Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:05]

I AM GOING TO GO AHEAD AND WELCOME EVERYONE TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 24. AND WE WILL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS OUR CITIZENS INPUT.ND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE INTERESTED IN KNOWING, WE HAVE INCLUDED A CITIZENS INPUT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA EVERY MEETING SO THAT ANYONE OF OUR RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF ROWLETT WHO WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE MEETING ON THE AGENDA ITEMS OR ON ANYTHING ELSE, WE WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO LIMIT IT TO THREE MINUTES. BUT YOU'RE WELCOME TO PROVIDE A COMMENT AND SEND AN EMAIL TO CITIZEN INPUT@áUNTRAN9á.COM BY 3:30 P.M. THE DAY OF THE MEETING.

PLEASE STATE WHETHER YOUR, IS REGARDING A SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM OR A GENERAL COMMENT TO THE COMMISSION. AND YOUR COMMENT WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD DURING THE MEETING. AS I MENTIONED WITH THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT AND THERE WILL BE NO COMMENTS TAKEN DURING THE MEETING.O WE HAVE ANY CITIZEN INPUT?

>> NO, WE DO NOT. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY GREAT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT

[3. CONSENT AGENDA]

AGENDA. ITEM 3A, THE FIRST ITEM. CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 10 2020. DID ALL THE COMMISSIONERS GET A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES? I WAS NOT PRESENT SO I WILL ABSTAIN FROM THIS VOTE.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS? OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES? >> MR. COTE HAS HIS HAND UP

BUT HE IS ON MUTE. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: I CAN'T SEE EVERYBODY.

SO PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. >>JOHN COTE : I HAVE A COMMENT ON THE MINUTES JUST YET, BUT WE ONLY HAVE SIX COMMISSIONERS AND WE SHOULD HAVE SEVEN. YOU WANT TO ASK AN ALTERNATE TO PARTICIPATE? WE HAVE A QUORUM BUT WE CAN HAVE SEVEN.

>>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY. WELL, WHO PARTICIPATED LAST WEEK WHEN THE LAST MEETING,

DOES ANYBODY REMEMBER? >> ALL THREE OF THEM, I THINK. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY.

MR. DAVIS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO JOIN US THIS EVENING? >>WESLEY DAVIS: SURE.

>>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY, GREAT. WELL, I WILL MAKE A NOTE OF THAT.

>> I HAVE NO COMMENTS ON THE MINUTES. IN FACT, I RECOMMEND WE SHOULD

APPROVE THEM. >> AND I SECOND. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: WE HAVE A

MOTION. >> AND A SECOND. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. COTE TO APPROVE. IS EVERYBODY READY TO VOTE WITH A SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE.

OKAY. THAT WOULD BE A UNANIMOUS VOTE WITH ME ABSTAINING.OKAY.

[4A. Take action on the FBC Rowlett Addition Preliminary Plat submitted by Bill Thomas, Engineering Concepts and Design, on behalf of First Baptist Church of Rowlett. The approximately 28.882-acre site is located northeast of the intersection of Main Street and the President George Bush Turnpike in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. THE FIRST ONE I'M A FOR A. IS TO TAKE ACTION ON THE FEC ROWLETT PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTED BY BILL THOMAS ON BEHALF OF FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF ROWLETT. THE APPROXIMATELY 20..2 ACRE SITE IS LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET IN THE PRESENT GEORGE BUSH

TURNPIKE IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS. >> THANK YOU.

HERE WE GO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH THAT, IF LAURA CAN PUT THE PRESENTATION OF HERE, PLEASE. THANK YOU. NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT. 29 ACRES GIVE OR TAKE NORTHEAST OF MAIN STREET.

[00:05:01]

AND THE GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE. THERE ARE TWO POINTS OF ACCESS THAT WOULD BE UTILIZED OFF OF MAIN STREET TO THE SOUTH. CURRENTLY IT IS A VACANT PROPERTY.

THIS WILL PREPARE THE SITE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WORSHIP AN EDUCATIONAL FACILITY FOR FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF ROWLETT AND TO POTENTIAL BUILDING PHASES IT.EXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

WOULD ALSO ESTABLISH TO LOTS OF WHICH LOT ONE BLOCK ONE. THE LARGER OF THE TWO LOTS HAVING 17 AND THREE-QUARTER ACRES WOULD BE MORE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH WOULD BE PROPOSING TO DEVELOP. THAT IS THE RED LOT ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THE PLANT THERE, WHICH DOES HAVE THE FRONTAGE ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD. IN THE SECOND BLOCK LOT WOULD BE LOT TO BLOCK ONE. THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 11 ACRES THAT WILL BE RESERVED FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH AT THIS TIME IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF ROWLETT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO OUR ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE 77 ã8063 B REQUIRES A TREE SURVEY PRESERVATION PLAN IN ORDER TO SECURE APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT.BECAUSE THE CHURCH WILL BE APPLYING FOR AN ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPE PLAN PRIOR TO THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW. AND THE TREE SURVEY PRESERVATION PLAN IS CONTINGENT UPON AN ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPE PLAN APPROVAL AND HOW THAT TURNS OUT. THEREFORE APPROVING THIS TST P WOULD BE PREMATURE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.AND THIS DOES GIVE THE FULL EXTENT OF THE PLAT WITHOUT ANY OF OUR COLORING ADDED TO IT AS WELL. NEXT SLIDE. THE RECOMMENDATION WE HAVE WOULD BE A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT PENDING APPROVAL OF THE TREE SURVEY PRESERVATION PLAN. AND ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, IWILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM .

WE ALSO HAVE MR. TOM IS HERE TO ALSO ADDRESS QUESTIONS FROM THE APPLICANT SIDE.

>> DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE A PRESENTATION OR ARE THEY JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS?

>> WE ARE JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY.

DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR EITHER THEAPPLICANT OR THE CITY STAFF ? PLEASE LET US KNOW WHO YOU ARE ADDRESSING.

ALL RIGHT. I DON'T SEE OR HEAR ANYONE. HIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING SO I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND YOU THAT WITH THE CITIES RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL, PENDING APPROVAL OF THE TS PP. YOU MAY WANT TO MENTION THAT IN ANY MOTION THAT IS MADE.

I AM READY FOR A MOTION.> MADAM SECRETARY? >>MIRANDA MORGAN: MR. COTE?

>>JOHN COTE : I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF ROWLETT PULMONARY PLAT PENDING APPROVAL OF THE TREE SURVEY AND PRESERVATION PLAN.

>>MIRANDA MORGAN: WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY. AND WE HAVE A SECOND.

AND WE WILL GO AHEAD AND VOTE. WAIT, BEFORE WE VOTE, DOES ANYBODY ãTHIS ISN'T A PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY. IS EVERYBODY READY TO VOTE? WITH A SHOW OF HANDS, WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL BY THE CITY. SO LET'S HAVE A SHOW OF HANDS

FOR THE VOTE.OKAY. AND THAT ONE CARRIES UNANIMOUS. >> THANK YOU.

>> YOU BIT. MOVING ON TO ITEM 4B ON THE AGENDA.

[4B. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council on a request by Cypress Creek Rowlett, LP, to rezone the approximately 14.30-acre tract from Limited Office (O-1) District to Planned Development (PD) District for Multi-Family-Suburban (MF-S) and Limited Commercial/Retail (C-1) Uses in order to develop the property with mixed uses consisting of office/commercial uses and a multi-family development. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Old Rowlett Road and Big A Road, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

THAT IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REQUEST FOR LP TO REZONE THE 14.30 ACRE TRACT FROM LIMITED OFFICE TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR MULTIFAMILY SUBURBAN MFS AND LIMITED COMMERCIAL RETAIL C-1

[00:10:09]

USES. IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY WITH MIXED USE CONSISTING OF COMMERCIAL USES IN A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ONLY NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLD ROWLETT ROAD IN THE CITY OF DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS.

MISS BRADLEY QUICK. >> THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

JUST WAIT ONE SECOND FOR THE SLIDES TO PULL UP TO START THE DISCUSSION.

THANK YOU, LAURA. AS DESCRIBED EARLIER, THIS IS A REZONING FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM LIMITED O-1 TO PLAN DEVELOP AND DISTRICT FOR MULTIFAMILY SUBURBAN MFS AND LIMITED OFFICE RETAIL C-1. THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL CONSIST OF MIXED USES CONSISTING OF LIMITED COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY. THAT WOULD CONSIST OF ABOUT 234 UNITS OF MULTIFAMILY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.THE SITE IS 14.30 ACRE TRACT LAND AND IT IS DEVELOPED TO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES HOOD AS WELL AS A BARN AND A PASTURE.THE SITE HAS ABOUT 530 FEET OF OLD ROWLETT ROAD AND 1125 FEET ALONG BIG A ROLE. AND DOES HAVE MATURE TREE CANOPY COVERAGE EXISTING IN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY TO READ NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERNS TO THE NORTH YOU HAVE A PLAN DEVELOPMENT THAT IS FOR 138 MINUTE SENIOR LIVING FACILITY.

YOU HAVE A LIMITED OFFICE, IS ONLY LIMITED OFFICE COMMERCIAL PARK UP TO THE NORTH, WHICH IS THE CITY PARKS ON EDWARD CITY PARK. TO THE EAST YOU HAVE A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBURB. SUBDIVISION THAT IS OWNED AS F . AND TO THE SOUTH HE HAVE A PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR MIXED COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USE, WHICH IS UNDEVELOPED AND DEVELOPED WITH COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL USES LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES BUT ALSO, THERE IS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR RETAIL OFFICE AND GENERAL AND MEDICAL USES AND THAT LAND IS UNDEVELOPED AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL RETAIL C2 DISTRICT, WHICH IS TO THE SOUTH AS WELL WHICH IS UNDEVELOPED.

TO THE WEST AND IS ZONED GENERAL COMMERCIAL RETAIL C2 DISTRICT AND IT IS UNDEVELOPED AS WELL. THAT IS THE SURROUNDING AREAS OF THAT LAND.

NOW, OFTEN TIMES WHEN WE LOOK AT REZONING LOOK AT THE COMPATIBILITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DOES DESIGNATE THE SUBJECT PLAN FOR RETAIL COMMERCIAL OFFICE USE. THE ENVIRONMENT IS A COMBINATION OF LOW, MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS AND RESIDENTIAL ESTABLISHMENTS, BUT THERE ARE KEY COMPONENTS TO SUPPORTING RETAIL COMMERCIAL OFFICE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH DO EXIST IS ALREADY TO SUPPORT COMMERCIAL IN THAT AREA. GOAL FIVE OF THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN STATES HOUSING SHOULD BE PROVIDED THAT SUPPORTS VARIOUS LIFESTYLES AND POPULATION DEMOGRAPHICS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY FOR THE PROPOSED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT WITH OFFER MARKET RATE AND RENT RESTRICTED MULTIFAMILY UNITS, WHICH DOES COMPLY WITH PROVIDING DIVERSE HOUSING STOCK WITHIN THE CITY OF ROWLETT. THE AREA IS DESIGNATED FOR OFFICE USE, WHICH IS ENVISIONED TOPROVIDE SERVICES TO THE SOUND ROUNDING EVERY PART OF THE REZONING IS APPROVED, THE OPPORTUNITY WILL BE REALIZED WITH THIS PROPOSED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT . NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. NOW, I WANT TO TAKE EITHER THE SITE PLAN BEING PROPOSED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IT WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT IS A MIXED DEVELOPMENT SO YOU HAVE VARIABLE USES WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT.

SO STARTING FROM YOUR SCREEN FROM YOU LEFT YOUR TO RIGHT OF THE SITE PLAN, YOU WILL SEE FROM OLD ROWLETT ROAD YOU HAVE TWO FOUR-STORY MIXED-USE BUILDINGS.

WITH THOSE BUILDINGS IT WOULD CONSIST OF 31,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL USE ON THE GROUND FLOOR AND THAT WILL BESPLIT BETWEEN BUILDINGS ONE AND TWO .

FROM THERE YOU WOULD HAVE 90 MULTIFAMILY UNITS ON THE UPPER FLOORS.

SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH FLOORS. AND IF WE MOVE ALONG TO YOUR FAR RIGHT, YOU WILL SEE THERE IS A POND, SMALL PARK AND THE DETENTION POND IS ENCLOSED WITH A TRAIL YOUR MIXED-USE BUILDING IN THE POND AND THE SMALL PARK TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR NOT JUST RESIDENTS BUT THE EXTERNAL COMMUNITY THAT DOES NOT LIVE

[00:15:06]

WITHIN THE MULTIFAMILY COMPLEX. SO GOING BACK IN THE MIDDLE YOU WILL SEE THE RED THE MULTIFAMILY COMPLEX. NOW, THIS WILL CONSIST OF SIX BUILDINGS AND THAT WOULD BE THREE-STORY MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS EVERYDAY WILL CONSIST OF 144 UNITS CONSISTING OF ONE, TWO, THREE AND FOUR BEDROOM UNITS, A CLUBHOUSE, A PAVILION, SPORTS COURT, PLAYGROUND AND POOL AREA. I JUST WANT TO TAKE NOTE THAT ON THE SITE PLAN THESEUSES INTEGRATE WITH EACH OTHER . IT IS NOT ONLY SUBJECT TO THE TENETS OF LIVE IN THE PROPERTY BUT ALSO TO THE NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THEY HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO THE MIXED-USE BUILDING BY POSSIBLY BY UTILIZING THE COMMERCIAL USES THAT WILL BE PROPOSED WITHIN THE GROUND FLOOR OF THE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT. NEXT SLIDE, POLICING.

NOW, WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION SOME ITEMS THAT DO NOT MEET THE DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR MULTIFAMILY CRITERIA WITH THE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD ONE OF THEM THATTHE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING IS A LENGTH OF THE BUILDING . OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE DOES STATE MULTIPLY SHOULD NOT EXCEED 116 IN LINE. BUILDING ONE OF THE MIXED-USE BUILDINGS DOES EXCEED THE REQUIREMENTS, BUT IT SHOWS ABOUT 219 FEET FRONTING OLD ROWLETT ROAD 193 FEET FRONTING BIG A ROAD. BUILDINGS THREE, FOUR, FIVE AND SIX ARE 173 FEET IN LENGTH, WHICH ARE INTERNAL TO THE SITE. BUT BUILDING EIGHT DOESN'T MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF 160 FEET. SO THE APPLICANT PROPOSALS THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS IS THE PROPOSED REQUIRE LIMIT THE BUILDING ORIENTATION IN A VARIETY ACROSS THEBUILDING FACADE . AND THAT WOULD HELP WITH THE ARTICULATION OF THE BUILDING TO ALLOW FOR THIS LINK OF THE BUILDING PROPOSED. THEY ARE ALSO ASKING FOR AND REQUESTING FOR PARKING TO BE A TOTAL OF ABOUT 442 PARKING SPACES WERE THE ROWLETT CODE DOES REQUIRE A TOTAL OF 506 SPACES, WHICH IS A MIXTURE OF THE COMMERCIAL USE IN THE RESIDENTIAL USE. NOW, THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED A FIVE PERCENT REDUCTION, WHICH WE DO ALLOW FOR A MIXED USES A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT BY FIVE PERCENT.

ON AND ALSO THEY WILL BE ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL 114 SPACES. THIS IS TO BE SUPPORTED BY A SHARED PARKING PLAN THAT THEY PROPOSE TO PROVIDE ON-SITE DEVELOPMENTS FOR STAFFS REVIEW TO MAKE SURE IT IS CONSISTENT. SOME OF THE JUSTIFICATION BUT THAT IS BECAUSE IT IS A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT, NOT ALL TIMES WILL PARKING BE UTILIZED BY THE OFFICE USES.O THEREFORE THERE'S OPPORTUNITY FOR THE RESIDENTS TO HAVE PARKING AT ANY GIVEN TIME DURING THE DAY AND EVENING WHEN THE BUSINESSES ARE CLOSED. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT WITHIN THE DIMENSION REQUIREMENTS, IT DOES REQUIRE EITHER THE BUILDING IS 35 FEET OR TWO STORIES AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOR THE MIXED-USE BUILDING THAT CONSISTS OF THE COMMERCIAL OFFICE USE TO BE 49 FEET OR FOUR STORIES FOR A BUILDINGS FRONTING BIG A AND ROWLETT ROAD. THIS IS AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IT WITH REQUESTING A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 39 FEET OR THREE STORIES FOR SIX MULTIFAMILY BUILDING THAT ARE IN THE MIDDLE BUT ARE BUFFERED BY A BUFFER AND ALSO BY THE POND. THEY ARE PROPOSING THIS BECAUSE WE DO HAVE EVERGREEN LOCATED TO THE NORTH YOUR DEPARTMENT COMPLEX BUT DOES HAVE, THAT IS AND SOME HEIGHTS ARE FOUR STORIES IN HEIGHT IT WOULD BE SIMILAR IN SCALE TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THEY ARE PROPOSING AN INCOMPATIBILITY BUFFER ADJACENT TO THE WEST PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEY ARE PUTTING IN A METAL DECORATIVE FENCE IN LIEU OF THE REQUIRED MASONARY FUNDS.

BUT THEY WILL HAVE THE PLANTINGS REQUIRED FOR INCOMPATIBILITY BUFFERS, WHICH IS ONE CANOPY TREE PER 35 FEET PER LINEAR FEET. THIS JUSTIFICATION IS THAT THEY PROPOSE THE POND ADJACENT TO THEM THAT GIVES THEM ABOUT 193 FEET SETBACK FROM THE RESIDENCE ADJACENT TO THEM TO THE WEST AND THEY WILL BE PROVIDING THE PATHS OF RECREATION.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. NOW, THE LAST ONE THAT REQUESTING IS A MINIMUM DWELLING AREA WHERE OUR TABLE OF DIMENSIONS REQUIRED REQUIRES A MINIMUM DRAWING AREA FOR

[00:20:05]

MULTIFAMILY UNITS OF 700 SQUARE FEET.REQUESTING A MINIMUM OF 600 EIGHT SQUARE FEET.

AND THEY HAVE SEEN THAT THIS MODEL WORKS WELL IN THE EXISTING COMMUNITIES SO THEREFORE THEY WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE THIS AS WELL IN THIS REQUEST.

STAFF DOES NOT HAVE ãDOES NOT THINK THE RIPOSTE WILL HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE DEVELOPMENT APPROVED. NEXT SLIDE. JUST TO PROVIDE YOU TRAFFIC CIRCULATION WITHIN THE PROPERT , AS YOU CAN SEE THERE. FROM IN THE GREEN YOU WILL HAVE THE MIXED BUILDINGS. YOU WILL PARKING IN BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS AND TO THE REAR AND BEHIND THE BUILDINGS. AND THEN DOWN ON BIG A ROAD TO THE SOUTH YOU WILL HAVE TWO OPENINGS. ONE WILL BE A SECONDARY IN THE RED AND FOLLOWING THE RED AREA, ARROW. EXCUSE ME. IN THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE WOULD BE WITH THE GREEN ARROW OFF OF ROWLETT ROAD.

, PLEASE. I WILL ASK JEFF IF HE COULD PLEASE TALK ABOUT HIS SLIDES

HERE FOR DRAINAGE CONCERNS. >> GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. CHAIRWOMAN.

SO THE PROPOSED SITE, YOU'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE. THE CHANGES MADE ARE PRIMARILY INTERNAL TO THE OPERATION OF THE SITE. THE POND THEY HAD DESIGNED IN THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION IS BASICALLY IN THE SAME LOCATION. LET ME DESCRIBE SOME OF THE DRAINAGE FEATURES FOR YOU. WITH SITE VISIT AT THE TOP OF WATER SHOULD AND RUNOFF DOES EXIT THE NORTHEAST AND FLOWS THROUGH THE THE LIBERTY CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS IN 16 CONDITION THE APPLICANT IS NOT CHANGING THAT. AND AVERY ORIENTED THE POND AND I MADE IT A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN IT WAS IN THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION.

THE POND IS NOW ABOUT 5.8 ACRE-FEET IN VOLUME. BUT THEY ARE DESIGNING THAT POND TO LIMIT THE DISCHARGE RATE FROM THE SITE TO THE PRE-DEVELOPED RATE, WHICH IS WHAT IS REQUIRED OF DEVELOPERS, ACCORDING TO THE ROWLETT CODE. THE PROPOSED POND WHERE THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS UNLIKELY TO HAVE ANY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT THE LIBERTY CREEK SINCE THE DISCHARGE FROM THE DEVELOPED SITE WILL EQUAL OR MAY EVEN BE LESS THAN WHAT IS DISCHARGING NOW FROM THE UNDEVELOPED SITE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO NOW I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC CONSIDERATION. A KEY IN THE CHANGES TO THIS APPLICATION ARE MUCH ABOUT THE INTERNAL ASPECTS OF THE SITE. THE TRAFFIC CONSIDERATIONS ALONG BIG AID ROAD AND RALL AT ROAD WILL REMAIN THE SAME BECAUSE THEY ARE EXTERNAL TO THE SITE.

AND IS TRAFFIC CONSIDERATIONS HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT THESE ROADS ARE CLASSIFIED AS BY THE MASTER OF THOROUGHFARE PLAN AND WHAT THE RESPONSIBILITIES ARE OF THE APPLICANT TO IMPROVE THESE ROADS. SO BOTH BIG A ROAD AND ROWLETT ROAD ARE SUBSTANDARD ACCORDING TO CURRENT ROWLETT PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. HESE ROADS ARE SUBSTANDARD TWO LANE ASPHALT ROADWAYS. THEY DON'T MEET CURRENT CITY STANDARDS.

BIG A ROAD IS IDENTIFIED IN THE 2015 MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN AS IT TYPE C THOROUGHFARE, WHICH IS A TWO LANE UNDIVIDED COLLECTOR ROAD. THAT WOULD HAVE A 38 FOOT WIDE CONCRETE PAVEMENT. OLD ROWLETT ROAD IS A CLASSIFIED AS A MINOR RESIDENTIAL ROADWAY, WHICH ACCORDING TO CITY STANDARDS IS 31 FEET WIDE.

[00:25:02]

THE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS FOR THESE ROADWAYS REQUIRE CONCRETE PAVEMENT, CARBON GUTTERS AND A TREATED BASE.NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.SO THE ROWLETT CODE AND SECTION 77 CHAPTER 604 REQUIRES DEVELOPERS TO IMPROVE SUBSTANDARD ROADWAYS. AS I HAVE SAID, TAKE A ROAD AN OLD ROWLETT ROAD, WHICH ARE ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPED SITE, ARE SUBSTANDARD. SO THEY NEED TO BE APPROVED. THE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE TO IMPROVE THEIR HALF OF THE ROADWAYS. NOW, WE DON'T NORMALLY LIKE TO BUILD JUST HAVE A ROADWAY, HALF THE WIDTH. THERE ARE MANY REASONS FOR THAT. SOME OF WHICH INVOLVE THE FINISHED GRADES OF THE NEW ROAD VERSUS THE EXISTING ROAD THROUGH THE DIFFERENCE IN MATERIALS ETC. SO THAT IS SOMETHING WE TRY TO AVOID. AND SO WHEN YOU HAVE A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS WITH THE DEVELOPER WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE TO IMPROVE THEIR HALF OF THE ROAD, THE CITY WOULD THEN TAKE ON THE OTHER HALF OF THAT ROADWAY . HOWEVER, CURRENTLY WE DON'T HAVE FUNDS TARGETED FOR THE STREETS. WE HAVE THE FUNDS ARE EARMARKED FOR OTHER PROJECTS. AND SO WE WOULD RATHER THAT THE DEVELOPER ESCROW A SHARE OF THE CONSTRUCTION COSTS SO WE CAN USE IT LATER TO BUILD THESE ROADS.

THAT COST CURRENTLY, ACCORDING TO THE ESTIMATES, IS $530,000. I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU THE WRONG IDEA. THIS IS NOT AN ENGINEERING PROBABLE COST AT THIS POINT.

THIS IS A BALLPARK NUMBER TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE CONTRIBUTION THAT THE DEVELOPER WOULD MAKE TOWARD THE IMPROVEMENT OF THESE ROADS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.AND I

THINK THAT IS ALL OF MY SLIDES. BACK TO TARA, PLEASE. >> THANK YOU, JEFF.

SO WE DID SEND OUT NOTICES NOVEMBER 6, 2020 WITHIN THE 200 FOOT AREA AND 500 FOOT AREA BUT WITHIN THE 200 FOOT AREA 37 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT WITHIN THE 500 FOOT AREA 54 NOTICES WERE SENT OUT GOOD RESPONSES TO THE DOING FOOT LEGAL NOTICE RECEIVED TWO IN OPPOSITION AND WE RECEIVED IN THE 500 COURTESY NOTICE AREA 38, WHICH A MAJORITY CAME FROM THE EVERGREEN DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY. WE ONLY RECEIVED ONE IN FAVOR.

AS YOU DID RECEIVE THIS EVENING SOME MORE NOTICES THAT WERE SENT PROVIDED TO ME AFTER THE NOVEMBER 20 DATE FOR YOUR REVIEW. SO I HOPE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THOSE ITEMS PROVIDED. NEXT SLIDE. SO I DO WANT TO REITERATE THAT THIS APPLICATION DID COME BEFORE IN JULY 14, WHICH WAS STRICTLY JUST MULTIFAMILY.

AND NOW WE ARE IN NOVEMBER WE HAVE A NEW APPLICATION THAT IS A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WHICH PROVIDES A COMMERCIAL COMPONENT TO THIS AREA AND A LARGER POND AND A SMALL PARK FOR EXTERNAL COMMUNITY TO COME IN AND VISIT WITHIN THIS AREA. AND SO WITH THAT, WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONING TO ESTABLISH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE MULTIFAMILY SUBURBAN MF AND LIMITED COMMERCIAL RETAIL IT AS A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROVIDES A SUITABLE TRANSITION OF THE LORD RESIDENTIAL USES AND HIGHER INTENSITY COMMERCIAL USES AND INCLUDES GENEROUS SETBACKS FROM RESIDENTIAL AND A LANDSCAPING BUFFER FROM THE NEIGHBORING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE. AND ITPROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.HIS COMPLETES THE PRESENTATION . I DO HAVE EMILY AND CASEY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU THEIR PRESENTATION. BUT WE ARE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> DOES THE CITY HAVE A TIMELINE IF THE FUNDS OF THE STREET WERE GOING TO ESCROW AS TO WHEN THAT CAN POTENTIALLY TAKE PLACE? FIVE YEAR, 10 YEAR, ANY SORT

OF? >> I DO NOT HAVE A TIMELINE ON WHEN PUBLIC WORKS IS SETTING

[00:30:09]

THEIR SITES ON BIG A ROAD. I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS ON ANY OF THEIR FIVE-YEAR LISTS RIGHT NO . LET ME ALSO SAY THAT ACCORDING TO THE CODE, THOSE ESCROW FUNDS WOULD BE RETURNED TO THE DEVELOPER IF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT BEGUN

WITHIN A 20 YEAR PERIOD. >> THANK YOU. >> MR. COTE.

>>JOHN COTE : I HAVE A QUESTION FOR A STAFF. IN THE BACKGROUND ON THIS ITEM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY MENTIONED WAS THAT IT WAS PASSED WITH THE RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION HERE'S MY QUESTION TO THE STAFF IS IF THEY COULD EXPLAIN WHAT THAT MEANS.

>> THE RESOLUTION OF OBJECTION. >>JOHN COTE : NO OBJECTION. >> OF NO OBJECTION IS PROVIDED THE CITY COUNCIL. THIS BASICALLY WAS TO SAVE THE ZONING IS NOT APPROVED, THE CITY IS NOT HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR IT I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THEM REPORT APPLYING FOR FUNDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. THAT WAS THE RESOLUTION OF NO OBJECTION WITH THE TWO THINGS.

>> THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY SUPPORT IN ANY WAY. >> IT IS NOT SUBORDINATE ZONING CHANGE OR SITE PLAN APPROVAL REALLY JUST SAID WE WOULD NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE IF THEY DON'T RECEIVE THEIR ENTITLEMENTS AND WE DON'T OBJECT TO THEM APPLYING IT IT DOES NOT APPROVE ANY ZONING CHANGES. THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES THAT WE ARE REQUIRED.

IF THEY ARE APPROVED FOR THIS RECEIVING THEIR ENTITLEMENTS. >>JOHN COTE : ONE MORE QUESTION FOR STAFF. WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THE PAYMENT OF TAXES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS

PROJECT? >> A LOT OF TIMES THESE DEVELOPMENTS THEY WILL PROPOSE A PAYMENT IN LIEU, WHICH MAY ã SAY THEY WILL NOT PAY TAXES OR THEY WILL PAY TAXES UPFRONT.

IT'S AN AGREEMENT THAT HASTO BE HASHED OUT . BUT THEY WILL PROVIDE.

>> MAY I PIGGYBACK ON THAT ONE? IF THIS IS IN THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS PROGRAM WHERE IT IS A TAX CREDIT PROGRAM FOR ACCOMMODATION, THE PROJECT IS DEEMED TAX EXEMPT. BECAUSE THE RELATIVE SIZE OF THE HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION IS PART OF THE AGREEMENT THAT WE CAN RECEIVE SOME BENEFIT TO ENSURE OUR SERVICES ARE NOT

COMPROMISED AND PAID FOR ALONG THE WAY. >> THE FIRST ITEM THAT YOU MENTION, AT WHAT LEVEL DOES IT HAVE TO HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSIN .

A PERCENTAGE OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT TO BE CLASSIFIED AS A NONTAXABLE.

>> IF THEY RECEIVED, IF THE PROJECT WITH THE DEVELOPER DOES RECEIVE APPROVAL, WHICH WAS THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHERE THEY HAVE SPECIFIC BOND ISSUANCE AND CREDIT REQUIREMENTS THAT ENABLE THEM TO FORWARD FUND THE PROJECT.

IN THIS INSTANCE, IF THEY ARE TO PROCEED AND SECURE THEIR APPROVALS, THEN THEY ARE TAX EXEMPT. COMMISSIONER, REPEAT THE TAIL END OF YOUR QUESTION.

>> MY QUESTION IS THIS IS GOING TO BE A MIXED USE FACILITY. SO A PERCENTAGES COMMERCIAL THAT IS GOING TO BE AT MARKET RATE HOUSING AND THAT DISCOUNTED RATE.

MY QUESTION IS WHAT PERCENTAGE HAS TO BE AT THE DISCOUNTED RATE IN ORDER FOR THEM TO

QUALIFY. >> TO QUALIFY TO BE A TAX EXEMPT PROGRAM? I THINK CASEY IS NODDING BECAUSE I BELIEVE HE HAS THE ANSWER.

OBVIOUSLY WITH THE NONRESIDENTIAL COMPONENT, WE WOULD HAVE TO DETERMINE HOW

THAT WOULD WORK IN TERMS OF THE PILOT AGREEMENT. >>JOHN COTE : WHICH BRINGS UP ANOTHER QUESTION BECAUSE ALL THIS LAND WOULD STILL BE OWNED BY THE RAILROAD HOUSING COURT.

RIGHT? ANDTHEY ARE A TAX EXEMPT ORGANIZATION .

>> AND SO THE PILOT AGREEMENT WOULD BE ESTABLISHED TO ENSURE THE COSTS ARE CAPTURED.

[00:35:10]

IT'S THROUGH THAT PILOT AGREEMENT THAT YOU CAPTURE THOSE COSTS.

IT MIGHT BE A TAX-EXEMPT PROJECT, WITH THE PILOT AGREEMENT WOULD BE BUILT TO

SECURE OR CAPTURE THOSE COSTS. >>JOHN COTE : THE COSTS BASED ON REAL ESTATE TAXES?

>> ON THE VALUATION OF THE BUILT PROJECT, YES. >>JOHN COTE : FOR APPROXIMATELY

HOW LONG? >> FOR THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT WHILE IT IS IN A AGENCY PROGRA

. 25 YEARS OR SO. >>JOHN COTE : OR ANY PORTION OF THAT PILOT PROGRAM MONIES APPLIED TO THE SCHOOLS DISTRICT?

OR IS IT ALL JUST TAXES. >> THESE ARE THE CITY TAXES, YES.

SO IN TERMS OF PILOT AGREEMENT, THE DEVELOPER AND APPLICANT AS COMMITTED TO A PILOT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY. THAT IS SOMETHING COUNCIL WITH THEN EVALUATE AND ASSESS TO

DETERMINE WHETHER THEY HAVE A CONSENSUS ON IT OR NOT. >>JOHN COTE : OKAY.

AND DOES THE SCHOOL DISTRICT HAVE ANY SAY OR INPUT TO THIS CONSIDERING THE FACT WE WOULD BE INCREASING THE USAGE OF SCHOOLS BUT NOT NECESSARILY, NOBODY IS PAYING SCHOOL TAXES?

>> COMMISSIONER, I WILL PULL UP THE DRAFT. I THINK WE HAVE SOMETHING IN OUR PACKET IT MAY BE CASEY DOES WHERE WE CAN DETERMINE. I KNOW THERE IS A LINE ITEM TO IT. I JUST WANT TO VERIFY. I'M NOT 100 PERCENT SURE WITH

THE LINE ITEMS EXCLUDE. >>JOHN COTE : OKAY. THANK YOU.

>>MIRANDA MORGAN: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >>MARK ENGEN : FOR TERRA, JUST GOING OVER YOUR REVIEW, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT A COUPLE THINGS THAT WERE NOT ENCODED WITH THE ROWLETTBUILDING REQUIREMENTS OVER THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING AND I REMEMBER THERE WAS LIKE THE SIZE OF THE ROOMS. WOULD YOU BEHIND THIS? IF THERE IS A CERTAIN LENGTH, WHY CAN'T THEY ABIDE BY THE RULES THAT HAVE BEEN SET FORTH?

>> I WILL START WITH THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING. IT EXCEEDS IT BY ABOUT 17 FEET.

WITH THAT IF YOU LIKE IT DOES ADD RELIEF FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENT FOR THAT WOULD BE BEHIND THAT. THE LONGER THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS TO VARY WITHIN THE CITY. THE SECOND ONE FOR THE SMALLER MINIMUMDRAWING AREA , THAT IS ABOUT 92 SQUARE FEET LESS THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED BY THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE.

BUT IF YOU LIKE THAT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DIVERSE HOUSING STOCK WITHIN THE CITY TO PROVIDE THOSE DIFFERENT RANGES FROMONE-BEDROOM TO TWO-BEDROOM, THREE-BEDROOM , FOUR-BEDROOM.

THAT GIVE THAT VARIETY WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING FROM.

>>MARK ENGEN : CAN I MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT BUILDING? BECAUSE COMMISSIONER ENGEN IS CURIOUS. AM CURIOUS AS WELL.HE ONLY THING YOU ARE ADDRESSING IS THE FACADE OF THE BUILDING, WHEN IN ALL ACTUALITY ONE OF THE THINGS I DID WAS I SAT DOWN WITH MY PDF AND TOOK A LOOK AT A COUPLE TOOLS AND MEASURED EGRESS DISTANCES IN THAT LONG BUILDING. ACCORDING TO THE FDA, WHICH IS A NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION AGENCY CODE, THE LIFE SAFETY CODE. THAT IS CHAPTER 101.

CHAPTER 7 MEANS OF EGRESS AND SPECIFICALLY CHAPTER 30, NEW APARTMENT BUILDING SECTIONS 263, ONE AND TWO, LIMIT THE TRAVEL DISTANCE FROM THE APARTMENT ENTRANCE TO THE PUBLIC EXIT SPOT WRITTEN THOSE BUILDING PLANS INDICATE IS WILL END ACCESS TO THE 100 AND 200

LINEAL FEET RESTRICTIONS SET BY THE LIFE SAFETY CODE. >> COMMISSIONER COTE , IF I CAN TAKE THE LIBERTY TO RESPOND TO THAT. WE HAVE IS A SITE PLAN.

THE INTENT OF WHAT I AM GOING TO CALL EXAGGERATED LENGTH OF THE BUILDING IS MERELY FROM A DESIGN PERSPECTIVE.HEY ARE NOT IN THE POSITION TO COMPROMISE OF ANY TYPE OF CODER BUILDING CODES. IN HEALTH OR SAFETY STANDARDS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUILDING CANNOT BE COMPROMISED. WHETHER IT IS INGRESS AND EGRESS WERE FIRE RELATED WALLS OR LOCATION OF FIRE HYDRANTS IN THE ASSOCIATED FIRE LANES. FROM A PLANNING STANDPOINT AND

[00:40:01]

A DEVELOPED STANDPOINT THE INTENT IS PURELY TO ENSURE YOU AVOID BLANK FACADES OR BLANK SPACES. AND IN THIS INSTANCE, THAT'S WHY IT WAS PUT IN THE CONTEXT TO HAVING THAT RELIEF. HOWEVER, FROM A STANDPOINT OF EXIT OF EACH DOOR AND TO WHETHER IT IS A HALLWAY OR COURT ORDER OR WHETHER IT'S OUT ONTO THE PUBLIC REALM, ALL THOSE ELEMENTS HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE BUILDING CODE. SO THIS IS NOT AN APPROVAL OF THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION. IF THIS SHOULD BE APPROVED BY YOURSELVES, THEY WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO DEVIATE FOR THIS REQUIREMENT FROM A SPATIAL

ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: THE BACK GET YOUR ANSWER?

>> YEAH. >> I HAVE GOT A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

THIS IS ROB. WE LOOKED AT THIS IN JULY AND MY QUESTION IS FROM JULY HIS PRESENTATION TO TODAY'S PRESENTATION, WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES.

>> LET ME HANDLE THIS ONE. COMMISSIONER SWIFT, THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION YOU SAWIN JULY, THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN SO IT'S NOT THE SAME APPLICATION.

THE APPLICANT DID NOT PROCEED TO COUNSEL.HIS IS AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ZONING REQUEST . WHAT YOU SAW PREVIOUSLY ON THE SITE, THE REQUESTED THE DID NOT COME TO FRUITION WITH THE SERVER PARK MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

THIS INCLUDES A MIXED-USE CONCEPT ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF OLD ROWLETT ROAD.

AND AND HAVING THE INTEGRATED USE OF THE SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH LORD.

>> VISA WE HAVE ADDED MIXED-USE WHERE THERE WAS NONE BEFORE. WE HAVE REDUCED THE AMOUNT

UNITS TOTAL. >> I THINK ABSOLUTELY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE WAY THE BUILDINGSAND PLACED THEM IN THE DETENTION FACILITY THE APPLICANT USE THAT .

THEY CHANGED HOW IT WAS ãI DON'T SAY ORIGINALLY PRESENTED BECAUSE IT WAS AN APPLICATION THAT DIDN'T COME TO FRUITION, BUT WHAT WE HAVE SEEN OR ENVISIONED IN THE PAST FROM OTHER APPLICANTS, IT SHOULD SHOW THE DETENTION FACILITY. N THIS CASE PROVIDING A TRAIL SYSTEM AROUND IT FOR THE DISTANCE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE BUILDINGS.

THE TREATMENT FOR SCREENING THROUGH THE PARKING INSULTS, THE COVERED PARKING.

SO THERE IS DEFINITELY A DIFFERENT SITE PLAN WITHIN THE PROVISION.

>> NO DOUBT WHAT I WAS JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCES OUTLOOK AS WE HAVE TO MAKE THIS DECISION FOR NOTICING THE MIXED-USE IS THE BIGGEST CHANGE I PERSONALLY

NOTICED OUT THERE. THANK YOU. >> CAN I ASK ONE MORE QUESTION? THE PARKING THAT STAFF IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS, BUT THE PARKING IS BEING REDUCED BY ABOUT 150+ SPACES. IS THERE ANY CONCERNED THAT? I KNOW THERE WOULD BE AN INFLUX OR OVERLAP BETWEEN THE TIME AND DATE.

I GET ALL THAT. BUT THAT IS A LOT OF SPACES. SO CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT A

LITTLE BIT MORE? >> WITH THE PARKING BECAUSE IT IS A MIXED DEVELOPMENT, I FEEL LIKE THERE IS PARKING TO CATER TO THE RESIDENCE THAT WOULD BE LOCATED IF APPROVED IN THAT PROPERTY, ON THAT PROPERTY. BECAUSE IT IS MIXED USE THERE WILL BE CUP PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT THAT THERE WOULD BE A TIME THE OFFICE USE IS CLOSED FOR THE RESIDENCE AND USE THE UPPER SPACES. BUT I BELIEVE THE APARTMENT AND FOR FAMILIES THAT WILL, MAY NOT HAVE CORSETS OF THEMAYBE SMALL CHILDREN . SO WE WOULD WANT TO NOT EVERYBODY WILL HAVE A CAR. BUT I THINK HAVING LITTLE SPACE AND NOT AS MUCH CARS WOULD HELP WITH THE TRAFFIC AS WELL IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO MANY PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE TO

EVERYBODY TO PARK IN THAT AREA. >> OKAY. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DOES THE DEVELOPER HAVE A PRESENTATION.

>> THEY DO. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY. >> GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.

[00:45:13]

MY NAME IS CASEY AND I'M THE PRESIDENT BANKING MANAGER AND COMMISSIONERS FOR YOUR TIME.

WE ARE BACK AND IT WORKED REALLY HARD TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING WE THINK IS GOING TO BE A BENEFIT TO YOUR COMMUNITY. WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE EMILY. SHE IS OUR OUTREACH LIAISON BRIDGES GOING TO START OFF WITH AN OVERVIEW THEN I WILL COME BACK TO ANSWER MORE THE TECHNICAL QUESTIONS. EMILY? OKAY.

EMILY, WE ARE LOSING YOU. BUT I WILL GO AHEAD AND DIVE IN HERE.

SO MOUNIR CARRINGTON IS AN AUSTIN-BASED COMPANY BUT WE DEVELOP, DESIGN, CONSTRUCT, MANAGE, MAINTAIN AND IT IS OUR INTENTION TO OWN THIS COMMUNITY FOR EVERY.

AND BEEN A MEMBER OF THE FAMILY FOR 20 YEARS. I STARTED AS AN INTERN 20 YEARS AGO AND I AM NOW A PARTNER WITH THE OWNER, STUART SHAW. WE ARE SETTING THIS UP TO BE A MULTIGENERATIONAL COMPANY. THE PROGRAM WE ARE UTILIZING HERE IS GOING TO ALLOW US TO ON THIS FOREVER WE DON'T HAVE TO BUILD AND SELL IT. THAT'S WHY WE ARE PARTNERING WITH THE ROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION. AND RICK WAS UNABLE TO MAKE IT THIS EVENING TO SPEAK WITH YOU ALL BECAUSE OF A PERSONAL MATTER, BUT HE WILL BE AVAILABLE SHOULD ANY QUESTIONS COME UP IN THE FUTURE. CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.THIS IS OUR PORTFOLIO THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF TEXAS. AND THESE ARE FOR THE GENERAL POPULATION AND ARE MARIPOSA SURFER SENIORS. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ARE FAIRLY ACTIVE IN THE DALLAS REGION. CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.THIS WAS THE OVERVIEW OF WHERE THE LOCATION IS OUT. WHILE WE ARE HERE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS LIBERTY GROUP CREEK AND FLOWER HILL IS UP TO THE TOP LEFT ON THIS PAGE WE WILL TALK ABOUT THE OUTREACH WE DID TO BOTH THOSE COMMUNITIES TO SEEK INPUT. CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

. THESE ARE THE COMMUNITY PHOTOS. THIS WILL BE SIMILAR TO THE CLUBHOUSE THAT WE HAD PROPOSED IN THE MULTIFAMILY PORTION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS JUST A PICTURE OF THE POOL. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS THE COURTYARD THAT WILL BE FOR THE RESIDENCE IN THE MAIN PART OF THE COMMUNITY.

YOU CAN SEE AN APPROVAL AND ALSO THE PAVILION. WILL REALLY GO THROUGH A LOT OF EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE THE AMENITIES CAN BE AVAILABLE FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND RESIDENTS SO THEY ARE ABLE TO ENJOY THE AREA. SO YOU WILL SEE THE MULTIFAMILY PART OF THE SITE PLAN THAT WE HAVE THE PARKING OUTSIDE SO YOU HAVE ACCESS FOR THE COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO GO OUT AND ENJOY THESE AMENITY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS JUST THE PAVILION. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS THE SPORT COURT.

SOME OF THE INTENTIONAL THINGS WE GO TO IS DIVIDED INTO PARTS IN ONE IF IT IS FOR THE OLDER KIDS AND WE DO NOT PUT THE BASKETBALL GOAL ON THE OTHER SIDE SO THE YOUNGER KIDS CAN BE OUT THERE HAVING PART OF IT AVAILABLE TO THEM WILL NOT HAVING A FULL BASKETBALL GAME.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.THIS IS THE CLUBHOUSE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS ANOTHER VIEW OF THE CLUBHOUSE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.THIS IS THE COMMUNITY ROOM AVAILABLE FOR ACTIVITIES OR EVENTS I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE.

WHETHER THAT BE A BIRTHDAY PARTY OR A BIBLE STUDY OR A GATHERING OR AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAMS. THIS IS THE BUSINESS CENTER. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.WE WILL POSITION THE FITNESS CENTER SO WE CAN SEE THE POOL OUT THE WINDOW SO YOU CAN, A PARENT COULD BE IN THERE WORKING OUT WHILE THE FAMILY IS AT THEPOOL .

NEXT SLIDE. THE OTHER THING WE DO, WE WORK REALLY HARD AT HIS BUILDING COMMUNITY. ONE THING WE DO IS PARTNER WITH A FAITH-BASED NONPROFIT LOCATED

[00:50:06]

IN DALLAS. THEIR JOB IS TO CREATE COMMUNITY.

THEY ARE TO MEET RESIDENTS IN TIMES OF NEED THEY ARE THERE TO WELCOME ON THE COMMUNITY.

THEY ARE THERE TO WORK FOR RENEWALS AND THERE TO CONNECT PEOPLE AND PERFORM ACTIVITIES.

IF A RESIDENT HAS JUST ONE FRIEND IN THE COMMUNITY, THEY ARE MUCH MORE LIKELY TO RENEW.

WORK REALLY HARD TO MAKE THESE HOMES GRACIOUS AND MAKE IT A COMMUNITY.

VERY MUCH WHAT YOU MIGHT SEE IN A SINGLE-FAMILY COMMUNITY. ANOTHER THING WE ARE ABLE TO DO THROUGH OURPROGRAMS , WE HAVE EXTENSIVE RULES IN THAT YOU CANNOT BE A FELON OR EIGHT SEXUAL OFFENDER OR ANYTHING LIVE IN OUR COMMUNITY WE HAVE TO FOLLOW RULES TO LIVE THERE AND IF YOU ARE NOT THERE'S A THREE STRIKE RULE AND YOU ARE OUT.

SO THERE ARE A LOT OF ABILITIES TO MAKE SURE OUR COMMUNITY STAYS NICE AND SAFE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.THIS IS A SUMMARY OF THE OUTREACH WE HAVE IN JANUARY.

WE MET WITH THE LIBERTY CREEK AG PRESIDENT AND BOARD MEMBER AND THEN WE CONTINUED THAT WITH THE LIBERTY CREEK HOA MEETING IT AND THEN ON GENERALLY 30TH WE HAD A PRESENTATION WHERE THE BOARD VOTED TO SUPPORT US IN THE OLD SITE PLAN. AND THEN WE HAVE BEEN KEPT IN CONCEPT CONTACT WITH THE HOA THIS SUMMER WE RECEIVED A LOT OF FEEDBACK FROM THE FLOWER HILL GROUP WHEN WE CAME TO LAST TIME. AND IT WAS ONE OF THOSE WHO WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD. THAT'S WHEN WE DECIDED TO REINVENT THE PROJECT.

AND IN NOVEMBER OUR TEAM, LED BY EMILY, FLYER 931 HOMES TO LET THEM KNOW THE PROPOSAL.

AND OUT OF THAT WE HAD OPTIONS FOR IN PERSON MEETINGS, WHICH WAS NOVEMBER 17 FOR WE ONLY HAD ONE PERSON SHOW UP BUT WE WERE STILL THERE. AND THEN ON NOVEMBER 19 WE HAD A ZOOM MEETING, WHICH WE HAD ABOUT 15 TOTAL PEOPLE AND PROBABLY EIGHT OR 10 RESIDENTS.

THE ASKED A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS. BY THE TIME WE WERE DONE ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS WHO LIVES AT LIBERTY CREEK SAID SHE LIKED THE PLAN A LOT BETTER COULD EVER HOPE THEY WERE ABLE TO GET THE LETTERS TO SUPPORT. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY MADE IT ON TIME OR NOT.

BUT I GUESS WE WILL FIND OUT SHORTLY IF THERE IS ANY OTHER FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.SO WE WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD WAS WE KNEW THERE WAS FEEDBACK THAT SAID LOOK, THERE'S OFFICE OF THIS IS THE ZONE FOR OUR ONE. UNTIL WE START TO GO IN AND THINK ABOUT WHAT CAN WE DO THAT BLEND WELL WITH THE COMMUNITY. OF THIS CAME THE MIXED USE, WHICH IS THE NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE AND OUR VISION WOULD BE THAT IT WOULD BE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES, POSSIBLY RESTAURANTS, COFFEE SHOPS OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE USEFUL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. CONNECTIVITY WITH THE SIDEWALKS.AND THEN THE PAUSE REGARDING THE TRAIL IN THE PARK AT PARK THERE IS A NICE BUFFER BETWEEN US AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT IT EVENTUALLY, THERE IS A PARK IS OWNED BY THE CITY TO THE NORTH THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE COULD BE CONNECTED. WE PUT ALL THAT TOGETHER AND WORKED REALLY HARD TO GO BACK WITH STAFF AND GET THEIR INPUT. WE THINK WE HAVE COME UP WITH SOMETHING HERE THAT WILL BE A BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.WE WERE ASKED TO DO A 3D RENDERING FOR THE CORNER PIECE. AND DOES A GOOD JOB AT SHOWING THE FOUR-STORY, BUT I WILL TELL IT DOESN'T HAVE THE TOUCH COULD WE HAVE THE ARCHITECT THAT THROUGH THE PERMITTING AND DESIGN PROCESS WILL MAKE THIS LOOK A LOT BETTER.

I CAN TELL THAT THE ARCHITECT PUT THIS TOGETHER. THEY GOT THE STRUCTURE MAINLY CORRECT, BUT THE COLORS ARE NOT VERY FLATTERING. AND SO I WILL ASSURE YOU THAT IT WILL LOOK FANTASTIC THERE AT THE CORNER AND FOR GAY AND OLD ROWLETT ROAD.

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IN SOME OF OUR OTHER PHOTOS. BUT THIS GIVES YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT THE FIRST FLOOR NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE AND RETAIL COULD LOOK LIKE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND THIS IS JUST ANOTHER ANGLE THAT KIND OF SHOWS THE BUILDING. AND NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE ONLY OTHER FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP WAS THE BUFFERING WRITTEN SO WE WENT BACK WITH A ASKED IF WE COULD PUT THE TREES AND DIFFERENTLY PROPOSED IN THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN BACK IN AND

[00:55:12]

WE SAID WE WOULD DO THAT. TO THAT IS NOT IN OUR LANDSCAPING PLAN AT THE MOMENT.

BUT WE DO HAVE A COMMITMENT AT THE BUFFERING BACK THERE THERE WILL BE AN ARRAY OF TREES BETWEEN US AND THE NEIGHBORS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL BUFFERING AS WELL AS QUICK GROWING PLANTS THAT WILL GET HIRED TO CREATE MORE BUFFER BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS AND THE COMMUNITY.

PREVIOUSLY THERE IS PARKING UP NEXT TO THEM. THAT WAS A BIG CONCERN.

WE HAVE A GRACIOUS TRAIL AND PARKED. THAT'S ALL I HAVE AT THE MOMEN . EMILY WILL HAVE SOME TECHNICAL ãACTUALLY, CAN YOU GO TO ONE OF THE SLIGHTLY THIS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE 608 SQUARE FEET UNIT. THIS IS A UNIT THEY HAD SAID, WE IN A VARIETY OF OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE IN AND BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING THIS FOREVER, WE DO WANT THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE FUNCTIONAL EVIDENCE OF THIS PARTICULAR APARTMENT HOME IS A GOOD AMOUNT OF SPACE. TO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, IT'S CALLED IMPLEMENT LARGE STONE AND SO THIS REALLY JUST SHOWS YOU THE ENTRY DOORS ARE IN A LITTLE DIFFERENT SPOT ONLY CURRENT ONE. BUT WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS A GOOD UNIT THAT CAN BE USEFUL.AND SO THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDINGS, THE UNIT FOR A LITTLE BIT BIGGER AND WIDER. WE HAVE BIG NICE PATIOS. SO IT JUST ADDS TO THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDINGS. WE THINK WITH THE ARTICULATION WE HAVE THE FINISHES WE ARE GOING TO AND THE COLOR SELECTION IS GOING TO LOOK VERY NICE.

FINALLY, THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT THE PILOT PROGRAM. SO ONE THING ABOUT THE PILOT THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS IS THAT BY PARTNERING WITH THE ROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION, WE ARE ABLE TO BRING A PRODUCT LIKE THIS TO THE MARKET THAT ALLOWS US TO OWN AND NOT HAVE TO SELL IT. AND SO WE ARE FOLLOWING THE PILOT PROGRAM THAT HAS BEEN USED IN OTHER COMMUNITIES AND THAT IN ROWLETT. SO THE ROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY WILL OWN THE PROPERTY. THEY WILL BE OUR PARTNER. AND WILL PAY THE TAXES TO THE CITY BASED ON THE ASSESSMENT FROM THE CITY OF DALLAS. PALACE, BUT THE DALLAS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT THROUGH THEY WILL EVALUATE THE CALCULATION PAY THE CITY TAXES BASED ON THAT PARTICULAR VALUATION. AND THE COMBINATION OF BEING ABLE TO DO A PILOT LIKE THAT IS WHAT MAKES COMMUNITIES LIKE THIS FEASIBLE. AND SO THAT IS PART OF THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WE HAVE. AND AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: DOESN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? P8 YOU JUST MENTIONED THE BY THE PROGRAM BASICALLY DALLAS WILL GO AHEAD AND EMBRACE YOUR PROPERTY AND IN EVERY YEAR SEND YOU A BILL AND YOU WILL PAY

THAT BILL? >> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. WILL HAPPEN IS A PROPERTY WILL TECHNICALLY BE EXEMPT BECAUSE IT WILL BE OWNED BY THEROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY .

IT IS NOT THE PROGRAM. JUST ONE CLARIFICATION. IT'S A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE ROWLETT HSC THAT ALLOWS THE EXEMPTION. AND SO EVEN THOUGH THE PROPERTY WILL BE EXEMPT IT WILL STILL BE IS ASKED BECAUSE THAT IS THE BASIS OF WHAT WE HAVE TO PAY THE PILOT. AND SO FOR THE PORTION OF THE TAXES.

AND SO THEY WILL COME OUT AND DO THEIR ANNUAL ASSESSMENT. AND THEY WILL NOT BILL US BUT WE WILL PAY IN ACCORDANCE. THEY WILL COME UP WITH A VALUATION AND WE WILL PAY BASED

ON THAT VALUATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PILOT AGREEMENT. >>JOHN COTE : BUT THAT DOESN'T

DO ANYTHING FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, CORRECT. >> NO, SIR.

IT DOES NOT. BUT ALSO DOES NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS IN THE WAY THE STATE PAYS IT, IT IS OUR ASSERTION ã I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ARE IN A DISTRICT OR NOT, BUT WORK WITH THE ROWLETT HSC HAS EXPLAINED TO US THAT THE IMPACT OF THE

DISTRICT SHOULD NOT BE AFFECTED. >>JOHN COTE : OKAY.

>>MIRANDA MORGAN: AND THE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? >> I DO.

[01:00:04]

I JUST HAVE TO ASK THIS QUESTION BECAUSE OF READING SOME OF THE COMMENTS SUBMITTED.

COULD YOU AT LEAST THINK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE QUALITY OF THE CONSTRUCTION WHERE THE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY YOU WORK WITH IN BUILDING THESE? BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS ABOUT HOW THESE BUILDINGS WERE BUILT BUT I THOUGHT IT PEOPLE ARE LISTENING, TO SPEAK ABOUT

THAT. >> YES, SIR.THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.

SO OUR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY WILL ACTUALLY BUILD IT. WE GOT IN THE CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS IN 2006 PARTLY BECAUSE HE WANTED TO CONTROL THE QUALITY OF OUR COMMUNITIES.

THE PRODUCTS WE SELECT AND THE WAY WE DESIGNED THIS IN OUR MANAGEMENT, WE ALSO MANAGEMENT COMPANY.T IS ALL FOR LONG-TERM OWNERSHIP. AND SO THE PARTICULARS OF THIS PROGRAM YOU ARE GOING TO BE SPEAKING WITH A REPRESENTATIVE AS LONG AS THIS PROPERTY EXISTS. AND SO OUR FINANCING IS SET UP. NOT ONLY DO WE BUILD IT CORRECTLY AND NICELY RIGHT OUT OF THE GATE, AND OUR FINANCING IS SET UP WHERE WE HAVE PROPER RESERVES AND REPLACEMENT RESERVES , OPERATING RESERVES TO NAVIGATE THE UPS AND DOWNS OF THE MARKETS THAT WILL COME ALONG. AND BECAUSE OF THE LONG-TERM OWNERSHIP PIECE, WE ARE UNDER TREMENDOUS GUARANTEES FOR A LONG TIME.

SO THE GOALS OF MAINTAINING AND KEEPING THE COMMUNITY IN GOOD SHAPE ARE NOT ONLY SOMETHING THAT EVERY COMPANY STICKS TO BUT IS THERE FROM A REGULATORY BASIS AS WELL.

AND WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO HOST YOU OR ANYONE ANY OF OUR COMMUNITIES THROUGH THE OLDEST ONE WE HAVE IS IN CEDAR PARK. ON IT IS GOING ON 16 YEARS OLD AND IT IS NEXT TO THREE AND

$400,000 HOMES AND IT LOOKS GREAT.>>MIRANDA MORGAN: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE

APPLICANT? OKAY. >> I THINK MR. COTE HAD A

QUESTION >>MIRANDA MORGAN: GO AHEAD, JOHN .

>>JOHN COTE : FIRST DRAFT OF THIS QUESTION IS FOR STAFF. THAT IS ON THE MIXED-USE PROJECT LIKE THIS, DO WE HAVE ANY PERCENTAGES FOR COMMERCIAL VERSUS RESIDENTIAL?

>> WITHIN THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE, WE DO NOT. OUR FORM-BASED CODE DOES BUT

THE ROWLETT DOES NOT. >>JOHN COTE : SO IS THIS NOT A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

>> IT IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. IT IS NOT ZONING BASED CODE. IT IS JUST A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR OUR ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE MULTIFAMILY MS AND C-1 COMMERCIAL USE.

>>JOHN COTE : SO WE WE SHOULD WE NOT BE ALTERING ANY OF THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE WITH

THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF PROJECT? >> THE REQUEST IS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS DOZEN TIMES AS FOR INTEGRATED USES AND ALTERNATIVES WITHIN THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE SET FORTH IN THE CODE.

>>JOHN COTE : OKAY. KNOWING THAT THERE IS NOT ANY SPECIFIC PERCENTAGE OF WHAT COMMERCIAL VERSUS RESIDENTIAL AND WHATNOT, DOES THE OWNER KNOW WHAT HE HAS PERCENTAGEWISE

IN THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT? >> WAS THAT FOR ME?SO WE HAVE 31,000 SQUARE FEET OF NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE AND THEN WE HAVE 234 APARTMENT HOMES. AND SO ON A PERCENTAGE BASIS, I WOULD HAVE TO PULL THAT BACK TO SEE. WITHOUT THAT WAS A GOOD MIX TO

BE ABLE TO SERVE BOTH USES WHILE ALSO HAVING THE PARK. >>JOHN COTE : WE ARE NOT COUNTING THE PARK. A PERCENTAGE OF COMMERCIAL VERSUS RESIDENTIAL IS 10 PERCENT COMMERCIAL.CTUALLY 10.4 PERCENT MARSHALL VERSUS THE RESIDENTIAL.

>> AND YOU ARE GOING ON GROSS BUILDING AREA? >>JOHN COTE : ON THE FIGURES

THAT WERE ON THE PACKAGE YOU PRESENTED. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR THE CITY STAFF? I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. ONE OF THEM, DO WE NEED TO ãI

[01:05:07]

GUESS TARA, THIS WOULD BE TOO YOU. WHEN WE MAKE A MOTION, IF WE WERE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL, WE WOULD NEED TO DESIGNATE ANYTHING IN OUR

MOTION REGARDING THE ROADWAY CROSS? >> NO.

THAT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT WOULD BE DOWN THE ROAD FROM THE OF THE REVIEWS.

>>MIRANDA MORGAN: I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. I GUESS THAT IS IT FOR RIGHT NOW. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

IF THERE ARE NOMORE QUESTIONS, WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING .

DO WE HAVE SPEAKERS? >> WE DO, MADAM CHAIR. SO WE WILL GO THROUGH THE PROTOCOL AND THEN ADDRESSED THE CALLERS. FOR THE CALLERS ON THE LINE, PLEASE MUTE ALL ELECTRONICS IN THE BACGROUND. CALLERS WILL BE RECOGNIZED BY A NUMBER ASSIGNED BY STAFF AND YOU WILL HEAR A PROMPT TO UNMUTE WHEN IT IS YOUR TURN TO SPEAK. YOU WILL PRESS STAR SIX. ONCE RECOGNIZED, YOU WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AFTER PROVIDING YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

AND THE SOUND WILL BE MUTED AT THE END OF YOUR TIME. IF YOU SUBMITTED COMMENTS VIA EMAIL, THEY WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD. COLOR ONE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO

ADDRESS THIS ITEM? >> THERE IS ALSO A LAG TIME IN WHAT I SAY AND WHAT THEY HEAR.

AS WE HAVE TO WAIT A LITTLE BIT. SO WE WILL GO ON TO COLOR NUMBER TWO. DO YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM? PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX TO UNMUTE. OKAY.

CALLERS THREE, DO YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX TO

UNMUTE.>> HI. CAN YOU HEAR ME? >> YES GOOD PLEASE STATE YOUR

NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> MY NAME IS 10 ELDRIDGE.

I LIVE AT 6001 IRISH DRIVE IN FLOWER HILL. I HAVE GOT SEVERAL CONCERNS.

MOST OF THEM ARE THE CONCERNS OF MY NEIGHBORS THAT I HAVE SPOKEN WITH.

NEIGHBORS AND JOINING EACH SIDE OF ME AND UP AND DOWN MY STREE .

THAT IS ABOUT 15 PEOPLE TO READ EVERY ONE OF THOSE NEIGHBORS OF MINE HAVE A NEGATIVE VIEW OF THIS PROJECT. MAINLY BECAUSE OF INCREASED TRAFFIC, NOISE, ORGANIZATION, THE SIZE OF THE COMPLEX BEING A FOUR-STORY BUILDING. AND BEING A MULTIFAMILY UNIT.

THIS IS A COMPANY BUILDING PER PROFIT. THEY REALLY DON'T HAVE OUR BEST INTEREST AS NEIGHBORS. AGAIN, IT IS A CORPORATION THAT IS FOUND LAND THEY WANT TO REQUIRE TO BUILD THEIR COMPANY OUT. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WORK FOR THE CENSUS SO WAS THAT MANY COMPLEXES. AND ALMOST ALL OF THEM DETERIORATE OVER TIME. SOME ARE MANAGED MUCH BETTER THAN OTHERS.

[01:10:01]

I WILL GIVE THE NEWARK COMPLEXES TO MANAGE THE APARTMENT DWELLERS.BUT I SAW MANY APARTMENTS THAT WERE HIGHLY MISMANAGED OR UNDER MANAGED.

I WAS PROBABLY IN 30, 35 DIFFERENT COMPLEXES FROM GARLAND, RICHARDSON DOWN TO DALLAS AND MESQUITE TO READ MAY HAVE EVEN BEEN IN ONE OF THIS FACILITIES COMPLEXES.

I DID SEE QUITE A FEW NEGATIVE COMMENTS, WITH THE SUM OF THE COMPLEX IN MCKINNEY.

ALSO, IT'S A STEPPING STONE TO THE BUILDING OTHER COMPLEXES IN ROWLETT.

AGAIN, I WANT TO VOTE NO AND MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS HERE SAY NO AS WELL.

THE TAX ISSUE IS BIG. THE POND DRAINAGE ISSUE, THAT IS A NATURAL RESOURCE UP THERE NOW WITH GRASS. IS VIRTUALLY NO DRAINAGE. AND WHEN YOU PUT CONCRETE ROOFING IN THERE, IT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE. ALSO, WE ARE TALKING WHAT ALL THE APARTMENTS COMING INTO THIS OLD SECTION OF ROWLETT. YOU ARE GOING TO ADD ENOUGH.

>> THANK YOU. YOUR TIME IS OVER. COLOR LISTED AS FRANK NELSON? DO YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM? PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX TO UNMUT . OKAY. THAT IS IT FOR THE CALLERS.

I WILL TURN IT OVER TO SUSAN TO READ ANY CITIZEN INPUT WE RECEIVED VIA EMAIL.

>> THANK YOU. OKAY. JOSHUA 3507 JASMINE LANE RELLA.

I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY CONCERN ABOUT THE PROPOSED IPERS CREEK APARTMENT PROJECT PROPOSED AT THE CORNER OF ROWLETT ROAD BUT I'M A HOMEOWNER IN THE ADJACENT FLOWER HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ON OLD RELLA ROAD AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS PROJECT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE RESIDENTS OF ROWLETT WHO WOULD BELOW MARKET LEVEL ROOMS HAVE LED TO AN INCREASE IN VIOLENT CRIME IN TEXAS BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO READ THE ARTICLE PUBLISHED BY NPR ON THE SUBJECT. AND COMMISSIONERS, HE PROVIDED A LINK TO THIS INFORMATION IN THE COMMENTS AND I WILL EMAIL IT TO YOU AFTER THE MEETING. AS WELL AS OTHERS WHICH SUPPORT THIS CLAIM. AS FELLOW CITIZENS OF OUR FINE CINDY, I KNOW THE WELL-BEING OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS A PRIORITY FOR EACH OF YOU AND WILL THE INCREASE IS MY FIRST CONCERN, THERE ARE SECONDARY CONCERNS WORTH DISCUSSING FOR THE ROAD TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY CANNOT HANDLE THE TRAFFIC OF 200+ RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR THANKFULLY THEY RECEIVE MUCH NEEDED REPAIRS TWO YEARS AGO BUT THE CAPACITY OF THE ROADS TO LANE IS NOT ADEQUATE FOR A LARGE PROJECT AS THIS AND WOULD NEED EXPANSION PRIOR TO CHANGING THE ZONING FOR THIS TYPE OF PROJECT. WILL ROWLETT ROAD IS NOT RECEIVE REPAIRS NEEDED THAN THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ADDED BY THE EVERGREEN APARTMENTS HAS LED TO FURTHER DETERIORATION IT WITH THE OPENING OF THE NEW LIBRARY AND RECENT ADDITION OF THE CITY OFFICESLOCATED , THE NEEDS OF THE ROAD HAVE BECOME MORE OBVIOUS THAN EVER. BEFORE CHANGING ZONING RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPOSED PROPERTY, I STRONGLY URGE THE CITY TO FIRST INVEST IN THE ROADS BUT LASTLY, I BELIEVE APARTMENT HOMES WILL LOWER THE VALUES OF THE HOMES IN FLOWER HILL AND LIBERTY CREEK NEIGHBORHOODS BUT ACCORDING TO A 2016 STUDY PUBLISHED BY REALTOR.COM WITH A LEADING CAUSE A LOWER PROPERTY VALUES IS A HIGH CONCENTRATION OF RENTAL UNITS. IS ANOTHER LINK PROVIDED I WILL SEND TO YOU BUT AS A HOMEOWNER WHO PURCHASED MY HOME AT THE PEAK OF THE HOUSING MARKET, I'M COUNTING ON PROPER MANAGEMENT TO PROTECT THE VALUE OF MY INVESTMENT. IT'S IN THE CITIES BEST INTEREST TO PROTECT PROPERTY VALUES AS THAT PROTECTS THE TAX REVENUETHAT KEEPS OUR CITY OPERATING AT ITS FINEST . NEXT COMMENT. KATIE PROFITS 3506 TWO TO THE BRAIN OR I'LL LET. AND LINDA IN THE DISASTER SINCE 2009 IMMIGRANT PARENTS LIVED HERE FOR SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE ME. MY PROPERTY BACKS UP TO THE FIELDS AREA THAT USED TO BE A HORSE PASTURE PAREN I'M WRITING TODAY REGARDING THE PROPOSED REZONING CLOSE TO MY HOME FOR CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENT FOR THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN JULY AND VOTED DOWN. BUT TO OUR COLLECTIVE NEIGHBORHOODS SURPRISE, CYPRESS

[01:15:08]

CREEK IS BACK TO TRY AGAIN. THIS WAS ALL HANDLED IN A SHADY MANNER AND AM VERY DISAPPOINTED IT IS EVEN UP FOR DISCUSSION AGAIN. THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS WHY THIS IS NOT A GOOD IDEA AT THIS LOCATION WOULD FIRST OF ALL, I BELIEVE THE PROXIMITY OF AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE PROPERTY VALUES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WILL LEAD TO AN INCREASE OF CRIME IN THE AREA. WE ALREADY HAVE ISSUES WITH CAR BREAK-INS AND PROPERTY DAMAGE THE POLICE CANNOT MITIGATE. SECOND, THERE WILL BE A LARGE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC IN THE ARE , WHICH IS SMALL ROADS ARE NOT EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THE REAL WE ARE TO HAVE INCREASED TRAFFIC FROM THE NEW OFFICES AND SENIOR LIVING.

THIRD, BUILDING APARTMENT COMPLEX WILL CAUSE IRREPARABLE DAMAGE TO NATURE INCLUDING A LOSS OF TREES IN MANY CREATURES THAT LIVE IN THE AREA. THE PASTOR IS PART OF WHAT MADE ROWLETT BEAUTIFUL. RELIES ROWLETT 2020 FRAMEWORK INCLUDED EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS USING THE NATIONAL ASSETS AND BALANCING GROWTH THE PROPOSED REZONING APARTMENT CONSTRUCTION DOES NOT SUPPORT THOSE VALUES ALL PRINT THERE PLENTY OF OTHER LOCATIONS IF YOU BELIEVE CYPRESS CREEK IS GOOD FOR OUR CITY BASED ON THE HISTORY I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY ARE.

I'M CONCERNED WITH WHAT THE AREA IT IS BECOMING AND ASKING YOU TO PLEASE VOTE NO TO THE PROPOSED REZONING AND TO CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS. NEXT COMMENT.

THERESE YUNKER PLEASE CONTINUE TO ADHERE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND TURNED DOWN THE PROPOSED CYPRESS CREEK MULTIFAMILY UNIT PROJECT TO BE BUILT ON LAND AT ROWLETT ROAD WE CURRENTLY LIVE IN THE SUBDIVISION ADJACENT TO THE SITE AND ARE OPPOSED TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AS WE FEEL A LARGEMULTIFAMILY APARTMENT PROJECTIS NOT THE BEST OPTION FOR THE SPACE BUT PLEASE KEEP THE LAND ZONED AS IS FOR RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL OFFICE DEVELOPMENT . NEXT COMMENT . ELIZABETH, A RESIDENT OF THE FLOWER HILL SUBDIVISION IN WRITING TODAY EXPRESS MY EXTREME DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED REZONING FOR THEIR CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENT THE INFLUX OF TRAFFIC WAS COMPLEX WOULD BRING WILL CONTRAST THE SMALL ROAD ROUTE 1 THAT ALREADY BACKS UP AT GEORGE BUSH TO THE EAST AND ROWLETT ROAD TO THE WEST. AND 30 SUBJECT TO SPEEDING AND RECKLESS DRIVING. MY HUSBAND WAS REAR ENDED WAS STOPPED WAITING FOR A CAR TO TURN INTO LIBERTY CREEK SUBDIVISION. THESE TYPES WILL BECOME COMMONPLACE WITH THE ADDITION OF THIS COMPLEX. PLEASE CONSIDER THE IMPACT THIS REZONING WILL HAVE ON THE CURRENT RESIDENTS ON AROUND BIG A ROAD AND VOTE NOBODY REZONING IS NOT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE YOU'VE BEEN CHOSEN TO REPRESENT.

NEXT COMMENT. LAUREN FRANKS, 5813 IRISH DRIVE.

I AM WRITING TO VOICE MY OPINION IS A RESIDENT LIVING NEAR THE GATE AND RELLA RODRIGUEZ EVERY HAS HEAVY TRAFFIC FLOW, POOR STREETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE AND CHANGING THE COMMERCIAL AREA TO MULTI-HOUSING IS WIDELY YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE.

OUR LOCAL AREA IS OVERSATURATED WITH DEPARTMENT ALREADY AND THERE'S PLENTY OF FREE SPACE IN OTHER AREAS OF ROWLETT. LIKE WATERVIEW. THAT WOULD BENEFIT MORE FROM HOUSING DIVERSITY. ALSO WITH THE RETIREMENT FACILITY THE CITY OFFICES RECENTLY BUILT HERE WE HAVE SEEN INCREASE DISPLAYS WILDLIFE, WHICH IS CAUSED OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ANIMALS TO GO MISSING OR BECOME INJURED IN LARGE TREE RATS DESPERATE FOR RESTING AND IRRESPONSIBLE TO ADD 200+ HOUSING UNITS IN THE SMALL SPACE THAT IS BEAMING WITH THRIVING COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ALREADY PURELY ASK THAT YOU PLEASE VOTE NO TO THIS CHANGE AND KEEP THE SECTION OF LAND COMMERCIAL BUT I AM OFFENDED THEY ARE SCREENING THE ORIGINAL RULING BY DOING A SMALL OFFICE SPACE OR TWO TO GET AROUND THE ZONING THIS QUEST. NEXT COMMENT. BIANCA.

LIVE IN THE FLOWER HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ADJACENT TO BIG A ROAD AND THE PLANNING COMMUNITY OF CYPRESS CREEK THAT I'M WRITING TO OPPOSE THE COMMUNITY AS I BELIEVE IT WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I AM NEW TO ROWLETT AND HAVE BEEN HERE FOR OVER A YEAR.

THE SMALL TOWN CHARM FACTOR WAS A HUGE PART OF MY HUSBAND AND I DECIDED ON THE TOWN PRETTY FROM A SMALL TOWN SOUTH OF HOUSTON AND IT REMINDED HIM OF HOME. COUPLED WITH THE DOOR IN THE 15 MINUTE COMMUTE FOR MYSELF, WITHOUT WE FOUND THE IDEAL PLACE TO PUT DOWN ROOTS AND START A FAMILY. ONE OF THE THINGS I LOVE ABOUT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS BIG A ROAD AND HOW I CAN TAKE IT TO SO MANY PLACES HERE IN ROWLETT PUYALLUP DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD AND FEELING LIKE A LITTLE NEWER BUT YET BE SO CLOSE TO EVERYTHING.

CYPRESS CREEK IS NOT ONLY A THREAT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUT TO OUR TOWN WITH VERY LITTLE IS LEFT OF THE SMALL TOWN CHARM OF RELLA. THE LAND THAT IS LEFT IS BEING SWALLOWED UP IN DESTROYING THE INTEGRITY OF THIS TOWN. I'VE HEARD COUNTLESS PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY MISS THE WAY THE TOWN WAS NOT EVEN FIVE YEARS AGO AND WHAT YOU MAY CALL PROGRESS IS THE MEANING OF WHAT THE TOWN HOLDS DEAR SMALL TOWN FAMILY VALUES IN A CLOSE KNIT COMMUNITY SURROUNDED BY OPEN NATURE BUT I HAVE SEEN HOW PROGRESS IS TREATED FROM IMPROPER FOR A TALK AND JUST HE SEVEN YEARS AGO AND WAS PLACE TO BE.

I KNEW OF LIFE BROUGHT ME BACK OVER HERE AND WANTED TO SETTLE IN THE AREA WHEN IT DID I WAS APPALLED THE PROGRESS THE CITY HAD MADE. I REFUSE TO GO THROUGH AT ANY

[01:20:14]

TIME THE DATE AND I GREW UP IN FORT WORTH AND WAS TAUGHT TO NOT GO ANYWHERE EAST OF I-35 BECAUSE OF HOW DANGEROUS IT IS. THAT IS NOT SAYING MUCH. I GOTTA FIND A SAFE PLACE IN ROWLETT BELLOWING CYPRESS CREEK AND YOU WILL BE ALLOWED THE DEVALUING OF A NEIGHBORHOOD IN TOWN KNOWN WANT TO COME TO DELIVER VISIT. YOU WILL TURN THIS TOWN INTO AN AREA THAT IS IS RUNDOWN IS A SET OF FORT WORTH. RECORDS WILL MEN DO EVERYONE LEAVE BY 4:30 P.M. EVERYDAY BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN IT STARTED GETTING DANGEROUS GOOD OR OF ALL THE SCHOOLS ON THE REQUIREMENT. MANY ARE BECOMING IF YOU.

THAT IS WHAT YOU RISK TURNING SCHOOLS INTO BY ALLOWING CYPRESS CREEK IN OUR TOWN.

EMPLOYEE NOT TO ALLOW CYPRESS CREEK IN OUR TOWN NEIGHBORHOOD. BY DOING SO YOU WILL BE DRIVING OUR HARD-WORKING FAMILIES WHO GIVEN THE TOWN SO MUCH AND YOU WILL BE STORING THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION TOWN HAS TO OFFER AFFECTING THE EDUCATION OF OUR CHILDREN TO THE FUTURE THE TOWN, STATE AND COUNTRY. THE ONE THAT BLOOD ON YOUR HANDS? DO WOULD BE CAUGHT RED-HANDED WITH A TONE EDUCATION SYSTEM FALLS FLAT AND WHEN BUSINESSES FAIL, WHICH BY THE WAY THERE ARE SO MANY EMPTY STOREFRONTS IN THIS TOWN AND THINK THAT IS A LITTLE MORE PRESSING THAN THESE APARTMENTS PUT ALL THIS WILL BE A NEW AND WHEN YOU NEED HELP TO TURN THE TOWN AROUND THAT YOU DESTROYED YOU WON'T HAVE ANYWHERE TO TURN TO BECAUSE WE WILL ALL BE GONE BECAUSE YOU DROVEUS OUT . NEXT COMMENT.

MARY COBB TOURNAMENT 30 YEAR RESIDENT FLOWER HILL. ONE OF THE ORIGINAL.

AND TERRIBLY DISAPPOINTED IN MY CITY FOR TRYING TO SNEAK THESE APARTMENTS THROUGH ON THE CORNER OF BIG A IN ROWLETT ROAD COULD WE THOUGHT THIS HAD BEEN DECIDED WE WERE PLEASED TO THINKER CITY HAD LISTENED US SO WE WRITING TO INFORM YOU YOUR ANSWER HAS NOT CHANGED AND WE DO NOT APPROVE THE ZONING FOR APARTMENTS IN THE CORNER OF BIG A AND ROWLETT ROAD COULD BE EXPECTED AS WORDS LIKE THEIR JOBS DEPEND ON IT BECAUSE THEY DO.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. NEXT COMMENT. JEREMY DONOVAN.

I VOTE NO FOR MORE APARTMENTS A BIG A AND ROWLETT ROAD. THANK YOU.

NEXT COMMENT. TARA ANDERSON 2617 VITAMIN CONSUMER MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PEER THE CITY HAS BECOME A BACKUP OF THIS TYPE HOUSING PEOPLE EVERYWHERE.

WE DON'T HAVE THE ROADS AREA TO BUILD MORE ROADS TO HANDLE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC TO STOP THE HOUSING ONE. INCREMENTS MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS PUBLISHED WEEKLY. WE DO NOT NEED ANYMORE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING.

PLEASE STOP TRYING TO MAKE IS NEW YORK CITY . SHARON MARINO CORNERSTONE CHURCH MEMBER OF FLOWER HILL. I DO NOT SUPPORT A NEW A COUPLE APARTMENT COMPLEX OFF BIG A ROAD AN OLD ROWLETT ROAD. NEXT COMMENT. JIMMY CARTER AND CT DIRECTOR BUT IN THE BUSINESS OF THE LOOK AT 37 AND TO BE A ROAD AND I'M EXTREMELY AND COMPLETELY AGAINST THE PROPOSAL OF REZONING THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THE CYPRESS STREET APARTMENTS. THEY HAVE NOT CONDUCTED A BUSINESS OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPOSED SITE APPEARED AFTER CALLING THEM OUT ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND SENDING THEM AN EMAIL AFTER FINDING OUT THEY WERE HAVING ANOTHER MEETING FOR TWO DAYS LATER THEY CAME TO PUT FLYERS ON OUR DOORS. THIS WAS THE SAME ON THEIR LAST PROPOSAL AS WELL.

THAT HAD NO INTENTION OF COMMUNICATING WITH US. I HAVE BEEN A SMALL BUSINESS FOR 13 YEARS WITH RAPID ORTHOPEDIC SUPPLIES YOU MIGHT SPEND THE NIGHT IN A SMALL SALTWATER AQUARIUM STORE OF HIGHWAY 66 MANY YEARS AGO. WITH OUR CURRENT BUSINESS WE RENTED FOR 10 YEARS. AFTER NUMEROUS INCIDENTS AFTER DOCUMENT WE DECIDED IT WAS BEST TO LOOK ELSEWHERE. IT WAS NOT IN THE WAREHOUSE DISTRICT.

AFTER A LOT OF DIFFERENT CHURCHES AND CONSIDERATIONS WE DECIDED TO PURCHASE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING OFF BIG A ROAD. WAS VERY OUT OF DATE AND YOU DID A LOT OF WORK, BUT WE MADE IT BEAUTIFUL. WE LOVE THE AREAS AROUND THE BUILDING REZONED COMMERCIAL USE AND WHEN YOU THIS AREA WOULD BE BRING GROWTH AND WE ARE BEEN EXCITED AT THE POTENTIAL. OUR BUSINESS HIGHLY RELIES ON CLINICS, PHYSICAL THERAPISTS, CHIROPRACTORS ETC. WE TOOK ALL THIS INTO CONSIDERATION BASED ON WHERE WE DECIDED TO PURCHASE. WE ALSO THE STOREFRONT SO SURROUNDINGS MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

WE COULD'VE EASILY MOVED HER BUSINESS TO GARLAND OR ROCKWELL FOR ABETTER CURB APPEAL .

SINCE WE LIVE IN ROWLETT AND HAVE FOR OVER 30 YEARS, WE WANTED TO CONTINUE TO HAVE ROWLETT AS OUR BUSINESS HOME. WE ALREADY HAVE ISSUES ON BIG A WOOD CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC, TRASH, SPEEDING, PEOPLE DRINKING IN THE PARKING LOT TO LIVE IN THE BOTTLES OVER THE WEEKEND ETC. THIS IS A BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND COULD HAVE SO MUCH BUSINESS POTENTIAL, BUT WE NEED THE SUPPORT FROM OUR CITY AND WE NEED FOR THE PROPOSAL TO BE DENIED SO YOUR BUSINESSES WILL CONDUCT BUSINESS HERE IN YOUR CITY FOR YEARS AND YEARS TO A COMMODITY TO YOUR COMMUNITY AND CONTINUE TO DRIVE. WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER SET OF

[01:25:05]

APARTMENTS FOR THE SCHOOLS REPACKED FOR THIS PROPERTIES MY INVESTMENT IN MY FUTURE AND THE FUTURE OF MY COMPANY AND PEOPLE I EMPLOY. I NEED TO BE ABLE TO PREDICT THAT. WE HAVE ENOUGH APARTMENTS ARE READY WE NEED MORE BUSINESSES.

YOU WANT TO PUT MORE APARTMENTS OR, PUT THEM IN RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES.

NEXT COMMENT. MEGAN RIDDLE. THIS EMAIL IS IN REGARDS TO THE COMPANY NAME BONNER CARRINGTON TRYING TO BUILD A TAX CREDIT PROPERTY IN ROWLETT.

THEY WILL CALL IT CYPRESS CREEK REPORT FOR THIS COMMITTEE FOR ALMOST A YEAR AND WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE BUILDOUT. THEY ARE A TERRIBLE COMPANY. FIRST OFF, THEY WERE TRYING TO MAKE ME NOT ACCEPT SERVICE ANIMALS, WHICH IS A CONSOLE. HEY DISMISSED AND CONTINUED TO TELL ME TO TURN AWAY ANYONE WITH A SERVICE ANIMAL AND ONLY EMOTIONAL SUPPORT ANIMALS WERE ALLOWED WITH A DOCTOR'S NOTE. DIDN'T TELL THE CITY THIS IN THE BEGINNING BEFORE CONSTRUCTION AND DECIDED TO CHANGE THE RULES, WHICH WAS AGAINST THE LAW.

THE TWO BUILDINGS FLOODED AND THEY TOOK SO LONG TO REPAIR AND DIDN'T REPAIR IT QUICKLY THAT RESIDENTS HAD MOLD IN THE BODY BEEN SEEN BY RESIDENT FORMAL AND ENDED UP SETTLING OUT OF COURT. APARTMENT WALLS ARE NOTICEABLY UNEVEN AND NOT STRAIGHTALTERING ONE APARTMENT A PART OF THE PLUMBING STICKING OUT OF THE WALL BEHIND THE TOILET AND REFUSED TO FIX IT BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE DETERRED ON THE WHOLE WALL .

THEY CLAIM TO BE A CHRISTIAN COMPANY BUT I QUICKLY NOTICED THE TALK BUT DON'T WALK THEWALK . NOTHING IS DONE ON TIME AND WHEN IT WAS THE AMENITIES WERE NOT.O GET SEVERAL CALLS CONSTANTLY FROM BURGLARY AND DOMESTIC.

CITY RESIDENTS ARE NOT HAPPY BECAUSE IT IS BROUGHT A LOT OF CRIME TO THE AREA DUE TO THE LENIENCY ON CRIMINAL RECORDS AND RESIDENTS OF A NONRESIDENT LIVE WITH THEM THAT WOULD OTHERWISE NOT PASS A PROCESS. THE TRADABLE SENIOR PROPERTY HERE IN ALL THEISSUES WITH THE CURRENT PROPERTY IT WAS TO CLIMB ANYWAYS, JUST THOUGHT I WOULD GET THE WARNING AFTER THAT THEY ARE BAD NEWS. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO REACH OUT FOR QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS.

NEXT COMMENT. KIM RIGHT. I AM WRITING TO VOICE MY OPINION. THIS AREA ON HIS TRAFFIC FLOW, POOR STREETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE. BY CHANGING THIS TO A MULTI-HOUSING IS EXTREMELY IRRESPONSIBLE. OUR AREA IS OVERSATURATED WITH DEPARTMENTS AND THEREFORE OTHER AREAS IN ROWLETT SUCH AS ONE OF YOU THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM WAREHOUSING DIVERSITY APPEARED WITH THE APARTMENTS AND CITY OFFICES RECENTLY JUST BUILT IN THIS AREA, WE ARE SEEN DISPLACED WILDLIFE, COYOTES FOR ONE. WHICH CAUSE NEIGHBORING PETS TO GO MISSING OR INJURED ALONG WITH AN INCREASE IN LARGE THROUGHOUT SPIRIT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO ADD TO AN PLUS HOUSING UNIT IN SUCH A SMALL AREA OVERLY THRIVING COMMERCIALLY. TO ASK YOU TO HONOR OUR REQUEST IS FOR BUSINESS FOR THE CITIZENS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO VOTE NO AND KEEP HIS LINE COMMERCIALLY ZONED.

NEXT COMMENT. COURTNEY COX. AM A RESIDENT IN FIREHOUSE SUBDIVISION OFFER A LOT ROAD EARLIER THIS YEAR THERE WAS A MEETING AND DISCUSSION OF REZONING THE AREA OFF BIG A THREAT AS AN EMAIL AND REQUEST FOR A VOTE OF NO AT THAT TIME.

WRITING AGAIN FOR A VOTE NO THERE THERE WERE SEVERAL REASONS WHY I'M GOOD SO CYPRESS CREEK PLAN TO USE BIG A AN OLD ROWLETT ROAD EVERY SINGLE DAY. THOSE ROADS ARE OLD BEAT UP WITH POOR INFRASTRUCTURE. THE CITY OFFICES THAT HAVE MOVED OVER TO THIS AREA IN THE BUILDING AS A SENIOR LIVING FACILITY EVERGREEN TO ROWLETT, THE ROADS WERE DESTROYED MANY POTHOLES AND WEAR AND TEAR ON A USED ROAD. I DID NOT THINK THAT ADDING TO THE AREA OF AN APARTMENT WAS TERRIBLE IDEA. ISAVAILABLE IN THE LAND IS NOT SUITED FOR EVEN MORE TRAFFIC IN THE AREA. IT IS WIDELY IRRESPONSIBLE GREAT WE'VE SEEN AN INCREASE IN WILDLIFE THE MISSING PETS DO MANY COYOTES AND OTHER WILDLIFE THAT HAS BEEN DISPLACED AND ALL THE OTHER NEW DEVELOPMENT. ADDING ANOTHER APARTMENT SPACE AND CREATE MORE CONCRETE IN THE TOWN AND LOSE MORE NATURE BUT I CHOOSE A LEAF AND FLOWER HILL BECAUSE THE COMMUNE IS TO MY JOB AT ROWLETT HIGH SCHOOL. GROWING UP IN ROWLETT WAS A HUGE BLESSING YOUR DATA SMALL TOWN FEEL BUT NEVER FELT WAS LACKING ANYTHING.

MANY PEOPLE KNEW EACH OTHER AND CONTINUE TO BE CLOSE-KNIT COMMUNITY.

AS I'VE SEEN MORE AND MORE APARTMENTS LIVING SPACES FOR LOWER INCOME FAMILIES, OUR SMALL TOWN TERM HAS DISTRIBUTED 200+ APARTMENT COMPLEX IS A TERRIBLE IDEA NO MATTER WHAT THE BUILDING COMPANY SAYS AND OFFERS THE CITY, ADDING ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX ON THE SITE IS CLEARLY BECOMING ABOUT MONEY AND IF THE DEVELOPMENT IS APPROVED I WILL LOOK ELSEWHERE TO LIVE AND PAY MY TAXES TO AND LOOK FOR A PLACE WITH LOWER WATER BILLS AND RATES.

[01:30:06]

THERE IS PLENTY OF FREE SPACE IN OTHER AREAS. URGE YOU TO VOTE NO AND NO TO THE DEVELOPERS OF CYPRESS CREEK. PLEASE BE A RESPONSIBLE SPACE.

LOOK TO OUR OPINIONS AND VOICES BEFORE AGREEING TO THIS. WHATEVER THE BUILDIN IS GIVING A PROMISING BY THE DEAL IS NOT WORTH UPSETTING RESIDENT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.THE DEVELOPER HAS NO INTEREST IN HELPING ROWLETT BY CHOOSING LOCATIONFOR THIS IDEA.

PLEASE HELP ROWLETT AND SAY NO . NEXT COMMENT.

Z FERNANDA SPIRIT IN WRITING TO SAY NO BECAUSE THE BUILDING OF CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS BUT AS A RESIDENT LIVING IN BEING A OLD ROWLETT ROAD, THE AREA HAS HEAVY TRAFFIC FLOW FROM POOR STREETS OF INFRASTRUCTURE IN CHANGING THE COMMERCIAL AREA IS IRRESPONSIBLE FOR THE LOCAL AREA IS OVERSATURATED WITH DEPARTMENTS ALREADY IN THIS PLENTY OF SPACE IN OTHER AREAS LIKE WATERVIEW THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM WAREHOUSING DIVERSITY.

ALSO, WITH THE RETIREMENT FACILITY IS A OFFICES RECENTLY BUILT RIGHT HERE, WE HAVE SEEN INCREASED DISPLACED WILDLIFE PRODUCER RESPONSIBLE TO ADD 200 HOUSING UNITS WITH ONE LANE INCOMING AND OUTGOING TRAFFIC AND PEOPLE USE IT FOR ACCESS TO THE TOLLWAY AND HAS CREATED A HEAVY TRAFFIC FLOW JUST TO GET TO THE SHOPPING STRIP FOR THIS AREA IS BEAMING WITH THRIVING COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ALREADY. WE ASK THAT YOU PLEASE FOOTNOTED THIS CHANGE INCH KEEP THAT SECTION OF LAND COMMERCIAL.NANCY POT! MY HUSBAND AND I LIVE IN FLOWER HILL. THE ALREADY, IF THE COMPLEX THAT HOUSES SENIORS.

WE DO NOT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM NEED ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX IN THE CITY AND HAVE NO INFRASTRUCTURE TO HANDLE MORE APARTMENTS APPEARED WE HAVE NO MAJOR RESTAURANTS OF THE FAST FOOD WE HAVE OVER 18 DENTISTS AND YETYOU REFUSE TO BRING A MAJOR GROCERY STORE .

PLEASE NO MORE APARTMENTS. GEORGE BERNARD. I'M SITTING MY OPINION AGAIN IS A BUILDERS ARE TRYING TO SLIDE UNDER THE RADAR FOR THE LOCATION OFPOPULATION IS NOT CHAINED TO WHY THE PROPOSAL SHOULD . DECIDE IF ROWLETT IS OUR FAIR SHARE OF APARTMENTS. PERHAPS WATERVIEW HAS SPACE AVAILABLE.

VACANT OFFICE SPACE BUT ONLY FEW PARKWAY SO THAT INCLUSION IS NOT A STRONG SELLING POINT TO THE GET THE EXAMPLES PURSUIT OF A BUILDING THE COMMERCIAL FOR SCHOOL REMAINS OPEN ãEMPTY THREE YEARS LATER THE COMPANY IS NOT GOOD FOR ROWLETT. PLEASE VOTE NO FOR ASSISTANCE IN LIVING IN THE ADJACENT COMMUNITY, I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE THE PROPERTIES LISTED IN BIG A AN OLD ROWLETT TO MULTIFAMILY. BIG EIGHT IS A SMALL ROAD, ONE STEP ABOVE AN ALLEY. CANNOT AND WILL NOT HANDLETHAT MUCH TRAFFIC .HERE ARE NO APARTMENTS GOING UP IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS AROUND ROWLETT. HOW ABOUT GIVING A CHANCEL THOSE GROW AND SEE WHAT CHANGES ARE NEEDED TO BOTH THROW SYSTEMS AS WELL AS OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM IN ROWLETT FOR THE AREA IS NOT EQUIPPED TO HANDLE THAT MUCH GROWTH IN A SMALL AMOUNT OF TIME. AS A NEW RESIDENT OF ROWLETT, I FEEL COMPELLED TO RESPOND TO THE PROPOSAL FROM CYPRESS CREEK. I RECENTLY MOVED FROM MESQUITE WHERE A COMPANY PROMOTES APARTMENTS GOT TURNED DOWN. THEY THEN CHANGE TO INCLUDE COMMERCIAL LOAN GROWTH FOR THROUGH THE WERE APPROVED AND FIVE YEARS LATER THE COMMERCIAL LEVEL IS FOR COMPARED PLEASE THINK ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY. IT IS NOT LARGE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE MAJOR TRAFFIC. IN ADDITION, WITH MULTIPLE COMPLEXES BEING BUILT CURRENTLY BETWEEN NOTES ON ROWLETT ROAD IN THE COMPLEX IN DOWNTOWN SIMILAR TO THIS PROPOSAL WE ARE GETTING HUNDREDS OF NEW UNITS TO PERHAPS WATERVIEW OR FOR THE NORTHEAST WOULD BE A BETTER CHOICE. WAITING TO SEE HOW SCHOOLS JUST BEFORE ADDING MORE FAMILIES TO THE MIX. PLEASE VOTE NO TO THE NEW PROPOSAL.

NEXT COMMENT. PATRICIAN, 3508 LOCUST STREET RELATIVE.

11TH FLOWER HOOD NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I DO NOT WANT CYPRESS CREEK MIXED-USE DEPARTMENTS OR ANY OTHER APARTMENTS MIXED USE OR NOT BUILT AT THE LOCATION OF OLD ROWLETT ROAD FOR THE DEVELOPER WAS ALREADY TOLD IN THE FIRST REZONING MEETING THE PROBLEM WITH THE APARTMENTS WITH THE LOCATION PROVIDE NO OTHER CONGESTION AND MIXED USE HIGH DENSITY HOUSING COMPLEX WOULD BRING ON THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN FLOWER HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.

PLEASE VOTE NO . NEXT COMMENT. ROSS HUNTER.

IS A CITIZEN OF ROWLETT, I WOULD EMPLOYEE TO VOTE NO ON THE APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT.

THANK YOU. NEXT COMMENT. BOB AND KAY CONTROL.

FLOWER HILL NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M WRITING TO VOICE MY OPINION IS RESIDENT LIVING NEAR THE GATE FOR THIS AREA HAS HEAVY TRAFFIC FLOW. CHANGING THE COMMERCIAL AREA

[01:35:06]

INTO MULTI-HOUSING IS UNTHINKABLE. IT IS HARD TO IMAGINE AN ADDITIONAL 400+ VEHICLES TRYING TO USE THE TWO LANE STREET DAILY.

ARE LOCAL AREAS ARE OVERSATURATED WITH APARTMENTS BEING BUILT FOR THIS PLENTY OF FREE SPACE IN OTHER AREAS LIKE WATERVIEW THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM WAREHOUSING DIVERSITY.

WE RECENTLY SEEN INCREASED TRAFFIC WITH THE EVERGREEN OFFICES BUT WHY HERE.

AS A RESULT OF THESE TWO NEW BUILDINGS ON OLD ROWLETT ROAD, LOSING INCREASED DISPLACED WILDLIFE, WHICH IS COST OF NEIGHBORHOOD ANIMALS TO GO MISSING OR BECOME INJURED IN LARGE TREE RATS DESPERATE FOR NESTING SPACE. BE RESPONSIBLE TO ADD ADDITIONAL UNITS IN THE SMALL SPACE THAT IS BEAMING WITH THRIVING COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ALREADY. WE ASK YOU PLEASE VOTE NO TO THIS CHANGE AND KEEP THE SECTION OFLAND COMMERCIAL . NEXT COMMENT. CARLOS FERNANDEZ WILL FLOWER HILL NEIGHBORHOOD. MY NAME IS CARLOS FERNANDEZ AND I RESIDE IN THE FLOWER HILL NEIGHBORHOOD. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT SINCE 1977 AND DECIDED TO LIVE IN ROWLETT DUE TO ITS SMALL TOWN FEEL. AM WRITING TODAY TO VOICE MY OPINION AS TO WHY I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE PLAN APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT AT ALL ROWLETT ROAD IN BIG A ROLE.

FIRST OFF, THE PARCEL LAND IS WAY TOO SMALL FOR AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH 248 UNITS AS PROPOSED BY CYPRESS CREEK. WE CURRENTLY HAVE FOUR STREETS IN THE AREA AND OVERCROWDING DUE TO THE EVERGREENSENIOR LIVING COMPLEX. TRAFFIC AND ALL THE CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC ON BIG A ROAD FROM PEOPLE TRYING TO GET TO PRESIDENT .

TO THE AREA MAKES NO SENSE AND IS UNLOADED. SECONDLY, AT A MORE AFFORDABLE AND MARKET RATE RENTAL HOUSING ONLY HURTS THE SURROUNDING AREAS PROPERTY VALUES AND ADVICE HIGHER CRIME RATES FOR CRIME STATISTICS HAVE SHOWN MULTIFAMILY HOUSING SUCH AS CYPRESS CREEK BREEDING GROUND FOR PROPERTY CRIME SUCH AS VEHICLE BURGLARIES AND CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS SUCH AS ROBBERIES AND AGGRAVATED ASSAULT RETURNED AND HAS AN OBLIGATION TO KEEP A SAFE AND ALLOWING CYPRESS CREEK TO BE BUILT WILL ONLY PUT A BIGGER STRAIN ON OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. I ATTENDED THE CITY COUNCIL SESSION VIRTUALLY THAT DISCUSSED THIS PROPOSAL PREVIOUSLY ON EVERY BALLOT CITIZEN SIGNED UP TO SPEAK OPPOSE THE DEVELOPMENT. I HOPE AND PRAY THAT SEVEN MORE CITIZENS WILL COMMIT AGAIN TO MAKE OUR VOICES HEARD AND SAY NO.

IN CONCLUSION, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK CITY COUNCIL IN OUR CITY LEADERS FOR THEIR TIME AND OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. AND GREATLY OPPOSED TO ALLOW ANY MULTIFAMILY HOUSING TO BE BUILT IN THE PARCEL OF LAND AND WOULD LIKE FOR THE PROPERTY WERE TO REMAIN ZONED COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE. NEXT COMMENT. I AM WRITING IN TO VOICE MY OBJECTIONS TO THE APARTMENTS NEAR BIG A AN OLD RELIC ROAD WELL IT IS ALREADY FILLED WITH APARTMENTS. RETIREMENT FACILITY IS ENOUGH FOR THEM I WOULD MUCH RATHER SEE THE ART ARNOLD EDWARDS PART COME TO FRUITION. WOULD LIKE THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO KEEP THE PMC DISTRICT WOULD BE COMMERCIAL ONLY AND THE VOTE NO ON RESTRICTING THE ZONE FROM CYPRESS CREEK. NEXT COMMENT.

RANDY TRAVIS. PLEASE DON'T DO THAT TO ROWLETT FOR IN THIS IS A SMALL COMMUNITY WE ARE ALREADY GETTING CROWDED WITH ALL THE APARTMENTS IN NEW BUILDINGS AND OFFICE SPACE. ROWLETT WAS A SUPER NICE AND AWESOME CITY.

WE DON'T NEED TO OVERLOAD IT WITH MORE APARTMENTS. VOTE NO, PLEASE, AND SAVE OUR CITY. NEXT COMMENT. CHARLES HINTON 3506.

I AM ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THE CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS AND ADDING HIGH DENSITY HOUSING WILL ONLY EXASPERATE THE CITY INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS ALREADY OVERTAXED THROUGH THE WATER PRESSURE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD IS TERRIBLE AND ADDING APARTMENTS WILL MAKE IT WORSE AND INCREASED TRAFFIC IS ALSO A VERY REAL ISSUE. THEY ARE REGULARLY RESIDENTS OF THE EVERGREEN APARTMENTS WRITING SCOOTERS AND WHEELCHAIRS ON BIG A AN OLD ROWLETT RUN. AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, SATAN IS VEHICLES IS OFTEN TIMES DIFFICULT AND ADDING THAT MUCH ADDITIONAL APARTMENT TRAFFIC TO THE MIX WILL MAKE LOOKING FOR THE EVERGREEN RESIDENCY THE MORE DIFFICULT. ADDITIONAL AUTOMOBILE TRAFFIC IN THE AREA IS NOT A GOOD IDEA. IN ADDITION TO BE IN A POST APARTMENTS IN GENERAL, THIS IS A RENT SUBSIDY PROJECT, WHICH MAKES IT EVEN MORE IMPACTFUL TO PROPERTY VALUES HOMES NEARBY PAIRED WITH THE EVERGREEN FACILITY BEING A RENT SUBSIDY FACILITY ALLOWING TO SUCH MULTIFAMILY LOCATED PROJECTS TO BE LOCATED LIBERALLY NEXT TO EACH OTHER IS UNFAIRLY DISCRIMINATORY TO THE CURRENT OWNERS WILL THE NEIGHBORHOODS ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED SITE.

WHILE THERE MAY BE SOME SHORT-TERM MONETARY BENEFITS, ON WHERE THE CITY WOULD RECEIVE THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS, LONG-TERM COST ASSOCIATED WITH RENT SUBSIDY

[01:40:02]

UNITS IS ALWAYS TOO HIGH.'VE SEEN MANY CHANGES IN THE 30+ YEARS I HAVE LIVED HERE BUT I AM SURE THAT PEOPLE HERE BEFORE THE AREA WAS DEVELOPED WITH SINGLE FAMILY HOMES NOT PLEASED TO SEE THE FARMER AND DISAPPEAR . SINGLE-FAMILY HOMEOWNERS GIVES PEOPLE A STAKE IN THE CITY ON A ONE TIME THE HOMES BEING BUILT ENDED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION OF BEING HIGHER-PRICED, WHICH HELPS EXISTING HOMEBOUND IS APPRECIATE.

NOW THE CITY IT IS BECOMING OVERRUN WITH APARTMENTS AND THAT'S THE WRONG DIRECTION.

SAY WHAT YOU WILL, BUT RENTERS ARE TRANSITORY. APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN GENERAL DO NOT AGE WELL AND WHEN SUBSIDY APARTMENTS DETERIORATE VERY RAPIDLY.

RENTERS DO NOT HAVE A STAKE IN THE CITY COMPARED TO HOMEOWNERS ANDPLEASE, I IMPLORE YOU, AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF ROWLETT TO NOT ALLOW THE CYPRESS CREEK APARTMENTS TO BE BUILT .

NEXT COMMENT. RYAN STANWYCK SPIRIT AM A RESIDENT OF ROWLETT.

I'M NOT SURE IF I AM FOLLOWING THE CORRECT PROCEDURE, BUT I WANTED NOT TO VOTE AGAINST THE PROPOSED REZONING OF THE 40 ACRE LOT LOCATED AT OLD ROWLETT ROAD AND BIG A ROAD THAT A VOTE AGAINST THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BROUGHT FORTH BY CYPRESS CREEK.

NEXT COMMENT. I AM OPPOSED TO THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLD ROWLETT ROAD AND VACATED ROAD TO MULTIUSE DEVELOPMENT FOR A TUNA 48 APARTMENT COMPLEX AND 31,000 SQUARE-FOOT COMMERCIAL AREA. SPECIFICALLY AS A RESIDENT AFTER FLOWER HILL, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT INCREASED WHERE ON OLD ROWLETT ROAD AND BIG A ROAD ADJACENT TO THE SITE, INCREASED TRAFFIC CONGESTION TO THE POINT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO LEAVE THE SUBDIVISION ONTO ROWLETT ROAD. DECREASED ABILITY TO USE VACATE ROAD TO GET TO TARGET LA FITNESS OR GEORGE BUSH ACCESS ROAD AND INCREASED SAFETY CONCERNS FOR RESIDENTS OF EVERGREEN IT MANY TIMES I ENCOUNTER INDIVIDUALS WRITING THE MOTORIZED WHEELCHAIRS ON OLD ROWLETT ROAD. AND ALSO OPPOSED TO MORE APARTMENT COMPLEXES IN THE AREA. WITH THE LAST YEAR I'VE SEEN MANY APARTMENT COMPLEXES CONSTRUCTED IN THE CITY, WHICH IS CHANGING ROWLETT SIGNIFICANTLY. FROM A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING COMMUNITY TO ONE EXPLODING WITH MULTIFAMILY UNITS. THESE COMPLEXES BRING WITH THEM A GREAT INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR SCHOOLS. BACK ELEMENTARY AND ROWLETT ELEMENTARY ARE ALREADY NEAR OR AT CAPACITY. I DO NOT WANT HAD MY PROPERTY TAXES CONTINUALLY INCREASING DUE TO THE CONTINUOUS NEED TO RESTRICT SCHOOLS BUT IT APPEARS THE ONLY INDIVIDUALS BENEFITING FROM THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE THE DEVELOPER. THOSE INDIVIDUALS WILL NOT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I LIVE IN AFTER THEY LEAVE AND I AND MY NEIGHBORS WILL BE LEFT WITH MORE ROADS, MORE CONGESTION, HIGHER PROPERT TAXES AND INCREASED CRIME RATE.

THE DEMAND FOR A FULL-SERVICE GROCERY STORE IN OUR AREA IS IN DIRE NEED SINCE ALBERTSONS LEFT AND WILL BE WHEN THE MASSIVE APARTMENTS ON MERCER ROAD ARE COMPLETED.

I ALSO UNDERSTAND IMMEDIATELY ACROSS THE ROAD NORTHWEST CORNER OF OLD ROWLETT ROADAND BIG A ROAD ANOTHER APARTMENT IS BEING CONSIDERED . CYPRESS CREEK, WHICH MAGNIFY MY CONCERNS AND REVIEW I AM CONCERNED ABOUT CONGESTION, ROAD WEAR AND TEAR, OLD ROWLETT ROAD AND BIG A ROAD ARE ALREADY FALLING APART AND CANUTE GENUINE INCREASE OF CRIME THAT USES OLD ROWLETT ROAD TO DRIVE THE TOWN AS WELL AS EXHILARATING PROPERTY TAXES REMOVED THE FLOWER HILL 1987 BECAUSE IT WAS A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING COMMUNITY RAPIDLY CHANGING FOR NO APPARENT REASON OTHER THAN FOR THE APPARENT BENEFIT THE DEVELOPERS THAT LIVE OUTSIDE THE COMMUNITY. THEY DO NOT HAVE BE LEFT WITH THE PROBLEMS AFTER LEAVING MANEUVERS AND I WILL BE. I WILL SUPPORT COMMERCIAL DEVELOP MEN BUT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO IT I ASKED THAT I GET A RESPONSE TO MY COMMENTS AS A CITIZEN OF ROWLETT IN THESE BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD.

AS I MENTIONED, I DO SUPPORT REZONING ON THE PROPERTY FOR LIMITED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LANDOWNER CAN SELL HIS PROPERTY FROM ROAD CONGESTION WILL BE LESS AND NOT HAVING 248 PERMANENT RESIDENCE CONSTANTLY LEAVING THE PROPERTY. SLOWLY PROPERTY TAX GROWTH DUE TO NOT ACCELERATING THE NEED FOR MORESCHOOLS . NEXT COMMENT.

BETH CROCKETT, 6401 BLUEBONNET DRIVE VALID. AM WRITING TO REGISTER MY OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE GAY AND ROWLETT ROAD. THIS DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES LIMITED COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE IN OVER 200 APARTMENTS FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES A CHANGE IN THE CURRENT ZONING OF COMMERCIAL BUSINESS AND IS NOT A GOOD USE OF THE LAND IN QUESTION.

BIG A ROAD IS A TWO LANE COUNTRY PLANE WITH NO GUTTERING OR SIDEWALKS.

THIS IS AND WILL USED BY THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO ACCESS THE TARGET SHOPPING CENTER.

I BELIEVE ADDING OVER 200 APARTMENTS IN ADDITION TO PROMOTIONAL BUSINESS SPACE WILL OVERLOAD THE COUNTRY LANE. WE DO NOT NEED THIS KIND OF TRAFFIC ON BIG A ROAD.

[01:45:07]

IT WILL CHANGE THE WHOLE AREA THE ONE BIG TRAFFIC JAM ON THE ROAD NEVER BUILT FOR SUCH A TRAFFIC LOAD AND IS NOT SUITABLE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT THAT I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST HE DENIES THE ZONING CHANGE TO SUCH A DENSE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA.

NEXT COMMENT. WE LIVE ON TO THE LANE AND FLOWER HILL HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT. MY NEIGHBORS AND I AGREE WE DO NOT WANT APARTMENT SUPER TRAFFIC IS ALREADY INCREASED QUITE A BIT SINCE THE SENIOR APARTMENTS HAVE BEEN BUILT AS WELL AS THE NEW OFFICE SPACE ACROSS FROM THE SENIOR APARTMENTS.

IS A SMALL STREET, WHICH IS OFTEN FALLING APART AND RIDDLED WITH POTHOLES AND CANNOT SUPPORT HUGE INFLUX OF TRAFFIC ON IT. BIG A IS NOT MUCH BETTER.

OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, AK HAS A LOT MORE TRAFFIC ON IT AND PEOPLE SPEED DOWN IT ALL THE TIME BUT I CAN'T COUNT HOW MANY TIMES ACCIDENTS HAVE NARROWLY BEEN AVOIDED BY PEOPLE SPEEDING DOWN BIG A. WE DON'T NEED MORE PEOPLE TRAVELING THE STREET. IN ADDITION TO TRAFFIC, CRIME AND INFRASTRUCTURE, WHAT ABOUT THE WILDLIFE GETTING MORE AND MORE DISPLACED.

WE HAVE COYOTES NOW ACTIVELY HUNTING OUR PETS. THEY ARE COMING INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE NIGHT AND DAY. WE HAVE RACCOONS, POSSUMS, TREE RATS ALL FIGHTING FOR SPACE TO LIVE IN NOW ENCROACHING ON OUR PROPERTIES BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO GO THROUGH THE SEVEN YEARS WE HAVE LIVED HERE, WE'VE SEEN A SERIOUS DECLINE IN PRODUCTIVITY IN OUR YARD FOR DESPITE ALL THE THEATERS WE HUNDRED NATURE IS EVEN TELLING ME KNOW. MOTOR SEVEN YEARS AGO BECAUSE WE LIKE THE SMALL TOWN FEEL THAT WE LOVE THE QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD WE WERE TOLD NOTHING WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD CROP WAS SUPPOSED TO BEBUILT BEHIND OUR HOME EVENTUALLY. NOW IT IS BEING GOBBLED UP BY APARTMENTS THAT WE UNDERSTAND GROWTH IS INEVITABLE . WE HAVE LIVED IN AREAS BEFORE THAT WERE ALL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ONCE APARTMENTS CAME INTO THE CRIME INCREASED.

WE ARE ALREADY SEEING CRIME INCREASE AFTER AS MORE AND MORE PEOPLE FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND RENT OUT THEIR HOMES. BRINGING APARTMENTS BY OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WILL NOT HELP INCREASE OUR HOME VALLEYS FOR THE HOMEOWNER WANTS TO LOOK OUT THE WINDOW AND INSTEAD OF SEEING TREES AND NATURE AIR FORCE TO LOOK AT AN APARTMENT BUILDING.

WE WERE HERE FIRST AND PAY A LOT FOR THAT. THIS IS NOT A WISE LOCATION TO PUT MORE APARTMENTS. WITH ALL THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS BEING BUILT AROUND HERE, YOU'RE INCREASING THE FRUSTRATION AND LIVES AT YOUR CURRENT RESIDENCE BY INCREASING TRAFFIC, MORE WEAR AND TEAR ON THE ROADS NOT GIVING US MORE TO ENJOY AND DO IN OUR OWN TOWN.

URROUNDING CITIESHAVE SO MANY OPTIONS FOR ENTERTAINMENT, BETTER DINING OPTIONS ETC. ARE APARTMENTS . WE ASK FOR YOU TO VOTE NO ON THIS APARTMENT PROJECT.

I KNOW MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORS ARE TALKING ABOUT MOVING OUT OF ROWLETT IF YOU APPROVE THE PROJECT. WE WILL AS WELL. WE DO NOT WANT MORE APARTMENTS, MORE TRAFFIC AND MORE CRIME. VOTE NO, REPRESENT THE RICHES OF YOUR CURRENT RESIDENCE.

AND APPARENT KIDSGETTING CLOSER TO THE AGE OF MOVEOUT BUT I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING APARTMENTS AND THEY HAVE A PLACE TO MOVE OUT TO , BUT THERE ARE SO MANY OPTIONS IN ROWLETT. WE DO NOT NEED THEM ON EVERY OTHER CORNER OR BARE SPOT OF LAND WITHIN OUR CITY. NEXT COMMENT. ANTONIO RIVERA.

EVERGREEN SENIOR LIVING. A GOOD SENSE IN BOTH COMMERCIAL AND COMPETITION AND LIVING ACCOMMODATION. I APPROVE IT. NEXT COMMENT.

CAROL DAILY. CONCERNING THE 4B HOUSING FOR SENIOR LIVING, THERE SHOULD BE STRONG BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR NO CRIMINALS MONITORING THAT ONLY VERIFIED RESIDENT SHOULD BE LIVING IN THEAPARTMENT . NEXT COMMENT. ANDY STRIKE.

3414 TO THE LANE ROWLETT. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, HERE WE ARE AGAIN DISCUSSING THE MERITS OF A REQUESTED ZONING CHANGE TO ALLOW MORE APARTMENTS.

FROM THE LOOKS OF IT, ROWLETT IS LOSING THE CURRENT BEDROOM COMMUNITY LOOK AND FEEL TO ALLOW MORE POPULATION DENSITY AND MORE TRAFFIC THAN IT IS CAPABLE OF SUPPORTING.

I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL OF THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT FOR THIS TRUCK ALAND.

TREND AND HAS WAY TOO MANY APARTMENTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION . WHEN WILL ROWLETTEVER ATTRACT MEANINGFUL COMMERCIAL BUSINESS . NEXT COMMENT.

DIANE ELLIS. PLEASE LET ME ADD MY NOTE TO THE LIST AGAINST THE ABOVE-MENTIONED REZONING PROPOSAL. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT. IS IN BAD NEED OF REPAIRS WITH LIMITED TRAFFIC AT PRESENT BUT ADDING TO THIS WILL INCREASE THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL AND CONTINUAL UPKEEP OF THE ROAD WIDENING THE EXPANDING AND POSSIBLY A TRAFFIC SIGNAL.

IS A SENIOR LIVING RESIDENCE AT THIS LOCATION. MANY OF THESE PEOPLE ARE ACCUSTOMED TO A QUIETER ATMOSPHERE AS A NECESSITY SOME WALK IN OR BY THEIR MOTORIZED CHORES CHAIRS TO GET GROCERIES AND MEDICAL NEEDS THROUGH THEY WILL BE SEVERELY IMPACTED WITH INCREASED TRAFFIC AND COMMOTION IN THE AREA. WILL IMPACT SAFETY FOR SOME.

WE ALL KNOW THAT MULTIFAMILY HOUSING BY SHEER NUMBERS INHERENTLY BRINGS INCREASED

[01:50:02]

NOISE CONGESTION, TRAFFIC WILL BE IMPACTED BY THIS. SCHOOL BUSES AND ALL KINDS OF ACTIVITY, INCREASED ACTIVITY WHICH WE DO NOT WANT, NEED OR CAN SUPPORT IN THE LIMITED LOCATION. AGAIN, PLEASE CONSIDER ALL SAFETY ISSUES.

WE HAVE A SOMEWHAT LOVELY VIEW OF A USEFUL PASTURELAND WHICH WE ENJOY.

PUTTING IN BUILDING THE FOCUS WILL IMPACT OUR QUALITY OF LIFE YEAR.

AND LIVE WITHIN 500 FEET OF THIS ADDRESS AND 5611 OLD ROWLETT ROAD ROWLETT TEXAS.

I PLEAD WITH YOU TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER THE IMPACT OF THE SMALL QUIET PART OF ROWLETT BEFORE MAKING YOUR DECISION TO THERE ARE OTHER AREAS THAT WILL BETTER SUPPORT THE WELCOME AND MAY EVEN BENEFIT BY THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSINGPROJECT . NEXT COMMENT.

BECKY SEBASTIAN, 42 YEAR RESIDENT. REQUEST ON TRAFFIC ALONE.

WE NEED TO CARE ABOUT OUR CITY AS A WHOLE FOR DEVELOPERS ONLY CARE ABOUT THEIR INVESTMENT.

THANK YOU. NEXT COMMENT.EILEEN GORDON, TO THE LANE.

IS A 23 YEAR RESIDENT OF LAUDERHILL, AND NOT IN FAVOR OF HAVING THE CYPRESS CREEK DEVELOPMENT BUILT AT THE CORNER OF ROWLETT AND BIG A ROADS. FESTIVAL, I DO NOT BELIEVE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE CAN HANDLE THE INCREASED VEHICLE TRAFFIC IT WILL ROWLETT ROAD IS NOT IN GOOD CONDITION CURRENTLY. ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC BY THOSE DRIVING TO AND FROM CYPRESS CREEK WILL CAUSE MORE DETERIORATION OF THE ROAD SURFACE, MAKING IT MORE HAZARDOUS FOR ALL GOOD SECONDLY, PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC AROUND CYPRESS CREEK WILL CREATE INCREASED CONCERNS. PREVIOUS CONCERNS I SUBMITTED TO THE CITY REGARDING THE LACK OF SIDEWALKS ON OLD ROWLETT ROAD HAVE NEVER BEEN ADDRESSED TO DATE.

IT IS QUITE COMMON TO SEE EVERGREEN RESIDENTS IN MOTORIZED SCOOTERS, WHEELCHAIRS WRITING IN THE MIDDLE OR THE EDGES OF THE ROAD, WHICH IS NOT A SAFE SITUATION FOR THEM WHERE THE DRIVERS. UNLESS YOU LIVE IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, YOU MAY NOT BE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM. PLEASE DRIVE IS OPEN TO THE CURRENT CONDITIONS IN PERSON PARIS FRANKLY, I DON'T THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE TO BUILD A HIGH DENSITY HOUSING COMPLEX NEXT TO ESTABLISHED SINGLE-FAMILY HOME NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND NOT AGAINST APARTMENTS IN GENERAL PRETTIFY, MY SON AND HIS WIFE CURRENTLY ARE APARTMENT RESIDENTS. I'M JUST NOT IN FAVOR OF APARTMENTS BEING BUILT IN THE LOCATION BEING CONSIDERED YOU FINALLY COME UP WITH A PLETHORA OF APARTMENTS ALREADY BUILT , BEING BUILT IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, DO WE REALLY NEED MORE? CAN WE ACTUALLY SUPPORT THEM? CAN OUR WATER, USE THE FACILITIES, SAFETY PERSONNEL ETC. KEEP UP WITH THE INCREASED DEMANDS? PLEASE HEED THE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS WILL BE MOST IMPACTED AND DO NOT APPROVE THE CYPRESS CREEK PROJECT THAT WILL ROWLETT

AND BIG A ROAD. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: SUSAN? I'M GETTING SOME REQUESTS FOR A

FIVE MINUTE BREAK. CAN WE BREAK FOR FIVE. >> SURE.

I ONE LAST COMMENT. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY, GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.

AND THEN WE WILL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. >> MISS SUE 3110 HARBORVIEW BOULEVARD YOU WOULD PLEASE KNOW MORE MULTIFAMILY BUILDING IN ROWLETT UNTIL THE ABILITY CITY IS ABLE TO FIRST TAKE CARE OF THE NEEDS OF THE CITIZEN THEY CAME BEFORE PARIS WAS ABSORBED IN THOUSANDS OF NEW CITIZENS AND NEW APARTMENTS APPROVED OVER THE PAST YEARS BEFORE BUILDING ANYMORE FOR TRAFFIC, ROADS IN DISREPAIR AT TRAFFIC LIGHTS ALL SHOULD BE ADDRESSED FIRST BEFORE ALLOWING ANY MORE APARTMENTS, MULTIFAMILY, TINY LOT HOMES ETC. AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE.>MIRANDA MORGAN: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS

FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4B? >> I DO NOT HAVE ANY COMMENTS

TO READ. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY. WILL THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND AT THIS POINT I BELIEVE WE ARE READY FOR A MOTION.

MR. COTE? >>JOHN COTE : I MAKE A MOTION TO DISAPPROVE THE REQUEST TO REZONING OF 14 POINT THROUGH ACRE TRACT OF THE LAND FOR OFFICE DISTRICT PLAN DEVELOPMENT P.D. DISTRICT FOR MULTIFAMILY SUBURBAN AND OF LIMITED COMMERCIAL RETAIL C1

USES. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY APPROVAL FROM

YOU DO WE HAVE A SECOND. >> SECOND. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: SECOND BY MR. ENGEN . AND IF EVERYONE IS READY, PLEASE SHOW A BOAT WITH A RAISE

OF HAND. >> WE WANT TO HAVE DISCUSSION NOW THAT WE HAVE A MOTION?

>>MIRANDA MORGAN: I'M SORRY. YES, WE DO WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON IT.

AND WE WANT TO START WITH ãDO YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON THIS? >> OF COURSE.

I AM IN AGREEMENT TO DISAPPROVE SIMPLY BASED ON THE LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE GUARANTEED IN A

[01:55:07]

TIMELY MANNER THE PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT. >> OKAY.

DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON THIS? WE DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS. >> THIS DOESN'T APPEAR MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THE FIRST GO AROUND. I APPRECIATE THE COMMERCIAL ADDITION BUT IT IS NOT ENOUGH FOR ME.

HAVE BEEN A HOT TOPIC WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. THE THIRD TERM PLANNING AND ZONING AT NEVER HEARD 171 ALLOWING MORE BEYOND WHAT IS GOING.

THE COMMENTS DO NOT GO UNHEARD AND I WILL NOT BE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

>> I HAVE A COUPLE OF NOTES WITH RESPECT TO THIS PROJECT AND I WANT TO POINT THEM OUT THAT ONE OF THE DRIVING FORCES NOTED BY THE STAFF REPORT WAS THE FACT THAT THE STATION IS LESS THAN HALF A MILE FROM THE SITE.IT SHOULD BE NOTED AS A OVER A 30 MINUTE WALK BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GO EITHER TO ROWLETT ROAD OR GEORGE BUSH. AND THEN TO THE DART STATION.

SUPPORTING IT HERE BASED ON THAT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY, IT IS NOT A DECIDING FACTOR FOR ME. AS FAR AS COMMERCIAL USES CONCERN, THE FIRST FLOOR OF BUILDING ONE AND TWO, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT AND THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN OR WHATNOT, IS NO ACCESS TO THAT UNLESS YOU GO INTO THE HOUSING, INTO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX AREA.

AND IT IS LIKE I DON'T KNOW OF ANYBODY WHO WOULD WANT TO LEASE THE SPACE KNOWING THEY DON'T HAVE ANY OF YOU TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY OR TO ANY PASSERBY BECAUSE THEY ALSO HAVE A FENCE AROUND THE PROPERTY. I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WAS MADE IN THE PUBLIC WAS THE FACT THAT HE KNEW OF ANOTHER PROJECT LIKE THIS AND THE COMMERCIAL SPACE IS STILL ãI WOULD BE HARD FOR US TO FIND SOMEBODY WHO WOULD BE INTERESTED IN LEASING THE SPACE HERE ESPECIALLY AS A COFFEE SHOP OR RESTAURANT. BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE PARKING IN THE AREA, YOU'RE ASKING FOR 155 SPOT REDUCTION WOULD BE TAUGHT. AND THERE IS NO ON STREET PARKING ON BIG A OR ROWLETT ROAD EITHER BECAUSE OF THE CONDITIONS OF THOSE ROADS.

IT TO ME DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. AND AGAIN, A PLAN DEVELOPMENT SHOULD RESULT IN ENHANCED HIGHER-QUALITYBUILDUP . AND I JUST DON'T SEE THAT WITH

THIS PROJECT. SO I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: MR. ENGEN?

YOU ARE MUTED. THERE YOU GO. >>MARK ENGEN : I AGREE WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WITH EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT.

ESPECIALLY WITH INFRASTRUCTURE. I WANT TO STICK WITHTHE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE ZONING CHANGE . AND I THINK IN TIME IT WILL STILL BE AN IDEAL SPOT FOR COMMERCIAL SPACE, COMMERCIAL OR OFFICES RETAIL IN THAT AREA.

EVERYBODY WHO LIVES OVER THERE, EVENTUALLY THOSE COWS ARE GOING TO BE GONE, SADLY.

BUT I JUST DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY HUGE CHANGE IN WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING AND I AGREE WITH THE OTHERS THAT THE RETAIL SPACE MAY BE LIKE SEMINAR OTHERS THAT REMAIN EMPTY.

I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF IT. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: THANK YOU. MR. WINTON?

HE IS NOT HERE TODAY. I'M SORRY. >> I AGREE WITH THE PARKING IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES MENTIONED, AS WELL AS THE OUTPOURING OF COMMUNITY

DISSATISFACTION. >>MIRANDA MORGAN: OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR.

I MYSELF FEEL LIKE THE CURRENT ZONING IS A BETTER FIT FOR THAT PROPERTY.

ON THINK THAT THE PILOT PROGRAM IN THE SMALLER APARTMENT SIZES FOR THAT AREA AND GENERALLY THE WHOLE MULTIFAMILY IDEA IS NOT A GOOD IDEA THERE. I AGREE THAT SOMETHING WILL EVENTUALLY GO IN THERE. AND THAT THE COWS WILL EVENTUALLY PROBABLY BE GONE.

[02:00:04]

BUT I JUST THINK THIS IS NOT A GOOD FIT FOR THIS PROPERTY. ARE THERE ANY MORE COMMENTS ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE.IF NOT, I BELIEVE WE ARE READY TO TAKE A BOAT.

>> LISA, WE NEED TO MAKE ONE NOTE. AND THAT IS IF WE ARE GOING TO VOTE TO APPROVE THIS MOTION, IT IS A DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST.

>>MIRANDA MORGAN: WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO DENY APPROVAL AND IT HAS BEEN SECONDED. AND SO IF EVERYBODY IS RATING WE WILL, WITH A SHOW OF HANDS TO RECOMMEND DENIAL. YOU HAVE YOUR HAND RAISED. AND THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

NLESS I DIDN'T SEE SOMEONE CORRECTLY, PLEASE SAY IT OUT LOUD.

OKAY. WE ARE READY TO MOVE ON. SO THAT ONE, THE DENIAL WAS APPROVED. AND WE ARE READY TO MOVE ON TO ITEM FOUR.

[4C. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council on a request by Kevin Harrell, Skorburg Company, on behalf of property owner Brian Hyatt, Cornerstone Assembly of God, to rezone the subject property from Single-Family Residential (SF-10) District and Limited Office (O-1) District to Planned Development (PD) District for Single-Family Residential (SF-5) Uses in order to develop the site with a single-family subdivision. The 21.74-acre site is located on the west side of Dalrock Road, approximately 760 feet south of Schrade Road, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

WHICH IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON A REQUEST ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER BRIAN HYATT. REESE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AS OF 10 DISTRICT AND OFFICE AMONG DISTRICT THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT P.D. DISTRICT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SSI USES IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE SITE WITH A SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISION. THE SITE IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE AND DELHI ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 756 FEET SOUTH OF SHREDDING ROAD.

>> THANK YOU. WE WILL HAVE LAURA BRING UP THE PRESENTATIONS.

JUST WOULD NOTE THAT AGAIN, THIS IS A PROJECT ALSO THAT THE COMMISSION SHOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH. THIS IS THE THIRD SHOT ON THIS REQUEST.

SHOULD PUT THIS UP HERE. YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT IS WHAT THE EXISTING ZONING SITUATION WOULD BE AND ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED INCLUDED PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT AND 99 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND SHOULD KNOW THIS IS A PORTION OF A LARGER TRACT OWNED BY CORNERSTONE ASSEMBLY OF GOD OF APPROXIMATELY 16 ABOUT FIVE ACRES ON THE WESTERN HALF OF THE PROPERTY WERE SINGLE-FAMILY A SECOND ZONE IS OWNED 01 WHICH IS A LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS THE THIRD TIME IT IS COME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONINGCOMMISSION BUT ADMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON AUGUST 4, 2020 . AT THAT POINT IN TIME THE APPLICANT MADE ADDITIONAL CHANGES AND BROUGHT ADDITIONAL ITEMS TO BEAR THAT WERE NOT BROUGHT FORWARD AT THE JUNE 23 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING THEREFORE THEY WERE DEMAND THAT REQUEST BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND THEN ON SEPTEMBER 8 THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THAT REQUEST. THEY HAVE COME FORWARD AGAIN AND WHAT THEY'VE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT COULD. THE PROPOSAL DOES REFLECT VARIANCES FOR THE PROPOSED SFY BASE ZONING RELATED TO THE DENSITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT, LOT DIMENSIONS PROVIDING GARAGES AND NOT HAVING ALLEYS OR UTILIZING THE EXISTING ALLEY ON THE WEST OF THIS PROPERTY.

NOT ACTUALLY ON THE PROPERTY. BUT WHAT WILL BOARDED THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST.

THEY WOULD ROOT BE REDUCED SETBACKS AND REDUCED LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. CURRENTLY THE SITE IS UNDEVELOPED AND THE EXCEPTION OF A RECREATIONAL FIELD IN THE NORTHWEST PORTION IMPORTANT YOU CAN SEE THAT IS THE DARKER SQUARE OF RED ON THE SLIDE THERE ARE 227 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON TAO ROCK ROAD AND AN EXISTING MEDIAN BREAK THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE EXTENSION OF WATERWAYS DRIVE.

[02:05:01]

SODA VERY MUCH AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THIS PROPERTY TO BE EXTENDED ONTO THIS PROPERTY FOR ONE OF THE TWO SITE ACCESSES. CANOPY IS ON THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, AS WELL AS ALONG THE WESTERN AND SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINES ADJOINING THE SINGLE-FAMILY PROPERTIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.O I'M GOING TO LET JEFF JUMP IN HERE.

TO EXPLAIN THE PROPOSED SITE ACCESS AND A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN.

>> THE AXIS IS FULL ACCESS WOULD BE ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER PREVENTS AN EXTENSION OF WATER SPRAYED. THAT IS ON TAO ROCK ROAD, WHICH IS CURRENTLY A FOUR-LANE DIVIDED THOROUGHFARE CLASSIFIED BY THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN IS A SIX LANE DIVIDED ARTERIAL THAT WILL HAVE 110 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WA . IT IS CURRENTLY FOUR LANES RIGHT NOW AND THERE ARE NO DESIGN PLANS YET TO IMPROVE THAT TO ITS FULL SIX LANES.

IF THE ZONING REQUEST IS APPROVED OR RECOMMENDED THAT THE COUNCIL AND COUNCIL APPROVES THE ZONING REQUEST, THEN WE GET TO SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WE WOULD ASK THE APPLICANT TO DO A FULL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THERE ARE GOING TO BE TWO ACCESS POINTS AS WE HAVE MENTIONED.

WATERS WAY UP IN THE NORTHEAST CORNERWILL BE FULL ACCESS . AT THE TIME THEY DO THE TIA, THAT WOULD IDENTIFY WHETHER A LEFT TURN, DEDICATED LEFT TURN LANE HINTED THE SITE AT WATERS WAY WOULD BE NECESSARY OR NOT. THEY HAVE SHOWN A LEFT TURN LANE AS A POSSIBILITY ON SOME OF THEIR CONCEPTUAL PLANS. BUT IT IS NOT WRITTEN IN STONE JUST YET BUT AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THE TIA WOULD RECOMMEND. THE ACCESS POINT AS YOU CAN SEE SOUTH THE WATERS WAY, WHICH IS THE SECOND ACCESS POINT, THAT IS GOING TO BE RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT ONLY STREET. INTERSECTION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.SO THE NEXT TOPIC WOULD BE THE DRAINAGE FROM THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

AND THERE IS AN EXTENSIVE NETWORK CURRENTLY UP AND DOWN TAO ROCK THAT SERVE THAT PROPERTY AND THE CHURCH CORNERSTONE CHURCH PROPERTY. THAT NETWORK DISCHARGES DIRECTLY TO LATE GREAT HUBBARD. IN THE AS BUILT RECORDS FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE, SHOW THE SIZE THE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR A DENSE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY. AND SO THEREFORE SINCE THE INFRASTRUCTURE CAN SAFELY PASS THE EXPECTED FLOWS FROM THE DEVELOPED PROPERTY IN THE DISCHARGE DIRECTLY INTO THE LAKE, THERE IS NO REASON FOR DETENTION FROM THIS PROPERTY. BY THIS PROPERTY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.AND THAT CONCLUDES THE CIVIL PORTION. I WILL LET ALEX CONTINUE.

>> AS MENTIONED BEFORE, THIS HAS TWO DIFFERENT ZONINGS ON THIS PROPERTY.

THE SF 10 ON THE WEST IS INTENDED TO ACCOMMODATE PRIMARILY LOAN DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON LOTS THAT HAVE A MINIMUM SIZE OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET. AND THE 01, THE PORTION OF BLUE CLOSER TO TAO ROCK ROAD INTENDED TO ACCOMMODATE LOW INTENSITY OFFICE USES THE SIZE AND SCALE, WHICH ARE COMPATIBLE

[02:10:03]

WITH NEARBY RESIDENTIAL USES, WHICH PROVIDE A TRANSITION FOR MORE INTENSE COMMERCIAL USES.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.THE SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN, WE WILL GO QUICKLY THROUGH THIS. TO THE NORTH WE HAVE A DAY CARE, WE HAVE THE FIRE STATION ON THE AGE RESTRICTED MULTIFAMILY PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE EXISTING CORNERSTONE CHURCH AND PRESCHOOL. OVER TO THE EAST, WHICH WOULD THIS WOULD BE THE SOUTHEAST MORE OR LESS. BUT THE CONDITIONALLY APPROVED FOR THE CORNERSTONE ASSEMBLY OF GOD BETWEEN THE EXISTING CEMETERY, WHICH IS ON ROWLETT ROAD AND ACROSS ROWLETT ROAD WOULD BE SINGLE-FAMILY. THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY THAT WAS DEVELOPED WOULD BE LOCATED WITHIN THE 01 DISTRICT AS WELL AS THE SF 10 AND THE CEMETERY IS CURRENTLY ZONED 01 AND ACROSS THE STREET IS SF 10. TO THE SOUTH IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES. AS WELL AS, LIKE WE MENTIONED BEFORE, THE CORNERSTONE ASSEMBLY OF GOD WHERE THEY ARE PROPOSING THEIR NEW CAMPUS. TO THE WEST IS A SINGLE-FAMILY USE, LOCATED WITHIN A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.HIS ALSO IS A COMPATIBILITY BASED UPON THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL USES. TO THE EAST THAT SLIDE, I DID NOT PUT THAT IN THE CORRECT.

THAT IS ACTUALLY SF 10 ACROSS TAO ROCK ROAD, WHICH IS A MINIMUM AREA OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET AND A MINIMUM BUILDING AREA 2100 SQUARE FEET. TO THE SOUTH IS THE P.D. FOR R1 BASED UPON A FORMER ZONING CODE AND THE R1 DISTRICT A MINIMUM LOT AREA OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET, MINIMUM BUILDING AREA OF 1800 SQUARE FEET PEER TO THE WEST IS ANOTHER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WITH A MINIMUM LOT AREA OF 7200 SQUARE FEET AND A HOME SIZE OF 1500 SQUARE FEET.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.IT SHOULD BE NOTED OF COURSE THAT THE ZONING ESTABLISHES MINIMUMS. AND SO WHEN PROPERTIES ARE BUILT OUT AND CONSTRUCTED THEY OFTEN TIME EXCEED THOSE REQUIREMENTS WITH THE SLIDE WHICH SHOWED THAT THE PROPERTIES ARE CROSSED TAO ROCK ROAD OF AN AVERAGE LOT SIZE SHY OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET. BUT AVERAGE HOME SIZE OF GREATER THAN 2600 SQUARE FEET. ALSO TO THE SOUTH, THE AVERAGE AREA FOR THOSE HOMES SHOWN THERE IN THE ORANGE WAS ABOUT 1200 ã12,500 SQUARE FEET LOT AREA AND 2400 SQUARE-FOOT HOME SIZE ON AVERAGE IN THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST OF THE SUBDIVISION AND PROPERTIES ABOUT 9100 SQUARE FEET. IN AVERAGE HOMES EXCEEDING 2100 SQUARE FEET.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.SO THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WOULD HAVE 76 LOTS, WHICH WOULD HAVE A MINIMUM SIZE OF 6000 SQUARE FEET AND THE MINIMUM DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF 1850 SQUARE FEET.

ALTHOUGH 27 OF THE LOTS BASED ON WHAT THE DEVELOPER HAS PROPOSED WOULD HAVE AT LEAST 2000 HOME SIZE OF AT LEAST 2000 SQUARE FEET. THE REMAINING 22 LOTS OF THE 99 PROPOSED WHICH GENERALLY THE EXISTING RESIDENCE TO THE SOUTH AND WEST WOULD HAVE A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 7200 SQUARE FEET IN HOMES WITH NO LESS THAN 2000 SQUARE FEET.

AND THERE IS ONE MORE LOT WHICH IS KIND OF A UNIQUE SPECIAL LOT.

IT WOULD EXCEED 7200 SQUARE FEET IN AREA AND HOME SIZE OF 2000 SQUARE FEET.

THIS LOT LAYOUT WOULD PROVIDE COMPLEMENTARY LOT SIZES AND HOMES ISIS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS ON THE SOUTH AND WEST.ITH SMALLER LOTS AND HOMES THAT WOULD BE IN THE INTERIOR PORTION OF THE PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND CLOSER TO TAO ROCK ROAD, WHICH PROVIDE A SUITABLE TRANSITION FROM THE EXISTING MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON THE NORTH MONTH TO THE NORTHEAST OF THIS PROPERTY.

IN THE FUTURE NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHURCH TO THE SOUTH ALONG TAO ROCK ROAD.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. ONCE AGAIN WE LOOK AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS A GUIDE FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE OF THIS PROPERTY. AND DOES DESIGNATE FOR THE LOW RESIDENTIAL WHICH WOULD BE THE YELLOW COLOR. ON THE MULTIFAMILY USES, WHICH WOULD BE THE BROWN GOLD COLORED.WE BELIEVE LIKELY THAT THE MULTIFAMILY DESIGNATION IS A RUMINANT OF A PAST PROPOSAL, WHICH DID NOT EVER DEVELOP ON THAT.

THE PROPOSED LOT SIZE DOES HAVE A MINIMUM OF 7200 SQUARE FEET IN AREA ALONG THE SOUTHERN AND

[02:15:04]

WESTERN PORTIONS. THAT WOULD BE DEEMED LOW DENSITY BASED UPON WHAT THE PLAN SHOWS AND WHEN CONFORMED TO THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY WOULD HAVE LOT SIZES WHICH WOULD BE LESS THAN 7000 SQUARE FEET FOR THOSE WOULD BE CONSIDERED MEDIUM DENSITY, WHICH IS AN ORANGE COLOR WHICH YOU CAN SEE TO THE UPPER LEFT OF THE INSET MAP THERE. SO NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS CONCENTRATED AWAY FROM THE EXISTING LOAN DENSITY DEVELOPMENT AND WOULD BE SEPARATED BY THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, THE SURROUNDING EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS BY THE PROPOSED LOW DENSITY LOTS, WHICHWOULD BE LOCATED ON THE WESTERN AND SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT . NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THIS IS THE PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN. I WILL TRY TO WALK US THROUGH IT FAIRLY QUICKLY. AND DOES HAVE A TOTAL OF 99 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND FOUR HOA LOTS OF THOSE HOA LOTS ARE SHOWN IN GREEN. THE PURPLE LOTS, WHICH YOU SEE MOSTLY ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE, THOSE ARE THE 7200 SQUARE-FOOT MINIMUM LOT SIZE ON THE 2000 SQUARE-FOOT MINIMUM HOME SIZE. THE YELLOW LOTS ARE 6000 SQUARE-FOOT MINIMUM WITH A 1850 SQUARE-FOOT MINIMUM HOMESITES WITH AT LEAST THE STIPULATION THAT 27 OF THOSE LOCKS WILL HAVE HOMES THAT ARE 2000 SQUARE-FOOT IN AREA. THE BLUE LOTS ARE WHAT ARE CALLED TERMINATED VISTAS. WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IF THEY ARE AT THE END OF THE STREET OR IN OPEN SPACE. AND THEREFORE THEY WOULD HAVE AN ENHANCED ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE OR AN ENHANCED LANDSCAPE FEATURE. THE STANDARDS ARE SUGGESTING THAT WOULD BE ABOUT A 50 SQUARE-FOOT ADDITIONAL SPECIAL LANDSCAPING FEATURE THAT WOULD BE PLACED ON THOSE.HOSE ARE REALLY TO PROVIDE AN AMENITY FOR PEDESTRIANS AS WELL AS DRIVERS ON THE STREETS TO GIVE A FOCAL VISUAL POINT OF INTEREST AS WELL AS IN THE CASE OF THE HOMEOWNERS TO ALSO PROVIDE THEM SOME PROTECTION FROM PERHAPS ONCOMING HEADLIGHTS AS WELL AS AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF PRIVACY FOR FOLKS THAT WILL BE WALKING DOWN THE STREET AS WELL. THAT THEY WOULD ALSO BE A POINT OF PRIDE FOR THOSE HOMEOWNERS AS WELL.THE SALMON LOT, WHICH I BRIEFLY MENTIONED BEFORE, THAT IS SORT OF DOWN THERE IN THE CORNER. THAT IS A MINIMUM SIZE OF 7200 SQUARE FEET.

IT IS A FRONT ENTRY LOT AND WOULD HAVE A 2000 SQUARE-FOOT MINIMUM HOME.

WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THERE ARE NO ALLEYS THAT WOULD BE PROPOSED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING WOULD NOT UTILIZE THE ALLEY ON THE WEST FOR THAT. THE GARAGE CONFIGURATION, WHICH IS PROPOSED FOR THE LOW WOULD BE FRONT ENTRY AND THEN FOR THE PURPLE WOULD BE A J HOOK VELOPE IN ONE. IN THAT SITUATION THERE WOULD BE GARAGE SPACE FOR THREE CARS COULD HOWEVER, ONLY THE GARAGE DOOR FOR ONLY ONE CAR SPACE WOULD BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. AND SO THE ALSO BRIEFLY TOUCH UPON THE GREEN SPACES, THE OPEN SPACES, WHICH ARE THERE. THE PROPERTY, THE TWO TOWARD THE FRONT WOULD HAVE A DOG PARK ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE AND THEN ALSO A COMMUNITY GARDEN ON THE NORTH SIDE WITH FIVE PARKING SPACES. THERE WOULD BE A TRAIL WHICH WOULD CONNECT BETWEEN THE OPEN SPACE. IT IS CURRENTLY PROPOSED TO GO BETWEEN THE CEMETERY AND THE FIRST LOT IN THEIR.WE AS A STAFF ARE NOT A FAN OF THAT CONDITION AND DON'T FEEL IT WOULD BE PARTICULARLY WELL USED. AND SO WHAT WE ARE SUGGESTING IN THE DEVELOPER IS AMENDABLE TO THE APPLICANT IS AMENDABLE TO, WOULD BE HAVING A GATE THAT WOULD BE IN THE WROUGHT IRON FENCE, WHICH WOULD BE THE SCREENING MECHANISM ALONG TAO ROCK ROAD THAT WOULD HAVE AN ACCESS CONTROL GATE THAT WOULD CONNECT TO A SIDEWALK ON STAUBACH ROAD FOR THEIR. YOU ALSO SEE GOINGFURTHER WEST THERE WOULD BE A LINEAR GREEN SPACE, WHICH WOULD CONNECT AND CORNERSTONE DRIVE TO CANTERBURY DRIVE .

THAT WOULD ALSO HAVE A GAZEBO IN THERE FOR A COMMUNITY GATHERING SPACE.

AND LASTLY, THE NORTHWEST CORNER IS PROPOSED TO BE A PLAYGROUND.EXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AGAIN THIS WOULD BE A COMPARISON OF THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS. VERY BRIEFLY IN THE SF 10 WOULD BE ON THE LEFT PERTHE SF FIVE,

[02:20:01]

WHICH IS THEIR BASE ZONING DISTRICT . AND IN THEIR P.D. THAT THEY ARE HAVING THEIR. THE MINIMAL LOT SIZE FOR THIS WOULD BE 6000 SQUARE FEET WITH THE ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS OF THE LOTS WE HAVE DISCUSSED IN THE LAST LINE TO THE MINIMAL LOT DEBT FOR THE SUBDIVISION WOULD BE DEEPER THAN WHAT IS TYPICAL FOR THE SF FIVE WITH THE SF 10. WOULD BE 120 FEET WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LOT TO UNBLOCK A.

THAT ONE IS SHORTER AT 115 FEET. ON ONE SIDE.

THE MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK WOULD BE 20 FEET WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 29 AND 30 UNBLOCK BE.

THOSE WOULD BE 35 FEET. DUE TO THE FACT THOSE ARE THE FIRST TO LOTS AND PROPOSED CORNERSTONE DRIVE, WHICH DO NOT REALLY HAVE A LOT OF DEPTH BEFORE YOU GET TO TAO ROCK ROAD. AS WELL AS THERE IS PROPOSED SIX FOOT MASONRY WALL SCREENING WALL FROM THE CEMETERY. SO FOR SITE DISTANCE ISSUES, THE THOUGHT WAS TO PUT THAT HOUSE FOR THE BACK WERE THOSE TWO HOMES FOR THE BACK FOR INCREASED SAFETY.

THE MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK WOULD BE A FIVE FOOT SETBACK FOR THE INTERIOR LOTS.

HOWEVER, ADJACENT TO A STREET WOULD BE 10 FEET, WHICH IS TYPICAL.

WITH THE EXCEPTIONS OF LOT 1, 12, 13 AND 24 ON BLOCK B, THAT WOULD BE REDUCED TO SEVEN FEET.

AND THAT WOULD BE A PART OF A CONCESSION TO ALLOW FOR THAT LINEAR GREEN SPACE IN THAT BLOCK. IN THE MINIMUM REAR SETBACK IS PROPOSED TO BE 10 FEET, WHICH IS LESS THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED UNDER THE SF 10 OR THE SF FIVE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.SO AGAIN WE MENTIONED EARLIER THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A FEW VARIANCES, MODIFICATIONS FROM THE SF FIVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WHICH INCLUDE THE FIRST TWO WE WILL HANDLE TOGETHER. ILLUMINATING THE ALLEY REQUIREMENT AND PROVIDING FRONTLOADED GRUDGES WITH NO RECESS FROM THE FRONT WALL OF THE HOUSE OR PORCH.SECONDLY, TO PROVIDE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS WITHOUT AN L OR J HOOK WHICH IS REQUIRED UNDER THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE. EXCEPT FOR LOTS 18 THROUGH 39 OF BLOCK A, WHICH WOULD HAVE EITHER THE J HOOK FOR THE TWO IN ONE CONFIGURATION. THOSE, TO REMIND YOU, ARE THE ONES THAT THE EXTERIOR LOTS ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.I WOULD AGAIN NOTE THEY ARE REQUESTING AN ALLEY WAIVER FOR ALL THIS DEVELOPMENT. THEY ARE LOOKING FOR A COMBINATION OF THE FRONT ENTRY PRODUCTS FOR 78 OF THOSE LOTS. AND THE OPTION FOR A J HOOK OR 21 ON THE REMAINING 21.

PER THE RDC, THE GARAGE IS REQUIRED WHEN ALLEYS ARE NOT PROVIDED THIS IS A REQUIREMENT THAT'S INTENDED NOT TO HAVE GARAGES TO BE A DOMINANT FEATURE WHICH WOULD BE SEEN FROM THE STREET AS WELL AS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SPRINGING -- SORRY, AND THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED TO WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE THIRD CONSIDERATION IS TO ELIMINATE THE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ENTRYWAYS IN LIEU OF ENTRANCE SPACE LOTS. AND THIS IS A REQUIREMENT IN THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT WILL REQUIRE ENTRYWAY LANDSCAPE FEATURES. THOSE FEATURES ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE SEPARATION FROM THE MAJOR THOROUGHFARES TO TRANSITION TO LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREETS AND PROVIDE AN AMENITY, WHICH CREATES BEAUTY IN A SENSE OF PLACE FOR COMMUNITIES.

THE APPLICANTS IS PROPOSING TO REVIVE THE HOH LOTS ALONG THE ROAD WHICH WOULD ALSO BE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE EXTENSION OF WATER'S WAY ROAD. THOSE WOULD FUNCTION AS OPEN SPACE, THAT WILL MEET THE INTENT OF THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENT.

THESE TWO SPACES DO TOTAL OVER AN ACRE AND IT WILL CONTAIN, HOA WOULD MAINTAIN COMMUNITY GARDEN, NORTH LOT, DOG PARK TRAIL AND TRAIL TO THE SOUTH. AND THEY WOULD SERVE TO PRESERVE THE TREE STANDS THAT ARE LOCATED IN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

WE DO FEEL THE STAFF WOULD MEET THE INTENT OF THE LANDSCAPE

[02:25:08]

CEILING. IT'S CHANGED UP A LITTLE BIT, AS YOU COULD SEECHL THERE'S NO PROPOSED IN THE 7TH ENTRYWAY.

THAT LANDSCAPING YOU SEE IS SOMETHING ON THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY. THAT WOULD NOT BE SOMETHING THAT THIS DEVELOPER OR THE HOME BUILDERS, IF THIS PROJECT GETS APPROVED, COULD CONSTRUCT. WE WOULD SUGGEST, THEY WOULD TRY TO FIGURE OUT, IF IT DOES MOVE FORWARD, THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME KIND OF ELEMENT OF LANDSCAPING FOR THE SOUTHERN ENTRYWAY. WE ALSO NOTE, THE 6 FOOT MASONRY WALL WOULD BE PROVIDED FOR THE CEMETERY.

THEY ARE PROPOSING, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, ROT IRON OR DECORATIVE METAL, FENCE THAT WOULD BE THE SCREENING FROM THE ROAD, THAT WOULD HAVE, EXTENSIVE LANDSCAPING, WITH THAT AS WELL.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE 4TH CHANGE THEY WILL BE SEEKING TO MAKE, WOULD REDUCE THE SETBACK FROM 15 FEET TO 10 FEET. IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE, TO IN THE BACKYARD AND WE WOULD NOTE, IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE IMMEDIATE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FROM NORTH TO SOUTH.

AND NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND THE LAST ONE WOULD BE TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FROM 35 FEET OR TWO STORIES TO 36 FEET OR 2 1/2 STORIES. AND THE REST OF THAT WAS LEFT ON THERE ACCIDENTLY. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FROM -- BACKWARDS ON THAT ONE AS WELL. INCREASED THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FROM 36 TO 35 FEET. AND THIS FEEL IT WON'T CREATE A NOTICEABLE HEIGHT DIFFERENCE FROM THE ENVIRONMENT.

>> AND A FEW PHOTOS THAT WE'VE PUT IN HERE, THIS WOULD BE THE TREE COVERAGE ON THE SITE A LITTLE NORTH OF THE CEMETERY.

ABOUT THE PRIOR LOCATION OF THE PRIMARY ENTRY WAY TO THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS A VIEW FROM THE ALLEY OF THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, LOOKING INTO THE INTERIOR.

AND THIS IS THE EXISTING RECREATIONAL FIELD THAT WE MENTIONED, WHICH IS IN THE NORTHWEST PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. AND SO I WANT TO TALK AGAIN, ABOUT THE CONCEPT, SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE'VE BEEN BUILDING UP HERE. SO WE BELIEVE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENTS SHOULD BE ENHANCEMENT TO THE COMMUNITY, THAT BOTH NEW DEVELOPMENT AND EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS SHOULD BE UNIQUE PLACES THAT HAVE A DISTINCTIVE CHARACTER AND ALSO MAINTAIN THEIR VALUE OVER TIME AS WELL AS TO CONTINUE ATTRACTING INVESTMENT BY THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS WELL AS NEW PROPERTY OWNERS. TO SAY THE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE THE FOUNDATIONAL ELEMENT OF THE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY.

THE PLACES SHOULD PROVIDE RESIDENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION, A PHYSICAL PLACE, AS WELL AS MENTAL WELL-BEING AND A FEELING OF BELONGING. THE PLACES SHOULD BE CHARACTERIZED OF A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES, FLEXIBLE SHAPES AND TO ADD DIVERSITY TO THE COMMUNITY AND ATTRACT A WIDER BASE OF RESIDENTS TO ROWLETT. THE PHYSICAL REALM SHOULD INCLUDE INTERIOR PORTION, OPEN SPACES FOR THE HOMEOWNERS, THAT SHOULD BE INTERCONNECTED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND AS APPROPRIATE TO AJOINING NEIGHBORHOODS. HOMES SHOULD BE ORIENTED TO OPEN SPACES AND STREET WALKS SHOULD ALSO ENCOURAGE CONNECTIVITY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. THIS SLIDE -- THE PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN DOESN'T -- DOESN'T INCORPORATE A MIXING HOUSING TYPES. HOWEVER, IT PROVIDES VARIATION OF LOT SIZES AS WELL AS THE DWELLING UNIT SIDE. AND THE EXISTING FAMILY HOMES, 270 AREA FEET MINIMUM IN AREA, WITH HOMES OF AT LEAST 200 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE, WHICH IS MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING LAND-USE PATTERN. THE COMMUNITY OPEN SPACES, ARE SITUATED WITHIN EASY WALKING DISTANCES TO THE HOMES AS WELL AS PROVIDE CONNECTIVITY FOR PEDESTRIANS AND OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE WITH EACH OTHER AND ENJOY OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. IN THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION,

[02:30:02]

THESE WOULD BE THE NOTICES THAT WE SENT OUT ABOUT THE PROPOSAL.

THERE WERE 66 NOTICES SENT TO PROPERTIES WITHIN 200 FEET AND 500, THE 500 FOOT NOTICE, THERE WERE 97 OF THOSE.

WE DID RECEIVE FOUR RESPONSES BACK WITHIN THE 200 FOOT NOTICE.

THREE WERE IN OPPOSITION. ONE WAS IN FAVOR AND ALSO WITHIN THE 500 FOOT, THERE WAS ONE IN RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION ZERO IN FAVOR. THE APPLICANT ALSO DID HOLD TWO VIRTUAL MEETINGS OF WHICH THEY INVITED NEIGHBORS FROM THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS, NEIGHBORHOODS, BOTH ON THE -- BOTH ON THE SOUTH, THE WEST AND AS WELL AS EAST NEIGHBORHOOD ACROSS ROCK ROAD. AND THERE WERE TWO DIFFERENT MEETING TIMES. ONE WAS IN THE EVENING LAST WEEK AND ONE WAS IN THE AFTERNOON. THEY DID HAVE NEIGHBORS THAT DID SHOW UP PARTICIPATE AND ADHERE THE PRESENTATION AND MAKE SOME COMMENTS. I BELIEVE ALSO, THE APPLICANT WILL PERHAPS SPEAK TO THAT IN THEIR PRESENTATION.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST, TO RESUME, RESIDENTIAL 10 DISTRICT, TO PLAN DEVELOPMENTAL DISTRICT, FOR DEVELOPMENTAL SS5.

AS PRESENTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.

THAT ALL FRONT ENTRY GARAGES WILL PROVIDE THE REQUIREMENT BY THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENTAL CODE. SECONDLY THE OPEN SPACE AMENITIES AS SHOWN IN THE LANDSCAPING PLAN SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN THE GENERAL LOCATION IN SPECIFIC QUANTIES WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTION. TRAIL FROM LOT B IN THE CORNERSTONE DRIVE WOULD BE REMOVED AS DISCUSSED AND WOULD HAVE THE GATE ACCESS TO THE DALALK ROAD.

AND LASTLY, THAT THE TREE SURVEY PRESERVATION PLAN, WHICH WOULD BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLOT, WOULD SHOW THE TREE MASSES IN THE OPEN SPACES THAT WOULD BE PRESERVED.

THIS PROPOSED STAFF, FEELS PROPOSED PLAN DEVELOPMENT, WITH THOSE CONDITIONS, WOULD FOSTER SUSTAINABLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WOULD CREATE ANY UNIQUE SENSE OF SPACE, FOR PHYSICAL AND WELL-BEING. THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED A VARIETY OF AMENITIES, AS WELL AS THE CONFIGURATIONS AND SIZES THAT WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, AS WELL AS CONTRIBUTE TO FURTHER IN THE GOALS AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO PROVIDE MORE VARIETY FOR, FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

AND WITH THAT, I WILL ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY AT THIS TIME OR WE CAN MOVE OVER TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO MAKE

THEIR PRESENTATION. >> YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY? DO WE WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE

APPLICANT HAS SPOKEN? >> I COULD WAIT.

>> OKAY. >> LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE THE -- HAVE A PRESENTATION. LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE THEM AM COULD FORWARD. WILL YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS ADAM U. CHECK WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD COMPANY IN WINDSOR HOLMES.

ADDRESS IS 8214 WESTCHESTER DRIVE SUITE 100, DALLAS, TEXAS, 75225. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION.

I HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION. I KNOW IT'S GETTING LATE SO I WILL JUMP TO IT AND I WILL TRY TO NOT STAY TOO REDUNDANT WITH THE FINE PRESENTATION THAT ALEX JUST GAVE.

IT'S REALLY SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION, ZONING REQUESTS, SCREENING PLANNED AND REALLY A HIGH QUALITY REPRESENTED QUALITY SLIDE SHOW. BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THIS, I WANT TO SAY IN A NUTSHELL, WE'RE IN THE SAME PAGE AS STAFF.

THIS IS A JOURNEY REALLY SINCE THE FIRST QUARTER OF THIS YEAR, WITH THREE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING COLLECTIVELY AND TWO MEETING AND TWO COUNCIL MEETINGS. AND WE'RE VERY PROUD AND THINK HIGHLY AND ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS REVISED PLAN WHICH IS AN ECOLLECTIVE EFFORT WITH STAFF.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH SOME CONDITIONS.

WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE WITH STAFF, WITH ONE EXCEPTION AND THAT IS THE 4 FOOT OFFSET OF FOR THAT FRONT ENTRY PRODUCT.

[02:35:05]

THAT'S SIMPLY BECAUSE OUR BUILDERS, WINDSOR HOLMES AND ANOTHER PRIVATE, THAT BUILDS ON A PAR QUALITY OF WINDSOR.

WE DO NOT HAVE THE PRODUCT. IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING, THAT STAFF ASKS. IN LIGHT OF THE ELEMENTS, AS I'LL SHOW YOU, WE HOPE THE SPIRIT THAT YOU SEE, AS A WHOLE, YOU'LL AGREE HAS BEEN MET AND AGAIN, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE APPROVAL. WE AGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY HAVE OUTLINED. WITH THAT -- NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THE PROPERTY, LAKE TRUE VILLAGE IS OFF THE ROAD.

WE JUST TALKED ABOUT IT. NEXT SLIDE, TO SAVE TIME.

IF YOU DON'T WANT ME TO ELABORATE MORE ON WHAT WE'VE COVERED, I'LL LET YOU KNOW. WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE PERIMETER. I'LL GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS OUR CONCEPT PLAN AND WE HAVE BEEN WORKING COLAB RATTIVELY WITH THE STAFF, TO CREATE THIS LONG LASTING HIGH QUALITY COMMUNITY THAT WOULD BEAUTIFY THE ENTIRE AREA AND SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT. THIS SHOWS THE PLOT THAT HAS BEEN CONDITIONALLY APPROVED BY STAFF, SUBMITTED BY THE CORNERSTONE CHURCH. YOU COULD SEE IT'S COHESIVE.

THE BLACK LINE IS THE BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY WE'RE PURCHASING IF APPROVED FROM THE CORNERSTONE CHURCH.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. ZONING REQUESTS, AS ALEX MENTIONED, IT'S 99 TOTAL LOTS AND WE HAVE THE PEACH COLORED ONE LOT, IS CONSIDERED A 50 FOOT.

IT'S AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THERE.

IT'S CONSIDERED A 50 FOOT LOT. IT'S ACTUALLY OVER 12,000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE, WHICH IS IN LINE OF THE AVERAGE, HALF A LOTS, SOUTHERN EDGE, CORNER LOTS AND FLAG LOTS, ARE OVER 10,000 SQUARE FEET. HALF OF THE LOTS ARE AT LEAST 10,000 AGAINST THE SOUTHERN, SOUTHERN NEIGHBORS.

AGAIN, ALL OF THE PURPLE LOTS ARE AT LEAST 7200 SQUARE FEET.

THE ONE PEACH LOT IS ONLY A 50 FOOT LOT BECAUSE IT'S AT THE KNUCKLE. IT'S A LARGE LOT.

THE INTERIOR YELLOW OR ORANGE LOTS ARE THE 50 FOOT LOTS.

THERE'S 76 OF THOSE, THAT HAVE A MINIMUM 1850 SQUARE FOOT.

THERE'S AN ASTERISK THERE. MINIMUM OF 75 PERCENT, SHOULD BE A 22 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM, THAT BRINGS THE TOTAL MIX, BASICALLY 56 PERCENT OF THE LOTS AND 100 PERCENT OF THE SOUTH AND WEST TO BE COMPATIBLE TO THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS.

THE BLUE LOTS ARE THE TERMINAL VISTA LOTS AS STAFF OUTLINED, WHICH HAVE ARCHITECTURAL LANDSCAPING FEATURES, FOR BEAUTIFICATION AND ARCHITECTURAL INTEREST, ALL THE AREAS THAT ALEX OUTLINED. THOSE ARE THE COLORED CATEGORIES. OVERALL DENSITY IS 4 1/2 UNITS PER ACRE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

>> THIS TABLE HERE, SHOWS, THE BASE DISTRICT.

WE'RE SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCED OVER THAT, AND PUT OUT SOME OF THE DIFFERENCES. THE SO5, WOULD HAVE A MAX DENSITY OF 8. WE'RE NOT CLOSE TO THAT.

>> WE'RE ABOUT 4 1/2. LOT DEPTHS ARE DEEPER.

MINIMUM, IS 6,000 FEET. THOSE ARE 50 BY 120.

AND, OF COURSE, ALL OF OUR 22 OF THE LOTS WILL BE 60X120 OR 7200 SQUARE FEET MINIMUM. THE MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE IS 1850 SQUARE FEET ON JUST THE 50 FOOT CATEGORY.

35 PERCENT OF THOSE HAVE TO BE AT LEAST 2000 SQUARE FEET.

AND 100 PERCENT OF THE 60S HAVE TO BE AT LEAST 2000 SQUARE FEET.

I THINK THOSE ARE MINIMUMS. THE AVERAGES WILL BE IN LINE OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODINGS. THE MINIMUM SET SETBACK IS 20 FEET, VERSUS 10 FEET. THE DIFFERENCE, WE'RE NOT DOING ALIS. WE'RE ASKING PERMISSION FOR THE WAIVER. THAT'S THE, THE SAME DIFFERENCE FOR THE WAIVER OF THE SETBACK. INSTEAD OF HAVING A DRIVEWAY IN THE BACK, OUR DRIVEWAYS, IN THE FRONT.

SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A 10 FEET. AND THEN THE SIDE SETBACK IS THE SAME AND MINIMUM LOT, WOULD BE THE SAME ON THE 50'S AND, OF COURSE, 60 FEET, 60 FOOT LONG CATEGORY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. >> SO AS EXPLAINED, WE HAVE THE LARGE LOTS IN THE SOUTH AND WEST.

AND I'M NOT GOING TO REGURGITATE ALL OF THAT.

4-5 LOTS, ARE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT PLUS, AGAINST THE WOODLANDS, AGAINST THE CAMBRIDGE MEADOWS ESTATES.

THEY ALL HAVE TO BE 2000 SQUARE FEET.

[02:40:02]

WE DON'T HAVE A CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING ALLEY TO THE WEST.

NEIGHBORING INPUT. WE DIDN'T WANT THAT.

WE DID LOOK AT THAT AS AN OPTION.

PROCESS OF PRIOR -- AND THERE'S DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT WE IDENTIFIED IN THE ENGINEERING ANALYSIS AS TO WHY WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO USE THE EXISTING ALLEY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. I'M GOING TO HIGHLIGHT THE SELLING POINTS THAT HAVE US EXCITED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PROJECT. WE AMENITTIZED IT TREMENDOUSLY, WITH IDEA FROM STAFF. AND THE EN CLOSED PLAYGROUND IS NUMBER ONE. WE HAVE ABOUT TWO ACRES OF OPEN SPACE. HOA MAINTAINED IN PERPETUITY.

NUMBER ONE, WE HAVE ENCLOSED PLAYGROUND.

NUMBER THREE, WE HAVE AN ORGANIC COMMUNITY GARDEN.

NUMBER 4, PARK BENCHES, TRAILS AND DETAILED IN THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. NUMBER 5, NEIGHBORHOOD GAZEBO.

YOU LOOK THROUGH CORNERSTONE DRIVE.

IT'S ALSO NEIGHBORHOOD GATHERING AREA, WHERE PEOPLE HAVE PICNICS AND --SO FORTH. TO CONNECT THE BLOCKS WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

JUST SOME PHOTOS, REPRESENTING THE PHOTOS IN THE NEXT FEW SLIDES. THESE ARE THE TYPES OF AMENITIES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. NUMBER ONE, IS THE PLAYGROUND.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND CIRCLE IN BLUE HERE IS THE LARGE OPEN SPACE IN THE FRONT, THAT WE WANT TO CAPTURE AND PRESERVE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. BY DOING THIS, CONSOLIDATED OPEN SPACE IN THE FRONT, WE CAN ACHIEVE THAT.

WE HAVE LARGE TREES, YOU SAW A PHOTO OF IN THE PRESENTATION.

IN THE AREA, WE HAVE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING, ENCLOSED DOG PARK, PARK BENCHES, TRASH RESENTICLES. SO PEOPLE COULD WALK AROUND IT.

THEY WILL BE IN THE SAME AREA, AS THE ENCLOSED AREA.

THEY CAN STILL BE UNDER THE TREE CANOPY AND ENJOY THE AREA.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE'S THE PHOTOS OF THE TREES IN THE FRONT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO THERE'S THE ENCLOSED DOG PARK, WITHIN THE OPEN SPACE IN THE FRONT. AGAIN, IT WILL HAVE A DECORATIVE METAL FENCE ENCLOSURE, SO YOU COULD KEEP THE DOGS CONTAINED.

IT WILL HAVE TRAINED COURSE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

IT WILL BE UNDER THE TREE COVER. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

WE'LL HAVE THE H.O.A. COMMUNITY GARDEN NEAR THE NORTH, IN THE PARKING AREA IN FRONT OF IT, WITH CONVENIENT ACCESS.

IT'S REPRESENTATIVE OF AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE'RE ENVISIONING. THE H.O.A. COULD KEEP IT NICE AND MAINTAINED AND SO FORTH. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

>> HERE'S ANOTHER IN THE FRONT ENTRY, KIND OF SEE OF DOG PARK IMPOSED IN THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, WITH THE TRAIL CIRCLING IT.

WE'LL HAVE LANDSCAPING, THAT WOULDN'T CONFLICT WITH THE EXISTING TREES. THE PARK BENCHES AND TRAIL AROUND IT. THE 5 FOOT WALKING TRAIL, WITH THE DOG PARK WITH THE TREE COVER.

AS STAFF MENTIONED, ALEX, WE DID HAVE A, YOU COULD SEE MY ARROW, YOU COULD SEE MY ARROW ON MY SCREEN, WITH I'M POINTING.

IF NOT -- THERE'S A TRAIL BETWEEN --

>> THERE IT IS. WE CAN SEE IT

>> YEAH, THAT LAST SLOT IN THE CEMETERY AND STAFF IS OF THE MIND, IT IS NOT PREFERABLE, DESIGN ED TO NOT HAVE OUTPUT.

WE'RE GOOD EITHER WAY. >> NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

>> WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD GAZEBO, MEANDERING IN THE CONCRETE SPACE. AND IT'S AT THE TERMINAL VISTA FOR CORNERSTONE DRIVE, WHICH IS THE SOUTHERN EASTSIDE ROAD.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SCREENING PLAN.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. STARTING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER ALONG THE OPEN SPACE OF THE NORTHERN ENTRANCE, WE HAVE AN 8 FOOT, WOOD ON WOOD. AND ALL FENCING, ABUT TING H.O..

AND WE HAVE AN 8 FOOT 8 FENCE. IN THE NORTHWEST, WE HAVE A SOLID GREEN LINE. WE WILL CONTINUE THE GREEN ON GREEN FENCE, BUILT BY THE BUILDER MATCHING, AS THE HOMES ARE BUILT. WE GET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER,

[02:45:01]

WE HAVE A 6 FOOT DECORATIVE FENCE, THAT WILL SURROUND THE PLAYGROUND AREA, WHICH IS STAFFS PREFERRED FENCING.

WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT. THEN WE COME DOWN THE WEST SIDE.

WE HAVE THE BLACK LINE. THERE'S A 6 FOOT BOARD ON BOARD, BUILT ALONG THE ALLEY. THE SOUTH EDGE, SOLID GREEN LINE, AGAINST THE CAMBRIDGE MELLOW SUBDIVISION.

THAT WILL BE BUILT WITH THE BUILDERS AS WELL, ALONG THE SOUTHERN LINE WE WILL CONTINUE THAT ALONG THE PROPERTY THAT'S MAINTAINED IN THE CORNERSTONE CHURCH, AS WE ARE NORTH ALONG THE CORNERSTONE DRIVE.

IN PURPLE, WE HAVE THE DECORATIVE FENCE WITH THE MAINSTREAM COLUMN, SO YOU COULD KEEP THE OPEN LOOK INTO THE COMMUNITY. WE WANT TO KEEP THE LOOK INTO THE BEAUTIFUL TREES FROM THE ROAD.

AND THEN WE'LL PUT ANY SIX FOOT TALL MASONRY, ALONG THE COLUMNS, AS SHOWN IN THE BLUE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

SO THIS IS WHAT I WANTED TO SHOW YOU HERE.

WE HAVE WORKED COLLABORATIVELY AND BUILDING IN THE OUTSIDE PARTY, PRIVATE BUILDER, THIS IS REPRESENTATIVE OF THEIR PRODUCT, AND THEIR PRODUCT, HALF AND HALF, THAT WOULD FIT IN THE LOTS. I WANT TO SHOW YOU THIS, BECAUSE THESE PICTURES ARE ATTACHED TO THE P.D., ELEVATION IS A LOT OF THEM. YOU HAVE A STRONG REPRESENTATIVE PRODUCT SAMPLING AND THAT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND QUALITY OF THE HOMES, YOU WILL SEE WHY I'M ASKING, WHY WE FEEL THIS STILL MEETS, AS A WHOLE THE INTENT WHAT YOU SEE. AND IT WILL ALLOW US TO GET AN OPPORTUNITY, TO BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL.

THESE ARE SLIDE PHOTOS HERE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

YOU WILL SEE A MIX OF THE INSIDE SWING AS WELL AS SOME FRONT ENTRY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

I WANT TO REITERATE THEN, THAT WE DO BELIEVE -- WE'RE IN THE SAME PAGE WITH STAFF, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THAT FOUR FOOT OFFSET. THIS IS THE PRODUCT YOU'RE GETTING. YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GETTING.

WINDSOR HAS GREAT PRODUCT AND ARE COMPATIBLE WITH OUTSIDE THIRD PARTY BUILDER WE HOPE TO HAVE WITH US, ALREADY SIGNED, DOES GREAT PRODUCTS, IF WE CAN GET IT APPROVED.

HIGH QUALITY RESIDENTIAL PRODUCT.

THE FACT THAT TWO-THIRDS OF THE HOMES ARE GOING TO BE 2000 SQUARE FEET MINIMUM. WE HAVE THE TERMINAL VISTA LOTS.

WE HAVE 22 OF THE LOTS ARE GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, THE INSIDE, TWO WAY GARAGE CONFIGURATION. THE PLAN THAT OUR PLAN, HARMONYATES WITH THE CHURCH. DECORATIVE HARDWARE, WOOD OVERLAY OR WOOD BEAM STEEL, ARE REQUIRED IN ALL LOTS.

WE HAVE MANY ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS THAT ARE DETAILED IN THE P. D. AND IF YOU HAVE THE P.D. AND READ IT, YOU COULD SEE THERE'S ITEMS LIKE GABLES, 8-12 ROOF PITS AND OTHER ELEMENTS AND, OF COURSE, OTHER AMENITIES THAT WERE INCORPORATED IN THE LAKE SHORE VILLAGE AND WE HOPE YOU ALL AGREE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. WHAT IS THE -- WHAT IS THE THE AVERAGE SQUARE FOOTAGE? YOU ALL EXPECT TO HAVE MORE HOMES THAT ARE BIGGER? MORE HOMES THAT ARE SMALLER?

WHAT IS THE PRICE RANGE? >> I THINK THE AVERAGE SQUARE FOOT OF THE COMMUNITY IS GOING TO BE IN THE 22-2400, MAYBE EVEN 2600 SQUARE FOOT. SOMEWHERE IN THE RANGE, DEPENDING ON THE MARKET. I DON'T SEE IT BEING BELOW 2200.

>> WHAT ARE THE -- DO YOU HAVE A PRICING STRUCTURE FOR THE HOMES

[02:50:03]

YET? WHAT IT WILL COST?

>> WELL, YEAH. WE ANTICIPATE THE HOMES TO BE IN THE MID-300-MID-400'S. THE TYPICAL BUYER WILL ADD TYPICALLY 20-40,000 ON AVERAGE. ON TOP OF THE PRICE RANGE.

>> AND BACK TO THE FRONT ENTRY OFFSET --.

>> I'M SORRY. >> I DON'T REMEMBER.

IN THE DIVISIONS THAT YOU'VE DONE, DID YOU DO THE OFFSET?

>> NO, WE HAVE NOT. NO, MA'AM.

>> PARDON ME? >> NO, MA'AM, WE HAVE NOT.

>> OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUES QUESTIONS.

>> MR. SPEAKER? >> YEAH, SF5, THEY ARE TELLING US THE MINIMUM LOT IS 6,000. HOW DO WE KNOW THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BACKTRACK AND START BUILDING.

I'M NOT ACCUSING THE DEVELOPER OR ANYTHING, JUST PEOPLE OUT THERE, CURIOUS. WE HAVE SOME COMMENTS, HOW DO WE INSURE AND MAKE SURE WE DON'T HAVE A BAIT AND SWITCH.

>> THAT WOULD BE IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING.

IT THAT WOULD BE ATTACHED TO THE CONDITIONS.

WE HAVE A DRAFT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

IT ALSO LIMITS THEM TO 99 TOTAL LOTS IN THERE.

SO THOSE ARE THE CHECKS THAT WE HAVE ON THERE, ALL THE PD CONDITIONS THAT ARE THERE, THAT ALSO WHEN GOING THROUGH, SHOULD THIS BE APPROVED, GOING THROUGH THE NEXT PHASE FOR THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE PLOTTING, THE PRELIMINARY, THE CIVIL PLANS, THOSE WILL BE THOSE ADDITIONAL CHECKS THAT WILL COME ALONG WITH THAT. ALSO, ONCE THEY GET TO THE BUILDING PERMIT STAGE, WE WILL BE WORKING WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE CENTER FOLKS, AND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND HIS STAFF TO CONFIRM THAT THE HOUSES THAT ARE PROPOSED ARE MEETING OR EXCEEDING THE REQUIRED MINIMUM SIZES, DEPENDING ON THE TOP OF

LOT THAT'S PROPOSED. >> THANK YOU

>> CERTAINLY. >> COULD I MAKE A COMMENT?

>> >> I'M SORRY. EXHIBIT F HAS A TABLE, HAS A LOT SIZE AND THE TABLE YOU REQUIRED FROM US AS WELL.

IT'S PART OF THE PD? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> I HAVE ONE LESS QUESTION. BASED ON THE PRODUCT THAT YOU'RE PLANNING ON PUTTING ON THE LOTS, THE 10 FOOT REAR YARD MINIMUM, ARE MOST OF THEM STICK IT THAT OR MOST OF THE YARDS WILL BE

DEEPER? >> MOST OF THEM WILL BE DEEPER.

THE REASON WE ASKED FOR THAT, WE HAVE SOME NICE ONE STORIES, YOU HAVE THE ONE STORY THAT HAS THE HIGHER SQUARE FOOTAGE ANYWHERE YOU HAVE A TWO-STORY, YOU WILL HAVE A BIGGER BACKYARD.

MOST PEOPLE WANT THE BACKYARD. THE 10 FOOT DOES ACCOMMODATE SOME NICE ONE STORY ONYXES THAT ARE POPULAR SELLERS THAT HAS PRETTY GOOD SQUARE FOOTAGE AS WELL.

>> THANK YOU. >> AND I WAS WONDERING ABOUT IT MYSELF. THAT WAS A GOOD ONE.

>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS. MR. KIRK, NO QUESTIONS FOR ME?

>> AND YEAH, THIS IS TO BE APPROVED AND THEY DO A TRAFFIC SURVEY, IS THE DEVELOPER, RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RIGHT-HAND TURN LANE? IT'S 40 MILES AN HOUR ON THAT EXPRESSWAY. I'M WONDERING IF THE DEVELOPER

PAYS IN. >> AND YOU MEAN THE LEFT-TURN

LANE? >> NO, THE RIGHT.

THE RIGHT, TOO. >> WHICH RIGHT-TURN LANE?

>> WHEN YOU'RE GOING SOUTH. I'M WONDERING HOW THAT'S ANALYZED. YOU HAVE CARS MOVING AT 40 MILES

AN HOUR >> THAT'S A STREET INTERSECTION.

IT'S NOT A DRIVEWAY SO IT WOULD BE UNUSUAL TO PUT A RIGHT TURN,

[02:55:04]

TO THE LANE TO THE RESIDENTIAL STREET LIKE THAT.

WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT WOULD BE A DEDICATED LEFT-TURN LANE FROM

THE NORTHBOUND DIRECTION. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT.

I HAVE -- I WAS CURIOUS IN KNOWING WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS WERE

BECAUSE OF THE SPEED. >> MAYBE I'M OFF, BUT TO KEEP

THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. >> THERE ARE MANY, MANY RESIDENTIAL STREETS THAT INTERSECT THAT ARTERIAL WITHOUT THAT RIGHT TURN DEDICATED LANES. IT'S NOT A DRIVEWAY.

IT'S A STREET. SO THAT WOULD BE AN UNUSUAL

SITUATION. >> ANYTHING ELSE, MR. ENGEN? ANY QUESTION BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE EVERYBODY.

OKAY. WELL, AT THIS TIME WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

DO WE HAVE SOME COMMENT OR ANYONE ON THE LINE?

>> YOU HAVE TWO CALLERS ON THE LINE.

>> OKAY. >> I'LL REMIND THOSE WAITING TO SPEAK THAT YOU WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS. WHEN YOU'RE CALLED UPON PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

AT THE END OF THE THREE MINUTES, THE SPEAKER WILL BE MUTED.

SO CALLER NUMBER 2, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM?

>> YES. >> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? >> BRIAN HYATT, 8200 WOODSIDE ROAD ROWLETT, TEXAS. AND I'M ALSO THE PASTOR OF CORNERSTONE CHURCH WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY AND MY ROLE TONIGHT IS TO GIVE YOU INSIGHT WHY THIS REZONING NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT AND PASSAGE. I KNOW WE'VE BEEN HERE AGAIN.

THERE'S BEEN SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES AND COOPERATION, THAT HAS BEEN BETWEEN THE CITY AND STONER AND CORNERSTONE CHURCH.

THIS WILL BE BENEFICIAL FOR STOBER AND CORNERSTONE.

WE MADE SURE THE BEST FEATURES OF THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN PRESERVED. AND NOW THE NEW DOG PARK, PLAYGROUND AND THE AMENITIES, TIES DIRECTLY INTO THE NEW FACILITY THAT WILL BE BUILT IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER.

OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS, SINCE THE 1ST CORNER, EVERYBODY HAS WORKED SO HARD TO GET THIS DONE.

IT'S A GOOD THING. AND IT'S GOING TO FUNCTION WELL WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND PROVIDE A GREAT PRODUCT.

SO CONCESSIONS AND COME PRONL MICES AND -- COMPROMISES ON BOTH SIDES HAVE HAPPENED IN ORDER TO BRING THIS ISSUE BACK TO P AND Z, THESE THINGS HAVE BEEN DONE AND THEY HAVE BEEN DONE RIGHT.

WINDSOR CRAFTMAN HOMES, FIT THE COMMUNITY IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

THE LOT SIZES ARE WONDERFUL, FOR THE MILLENNIAL GENERATION IS LOOKING TO BUY. I STRONGLY BELIEVE THIS WILL DRAW YOUNGER FAMILIES IN OUR COMMUNITY WHO ARE LOOKING FOR LAYOUTS. I SEEN THE HOMES BUILT ON THE WEST SIDE. I WALK BY THEM NEARLY EVERY DAY, BY PEARSON ELEMENTARY AND THE FRONT ENTRY HOMES HAVE NO ALLEY AND ARE BEAUTIFUL AND JUST ABOUT SOLD THEM ALL.

THE CURRENT HOME VALUES IN THE AREA OF DELL ROCK WILL NOT BE HINDERED. THE TAX REVENUE THAT THE CITY SORELY NEEDS RIGHT NOW WILL INCREASE AND THE HOA WILL INSURE THE PROPERTIES ARE WELL MAINTAINED.

THERE'S PRECEDENCE BY THE CITY STAFF AND BY CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE THIS TYPE OF REZONING ALREADY.

SO THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY ROWLETT IS SUCH A WONDERFUL PLACE TO LIVE. AS FAR AS THE CHURCH, IT'S A WONDERFUL PLACE TO WORK WITH STOBER AND THE CITY TO HAVE A DEVELOPMENT THAT'S NOT BEEN DONE.

THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY WILL ENHANCE OUR CAMPUS AND MINISTRIES IN THE CITY AS WELL AS NEW ONES COMING IN.

THIS REZONING WILL HELP US AS A CHURCH TO BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY TO BENEFIT OUR FUTURE AS WE STRIFE TO BE A LIGHT IN ROWLETT.

AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMISSION TO SUPPORT A MEASURE THAT WILL HELP OUR COMMUNITY BUT ALSO OUR CHURCH AND OUR -- THE PEOPLE AROUND THE CHURCH.

AND WE'RE ASKING YOU TO APPROVE THIS ZONING CHANGE FROM SF10 TO SF5. THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR HARD WORK

AND THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY CALL >> CALLER NUMBER 2.

[03:00:04]

WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM?

>> IF SO, PLEASE PRESS STAR 6 AND MUTE.

>> CALLER LISTED AS FRANK NELSON.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM?

>> YES, THANK YOU, FRANK NELSON. 10050 COUNTY ROAD 2448, ROWLETT CITY, AS A FUNCTIONING MEMBER OF CORNERSTONE CHURCH, A RM TOER AND FUTURE RESIDENT OF ROWLETT, I AM EXCITED TO SEE OUR CITY PARTICIPATE IN THE POSSIBILITY OF ANOTHER SET OF BENEFICIAL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. I BELIEVE NOT ONLY WILL THE DEVELOPMENT ENHANCE THE CITY, BUT IT WILL ALSO ENHANCE THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR CHURCH CAMPUS TO, DO THE WORK OF THE CHURCH IN ROWLETT AND GATHER MORE PEOPLE TO A CITY THAT IS NOT ONLY A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE, BUT IT IS A GREAT PLACE TO SERVE AND TO WORK. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, CALLER. >> MADAM CHAIR, THAT'S ALL THE CALLERS WE HAVE. I'LL TURN IT TO SUSAN FOR

E-MAILS RECEIVED. >> THANK YOU.

>> ALEXANDER WHITE, MY WIFE AND I AND TWO SONS 3 AND 6-YEAR-OLD LIVE AT 3646 MARSHALL LANE, ROWLETT TEXAS.

OUR OLDEST SON HAS AUTISM AND THE FOOTBALL FIELD PROVIDE A SPACE HE LOVES TO RUN IN AND PLAY SPORTS.

THE CONVENIENCE OF HAVING THE FIELDS NEARBY IS HELPFUL.

WE WANT OUR KIDS TO ENJOY MAKING MEMORIES.

WE DON'T WANT TO LOSE THOSE FIELDS.

THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE'RE OPPOSED BY THE PROJECT ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING CONCERNS. ONE, POOR DRAINAGE IN THE MEADOW THAT LEADS TO CONCERN OF FLOODING TO THE BACK END OF THE MEADOW SUCH AS OURS. TWO, SCHROEDER AND DELL ROCK CAN'T, THE TRAFFIC. AND CONSIDERING THE CHURCH PARKING LOT THAT'S NEXT TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL LEAD TO FURTHER CONGESTION. THREE, NEIGHBORHOOD ARE ZONED IN SF10. REZONING TO SF5 WILL LIKELY DECLINE THE PROPERTY. VALUES.

AND THE NEXT COMMENT IS ERIC WADE, 8213 MARTHA LANE ROWLETT.

I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS I'M COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO THE REZONING FROM SF10 TO SF5, FOR THE 29.59 PARCEL ACRE.

THEY ARE DOING A FANTASTIC JOB, AND THERE'S NO REASON OTHER THAN INCREASING REVENUE TO THE DEVELOPER BY CHANGING THE CLASSIFICATION FROM SF10 TO SF5 TO SQUEEZE MORE HOMES ON WHAT IS ALREADY A HIGHLY POPULATED AREA. THE AREA OF THE PARCEL CONNECTED TO THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS SHOULD AT LEAST STAY TO THE ALLEY STANDARDS OF OUR EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS.

I'VE OWN THE PROPERTY FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS ARE DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO THE PROPERTY AND I'M A 30 YEAR RESIDENT TO ROWLETT. THE CHURCH PUT IN FRONT DRAINAGE TO TRY TO HELP THAT WITH SOME SUCCESS.

AND THERE'S STILL DRAINAGE ISSUES OF STANDING WATER TODAY.

I COULD ONLY IMAGINE THIS WOULD BE WORST WITH THE HOME BUILT RIGHT ON TOP OF WHAT SHOULD BE AN ALLEY AREA WITH PROPER DRAINAGE. I'M ALREADY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC RAMIFICATION TO AN ALREADY OVERTAXED STRUCTURE IN THE AREA. MORNING AND EVENING TRAFFIC, EXISTING RUR COMMUNITY, WITH THE ADDITION OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT AREA, HAS CAUSED ALREADY MAJOR TRAFFIC DELAYS.

ADDITION OF 99 MORE HOMES IN THE SMALL SPACE WITH ONLY AT BEST TWO WAYS OUT, WILL BE A NEW ADDITION TO THE ALREADY TRAFFIC SITUATION. I WOULD URGE OUR ZONING COMMITTEE TO KEEP THE PROPERTY AS SF10 OR HAVE THE DEVELOPER DEVELOP A PLAN TO KEEP THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THE ALLEYS.

NEXT COMMENT. >> STAYTON SHERMER, 8405 COMMODORE ROWLETT. AND I'M REGISTERING MY PLAN.

AND I WRITTEN TO YOU BEFORE AND SEE NO ADJUSTMENTS THAT SATISFY ANY OF MY PREVIOUS OBJECTIONS. AS A LAND OWNER AND I MUST LIVE

[03:05:04]

WITH YOUR DECISION ON A 24-7 BASIS I HAVE STANDING IN THE MATTER. I DOUBT IF ANY OF YOU IN THE COMMITTEE LIVE IN THE AREAS SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE DECISION. CHANGING THE CURRENT SITUATION, IN ORDER TO PLACE 99 HOUSES IN A 29.74 ACRE DEVELOPMENT IN THE MIDDLE OF MUCH LARGER HOMES IS JUST PLAIN IRSPNSIBLE.

IT WILL DRIVE DOWN MY HOUSE AND NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE VALUES.

IT WILL ADD TO THE CONGESTION AND DEVELOPMENT WILL BE BLOCKED ON TRASH DAYS AS THERE'S NO ALLEYS.

VEHICLES AND TRASH CONTAINERS WILL BE ALL OVER THE STREET AND MAKE THEM IMPASSABLE IN THE DAYS.

FINALLY, YOU HAVE FAILED IN YOUR DUE DILIGENCE, AS THERE'S NO ANALYSIS PERFORMED IN THE DEVELOPMENT.

I'M GLAD MY PROPERTY HAS NOT BACKED UP.

AND HOW YOU MANAGE TO LEAVE THE CITY HOLDING THE BAG ON THAT DISASTER IS BEYOND ME. NOT BEING SATISFIED NOW YOU'RE PLANNING TO PUT A MINI. DO YOUR JOB AND MAKE ROWLETT FOLLOW THE LEARNING CODES. NEXT COMMENT.

TONY RORY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. MEN OF LADIES OF HONOR.

PLEASE ACCEPT THIS LETTER FOR THE PROPOSED ZONING TRADE IN CONSIDERATION OF SF10 TO SF5. I WOULD, THEIR STRONG COMMITMENT TO THE ROWLETT COMMUNITY. THEY ARE LOVING, GIVING AND INSPIRING CONGREGATION AND A BLESSING TO THE COMMUNITY.

I BELIEVE THE HIGH QUALITY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WINDSOR HOMES ARE COMMITTED TO BUILD WILL BE A BEAUTIFUL AND COMPLIMENTARY ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND BE A GREAT UPGRADE FOR THE AREA OF ROWLETT. NEXT COMMENT.

>> SUZANNE HERRERA >> WE OPPOSE THE REZONING OF THE MEADOW FROM SF10 TO SF5 FOR THE REASONS.

DESTROYING ROWLETT'S BEAUTY, TRAFFIC PROBLEMS, SAFETY ISSUES, EVALUATING, SF10 PROPERTY IN CAMBRIDGE MEADOWS AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, FAIRNESS TO OTHER HOUSES, LIKE CATALINA STREET BY PROVIDING AN ALLEY, TREE ZONE PROPERTY LINES LEFT ALONE FOR BEAUTY. LASTLY, ILLEGAL TRAFFIC IN CAMBRIDGE MEADOWS. NEXT COMMENT.

SALLY GREGORY, 3215 PECAN. NEXT COMMENT.

LEWIS LET, 7201 FAIRFIELD DRIVE, ROWLETT.

I DELL ROCK ROAD FROM SF10 TO SF5.

NEXT COMMENT >> NICK AND SANDY LAMB.

7220 STONE MEADOWS CIRCLE ROWLETT.

WE'RE IN SUPPORT OF THE REZONING CORNERSTONE CHURCH'S PROPERTY ON

DELL ROCK. >> NEXT COMMENT.

>> LISA HYATT. I'M A ROWLETT CITIZEN LIVING ON WOODSIDE. I WATCHED WINDSOR HOMES.

THE HOMES ARE HIGH QUALITY AND A BEAUTIFUL ADDITION TO THE COMMUNITY. I FULLY SUPPORT THE REQUEST FOR A SCORING CHANGE FROM SF10 TO SF5 LOCATED AT 8200 SCHRADER ROAD. THESE HOMES AND FAMILIES WILL BE A GREAT ADDITION TO OUR CITY AND TO OUR SCHOOL COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND SERVICE TO OUR XCOMMUNITY.

NEXT COMMENT. >> SENIOR PASTOR, FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH, ROWLETT. IN MY OPINION, WE HAVE TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO HELP CHURCHES. THEREFORE, I AM IN FAVOR FOR THE ZONING REQUEST. HEALTHY CHURCHES MAKE FOR A HEALTHY COMMUNITY. LET'S HELP THIS AND EVERY CHURCH OUT SO THEY CAN HELP OUR COMMUNITY BE A BETTER PLACE TO LIVE. NEXT COMMENT.

ADAM JONES. AS A RESIDENT OF ROWLETT, I SUPPORT THE REZONING OF CORNERSTONE CHURCH PROPERTY FROM DELL ROCK ROAD FROM SF10 TO SF5. NEXT COMMENT.

BILL AND JUDY COCHRAN. PLEASE KNOW I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES BEING STUCK IN THE AREA.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. CONGESTION, TRAFFIC, AND PROBLEMS WE ALREADY FACE WITH BURGLARY AND CRIME IN THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS NEARBY NEEDS TO BE HEALED FIRST.

NEXT COMMENT. GAIL GARBASKEY.

I OPPOSE REZONING OF THE MEADOW. NEXT COMMENT.

CAROLYN BRUMFIELD 7606 CAROL ROAD.

AND I WAS E-MAILING TO SAY, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE LAKE SHORE

[03:10:04]

VILLAGE PROJECT HERE IN ROWLETT. THANK YOU.

NEXT COMMENT. ROY AND JEAN GILES.

WE SUPPORT THE LAKE SHORE VILLAGE ZONING REQUEST.

NEXT COMMENT. VICKY SUMMERS.

I SUPPORT THE ZONING REQUEST, YOU'RE CONSIDERING ON NOVEMBER 24TH. PLEASE APPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, THAT WILL PROVIDE, NEIGHBORHOOD AND FAMILIES THRIVE. DONNA TOWNSEND.

AS SUPERINTENDENT, INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY, I HIGHLY SUPPORT THE ZONING CHANGE FROM SF10 TO SF5. CORNERSTONE CHURCH HAS CONTINUALLY HELPED FAMILIES. I RESPECT THE WINDSOR HOMES AND SCAR BOROUGH COMPANIES, TO PROVIDE HIGH QUALITY PRODUCTS AND AESTHETICALLY PLEASING TO ROWLETT.

>> NEXT COMMENT. D MICHAEL AND CINDY WILLY.

I SUPPORT THE REZONING OF SF10 TO SF5.

DEBBIE MAIN. I'VE BEEN A MEMBER OF CORNERSTONE CHURCH FOR 12 YEARS. I ALSO WORK FOR ECI ACADEMY PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOL IN ROWLETT.

I'M IN COMPLETE SUPPORT FOR THE REZONING IN DELL ROCK.

THIS ADDITION WILL BRING TO THE COMMUNITY.

>> AND CHERYL MORENO, FLOWER HILL NUMBER 3 RESIDENT.

I SUPPORT THE REZONING OF CORNERSTONE PROPERTY FROM SF10 TO SF5. NEXT COMMENT.

LOUISE CARTER. I LIVE ON CHISOM DRIVE, WHICH IS A FEW BLOCKS FROM DELL ROCK. I ALSO WORK IN THE AREA.

I WANT TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY.

I WATCHED EACH MEETING CONCERNING THE PROPERTY AND I BELIEVE THE BUILDER WORKED HARD TO COMPROMISE, THAT'S GOOD FOR ALL CONCERN. THE BUILDER HAS OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN ROWLETT AND THE HOMES BUILT THERE ARE BEAUTIFUL.

I'M SURE THE SAME WILL BE TRUE FOR THE LAKE SHORE.

I ASKED FOR THE REBUILDING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR

RECONSIDERATION. >> MELINDA SLOAN, BOB TAIL ROAD, APARTMENT 204. I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE LAKE SHORE VILLAGE ZONING REQUEST FOR CORNERSTONE CHURCH.

AND THAT'S THE LAST COMMENT. >> THANK YOU, SUSUSAN.

WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT IN THE CITY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I THINK

WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION >> MAKE A MOTION.

>> YES, SIR, MR. SEGGERS. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION OF THE REQUEST TO REZONE THE SINGLE PROPERTY SF10 DISTRICT IN LIMITED OFFICE TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS SF5, IS PRESENTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION, ENTRY GARAGES WILL BE OFFSET BY THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE, TWO OPEN SPACE AMENITIES AS SHOWNS IN ENRAL LOCATION AS SPECIFIC KWAUBTIES AS STATED WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTION, A, THE TRAIL EXTENSION FROM THE COMMON AREA LOCK 31 TO THE CORNERSTONE DRIVE AND B FURTHER LANDSCAPE AND HARD SCAPE TO BE UTILIZED IN THE SOUTHERN ENTRY WAY INTO THE COMMUNITY.

THREE, THE TREE SURVEY PRESERVATION PLAN, SHOW THE

MASSIVE SPACES AS PRESERVED. >> OKAY.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. SEGGERS FOR APPROVAL WITH THE ITEMS RECOMMENDED ACTIONS FROM THE CITY.

>> I'M SORRY. I'M SORRY.

MADAM CHAIR. >> YOU'VE ALREADY HAD YOUR PRESENTATION. WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A MOTION.

>> I DIDN'T KNOW IF THE MOTION TO APPROVE WAS WITH THE 4 FOOT OFFSET. IF NOT, THE PICTURES IN THE PD

DON'T MATCH. >> I DON'T THINK THAT REALLY MATTERS AT THIS POINT, WHETHER YOUR PICTURES MATCH OR NOT.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY THE FLOOR.

>> JUST WONDERED IF THEY CAN'T BUILD IT.

[03:15:07]

>> WE HAVE A SECOND. >> MR. COTE?

>> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION, IN ORDER TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.

>> THANK YOU, MR. COTE. >> ALL RIGHT.

LET'S OPEN IT UP TO DISCUSSION. >> MR. SEGGERS, WE'LL START WITH YOU. YOU'RE THE FIRST PERSON.

>> I LIKE THE CHANGES THEY MADE, THE FIRST TIME AROUND WAS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T LIKE SF5, BUT THE PROMISES TO UP AT THE 6,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM, I THINK IT'S AN APPROPRIATE CHANGE ALONG WITH THE OTHER CHANGES. I THINK THE LOT SIZES, HOUSE SIZES ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA.

I WOULD PREFER COMMERCIAL ALONG THE DELL ROCK BUT I THINK JUST BECAUSE MOST OF THE LAND IS SETBACK, I THINK IT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT UNREALISTIC, IN ADDITION TO SF10.

I DON'T THINK IT'S REALISTIC EITHER.

I DON'T THINK THE DEVELOPER WILL DIG INTO THAT AND I DON'T THINK THE INDIVIDUAL WILL DIG INTO THAT.

IF IT WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT LOCATION, MAYBE.

I THINK -- I DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THE GARAGES, ALLEYS A DIME THESE DAYS. I'M ALL ABOARD.

>> THANK YOU, SIR >> MR. COTE?

>> I GUESS CONTRARY TO MR. SEGER'S OPINION, ALL ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE TELLS US WE HAVE A FEW THINGS WE HAVE TO DO.

ALLEYS ARE ONE OF THEM. ALL I SEE HERE IS TRYING TO SHOEHORN AS MANY HOMES AS THEY CAN INTO THE SPACE THAT THEY HAVE. AND I APPRECIATE THE LANDSCAPING IN THE FRONT. I DON'T APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THIS IS COMPLETELY FENCED FROM EVERYTHING ELSE SO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS A STAND ALONE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE'S NO WAY TO -- BECAUSE OF THE FENCING THAT BECOMES PART OF THE COMMUNITY THAT ALREADY EXISTS THERE.

AND THAT COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, IF WE SAID, HEY, I'D LIKE TO CHANGE THIS TO SF10, WITH SOME EXCEPTIONS ON SIZES, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. RIGHT NOW, LOOKS LIKE WE JUST WORK WITH 2000 SQUARE FOOT HOMES ON THE SMALL PROPERTY AS YOU CAN, SO YOU COULD GET AS MANY AS YOU CAN IN THERE.

I DISLIKE FRONT LOADED GARAGES WITH A 20 FOOT DRIVEWAY.

MOST PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY YOU TAKE MY TRUCK, IF I PARK ON THE DRIVEWAY, I'M HANGING AROUND THE SIDEWALK AND IMPING THE PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO WALK DOWN THE SIDEWALK.

SO I'M NOT AT ALL -- AND I COULD APPRECIATE PASTOR POSITION. AND I COULD, SF10, TO MODIFY IT, IN ORDER TO GET ALLEYS, THAT ARE FOOLPROOF FOR THE AREA MUCH ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THE, THE LOCATION, WHICH IS RIGHT -- FROM THE LAKE. GOOD PLACE, GOOD LOCATION, BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR PLAN

>> MR. SWIFT. >> SO WE LOOKED AT THIS BEFORE.

I WAS PRETTY ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO IT BEFORE.

I LOOK AT IT AS IT STANDS, AND IT'S LARGELY BETTER.

BY THAT, IT'S SLIGHTLY MARGINALLY BETTER.

I THINK THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS SPOKEN.

I THINK THERE'S GOOD POTENTIAL, AS WELL.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S COMPELLING SITUATION TO CHANGE.

>> AND MS. MORGAN. >> NOT KNOWING THE HISTORY, I HAVE ONE QUESTION. HAS IT BEEN PRESENTED AS A

MODIFIED SF10? >> NO.

>> IT'S ALWAYS GOING FOR SF5. IT'S SORT OF A SPLIT.

I LIKE THE CHANGES TO THE SF5. I DON'T LIKE THE SF5.

I THINK THE MODIFICATIONS THEY MADE ARE ADEQUATE TO THAT POSITION. I UNDERSTAND THE OTHER RATIONAL BUT HOLING NO COMMENT FOR THE MOMENT.

>> OKAY. >> MR. ENGEN.

[03:20:06]

>> IT'S A TOUGH ONE TO DECIDE HERE.

I'VE ALWAYS BEEN A STRONG COMPONENT OF IT BEING AN SF10.

I'M CERTAINLY NOT OPPOSED TO FRONT LOADED DRIVEWAYS.

I LIVED THAT WAY ALL MY LIFE. I THINK IT COULD BE A PROBLEM IN THE SPECIFIC AREA. HE CERTAINLY HAS COME BACK WITH IMPROVED CHANGES BUT HE WENT FROM 5,000 TO 6,000.

IF IT WOULD HAVE BEEN 9,000, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN OKAY.

I'M STUCK HERE AS TO WHERE WE SHOULD BE GOING.

I KNOW HE HAS QUESTIONS ON THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT'S GOING INTO THE AREA, TOO. WE'RE REALLY CLOSE BUT NOT, NOT THE -- WE'RE TRYING TO STAY WITH SOME BIGGER HOMES.

WE'RE NEAR THE LAKE FRONT. I THINK WE CAN GET SOME BIGGER

LOTS IN THE AREA. >> AND COULD I SAY SOMETHING? COULD I SHARE SOMETHING? I WANT TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW, ROWLETT'S PRICE POINT ABOVE 400 IS PRETTY BAD.

IT'S SLOWED DOWN THE LOT. THEY ARE SITTING ON THE MARKET.

SO KEEP THAT IN MIND. >> YOU'RE SAYING, WITH THE PRICE

POINT. >> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHEN YOU'RE GOING SF10, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MUCH HIGHER.

THE DEVELOPER AND THE BUILDER WILL HAVE TO BUILD A CERTAIN QUALITY HOME. THEY HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN BIAS. YOU'RE FORCING, THIS LAND WILL SIT FOR A LONG TIME. SO YOU'RE EITHER GOING TO HAVE TO CONCEDE A LITTLE BIT. AN 1800, 22 SQUARE FOOT HOME, THAT'S A 350,000 HOME. THAT'S A NICE HOUSE.

THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS SURROUNDING, ARE ALL ABOUT THAT SIZE.

SO I DON'T REALLY SEE -- YOU'RE PUTTING THE, YOU KNOW, MASSIVE LOTS WITH THE SMALLER LOTS, UP AGAINST.

IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME. YOU KNOW, FRONT ENTRY GARAGES, EVERYBODY DOES FRONT ENTRY TODAY.

NOBODY DOES ALLEYS ANYMORE. IT'S JUST NOT.

>> IT'S VERY RARE. FRONT ENTRY GARAGES AND JAY SWINGS, AND YOU GO TO ANY NEW BUILDS, IT'S JAY SWING.

AND ESPECIALLY GOLF COMMUNITIES, FRONT ENTRY JAY SWING.

>> AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH MR. SEGGERS, BUT I WAS IN LAND DEVELOPMENT FOR 20 YEARS.

BACK THEN, IT WAS SF10, SF7. THOSE DAYS, UNLESS YOU'RE OUT IN LUCAS AND YOU GOT A MILLION BY THE LOT, HALF MILLION, THAT KIND OF STUFF IS NOT HAPPENING HERE. IT'S NOT WHAT'S POPULAR.

IT'S NOT PARTICULARLY NOT GOING TO HAN UNLESS YOU'RE ON THE LAKE IN ROWLETT. BUT I DON'T LIKE THE SF5.

I DON'T LIKE THE FRONT ENTRY BECAUSE IN MY ERA, THAT'S ALL KIND OF BLOWING, KIND OF STUFF. IT'S JUST CHANGED.

I AGREE WITH THIS. IT'S WHAT EVERYBODY IS BUILDING.

THE SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE GONE IN ARE VERY NICE.

THE HOMES ARE NOT CHEAP. I'M A LITTLE -- I'M STILL A LITTLE -- GOT A FEW QUESTIONS IN MY MIND, NUMBER ONE IN THE RECOMMENDED ACTION. EVERYTHING THAT THEY ARE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND WHY THE CITY WANTS THAT.

IT GETS BACK TO THE PROBLEM THAT MR. TALKED ABOUT, CARS GETTING IN THE DRIVEWAY, NOT GETTING IN THE SIDEWALK OR STREET OR WHATEVER. I THINK THEY HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF TRYING TO MAKE US HAPPY AND I DON'T KNOW IF I'M GOING TO

BE BETTING AGAINST IT. >> I AGREE WITH WHAT -- SAYING.

I DON'T SAY IT HAS TO BE SF10. HOWEVER, I DON'T THINK SF5, MAKING A LARGE HOUSE IN A SMALL LOT, MINIMIZING THE SETBACKS IS THE WAY TO GO. I COULD PROBABLY COMPROMISE ON

[03:25:01]

FRONT ENTRY GARAGES, IF THEY WERE NOT SITTING RIGHT ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. BUT I THINK THAT THIS IS JUST TOO MUCH AND TOO SMALL OF A SP

SPACE. >> GO AHEAD.

>> I AGREE WITH YOU ON THE GARAGES.

IT LOOKS SLOPPY. THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES I HAVE WITH SF5. IF YOU HAVE A TRUCK, WILL SIT IN THE SIDEWALK. IT LOOKS GREAT THE FIRST FEW YEARS AFTER THEY BUILD IT. 10 YEARS LATER, IT LOOKS CROWDED. EVERYBODY IS ON THE STREET.

IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD. IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD.

>> OTHER THING, YOUR 2000 SQUARE FOOT HOMES.

YOU WILL HAVE MORE THAN TWO VEHICLES IN THE HOUSE.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING ON THE STREET.

YOU'RE GOING TO. OVERLY CLUTTERED.

>> COULD WE TALK WITH STAFF STILL ON THE DISCUSSION?

>> IS THERE ANY WAY TO CHANGE THE GARAGE SETBACK.

WAS THAT REALLY THE HANG-UP? I KIND OF AGREE.

I DON'T LIKE IT EITHER. THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH YOU COULD DO. THIS IS A VERY SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE'S NOT, IT'S NOT A HUGE FOOTPRINT. SO I DON'T WANT TO BE TOO NITPICKY. I DON'T THINK THE DEVELOPER WILL COME IN HERE AND WANT TO DEVELOP AN HOA, YOU KNOW, VERY SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD. ROWLETT IS JUST NOT THERE.

IT DID HAVE A REALLY GOOD, YOU KNOW -- THERE WAS LITTLE POCKETS THAT DID REALLY WELL. I THINK WE'VE MOVED ON FROM THE HIGH END PRICE RANGE. I THINK THE LITERALLY GROVE, OVER IN WATER VIEW, IS THE BIG HALL IN I FEEL THEIR PRICE RANGE IS CORRECT.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE WE CAN GET OUT OF IT.

I THINK YOU'RE ASKING TOO MUCH. WHERE COULD WE -- MAKE IT STILL WO WORK.

>> DOES NAL WANT TO TAKE THAT ONE.

>> BEFORE YOU JUMP IN AND TAKE THE INDIVIDUAL STICK POINTS, WE TALKED ABOUT THE DRIVEWAYS THAT WE DON'T LIKE.

MY SIMPLE GOOGLE, F-150 IS 80 FEET AND COUPLE INCHES LONG.

AND I THINK WE HAVE SOME HEARTBURN IN THE MIDDLE YARD, BEING TEN FEET. IT'S A SMALL BACKYARD.

THE DEVELOPER DIDN'T SAY THEY ARE ALL GOING TO BE LIKE THAT.

20 FOOD DRIVEWAY AND 10 FOOT BACKYARD.

AS WE TALK ABOUT BIG HOUSES, THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO FIT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I COULD RED LINE A FEW OTHER ITEMS. BEFORE WE MAKE IT A DRIVEWAY, THERE MAY BE SEVERAL THINGS WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT.

>> KNOW WORRIES, COMMISSIONER IN FACT, I APPRECIATE THAT COMMENT. I APPRECIATE THE ENTIRE COMMISSION'S COMMENTARY THUS FAR.

THIS HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE IN TERMS OF ANALYSIS.

WE'VE SEEN IT COME FORWARD, WITH DIFFERENT VARIATIONS THUS FAR.

AGAIN, WE WANT TO BE, WE WANT TO GO THROUGH OUR ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS, DEVELOPMENT IS NOT IN KEEPING, COMPLIMENTARY TO ENABLE DESIGN WITH THE SURROUNDING BUILT ENVIRONMENT.

ONE OF THE KEY ASPECT, IF WE HAVE A GARAGE THAT IS IN LINE WITH THE FRONT FACE OF THE BUILDING, IT REALLY CAUSES, OR IMPACTS, OR IMPINGS UPON THE PEDESTRIAN REALM.

AND THE LENGTH OF VEHICLES, DEFINITELY THE SIDEWALKS, WOULD BE ENCROACHED UPON. THE FACT THAT THE APPLICANT, WILL THROUGH THEIR CIVIL DESIGN, REQUEST A LESS, A STREET THAT'S NOT THE MINIMUM 60 FEET. WE HAVE AN OPTION IN OUR ORDINANCE THAT ENABLES OUR MECHANISM.

WITH THE LARGE VEHICLES, LET'S THEM PARK IN THE STREET.

SOME ARE IMPINGING IN THE SIDEWALK.

IT DOESN'T LENT THE SENSE OF SUSTAINABLITY.

THOSE ARE KEY ELEMENTS. THE ELEMENT IS TO HAVE THAT RELIEF. IF YOU PUSH THE GARAGE AS FAR AS YOU CAN, IT MAINTAINS THE YARD. IF YOU DON'T DO AN ALLEY, AND IF

[03:30:02]

AN ALLEY IS A THING OF THE PAST, THE ORDINANCE, IF YOU HAVE TO DO THAT, YOU HAVE TO DO JAY OR HOOK PATHWAYS.

AND IN THIS ELEMENT, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION AND I WILL LOOK AT ALEX AND THE REST OF TEAM TOO, BUT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, NOT TWO, OR THREE, BUT 10-15 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, TO MAKE SURE THIS PART OF THE ELEMENT

REMAINS INTACT. >> IT'S ALMOST AS IF, IT'S

PERFECT FOR SF7. >> AND QUITE FRANKLY, WE'VE BEEN COGNIZANT OF THE DEVELOPER/APPLICANT'S BUSINESS MODEL, BUT THERE'S A POINT, WHERE YOU HAVE TO DO AN ASSESSMENT AND DETERMINE WHAT ARE WE TRULY COMPROMISING IN THIS INSTANCE? AND THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE HAS AN ABILITY THAT HAS ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OR FEWER CONDITIONS.

DEFINITELY THIS IS A PD. PD'S ARE TRYING TO EXECUTE AND

SOUND DESIGN. >> THIS IS GOING IN FRONT OF THE

CITY COUNCIL. >> SHOULD THE APPLICANT CHOOSE

TO DO SO. >> ONLY IF THEY CHOOSE TO.

>> RIGHT. IF IT IS AN UNANIMOUS DENIAL, BASED ON THE ORDINANCE, THEY WOULD NEED A UNANIMOUS APPROVAL FROM THE -- MAJORITY APPROVAL FROM THE CITY COUNCIL.

>> I GUESS MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS -- I DON'T KNOW.

LIKE I SAID, I HATE TO NITPICK IT.

DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD APPROVE THIS AND LET THE ELECTED

OFFICIALS APPROVE THE DECISION. >> NO.

NO. WE'RE NOT NEEDED, IF THAT'S THE

CASE. >> I THINK IT'S A GOOD PLAN.

I JUST THINK, IT'S OKAY TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> LET'S GO FORWARD. I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD PLAN AND I RESPECT YOU SAYING ABOUT THAT SO LET'S PUT IT TO A VOTE.

>> WHAT'S YOUR HANG UP? IS IT THE GARAGE?

>> I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE GARAGE IT'S THE SETBACKS, THE DRIVEWAY LENGTH OUT THERE, IT'S THE LOT

SIZES. >> NOT EVERYBODY COULD GET A HUGE YARD. A HUGE YARD.

I'VE SEEN HALF MILLION DOLLAR HOUSES WITH THESE THINGS

SETBACKS. >> I'M NOT HERE TO ARGUE

AESTHETICS. >> ZERO LOT LINES.

THIS IS A SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT HUNDREDS OF HOUSES. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A SMALL SAMPLE SIZE OF PEOPLE THAT WILL COME HERE AND DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO BUY A HOME. IT'S PROBABLY 350,000 ON AVERAGE, IS PROBABLY WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A CHEAP HOUSE.

>> I THINK THERE'S SO MANY THINGS OUTSIDE OF CODE THAT

MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR ME. >> YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER, IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S A FUNNY PROPERTY. IT'S NOT ALL ROCK.

A LOT OF IT -- YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, IT'S GOING TO BE A MULTI-FAMILY APARTMENT COMPLEX THERE.

AND YA'LL WANT THAT? I KNOW THE CITIZENS DON'T WANT THAT. YOU KNOW, OFFICE RETAIL -- OFFICE RETAIL, PUT LIKE A CVS. HAVE THE HOUSES WRAPPED IN A

CVS. >> WE'RE LOSING TO THE TOPIC, IN

FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW. >> AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S ZONED TODAY. 9 WAS ZONED TODAY.

ARE WE GOING TO DENY THIS BECAUSE YOU'RE WANTING AN SF7? I THINK SF10, IS OUT OF THE QUESTION.

I DON'T THINK IT'S POSSIBLE. >> I AGREE WITH YOU.

I AGREE WITH YOU, OKAY, ON SEVERAL OF YOUR POINTS.

AND HOWEVER, I'M NOT LOOKING FOR A CVS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

WE'RE LOOKING AT CHANGING THE ZONING FROM SF10 TO SOMETHING, WHERE YOU COULD PUT SOME SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THERE.

IN MY OPINION IS, THAT TAKE AWAY THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.

IF YOU WANT TO INTEGRATE THIS INTO ROWLETT, TAKE A LOOK AT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, LOOK AT THE TREK THAT THE STAFF IS ALREADY PUT TOGETHER AND AS FAR AS AVERAGES, OKAY AND SHOOT FOR THAT. IF THAT'S AN SF10, WITH A

FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS, TO GET -- >> HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK THE SF10 IS GOING TO COST? HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK IT'S GOING

TO COST TO BUILD IT. >> LOOK AT THE CHART THAT THEY PROVIDED US. IT'S NOT AN SF10.

ALL I'M SAYING, YOU COULD DO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH AN SF10

[03:35:01]

BASELINE, THAT YOU WILL MODIFY, OKAY.

>> THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE DOING HERE WITH AN SF5, THAT THEY ARE

MODIFYING. >> THEY ARE MODIFYING TO EVEN LESS. THAT DOESN'T -- I CAN'T SUPPORT THAT. OKAY.

>> I WANT TO STICK BY MY GUNS AND SEE HOW IT PLAYS OUT.

IF IT GETS DENIED. >> I TELL YOU WHAT? WE HAVE NOT HAD THIS MUCH CONVERSATION IN WHILE BUT AT

LEAST WE'RE CLOSE. >> I'LL BE VOTING AGAINST IT BUT

WE'RE CLOSE. >> IT'S GOOD FOR THE DEVELOPER.

>> IT'S A LOT OF GOOD COMMENTARY.

I THINK -- ARE YOU A REAL ESTATE AGENT?

MR. STEGGERS? >> I'M SORRY.

>> ARE YOU IN REAL ESTATE? >> I'VE BEEN OVER FOR A WHILE.

>> AND NOW YOU GOT YOUR FINGER ON THE PULSE ON WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING AND WHAT BUYERS ARE LOOKING FOR.

I THINK WHAT THE CITY IS TRYING TO DO HERE IS GET THIS THING DONE AND -- I THINK THIS DEVELOPER AND HOMEBUILDER HAS DONE SOME GOOD THINGS TO ROWLETT.

I DO THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT THE -- THING IS GOING TO POSE A PROBLEM, IT SOUNDS TO ME, FOR A BUILDER.

THAT'S THE ONE THING WE HAVE TO IRON OUT.

I PERSONALLY AGREE WITH YOU ON THE LOT SIZES.

SF7 AND SF10. >> THAT WOULD BE PERFECT.

YOU CAN'T GET PERFECT. >> IT WOULD BE GREAT BUT -- WE HAVE A MOTION -- I DIDN'T HEAR, I DON'T MEAN TO BE RUDE, MR. DAVIS. YOU HAVE A COMMENT TO CARRY ON

THIS? >> JUST MY UNDERSTANDING ON THE REC. I THINK IT FITS WITH THE SPIRIT AND I INCLINE TO GO TO THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT. >> MR. COTE, DO YOU HAVE ONE MORE THING? I SAW YOUR HAND GO UP.

JOHN? >> I THINK I'VE ALREADY SAID

I'VE NEEDED. >> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROV WITH THE ADDITION WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON PAGE 15 OF THE PACKET, OF THE ITEM, OF THE AGENDA.

IT'S BEEN SECONDED. WE WILL VOTE NOW.

A VOTE, RAISED HAND IS TO VOTE FOR APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM.

LET'S VOTE. WE HAVE 1, 2.

SO THAT ITEM DOESN'T CARRY. >> THERE'S 3.

>> 2 IS MORE. >> I SEE MR. SEGERS.

I SEE WESLEY DAVIS AND WHO IS THE THIRD ONE?

>> MIRANDA. >> MIRANDA, OKAY, I'M SORRY.

STILL, THAT ITEM DOESN'T CARRY. >> YOU SHOULD CALL FOR A HAND COUNT ANYWAYS SO IT'S SHOWING, FOR THOSE WHO DISAPPROVE.

>> ACTUALLY. >> IT'S LOST.

>> I KNOW. SHOULD HAVE.

>> THE HAND GOES UP FOR THE APPROVAL, WHICH IS THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE. WE HAD THREE HANDS GO UP.

SO THAT'S OUR VOTE. OKAY. WE ARE READY TO MOVE ON

[4D. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council on an application by Pov Chin, J.M. Civil Engineering, for the approval of a Special Use Permit to allow for a convenience store with gas pumps on property zoned General Commercial/Retail (C-2) District. The 0.73-acre site is located approximately 330 feet east of the intersection of Lakeview Parkway and Eula Street, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

TO THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA. ITEM 4D WHICH IS CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO SEE COUNCIL AND THE APPLICATION -- PUT MY GLASSES ON.

PAUL SIN, TO ALLOW FOR CONVENIENT STORE, WITH GAS PUMPS, GENERAL COMMERCIAL RETAIL C2 DISTRICT, 0.73 ACRE LOT, IS APPROXIMATELY 083 TO THE PINTER ROWLETT TEXAS.

MR. ROBERTS. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

> SIR, AS WE JUST HEARD, TONIGHT WILL BE WRAPPING UP WITH THE DISCUSSION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT, TO ALLOW THE GAS PUMPS ON THE PROPERTY ZONE GENERAL COMMERCIAL RETAIL, EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HUGH AND LAKE VIEW PARKWAY IN FRONT OF WAL-MART. IF APPROVED, THE, THE SITE WILL

[03:40:02]

BE REDEVELOPED WITH ADMONISHINGY OIL, GAS STATION CONVENIENCE STORE, WHICH IS THE CURRENT USE ON SITE.

I WILL GET INTO A LITTLE BIT SHORTLY AS TO WHY WE'RE CONSIDERING AN S.A.T. FOR THE USE.

SNEAK PEEK, 77301 AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN, REQUIRES AN S.A.T., FOR THE COMMUNITY GAS PUMPS.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, LAURA. SO LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THE SITE, WILL HELP US TO UNDERSTAND, WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS TONIGHT THE SITE WAS DEVELOPED IN 2001, UNDER THE REGIONAL RETAIL C2 ZONING DISTRICT AT THAT TIME IN THE 2001 DEVELOPMENT CODE, CONVENIENCE STORES WITH GAS PUMPS WERE INVOLVED WITH WRIGHT. AND SINCE THEN, WE'VE HAD A CURRENT SEP. THE SEP REQUIREMENT WAS ADDED FOR THE USE CATEGORY. AND AS SO, ANY REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE WOULD REQUIRE THE CURRENT REQUIREMENT SUP AS WELL AS STRIKING UP SOME OTHER DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING LANDSCAPING AND SIGNAGE, WHICH WE WILL GO THROUGH AS WELL. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, LAURA.

>> SOME SITE DAMAGE FOR. AND JUST SHY OF THE 24R50E QUARTER TRACK, AS PART OF THE FRONTAGE, WHICH IS PART OF THE SITE AND 245 FEET IN DEPTH. AGS I DISCUSSED EARLIER, IT IS DEVELOPED AS MURPHY OIL, AND IT'S GOT THREE PARKING SPACES TO THE EAST. ABOUT 290 SQUARE FEET OF ENCLOSED RETAIL SPACE, WHICH IS SEEN IN RED AND ABOUT JUST NORTH OF 2700 SQUARE FOOT CANOPY, WHICH IS IN YELLOW THERE.

ACCESS TO THE SITE IS FROM TWO POINTS.

ONE IN THE NORTH AND ONE IN THE WEST.

BOTH OF WHICH ARE TWO EQUAL ACCESS EASEMENTS, THAT SERVE THE WAL-MART SUPER CENTER AREA AS WELL.

AS FAR AS EXISTING TREES, THERE'S APPROXIMATELY 24 INCH CALIBER TREATED WEST TO THE SITE AND ORNAMENTAL TREE TO THE SOUTH. IT'S THE APPLICANT'S INTENTION TO INCORPORATE THAT TO THE DEVELOPMENT.

NEXT SLIDE AS WELL. AND WITH THE REQUESTED SUP WE HAVE THE CONSENSUAL PLAN. AND KIND OF PUT THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PROPOSED SITE IN FOR YOU.

AND ALL THE BIG THINGS. THE PROPOSED SITE WILL HAVE EIGHT STATIONS AND INCREASE FROM 4 ON THE PREVIOUS SITE.

WE'LL BE INCREASING THE CANOPY AREA FROM 27, OVER 2700 SQUARE FEET TO 6,855 SQUARE FEET ROUGHLY.

IT WILL INCLUDE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 1400 SQUARE FOOT CONVENIENCE STORE, WHICH IS A LITTLE BIT MORE TRADITIONAL THAN THE EXISTING 290 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE.

THERE WILL BE A SIDE, COMPLETION OF THE SIDEWALK TO THE SOUTH OF THE SITE. THAT WILL BE THE NORTH END OF WHAT DUE PARKWAY. I APOLOGIZE.

I PUT THE KEEGAN IN FRONT OF THE SIDEWALK LOCATION.

WE'LL SPEAK TO THAT AS WELL. AS WELL AS THE DEDICATION OF LANDSCAPE BUFFER AREAS, ON ALL FOUR SIDES OF THE PROPERTY.

THAT WILL BE 6 FEET FOR COMPATIBLITY BUFFERS ON EAST AND 24 FEET FOR RIGHT OF WAY BUFFER ALONG THE LAKE PARKWAY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. SIR, I'LL KIND OF GO IN THE BACK OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS. SOME OF THE OBVIOUS ONES FIRST, THE INCREASE FROM 4-8 STATIONS WILL ALLOW FOR MORE SERVICE VEHICLES AT A TIME. LIKEWISE, THE INCREASED IN CANOPY AREA WILL PROTECT AND COVER THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THIS DOES, THIS DOES INCLUDE AN INCREASE IN LOT COVERAGE.

HOWEVER, THE C2 DISTRICT, DOES NOT HAVE A MAXIMUM LOT REQUIREMENT. THE APPLICANT, WE'RE NOT IN THE RANGE OF A VIOLATING ANY OF THAT, IN TERMS OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS, AS YOU COULD SEE IN THE LOCATION.

[03:45:02]

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, LAURA. SPEAKING TO THE SIDEWALK TO THE SOIT OF THE SITE, IT WILL BE REQUIRED SHOULD THE SUP BE APPROVED AND THE SITE BE REDEVELOPED.

THIS IS THE ONLY STRETCH OF SIDEWALK ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF LAKE VIEW PARKWAY, THAT DOES NOT HAVE A COMPLETED SIDEWALK BETWEEN DECKSON ROAD AND ROWLETT ROAD TO THE EAST, AS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT STRETCH WITHIN THE SIDEWALK, AS THE ONLY BREAK BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAY ACCESSES. LIKEWISE, CIRCLES ON THE SPRING, YOU COULD SEE THE DARK STATION THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY.

IT RESIDES, YOU KNOW WITH NO IMPROVED SURFACES ACCESSING IT.

SO THIS COMPLETION OF THE SIDEWALK, IT WOULD BE ACHIEVED THROUGH SUP PROCESS AS FAR AS THE REDEVELOPMENT.

IT WILL SERVE PEOPLE COMING TO AND FROM THE STATION.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. AS I DISCUSSED EARLIER, WE'LL HAVE SOME DEDICATION OF LAND FOR LANDSCAPE BUFFERS THAT ARE IMPOSED DURING THE PLANNED PROCESS.

DURING THE SUP PROCESS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE, WE GAVE OURSELVES ENOUGH REAL ESTATE, IN THE BACK END, WE'LL BE -- NOT HAVING ENOUGH AREAS. THAT'S WHY WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING IT HERE. YOU COULD SEE FROM THE AERIAL SPOT, THERE'S NO DELIBERATELY PLANTING ON SITE.

ASIDE FROM EVEN THE TWO TREES THAT EXIST.

DO NOT APPEAR TO BE DELIBERATELY PLACED.

AND SO THE TABLE THERE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN WILL KIND OF BREAK DOWN WHAT THAT WILL LOOK LIKE.

AS I DISCUSSED EARLIER, IT'S SIX FEET OF AREA, ON THE NORTH EEFLT AND WEST, THAT WILL COME WITH THE PLANTING REQUIREMENT.

OF ONE TREE AND 10 EVERGREEN SHRUBS.

THE BUFFER TO THE SOUTH, IS A RIGHT OF WAY BUFFER THAT WILL MEASURE 20 FEET IN LENGTH. IT WILL HAVE ONE FEET, AND THEN THE STANDARD TEN SHRUBS. BEST PROCESS, SUP APPROVED WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE, WILL INTRODUCE QUITE A BIT OF LANDSCAPING TO THE SITE, THAT DOES NOT CURRENTLY EXIST.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. I JUST WANT TO FIND SOME SITE PHOTOS. THIS IS THE PHOTO OF THE EXISTING MURPHY LOCATION FROM THE SOUTHEAST WAL-MART THERE IN THE BACK, WORKING ON THE RIGHT THERE.

YOU COULD SEE HERE TWO PUMPS ON THIS SIDE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, LAURA. AND THEN I WANTED TO FIND SOME IMAGES OF THE TREES. HERE'S THE OAK TREE TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY, YOU HAVE SHERMAN IN THE LEFT AND ORNAMENTAL TREE ON THE RIGHT. THE APPLICANT IS, HAS COMMITTED TO KEEPING THOSE. AND INCORPORATING THEM INTO THE PLANTING REQUIREMENTS THAT IS LIBEL.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, LAURA. WE DID SEND OUT PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS FOR THE SUP AS IT IS ZONING ACTION.

WE SENT EIGHT 200 FOOT NOTICES AND FIVE 500 FOOT NOTICES.

WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANYTHING BACK IN OPPOSITION OR IN FAVOR.

WITH THAT, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE SUP TO ALLOW FOR THE CONVENIENCE STORE GAS PUMPS, PROPOSED SUP WOULD ALLOW FOR THE SITE TO BE REDEVELOPED. IT HASN'T LARGELY BEEN TOUCHED SINCE IT WAS FIRST DEVELOPED. LIKEWISE, THE APPROVAL WOULD BRING THE SITE UP TO THE COMPLIANCE OF ANY REDEVELOPMENT, WHICH WOULD NOT BE PREVIOUSLY CAPABLE UNDER THE CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

AND I'M OPEN FOR QUESTIONS, THE APPLICANT IS HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. HE DOESN'T HAVE A PRESENTATION.

HE'S JUST HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> THANK YOU, MR. ROBERTS. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE DEVELOPER? ANYBODY.

MR. COTE? >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF. WILL DART BE ANY TYPE OF IMPROVEMENT TO THE BUS STATION THERE AS SOON AS WE GET THE

[03:50:02]

SIDEWALK INTO IT? >> I DO NOT KNOW FOR CERTAIN WHAT DART'S PLANS ARE FOR THE STOP.

ALL WE CAN DO HERE IS PROVIDE THE PAVEMENT AND GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE INTERESTED IN PERHAPS ADDRESSING THAT BUT I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ON TOP OF HAND.

>> I THINK THAT'S THE POINT. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THEY KNOW ABOUT THE IMPROVEMENTS AND THEY CAN GET INTERESTED.

>> SURE. I'LL MAKE SURE WE REACH OUT TO THE RESPONSIBLE PARTIES FOR THAT.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE IN THE HOUSE? PLEASE SPEAK UP BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE EVERYBODY.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND LARGELY, WE HAVE ANY ONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK?

>> WE HAVE ONE CALLER ON THE LINE.

CALLER 2, IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM, PLEASE UNMUTE, PRESS STAR 6. I'LL TAKE THAT AS A NO, AND TURN IT OVER TO SUSAN FOR THE E-MAILED COMMENTS.

>> I HAVE NO WRITTEN COMMENTS FOR THIS ITEM.

>> ALL RIGHT. WELL, THEN IF THERE'S NO ONE TO SPEAK, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I THINK WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION. MR. COTE?

>> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT, TO APPROVE A PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A CONVENIENCE STORE WITH GAS PUMPS IN GENERAL ZONE

DISTRICT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR APPROVAL. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? PLEASE SPEAK UP BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE YOU.

>> WESLEY DAVIS, SECOND. >> WESLEY DAVIS, WE HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. WESLEY DAVIS. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ANYBODY WANT TO COMMENT ON THIS ONE.

PLEASE SPEAK UP. >> I JUST THINK IT'S A WIN-WIN

SITUATION. >> THANK YOU, MARK.

I AGREE WITH YOU. ANYBODY ELSE?

>> I AGREE. IT'S A GOOD, TWO THUMB'S UP.

>> OKAY. LET'S TAKE A VOTE. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND A SECOND. AND ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS AND THANK YOU EVERYONE. WE DON'T NORMALLY GO THIS LATE FOR THE NEW ONES, IN CASE YOU'RE WONDERING

>> WE MADE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.