The DeSoto Planning and Zoning Commission heard a request to defer action on a proposed specific use permit (case ED-1540-25) for a food-and-beverage sales store with gasoline sales at 1507 Kestrel Avenue after city staff recommended denial. Planning staff said the applicant asked to reconfigure the site and requested more time to revise the proposal. The public hearing was opened and later closed without a final decision; staff will work with the applicant to return the case at a later date.

The proposed site is part of Eagle Office Park and the staff report described the total property as roughly 18.752 acres, with the SUP area about 1.42 acres. The applicant was identified in the staff report as Val Gutierrez of Design and Construction; the property owner was listed as Nagar Nargar (Cody Rubina Maske). Ms. Jordan, planning and zoning manager, told the commission that staff's recommendation on ED-1540-25 was denial and that the applicant told staff on the day before the meeting that they wanted to reconfigure the site so it could meet regulations and seek approval rather than face denial: "That information was shared with the applicant about 3 weeks ago and they decided yesterday that they were wanting to take a step back and reconfigure the area," Jordan said.

Because the item had been advertised as a public hearing, the commission opened the hearing to allow in-person comments. Two members of the public had submitted comment cards. The record read one comment asserting there is already a 7-Eleven near the location and noting a school nearby; another written commenter, Lena Johnson, was recorded as opposing the request and saying the city has enough convenience stores. No speaker presented sworn testimony at the dais in favor of the SUP during the hearing.

Commissioners discussed scheduling. The applicant had indicated informally they expected to return within about 30 days, but no specific date was finalized. Commissioners and staff also discussed calendar conflicts (Veterans Day on Nov. 11), quorum concerns for a possible Nov. 13 meeting, and the administrative trade-off between leaving the public hearing open (avoiding another mailed notice) and officially closing it and re-noticing residents when a new hearing date is set. After discussion the chair closed the public hearing at 6:21 p.m.; staff will follow up with the applicant and advise the commission when the case will return to a future meeting.

No formal motion to approve or deny the SUP was taken at this meeting. The only formal actions recorded on the agenda were approval of the consent minutes and, later, adjournment. The minutes approval motion passed; the SUP item will return to the commission after the applicant submits revised plans and staff re-reviews them.

The commission was careful to note the staff recommendation and the presence of written opposition; commissioners also raised multiple scheduling and notice questions during the discussion. The staff contact at the meeting said they would obtain the resident's contact information and follow up regarding the road and other neighborhood concerns mentioned during citizen appearances.