoor
commercial amusement, movie theaters, banks, convenience stores, furniture and
appliance sales, grocery, supermarket, home improvement center, nursery,
1
Laundromat, offices, pet sales, restaurant, retail sales, personal service, animal clinic,
etc... I have attached an electronic copy of the old zoning ordinance that has the listed
uses for SC districts starting on page 15 of the electronic file. I have also attached the
list of permitted uses that is included in the GDC, although the GDC has significantly
more defined uses, the Community Retail (CR) category is the closest match.
>>
>> The applicant has always asserted that they will be just like Saigon Mall, when I
reviewed the Certificate of Occupancy for Saigon Mall it was listed as Retail Sales. It
was not classified as an Indoor Flea Market because the leases are long term. The
applicants for 3161 Broadway claim that all their leases will be long term leases and
they do not meet the definition of an Indoor Flea Market. In speaking with other
officials that have dealt with this applicant, he usually requires a hefty up-front fee to
recoup his construction costs then there is a long term lease for each suite.
>>
>> The old zoning ordinance did not have a definition of Indoor Shopping Mall so if he
does not meet the definition of Indoor Flea Market, we will have to consider his use
Retail Sales, (like Saigon Mall). Retail Sales is a use that is permitted by right in that
zoning district. We are attempting to impose restrictions that will encourage
compliance with the intent of this development being a viable indoor mall. We will
require COs be issued for each tenant space, we will limit the COs to only allowing
display of merchandise within the lease space and we will require them to provide us a
copy of their lease so can make sure it is a long term lease.
>>
>> Prior to issuance of the permit, I will review our findings with the City Attorney to
insure we have acted appropriately.
>>
>>Please let me know if you have any further questions.
>> Sincerely,
>>Jim
>>
2

20. >>
>> Jim Olk - Building Official
>> City of Garland
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Williams, Councilman BJ
>> Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:03 PM
>>To: Olk, Jim
>> Cc: Montgomery, Neil; Stanley, Councilman Stephen
>> Subject: Re: Old K-Mart Property
>>
>>Jim:
>>
.>>This is a reminder regarding the information previously requested.
>>
>> Councilman B. J. Williams
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Jul 16, 2015, at 8:39 AM, Williams, Councilman BJ
<BJWilliams@garlandtx.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>>Jim:
>>>
>>> Please send me the list of types of businesses are allowed at this site "by right",
and the type of businesses that require an "SUP", under the GDC. I would like to
discuss/review all additional plans (concept, detailed, landscaping, etc.) with you and
Neil before CO is issued. Constituents are adamant about not having "flee market" at
this location, not even a modified version. No "by right" surprises here - please.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>> Councilman B. J. Williams
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>>On Jul 15, 2015, at 2:21 PM, Williams, Councilman BJ
<BJWilliams@garlandtx.gov> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks. Please keep me informed.
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 15, 2015, at 2:06 PM, Olk, Jim <JOlk@garlandtx.gov> wrote:
>>>>>
3

21. >>>>> Councilman WilliamsI
>>>>> Yes sir, I did get out there. I actually visited two of them in that area. I went to
the one on the north side of 1-30 first then found the right one on the south side. There
are some things I think we can do to make it so that it doesn't end up that way. I plan
to visit with Mr. Montgomery this week about it. We are still waiting on more detailed
plans from the new tenant before we can issue the permit.
>>>>> Let me know if you have any further questions.
>>>>> Sincerely
>>>>>Jim
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim Olk - Building Official
>>>>> City of Garland
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Williams, Councilman BJ
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 1:44 PM
>>>>> To: Olk1 Jim
>>>>> Cc: Montgomery, Neil
>>>>> Subject: Old K-Mart Property
>>>>>
>>>>>Jim:
>>>>>
>>>>> This is in followup to our meeting last week regarding the subject property. Did
you get an opportunity to visit the "flee market" facility located (Buckner@l-30) that I
mentioned. As we discussed, after reviewing the preliminary floor plan that you shared,
it appears to be modified plan for a flee market, which is not the highest and best use
for this property.
>>>>>
>>>>> ThanksI
>>>>> Councilman B. J. Williams
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>> <GOC Chapter 2 Land Use Matrix.pdf>
>> <Old Zoning Ordinance.pdf>
4

22. Martinez, Rosalinda
Subject:
Location:
Start:
End:
Recurrence:
Meeting Status:
Organizer:
Required Attendees:
Resources:
Rosalinda
7/24/15
Old K-Mart Property
Spring Creek Conference Room
Mon 7/27/2015 2:00 PM
Mon 7/ 27/2015 3:00 PM
(none)
Meeting organizer
Counci14
Stanley, Councilman Stephen; Council3; Williams, Councilman BJ; Montgomery, Neil;
Neighbor, Brad; Olk, Jim
Spring Creek Conference Room

23. Martinez, Rosalinda
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Stanley, Councilman Stephen
Friday. July 24, 2015 10:05 AM
Williams, Councilman BJ
Montgomery, Neil; Neighbor, Brad; Olk. Jim; Martinez, Rosalinda
Re: Old K-Mart Property
I'm available Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning.
Stephen W. Stanley
Garland Councilman District 3
Counci13@.GarlandTX.Gov
214-870-6266 Cell
On Jul 24, 2015, at 10:02 AM, Williams, Councilman BJ <B.JWilliamsrQ;garlandtx.gov> wrote:
Neil:
Stephen and I would like to meet with you and Jim on this next week. Please have Rosalinda
schedule. I am available anytime Monday afternoon or Tuesday morning.
Thanks!
BJ
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 23, 2015, at 5:20 PM, Williams, Councilman BJ <BJWilliams<@!!arlandtx.!!ov> wrote:
Jim:
Appreciate the update. Please note:
l. There are major differences between the footprint of Saigon Mall and the old
K-Mart property.
2. Per the draft floor that you shared, let's make sure that the "Retail Sales" by
right provision, is not used as a cover for a flee market, trader's village or Vikon
Village type business at this critical location.
Along with Councilman Stanley, I would like to meet with you, Neal, and Brad,
to review/discuss final plans, before COs are issued. Getting this project right, is
absolutely critical to constitutes for longterm economic viability along two
intersecting major corridors (Broadway@Centerville Rd.) in South Garland.
Councilman B. J. Williams

24. Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 23, 2015, at 3:59 PM, Olk, Jim <JOlkr@l!arlandtx.gov>
wrote:
Councilman Williams,
I started to draft a reply then I got bogged down with drafting a
response based on the current GDC regulations. However, this
proposed use was submitted prior to the GDC and because they
have vested rights we have to review the plans based on the Zoning
Ordinance that was in place when they submitted.
When they submitted the property was zoned Shopping Center
(SC) the SC zoning district allowed uses like churches, commercial
schools, indoor athletic facilities, indoor commercial amusement,
movie theaters, banks, convenience stores, furniture and appliance
sales, grocery, supermarket, home improvement center, nursery,
Laundromat, offices, pet sales, restaurant, retail sales, personal
service, animal clinic, etc... I have attached an electronic copy of
the old zoning ordinance that has the listed uses for SC districts
starting on page 15 of the electronic file. I have also attached the
list of permitted uses that is included in the GDC, although the
GDC has significantly more defined uses, the Community Retail
(CR) category is the closest match.
The applicant has always asserted that they will be just like Saigon
Mall, when I reviewed the Certificate of Occupancy for Saigon
Mall it was listed as Retail Sales. It was not classified as an Indoor
Flea Market because the leases are long term. The applicants for
3161 Broadway claim that all their leases will be long term leases
and they do not meet the definition of an Indoor Flea Market. In
speaking with other officials that have dealt with this applicant, he
usually requires a hefty up-front fee to recoup his construction
costs then there is a long term lease for each suite.
The old zoning ordinance did not have a definition of Indoor
Shopping Mall so if he does not meet the definition of Indoor Flea
Market, we will have to consider his use Retail Sales, (like Saigon
Mall). Retail Sales is a use that is permitted by right in that zoning
district. We are attempting to impose restrictions that will
encourage compliance with the intent of this development being a
viable indoor mall. We will require COs be issued for each tenant
space, we will limit the COs to only allowing display of
merchandise within the lease space and we will require them to
provide us a copy of their lease so can make sure it is a long term
lease.
2
l

25. Prior to issuance of the permit, I will review our findings with the
City Attorney to insure we have acted appropriately.
Please let me know if you have any further questions.
Sincerely,
Jim
Jim Olk - Building Official
City of Garland
-----Original Message-----
From: Williams, Councilman BJ
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 3:03 PM
To: Olk, Jim
Cc: Montgomery, Neil; Stanley, Councilman Stephen
Subject: Re: Old K-Mart Property
Jim:
This is a reminder regarding the information previously requested.
Councilman B. J. Williams
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 16, 2015, at 8:39 AM, Williams,
Councilman BJ <B.IWilliamslU!carlandtx.gov>
wrote:
Jim:
Please send me the list of types of businesses are
allowed at this site "by right", and the type of
businesses that require an "SUP", under the GDC.
would like to discuss/review all additional plans
(concept, detailed, landscaping, etc.) with you and
Neil before CO is issued. Constituents are adamant
about not having "flee market" at this location, not
3

26. even a modified version. No "by right" surprises
here - please.
Thanks,
Councilman B. J. Williams
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 15, 2015, at 2:21 PM,
Williams, Councilman BJ
<BJWilliamswhrnrlandtx.Qov
wrote:
Thanks. Please keep me informed.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 15, 2015, at
2:06 PM, Olk, Jim
<JO!k<@1mrlandtx.gov
>wrote:
Councilman
Williams,
Yes sir, I did get out
there. I actually
visited two of them in
that area. I went to
the one on the north
side of I-30 first then
found the right one on
the south side. There
are some things I
think we can do to
make it so that it
doesn't end up that
way. I plan to visit
with Mr. Montgomery
this week about
it. We are still
waiting on more
detailed plans from
the new tenant before
we can issue the
permit.
4

27. Let me know if you
have any further
questions.
Sincerely
Jim
Jim Olk - Building
Official
City of Garland
-----Original
Message-----
From: Williams,
Councilman BJ
Sent: Wednesday,
July 15, 2015 1:44
PM
To: Olk, Jim
Cc: Montgomery,
Neil
Subject: Old K-Mart
Property
Jim:
This is in followup to
our meeting last week
regarding the subject
property. Did you get
an opportunity to visit
the "flee market"
facility located
(Buckner@I-30) that I
mentioned. As we
discussed, after
revic-.ving the
preliminary floor plan
that you shared, it
appears lo be
modified plan for a
flee market, which is
not the highest and
best use for this
property.
5

28. Thanks,
Councilman B. J.
Williams
Sent from my iPhone
GDC Chapter 2 Land Use Matrix.pdt'>
<Old Zoning Ordinance.pdt'>
6

29. July 27, 2015
Marc Morrocco
1875 Laws Street
Dallas, Texas 75202
Re: 3161 Broadway.
Dear Mr. Morrocco,
GARLAND
TEXAS MADE HERE
On April 10, 2015 a permit application was submitted by KLT Renovation for "Commercial
Interior Remodel" at your property located at 3161 Broadway. Since then we have had several
plan iterations that we have discussed and tentatively reviewed. Upon a more thorough review
of the latest plan, I have determined that your proposed use of the property meets with the
definition of "Flea Market, Indoor" as listed in Section 38, 94 of the Zoning Ordinance
(Ordinance No. 4647).
Based on Section 10-200 of the Zoning Ordinance a "Flea Market, Indoor" is required to have a
Specific Use Permit in this Shopping Center zoning district. At this time we will not be able to
approve a building permit or issue a Certificate of Occupancy for an indoor flea market without
obtaining the approval of a Specific Use Permit.
Specific Use Permit applications may be found on-line at www.garlandtx.gov or you can contact
our Planning Department at 972-205-2445 and they can assist you through the Specific Use
Permit process.
Sincerely,
Jim Olk
Building Official
City of Garland, Texas
Cc: KLT Renovation
7920 Beltline Rd. #730
Dallas, Texas 75254
CITY OF GARLAND
PO BOX 469002 GARLAND, TX 75046·9002
972·205·2000
WWW.GARLANDTX.GOV

30. CITY OF GARLAND
PO BOX 469002 GARLAND, TX 75046-9002
972-205-2000
WWWGARLANDTX.GOV