[1. CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:14] >> IT'S 7:02 AND WE ARE GOING TO RECONVENE WITH THE REGULAR SESSION OF THE MEETING. AS AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 551.071 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, THIS MEETING MAY BE CONVENED INTO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEEKING CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL ADVICE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ON ANY AGENDA ITEM HEREIN. THE CITY OF ROWLETT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO RECONVENE, RECESS OR REALIGN THE REGULAR SESSION OR CALLED EXECUTIVE SESSION OR ORDER OF BUSINESS AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO ADJOURNMENT. TO PROVIDE COMMENT FOR THE MEETING (IF YOU ARE NOT ATTENDING IN PERSON), PLEASE SEND AN EMAIL TO CITIZENINPUT@ROWLETT.COM BY 3:30 P.M. THE DAY OF THE MEETING. PLEASE SPECIFICALLY STATE WHETHER YOUR COMMENT IS REGARDING A SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM OR A GENERAL COMMENT TO THE COMMISSION. YOUR COMMENT WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD DURING THE MEETING (MUST BE WITHIN THE 3-MINUTE TIME LIMIT). FOR IN-PERSON COMMENTS, REGISTRATION FORMS/INSTRUCTIONS ARE AVAILABLE INSIDE THE DOOR OF THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. AT THIS TIME, THREE-MINUTE [3. CITIZENS’ INPUT] COMMENTS WILL BE TAKEN FROM THE AUDIENCE ON ANY TOPIC. NO ACTION CAN BE TAKEN BY THE COMMISSION DURING CITIZENS' INPUT. IF YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK ON A SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEM YOU CAN SPEAK NOW OR WAIT UNTIL THAT ITEM IS PRESENTED. DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? OKAY, ONE TO READ. PERFECT. >> JENNIFER DIXON [ADDRESS] I'M IN FAVOR OF THE BREYER WOOD . . . REPLAT. FROM WHAT I CAN TELL IN THE DETAILS INCLUDED IN CITY'S DOCUMENTATION I'M HOPING THE DIVISION INTO TWO SEPARATE LOTS WOULD SPEED UP THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, HOPING HAVING THEM SEPARATED, THIS NEEDS TO BE COMPLETED AN DEVELOPED WITH ITEMS THAT WILL LAST BECAUSE THEY'RE NEEDED VALUED WANTED BY THE COMMUNITY. SEVERAL BUSINESSES HAVE COME AND FAILED IN THIS AREA. HOPEFULLY THE DEVELOPMENTS WILL MAKE SENSE FOR THE AREA AND HOPEFULLY BREAKING INTO SMALLER PIECES WILL AID IN RECEIVING THE ATTENTION . . . I AGREE WITH THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST. [4. CONSENT AGENDA] >> THANK YOU. OKAY. WE WILL MOVE TO THE ITEM 4. THE FOLLOWING MAY BE ACTED UPON IN ONE MOTION. A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONER OR A CITIZEN MAY REQUEST ITEMS BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. WE HAVE DISCUSSED. DID EVERYONE HAVE A CHANCE FOR ITEM 4 A-TO REVIEW THE MINUTES OF THE PRIOR MEET? ITEM 4 B, 4B. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE BRIARWOOD ARMSTRONG ADDITION LOT 7, BLOCK A REPLAT CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON THE BRIARWOOD ARMSTRONG ADDITION REPLAT, A REQUEST BY WALKER ROYALL, BRIARWOOD ROWLETT, LLC., TO REPLAT LOT 7, BLOCK A OF THE BRIARWOOD ARMSTRONG ADDITION. I'M READY FOR A MOTION. MR. COTE. >> MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA BY MR. COTE AND WE HAVE A SECOND I BELIEVE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND FROM TAMARA? AND LET'S VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR. SUSAN, ARE YOU READY? PARDON ME? YES, WE HAD A SECOND FROM TAMARA. WE HAD A MOTION FROM JOHN. OKAY. WE NEED TO DO A HAND VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HANDS? AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS AND WE [5A. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council regarding a request by Gaby Rawlings, Jackson Walker LLP., on behalf of property owner RRC Acquisitions VI LLC., to rezone the subject property from Single-Family Residential (SF-9) District and General Commercial/Retail (C-2) District to Planned Development (PD) District for Form-Based New Neighborhood (FB-NN) Uses and approval of a Concept Plan to construct 32 single-family homes. The approximately 5.89-acre site is located west of Wilson Road and approximately 200 feet north of Woodside Road, situated in the J. W. Gardener Abstract, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.] WILL MOVE TO ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERING. [00:05:08] PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS MAY BE MADE IN PERSON AND WILL BE LIMITED TO 3-MINUTES. REGISTRATION FORMS/INSTRUCTIONS ARE AVAILABLE INSIDE THE DOOR OF THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. DUE TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST I'M RECUSING MYSELF FROM 5-A AND WILL RETAKE THE CHAIR AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF ITEM 5-A. 5A. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING A REQUEST BY GABY RAWLINGS, JACKSON WALKER LLP., ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER RRC ACQUISITIONS VI LLC., TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (SF-9) DISTRICT AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL/RETAIL (C-2) DISTRICT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) DISTRICT FOR FORM-BASED NEW NEIGHBORHOOD (FB-NN) USES AND APPROVAL OF A CONCEPT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 32 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. THE APPROXIMATELY 5.89-ACRE SITE IS LOCATED WEST OF WILSON ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 200 FEET NORTH OF WOODSIDE ROAD, SITUATED IN THE J. W. GARDENER ABSTRACT, IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. MR. ROBERTS. IS THAT. >> AS WAS JUST TREATED INTO RECORD THIS ITEM IS TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC RECOMMENDATION REGARDING REZONING REQUEST CHANGING THE ZONING FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL AN SINGLE-FAMILY TO PD DISTRICT FOR SINGLE-FAMILY USE TO CONSTRUCT DEVELOPMENT. DECEMBER 17 PROPERTY NORTH OF THIS SITE WAS REZONED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN AGE RESTRICTED MULTI-FAMILY COMPLEX THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE SLIGHT SLIVER OF C-2 YOU SEE ON THE SUBJECT SITE N. MAY OF 2021, THE PLANNING AN ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DE NIGHT TO CITY COUNCIL ON REZONING REQUEST, REFLECTED 33 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS. JUNE OF THIS YEAR, CITY COUNCIL REMANDED THAT APPLICATION BACK TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STATING CONCERNS WITH THE LOT AN DWELLING SIZE THE ENTRYWAY LANDSCAPING CONDITIONS AND EXAMS BUILT WITH SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS JUST AS REFRESHER AND FOR EDUCATIONAL MOMENT FOR THE VIEWING AUDIENCE THE COMMISSIONERS NOT WITH US THAT DID REFLECT 33 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 3300 SQUARE FOOT. THE APPLICANT IS PURSUING APPLICATION FOR 32 HOMES THIS BEING WITH THE BASE DISTRICT OF THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD UNDER THE FORM BASED CODE RATHER THAN THE RDC. SITE DATA THE SITE IS DEVELOPED SINGLE-FAMILY HOME WITH SHEDS THAT WOULD BE APPROVED. A TREE CANOPY ON SITE. CAN YOU SEE THAT IN THE GROWN DOTTED LINE. THERE'S APPROXIMATELY .86 ACRES OF FLOOD PLAIN WITH A 50 FOOT WIDE GAS EASEMENT THAT RUNS DIAGONALLY. YOU'LL SEE THAT ON THE RED LINE. SITE ACCESS FOR THE PROPOSAL IS PROPOSED FROM TWO ALLEY ACCESS POINTS ON WILSON ROAD TIN TERRIBLE ALLEY CONNECTIONS DO PROVIDE A LOOP ON THE ACCOMMODATE THE FIRE APPARATUS ON THE NORTHWEST PORTION OF THE SITE, A TIA OR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS WOULD BE REQUIRED AT THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHOULD THIS BE APPROVED THAT TIA WOULD IDENTIFY ANY IMPROVEMENT NECSSARY TO WILSON ROAD OR SURROUNDING INFRASTRUCTURE. THE CITY HAS APPROACHED THE GARLAND INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS EAST AND SOUTH. TO EXTEND THE WILSON ROAD RIGHT OF WAY NORTH TOWARDS LAKEVIEW PARKWAY. THEY ARE REQUIRED TO BE SORT OF SPOKEN TO ABOUT IT ON THIS PROPERTY. A SURVEY HAS BEEN CONDUCTED BY THE CITY. IT'S IN REVIEW BY US OR RATHER THE CITY. THE APPLICANT HAS CONDUCTED A FLOOD STUDY OF MUDDY CREEK. THE FLOOD MODEL DOES REPRESENT ALL UP TREATMENT PROPERTIES FULLY DEVELOPED INCLUDING THE MULTITY FAMILY DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH. THE STUDY CONCLUDED THE STUD BY DE DIMENSION WILL HAVE ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE CREEK AN DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES BECAUSE THE TIME OF THE PEAK DISCHARGE FROM THE RETENTION POND WOULD COINCIDE WITH THE DISCHARGE OF THE CREEK. THEREFORE THE PROJECT DRAINAGE [00:10:02] INFRASTRUCTURE CAN BE DESIGNED FOR DISCHARGE INTO THE STREAK WITHOUT DETENTION. USE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING IS C-T AND SF-9. THE SF-9 DISTRICT IS INTEND E FOR LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT THE C-2 LOW INTENSITY OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL USES AS GENERAL RETAIL DISTRICT. WITH ANY REZONING CASE STAFF IS TAKING A LOOK AT SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN. YOU'LL NOTICE MOST OF THE PROPERTIES IN THE AREA ARE ZONED FOR REDEVELOPMENT. THERE'S A SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT BEING CONSTRUCTED APPROACHING BUILD OUT TO THE SOUTH BEYOND THE WOODSIDE ROAD THOROUGHFARE. AGAIN TO THE NORTH YOU'LL SEE THE AGE RESTRICTED MULTI-FAMILY. STAFF TAKES A LOOK AT THE EXAMS BUILT WITH THE SURROUNDING BUILT ENVIRONMENT. YOU'LL SEE THAT THE PROPERTY ZONED SF-9 SUBJECT TO 9,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT WITH MINIMUM DWELLING AREA OR BUILDING AREA OF 1800 SQUARE FEET. YOU'LL SEE THERE ON THE TABLE THE PROPOSED PD FOR NEW NEIGHBORHOOD USE IS PROPOSING A 2700 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AREA. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THE BUILT IN ENVIRONMENT OFTEN DOES DIFFICULT FORMER THE ZONING MINIMUMS IN THIS CASE OF THIS PROJECT SF-9 PROPERTIES TO THE WEST HAVE AN AVERAGE LOT SIZE OVER 60,000 SQUARE FEET AS WELL AS AVERAGE DWELLING UNIT SIZE OF ALMOST 2,000 SQUARE FEET. THE WOODSIDE ESTATE DIVISION DEVELOPING SOUTH SIDE WOODSIDE DRIVE HAVE AVERAGE DWELLING AREA OF 3250 SQUARE FEET BASED ON ACTIVE BUILDING PERMITS THAT WE HAVE. AS IT RELATES TO THE PROPOSED PD CONCEPT PLAN WE ARE LOOKING AT 32 LOT SUBDIVISION. THOSE ARE IN YELLOW. WITH THE FOLLOWING DESIGN CRITERIA. MINIMUM LOT SIZE 2700 SQUARE FOOT, LOT WIDTH AN DEPARTMENT OF 30 AND 08 FEET LOOKING AT ABOUT A 6.1 PER ACRE DENSITY THERE. ARE ADDITIONAL 8 MOA LOTS WHICH OPERATE AS MUSE OPEN SPACES INCLUDING A DOG PARK PICNIC TABLES PEDESTRIAN TRAIL ON THE FLOOD PLAIN AND MUSE OPEN SPACES. WHAT YOU SEE ON SCREEN IS A COMPARISON OF THE DETENTIONAL REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN THE EXISTING OWNING OF SF-9 AND THE PROPOSED PD STANDARDS. YOU'LL NOTE THE LARGEST DEFENSIVE RELATION WOULD BE THE FRONT SET BACK OF THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD REQUIRING ABILITY TO ZONE SO RANGE OF A-10 FEET WHAT IS THE PD STANDARD IS LOOKING TO INCREASE THAT TO 20 FEET. THE MAXIMUM BUILD 2 ZONE IS ENCOURAGE WALKABILITY AND PRESERVE THE PEDESTRIAN RECOMMEND. STANDARDS NOT SPECIFIED IN PD WOULD COMPLY IN THE NOOMD SOENG DISTRICT IN THE FORM BASE CODE. SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS IS IS RELATES TO THE CONCEPT PLAN THREE AS THE 8 HOA LOTS ARE OPEN SPACES MEANING GENERALLY INTENDED TO HAVE THE CON GRE IMMIGRATION OF THE PUBLIC. LOT ON SCREEN HIGHLIGHTED WITH THE RED BOUNDARY OCCUPIES MOST OF THE 50 FOOT GAS EASEMENT THAT DOZEN COUPLE BETTER THE LOT AS ABOVE GROUND IMPROVEMENT ARE NOT PERMITTED IN ITS LIMITS. AS IT RELATES TO THE MUSE ALLEY CONDITION BEING PROPOSED WE WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE DESIGN CRITERIA THE FORM BASE CODE HOW THAT'S BEING APPLIED TO THIS PROJECT. IN YEN MUSE LOTS ARE SERVICED BY AN ALLEY. IT'S TYPICALLY 15 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY 12 FOOT PAVEMENT A MUSE PAVEMENT IS 20 FOOT PAVEMENT WITH 20 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY. THESE HOMES FACE DEDICATED OPEN SPACE. MUSE AL LIST DESIGNED INTENDED TO FACE PUBLIC OPEN SFAISZ COMMONLY USED FOR ADDRESSING TO HAVE ALLEY FIRE PROTECTION OTHER PLEDGES. IT'S THE INTENT OF THE FORM BASE CODE MUSE LOT TO ENCOURAGE [00:15:04] WALKABILITY. YOU'LL SEE THE IMAGE ON SCREEN IS TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE APPENDIX OF THE FORM BASE CODE. YOU'LL SEE THERE IN THE FRONT OF HOMES INSTEAD OF AN ACTUAL STREET IT'S AN OPEN PRESUMABLY BEHIND THESE HOMES, NOT SHOWN IN THE PHOTO WOULD BE A WIDER ALLEY THAT SERVICES THESE HOMES. THE PROPOSAL ACTUALLY REBEL FLEKTS 32 SPOTS. YOU'LL SEE THE OPEN SPACES THESE LOBTS FRONT ON I'VE SURROUNDED WITH RED. THE ALICE CONNECT TO WILSON AT TWO POINTS THAT ALLOWS FOR INGRESS AN EGRESS OF RESIDENTS AN EMERGENCY VEHICLES. FBC REQUIRES WIDTH BE 20 FEET SO THOSE LOTS WOULD START AT THE EDGE AND BE SERVICED OFF THE OF IT. THIS PROPOSAL IS INCREASING THE PAVEMENT WIDTH TO 26 FEEMENTD AND THE RIGHT OF WAY TO 30 FEET. THIS INCREASE IN PAVEMENT WIDTH FROM 20-26 FEET DOES NOT MEET THE INTENT OF A MUSE ALLEY AS MORE OF A SUPPORTING HOUSING TYPE. THE PROPOSED MUSE ALICE APPEAR TO BE USED IN PLACE OF A DEDICATED STREET. A STREET IS TYPICALLY A 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY WITH 30 FOOT PAVEMENT SO FOUR FEET SHORT FROM THAT FACE OF CURB. AS IT RELATES TO EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS WHENEVER WE GET AN APPLICATION SENT OUT TO OUR CITY DEMOCRATS FIRE DEPARTMENT IS DEFINITELY ONE OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT THESE GET RUN BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS STATED THEIR CONCERN WITH PROVIDING VEHICLE ACCESS SPECIFICALLY TO LOT 7-15 SURROUNDING IN RED BOUNDARY ON SCREEN. THE CONCERN ABOUT THE NARROW ALLEY PAVEMENT THAT WOULD BE UTILIZED SOLELY TO PROVIDE EMERGENCY SERVICES TO THESE HOME AS WELL AS THE HOSE LAY REQUIREMENTS OF 150 FEET. THE PROPOSAL IS INCREASING THE MUSE ALLEY FROM FORM BASE CODE STANDARD BUT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS SUPPRESSED CONCERN TYPICALLY IN A FORM BASED PROJECT WITH A SURROUNDING TREATMENT NETWORK THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO SERVICE FROM THOSE STREETS. THE 26 FEET OF ALLEY PAVEMENT DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR ON STREET OR ON ALLEY PARKING. PARKING IS NOT ALLOWED WITHIN MUSE ALICE, HOWEVER MONITORING THAT CONDITION FROM THE CITY SIDE OF THINGS DOES EXPEND RESOURCES AN PERSONNEL. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS RECOMMENDED 60 FOOT RIGHTS OF WAY WITH 30 FOOT OF PAVEMENT UTILIZED. WITH REZONING WE LOOK AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AN FUTURE LAND USE PLAN. THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATES THE PROPERTY SOUTH AN WEST AS STATE RESIDENTIAL AS REMINDER STATE RESIDENTIAL LOTS HAVE A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 25,000 SQUARE FEET. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT HAS LOTS WITH MINIMUM 2700 SQUARE FEET. AS SHOWN IN THE CONCEPT PLAN THIS IS NOT EXAMSABLE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STATE RESIDENTIAL ALTHOUGH ZONING AN CONDITIONS ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH FUTURE LAND IT'S PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THE PROPOSED SUBVISION WOULD FURTHER GOAL 5. AS IT RELATES MOVING AWAY FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BUT TIN 10TH OF THE FORM BAITS CODE PER ARTICLE II OF THE FORM BAITS CODE THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN FEELING NEIGHBORHOOD WITH CLOSE PROXIMITY TO OPEN SPACES SALES AN PERSONAL SUPPORT SERVICES, NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE NEW DISTRICT ARE INTENDED TO OFFER VARIETY OF HOUSING TIMES INCLUDING MANOR ESTATE COTTAGE CASITA LOT TYPES. I'LL ELABORATE ON THAT THE PROPOSED PD DOES NOT MEET THE INTENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS THE LOTS ARE NOT COMPLIMENTARY WITH THE SURROUNDING BUILT ENVIRONMENT MORE DOES IT PROVIDE DIVERSITY IN LOT TYPE AS THESE 32 LOT TYPES ARE KASOTA ON MUSE. ON SCREEN YOU'LL SEE AN APPENDIX ALL THE ALLOWABLE LOT TYPES MAIN OR ESTATE VILLAGE BEING THE LARGER SIDE. YOU'LL SEE THE COTTAGE ON THE LOWER SIDE CASITA ON MUSE IS THE CONCLUSIVE LOT TYPE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. PER ARTICLE II, MIX OF HOUSING TYPES IS REQUIRED FOR NEW NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS AGAIN 10-20 ACRES. THIS DOES NOT MEET THAT INTENT AS IT DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR HOU [00:20:04] HOUSING. IN ORDER TO REZONE THERE IS A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT OF 20 ACHERS MANY THAT'S TO PROVIDE HOLISTIC DEVELOPMENT WITH MIX OF HOUSING TYPES. YOU'LL NOTE THIS SUBJECT SITE IS SHY OF SIX ACRES. IT DOES APPEAR THE SELECTION OF THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT IS BASED ON THE ATTEMPT TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF VARIATIONS FROM A BASE CODE RATHER THAN PROVIDING THE INTENT OF THE FORM BASE CODE. FUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RESILIENT NEIGHBORHOODS FOCUS ON A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES THAT CREATE A COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD INCLUDING FLEXIBLE LOT SHAPES AND CONFIGURATION THAT WILL ADD TO DIVERSITY, PROVIDING RESIDENTS WITH A SUBDIVISION OF A SENSE OF PLACE AND BELONGING TYPICALLY CONNECTING NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS. THE PROPOSED CONCEPT PLAN DOES NOT INCORPORATE A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES AS THE ONLY PROVIDED ARE THE MUSE CASITA LOTS 2700 SQUARE FEET. THE CITY STRATEGIC PLAN HAS A GOAL TO STRENGTHEN RESILIENT NEIGHBORHOODS. ALTHOUGH COMMON AREA LOTS IN THE PROPOSED PLAN ARE WITHIN WALKABLE DISTANCES TO RESIDENTS AS HOMES ARE FRONTING THEY'RE NOT TO ACCOMMODATE ACTIVE OPEN SPACES WITH THE DOG PARK THE GAZEBO OR PASSIVE OPEN SPACES THAT ARE MORE OF AN ABILITY TO MOVE ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPOSED PD DOES NOT INCORPORATE A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES AND THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT ALIGNED WITH THE STRATEGIC PLAN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE OVERALL CAN FORM BASE CODE. JUST SITE PHOTOS FOR YOU TAKEN FROM WOODSIDE ROAD THIS IS THE CANMY ALONG THE EXTENT THAT WE HAVE AT THE MOMENT. YOU'LL SEE THAT AGAIN AN EXISTING APPROACH TO THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE SOMEWHAT WE SENT OUR COURTESY NOTICES ON NOVEMBER 5TH, WE HAVE RECEIVED FIVE IN FAVOR FROM THE 200 FOOT, ONE IN FAVOR FROM THE 500 FOOT SINCE PUBLICATION OF THE PACKET. WE RECEIVED THAT FIFTH RESPONSE TO THE 200 FOOT THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION. WITH THAT STAFF DOES RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUEST TO REZONE THE PROPERTY THE PD FOR NEW NEIGHBORHOOD USES, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT SUITABLE OR MEET THE INTENT OF THE FORM BASE CODE AS ALICE ARE 30 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY AND THE KPROEPD CONFIGURE CASE DOES POST CHALLENGE FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS AS ON STREET PARKING THAT COULD REDUCE ACCESSIBLE PAVEMENT DOWN TO 10 FEET FOR PAYTON'S PEDESTRIANS EMERGENCY SERVICE AND THE LIKE W. THAT STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. THE APPLICANT AN THEIR TEAM HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. THE APPLICANT WANT TO GIVE THEIR PRESENTATION? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> HI NAY NAME IS GABBY RAWLINGS [ADDRESS] WITH ME I HAVE BILL FISHER PART OF THE APPLICANT AND RICK SHEFFIELD AND BRYCE ECKER BERGER AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. STAFF DID A GREAT JOB AND THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING. WE ARE HERE ON BEHALF OF CREEKSIDE VILLAGE TO DO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE FORM BASE CODE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT. IMPORTANTLY, THIS IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A STRAIGHT REZONING OFF THE FORM BASED CODE. SO, THAT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION. SO, OUR REQUEST TODAY IS AN APPROVAL OF A PD FOR SMALL AFFORDABLE COMMUNITY HOMES FOR PURCHASE SINGLE FAMILY CASITAS. IT'S GOING TO BE BUILD TO SUIT FOR HOMEOWNERS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE FINANCIAL AND DESIGN CONTROL. THE TARGET SALES PRICE IS GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN $175,000345,000 AND BE SPONSORED BY THE ROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION. [00:25:03] OF NOTE WE ARE MAKING THE REQUEST BECAUSE THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CANNOT ACCOMMODATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THESE FAMILIES NFL OTHER WORDS THE COST WOULD HAVE TO BE PASSED ONTO THE HOMEOWNERS USING THE CURRENT STANDARDS. AS STAFF PRESENTED THE SITE IS 5.88 ACRES OF VACANT LAND A COUPLE OF SHEDS ON THERE. IT'S ACROSS FROM PEARSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WHICH PROVIDES A SAFE ATTRACTIVE LIFESTYLE FOR YOUNG FAMILIES TO BE WALKING DISTANCE TO PEARSON ELEMENTARY. TO THE EAST THERE'S A FLOOD WAY AND CREEK WITH NATURAL AMENITIES TO USE ALSO THERE'S A WALKING TRAIL WAY THAT GOES AROUND THE ACTUAL PROPERTY WHICH PROVIDE A CONNECTABILITY. IT IS ALSO IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO AMENITIES OFF [NAME] ROAD DALROCK ROAD TOM DUNN AND WALMART. THIS IS A LOWER TRAFFIC AREA WHICH FURTHER PROMOTES THE WALKABILITY OF THE AREA. SO, JUST GOING BACK IN A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY, THE INITIAL APPLICATION WAS TO COME OFF OF A COUPLE OF THE STANDARDS FROM THE CURRENT SF-5 STANDARDS. WE WENT BACK AFTER BEING REMANDED WITH CITY COUNCIL AND DECIDED WITH STAFF IT WOULD BE MORE SUITABLE TO COME WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT USING THE FORM BASE STANDARDS FOR NEW NEIGHBORHOOD W. THAT, WE DECIDED TO EITHER MEET OR EXCEED THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FORM BASE STANDARDS. WE EXPLICITLY TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE FIRE MARSHAL'S CONCERN FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AN THAT'S A PRIMARY LEASE HURRICANE STEAD OF BEING 20 FOOT WE INCREASED TO 30 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY WHY WE TOOK AWAY ONE LOT TO THE NORTH TO MEET THE HOSE LANE REQUIREMENTS. IMPORTANTLY, THE DEFINITION FROM THE CODE OF PD DISTRICT IS ALLOWED, ITS INTENT IS TO ALLOW INTEGRATION OF VARIOUS LAND USES FOR TO COME DATE THE USE OF ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AN INTEREST GRATE USES THAT RESULT IN HIGHER QUALITY OF DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN BE ACHIEVED IN OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS AND I THINK THE LATTER PART OF THAT SENTENCE IS IMPERATIVE WITH. THIS IT'S A HIGHER QUALITY DEVELOPMENT. WE ARE EXCEEDING SEVERAL OF THE STANDARDS OF THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICTS FROM THE FORM BASED CODE. NEXT IS THE FORM BASED DISTRICT THAT'S DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE A MORE POSITIVE AND SUSTAINABLE OUTCOME FOR A DEVELOPMENT TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE BOTH WITHIN INTO NEW DEVELOPMENT AND I AM APPROVE OVERALL PERCEPTION OF THE CITY. IT PROVIDES MINIMUM MAXIMUM SPECIFICSES WITH STANDARDS FOR LAYOUTS OF BUILDING AN DESIGN. IT'S PROVIDING FOR FLEXIBILITY IN OTHER WORDS. HERE WE ARE PROVIDING A UNIQUE DEVELOPMENT TO ACCOMMODATE AN AFFORDABLE VIABLE COMMUNITY FOR SINGLE-FAMILY CASITA HOMES. AND HERE ARE THE ACTUAL STANDARDS SEWING THAT WE ARE MEETING OR EXCEEDING THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARDS. RATHER THAN ME REPEAT WHAT'S IN FRONT OF ME I'LL MOVE ON FOR THE SAKE OF TIME. IMPORTANTLY, THIS DOES MEET THE INTENT OF THE FORM BASED NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARDS. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT SPECIFICALLY SUBSECTION B, C, AND D. OUR MAIN OBJECTIVE IS TO ATTRACT YOUNG PROFESSIONALS, PROFESSIONALS COUPLES AN DE NESTERS RETIREES AN SENIORS OUR OBJECTIVE SINCE THE FIRST SUBMISSION WE HAD IN I GUESS IT WAS DECEMBER OF 2020. WE ARE ALSO TRYING TO PROVIDE THE ABILITY FOR THE CITY'S RESIDENTS TO MOVE TO APPROPRIATE HOUSING WITHIN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY WHEN CHANGES OCCUR IN THEIR LIFE WITHOUT HAVING TO MOVE TO ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD OR CITY TO FIND APPROPRIATE HOUSING. AGAIN THAT GOES BACK TO THE AFFORDABILITY CONCEPT. THEN SUBSECTION D A SENSE OF COMMUNITY BY PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CITIZENS TO MEET WITH EACH OTHER IN A COMFORTABLE SAFE FRIENDLY WALKABLE ENVIRONMENT. AGAIN WE POINT BACK TO THE TRAIL AND WALKABILITY TO PEARSON ELEMENTARY. ON THE NEXT SLIDE I TWO LIKE TO POINT OUT SUBSECTION F, I AND J. SUBSECTION F PROVIDES THAT IT'S THE BEST LOCATION FOR USEFULNESS AN IMPROVEMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD OPEN SPACE OVER THE TOTAL AMOUNT [00:30:03] OF OPEN SPACE PROVIDED. HERE WE ARE PROVIDING OVER 38.4 PERCENT OPEN SPACE OF THE GROSS AREA, WHICH IS SIGNIFICANT FOR 5.88 ACRE TRAIKT OF LAND TO MINIMIZE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AS A HEAT ISLAND EFFECT SIGNIFICANT TOP GRAPH FEATURES. WE HAVE DONE STUDIES TO DETERMINE IF A DRAINAGE POND WAS NECSSARY AND TAKING ADVANTAGE OF A FLOOD WAY TO BE PART OF AN A PLENTY FOR THE COMMUNITY. LASTLY WE ARE USING THE BEST POSSIBLE PROJECTS FOR THE CITY THROUGH STRONG STANDARDS FACILITATING THE APPROVAL PROCESS BY WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY. I THINK AFTER TEN SUBMISSIONS STAFF WILL RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY IN ORDER TO FIND SOMETHING SUITABLE AND AFFORDABLE FOR ALL OF ROWLETT'S COMMUNITY. STAFF POINTED OUT ARTICLE II.32 OF THAT BC REQUIRES A MIX OF HOUSING FOR DEVELOPMENTS LESS THAN TEN ACRES AN ESTABLISHES A MINIMUM ACREAGE FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN, I WANT TO REITERATE THE FACT THAT WE ARE COMING IN WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. WE ARE NOT COMING IN WITH STRAIGHT REZONING UNDER THE FB NEW NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARDS. WE ARE REQUESTING 5.8 ACRES USING THE FORM BASE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARDS. THESE WOULD NOT APPLY IN THIS CASE MANY GOING BACK MORE TO THE OPEN SPACE, STAFF AGAIN DID A GREAT JOB AT POINTING OUT EVERYTHING THAT WE ARE PROVIDING THE PEDESTRIAN TRAIL THE PICNIC AIR THE DOG THE GAZEBOS F. WE WERE TO TAKE OUT, I'LL JUST FLIP OVER TO THE NEXT SLIDE SO WE KNOW EXACTLY THE AREA WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, THE NORTHERN TRAIKTS THAT ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED, STAFF HAD A RECOMMENDATION SAYING THOSE AREAS WOULDN'T QUALIFY MEET THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS. PARDON. GOING BACK. DOES IT GO BACK? APOLOGIZE. I'M SORRY. I PRESSED THE WRONG BUTTON. I THINK I HAVE IT. I WAS JUST PRESSING AS IF IT WERE MY APPLE TV. SO GOING BACK LOOK THING AT THE GROSS AREA OF OPEN SPOESZ THE OPERATE TRAIKTS WOULD EXCEED THE 14 PERCENT GROSS AREA OPEN SPACE. IT HITS THE 18.3 AREA THAT'S PROVIDED. THIS IS PROMOTING COMMUNITY EDGE GAUGEMENT SUSTAINABILITY AN ADHERING TO THE 30 FOOT BUFFER AREA ALONG THE WESTERN OR EASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. AGAIN WE ARE GOING TO BE PRESERVING ANY EXISTING TREES IN ADDITION TO ADDING ANY PROPOSED TREES AN SHRUBS THAT ARE SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. TO ADDRESS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CONCERNS I KNOW I TOUCHED ON THIS, THE MUSE ALLEY PAVEMENT WIDTH WERE EXCEEDING THE 20 FOOT REQUIREMENT AND ADDING A 30 FOOT REQUIREMENT. THIS IS TO DESMARET ISSUES THEY HAD ALREADY HAD WITH NOT BEING ABLE TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED AMENITIES TO PROVIDE PRODUCTION. THE NORTHERN LOTS ARE GOING TO BE SVD H SERVICED BY THE TURNAROUND AND THE NORTHEASTERN LOTS MEETING THE 150 HOSE LAY REQUIREMENT. STAFF MENTION AHMED THEY'RE WORKING WITH GISD TO ACQUIRE THE WILSON ROAD EXTENSION. THAT WILL OBVIOUSLY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FIRE SAFETY, MEET FIRE SAFETY ISSUES THAT MAY COME AROUND. STAFF MENTIONED POTENTIAL ISSUES WITH PARKING. WE INTEND TO HAVE AN HOA THAT WILL BE CONTROLLING THE PARKING AND POLICING AS WELL IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT MOEB IS ACTUALLY PARKING ON THE STREET. THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE GOING TO PROVIDE THAT EACH PROPERTY OWNER MUST OWN A PROPERTY FOR 5 YEARS TO QUALIFY FOR MORTGAGE WITH RHFC AND THERE WILL BE RESTRICTION ON RENTALS THAT WILL OBVIOUSLY DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THAT'S ON THE STREET AS W WELL. IN THE INTEREST OF TIME I'LL GO PAST THE ELEVATIONS. THE INTENT IS WE ARE GOING TOVRP MULTIPLE FACADE OPTIONS FOR EACH [00:35:04] INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER GIVING THEM THE ABILITY TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY WITH THE TYPE OF DESIGN THAT THEY WANT AND GIVING MORE OF A VARIATION BETWEEN THE HOUSES. SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT IT'S JUST CASITAS. IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFERENT LOOKING HOUSES. EACH OF THE HOUSES HAVE A MINIMUM OF 20 FOOT DRIVEWAY AND 20 FOOT GARAGE SO AT LEAST TWO CARS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PARK PER EACH HOUSE MANY AGAIN WE HAVE BELIEVE THAT THIS COMPLIES WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ROWLETT'S FUTURE AS AN EMPLOYMENT CENTER WILL BLOSSOM WHEN ITS HOUSING INVENTORY EXPANDS AN DIVERSIFIES. IT PROMOTES AFFORDABLE DIVERSE HOUSING SPURRING FUTURE GROWTH IN THE COMMUNITY PROVIDES HOUSING FOR SERVICE SECTOR WORKERS AND THE HOMES ARE INTERCONNECTED BY TRAIL AND ORIENTED TOWARD THE PARK PERIMETERS TO PROVIDE A FOCAL POINT. AND NO SURPRISE AGAIN WE HAVE SUPPORT FROM ALL SURROUNDING OWNERS AND HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY NTICES IN OPPOSITION. SO, TO THE EXTENT THERE IS ANY THING DISPOSITIVE ABOUT THIS IT IS CAPABLE WITH NEIGHBORHOODS, OTHERWISE PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD HAVE COME INTO OPPOSITION WITH THIS. WITH THAT I WILL TURN IT OVER TO RICK SHEFFIELD OR BILL FISHER FIRST. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS, BILL FISHER SONOMA HOUSE, 1481 DALLAS PARKWAY SUITE 85. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TONIGHT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE. WE NEED YOUR HELP F. THE ZONING STRAIGHT ZONING CODES IN ROWLETT FACILITATED AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THIS PRICE RANGE WE WOULD HAVE A BUNCH AND THE ROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE CORPS WOULD NOT BE HERE. WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT PROCESS TO COME UP WITH YOUR ZONING CODE THAT LE - PROVIDES THE OPPORTUNITIES TO DELIVER COST EFFECTIVE HOUSING TO OUR FAMILIES THAT WANT TO CONTINUE TO LIVE HERE AND AVOIDING LIVING IN APARTMENTS. WE NEED IN THE NEWSPAPER ABOUT HOW AFFORDABILITY IS BEYOND THE REACH OF MOST OF HOUR KIDS F. DOWN PAYMENT THEY CAN'T BUY THE HOUSE AN HOUSING PRICES CONTINUE TO ROCKET UP. SO WE HAVE WORKED WITH ROWLAND HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION FOR TWO YEARS TO TRY TO MAKE A DEVELOPMENT WORK THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO SELL HOMES TO KIDS THAT WANT TO REMAIN IN ROWLETT AT A PROPERTY THEY CAN AFFORD TO LIVE IN. THERE'S A DISAGREEMENT HERE ON THE INTENT. I THINK STAFF IS IN ERROR. I THINK THEY ARE. THIS IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND THIS INTENT AND THIS ZONING ON 10 AND 20 ACRES, THAT'S NOT APPLICABLE ON THIS DEVELOPMENT. WE DIDN'T GO DOWN THIS PAST 6 MONTHS WITHOUT HAVING ACTIVE DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF SO THIS IS IN YOUR POWER TO HELP THE ROWLETT HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION DELIVER COST-EFFECTIVE HOUSE TO GO FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN THAT WANT TO CONTINUE TO LIVE IN ROWLETT IN A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME NEAR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. THE ISSUE OF THE ACTIVE NEIGHBORHOOD, I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ARE BUILDING A TRAIL SYSTEM AROUND THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT IF THAT DOESN'T GIVE OUR FOLKS THE OPPORTUNITY TO WALK OR DO OTHER THINGS CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE. SO, I THINK WHEN OUR ATTORNEY WAS TRYING TO TELL YOU NICELY WAS WE ARE NOT TRYING TO REZONE TO MUSE AND CASITA. WE ARE TRYING TO DO A PLAN BASED PLAN DEVELOPMENT WHICH GIVES TUESDAY OPPORTUNITY THEN TO APPLY THESE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD MUSE STYLE STANDARDS TO THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. YOU KNOW POINTING OUT THAT WAY VARY FROM 20 FEET TO 36 FEET WAS SIMPLY RESPONDING TO THE CONCERNS THE FIRE MARSHAL HAD. YOU COULD IMAGINE IF THIS GROUP WANT TO DO IT WE COULD GO FROM 30 FEET TO 20 FEET TO BE IN PERFECT COMPLIANCE WITH THE MUSE CODE. WHY ARE WE AT 30 FEET BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE THE CONCERNS THE FIRE MARSHAL HAD. I THINK THE OTHER THING I WOULD POINT OUT TO TEXAS TENT IT'S A FIRE CONCERN, THE HOUSING FINANCE CORP IS WILLING TO SPRINKLE THE HOUSES SO WE HAVE ACTIVE FIRE SPRINKLERS IN THE HOUSE WHICH WE TYPICALLY ONLY FIND IN COMMERCIAL OR MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING TO MAKE [00:40:03] SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE HOUSING FINANCE CORP DOES WANT TO KEEP ITS FAMILY SAFE BUT I THINK THE THING WE WANT TO KNOW, WE DESIGNED THIS WITH THE INTENT THAT WE WERE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND THAT THE MUSE CASITA STYLE WE PRESENTED TO YOU TONIGHT DOES COMPLY WITH THOSE STANDARDS AND TO THE EXTENT THEY'RE SMALL VARIATIONS MADE BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SO WE ARE ASKING FOR EACH OF THE COMMISSIONERS TONIGHT TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO BRING IT FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL TO ALLOW 32 OF OUR KIDS IN ROWLETT TO OWN A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AND CONTINUE TO LIVE HERE WITHOUT BEING IN AN APARTMENT. WITH THAT I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> RICK SHEFFIELD, 3610 DELIA STREET. IT'S GOOD TO SEE SOME NEW AND OLD FACES THAT ARE NEW TO THIS BOARD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. MR. ROBERTS DID A GREAT JOB OF RECITING THE CODE TO YOU. WHEN WE WERE UP HERE EARLIER THIS YEAR, ONE OF THE FIRST THING I TOLD SUE THE CODE IS BROKEN. STAFF HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT. AS YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ALREADY OUT LOOKING FOR BIDS TO HAVE THE CODE REWORKED AND REWRITTEN. WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TO DO HERE AND SOMETHING YOU SEE IN THE PAPER ALMOST EVERY WEEK, THE LACK OF ENTRY HOUSING IN THIS COUNTRY, LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOMES IN THIS COUNTRY, THIS LAST YEAR AND A HALF WITH COVID THESE ESSENTIAL WORKERS HAVE BEEN OUT HERE BUSTING THEIR TAILS TO SERVICE YOU, BRING YOU YOUR FOOD AND DO ALL THE THINGS OUT THERE FOR CLOSE TO MINIMUM AGE. NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE COULD AFFORD A HOUSE IN THIS TOWN. I THINK THAT IS REPREHENSIBLE. ROWLETT NEEDS TO BE ON THE LEADING EDGE OF THIS TO SHOW THAT YES, YOU REALLY ARE WANTED IN THIS CITY. WE WANT YOU TO OWN A HOME N THIS CITY AND BED HAD A TAXPAYER AND CONTRIBUTE TO OUR ECONOMY AND SPEND MONEY IN OUR RESTAURANTS. BUY CLOTHES IN OUR STORES. THE CODE IS BROKEN. YOU HAVE THE CHOICE TONIGHT TO SAY YES, WE DO WANT THIS TYPE OF HOUSING. WE DO WELCOME YOUNG FAMILIES THAT AREN'T MAKING $150,000 A YEAR TO COME IN AND LIVE AND BE PROCESS PROCESS CITIZENS IN THIS CITY. OR YOU CAN VOTE TO FOLLOW THE CODE. WE ALL KNOW WHERE THAT'S GOTTEN US. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR IS YOUR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT. THANK. >> THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE FOR THE APPLICANT? M MISS RAWLINGS, COULD YOU COME BACK UP PLEASE? ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? >> DO YOU HAVE A BUILDER IN MIND THAT Y'ALL WORK WITH? >> THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE A BETTER QUESTION FOR MR. SHEFFIELD TO RESPOND. >> THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO. THE LONGER ANSWER IS WE HAD MADE CONTACT WITH SEVERAL BUILDERS WAY BACK IN THE PROCESS, AND AS WE SAW, THIS WAS TAKING LONGER AND LONGER AND LONGER, THE PLANS WERE CHANGING, AND ALL THROUGH MOSTLY SUGGESTIONS FROM STAFF WE MADE OUR CHANGES TO TRY TO DO OUR BEST, SO WE KINDS OF PUT OFF THE BUILDERS UNTIL WE GET THROUGH THIS PHASE. >> DO YOU HAVE A CAP ON PRICE? IS THERE A CEILING? >> HEIGHTS GETTING HIGHER EVERY MINUTE. MY TIME IS CLEANUP BUT THESE ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS DESIGNING SUBMISSIONS WE ARE GETTING TO THE POINT NOW WE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE SOME OF THE HOMES AN SELL A FEW OF THEM AT MARKET RATE TO GET THE MAJORITY AFFORDABLE. THAT'S WHERE IT'S AT NOW. LONGER IT COULD BE WORSE. >> SO THIS IDEA IT'S SPECIAL FINANCE SOMETHING. >> YES, AND THERE IS A COUPLE THINGS THE HFC DOES AS WELL, JUST BY TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 394 UNDER WHICH THE HFC IS CREATED ANY LAND THEY OWN IS EXEMPT FROM PROPERTY TAX. NOW DURING THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A LOT THE CITY OF LOSING. AS EACH OF THESE HOMES ARE SOLD THEY'LL GO ON THE TAX ROLL. [00:45:04] WE WILL PROVIDE AND EXEMPTION FROM SALES TAX AN HARD CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND ALSO LOOKING FOR BUILDERS TO DO CONTRIBUTIONS SEVERAL BUILDERS IN THE AREA THAT ARE VERY INTERESTED IN TRYING TO HELP AND CONTRIBUTE AS BEST AS THEY CAN ON PRICING SO A LOT OF THINGS WE STILL HAVE TO NEGOTIATE ON THAT SIDE OF IT. I CAN'T DO ANY OF THAT UNTIL WE HAVE A PLAN. >> IS THIS THE ONLY DEVELOPMENT WE HAVE IN ROWLETT? >> FOR SINGLE-FAMILY IT IS YES. WE HAVE A SENIOR MULTI-FAMILY THAT'S IN ORDERABLE AND WE HAVE GOT FAMILY ORIENTED MULTI-FAMILY BUT THIS TOWN HAS BEEN WANTING US TO DO SINGLE-FAMILY FOR QUITE SOME TIME AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING HARD TO GET IT DONE. >> IS A TOWNHOME A POSSIBILITY? IS THAT CONSIDERED? IT'S MORE CONCISE AND YOU GET MORE SPACE. >> IT IS, BUT IT'S STILL THAT DREAM OF HOME OWNERSHIP THAT KIDS COME OUT FOR THE WORKERS TODAY HAVE THEIR OWN, AND NOT A TOWNHOME. IT DOES GET SO CLOSE TOGETHER PRACTICALLY MULTI-FAMILY BY ANOTHER NAME. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF ILL WILL AGAINST APARTMENTS AN MULTI-FAMILY SO WE TRY TO STEER CLEAR FROM THAT. >> IT IS A DIVERSE IDEA. >> WE ACTUAL DID I LOOK AT TOWN HOMES AS ONE OF THE OPTIONS. >> JUST THINKING, IT IS A UNIQUE PIECE OF PROPERTY. >> YES. >> IT'S TINY. YOU'VE GOT THE LIVING TO THE NORTH AND YOU GET THE SCHOOL TO THE RIGHT. I AGREE THE C-2 MAKES ZERO SENSE WHERE IT'S AT. I WANT TO FIT IT. IN MY IDEA I HAVE MORE ON MY STREET THAN WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR THIS ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT SO IT'S VERY SMALL SO I DON'T WANT TO BE TO BE TICKY TACKY. >> THESE HOMES WILL APPRAISE FOR MORE THAN WHAT THEY SELL FOR. >> ONCE YOU GET IT GOING IS THERE A CAP ON PRICE? I HAVE A FEELING WHAT YOU SAID 1400 IS YOUR BASELINE. >> YES, RIGHT AROUND 1400. >> PROBABLY GOING TO BE ON THE HIGHER END. >> 280. THAT WOULD BE MARKET REASONABLE GOING ON MY REAL ESTATE BACKGROUND. WE ARE GOING SELL FOR LESS THAN THAT. LIKE I SAID THE TOOLS THAT WE HAVE WE WILL GET THAT PRICE DOWN FOR THOSE HOMEOWNERS, AND THEN YOU KNOW, AFTER THEIR FIVE YEARS IS UP ON THE DEED RESTRICTION IF THEY WANT TO SELL AND MOVE ON THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN GOOD POSITION TO BUY A NICE HOME IN ROWLETT. >> THAT'S IT. OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MISS RAWLINGS I HAVE QUESTIONS. THIS WAS REMANDED BACK TO US FROM THE CITY COUNCIL WITH ADDED CONCERNS ON THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE UNIT SIZE COMPATABILITY WITH SURROUNDING AREAS. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO CHANGE ANY OF THOSE STUPT DECREASE THE SIZE OF LOTS? >> WE MET WITH TETHER AND THEY SAID THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD CASITA STYLE. WE MET WITH CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THEY HAD ALSO RECOMMENDED A SIMILAR TYPE OF CONCEPT SO THAT'S WHERE WE WENT. >> OKAY, BECAUSE I'M CONFUSED ON THE MUSE STYLE ARRANGEMENT WHAT I SEE AS A CENTRAL OR A MORE COMMUNITY GATHERING AREA AROUND WHICH HOMES ARE THEN FORMED. AND I DON'T SEE THAT HERE. THIS IS BASICALLY WE ARE USING A NEW AVENUE OR MUSE ALLEY BUT THERE'S NO STREET IN THAT ARRANGEMENT OR COMMUNITY GATHERING OR INTERSECTION BETWEEN THE PEOPLE LIVING FROM ONE HOUSE TO THE OTHER. >> SO THE INTENT WAS WITH THAT CONNECTING TRAIL IS TO CREATE A MORE COMMUNITY AREA AN HAVING THE GAZEBO THE DOG PARK THAT WOULD ALSO PROVIDE THAT AND ANOTHER ADDED LAYER IS THAT WE ARE EXCEEDING THE ALLEY REQUIREMENTS HAVING MORE OF A 10 FOOT, SORRY A 30 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE MORE OF A NOT NECESSARILY A MUSE STYLE BUT SOMETHING THAT IS CONFORMING WITH THE MUSE CONCEPT AN PROVIDEING THE PUBLIC SAFETY FACTOR AS WELL. MEETING THE PUBLIC SAFETY FACTOR AS WELL. >> ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF THOUGH. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT GETTING WILSON ROAD BUILT OUT AND YOU HAD THE SURVEY TO LOOK AT AND [00:50:03] YOUR COMMUNICATION WITH GISD, HAVE THEY INDICATED THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO DO THIS? >> SO IT'S BEEN SOMEWHAT OF AN ONGOING CONVERSATION LARGELY SPARKED BY THE INTEREST IN THIS PROPERTY TO DEVELOP. I HEARD FROM THE FIRST ITERATION THERE WAS STUB OUT FROM FUTURE WILSON ROAD LOOKING AT MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN ASIDE FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT IT'S SOMETHING STAFF IS INTERESTED IN DOING. THEY HAVE ITERATED THAT THAT SAID CASE OF RIGHT OF WAY FROM THE CITY IS POSSIBLE AND PLAUSIBLE FOR THEIR SIDE OF THINGS. IT'S A NATURAL PATH FOR THAT ROAD TO TRAVEL SO ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THEIR INDEPENDENT TWO LIKELY REQUIRE IT ANYWAY. >> THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? THIS IS A PUBLIC HERING. AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR TO ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO MAKE A COMMENT. HAVE YOU FILLED OUT A CARD F. YOU WOULD, PLEASE. AND GIVE IT TO MISS NIX OR TO MYSELF. ANYBODY ELSE? . >> NAY MAIM IS [NAME] HUSSAIN. I'M INTERESTED IN ROSEMOUNT. I HAVE CLIENTS WHO WANT TO BUILD AN CONSTRUCT HERE. I LOVE THE CITY. LOVE THE STAFF. REALLY, THEY'RE DIFFICULT WITH THE WHOLE ZONING CODING AND ALL THAT STUFF BUT AS INDIVIDUALS ARE AMAZING. MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS I HAVE SEEN SIMILAR CONSTRUCTION IN ALLEN AND OTHER AREAS. PEOPLE WANTED TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR FAMILIES THAT ARE YOUNG LIKE MY OWN DAUGHTER WHO IS 30 AND WE LOOKED AT SOME OF THESE HOUSES IN ALLEN. THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THE PATIO UP IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, A SMALL LITTLE PATIO AND THEY WORK AROUND AND THEY TO BE COMMUNITY PICNICS AND BARBECUES AND STUFF WHICH IS ADORABLE AND TOWN HOMES. I WANT TO COMMENT BECAUSE AS A REALTOR I SEE ALL THE TIME TOWN HOMES ARE DIFFICULT WHEN YOU HAVE AN ELDER GRANDMA WHO WANTS TO LIVE WITH A DAUGHTER WHICH IS MY SITUATION WHERE MY GRANDMA PASSED AWAY, MY MOM CAME TO TAKE CARE OF HER, MY SAYSTER PASSED AWAY AND MY MOM IS NOW LIVING WITH MY DAUGHTER. TOWN HOMES DON'T ACCOMMODATE MULTI-GENERATIONAL AND MORE AND MORE GRANDPARENTS ARE WILLING TO HELP AND TAKE DARE OF THEIR GRANDKIDS. THEY'RE NOT LOOKING FOR ENTERTAINMENT. THEY'RE LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO GET THINGS DONE AND APARTMENT DOESN'T WORK FOR THEM. I HOPE WOULD YOU CONSIDER. THANK YOU. >> THERE ARE -- ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? NOT SEEING ANY, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE -- I'M SORRY. YOU HAVE SOMEBODY. >> BARBARA MILLER 6662 SHAKE SHORE CODE, I AM AGAINST NEAR CREEKSIDE LIMITED ACCESS DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS NEAR SCHOOL. JENNIFER DIXON, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED CREEKSIDE VILLAGE PLANNED REDEVELOPMENT REZONING THE LOCATIONS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS IS A MAJOR CONCERN THERE. ARE ONLY TWO PROPOSED ENTRY EXIT POINTS BOTH ON WILSON ROAD WHICH [00:55:01] IS DIRECTLY IN PEARSON MEN TRIMENT THIS CREATES A TRAFFIC CONCERN AS WELL AS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT . . . A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO LAKEVIEW PARKWAY AND THIS ONE DOES NOT. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THE FOUR IN FAVOR RESPONSES ARE SUBMITTED ON A SUBMITTAL RESPONSE FORM . . . SITING FOUR ADDRESSES. WHAT EXACTLY ARE THESE FOUR ADDRESSES WHICH REPRESENT ONE SCHOOL IN ADDITION THE FACT THAT THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS DON'T MEET ZONING CONDITIONS THE ONE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED OR THIS ONE IS CONCERNING. AGREE WITH THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THIS REQUEST. >> THANK YOU. SO WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS. COMMENTS. MR. SEGAR. >> IT'S TRICKY. I'D PREFER TOWN HOMES PERSONALLY. I THINK IT'S MORE UNIQUE. I THINK WOULD IT FIT THE CITY'S -- I DON'T KNOW. WOULD THAT FIT? WHEN YOU HAVE MORE CONDENSED SPACING. WHAT IS THE ISSUE WITH THE FIRE STATION? YOU GET STUCK ON THE NORTH PARTED AN THERE'S NO EXIT FOR THEM. >> AS STAFFERS AND THE APPLICANT REITERATED THE MUSE CONDITION REQUIREMENT IN THE CODE IS 20 FEET AND THIS IS IN EXCESS OF THAT. HAD A DOES NOT ALWAYS MEAN FIRE DEPARTMENT IS COMFORTABLE WITH IT PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY LOOK AT FORM BASED COPED PROJECT AND SO YES IT IS LARGELY THE TURNING RADIUS COMBINED WITH POTENTIAL ON STREET PARKING IF YOU WERE TO CALL IT THAT. >> AND OR MULTIPLE VEHICLES. >> THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. THOSE COMMENTARIES FROM STAFF IS GIVEN TO YOU FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. >> IS THE DENIAL BASED ON THE ZONING THAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW, THE SF-9 C-2? >> WE DEFINITELY RECOGNIZE AN UNDERSTAND THAT C-2 AS IT RELATES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION AN EXISTING ZONING AN ITS COMPATABILITY WITH SURROUNDING ZONING AND BUILD TYPE THAT'S LARGE HER WHERE OTHER RECOMMENDATION AS WELL AS THE PD USING A FORM BASE CODE WHILE YES THAT IS NOT THE FORM BASE CODE IT'S STILL NECSSARY FOR TO US REVIEW IT ON THE INTENT OF THE FORM BASEED CODE. THAT'S LARGELY WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON. >> IF I MAY COMMISSIONERS AND OUR VIEWING AUDIENCE TO FOLLOW UP WITH A STATEMENT ONE OF THE ELEMENTS THAT WE CONSIDER WHEN WE CONDUCT OUR LAND USE ANALYSIS IS UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA IS HERE FULLY ACKNOWLEDGEING THE SITE IS SMALL. WE UNDERSTAND THE OTHER OBLIGATION ON THE STANDPOINT FROM THE DEVELOPERS STANDPOINT MIGHT BE DENSITY OR INCREASED DENSITY. HOWEVER LOOKING AT TWO SEPARATE DEVELOPMENT IT'S YOLGS YOU SUCH AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND YOU GOT THE FORM BASE CODE AND YOU TRY TO BRING THEM TOGETHER YOU SOMETIMES DON'T IDEALLY ACHIEVE THE DEVELOPMENT, THE BUILT CAPACITY WE HAVE TRIED TO EXPLAIN IN THE REPORT. IF YOU LOOK IN THE LAND USE REPORT WIRE TALKING ABOUT THE SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN AN EXISTING ZONING ON THE PROPERTY SO IN THIS INSTANCE, IF YOU JUST LOOK AT ONE PRODUCT TYPE FROM THE FORM BATED CODE WHICH IS YOUR NEW NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT AS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT THEY'RE USING THAT AS THEIR BASE ZONING THEN OBVIOUSLY YOU WANT TO PULL FROM THAT AND BUILD OR DEVELOP A COMMUNITY THAT EM LATE MANY OF THOSE ELEMENTS AS STIPULATED IN THE FORM BASE COACH AND UNFORTUNATELY FROM STAFF'S REVIEW THAT PRIMARY ELEMENT IS MISSING IN THIS APPLICATION. >> YOU'RE LOOKING FOR MORE DIVERSITY. >> CORRECT. SO WHY DOES THE FORM BASE CODE IF YOU RECALL ONE OF THE ECONOMY TARP I OR STATEMENTS MADE BY STAFF IS YOU NEED IF YOU'RE USING A -- THERE'S NOTHING LESS THAN 10 ACHERS IN THIS PRODUCT TYPE IN THE FORM BASED CODE. IT'S EITHER 10-15 OF 20 PLUS ACRES AN THE REASON FOR THAT IS YOU WANT TO CREATE THAT COMMUNITY. THAT RESILIENCEY IN YOUR PRODUCT STOCK SO ABSOLUTELY YES WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IN TERMS OF WHAT THAT PRODUCT TYPE IS, IT COULD WORK. BUT FROM STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE AND THE ASSOCIATED AGAIN DEVELOPMENT [01:00:05] CODE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE AND THAT WE IMPLEMENT AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY, THEN THOSE DO NOT YOU KNOW, IT'S HARD TO ■MAKETHEM KPATSABLE WITH EACH OTHER. SO IF YOU'VE GOT THAT ACREAGE, YOU WANT TO SEE THAT DIVERSITY SO WE UNDERSTAND WHERE THE DEVELOPER IS COMING FROM AND THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE CODE ARE AND THAT'S TALKING ABOUT THE CONVERSATIONS THAT STAFF AND THE DEVELOPER HAVE HAD. THOSE ARE THE CONVERSATIONS AN DISCUSSES WE'VE HAD. SO IF YOU'VE GOT A MUSE CONDITION WHAT OTHER COMPONENTS THEREOF DEVELOPMENT YOU HAVE OTHER STREET RIGHTS OF WAY WHERE IS YOUR ADDITIONAL PARKING GOING TO BE, WHERE ARE YOUR ADDITIONAL PRODUCT TYPES OR PROPPED MIXES AND AS IT STANCE THEY'VE ONLY GOT SIX ACHEERS >> YEAH AND THAT IS MY CONCERN BECAUSE WHEN YOU START PARKING ON THE STREET AN IT STARTS GETTING -- MAKES ME NERVOUS. >> AND THERE COULD BE H WOULD BE SAFETY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT SO THEY HAVE A CERTAIN DENSITY THEY HAVE TO MEET AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT BUT UNFORTUNATELY YOU PUT THE PIECES OF THE PUZZLE TOGETHER COMPREHENSIVE STANDPOINT THE ROWLETT PLANNING CODE AS WELL AS THE FORM BASE CODE THAT IS WHY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AT THIS TIME IS NOT FAVORABLE. >> I WISH WE HAD SOME BUILDINGS SOME EXAMPLES. IT'S HARD TO SEE THE FUTURE BUT I KNOW IT'S EXPENSIVE TO GET THIS -- I'M HAVING A HARD TIME WITH IT BECAUSE I WANT TO SEE SOMETHING FORM BASED. IS THAT POSSIBLE? TO GET MORE IN THE VISUAL AID. THE RENDERINGS. I WAS ASKING FOR BUILDERS BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE CITY OF ROWLETT IT WOULD BE EASIER IF WE COULD SEE THE PRODUCT. >> OF COURSE AND WE DID PROVIDE THAT. THERE'S A COUPLE OF SLIDES ON THE POWER POINT PRESENTATION. IT'S THE HOUSING TYPE AND ALSO GOING TO BE SHOWING THE STREETS AND ALSO THE OPEN SPACE AREA. AND WE ARE HAPPY TO EMAIL THAT OUT IF THAT'S HELPFUL. EXACT SAME? N GOING TO BE THE - DOES THE ELEVATION CHANGE? >> DIFFERENT MATERIALS, YES, EVERY HOMEOWNER IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO DECIDE THE SAME OR A DIFFERENT BUILDING FACADE BUT IT'S GOING TO BE VARYING BUILDING FACADE THAGS WOULD MEET WITH ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE. >> YOU SAID THERE IS HOA FOR THE COMMUNITY. >> YES, DEED RESTRICTIONS AND LOA POLICING THIS AND THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO BE IN CHARGE OF THE HOA. IT WILL BE DECLARANT CONTROL PERIOD FOR UNTIL 75 PERCENT OF THE LOTS ARE STORED BY STATUTE BUT IT'S CONTROL PERIOD BEYOND SELLING 75 PERCENT OF THOSE LOST THE DEVELOPER WILL HAVE CONTROL OF THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBDIVISION SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES THAT WILL BE GOING TO BE MANDATED BY THE DEVELOPER. >> STUCK ON 32 HOUSES, IS LOWERING THE DENSITY OF THE HOUSES HELP PUT THE -- >> I'LL LET MR. FISHER SPEAK TO THAT IF THAT'S OKAY. >> YEAH. >> AT THE MINUTE WE NEED SOME FEET BACK FROM YOU ALL. WE NEED TO DROP SOME LOTS, CREATE OFF STREET PARKING. WE NEED TO TRY TO FIND A WAY FOR THIS TO WORK. AGAIN IF THE CURRENT ZONING CODE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY IN ROUFLT PROVIDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE DON'T NEED THE HFC. WE WOULDN'T BE HERE. BUT BRAND NEW HOUSE FOR $157-GRAND, YOU CAN'T BY A CARDBOARD BOX IN RICHARDSON FOR THAT PRICE. IF WE GOT THE COMMISSION TO SAY WE ELIMINATED THE FEEDBACK WE LIKE THAT FEEDBACK. AFFORDABILITY IS A DENSITY ISSUE. NOW WE HAVE 5.8 ACRES AND 32 HOUSES. 5 AND A HALF UNI-IT TO THE ACRE ISN'T EXACTLY DENSE BUT IF MAKING SOME CHANGES HERE WOULD GIVE YOU ALL THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION WE WOULD CERTAINLY CONSIDER THAT. LET ME BE VERY CLEAR. THOSE HOUSES ARE NOT THE SAME. THE SIZE IS LIMITED. BUT THE FAMILY CAN COME N. THEY CAN DO TWO STORIES AND DO THEIR 14400 SQUARE FEET. [01:05:04] THEY CAN DO ONE STORY. THEY CAN BE TWO TWO OR THREE TWO SO THE IDEA IT'S NOT DIVERSE OR WE ARE SOME TYPE OF -- LET'S LOOK AT THE MORE MARSHAL ISSUE. ELIMINATE 4 HAIF 5 LOTS WE COULD PUT OFF MUSE PARK TO GO ADDRESS IT'S DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITH AN ISSUE WE ARE H WHERE PEOPLE ARE LEGALLY PARKING IS AN ISSUE FOR TURNING DOWN YOUR LAND USE. CAN YOU IMAGINE THE HOMEOWNERS IN HERE ARE GOING TO HAVE A STAKE IN IT AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO ALLOW FOR FOLKS TO PARK ON THE STREET AND THERE WILL BE SIGNAGE UP APPROPRIATELY AND MEDIC NICHLTS TO ENFORCE THAT. WE WILL DON'T EXPECT THE CITY TO DO THAT. >> CAN WE GET THE ONE THAT HAS THE FIRE MARSHALLS CONCERN A FEW LOTS UP TO THE TOP? IT'S GOT THE RED OUTLINE. THERE YOU GO. SO THESE ARE THE AREAS THAT AGAIN I THINK THE FIRE MARSHALL HAS TWO ENTRANTS AN EXITS, THE FIRE MARSHAL HAS A CONCERN IF WE ELIMINATED LOTS PROVIDED MORE GREEN BELT AN OFF-STREET PARK TO GO ADDRESS THE PARKING ISSUE, MAYBE THE THREE LOTS THERE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE THAT ARE TIGHT IN THAT LITTLE ALLEY WOULD BE ANOTHER AREA WE COULD DEAL WITH. WE COULD TAKE THE SAME NUMBER OF UNITS AND SPREAD IT OUT. SO LET'S GO FROM 32 TO 28 CREATE MORE GREEN SPACE IN BETWEEN. WE WOULD LIKE SOME FEEDBACK. >> WELL, GOSH. I WOULD HAVE ANTICIPATED CITY COUNCIL GAVE FEEDBACK IN THAT THEY SAID THEIR CONCERNS WERE WITH MINIMUM LOT SIZE OR THE LOT SIZE WAS TOO SMALL. THE NUMBER OF UNITS HERE WERE TOO MANY. THE EXAMS BUILT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREAS WHAT'S NOT IN THEIR VIEW CONSISTENT. SO THAT'S THE FEEDBACK. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO US DO, DESIGN IT FOR YOU? >> THE COUNCIL'S CONCERN AT THE TIME WAS TOO MANY VARIANCES FROM THE SF-5. >> AND RIGHT NOW. >> AND WE WENT TO THE MUSE CONCEPT. THIS IS WHERE WE DISAGREE WITH STAFF. >> AND I WOULD HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH YOU. >> OKAY. >> BECAUSE AGAIN WE ARE TRYING TO TAKE A PLANTED DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS A TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY AN MERGE WITNESS A FORM BASED CODE METHODOLOGY WHICH ARE TWO DIFFERENT ANIMALS. >> OKAY. THE WAY WE UNDERSTOOD IT WITHIN PLAN DEVELOPMENT TRYING TO DESIGN FOR THE SITE WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF UNDERLYING CODE. SO SFI WASN'T DOING IT. TOO MANY VARIANCES SO THE IDEA WAS SOMETHING THAT DOES EXIST. >> SF-5 WASN'T DOING IT BECAUSE THERE WERE TOOL VARIANCES. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> SO WHY DON'T WE TRY WORKING SOME OF THOSE VARIANTS OUT OF THERE. >> I THINK THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO TELL YOU. WAY UNDERSTOOD THE SKALT OR MUSE WOULD HAVE LESS VAIR YANSZ AND WE WOULD BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THAT EXISTING CATEGORY. IF YOU LOOK AT IT WE EXCEED THE MUSE CASITA STANDARDS WIDTH MINIMUM SIZE, WE ARE AT THE HIGH END SO I THINK ALL I CAN TELL SUE THAT'S WHAT WE DID IN GOOD FAITH WAS TO GO WITH AN UNDERLINING ZONING CATEGORY IN OUR PD THAT WE COULD BE MORE COMPLIANT WITH AND THAT'S WHAT'S DRIVEN THIS OPTION. >> AND I WOULD SAY THAT I'LL GRANT THAT YOU YES, OKAY, YOU WENT WITH THE MUSE UNDERLYING CONCEPT OR NOT BUT THAT'S PULLING ONE SECTION OUT AFTER LARGER NEW NEIGHBORHOOD CONCEPT FOR FORM BASED CONCEPT AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THE FORM BASED CONCEPT ENVISIONS. OKAY. TO WHERE AN SF-5 IS SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN WORK WITH THROUGH THAT WHOLE PIECE OF PROPERTY. OKAY, AND AGAIN, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT I THINK LAST TIME YOU CAME HERE WAS THE FACT THAT IT WAS SF-5 WITH THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES. [01:10:04] >> AND WE AGREE ON THAT. >> SO WHY WOULD WE NOT LOOK AT OKAY, INSTEAD OF 33 LOTS AN HAVING SETBACKS THAT ARE SMALLER AND SIDE YARDS THAT ARE SMALLER OR NOT -- YOU'RE ASKING VARIANCES ON AND SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHY DON'T WE DROP TO 30 LOBTS AND SEE WHERE THAT PUTS YOU AS FAR AS BEING ABLE TO MEET ALL THE SF-5 REQUIREMENTS? >> THAT'S CERTAINLY A DIRECTION WE GO BUT IN GOOD FAITH YOU ASKED US AND I THINK THE SLIDE TILLS YOU THE FORM BASED NEW NEIGHBORHOOD STANDARD HAS MINIMUM LOT SIZES OF 2000, WE ARE AT 2700 FEET, THE WIDTH MINIMUM IS 25, WE ARE 30 SACRAMENTO WE DID THOUGHT WE PURSUED A ZONING CATEGORY IN YOUR CODE ON THIS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT WE LITERALLY COULD MEET AND AS YOU GO DOWN EACH ONE OF THEM I THINK THE PERMITTED AMOUNT AND THE PROPOSED AMOUNT I THINK WE EXCEEDED EVERY TIME. SO, AGAIN, JUST IN GOOD FAITH, WE TRIED TO MAKE IT SO WE DIDN'T HAVE A TON OF VARIANCES WHICH SEEMED TO BE THE PROBLEM WHEN WE FIRST PURSUED IT. >> TO BE HONEST I CAN SEE WHERE YOU'RE BELIEVING THAT HAPPENED AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT YOU CHERRY PICKED ONE OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS OUT OF THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD, OKAY OUT OF THE FORM BASE, VS. -- I'M SORRY? >> WE ARE NOT GOING TO BLAME STAFF TONIGHT. WE WENT DOWN THIS IN AN EFFORT TO COMPLY WAS RICK'S POINT. SO, IF Y'ALL DON'T FEEL LIKE WE DID THAT, THEN IT'S YOUR OPINION THAT MATTERS TONIGHT BUT ALL CAN I TELL FROM YOU A DEVELOPMENT STANDPOINT WE WENT DOWN THIS ROUTE BECAUSE WE THOUGHT WAITS MORE COMPLIANT APPROACH NOT A LESS COMPLIANT APPROACH. I THINK THE ONLY BIG MY UNDERSTANDING AGAIN I RELY ON ATTORNEYS TO TELL ME WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT CODE SAYS ANYMORE AND THEY'RE TELLING ME THAT THE ONLY VARIANCE ISSUE HERE WITH THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD CASITAS APPROACH HAS TO DO WITH THE FACT IT'S ONLY ABOUT A 6 ACRE RIGHT WHERE IT OFTEN APPLIES TO 10 OR 12. THAT'S WHY WE ARE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. OTHERWISE IF IT WAS TEN ACRES WE WOULD HAVE DONE A STRAIGHT REZONE FOR THE CASITAS SO THAT'S WHY THE LAND IN DEVELOPMENT IS IN THERE. >> BUT WE APPRECIATE ANY CONSIDERATION CAN YOU GIVE TONIGHT. WE WOULD CERTAINLY ASK YOU NOT TO, SOMEONE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF US SO WE HAVE A CHANCE OF MAJORITY AT THE COUNCIL WHO WILL ULTIMATELY MAKE THE DECISION. SOME CITIES HAVE AN ISSUE WHERE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DENIES BUT MAKES A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION THAT ISN'T ALLOWED IN ROWLETT SO IF WE COULD GET SOMEBODY TO BE RESPONSIVE AS A HOUSING OPTION SO THE COUNCIL CAN GIVE FAIR CONSIDERATION WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT -- GO AHEAD. >> FULLY APPRECIATING THE CONCERNS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS BROUGHT FORWARD IN THE SENSE THAT YOU KNOW, FROM AN AFFORDABILITY STANDPOINT THIS PRODUCT IS IMPERATIVE. IT DOES PROVIDE A QUOTE-UNQUOTE NICHE MARKET FOR CERTAIN SECTORS WITHIN OUR RESIDENTS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY. HOWEVER, WE ARE TASKED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF INSURING THAT NOT JUST DID SPACIAL ASPECT OF A DEVELOPMENT IS ADDRESSED BUT ALSO THE INFRASTRUCTURE OBLIGATIONS, THE FUTURE INFRASTRUCTURE OBLIGATIONS AND THE PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY. I THINK WHEN THE CONVERSATION AND FORGIVE ME I SPEAK FROM MEMORY SO RICK DOESN'T ALWAYS SIDE WITH ME SO I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE FOR THAT. HOWEVER I DO WANT TO REITERATE THAT FULLY UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE ROWLETT HOUSING CORPORATION NEEDS ARE FULLY UNDERSTANDING THEY WERE OR ARE KEEN TO PROVIDE A SINGLE-FAMILY PRODUCT THE DISCUSSION ON THE MUSE PROVIDING A CASITA WITH A MUSE PRODUCT WAS MERELY TO SEE IF THEY COULD GARNER OR GLEEN FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST WHICH IS THE FLUT H FLOOD PLAIN AREA WHICH IS THAT ON SPACE BUT IT DIDN'T NECESSARILY IMPLY THAT THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE IN THAT FORM. AGAIN THIS IS PRODUCT TYPE IS ONE ASPECT OF THE ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE FORM BASE CODE. [01:15:01] THAT'S THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT AND SO THAT'S WHERE STAFF BRINGS UP THE OTHER ELEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FORM BASED CODE. NOW IN THERE WAS THE APPROPRIATE STREET RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH YOU COULD HAVE OVERFLOW PARK GG THE DENSITY WAS REDUCED BUT IN THIS INSTANCE TO USE THE FORM BASED CODE TO DEVIATE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OR TO USE THE PD TO PROVIDE A RIGHT OF WAY THAT DOES NOT MEET THE FULL INTENT OR IS NOT A FULL PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IN THIS INSTANCE, IT IS TRULY JUST IN THE INSTANCE IT'S A MUSE ALLEY. THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REFERRED TO. SO TO ITRATE ONCE MORE THIS IS A SMALLER ACT OF THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD FROM A PRODUCT TYPE. SO THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THAT DEVIATION IN PRODUCT TYPE, ALL THE WAY FROM YOU BUILD TO LINE, TO TO THE WIDTH OF YOUR LOT, THOSE EM ELEMENTS ALL APPLY AND EACH CAT GARY HAS A DIFFERENT WIDTH REQUIREMENT. AND NOT ALL YOUR LOTS CAN BE MUSE ACCESSIBLE, SO TO SPEAK. SO COMPREHENSIVELY THEN THOSE ARE THE ELEMENTS THAT WE SEE THAT ARE DEFICIENT IN THIS SITE PLAN. AND AS THE REVIEW OCCURS WITH A P.D. THERE IS ALSO A SITE PLAN ATTACHED TO THAT AND BE HOOVRS US TO PROVIDE THE COMMENTARY SO WE CAN EQUIP OUR VIEWING AUDIENCE OUR AUDIENCE SITTING HERE YOURSELVES WHO HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO REVIEW STAFF ANALYSIS. STAFF IS ONLY MAKING RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON THE ORDINANCES AND CODES THEY REVIEW AND IMPLEMENT N. THIS INSTANCE YOU HAVE YOUR STANDARD P.D. REQUIREMENTS. YOUR P.D. IS INTEND TO DO A SPECIFIC DESIGN BUT YOUR FORM BASE CODE IN ITSELF IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT IDEOLOGY FROM A DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE SO IT IS NOT YOUR EUKLIDAN ZONING AND THIS IS WHAT I MENTION THAT CAN YOU NOT DENSITY, APPROPRIATE BUFF ERRING TO WILSON ROAD OR FUTURE EXTENSION OF WILSON ROAD CAPITALIZING ON THE FLOOD PLANE WAS ONE OF THE STATEMENTS THAT STAFF DID MAKE. THOSE ARE MY WORDS BUT AGAIN THAT WAS INTENDED FOR THIS COMPONENT IN THIS AREA. SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION STANDS AS UNFAVORABLE. >> FIRE DEPARTMENT CONCERNS, THE APPLICANT SURVEY. >> LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE THE MOTION TO DENY THE REQUEST. OKAY. IT'S NOT PICKING UP. COULD WE HAVE A SHOW OF HANDS IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO DENY? THAT'S UNANIMOUS. AND I'LL TURN THE SEAT BACK OVER [01:20:02] TO OUR CHAIRMAN. CHAIRPERSON. SORRY. >> THANK YOU MR. COTE. SHOW FOR THE RECORD THAT THE CHAIRPERSON TOOK THE CHAIR AGAIN AT 8:20 P.M. AND WE ARE READY TO COMMENCE WITH ITEM 5-B UNDER [5B. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council on a request by property owner Mohammad Hussain, IRA Harwood LLC., regarding a Special Use Permit to allow a convenience store with gas pumps on an approximately 1.25-acre property zoned Limited Commercial/Retail (C-1) District. The subject property is located at the southwest corner of Miller and Chiesa Roads, being Lot 1, Block A of Milam Addition, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.] ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. MR. ROBERTS. >> THANK YOU. DOES IT NEED TO BE READ IN? >> SORRY. 5B. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON A REQUEST BY PROPERTY OWNER MOHAMMAD HUSSAIN, IRA HARWOOD LLC., REGARDING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A CONVENIENCE STORE WITH GAS PUMPS ON AN APPROXIMATELY 1.25-ACRE PROPERTY ZONED LIMITED COMMERCIAL/RETAIL (C-1) DISTRICT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MILLER AND CHIESA ROADS, BEING LOT 1, BLOCK A OF MILAM ADDITION, IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. >> HOW MR. ROBERTS. >> MAD PAM CHAIR. MR. H COMMISSIONERS THANK YOU. AS WAS JUST READ WE ARE HERE FOR THIS ITEM TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOLLOWING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 4500 SQUARE FEET VACCINES STORE AND RETAIL BUILDING WITH 5 GAS PUMPS AN STATIONS WITH PROPERTY ZONED C-1 DISTRICT. SUP IS A SONNING ACTION THAT ENCOURAGES REVIEW OF PROPOSED USE INTENDED TO SHIRN THE PROPOSED USE WON'T HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. BACKGROUND FOR YOU WAY BACK FEBRUARY 1985 PLANNING AND ZONING PROTECTION DID APPROVE THE MILAM PLAT THAT DEDICATION MEASURE 10-15 FEET BUT THERE WAS NO DEVELOPMENT H DEVELOPMENT FOLLOWING THAT PLAT. FAST FORWARD WE DID PURCHASE 5 FEET OF DEDICATION ON CHIESA ROAD TO ACCOMMODATE THE REQUIREMENTS PER THE MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN FOR A TYPE A 110 FOOT WIDE THOROUGHFARE. THE PORTION OF CHIESA AND MILLER ARE ADJACENT FUNDED AND ON OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN OR THE CIP LIST. SITE DATA FOR THE SUBJECT SITE HAS APPROXIMATELY 2440 FEET OF FRONT DAMAGE ROUGHLY SQUARE. ACCESS TO THE SITE WOULD BE FROM MILLER AND CHIESA ROADS VIA ACCESS THAT SNAKES SOUTH AN WEST MANY ACCESS WOULD BE LIMITED TO RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT CONDITIONS THERE, WOULD NOT BE MEDIAN BREAKS ALLOWING FOR LEFT TURNS INTO THE PROPERTY. THROUGH THE SUP PROCESS WE LOOK AT THE PROPOSED SITE CONDITIONS THROUGH A PROPOSED ZONING CONCEPT PLAN. THE SITE PLAN DOES REFLECT THE FOLLOWING, A 3500 SQUARE FOOT CONVENIENCE STORE. THERE'S ADDITIONAL THOUSAND FEET OF SPACE WITHIN THE BUILDING. THERE'S A CANOPY THAT COVERS 5 PUMPS, 17 PARKING STALLS IN BLUE ON THE SCREEN. THERE'S A MINIMUM 50 FOOT STRUCTURE SET BACK FROM MILLER AND CHIESA ROADS THAT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE. 44 FOOT SET BACK FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO THE WESSEX SAYS OF 30 FEET REQUIRED THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING HEIGHT OF 36 AND A HALF FEET UNDER THE 35 FOOT MAXIMUM. THERE ARE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS ON PROPERTY LINES I'LL EXPLORE AS WELL AS DUMPTER ENCLOSURE WITH LANDSCAPING TO THE SOUTH OF THE BUILDING. THE SUP IS A FORMAL ZONING ACTS AND WE TAKE A LOOK AT THE SURROUNDING LAND USE ANALYSIS, INCLUDING COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH AND EAST ACROSS CHIESA ROAD, A PROJECTED MILKED H MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT UNDER REVIEW IN THE STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT NORTH ADJACENT OF MILLER ROAD AND THE HILLCREST ESTATE SUBDIVISION DIRECTLY A BUTTING WEST. [01:25:03] AGAIN THE PURPOSE SF AN SUP IS TO MITIGATE IMPACT ON SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. LANDSCAPING CONSIDERATIONS FOR YOU, LANDSCAPING BUFFERS ARE PROVIDED ON ALL PROPERTY LINES. THOSE INCLUDE TWO 20 FOOT WIDE BUFFERS ON CHIESA AND MILLER ROADS THAT WOULD BE RATHER EAST AN NORTH RESPECTIVELY. THERE'S A 6 FOOT COMPATABILITY BUFFER TORE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH AS WELL AS A 15 FEET INEXAMS BUILT BUFF FORE THE WEST AS PART OF THE 15 FOOT INCOMPATABILITY BUFFER WE ARE LOOKING AT REQUIRED 6 FOOT SCREENING WALL AS WELL AS PLANTINGS TYPICALLY EVERY 35 FEET WITH SHRUBS ONE EVERY THREE FEET. YOU'LL SEE THE SECTION OF THAT MASONRY WALL SHOWN ON SCREEN THERE. ALL IN WALL SOLELY FOR THE BUFFERS WE ARE LOOKING AT SOMEWHERE IN THE BALLPARK OF 27 TREATMENT HAND ABOUT 300 SHRUBS. IF APPROVED. SOME PARKING CONSIDERATIONS FOR YOU THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 4500 FEET COMMERCIAL SPACE THAT WAS 3500 SQUARE FOOT CONVENIENCE STORE WITH THOUSAND FOOT LEASABLE SPACE. THE COPED REQUIRES RATIO ONE SPACE PER 300 FEET FOR GENERAL RETAIL USE THAT TOTAL 15 SPACES REQUIRED, THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING 17. FUELING PUMPS DON'T COUNT TOWARD THE REQUIREMENT. YOU'LL SEE ON SCREEN THE PARKING IS TO THE EAST AN NORTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. LIGHTING AND SIGNAGE CONSIDERATIONS, SPECIFIC LIGHTING CONDITIONS ARE REVIEWED AND OR WILL BE REVIEWED AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 77-510 RDC AS IT RELATES TO THE LIGHTING. PRECAUTIONS DO INCLUDE HEIGHT LIMITATION 12 FEET. YOU'LL SEE THAT IN THE SAMPLE SECTION THERE AS WELL AS MANDATORY SHIELDING THAT WOULD ENCOURAGE DOWNWARD NOT OUTWARD LIGHTING. THIS IS TO PREVENT GLAIR H GLARE PROVIDES CUT OFF ANGLE PARTICULARLY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN THE PROCESS TO INSURE EXAMS BUILT WITH PROPOSED USE AS SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT NO SIGNS BE ALLOWED ON THE WEST OR SOUTHERN FACADES AS THEY'RE THE CLOSEST MOST RELATED TO THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. UNDER CURRENT COPED REQUIREMENTS THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED IF PROPOSED AND THAT MONUMENT SIGNS ONLY BE ON CHIESA AS OPPOSED TO MILLER ROAD TO ENCOURAGE SEPARATION OF ADDITIONAL LIGHT FROM SIGNAGE. JUST FOR YOUR EDIFICATION ANSWER THE PUBLIC, MONUMENT SIGNS ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE TWO FOOT FALL BASES THAT CAN BE CAPPED OUT AT TEN FEET PER TENANT WITH 80 CUELLAR FEET THAT INCLUDES THE FRAME OF THE SIGN AS WELL. SOME BUILDING CONSIDERATIONS, THE APPLICANT HAS COMMITTED TO THE MASONRY DETAILS YOU SEE ON SCREEN HERE AS WELL AS DECENTLY DESIGNATED APPROPRIATE SIGNS FOR THE CONVENIENCE STORE WHICH IS PLANNED LEFT. THE CANOPY THAT WOULD COVER THE FUELING PUMPS IS MASONRY CLAD, THE COLUMNS ARE. AS IT RELATES TO THE UNDERLINING ZONING DISTRICT C-1 PER SECTION IS INTEND FOR RETAIL TRADE THAT MEETS THE NEEDS AND CONVENIENCE OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. THAT CODE SECTION GOES O TO ITRATE THESE SHOPS AND STORES MAYBE PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSIDERED CONSISTENT WITH THAT INTENT OF THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION VEHICLE REFUELING AS WELL AS OTHER GENERAL RETAIL USES THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICT ARE INTENDED TO SUPPORT THE IMMEDIATE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. THE NEAREST COMPARABLE USE OF REFUELING STATION IS APPROXIMATELY 1.3 MILES NORTH OF THE SUBJECT SITE THAT WOULD BE THE INTERSECTION OF 66TH AND CHIESA. THERE'S ANOTHER ONE AT DALROCK AND CHIESA. WITH ANY ZONING CASE WE LOOK AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN H PLANNING DECEMBER IGS NATION. THE COMP PLAN DECEMBER MATES AS RETAIL. THAT'S THE RED COLOR YOU SEE. THEY SHOULD PROVIDE GOODS AN SERVICES RELATE TO GEMS. THEY MAY RANGE IN SCALE AN SIZE. THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT ABOUT THAT DESIGNATION. THIS PROPOSAL HAS ACCOUNTED FOR ITS CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE SURROUNDING SINGLE-FAMILY [01:30:02] DEVELOPMENT TO TEST PROVIDING THE MASONRY WATTS AND PLANTINGS AND SEPARATES THE FUELING STATION AN PARKING AWAY FROM THAT RESIDENTIAL USE FROM THE BUILDING IN BETWEEN. SUP IS A FORMAL ZONING ACTION. AS SUCH WE DO NOTICE FOR SUP REQUESTS WE SENT NOTICES ON NOVEMBER FIFTH, 18, 200 FOOT NOTICES, 51, 200 FOOT WE RECEIVED ONE IN HOSPITAL -- COMMENTS AN OPPOSITION SITE CONCERNS WITH TRAFFIC AS WELL AS PROXIMITY TO THE BUSINESS TO THE EAST. FEW PROPERTIES TO THE EAST. WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS A APPROVAL OF THE SUP TO ALLOW FOR RETAIL BUILDINGS AND GASOLINE PUMPS LIMITED COMMERCIAL C-1 DISTRICT WITH FOLLOWING CONDITIONS THAT WALL SIGNAGE BE HIM TO IT THE WALL AND CANOPY FRONT DAMAGES AND TO MITIGATE ANY ADVERSE LIGHTING CONDITIONS THAT MIGHT BE CAUSED BY THAT SIGNAGE. THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN DESIGNATION RETAIL COMMERCIAL OFFICE AS WELL AS THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT C-1. WITH THAT I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. >> COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ANYBODY? OKAY. SO, THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION. >> STAFF AS YOU'VE SEEN HAS RECOMMENDED THE APPROVAL OF THE SUP. SO, WE ARE HERE AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS. YES, MA'AM. >> GOOD EVENING. WHAT IS THE HEIGHT OF THE CANOPIES OVER THE GAS PUMPS? >> LET ME REFER TO. 20 FEET. >> 20 FEET AND THERE'S LIGHTING? >> YES. >> AND HOW IS THAT LIGHTING GOING TO AFFECT THE HOMES THAT ARE BACK UP TO THAT PROPERTY? >> CANOPY IS ACTUALLY QUITE A DISTANCE AWAY FROM THE HOMES. WE HAVE I BELIEVE WHERE OUR BUILDING STARTS IS ABOUT 50 FEET FROM THE BACK WALL WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS. AND FROM THERE, PROBABLY ANOTHER WHAT YOU WOULD SAY 30 FEET TO THE CANOPY? 80 FEET. SO, 60 TO 80'TOTAL NEAREST NEIGHBORHOOD. >> SO THE LIGHTING WON'T AFFECT THEIR BACK YARDS? >> NO, WILL NOT. THAT IS CORRECT. >> MR. COTE. >> IT WOULD BE SAFE TO SAY THE CANOPY LIGHTING COULD BE BLOCKED BY THE BUILDING? >> YES BECAUSE ELEVATION OF THE >> WE ARE LOOKING AT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 10 FEET AND RIGHT NOW [01:35:15] ÃWOULD BE ALLOWED. >> THANK YOU. >> NO PROBLEM. >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION REGARDING TRAFFIC. TRAFFIC ON MILLER CAN BE REALLY REALLY BAD. SO IF SOMEONE PULLS INTO THE STATION HOW ARE THEY GOING TO GET OUT? >> IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT THE CURRENT STATE OF MILLER ROAD Ã AS TO LANE IT MIGHT BE ASPHALT NOW IS INTENDED TO CHANGE WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS THERE MIGHT BE MEDIANS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE AND THAT WOULD PREVENT THE LEFT WORK, TURN IN FROM MILLER AND IN REGARDS TO THE ABILITY TO LEAD IT WOULD BE A RIGHT IN, WRITE OUT CONDITION NOT MOVING ACROSS TRAFFIC BUT WITH THAT APPROACHING THE LIGHT IF YOU WERE TO TURN ONTO MILLER OR HEADING SOUTH IF YOU WERE TO TURN OUT THAT WAY AND I DO NOT KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD I DO HAVE JEFF HERE AND HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THAT IF NECESSARY I THINK WE COULD POTENTIALLY ACCOMMODATE THAT APPROACH AND THIS WAS A TOPIC OF CONSIDERATION AND THAT'S WHY YOU SEE THIS HAS BEEN MOVED AS FAR AWAY FROM THE INTERSECTION AS POSSIBLE TO ACCOMMODATE MOVING IN AND OUT WITHOUT AFFECTING THE ACTUAL INTERSECTION. >> WILL THERE BE A TRAFFIC STUDY IN RELATION TO THIS? >> IF AT TIME OF CIVIL PLANS WOULD BE FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSE REVIEW. >> THANK YOU. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM LOOKING AT THIS CORRECTLY THE BACK OF THE BUILDING WOULD BE THE PART THAT WOULD BE FACING HOMES >> AND APPROXIMATELY 44 FEET >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS. I CONCUR WITH THE COMMENTS EARLIER BY THE FELLOW COMMISSIONERS CONCERNING THE TRAFFIC ON ÃAND MILLER ROAD AND THE CONCERN THERE OBVIOUSLY IS BY THE TIME BOTH OF THOSE STREETS ARE RECONSTRUCTION RECONSTRUCTION AND WIDENS WE MIGHT HAVE AN ISSUE HERE AND I CERTAINLY WOULD PROPOSE THAT WHEN THE CLIENT, WHEN YOUR ENGINEERS OR DESIGNERS MOVE FORWARD THAT THEY LOOK AT POTENTIALLY PUTTING IN A TEMPORARY D CELL LANE UNTIL THE FINAL LANE IS INCORPORATED AND I REMEMBER CORRECTLY MILLER ROAD IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE FOUR LANES AND THAT'S SUPPOSED TO HAVE A MEDIAN AND IN THIS CASE THAT WOULD BE A LEFT TURN LANE MOVING TO THE NORTH FROM THE SCHEMATICS I HAVE SEEN AND I THINK IT'S SIMILAR PCONFIGURATION ON THE NORTHBOUN LEG SO THE POINT IS WELL TAKEN THAT I LIVE NEAR THAT AREA AND I HAVE BEEN STUCK ON THAT MILLER ROAD LEG MANY TIMES AND IT IS TO YOUR CLIENT'S ADVANTAGE TO GET IN AND OUT A LITTLE EASIER IT'S LESS ANNOYING FOR THEM AND FOR THE REST OF US AS WE ARE HAVING TO DUKE IT OUT WITH TRAFFIC I HAVE [01:40:04] ANOTHER, PERTAINING TO THE LIGHTING ON THE CANOPY SOME OF THESE CANOPIES I HAVE SEEN, THEY ALL HAVE THE DOWNWARD LIGHTING AND I UNDERSTAND WITH THE LED LIGHTING WE HAVE NOW, THERE IS NOT AS MUCH SPILLOVER, MY CONCERN IS THE DECORATIVE LIGHTING THE SUM OF THESE TEND TO HAVE ON THE PERIMETER AND YOU DON'T ALWAYS HAVE TO DO THAT IF YOU DO, I THINK I WOULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO BE VERY CAREFUL AND CAUTIOUS OF LETTING THAT WATTAGE GET TO HIGH DISCOURAGE THAT COMPLETELY SO ESPECIALLY TO THE WEST WHICH IS WHERE YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO BE, IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I HELD WHAT LITTLE CHROMATIN I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS. >> I CAN SPEAK TO THE LIGHTING AS WELL AS THE TIME OF BOTH DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ÃAT THE TIME OF THE ASSIGNED DEPARTMENT WE HAVE LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS ASSIGNED AND THE ESSENCE OF THIS IS GIVEN PROXIMITY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, MAKE SURE IT IS ÃAS WELL. SCHEMATICS OF THE FOLLOW-ON I REMEMBER THIS IS FOR THE OWNER AND ARE YOU PLANNING TO, IS THIS GOING TO BE A MOM AND POP SHOP? I GOING TO FRANCHISE? IS THIS A 7-ELEVEN CIRCLE K TYPE OF VENUE YOU ARE PROPOSING TO PUT IN HERE? >> WE ARE IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE FRANCHISE ÃAS WELL SIMILAR TO A 711 OR A GAS STATION AND STAFF BUT WE HAVE NOT FINALIZED ANYTHING YET. >> YOUR INTENT IS TO GO WITH A FRANCHISE ESTABLISHMENT BECAUSE THE QUALITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND BY THE WAY I REALLY LIKE THE FAC'ADE YOUR DESIGNER HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF INCORPORATING THE BRICK AND THE STONEWORK AND THE VARIABLE BESIDES AND ARCHITECTURAL YOUTHS A GOOD JOB AND I UNDERSTAND WE CAN'T IMPOSE MATERIALS AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND KUDOS FOR COMING TO THE COMMISSION WITH A DECENT LOOK AND FORCING HER HAND AND WE HAVE TO PLUG OUR NOSE AND ACCEPT MATERIALS THAT AREN'T VERY GOOD LOOKING BECAUSE OUR HANDS ARE TIED BUT ANYWAY GOOD JOB IN THAT REGARD. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONERS, AND THE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? >> ONE MORE QUESTION, WE ARE THE DUMPSTERS GOING TO BE LOCATED? >> ACTUALLY THEY HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB OF SHOWING THAT Ã >> I CAN ANSWER THAT, COMMISSIONER. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE THE SOUTH OF THE BUILDING, THAT WOULD REQUIRE A WALL ON ALL SIDES WITH METAL DOORS THAT SHUT >> HOW CLOSE IS THAT TO THE HOMES? MY CONCERN IS THE PROXIMITY TO THE HOMES. >> SO SOMEWHERE IN THE 60 FOOT RANGE. >> 60 FOOT? OKAY THANK YOU. >> IS A TALL WALL ON THAT SIDE SO IT'S VISIBLE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON THAT >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONERS? OKAY THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THIS ITEM IS A PUBLIC HEARING SO AT THIS TIME WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE INVITE ANYONE WHO HAS TURNED IN A CARD TO COME UP AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK AND PLEASE MAKE SURE SHE GETS A CARD. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU MY NAME IS GREG LAWSON I LIVE AT 3201 HILLCREST WHERE THIS IS GOING TO BACK UP TO YOU I HAVE LIVED THERE FOR 31 YEARS AND I HAVE RAISED TWO CHILDREN I'VE SIX [01:45:07] GRANDCHILDREN. MY BIGGEST CONCERN WITH THIS IS THE GRADE SCHOOL ACROSS FOR ONE THING WHICH HAS A BIG PLAYGROUND AND ALL OF THE TRAFFIC COMING AND GOING FROM THE GAS FACILITY AND SECONDLY, THE LIGHTING, THE SMILE, EVEN IF THEY PUT SOMETHING AROUND THE DUMPSTER, WHEN THE WIND BLOWS YOU'RE GOING TO GET THAT ISSUE AND WE ARE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, WE ARE NOT IN A COMMERCIAL AREA OR ANYTHING AND A MILE YOU CAN GET FUEL WHY DO WE NEED ANOTHER ONE? I JUST HAVE CONCERNS WHEN WE HAVE BEEN HERE FOREVER OUR NEIGHBORS ARE HERE IN EVERYTHING AND ABOUT THE SMELL, THE LIGHTING, THE GRADE SCHOOL EVERYTHING. IT DOESN'T JUST FIT WITH WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO. THANK YOU ALL. >> YES SIR. >> FIRST OF ALL MY NAME IS RUSH ÃROBERT CHRISTIAN I AM AT 3205 HILLCREST ON THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY I HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 28 YEARS SO I HAVE SEEN RALEIGH GROW AND I HAVE SEEN THE TRAFFIC GROW IN THAT AREA AND I PRETTY MUCH CAN TELL YOU PRETTY MUCH EVERY NEAR MISS EVERY ACCIDENT AND EVERY ROAD RAGE IN THAT AREA WITH THE INCREASING TRAFFIC BECAUSE OF THE KAYAK FACILITY PLUS THE POPULATION INCREASING ON THE WEEKENDS YOU ALMOST HAVE TO SCHEDULE WHAT TIME YOU CAN GET OUT AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER CONCERNS IT'S A PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERN NOT JUST VEHICLE BUT PEDESTRIANS AND AS YOU KNOW WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT A FIVE-YEAR PLAN BUT WE STILL HAVE A SCHOOL THERE IN A CHURCH THERE ANY CONVENIENCE STORE CHILDREN WOULD NOT GO TO THE INTERSECTION THAT IS A 40 MILE-PER-HOUR SPEED ZONE IT'S BAD ENOUGH IF YOU HAVE 30 STOP BAGHDAD UP AND THAT TRAFFIC COMES WHEN WE PUT SOMETHING THERE TO DETER THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC FOR SOMEONE TO SLAM ON THEIR BREAK TO MISS SOMEONE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE SIDEWALKS THE CHILD WALKING ON THERE THAT COULD BE A PROBLEM A CONVENIENCE STORE'S COMMUNITY YOU WILL HAVE CHILDREN COME YOU WILL HAVE PEOPLE, SOME HAVE GOOD INTENTIONS AND BAD INTENTIONS WITH SAFETY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD VERY VIABLE THERE 28 YEARS. WE SURVIVED A TORNADO WE LOOK OUT FOR EACH OTHER. ALSO, LIKE I SAID, THE NOISE. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE NOISE FROM THE TRUCKS COMING IN YOU WILL HAVE NOISE FROM THE SANITATION TRUCKS AND IF YOU HAVE EVER BEEN AROUND A SANITATION TRUCK, THEY JUST SLAM IT DOWN. YOU HAVE RODENTS THAT WILL COME BECAUSE IT'S A DUMPSTER AND WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND I HEARD THERE IS A 44 FOOT DISTANCE BETWEEN MY FOFENCE I AM NOT SURE IF THE WERE GOING TO HAVE BACKDOOR ACCESS BUT YOU MENTIONED A SIX FOOT FENCE. -8 FOOT I HAVE A SPOTLIGHT AND THAT WILL GO OVER MY FENCE INTO THE FIELD SO A SIX FOOT FENCE. >> WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD ANY CAN YOU PULL THAT [01:50:03] MICROPHONE DOWN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER? >> I AM ÃWE LIVE AT 3205 HILLCREST DRIVE. THE STATION WILL BACKUP DIRECTLY TO OUR HOME AND WE HAVE BEEN THERE ALMOST 30 YEARS AND I KNOW THAT HAS TO DEVELOP AND THINGS HAVE TO COME IN BUT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO PUT IN IS NOT THE BEST THING FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THE GAS, THE FUMES, THE TRAFFIC. TRAFFIC IS GOING FROM HARFORD ELEMENTARY STEPHENS ELEMENTARY PEARSON ELEMENTARY SO THAT'S GOING DOWN THE SAME DIRECTION THE CHILDREN WE HAVE A LOT OF CHILDREN IF THEY ARE WALKING AND COMING ACROSS THE GAS STATION OR CONVENIENCE STORE WHAT ABOUT THEIR SAFETY? ALSO THE NEIGHBORS AND I AM SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE NEIGHBORS. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEND AN EMAIL BUT THEY ARE OPPOSED TO THE GAS STATION BEING THERE IN THE TRAFFIC LIGHT WE SEE THE TRAFFIC LIGHT SO I NOW WITH WHATEVER YOU ARE GOING TO PUT UP WE WILL SEE THAT ALSO SAW IT'S GOING TO BE A DISTRACTOR BAR NEIGHBORHOOD AND I TOTALLY OPPOSED. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? >> MY NAME IS TRISH NELSON I LIVE AT 3201 HILLCREST THIS IS OUR HOME THIS IS WHERE OUR CHILDREN PLAY THIS IS WHERE OUR GRANDCHILDREN PLAY I CAN HEAR THE KIDS PLAYING IN THE PLAYGROUND AND YOU WANT TO TAKE IT AWAY AT HIS NOSE IT WILL COME IN WE NEED TO PROTECT OUR BABIES.E ARE TALKING GRADE SCHOOL WE HAVE THEM WALKING TO SCHOOL WE DON'T NEED PREDATORS WE DON'T NEED TRASH SOMETHING THAT'S FOR OUR COMMUNITY THERE'S GAS STATIONS IN TWO DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS WE DO NEED TO SLEEP. WOULD YOU WANT A GAS STATION WHERE GAS PUMPS ARE 200 FEET FROM YOUR BACKYARD OR YOUR BABY'S PLAYER YOU HAVE PICNICS? WE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO THESE THINGS ANYMORE IF WE HAVE A GAS STATION COMING ON THIS AND ALSO THE SALE OF TOBACCO DO WE WANT THAT AROUND OUR CHILDREN AND TOBACCO, IS THAT WHAT'S NEXT? THIS IS MY CITY. PLEASE. DON'T ALLOW SOMETHING LIKE THIS TO COME IN ON US, NOT WITH OUR CHILDREN. THERE'S OTHER PLACES I AM IN A NEIGHBORHOOD I WOULD LIKE TO STAY AT A NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> AND THE OTHER SPEAKERS? ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING? DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? >> BARBARA MILLER 602 ÃCOURT I WANT TO EXPRESS CONCERN ABOUT THE GAS STATION, I AM NOT IN FAVOR SINCE AREAS RESIDENTIAL IN THE CITY HAS PLENTY OF GAS STATIONS. >> CIVIC STACY SMITH I LIVE NEAR THE INTERSECTION FOR THE PROPOSED GAS STATION I AM HIGHLY OPPOSED TO HAVING A GAS STATION ON THIS CORNER THE TRAFFIC IS ALREADY BAD DURING SCHOOL DROP-OFF AND PICKUP TIME AND WHEN PEOPLE ARE ON THEIR WAY HOME FROM WORK THIS WILL CREATE MORE TRAFFIC THAN THAT AREA CAN HANDLE AND THE TRAFFIC IS ONLY WORSE IN THE GAS STATION WOULD NOT HELP WITH THAT AT ALL THERE PLENTY OF GAS STATIONS IN THE AREA AND I DO NOT FEEL LIKE ANOTHER GAS PSTATION IS NEEDED, PLEASE CONSIDER THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS AREA WE DO NOT NEED OR WANT ANOTHER GAS STATION IN THIS AREA. >> MY NAME IS STEPHANIE HIGGINS I LIVE AT 4021 ÃI AM 100 PERCENT AGAINST A GAS STATION GOING IN WE NEED ANOTHER GAS STATION LIKE WE NEED ANOTHER LIQUOR STORE WE HAVE 10 GAS STATIONS IN SEVERAL LIQUOR STORES NOT TO MENTION THE UNSAVORY TYPES OF PEOPLE THAT LOITER IN LITTER AROUND GAS STATIONS YOU WOULD INCREASE THE CHANCE OF ROBBERIES AND [01:55:04] KIDNAPPINGS TAKING PLACE LESS THAN SIX OF HER FEET FROM ELEMENTARY SCHOOL I DON'T SEE HOW IT'S CLOSE TO A GOOD IDEA I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME WHOLESOME RETAIL SHOPS OR RESTAURANTS GO IN SO PEOPLE FROM THE NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS AND PARKS COULD GO AS A FAMILY TO ENJOY. JENNIFER DIXIT 8041 GARNER ROAD I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO BUILD A GAS STATION I AGREE WITH THE RESIDENCE NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSAL THIS LOT HAS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON ONE SIDE, APARTMENTS ON ANOTHER NBA SCHOOL.THE CITIES UNDEVELOPED LAND, NEXT TO THAT IS A SCHOOL, THERE ARE 10 GAS STATIONS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY 2 AT 66 TWO AT MILLER AND ROW THAT 2 AT ÃTHE GAS STATION IS NOT THE RETAIL PROPERTY RESIDENCE NEED. IN ADDITION TRAFFIC APPROACHING IS ALREADY A PROBLEM. I DISAGREE WITH THE CITY'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS THIS SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED. RON SMITH ROW THAT I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO BUILD ANOTHER GAS STATION WE HAVE TWO GAS STATIONS AT THE END AND TWO GAS STATIONS AT THE END OF MILLER TWO GAS STATIONS AT 30 AND ÃAND IT WILL CREATE MORE TRAFFIC THAT IS NOT NEEDED IN OUR AREA. TREY HOLLOWAY 40132 ÃAS FOR AGENDA ITEM 5BI WOULD SAY NO TO A CONVENIENCE STORE GAS STATION BESIDES THE FACT IT WOULD CREATE A TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE AT THE INTERSECTION I THINK PUTTING A STORE THAT WOULD SELL ALCOHOL ACROSS A SCHOOL IS NOT WISE WE HAVE STORES CONNECTING TO MAIN STREETS THAT SERVE THE AREA WELL. >> IS THAT IT? >> AT THIS TIME WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONERS, I OPEN IT UP TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION. OR A MOTION. >> I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS WITH THE NOISE AND TRAFFIC AND THE SMELL OF THE LIGHTING AND POLLUTION AND THE CHILDREN SAFETY IN THE COMPATIBILITY WITH THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WAS RIGHT ON TOP OF THEM SO I WOULD HAVE TO VOTE AGAINST GREAT >> THIS IS A DIFFICULT ONE FOR ME WE LIVE ON SUNRISE DRY DOWN MILLER ALL THE TIME WE ALREADY HAVE A TRAFFIC PROBLEM ON MILLER AND IT DOES FIT THE INTENT OF THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION AND MR. CHRISTIAN IN PARTICULAR BROUGHT UP A NICELY LAID OUT LIST OF THE CONCERNS THAT TAMRA ECHOED AND THE NUMBER OF SPEAKERS HERE WHO ARE OPPOSED TO IT WHO LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND ARE SO CLOSE TO WHERE THIS WILL BE IT GIVES US SOME BIG CONCERNS BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES WHO WILL BE IMPACTED BY IT I WOULD FEEL BETTER IF IT WAS ACROSS THE STREET AND I THINK I AM ALSO GOING TO HAVE TO VAUOPPOSE TO IT EVEN THOUGH I SEE ADVANTAGES AND I STARTED OUT BEING IN FAVOR OF THIS. >> THANK YOU. >> I CAN UNDERSTAND THE NEIGHBORHOODS CONCERN BUT THIS IS ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL USE AND IT DOES MEET THAT REQUIREMENT THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS NOISE, TRAFFIC IS DEFINITELY AN ISSUE AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND WE ARE WORKING TO TRY TO MITIGATE THAT AND I'M NOT GOING TO BE THAT WORRIED ABOUT TRAFFIC BUT I CAN UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS SO BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS DEVELOPMENT AS LONG AS WE GO AHEAD AND HAVE A MINIMUM 10 FOOT WALL BETWEEN [02:00:09] THAT PROPERTY AND RESIDENTIAL Ã >> COMMENTS? >> IT'S A UNIQUE SITUATION I THINK IS A GREAT IDEA I GREW UP ON THIS CORNER IS TO GO TO HIGH SCHOOL MILLER TRAFFIC IS GOING TO GET WORSE YOU ARE SPREADING TRAFFIC AROUND I KNOW THAT AREA IS NOT CONGESTED ALL DAY I THINK I WOULD APPROVE IT I LIKE THE IDEA OF THE WALL BEING THERE >> FIRST AND FOREMOST WITH ME I PUT A LOT OF VALUE AND A LOT OF ATTENTION TO THE HOMEOWNERS AND THEIR CONCERNS WITH THE AREA AND SET HIGH FACTOR THAT IN VERY CAREFULLY WHEN I MAKE A DECISION BUT ON THE OTHER HAND WE ARE IN A BALANCING ACT HERE WE DEFINITELY RESPECT YOUR OPINIONS WE HAVE HOUSES THINK IT EFFECTIVE WHEN THINGS HAPPEN AROUND US THE LANDOWNER HAS MADE AN INVESTMENT HE IS IN THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY A CERTAIN RIGHTS TO DO CERTAIN THINGS WITH THIS PROPERTY AND IT APPEARS HE HAS MET THE CITY'S CRITERIA I THINK HE SEEMS LIKE A REASONABLE MAN MAY BE HE WILL DO HIS PART TO MEET YOU HALFWAY I CONCUR WITH THE ISSUE AS I MENTIONED BEFORE THE TRAFFIC, THAT'S AN ISSUE. FOR THE 2 WALL SCOPE OF THE SCREENING WALLS TO THE WEST AND TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY I WOULD CONCUR THAT THEY SHOULD BE TALLER HEDGES CAN GROW HIGHER THINGS LIKE A LIVING SCREEN THERE'S DIFFERENT TYPES OF ALWAYS OR ÃTHAT COULD EASILY REACH HEIGHTS OF 12 TO 15 FEET I THINK THAT WOULD CERTAINLY BLOCK A LOT OF THE LIGHTING ISSUES YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT AND IT'S ORGANIC IT'S NATURAL AND IT WILL LOOK BETTER I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT THE CITIES LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT I AM JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE IS A BRAINSTORM AND I GUESS I WOULD ASK STAFF TO COMMENT ON THAT >> I WANT TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION THE SIX FOOT WALL WOULD ONLY BE REQUIRED ON THE WEST PROPERTY LINE ON THE SOUTH THAT'S COMMERCIAL PROPERTY I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR. OUR CODE DOES SPEAK TO LIVING SCREENS THAT ARE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A WROUGHT IRON FENCE IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN MAKING A MOTION THERE'S NO REASON THAT TALLER PLANTINGS CAN BE ÃCAN'T BE CONSIDERED EITHER. >> SO WE ARE LOOKING AT EVEN WITH THE WALL A 24 INCH RIGHT MINIMUM TIME OF PLANTING EVERY THREE FEET THAT WILL NOT CLEAR THE WALL BUT THE TREES PLANTED, THAT WILL INCLUDE CANOPY TREES AS WELL. JUST AS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. >> MY POINT AND I WAS AWARE THERE WERE TREES BUT THE PROBLEM IS THE CANOPY LOOKS LIKE THIS AND A HEDGE WILL GIVE YOU A LITTLE MORE UNIFORM SCREENING IN EACH DIRECTION AND I UNDERSTAND THAT'S NOT GOING TO TAKE AWAY THE ODORS FROM THE TRASH OR POTENTIAL GAS IN THE AREA TO BE HONEST WITH YOU I AM VERY, I DON'T KNOW WHICH WAY I WANT TO GO, IS THIS GOING TO [02:05:09] INCLUDE A REQUIREMENT FOR SIDEWALKS TO BE PLACED? YOU HAVE A DISH OUT THERE NOW AND IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE THE FLOW OF DRAINAGE IN THE AREA? >> IF YOU NOTICE IN THE STAFF REPORT WAS ARTICULATED THAT THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL BE REQUIRED THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL THE SIDEWALK I THINK IT DOES NOT IMPEDE THE DRAINAGE DITCH THAT YOU MENTIONED AT THIS TIME SO JUST TO DISCUSS AND BRING OUT REGARDING THE WALL REQUIREMENT THAT IS A REQUIREMENT WITH A MINIMUM HEIGHT OF SIX FEET A WALL WITHIN A 50 FOOT WIDE BUFFER IN ADDITION TO THAT THE INSTALLATION OF TREES EVERY 35 FEET IS REQUIRED THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS TWOFOLD ONE FROM A MACRO LEVEL IS TO IMPACT THE TREE CANOPY BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY WHAT THAT FOLIAGE WOULD DO AT TIMES DEPENDING ON THE SEASON OF THE SPECIES OF THE TREE IT WOULD MITIGATE FURTHER GLARE OF LIGHTING AND TO SOME EXTENT MUTE THE SOUNDS THAT EMANATE FROM THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU. >> I HAVE ANOTHER CONCERN. >> GAS COMPANIES MAKE THEIR DELIVERIES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT AND I AM CONCERNED IT'S GOING TO WAKE UP THE RESIDENCE. >> WE DO HAVE APPLICABLE AUDIO NOISE ORDINANCES. IN THE PAST IF THERE ARE CONCERNS WE HAVE ORDINANCES IN PLACE TO HELP ACCOMMODATE THAT >> WE ARE ASSUMING THIS IS A 24 HOUR FUNCTIONING GAS STATION? >> I WILL LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK TO THAT. HOURS OF OPERATION. >>. >> THAT'S 6 PÃ6 AM TO 11 PM. >> MR. ROBERTS THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSE THANK YOU. MR. ROBERTS, CAN YOU SHOW US AGAIN THE ÃFROM THE GAS STATION ON SCREEN WE WILL TAKE A GLYPHS THAT TRAFFIC SITUATION AGAIN. >> IT APPEARS THOSE ENTRANCES AND EXITS ARE NOWHERE NEAR THE CORNER WHERE WE WOULD THINK THE CHILDREN WILL BE CROSSING THE ROAD >> IT'S MOSTLY A DISTANCE REQUIREMENT IT IS A TYPE A THOROUGHFARE >> OKAY. >> THE SIDEWALK CONNECTION WOULD EXTEND ALL THE WAY TO THE CORNER >> SO THERE WOULD BE SIDEWALKS ON ANY STREET FACING. [02:10:07] >> >> WELL. THIS DESIGNATION DOES FALL INTO AN APPROVED DESIGNATION FOR THE CURRENT ZONING OF THE PROPERTY I UNDERSTAND THE RESIDENCE CONCERNS I THINK THEY ARE VALID BUT I THINK THE USE IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PROPOSED ZONING AND I DO THINK THAT THE CITY AND KNOWING THE STAFF HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT A LOT OF THESE CONCERNS AND PARTICULARLY IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS SO I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS BUT THIS WILL GO IN THERE PROBABLY IT'S APPROVED WITH THE ZONING SO I DON'T KNOW THAT I WOULD VOTE AGAINST IT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CONDITIONS INCLUDED AND ALTHOUGH USUALLY A SIX FOOT HEIGHT WALL REQUIREMENT, WE CAN INCREASE THAT. OKAY. IT'S LIKE I HAVE A TRIGGER FINGER OVER HERE READY TO MAKE A MOTION. GO AHEAD. >> I WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONVENIENCE WITH GAS PUMPS ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. ÃTHE WALL AND FRONTAGE AND ATTACHED ÃPERMITTED TO THE SITE AND RESTRICTED FOR MITIGATING IMPACT ON THE ADJACENT ÃFAMILY USE AND THE WESTERN BOUNDARY BE HAVE A 10 FOOT MASONARY WALL AND THAT THE LIGHTING IN THE REAR OF THE BUILDING BE REDUCED TO A LEVEL CONSISTENT WITH A RESIDENTIAL AREA. THAT'S IT. >> STAFF WOULD LIKE TO SEE CLARIFICATION WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FOOTCANDLES INSTALLED ADJACENT TO THE REAR FAC'ADE OF THE BUILDING IS DOWNLOADED AND THEN WE WOULD MAKE SURE WE COULD ENSURE THAT THE GLARE DOES NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE BEGINNING OF THE 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER FROM A CANDLE PERSPECTIVE. >> I MUST BE TIRED OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA WITH THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH WITHIN OUR PACKET TONIGHT REGARDING WALL SIGNAGE AND MONUMENT SIGNAGE WITH THE ADDENDUM THAT WE HAD ON THE CAN YOU SAY IT AGAIN >> IF THE COMMISSION PLEASES FOR STAFFCLARIFICATION CAN YOU REPEAT THAT MOTION ? TO FOLLOW THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AS OFFERED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS THAT THE WESTERN BOUNDARY INSTALLED IN PLACE OF A SIX FOOT TALL WALL, A 10 FOOT WALL BE INSTALLED THE FOURTH CONDITION WOULD BE THAT THE LIGHTING ON THE WESTERN ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION EXTERIOR ELEVATION OFTHE BUILDING THAT THE LIGHTING WITH A GLARE FROM THAT DOES NOT GO BEYOND THE 15, THE PERIMETER OF THE 15 FOOT LANDSCAPE. [02:15:03] >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND >> ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE VOTE. ALL OPPOSED, OKAY THANK YOU. SO THAT ITEM CARRIES. MOVING ON TO ITEM 5C. DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK? WE WILL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK IT IS 9:15 PM WE WILL RECONVENE AT 9:20 PM >> WE ARE MOVING ON. LET ME MAKE SURE I KNOW WHAT I'M DOING. HERE IS MY SHEET OF PAPER? OKAY. WE WILL RECONVENE THE MEETING [5C. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council on a request by Manhard Consulting, on behalf of property owners Sapphire Bay Land Holdings I, LLC, and Sapphire Bay Marina, LLC, regarding a request for a Major Warrant to allow for private streets on properties zoned Form-Based Bayside Special (FB-BS) District. The approximately 115-acre site is located South of the intersection of Dalrock Road and Interstate 30 situated in the H. McMillan Survey Abstract N. 853 and the William Crabtree Survey N.346, City of Rowlett, Dallas County, and the H. McMillan Survey Abstract No.143, City of Rowlett, Rockwall County, Texas.] AND WE ARE READY FOR ITEM 5C TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON A REQUEST BY MANHART CONSULTING ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER SAPPHIRE BAY LANDHOLDINGS WANT LLC AND SAPPHIRE BAY MARINA REGARDING OUR REQUEST FOR A MAJOR ÃTO ALLOW FOR PRIVATE STREETS ON PROPERTIES OWNED SITES SPECIAL DISTRICT APPROXIMATELY 115 ACRE SITE IS ON DOWEL ROCK ROAD AND INTERSTATE 30 ABSTRACT 853 AND NORTH 346 THE CITY OF DALLAS COUNTY ADD 143 AND THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE NUMBER 346 THE CITY OF ROLLA AT ROCKWALL COUNTY TEXAS. >> GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS THE REQUEST IS FROM THE SAPPHIRE BAY MARINA AND DEVELOPERS WHO ARE REQUESTING THE STREET MEMBER WITHIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS REFLECTED IN THE RED SHADED AREA ON YOUR ÃAREA OF THE SCREEN PRIVATE STREETS AND I AM GOING TO USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO GUIDE YOU A LITTLE BIT AS IT RELATES TO Ã YES SIR. >> WHY IS THAT ONE TIP INCLUDED IN THIS? >> THAT IS WITHIN THE CITY OF DALLAS LIMITS. THE CITY OF DALLAS. THAT SITE IS RESERVED FOR THE UTILITIES SO THEY CAN PERFORM THEIR FUNCTIONS AND AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT AND THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT AND IS NOT WITHIN THE CITY OF ROWLETT JURISDICTION. COMMISSIONERS LEVEL WALK YOU THROUGH THIS PROJECT AS A RELATES TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND TO CLOSE WITH WHY THEY ARE REQUESTING A PRIVATE STREET NETWORK. BY WAY OF BACKGROUNDB& EARLIEST 2015 THAT THESE PROPERTIES WITH WHAT WE CALL THE BAYSIDE SPECIAL DISTRICTS SO THAT MARINA ITSELF AS YOU CAN SEE ARE A MIXED-USE PROJECT WHICH PLANS FOR RETAIL COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL HOTEL USES AND A COMPONENT TO IT AS WELL AND I AM SURE EVERYBODY DRIVES BY AND SEES THE DEVELOPMENT OCCURRING THERE AS THE APPLICANT HAS PROCEEDED TO INSTALL THE [02:20:02] INFRASTRUCTURE RELATED TO THE SITE THEY ARE SEEKING REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A MAJOR WARRANT TO ALLOW THAT TO BE A PRIVATE ONE AND SHE PROVIDE SOME IMAGERY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT AS YOU CAN SEE ÃTHIS ESTABLISH SOME COMPONENTS TO THIS AND YOU CAN SEE THAT MUCH OF THE STREET NETWORK BY WAY OF WORK ON SITE HAS BEEN AND SOLVE THE TOTAL AREA IS THE HUNDRED 15 ACRES APPROXIMATELY AND IT BOASTS SOUTHERN AND EASTERN PROPERTY ADD THIS IS ONE OF THE COMPONENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT AS FAR AS ACCESS IS CONCERNED IT'S ÃBY 30 ON THE NORTHERN BORDER AND IT IS BEING PREPARED AS WE SPEAK FOR CONSTRUCTION THAT INFRASTRUCTURE CONSISTS OF AN AREA OF DEVELOPMENT AND I WILL GET TO THAT IN THE SECOND BUT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT THESE ARE SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENING FOR A WHILE WE ARE REALIZING IN TERMS OF WE HAVE SEEN SOME UTILITY AND RELOCATION TO PREPARE FOR THE EXPANSION AND WITH THAT WE'VE GOT SOME ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS RECONSTRUCTION OF THE MAIN LANES THE ADDITION OF FRONTAGE ROAD THERE WILL BE A FLYOVER ACCESS THE SAPPHIRE BAY BOULEVARD WOULD CONNECT SAPPHIRE BAY TO ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTS AND THIS WILL CONNECT LIKE I EDUCATED IN THE BAYSIDE DISTRICT AS WELL THE IMAGE IN FRONT OF YOU BASICALLY SHOWS YOU THAT AN INTERNAL NETWORK WITHIN THE 115 ACRES AND SOME OF THE STREETS HAVE NAMES THAT WE TRY TO REFLECT THOSE FOR YOU THE PURPOSE WAS TO SHOW YOU THIS IS THE SAPPHIRE BAY BOULEVARD AND THIS WAS THE FIRST STREET THEY INSTALLED AND THEY HAVE GONE AHEAD AND WORK THROUGH THIS AREA AND STARTED ESTABLISHING THIS INFRASTRUCTURE THAT YOU SEE. WHEN INFRASTRUCTURE IS INSTALLED IN THE CITY AND THE RIGHT OF WAYS INCLUDING THE WATER AND STORM ONCE IT IS COMPLETED IT'S ACCEPTED BY THE CITY IT WOULD OWN IT AND MAINTAIN THAT THE DETERMINATION OF IF THE STREETS WOULD BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED WOULD BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO THE PLOTTING WHICH ALLOWS FOR BUILDING PERMITS THIS NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO THAT STAGE SO THAT THERE IS TIMELY ÃFOR THE PERMITS AS THEY START MOVING FORWARD IN AS SOON AS THEY START INSTALLING IT THEY START TO GO VERTICAL AND THAT'S WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW. SO IF THIS SHOULD BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL WITH THE RECOMMENDATION ALL PLANS TO INCORPORATE LANGUAGE INVOLVING THE OWNERSHIP AND OBLIGATIONS OF THESE PRIVATE STREETS AND WHAT'S UNDER THESE AND THE UTILITY ELEMENTS AND I WILL GET TO THAT IN JUST A SECOND. SO I HAVE ALSO COMMONLY USED WE HAVE WATER AND FIBER OPTICS FOR EXAMPLE AS A RELATES TO THIS DEVELOPMENT THESE DEVELOPMENTS THERE IS A PRIVATE UTILITY RUNNING PARALLEL TO THE STREETS AND SO WHAT I'VE TRIED TO EXPLAIN HERE IS THE UTILITIES WILL BE PART OF THIS AND THE OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE WILL BE DIFFERENT WHEN WE GET TO THAT IN A SECOND. >> WITH THE MASK IT'S HARD FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING YOU ARE SAYING. WHAT WAS THAT LAST SENTENCE? >> I WAS GOING TO SHOW YOU THE CROSS-SECTION FOR SAPPHIRE BAY AND SAPPHIRE BAY MARINA AS A RELATES TO THE STREETS AT UTILITY AND WHAT COMPONENT THEY [02:25:04] ARE REQUESTING TO BE PRIVATE AND WHAT WOULD BE THE CITY OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE. SO THIS IS A PRIVATE STREETS SECTION APPLICABLE TO SAPPHIRE BAY AND SAPPHIRE BAY MARINA AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN YELLOW WE HAVE A PRIVATE STREET COMPONENT AND YOU CAN SEE IT IS WITH RIGHT OF WAY THAT COMPONENT THAT IS WITHIN YELLOW IS A PRIVATE STREET AREA WHAT YOU SEE IN GREEN IS A ZONE THAT ZONE WOULD INCLUDE LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS AND THOSE TYPES OF FEATURES AND WITHIN THE BLUE AREA PURPLE, THAT IS WHAT SAPPHIRE BAY HAS INSTALLED ON THE PERIMETER AND THAT IS THE SAPPHIRE BAY EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT THAT WILL HAVE THEIR OWN PROVIDERS LOCATED IN CENTER THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY THE YELLOW SHADED AREA WHERE THE CITIES UTILITIES ARE AND WATER AND SEWER MOST OF THE ELEMENTS AND IT WILL ACCEPT THAT INFRASTRUCTURE AND IT WILL ACCEPT IT AND IT WILL OWN AND MAINTAIN THAT THE STREET ARE THOSE ACCESSIBLE ELEMENTS AND IT WILL BE THE OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE OF SAPPHIRE ÃNOW HERE'S SOME MORE SPECIFICITY TO IT SO THE 10 FOOT EASEMENT THAT I MENTIONED THOSE OF THE PRIVATE UTILITIES YOU HAVE YOUR FIBER IN THEIR AND THEY RUN ALONG EVERY COMPONENT OF THE PROPOSED STREETS THE AMENITIES OWN IN GREEN REPLACEMENT AND MAINTENANCE AND LIGHTING FIXTURES THE PRIVATE STREET EASEMENT SHOWN IN YELLOW IS THE STREET ITSELF AND BELOW IT IS THE PUBLIC SEWER AND STORM ALL THAT RUNS ONTO THE PAVEMENT. BECAUSE THERE IS NO SPECIFIC SECTION WITHIN THE CODE THAT SAID THIS STIPULATES THE REQUIREMENTS TO ALLOW FOR OR ENABLE PRIVATE STREETS THERE IS A CAVEAT TO ENABLE PRIVATE STREETS AND THE FORM-BASED CODE STATES THAT THIS MAY BE APPROVED WITH THE FORM-BASED CODE AND THE RESULT WILL BE AN IMPROVED PROJECT WHICH WILL BE AN ACTIVE CONTRIBUTION AND IT WILL NOT PREVENT THE REALIZATION OF THE OVERALL Ã THERE'S A TYPO THERE SO WHAT YOU REJECT THAT. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.HE REQUEST WILL NOT IMPACT PUBLIC USE OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS CASE THERE WANTED TO ASSUME THE OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE OF THAT STREET ITSELF IN ADDITION IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THIS THERE HAS TO BE LANGUAGE THAT IS PROVIDED WHAT WILL COME BEFORE YOU WHEN IT'S READY TO BE PRESENTED TO YOU FOR YOUR ACTION THAT WILL REFLECT WHAT ELEMENTS ARE DEDICATED TO THE CITY AND WHAT REMAINS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPERS. ARE THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN ADDITION TO THAT THERE WILL BE A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THAT WILL BE APPROVED WHERE THE DEVELOPER WILL CLEARLY ARTICULATE ACCESS TO PUBLIC UTILITIES AND ENSURING THAT THAT IS NOT HAMPERED. THIS COMPONENT HAS BEEN RUN THROUGH THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE ACCESSING THESE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HAS LOOKED AT IT SO BASED ON THE REQUEST THERE WOULD BE NO NEGATIVE IMPACT TO HAVE A PRIVATE STREET NETWORK WITHIN SAPPHIRE BAY. >> REAL QUICK BECAUSE I MUST BE SILLY I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY SOMEONE WOULD WANT TO ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR A STREET WHICH THEY COULD PAWN OFF ON THE CITY TO MAINTAIN VERSUS THEM HAVING TO DO IT. WHAT'S THE UPSIDE? >> THERE ARE SOME ELEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT AREA IT'S UNFORTUNATE THE APPLICANT WASN'T ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE SOME FEATURES SUCH AS BRICK [02:30:03] PAVERS FOR EXAMPLE WITHIN SOME OF THAT AND AS A LONG-TERM IMPLICATION WE HAD RECOMMENDED THOSE NOT BE PROVIDED AND ADDITIONALLY IN TERMS OF HAVING THE ABILITY TO WORK ON CERTAIN TYPES OF SIGNAGE SO FOR THEM IT IS AN OVERALL ÃIF YOU LOOK AT CERTAIN DEVELOPMENTS CERTAIN OTHER MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENTS IN SOME CASES THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PRIVATE STREET THEY JUST HAVE COMMON ACCESS SO THEY WOULD HAVE IT INTERNAL STREET NETWORK BUT THEY WOULD BE PRIVATE SO THEY WANT TO MAINTAIN THAT TYPE OF IMAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. >> LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING. I LIVE IN A GATED COMMUNITY. WE PAY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FEES AND THOSE FEES MAINTAIN OUR PRIVATE STREET SO WHAT HAPPENS IF THE DEVELOPER GOES BELLY UP AT SOME POINT OR SELLS ALL THE PROPERTIES OR DOES EVERYTHING HE IS GOING TO DO AND HE JUST SKATES IN THE STREETS FALL APART? >> A TWOFOLD RESPONSE TO THAT, THE FIRST IS ANY FORM-BASED CODE DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT THAT IS IN PERPETUITY AND FOLLOW SUCCESSES AND ASSIGNMENTS WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT WILL ALWAYS BE A CODE GOVERNANCE RESTRICTION DOCUMENT THAT INSURERS THE MAINTENANCE OF SUCH THIS IS NOT A GATED COMMUNITY THE STREETS WILL BE BUILT TO THE CITY SPECIFICATIONS THERE WILL BE NO GATES WILL BE ACCESSIBLE BY THE PUBLIC AND IT WILL BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC AND PUBLIC SAFETY AND TEAMS AS WELL. SO IF THE SCENARIO THERE IS THAT SITUATION YOU COULD DEFINITELY LOOK AT IT THEN BUT AT THIS POINT GIVEN THE SCALE OF THE DEVELOPMENTS, THEN IT'S LIKE ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT, JUST COMMON ACCESS IF THEY WERE IN DISREPAIR THEY WOULD BE ASSESSED OVERHEAD OWNERSHIP AT THAT POINT. >> YOU MENTIONED ONE OF THE REASONS THEY WANTED TO DO THIS WAS TO DO SOME KIND OF SIGN. >> >> AND THEY WANT TO INSTALL IT IN A WAY THAT HAS SOME DIFFERENT ELEMENTS TO IT. >> WITH THE CITY HAVE CONTROL OVER THE SIGNAGE OR NOT? >> >> THEY CAME FORWARD WITH THE MAJOR WARRANTS AND HAS SOME DEVIATIONS IN TERMS OF SIGNAGE AND WHAT TYPE THEY WANT TO THAT MIGHT BE TYPICAL AND THOSE ARE THINGS THAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT. >> >> ANY MORE QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW? SO YOU SAID THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE SO THERE IS NO ONE HERE TO DO ANY TYPE OF PRESENTATION. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. SO AT THIS TIME WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE HAVE ANY CARDS SUSAN? CAN WE HAVE A SHOW OF HANDS IF THERE IS ANYONE HERE IN THE BUILDING THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? DO YOU HAVE ANY? OKAY. SHOWING THEN WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONERS. >>. MONEY BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE CITY OF COURSE THAT'S GOING TO BE COVERED SO >> TAKES THE WEIGHT OFF THE CITY. >> ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO MAKE A,? I AM READY FOR A MOTION. [02:35:08] >> I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO ALLOW PRIVATE STREETS >> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FORAPPROVAL , DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> WE HAVE A SECOND BY MR. FRISBY. SUSAN ARE YOU READY FOR US? ALL INFAVOR, PLEASE VOTE AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS. I'M SORRY. WE HAD ONE NAY. BUT THAT ITEM PASSED. AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 5D [5D. Consider and make a recommendation to City Council on a request Humberto Johnson, Skorburg Company, on behalf of property owners Lake Shore Village SF, Ltd., for a Tree Removal Permit application on property zoned Planned Development (PD) District for Single-Family Residential (SF-5) Uses. The approximately 21.75-acre site is situated in the William Crabtree Survey, Abstract Number 346, approximately 750 feet southwest of the intersection of Schrade and Dalrock Roads in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.] ON THE AGENDA. MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO SEEK COUNSEL ON A REQUEST BY JOHNSON ÃON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNERS. [INDISCERNIBLE] FOR A REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICATION ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES APPROXIMATELY 21.75 ACRE SITE SITUATED ON THE CRABTREE SURVEY AND SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION IN THE CITY OF RAO LEGEND DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ARE HERE TO CONSIDER AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON EACH PERMIT FOR THE SINGLE-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD SECTION 77 504 AGE DOES STATE ÃREQUIRING CITY ACTION CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPON RECOMMENDATION. SO BACKGROUND FOR YOU SPECIFIC TO THE SITES IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED AND TO ALLOW FOR ÃFOLLOWING THAT IN APRIL THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVED AND FURTHER REITERATE THE STRUCTURE AND THE LAYOUT AND AUGUST THIS YEAR THE CITY COUNCIL DID APPROVE A PERMIT AND THE REMOVAL OF 81 PROTECTED TREES AND A TOTAL NORTH OF ÃTHE APPLICANT HAS BEGAN SEVERAL PLANNED REVIEW AND EIGHT ADDITIONAL PROTECTED TREES NEED TO COME DOWN. IN CONSIDERATION THIS RELATES TO THE RDC REQUIREMENTS IT DOES STATE THE PRESERVATION OF LONG-ESTABLISHED TREES IS ENCOURAGED 77504 AGE DOES REQUIRE PERMITS BY CITY COUNCIL FOR PROTECTED TREES FOR YOUR EDIFICATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO FIND IS IN A TREE WITH IT EIGHT INCH CALIBER 11 INCH OR ÃTHAT IS NOT ONLY PROHIBITED PLANT LIST AND THE DIAGRAM ON THE SCREEN SO SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS PROTECTED TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ARE TO ACCOMMODATE HOMESITES AND RETAINING WALLS AND PROPERTY VALUES ON FENCING THE IMPACT OF THE BUILDING PADS AND RETAINING WALLS ARE NOT KNOWN UNTIL WE ENTER THE ÃTHE TREES REMOVAL IS NECESSARY AND THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED ZONING CONCEPT PLAN AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN I REALIZE THAT TURQUOISE IS NOT THE CHOICE, OR YOU WILL SEE THAT I HAVE MARKED ADDITIONAL TREES FOR REMOVAL AND HE WILL NOTICE THEY ARE TOWARDS THE FRONT AND SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND. [INDISCERNIBLE] SECTION 504 AGE GIVES A CREDIT FOR PRESERVING PROTECTED TREES APPLICANT WOULD REMOVE AN ADDITIONAL 75.4 INCHES AND TOTALING 1358.4 PROTECTED CALIBER INCHES AND THEY ARE LOOKING TO PRESERVE RESULTING IN A 3 TO 51.6 DEFICIT THE APPLICANT HAS CHOSEN TO MITIGATE BY PLANTING REPLACEMENT TREES ON-SITE THEY ARE PROPOSING 88 ADDITIONAL CANOPY TREES THOSE COME OUT TO 352 PLACEMENT INCHES THE CALIBER INCHES EXCEED THE REQUIRED ÃTHEREFORE PAYMENT IS NOT NECESSARY THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO DESIGNATE THE OPEN SPACES TO PRESERVE 24 PROTECTED TREES AND SOME MEASURE 39 INCHES THE 88 REPLACEMENT TREES ARE LOCATED WITHIN OPEN SPACES THAT WOULD ENSURE THEIR PRESERVATION AND PUTTING THEM ON A SINGLE-FAMILY LOT THEY ARE PROPOSING EASEMENTS AS WELL AND ENSURING [02:40:04] EXISTING TREE STANDS ARE PRESERVED THESE WOULD BE DEDICATED TO THE FINAL. [INDISCERNIBLE] AND STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL THE PERMIT IS NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE THE ORDINANCE AS WELL AS RETAINING WALLS AND BUILDING PADS APPLICANT IS PRESERVING 40 PERCENT OF PROTECTED TREES ON-SITE IN THE REPLANTING IN THE OPEN SPACES.I WILL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS IN THE APPLICANT IS ÃFOUR QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY THERE IS NO PRESENTATION. SO MAKE ANY QUESTION FOR STAFF? >> YES. COULD YOU REITERATE WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT HAVING THEM DEDICATE THE EXISTING STANDS AROUND? >> WHENEVER A PRESERVE TREE IS LOCATED ON A SINGLE-FAMILY LOT ON THAT LOT IS DEVELOPED AND SOLD TO AN INDIVIDUAL WE LOSE A LITTLE BIT OF LEVERAGE IN ASSURING THAT TREE CONTINUES TO EXIST THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO DEDICATE A CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON THESE PROPERTIES ENSURING THAT THEY ARE PRESERVED AND WE WOULD JUST SIMPLY FLESHED OUT THAT LANGUAGE AND SEE THOSE EASEMENTS AND THOSE WOULD FOLLOW THE PROPERTIES INDIVIDUALLY AND >> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT'S WHO I UNDERSTAND IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. OKAY. IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THEY HAVE DONE THEIR BEST TO TRY TO ADHERE TO OUR TREE PRESERVATION PLAN I REMEMBER WHEN I BUILT MY HOUSE ONE DAY MY DOORBELL RANG AND THE GUY SAID I'M HERE WITH YOUR TREES AND WE SAID WE DIDN'T BUY ANY TREES AND HE SAID THE DEVELOPER PUT THESE IN SO MY FRONT YARD TREES WERE FREE AND THEY ARE BIG AND PRETTY.OKAY. IF NO MORE QUESTIONS I AM READY FOR A MOTION. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. THE REMOVAL PERMIT AS AMENDED. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY MR. FRISBY. SUSAN ARE YOU READY? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE VOTE.AND THAT IS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. MOVING ON TO ITEM 5F. IS THIS THE LAST ONE? THIS WAS 5E. THAT WAS 5D. [5E. Consider and make a recommendation to City Council on a request by Young Choi, JBI Partners, Inc., on behalf of property owners Rowlett Suburban Development, LLC., for approval of a Tree Removal Permit application on property zoned Single-Family Residential (SF-8) District. The approximately 12.93-acre site is situated in the Hanse Hamilton Survey, Abstract Number 548, approximately 130 feet northeast of the intersection of Pheasant Run Drive and Dalrock Road, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.] THIS IS 5E. CONSIDER MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL AND A REQUEST BY YOUNG ÃGBI PARTNERS INCORPORATED ON BEHALF OF PARTNER. [INDISCERNIBLE] FOR APPROVAL OF IT TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICATION WILL PROPERTIES SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT APPROXIMATELY 12.93 ACRE SITE SITUATED IN THE HAMILTON SURVEY ABSTRACT NUMBER FIVE FOR A APPROXIMATELY 130 FEET NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF PHEASANT RUN DRIVE IN THE CITY OF RAO LET'S DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS. SUE MAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS ITEM WAS TO CONSIDER MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON A PERMIT AGAIN SECTION 70 7504H REQUIRES A PERMIT TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON THE REMOVAL IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE TREES SO FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IDENTIFYING A 36 ÃNEIGHBORHOOD FEATURING A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN OCTOBER 2021 STAFF FURTHER IDENTIFIES UTILITY SETBACKS APPROVAL THEY WOULD ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO BEGIN IN PREPARATION FOR CONSTRUCTION. CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE DESIGNATION OF ESTABLISHED TREES IS ENCOURAGED IN ANY TREE WITH A MINIMUM EIGHT INCH CALIBER IS NOT LISTED ON THE PROHIBITED LIST DBH 4 AND A HALF FEET REFLECTED IN THE [02:45:07] IMAGE. THE 61 PROTECTED TREES PROPOSED TO REMOVAL ARE TO ACCOMMODATE HOMES, RETAINING WALLS AND THE STREET AND LOT CONFIGURATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PLOT THAT CAME BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THE PRESERVE TREES ARE SHOWN IN TURQUOISE SUMMER LOCATED WITHIN SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND SECTION 77504H IS THE APPLICANT WOULD REMOVE 964 PROTECTED CALIBER INCHES AND RESULTING IN 890 INCHES OF REQUIRED MITIGATION THE APPLICANT HAS CHOSEN TO MITIGATE BY REPLANTING ON-SITE AND THE REFORESTATION FUND THEY ARE LOOKING TO PLANT ADDITIONAL TREES AND 40 REPLACEMENT INCHES BRINGING THE REMAINING MITIGATION FOR THE REFORESTATION THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE DOES SPECIFY THE PAYMENT OF $121.67 PER INCH JUST OVER $100,000 REQUIRED IN REFORESTATION. MANY OF THE TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ARE IN THE AREA FOR THE FAMILY LOTS YOU WILL SEE THAT ON THE SCREEN AND PADS FOR TONIGHT ANTENNA INSTALLATION FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE APPLICANT IS UTILIZING THE EXISTING FLOODPLAIN ON-SITE TO MITIGATE STORMWATER RUNOFF AND PROPERTY CAPACITY AND FURTHER EXCAVATION IS REQUIRED AND IT RESULTS IN ÃTREE THE STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL THE REQUESTED TREE REMOVAL IS NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THE APPLICANT HAS PROMPTED TO REPLANT 10 REPLACEMENT TREES AND PAY $103,419.50 INTO THE REFORESTATION FUND AND WITH THAT I AM AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS HEREIN AVAILABLE. NO PRESENTATION. >> ANY QUESTIONS? OMMISSIONERS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. >> JUST ONE MORE TIME. COULD YOU TELL ME THE REFORESTATION FUND IS USED WHEN? >> IS AVAILABLE TO VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS LOOKING TO TYPICALLY INSTALL TREES, THUS THE PURPOSE OF IT. THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY, TREE MEDIANS ON PROPERTY WE ARE INSTALLING TREES FOR NEW PART DEVELOPMENT OR ANY OTHER CITY-OWNED PROPERTY. >> DO YOU KNOW THE CURRENT REFORESTATION FUND? >> I AM NOT PRIVY TO THE INFORMATION AT THIS TIME. >> I AM CURIOUS IF THERE IS ANY PROVISION TO START LOOKING AT REINFORCING OTHER PLACES LIKE PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE? >> THE REFORESTATION FUND AND ASSOCIATED POLICY RESOLUTION ASSOCIATED WITH IT ALLOWS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF TREES WITHIN THE PUBLIC REALM I THINK IS THE BEST WAY TO PUT IT AND I DO WANT TO REITERATE THAT ALTHOUGH A LITTLE SLOW GOING WE ARE GOING TO BE COMING FORWARD FOR THE FINALIZATION OF THE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE THAT PROVIDES MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR MITIGATION UTILIZING THE REFORESTATION FUNDS AND BEING ABLE TO UTILIZE TREE PLANTINGS AND OTHER LOCATIONS BY DEVELOPERS AND MORE IMPORTANTLY WE DO HAVE SOME INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WILL BE KICKING OFF SOON AND WE ARE HOPEFUL WE CAN UTILIZE THOSE FUNDS FOR THOSE TYPES OF INSTALLATIONS AND I KNOW THAT THE COUNCIL HAS BEFORE YOU FUNDS, THE REFORESTATION FUNDS FOR TREE PLANTINGS IN THE PAST IN THE CITY. >> I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T DOANYTHING FOR YOU IF IT'S . [INDISCERNIBLE] >> OKAY. IF WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE [02:50:09] QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR STAFF FOR THE APPLICANT I AM READY FOR A MOTION. >> MOTION TO APPROVE THE PERMIT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? AND WE HAVE A SECOND AND ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE VOTE. AND AGAIN, THAT IS UNANIMOUS. [5F. Consider and make a recommendation to City Council on a request by Young Choi, JBI Partners, Inc., on behalf of property owners Trail Creek Partners, Ltd., for approval of a Tree Removal Permit application on property zoned Planned Development (PD) District for Form-Based New Neighborhood (FB-NN) Uses. The approximately 71.4-acre site is situated in the William Blevins Survey, Abstract Number 95, approximately 1,130 feet northeast of the intersection of Vinson and Stonewall Roads in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.] AND NOW WE ARE READY FOR ITEM 5F CONSIDERING MAKING A RECOMMENDATION JUST TO THE COUNCIL ON A REQUEST BY JV I PARTNERS ON BEHALF OF TRAIL CREEK PARTNERS LIMITED FOR APPROVAL OF A TREE PERMIT TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICATION ON PROPERTY ZONE PLAN DEVELOPMENT PD DISTRICT FOR NEW NEIGHBORHOOD AND FBN USES 71.4 ACRE SITE MAKES PHASE 1 OF THE TRAILS AND SITUATED IN THE WILLIAM BLEVINS SURVEY ABSTRACT 95 APPROXIMTELY 1130 FEET NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION IN THE CITY OF RAO LET'S DALLAS COUNTY TEXAS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM BEFORE YOU IS TO CONSIDER MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR PHASE 1 OF THE TRAILS A COTTONWOOD CREEK DEVELOPMENT DOES TOTAL 71.4 ACRES LOCATED JUST OVER 1100 FEET NORTHEAST OF VINCENT STONEWALL ROSES THE FIRST OF FIVE PHASES PHASE 1 BEING THE CENTRALIZED ONE AND THE Ã FAMILY PROJECT AND IN OCTOBER 2019 THE PROPERTY WAS REZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT IT DID ALLOW FOR A MAXIMUM OF 765 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS APPROVED FOR THE OUTLYING PHASE 1 PROJECT SITE AND IN JULY OF THIS YEAR THE CITY COUNCIL DID APPROVE A PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE REMOVAL OF 320 PROTECTED TREES TOTALING 4220 CALIPER INCHES FOR THE APPLICANT TO BEGIN PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION FOR PHASE 1 IT HAS SINCE BEGAN THAT AND DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS. SOME CONSIDERATIONS FOR YOU THE STATE PRESERVATION ÃPROTECTED TREES ARE DEFINED AS ANY WITH AN EIGHT INCH CALIBER DBH AND 11 CALIBER DBH AND THE ADDITIONAL 23 PROTECTED TREES PROPOSED REMOVAL ARE TO ACCOMMODATE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE AND YOU WILL SEE THE RIGHT OF WAY TURQUOISE LINE AND THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A DEVELOPMENT CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING CONCEPT PLAN SECTION GIVES A CREDIT FOR PRESERVING PROTECTED TREES APPLICANT WILL REMOVE AN ADDITIONAL 200 ÃFOR THE WHOLE PROJECT SITE THEY ARE LOOKING TO PRESERVE 4220 AND A HALF CALIBER INCHES RESULTING IN A DEFICIT ÃTO BE REQUIRED FOR MITIGATION THE APPLICANT HAS CHOSEN TO MITIGATE BY REPLANTING ON-SITE THEY ARE PROPOSING 225 CANOPY TREES TO COME OUT TO A TOTAL OF 1566 INCHES WHICH IS IN EXCESS OF EACH OF THE 73 AND A HALF. [INDISCERNIBLE] REQUIRED. THE ZONING STAGE AND YOU WILL SEE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE FIVES FEE ÃFIVE PHASE DEVELOPMENT FEES SPECIFICALLY ARE CHOSEN AND THE COMPONENT OF ONE OF THE PARK IT POINTS AND WHAT THAT STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND THE EXISTING TREE STANDS AND TO BE PRESERVED AND TO ACCOMMODATE A DEVELOPMENT IN [02:55:14] CONJUNCTION WITH THE ÃI AM AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS STILL AVAILABLE BUT DOES NOT HAVE A PRESENTATION. >> QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? >> THEY ARE PLANTING OR MITIGATING. [INDISCERNIBLE] AS NECESSARY THIS AMOUNT OF EXCESS TREES COUNT TOWARDS ANY OTHERPHASE . ASSUMING THAT IS CORRECT. WE ARE REVIEWING THIS THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. >> ANYONE ELSE? >> I NOTICED THAT SEVERAL OF THESE ARE IN THE CREEK AREA I WOULD BE CONCERNED THAT THOSE TREE PLACEMENTS ARE THEY DON'T PRECLUDE THE FLOW OF DRAINAGE AND THAT THEY ARE NOT TOO CLOSE TO THE EDGES OF CASH TO THE CREEK BANK SO THEY DON'T ERODE OUT AND GET WASHED AWAY IN THE STORM. >> IS THROUGH THE REVIEW THE APPLICANT BECAME PRIVY TO OTHER COMPONENTS IN THESE DRAINAGE AREAS THE RESULTS AND REMOVAL OF THESE ADDITIONAL TREES AND IS THE REMOVAL OF THE TREES IN THOSE AREAS AND THE DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE MORE APPROPRIATELY AND THIS WAS IN A CADENCE AND THE REMOVAL OF THESE WILL BE MITIGATED BY THE REPLACEMENT OF THOSE Ã >> GREAT QUESTIONS. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM 5F THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. DO I HAVE A SECOND? >> WE HAVE A SECOND BY MR. FRISBY. ALL IN FAVOR? AND THAT WAS A UNANIMOUS VOTE. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.