Dec 12, 2023 Planning and Zoning Commission

[1. CALL TO ORDER ]

[00:00:06]

>> GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

WELCOME TO THE CITY OF ROWLETT'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12/12/23. THIS MEETING MAY BE CONVENED INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR PURPOSES OF SEEKING CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL ADVICE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ON ANY AGENDA ITEM HERE AND THE CITY OF ROWLETT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO RECONVENE OR CALL AN EXECUTIVE SESSION OR ORDER OF BUSINESS AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO ADJOURNMENT. THE PROCESS OF PUBLIC INPUT IF YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND IN PERSON, YOU CAN COMPLETE A CITIZEN'S INPUT FORM BY 3 3:30 P.M. THE DAY OF THE MEETING AND ALL WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING AND BE ZONING COMMISSION BEFORE THE START OF THE MEETING.

THE INSTRUCTIONS ARE AVAILABLE INSIDE OF THE DOOR OF THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. IT'S 7:03 AND WE HAVE A QUARTER QUORUM ANDCALL THIS MEETING TO . 3 MINUTE COMMENTS WILL BE TAKEN FROM THE AUDIENCE ON ANY TOPIC AND NO ACTION CAN BE TAKEN DURING THE CITIZEN'S INPUT AND IF YOU HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM, I SUGGEST THAT YOU WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE THAT PUBLIC HEARING.

IS THERE ANYBODY HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE CITIZEN'S INPUT.

[3. CONSENT AGENDA]

>> CONSIDER APPROVING THE MINUTES, 3A.

CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A REPLANT, 3B.

CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A FINAL PLAT, 3C.

>> IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WOULD WISH TO PULL AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? ITEM 3C? OKAY, ITEM 3C IS PULLED FROM THE AGENDA, I WOULD LIKE TO PULL ITEM 3B FROM THE AGENDA. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY, SO THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL CONSISTENT OF APPROVING THE MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 REGULAR MEETING.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS WRITTEN FROM THE

OCTOBER 24TH, 2023 MEETING. >> SECOND.

AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'M SORRY.

WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, SECONDED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. CALL THE VOTE.

AND THAT PASSES 7-0. NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS, ITEM 3B,

[3B.Consider action to approve the Toler Industrial Park No.3 replat. The approximately 1.347- acre property is located approximately 1,851 feet south of Lakeview Parkway, and is currently platted as Lots 34 and 35, Block 3 of Toler Industrial Park in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas. ]

ROWLETT IN TEXAS. >> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS, MY NAME IS KATIE AND I'LL BE PRESENTING ON THIS ITEM TONIGHT.

SO BACKGROUND INFORMATION, THIS IS A 1.347-ACRE PROPERTY AND LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1,751 FEET SOUTH OF THE PARKWAY.

AND THIS IS LOCATED ON OUR INDUSTRIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT.

AND THE SITE PLAN HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED TO CONSTRUCT 10,500 SQUARE FEET ADDITION ON LOT 34 TO AN EXISTING 9 NOW 762 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING ON LOT 35. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS LOOKING TO COMBINE THE TWO LOTS, 34 AND PA, ON BLOCK 3 INTO LOT 34R ON BLOCK 3. AND THIS REPLANT WILL DEDICATE A NEW FIRE LANE AND EASEMENT. HERE IS THE DRAWING OF THE PLAT PROVIDED AND FINALLY, THE STAFF APPROVES OF THE PLAT, ALL OF THE

[00:05:03]

QUESTIONS. >> THE REASON WHY I ASKED FOR THIS ITEM TO BE PULLED IS UNDER THE OWNER CERTIFICATE UNDER THE PLAT IS IT'S WRITTEN THAT ITS LOT 35 AND A PORTION OF LOT 34.

AND IN YOUR PRESENTATION, IT WAS ALL OF LOT 34, 35 IS GOING TO BE REPLATED TO 1. SO WHAT PORTION -- IS THERE A

PORTION -- >> SO THERE'S A PORTION OF THE BACK LOT THAT IS DEDICATED TO DART.

BUT THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE TO CONFIRM THAT.

>> IS THAT CONSIDERED TO BE LOT 34 THEN?

>> IT'S CONSIDERED TO BE LOT

>> IT'S NOT DESIGNATED AS ANYTHING HERE.

IT WAS DESIGNATED AS SOMETHING EARLIER, BUT THAT WOULD TAKE IT OUT OF LOT 34. SO THE REMAINDER OF ALL OF 34 IS STILL ALL OF 34. THAT'S MY QUESTION.

NOT JUST A PORTION OF IT. I'M SORRY, YOU GUYS PROBABLY DIDN'T HEAR THAT CONVERSATION. AGAIN I'M JUST CONFUSED IF IT'S JUST A PORTION, BUT IT APPEARS TO BE THE ENTIRETY OF LOT 34 IS GOING TO BE REPLATED AND THEN MY OTHER QUESTION, THE DEDICATED FIRE LANE AND MUTUAL ACCESS EASEMENT, WHETHER THAT WAS TRULY NECESSARY OR SOMETHING THAT THE OWNER WENT AHEAD AND AGREED TO BECAUSE HE'S A NICE GUY. I'M SORRY, SIR.

IF YOU WOULD PLEASE COME TO THE FRONT.

STATE YOUR NAME. ADDRESS.

AND THEN MAKE A COMMENT. >> CHUCK CARR, H ROOFING.

THAT WAS WHAT THE FIRE MARSHAL WANTED WAS AN EXTRA LANE IN

THERE, SO WE JUST SAID OKAY. >> OKAY.

>> I MEAN THAT'S WHAT HE WANTED.

CAN'T REALLY ARGUE WITH IT. >> I'M JUST CURIOUS WHY.

>> WELL, AT THE TIME THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PARKING THAT WAS IN THERE, SO WE HAVE WE HAD TO MAKE SURE THERE WAS ENOUGH ROOM BACK IN THE BACK FOR PARKING.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> IF YOU GREED WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL, THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME.

>> I AGREED WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL.

>> THANK YOU. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE FIRE

MARSHAL? >> THE ONLY COMMENT THAT I HAVE WHETHER PRELIMINARY OR FINAL, AND I THINK THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP BY COMMISSIONER COTE AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, AS WELL AS MYSELF, THAT WHEN WE'RE PRESENTED WITH THESE, UNFORTUNATELY, WE DON'T GET TO SEE THE SITE PLANS, THE ACCEPT PLANS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. AND I UNDERSTAND TO SOME DEGREE THAT THESE ARE PLATS WE'RE MOSTLY LOOKING AT PROPERTY LINES AND EASEMENTS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

BUT JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WA WANTED TO EXPRESS THE CONCERN THAT ITS SOMETIMES VERY DIFFICULT FOR INDIVIDUALS TO UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IN TERMS OF THE LAY OUTS AND THE LOCATION OF EASEMENTS.

AND AS JUST MENTIONED A MINUTE OR TWO AGO, WHY CERTAIN THINGS WERE THERE, AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT'S JUST THE PROTOCOL THAT WE HAVE IN OUR PROCESS. BUT EVEN IF IT'S NOT REQUIRED, I THINK IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY BENEFICIAL FOR US AS COMMI COMMISSIONERS AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PUBLIC TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND UNDERSTAND BETTER WHAT'S BEING

PROPOSED. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I'M READY FOR A MOTION. MS. WILLIAMS.

>> MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PLAT.

>> THE REPLAT? >> I MEAN THE REPLAT.

>> DO WE HAVE A SEC A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND.

[00:10:02]

>> MR. SWIFT. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO PRESENT THE REPLAT AND CALL TO VOTE.

AND THAT PASSES 7-0. NEXT ITEM IS CONSIDER APPROVAL

[3C. Consider action to approve the Lake Park Final Plat. The approximately 35.194-acre site is located in the Oliver V. Ledbetter Survey, Abstract Number 790, and the John D. Alston Survey, Abstract Number 7, approximately 400 feet south of Panama Drive at the termination of Sunrise Drive and Lafayette Drive, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

ABSTRACT NUMBER 790. AND ABSTRACT NUMBER 7, APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET SOUTH OF PANAMA DRIVE AT THE TERMINATION OF SUNRISE DRIVE AND LAFAYETTE DRIVE IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. MR. CONEY.

>> YES, SIR, THIS PROPERTY IS SHOWN IN THE RED IN THE DR DIAGM ON THE LEFT AND THE ZONING IS THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT.

WHEN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS APPROVED THEY WERE INTENDING FOR TWO PHASES AND HOWEVER, IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ENTIRE SUBDIVISION HAVE BEEN CONS CONSTRUCTED AND THEREFORE THE ENTIRE PLAT INCLUDING ALL OF THE SHOTS, SO THE ENTIRETY OF THE 142 LOTS, AND AGAIN, THIS IS THE FIRST PAGE OF THAT FINAL PLAT.

IT IS FOUR PAGES OVERALL, TWO OF THE PAGES BECAUSE IT IS A LARGER PROPERTY, SO TWO PAGES SHOWING THE GENERAL PLAT, AND WE HAVE THE DATA TABLE AND WE HAVE THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND SIGNATURES. AND WE DO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT, NOT THE REPLAT, AND ALL TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN SATISFIED FOR THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TEXAS CODE. AND WITH THAT, I WILL TAKE QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE THIS EVENING TO ASSIST.

>> QUESTIONS? MR. FREZBY.

>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER COTE.

THE GENERAL QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE PERTAIN PRIMARILY TO THE OPEN SPACE AS LISTED IN YOUR PACKAGE.

COULD YOU PLEASE JUST LET US KNOW WHAT KNOWS OPEN SPACE AREAS ARE PERP THE PLAT? AND ARE THOSE BEING DEDICATED AS STRICTLY OPEN SPACE? OR DO THOSE NEED TO BE LOOKED AT AS POTENTIAL DEEDING IN THE FUTURE AS PARK PROPERTY?

OR HOW ARE WE HANDLING THAT? >> OKAY, SO THE OPEN SPACES, WE HAVE -- LET ME MAKE SURE THAT I GET THESE -- UNFORTUNATELY IT DOESN'T SHOW UP VERY WELL. OKAY.

DO I HAVE IT UP HERE? YES, I DO.

SO WE HAVE AN OPEN SPACE HERE IN THE CENTER, AND WE ALSO HAVE THIS AREA HERE IS OPEN SPICE. SPICE AS WELL. WE HAVE THIS IS OPEN SPACE AS WELL AS THIS PORTION OVER HERE. AND THEN CONTINUATION OF OPEN SPACE WOULD ALSO BE THIS PORTION HERE.

THE QUESTION WOULD BE -- SO WITH THE FORM BASED CODE, PUBLIC THE OPEN SPACES ARE PUBLICLY -- PRIVATELY MAINTAINED BUT PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE WITH THAT, SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, IT IS NOT ANTICIPATED THAT ANY OF THESE PROPERTIES, OPEN SPACES, WOULD BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY FOR FUTURE MAINSTREAM.

>> SO IS THAT -- WHO OWNS THAT? >> THAT WOULD BE --

>> THE HOA? >> YES, OWNED BY THE HOA.

>> ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD. THE SECOND QUESTION, AND IN THAT VEIN, I'LL SAY THAT I LIKE THE WAY THAT WAS DONE.

SO KUDOS FOR STAFF FOR LEADING IN THAT DIRECTION, AND KUDOS TO THE DEVELOPER FOR LEAVING SOME OPEN SPACE AVAILABLE FOR USE FOR THE PUBLIC. AND NOT JUST FOR THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD. ONLY BECAUSE WE PRIVATIZE SO

[00:15:03]

AND MY QUESTION IS, AND I HAVE TO TRUST STAFF ON THIS BECAUSE I HAVE NOTHING, NO DRAWINGS OR PLANS TO GO BY, BUT AS FAR AS PARKING, THESE ARE ALL SINGLE-FAMILY UNITS, RIGHT?

>> RIGHT, YES. >> SO WILL THERE BE ANY KIND OF PUBLIC PARKING OR VISITOR PARKING ALLOCATED IN HERE FOR

ANY OF THESE SPACES? >> THERE WILL BE ON-STREET PARKING IN THAT BEING THE FORM BASED CODE.

THERE ARE SOME SPOTS THAT ARE MORE SETUP THAN A TYPICAL ROWLETT STREET FOR EXTRA PARKING.

I WILL ALSO HAVE TO CALL UPON OUR ENGINEER.

DO WE HAVE ANYWHERE ELSE THAT YOU HAVE INSTALLED SOME PARKING?

>> I'M JUST WONDERING IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS DONE ON BAYSIDE WHERE YOU HAD THE LITTLE POCKET PARKING SPACES KIND OF ALONG THE MAINLY ACCESS POINTS.

>> DAWSON ENGINEERS, PLANO, TEXAS, SO COMMISSIONER JAMES, THE QUESTION AS ALEX HAD MEN MENTIONED, WE HAVE ON STREET PARKING AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PROJECT THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PLAT, WE WORKED WITH THE CITY STAFF AS WELL AS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND THEY HAD REQUESTED THAT WE MAKE THESE STREETS WIDER THAN YOUR STANDARD SUBDIVISION STREET.

AND THAT WAS SO THAT WE COULD HAVE THAT ADDITIONAL PARKING ON BOTH SIDES AND STILL HAVE A FULL 24-FOOT FIRE LANE OR BASICALLY TWO-WAY ACCESS. SO WE DON'T HAVE DESIGNATED HEAD-IN OR ANGLED PARKING, BUT THERE'S A DESIGNATED ON-STREET

PARKING, IT'S OFF OF -. >> PARALLEL PARKING, I WOULD

IMAGINE, RIGHT? >> BASICALLY PARALLEL PARKING,

YES. >> THANK YOU FOR COMING UP TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, AND HOLD ON, YOU MIGHT WANT TO TAKE A STAB AT THIS NEXT ONE. THE SAME THING.

SO SIDEWALKS AND ENHANCED EITHER TRAILS OR WIDENED SIDEWALKS, ARE THOSE ALSO GOING TO BE ENVISIONED IN THIS AREA?

>> YES, SO THE SIDEWALKS DO MEET THE MINIMUM WIDTH AS REQUIRED BY THE FORM BASE CODE AND AS YOU MENTIONED, THE TRAIL, THERE'S A TRAIL ALONG THE LAKE FRONT AGAIN THAT WILL BE CONNECTING TO THE EXISTING TRAIL THAT LOOPS AROUND THE APARTMENTS ALREADY DEVELOPED HERE AND WILL CONNECT INTO THIS THAT RUNS THE LENGTH OF THIS NEW SUBDIVISION. THERE'S ALSO CONNECTIONS THROUGH THE OPEN SPACE, THAT ARE PAVED SIDEWALKS AS WELL.

AS WELL AS PRIMARILY STAIR WAYS TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE GRADE CHANGES THAT HAPPENED ON THIS SITE.

>> ACTUALLY I JUST WISH -- IT SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT PLAN AND I WISH THAT I HAD A PICTURE OF IT TO GIVE YOU MORE KUDOS, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE TAKEN GREAT PAINS TO MAKE THIS A GREAT PROJECT. SO THANK YOU.

>> MR. SWIFT, I'M A BIT RUSTY ON THE PLAT, SO ALL OF THE CONDITIONS ON THE PLAT HAVE BEEN MADE.

SO AS PNC, IT'S OUR OBLIGATION THAT WE MUST APPROVE THIS,

RIGHT? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> SO IF YOU PROVIDED US WITH A SITE PLAN THAT LOOKS LIKE A CIRCUS TENT, WE MUST APPROVE IT, CORRECT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT, BUT WE WOULD NOT PUT YOU IN A SITUATION SUCH AS THAT. BUT I SEE YOUR POINT.

>> IT'S MY COUNTERPOINT, MR. FRISBEE, THEY KEEP ASKING FOR SOMETHING THAT'S NOT REQUIRED.

AND WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HOLD UP -- IN THE PREVIOUS ONE, I REMEMBER SEEING WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE, AND IT LOOKS GREAT BY THE WAY. BUT I MISSED A FEW MEETINGS AND WE HAVE TO STAY IN OUR LANE ON THIS ONE TOO, AS FAR AS THE

TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS ARE MET. >> ANY ACQUIREMENTS? MR. SWIFT? THIS IS OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE.

>> MR. FRISBEE'S COMMENT CONCERNING OPEN ACCESS TO THE LAKE, ARE YOU TELLING ME THAT LOT 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, BEING ADJACENT TO THE LAKE, WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO LEASE THAT

[00:20:08]

TAKE AREA? >> I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT.

I BELIEVE THAT THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT THEY ACTUALLY A ABUT THE TAKE AIR, AND THERE WOULD NOT BE LEASABLE TAKE AREA FOR THOSE

PROPERTY OWNERS. >> EXCELLEN, OKAY.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

WELL, I'M READY FOR A MOTION. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE

THE PLAT. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT. SECOND? MR. HERNANDEZ. CALL TO VOTE.

PASSES 7-0. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA,

[4A. Conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council on a request by Nick Patel, on behalf of property owners First Baptist Church to 1) Rezone the subject property from General Office (O-2) District to Planned Development (PD) District for Multi-Family Attached Residential Townhouse (MF-TH); 2) Approve a Concept Plan to construct 61 Townhomes; 3) Amend the Comprehensive Plan; and 4) Amend the official Zoning Map of the City. The property is located northeast of the intersection of the President George Bush Turnpike and Main Street, consisting of 11 Acres of the Thomas Survey, Abstract 789 in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH TURNPIKE, AND THOMAS SURVEY ABSTRACT 789 IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS.

>> THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, MY NAME IS JOAQUIN MARTINEZ AND I'LL BE PRESENTING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

BACKGROUND ON THE PROPERTY, THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 11 ACRES AND IT'S LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF PRESTON AND GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE AND MAIN STREET.

THE REQUEST IS TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM GENERAL OFFICE DISTRICT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WITH BASE ZONING OF MULTIFAMILY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE.

PER THE RDC, SHOULD THE PD NOT DEVELOP WITHIN TWO YEARS, THE CITY COULD HAVE TO REZONE PDS. SO EXISTING LAPPED THAT YOU SEE HERE, THIS IS ZONED GENERAL OFFICE, AND THEN TOWARDS THE NORTH, YOU DO HAVE A DOOR AND SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEAR THAT EDGEWATER UP THERE, TO THE WEST, DIRECTLY ABUTTING IT, YOU HAVE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH. AND THEN ROWLETT HIGH SCHOOL, COMMUNITY CENTER AND PECAN GROWTH PARK.

THE APPLICANT WILL COMPLY WITH THE MULTIFAMILY TOWNHOUSE WITH MODIFICATIONS, WHICH ARE CURRENTLY IN THE RDC.

ANY REGULATIONS NOT MODIFIED BY THE PD WILL COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS SET OUT IN THE ROWLETT DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SO HERE'S THE CONCEPT PLAN. ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT IS, THEY ARE POSING 61 TOWNHOMES, AND YOU HAVE AMENITIES, A CLUBHOUSE WITH AN OUTDOOR POOL. A DOG PARK, AND WITHIN THAT THEY HAVE THE THREE OPEN SPACE SPOTS THAT THEY FALL WITHIN.

ALSO ON THIS DEVELOPMENT, THERE'S CURRENTLY NO STREET THAT GOES IN THERE, AND THEY WOULD BE DEDICATING A 60-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND ESSENTIALLY, 61 TOWNHOMES THROUGHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT AND SOMETHING THAT THEY HAVE ADDED ON THERE, 34 VISITOR PARKING LOCATIONS.

TOWARDS THE NORTH NEAR THE RAILROADS AND TOWARDS THE EAST.

SO JUST TO GET KIND OF AN IDEA OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, I DID PROVIDE THIS IN THE STAFF REPORT, ESSENTIALLY, WHAT THEY WOULD BE PROPOSING WOULD BE THE PD WITH THE BASE ZONE MFH DISTRICT AND THE CURRENT ZONING TOO.

THE MAJOR DIFFERENCES ON HERE WOULD BE IN TERMS OF LOT WIDTH, TYPICALLY THE MFTH ALLOWS FOR 30 AND 35 AT CORNER LOTS.

WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING IS TA FEET.

AND THEN IF YOU LOOK AT THE CURRENT ZONING THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY LOT WIDTHS. ADDITIONALLY, THE MINIMAL FRONT SETBACK, TYPICALLY WHEN YOU'RE DOING THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT,

[00:25:03]

AND THEN THE OT WOULD HAVE IT AT 60 FEET.

ANOTHER ONE THAT THEY'RE ALSO PROVIDING WOULD BE THE MINIMUM REAR SETBACK. TYPICALLY WITH THESE DEVELOPMENTS, YOU DO HAVE 5 FEET.

BUT THEY'RE PROVIDING A LITTLE BIT MORE SPACE FOR THE OWNERS TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF BACKYARD AND THEY WOULD BE PROPOSING 15-FOOT REAR SETBACK AND THEN 25 FEET. ON THE LEFT, IT'S A LAYOUT OF WHAT THE TYPICAL WOULD LOOK LIKE SO YOU WOULD HAVE THE DRIVEWAY AND THE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE BEES AND THEN THE PATIO AND THEN SOME SPACE TOWARD THE REAR. AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, TYPICALLY THE RIGHT-OF-WAY MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE IS 35 FEET.

AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING 25 FEET OF STREET MINIMUM FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT'S SPECIFICATION FOR ALL OF THE CHANGING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IS REALLY THE UNIQUE SHAPE OF THE LOT. THEY ALSO HAVE A SETBACK WHERE THEY CAN'T BUILD WITHIN 100 FEET OF IT.

AND THEY ALSO HAVE THE ELECTRICAL EASEMENT GOING THROUGH THE PROPERTY AND THE ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION WITHIN THE MIDDLE. STAFF IS AMENABLE TO THESE REQUESTS. WE FOUND THAT THE MODIFICATIONS STRIKE A BALANCE BETWEEN THE COMPLIANCE AND THE EXISTING REGULATIONS, KIND OF WITH THE PRACTICALITY WITH HOW THE LOT IS SETUP. ANOTHER FOLLOWED FIX THAT'S BEING REQUESTED IS FOR GARAGES AND ALLEYS.

THE APPLICANTS REQUESTING MODIFICATION ESSENTIALLY TO HAVE THE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE. THE RDC DOES REQUIRE THE RDC BE DEVELOPED TOWARDS THE REAR, SO THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL FRONT ALLEY WAIVER AND TYPICALLY, WHEN YOU SEE GARAGES MORE TO THE FRONT, IT WOULD BE A J HOOK AND THEY'RE ASKING FOR THAT FRONT ENTRY GARAGE. STAFF DOES SUPPORT THE REQUEST FOR THE ALLEY WAIVER AND THE ALLOWANCES FOR THE FRONT GARAGE.

IT ALLOWS ON SITE PARKING AND SHARED PARKING THROUGHOUT THERE.

AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS WOULD LIMIT THE DEVELOP ABILITY.

AND WHEN YOU'RE REALLY LOOKING AT THESE, IT WOULD BE IT'S OWN SINGLE LOTS. AND THEY WOULD BE ATTACHED.

THAT'S WHAT THE R RENDERING SHOS THERE.

SOMETHING ELSE THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING WOULD BE FOR LANDSCAPING AND LANDSCAPING STANDARDS ON HERE, THEY WOULD BE CONFIRMED FOR THE SITE REVIEW. BUT GOING INTO THE MODIFICATIONS OF LANDSCAPING, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO MODIFY THE FRONT ENTRY LANDSCAPE AND THE BUFFER RIGHT-OF-WAY TREES AND SHRUBS.

THE RDC REQUIRES THE PRIMARY ENTRY TO HAVE TWO TREES FOR EVERY 500 SQUARE FEET OF FRONTAGE AND ADDITIONALLY, THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WOULD BE ONE CANOPY TREE FOR EVERY 500 FEET AND THE SITE TO THE LEFT SHOWS WHAT THEY'RE INFORMEDFYING.

SPECIFICALLY THEY ARE LOOKING AT THAT FRONT ENTRY.

THEY WOULD BE REQUIRING 28 TREES, AND WHAT THEY ARE PROVIDING IS 29 TREES ON THERE. ADDITIONALLY, BECAUSE IT IS THE FRONT ENTRY AND THE RIGHT-OF-WAY BOTH IN THE SAME PLACE, THEY'RE ASKING FOR A DIVIATION OF NOT PROVIDING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY BUFFER BECAUSE THE PRIMARY ENTRY IS THE ONLY SPACE THAT'S ALLOWED FOR IT, BUT THEY'RE PROVIDING AN ADDITIONAL 10 TREES WITHIN THE OPEN SPACE. THE APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION COMES FROM A 15-15 UTILITY EASY. ON MAIN STREET AND THEY CAN TAKE MORE OF THE SPACE AWAY TO PROVIDE THE LANDSCAPING AND THE STAFF DOES PROPOSE THE ALTERNATIVE, THE CANOPY TREES IN THE OPEN SPACE AREA, AND THE SUB ADDRESSES SOME OF THE SPECIAL LIMITATIONS, AND ADDITIONALLY, THE LIVING SCREEN IS PROVIDED ALONG THE SUBSTATION AND THE MACE EARN WALL AMONG THE TREE

LOT TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY. >> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, YOU SAID MASONAIRY WALL, AND THE LAYUP DRAWING SAYS PRIVACY

FENCE. >> I BELIEVE IT IS, BUT I'LL

ASK THE APP CAN HERE. >> THAT WOULD BE ON THE WEST

[00:30:06]

>> I BELIEVE IT'S ON THE SITE PLAN.

I'LL MAKE SURE. >> WE'LL HAVE TO CONFIRM THAT

WITH THE APPLICANT. >> JUST FOR REFERENCE, FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN, FOR THIS AREA RIGHT HERE, WHERE THIS PROPERTY LIES, IT DOES CALL FOR MIXED USE.

THE PROPOSED TOWNHOMES WOULD PROVIDE RESIDENTIAL USE FOR THE GENERAL FUTURE PLAN, AND THE SCHOOL PLACE OF WORSHIP AND THE PLACE IN THE CENTER WITH A HORIZONTAL VIEW OF MIXED USE.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION WAS PROVIDED WITHIN 200 FEET.

WE SENT OUT 18 NOTICES, 500, WE PROVIDED 14.

AND THERE WERE TWO IN OPPOSITION IN 200, AND 500, AND TRAFFIC AND OTHER ISSUES THAT THEY HAD ON THERE.

RECOMMENDATION IS FROM STAFF IS APPROVAL TO REQUEST TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM GENERAL DISTRICT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, MULTIFAMILY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE TO APPROVE THE CONCEPT PLAN AND TOWNHOMES TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND AMEND THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY.

WE DID FIND THIS MODIFICATION, SIGNED AND FUNCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE CITY SCOPE AND MEETS THE EVOLVING NEEDS OF THE RESIDENT AND IF APPROVED, THE DEVELOPMENT MUST COMMENCE WITHIN TWO YEARS OF ZONING APPROVAL.

FAILING TO INITIATE DEVELOPMENT MY TRIGGER THE HEARING PROCESS, AND ZONING CLASSIFICATION OR OTHER SIGNED APPROPRIATE CONSIDERATION OF RELEVANT AT THAT TIME.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS? WE ALSO HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE TODAY AND HE HAS A PRESENTATION

AS WELL. >> COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS FOR

THE STAFF? >> YES, I HAVE A QUESTION.

ON ITEM 4 STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY MINIMUM LEFT FRONTAGE, IT STATES THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO HAVE A 25 FEET OF STREET FRONT ANNUAL. BUT WHEN I GO TO THE COMPARISON CHART, IT SAYS 20 FEET. SO IS IT 20 FEET OF STREET FR

FRONTAGE OR 25 FEET? >> IS THAT FROM THE FRONT?

>> UH-HUH >> IT WOULD BE 20 FEET.

>> IT'S 20 FEET. >> YEAH, ON THE PD, IT'S

20 FEET. >> IF I MAY, SIR, I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE ARE THERE. SO THE 25-FOOT REQUEST FOR THAT VARIANT FOR THE MODIFICATION IS IN THAT REGARD TO HOW WIDE THE LOT IS ON THIS REFRONTAGE AND THEN YOU HAVE THE FRONT SETBACK, WHICH IS REQUESTED TO BE 20 FEET.

AND I WANT TO BE SURE THAT YOU GOT THAT.

>> CERTAINLY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ? HAVE TRAFFIC STUDIES BEEN DONE?

>> THAT WON'T BE DONE UNTIL AFTER THIS PROJECT GETS STARTED.

>> CORRECT. TIA IF IT'S NECESSARY, WOULD BE AT THE DISCRETION OF OUR ENGINEERING PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND BASED UPON WHAT IS REQUIRED UNDER OUR CODE.

THE BUT THAT WOULD HAPPEN DURING THE CIVIL PLAN PROCESS SHOULD

THIS BE APPROVED. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS,

COMMISSIONERS? >> I DO HAVE ONE.

>> I HAVE ONE LAST ONE. I'M ASSUMING THAT THE EMF STUDIES WILL BE DONE PENDING APPROVAL TOO?

>> IF REQUIRED. >> I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T QUITE GET CATCH WHAT YOUR QUESTION WAS.

>> ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD STUDIES BE DONE?

>> YES, THOSE WOULD BE DONE IF REQUIRED, YES.

>> MR. FRISBEE. >> I WAS JUST NOTICING ON YOUR TABLE THAT YOUR CRITERIA ALLOWS FOR A MINIMUM OF TWO STORIES AND MAXIMUM OF FOUR STORIES. THE CONCEPT THAT WAS SHOWN FOR THE ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDINGS SHOW TWO STORIES?

[00:35:03]

>> YES, SO THE CODES, THEY ARE TWO STORIES.

>> AND YOU'RE PROPOSING TYPICAL MINIMUM DWELLING SIZE OF 2200

SQUARE FEET? >> YEAH, THEY WOULD BE

REQUESTING 22 SQUARE FEET. >> THAT'S JUST THE MINIMUM.

>> THEY COULD BE LARGER IF THEY WANTED, BUT THAT WOULD BE THE

MINIMUM. >> THAT'S A PRETTY DECENT SIZE FOR A TOWNHOME. THERE ARE REGULAR HOUSES THAT AREN'T EVEN THAT BIG. VERY GOOD.

THAT'S WHAT I HAVE. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS,

COMMISSIONER? >> I HAVE ONE.

IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, CLARIFY UNDER THAT TABLE, THE SAME TABLE, THE MAXIMUM DENSITY, BECAUSE I'M NOT SMART ENOUGH TO ANYTHING OUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DS PER ACRE AND MAX D USE FOR AREA. DT -- IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN THAT

LINE ITEM. >> SO ESSENTIALLY, THEY HAVE -- THERE ARE 11 ACRES AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT THEY CAME TO, THEY WOULD ONLY ALLOW 6 UNITS PER ACRE AND BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT, THIS WORKS FOR THEM.

BUT I THINK THAT COMES DOWN TO ROUGHLY IF YOU'RE LOOKIN AT LOT SIZE, THEY WOULD DO ABOUT 7,000 SQUARE FEET PER ACRE AND PLUS OPEN SPACE AND RIGHT-OF-WAY AS WELL.

>> I WILL JUMP IN THERE AS WELL.

YOU'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH THIS COMMISSION LONGER THAN I'VE BEEN WITH THE CITY AND PROBABLY THIS IS THE FIRST TOWNHOUSE HEARING YOU'VE HAD IN A GOOD LONG WHILE. OUR RECOLLECTION ON THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO THOSE ARE FROM PLANS THAT THE CITY PREVIOUSLY HAD FOR AREAS IN THE CITY AND THOSE ARE NO LONGER VALID OR IN EFFECT ON THERE, SO THOSE ARE KIND OF JUST SITTING THERE BECAUSE THAT'S HOW THEY ARE ON THE CODE.

IN THERE, AND DO YOU NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THOSE TWO AREAS THAT ARE MENTIONED, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA BUT HAVE NO IDEA EXACTLY WHERE THOSE MAY BE, BUT HOWEVER, WE WOULD STIPULATE THAT THE DENSITY THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS MUCH LESS THAN WHAT THE DISTRICT WOULD ALLOW.

>> OKAY. AND DEFINITELY MUCH LESS THAN

WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

THE PREVIOUS REQUEST I BELIEVE WAS -- WAS IT 275 UNITS?

>> IT WAS A LOT. OKAY.

ONE LAST QUESTION JUST TO CUT THIS OFF AT THE KNEES BEFORE IT GETS BEAT UP A LOT. THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS CONCERNING RENTAL UNITS, TOWNHOUSES, CONSIDERED ALWAYS TO BE RENTAL UNITS AND WHAT NOT, AND I DON'T NECESSARILY SHARE THAT OPINION, BUT MY QUESTION WOULD BE TO PUT ANYBODY'S CONCERNS TO REST, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE THAT WE HAVE A DEED RESTRICTION APPLIED TO ANY OF THESE UNITS? BASICALLY REQUIRING THEM TO BE OWNER OCCUPIED?

IS THAT POSSIBLE? >> WE'LL HAVE TO MAKE THAT REQUEST. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS POSSIBLE. WE'LL HAVE TO CONFIRM THAT WITH OUR ATTORNEY TO SEE IF THAT'S A LAWFUL THING THAT WE WOULD BE

PERMITTED TO DO. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO PROVIDE HIS --

>> I HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION. WILL THEY HAVE FRONT LOADED GARAGES OR FRONT AND REAR LOADED GARAGES?

>> FRONT LOADED. >> OKAY, BECAUSE THE RESUBMITTAL DATE IN 2023 STATES THEY OFFER THE CHOICE OF FRONT AND REAR LOADED GARAGES, SO I WANT A CLARIFICATION.

THEY ARE ALL GOING TO BE FRONT LOADED?

>> YES, ALL FRONT LOADED. >> AND THE RESUBMITTAL STATES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE 2300 SQUARE FEET TO 2500 SQUARE FEET.

BUT THE CHART SAYS MINIMUM 2200. SO IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE 2300

TO 2500? >> WE HAVE NOT FINALIZED THE PLANES BUT THEY'LL BE ROUGHLY THAT.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO STATE HIS NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD?

>> THANK YOU ALL, MY NAME IS NICK PATEL, WITH 360 INVEST.

AND THE ADDRESS IS 315 QUAKE ROAD IN DALLAS.

AND GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS. LIKE I SAID, I'M WITH 360 INVEST

[00:40:04]

I'M A LICENSED CIVIL STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, STATE OF TEXAS, OKLAHOMA AND NEW MEXICO AND EXPERIENCE IN RESIDENTIAL AND LIGHT COMMERCIAL DESIGN PLANNING AND DESIGN AND PLANNING, AND ALSO HANDS ON EXPERIENCE AS A GENERAL CONTRACTOR ON SUCH RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS AND CUSTOM HOMES.

MY PARTNER, JOHN HUFFMAN, HE COULDN'T MAKE IT HERE, AND HE HAS BEEN IN THE INDUSTRY FOR OVER 25 YEARS, AND A PROVEN TRACK RECORD OF HAVING SUC SUCCESSFUL REAL ESTATE PROJECTS AS SUCH. AND HE TOO IS A GEM CONTRACTOR ON SUCH PROJECTS AND CUSTOM HOMES.

SO A CORNERSTONE OF OUR DEVELOPMENT, WE STARTED OFF WITH CUSTOM HOMES AND THAT'S WHY A LOT OF THE DETAILS THAT YOU'RE SEEING ABOUT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, THEY'RE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT'S REQUIRED AND WE WANT TO PROVIDE A PREMIUM PRODUCT AND NOT JUST A RUN OF A MILL PRODUCT THAT YOU SEE TYPICALLY, SO I'LL SHOW YOU WANT PHOTOS AND OTHER DETAILS HERE.

I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT DETAILS ABOUT THE SITE PLAN, MARTINE HAS DONE A GREAT JOB OF GETTING US TO THIS POINT, AND AS YOU ALL KNOW, IT'S A DEAD-END STREET THERE, AND IT GOES DOWN TO THE LAKE. WE HAVE MAIN STREET RIGHT HERE, THE MAIN ENTRANCE, AND THESE TWO TRANCEENTRANCES HERE, AND EGRESO THE PARKING LOT AND THIS TURNS FROM ONE LANE TO TWO LANE EACH WAY AROUND HERE. WE HAVE UP NORTH AND THEN THE 30-40-HOME COMMUNITY UP NORTH AS WELL AND THAT'S ALSO A DEAD-END ROAD AND IT'S ALL RESIDENTIAL HOMES AND NO ACCESS TO THE LAKE FROM THERE, BUT THE ONLY ACCESS IS FROM MAIN STREET DOWN TO THE SOCCER FIELD THAT YOU SEE DOWN THERE.

AND AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE CHU CHURCHES ARE DEVELOPING WEST OF US. THE CURRENT ZONING, THE GENERAL OFFICES, IT DOES REQUIRE AS THE ORDINANCE CURRENTLY READS, BUILDING HEIGHT OF 6 STORIES, AND IT'S CONSIDERED TO BE MEME HIGH DENSITY OFFICES ON THE ZONING.

AS YOU ALL KNOW, THERE HAVE BEEN ATTEMPTS TO REZONE IT TO 200 PLUS UNIT AND MULTIUSE WHICH WAS DENIED, BUT A LOT OF RENTAL UNITS GOING UP AT THE MOMENT. THIS PARCEL IS ON A DEAD END ROAD AS I MENTIONED AND THE SITE LAYOUT MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR OFFICES OR RETAIL TO BE DRAWN IN, AND THE DEVELOPER ON THE LARGE SCALE PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S 11 ACRES AND THE ECONOMICS OF THE SITE WOULD REQUIRE IF AN OFFICE WENT IN, TO BE A FEW HUNDRED EMPLOYEES TYPE OF BUILDING, AND WHAT THAT WOULD CAUSE, THE EXIST PROPOSING OF WAY AND EASEMENT LIMITS FUTURE ROAD EXPANSION FOR HEAVY TRAFFIC USE ZONING.

AND THIS ROAD THAT I HAD MENTIONED UP HERE, FOR YOU LOOK AT THE SURVEYS, EASY WANTS, AND UTILITY EASEMENTS WITHIN 10 FEET OF IT. AND EXPANSION IF IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT FOR THE CITY OR ANYBODY TO UNDERTAKE, AND IT WOULD BE NOT PRACTICALLY FROM A CAUSE PERSPECTIVE.

WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING BASICALLY AS MARTIN LAID OUT IS A 16 UNIT TOWNHOME FOR SALE. AND NOT A RENTAL PRODUCT.

THE PROXIMITY TO THE SITE OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER, WATER PARK, KID'S PLAY AREA AND HIGH SCHOOL AND LAKE MAKES IT AN EXCEPTIONAL LOCATION FOR A WELL THOUGHT OUT RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY AND I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR FOUR TO FIVE MONTHS, AND THE MORE I THINK OF IT, AND DRIVE OUT THERE, IT'S SUCH A GREAT LOCATION TO HAVE A FAMILY WITH MIDDLE SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL KIDS THAT CAN WALK TO SCHOOL AND ENJOY ALL OF THE AMENITIES THAT THE CITY HAS TO OFFER AND WE THINK IT'S A GREAT LOCATION FOR THIS PROJECT. A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ON WHY WE CHOOSE TO NAME IT COIL ESTATES, AS MOST OF YOU ARE AWARE, THAT HISTORIC HOME OUT THIS, AND THE INSPIRATION CAME FROM A WALK-THROUGH THAT WAS DONE THROUGH THE COMMUNITY CENTER THAT WAS PART OF MY DUE DILIGENCE, JUST WALKING AROUND THERE AND GETTING THE LAY OF THE LAND, I STUMBLED ON THE HISTORIC HOME THERE, AND COINCIDENTLY, A LOT OF THE DESIGN ELEMENTS, THE WHITE ON WHITE TYPE OF LOOK, WITH THE SHIP LAP OR SIDING AND

[00:45:02]

SO WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE REALLY NOTICE TO NAME THE SUBDIVISION COIL ESTATES, AND HOPEFULLY THE PROJECT WILL PAY HOMAGE TO THE COIL FAMILY. FOR ANYBODY THAT HAS NOT SEEN IT, THAT'S THE HISTORIC HOME AND FROM RIGHT WHERE I TOOK THAT PHOTO BEHIND ME IS THE ACTUAL SITE.

THERE'S AN OPENING THROUGH THE LANDSCAPE THAT YOU CAN SEE.

AND THIS TREE LINE BACK HERE, THAT'S THE TREE LINE ON OUR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN THE DARK RAIL IS BEHIND THAT.

SO THIS PICTURE DIDN'T COME OUT TOO WELL BUT I'LL QUICKLY POINT OUT KEY FEATURES ON THE SITE PLAN.

WE HAVE TWO ENTRANCES, ONE ON THE WEST AND EAST SIDE.

AND AS MARTINE MENTIONED, ALL OF THEM ARE FRONT LOADED GARAGES.

INITIALLY, WE TOOK 3 OR 4 ITERATIONS TO GET TO THIS FINAL PLAN TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WORKED WITH THE CITY, FIRE AND ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS.

INITIALLY, WE DID HAVE ALLEY WAYS, BUT THE WIDTHS OF THE STREET DID NOT MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS AND IT GOT TOO TIGHT AND CONGESTED AND THIS IS WHAT WE ENDED UP WITH.

A MUCH CLEANER DESIGN, AND IT MEETS ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS.

NOW, ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WORKS IN OUR FAVOR AND AGAINST OUR FAVOR LIKE MARTINE ELUDED TO BRIEFLY, BACK HERE, AND I APOLOGIZE, YOU CAN'T SEE THIS TOO WELL.

I CAN TRY TO GO TO THE FIRST SLIDES SO IT'S EASIER.

YEAH. THE DARK RAILWAY IS UP HERE.

THEY HAVE A 50-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY ON BOTH SIDES WHERE YOU CAN'T BUILD ON. AND THE CITY OF ROWLETT'S ORDINANCE STATES ANY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY HAS TO HAVE A 100-FOOT SET BACK FROM THE RIGHT-RIGHT-O, AND WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THAT INITIALLY, SO WE HAD LIMITS THERE, BUT IN A WAY, AS DISAPPOINTED AS WE ARE, WE THINK THAT IT WORKED OUT FOR THE BEST BECAUSE WE LOST SOME DENSITY, BUT IT CREATED THAT HUGE BUFFER ZONE BETWEEN US AND THE NEIGHBORS ON EDGEWATER CIRCLE AND DRIVE. SO WE ARE ROUGHLY 200 TO 300 FEET AWAY FROM ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS UP NORTH.

JUST BECAUSE OF THAT ORDINANCE, SO IN A WAY, IT'S NICE AND IT KEEPS THE COMMUNITY A LITTLE BIT OPEN VERSUS DENSELY PACKED.

SO THAT'S ONE MAJOR THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THERE.

AND THAT ONLY APPLIES TO SINGLE-FAMILY.

MULTIFAMILY OFFICES, RETAIL, THERE'S NO ORDINANCE THAT'S SAY YOU HAVE TO BE 100 FEET AWAY AND THAT'S PRIMARILY FOR IF A HEAVY LOCOMOTIVE IS TRAVELING WITH THE HEAVY VIBRATIONS, YOU DON'T WANT IT IN YOUR HOUSE, BUT IT DOESN'T APPLY TO OTHER ZONING.

OUR VISION, YOU KNOW, IT'S INDIVIDUALLY PLATTED TOWNHOMES FOR SALE AND MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF TWO STORIES, AND WE DON'T INTEND TO GO HIGHER THAN THAT, THERE'S NO NEED FOR IT.

SINCE WE'RE CREATING LIVE AL SPACE, THE ORDINANCE AND NOT REQUESTING A DIVIANCE FROM THAT. AND AS SOMEBODY MENTIONED, THESE ARE BE PROBABLY THE LARGEST TOWNHOMES ON THE MARKET IF WE GET APPROVED. AND THE REASON, WE WANT A RE REFINED PRODUCT FOR ALL GENERATIONS, IT'S NOT MEANT AS A STARTER HOME BUT A LONG-TERM FIT FOR FAMILIES.

THE DESIGN, MARTINE JUST WENT OVER IT.

THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE ANY ORDINANCES ON THE MINIMUM MATERIALS THAT YOU NEED TO USE. SO YOU KNOW, AS A DEVELOPER, MOST PEOPLE JUST USE SIDING FROM TOP TO BOTTOM JUST BECAUSE IT'S ECONOMICAL. AND WE'RE GOING A DIFFERENT ROUTE. USING BRICK ALONG THE FIRST FLOOR ON ALL FOUR SIDES THAT'S PAINTED BRICK, AND IT WILL BE A SHIP LAP TYPE OF DESIGN UP TO AND THAT'S KIND OF THE DESIGN THAT'S SIMILAR TO THE HISTORIC HOME THAT I WAS REFERENCING TO.

AND IT'S A VERY SHARP PRODUCT AND I'LL SHOW YOU PHOTOS AFTER THE SLIDE OF THE PROJECT THAT WE FINISHED WITH THE DESIGN AND IT LOOKS REALLY SHARP. THIS IS THE BACKSIDE.

WE HAVE A PATIO WITH THE COLUMNS THAT KIND OF ELUDE TO THE FRONT PORCH COLUMNS ON THE HISTORIC HOME AND A FEW OF THE FINER DETAILS, YOU SEE THE LARGER WINDOWS AND THAT'S ALL.

LIVING SPACES AND THE BEDROOMS UPSTAIRS, MAXIMIZED AS MUCH AS WE CAN, AND WE'RE NOT TRYING TO CUT CORNERS THERE, BUT TRYING TO PROVIDE AS MUCH LIGHT IN, AND JUST THAT OPENNESS.

[00:50:02]

THE EXACT SAME DESIGN CONCEPT, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS IT'S A DETACHED TOWNHOME, THAT'S WHAT I CALL THEM.

BUT EXACT SAME CONCEPT. SO WE COMPLETED THIS JUST EARLIER THIS YEAR, AND THE RECEPTION THAT WE WITH GOT, YOU KNOW, AND THE POSITIVE FEEDBACK FROM THE HOMEOWNERS AND NEARBY PEOPLE, IT WAS JUST GREAT. IT SOLD OUT WITHIN A MONTH JUST BECAUSE OF HOW SHARP THEY LO LOOKED.

THE AMENITIES THAT WE OFFERED AND THESE WERE SIMILAR SIZED TOWNHOMES AND THEY LOOKED LIKE HOMES.

YOU KNOW? THE ONLY DIFFERENCE, WE'LL HAVE A SHARED WALL IN BETWEEN THE UNITS.

THESE ARE SOME OF THE PHOTOS FROM THE INSIDE OPEN FLOOR PLAN, PREMIUM FINISHES, AND AGAIN, IT'S PART OF OUR DNA JUST BECAUSE WE COME FROM CUSTOM HOMES WHO DO ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT'S NEEDED. THE OTHER COOL FEATURE, WE'RE PLANNING ON IMPLEMENTING IS HOME OFFICES IN ALL OF THESE BUILDINGS. ON THE FIRST FLOOR, THERE WILL BE A DEDICATED HOME OFFICE, AND MOST TOWNHOMES, YOU COLONEL VERT A BEDROOM TO MAKE IT A HOME OFFICE, BUT WE HAVE A SEPARATE ONE ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND THREE BEDROOMS UP ON TOP.

SO WHY DO WE THINK A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY MAKES SENSE HERE? PRIMARILY, IT'S PEOPLE LIVING WILL IT, AND THE NEIGHBORS UP NORTH. RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES PRIORITIZE QUIET AND PEACEFUL LIVING AND NOISE AND TRAFFIC FOR HOMEOWNERS NEARBY. AS I MENTIONED, IF THAT PROJECT WE JUST COMPLETED, SUCH A WELL DESIGNED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THE DESIRABILITY OF THE AREA INCREASED AND THE PROPERTY VALUES IN THE AREA PROBABLY INCREASE DUE TO THAT. THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF CONCERNS PREVIOUSLY FROM THE PREVIOUS REZONING ATTEMPT.

AND NOW OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT AND I WOULD LIKE TO SHED SOME LIGHT INTO THAT. I WENT THROUGH THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL MEETING FROM THE PREVIOUS REZONING AND WE TRACKED DOWNENT CONSULTANT THAT DID THE TIA FOR IT.

AND THAT REPORT STATED THAT EVEN WITH THE 200 PLUS MULTIFAMILY UNITS, THE ROAD THERE WAS ADEQUATE FOR THE FUTURE AND CURRENT TRAFFIC PLANS AND WE ASKED COULD YOU PROVIDE US GUIDANCE OF THIS FAMILY DEVELOPMENT OF 61 TOWNHOMES? AND THEY CONFIRMED THAT IT WILL PRODUCE LESS TRAFFIC THAN OBVIOUSLY THE MULTIFAMILY, WHICH IS THE HIGHEST DENSITY OF ANY PROJECT THAT YOU CAN PUT ON THERE.

SO IN REALITY, THIS IS THE PRODUCT THAT WILL GET YOU THE BESIDES GOING TO COMMERCIAL. AND ALSO, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS PRIVATIZE SECURITY THROUGH NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH AND SURVEILLANCE MEASURES, AND WE HAVE AFFLECK NEXTDOOR AND SOAR FORTH. LAST SLIDE, AND THEN I'LL BE DONE, I WANTED TO ADDRESS SOME CONCERNS THAT I BELIEVE YOU HAD TOUCHED ON BRIEFLY HERE FROM THE NEIGHBORS ACROSS FROM US.

CURRENTLY, I BELIEVE THE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS KIND OF GOING THROUGH THE VACANT LOTS AND TRYING TO CROSSOVER DART.

REQUEST A NEW DEVELOPMENT I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD STOP BECAUSE THERE ARE LOTS MORE EYES ON THE COMMUNITY PREVENTING THE KIDS GOING ACROSS THE DART RAIL. THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS THAT THE KIDS WOULD GO OVER THE DART TRACK TO GO DOWN TO THE LAKE AS WE SAW ON THE SITE PLAN, THERE'S NO ACCESS TO THE LAKE.

IT'S A DEAD END UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO TRESPASS ONTO SOME SOMEBODY'S LAWN. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ACCESS THERE, AND THE ONLY ONE WOULD BE DOWN THROUGH MAINLY STREET WHICH WILL BE SIGNIFICANT LE SHORTER ONCE WE PUT IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND WILL WANT EAST SIDE. THERE WERE CONCERNS WITH CRIME IN THE COMMUNITY. I THINK THAT THE COMMUNITIES BRING A SERENE ENVIRONMENT WITH MINIMAL NOISE AND TRAFFIC.

AS I HOPE THAT YOU ALL AGREE WITH THAT.

IN STARK CONTRAST TO THE ECONOMIC ZONES, WHERE THERE ARE ACTIVITIES COMING AND GOING AT ALL HOURS.

REGARDING PRIVACY AND SECURITY, NEIGHBORHOOD WATCHES AND SURVEILLANCE, THESE ARE ALMOST ANNOYING WITH THE APPS, BUT COMPARED TO OFFICES MANAGED BY THIRDER PARTY COMPANIES, WHO RARELY VISIT THE SITES AND YOU KNOW, PAY ATTENTION TO OTHERS CONCERNS. LASTLY, I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS THAT WE WERE ADDING MORE MULTI-FAMILY UNITS, AND THE CITY COUNCIL HAS STATED THAT THEY DON'T WANT ANYMORE.

I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT TOWNHOMES ARE NOT MULTIFAMILY.

THEY ARE TECHNICALLY SINGLE-FAMILY.

AND THEY ARE TAXED INDIVIDUALLY AND PLATTED INDIVIDUALLY.

THEY FALL UNDER MULTIFAMILY DESIGNATION, PRIMARILY BECAUSE

[00:55:03]

SUBSTATION CONCERNS, I BELIEVE THERE WERE SOME STATING IT'S GOING TO BE A HEALTH HAZARD AND WE HAVE DONE INITIAL RESEARCH ON THAT, AND THERE'S NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE AROUND SUBSTATIONS AND IF THERE WAS, CITIES AND GOVERNMENTS WOULD HAVE CREATED ORDINANCES LIKE THEY WOULD ARE THE RAILROAD ONE, PREVENTING US TO BUILD THAT CLOSE TO THEM AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, WE'RE NOT UP TOUCH NOT TOUCHIN0 TO 60 FEET AWAY.

AND SOME SAY THAT THEY'RE MORE PRONE TO LIGHTNING STRIKES, BUT THEY WOULD NOT TAKE ON THE LIABILITY IF THAT WERE THE CASE.

THAT'S ALL I GOT AND I HOPE THAT I HAVE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTIONS, AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO PUTTING THIS PRODUCT DOWN THERE.

WE THINK THAT IT WILL ADD TO THE ALREADY AMAZING AREA THAT THE CITY HAS WITH ALL OF ITS AMENITIES.

THE AND WHICH THINK IT WILL BE BE A GREAT FIT IN THE AREA.

I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>> THANK YOU. AND DO YOU HAVE ANAPROX PRICE

PER UNIT? >> YEAH, WE'RE THINKING THE MID

400S. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. HERNANDEZ.

>> MY CONCERN, I KNOW THAT YOU JUST SAID THAT YOU DID? TIA ON THERE, AND MY CONCERN IS THAT THE TRAFFIC TO BE SIGNIFICANT IN THE SENSE OF BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE JOINING WITH THE COMMUNITY CENTER, WITH THE HIGH SCHOOL, THAT STRIP OF ROAD IS NOT THE MOST WELL BUILT EITHER.

IT HAS BEEN IN NEED OF REPAIR I THINK FOR SOME TIME.

SO JUST ADDING IN THE SUBDIVISION TO ME SEEMS LIKE IT'S GOING TO COMPOUND THE ISSUES.

ALSO, BECAUSE OF THE HIGH SCHOOL, IT KIND OF BRINGS ABOUT MY THOUGHTS OF HOW MUCH STRAIN THIS IS GOING TO PUT INTO WHAT WE'RE ALREADY PUTTING IN WITH THE APARTMENTS ACROSS THE HIGHWAY, OUR SCHOOLS ARE ALREADY PRETTY MUCH MAXED OUT AND I THINK THIS IS -- I HAVE CONCERNS WITH THAT.

AND THEN THE PACKET INDICATED THAT THIS WAS TRYING TO BE AN AFFORDABLE BUILD. $400,000 DOES NOT SOUND AFFORDABLE TO ME, ESPECIALLY FOR THAT SIZE, 2200 PLUS JET.

THAT TO ME SOUNDS LIKE THESE ARE VERY HIGH END KINDS OF HOUSES AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S REALLY HELPING THE SITUATION THAT WE HAVE GOT ALREADY IN THAT WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO BEGIN

WITH. >> I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY.

THAT'S A GOOD POINT. THAT PACKET, I THINK LIKE I MENTIONED, FOUR I WANT RACES SO FAR, AND INITIALLY, WE HAD A MUCH HIGHER DENSITY. WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE 100-FOOT OFFSET. AND THAT'S THE INITIAL PACKET, THE SNIPPET THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN WAS FROM THERE.

AND SINCE THEN, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE HAD TO REDUCE OUR DENSITY SIGNIFICANTLY, PROBABLY HALF OF WHAT WE INTENDED IT TO BE AND IT MIGHT NOT SUPER BEEN UPDATED JUST TO CLARIFY.

>> THANK YOU. MR. SWIFT.

>> ON THE OTHER DEVELOPMENT AND I KEEP HEARING RENTAL A LOT.

BUT THE OTHERS YOU BUILT, DO YOU HAVE ANY PERCENTAGE OF WHAT OF THOSE ARE RENTAL? IT'S A COLLEGE TOWN.

SO I GET IT. >> A LOT OF T PARENTS BUY THEM FOR THEIR KIDS, AND 90% ARE O OWNED AND 10% MIGHT BE RENTALS.

>> MR. TUCKER? >> A QUESTION MORE FOR THE CHURCH THAN FOR YOU. MY CONCERN IS, IS THE CHURCH GOING TO OWN THIS PROPERTY AND MAKE THE SALES OF THESE PROPERTIES? NO, IT'S COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT.

>> SO THE TAXATION WILL STILL BE THERE.

>> YES, SIR. >> OKAY.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? HEARING NONE, THANK YOU. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING SO I WILL NOW OPEN THE FLOOR FOR PUBLIC HEARING.

MR. POLLARD. >> COMMISSIONER STANLEY POLLARD HERE IN ROWLETT, TEXAS. WITH DECISIONS COMES CONSE

[01:00:01]

THE CHURCH BOUGHT THE PROPERTY AND THEY KNEW WHAT THE ZONING WAS WHEN THEY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.

THE LAST TIME THEY WERE UP HERE, BEFORE COUNCIL AS WELL, THEY WANTED AND IT WAS SUGGESTED, WHY DON'T YOU MOVE YOUR BUILDING DOWN TOWARD THE ELECTRICAL SELL OFF THE FRONT END BY THE HIGHWAY AND SERVICE ROAD. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO THAT.

THEY WANTED THE EXPOSURE TO THE SERVICE ROAD.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, AND THAT'S THEIR RIGHT TO DO THAT.

BUT WITH THAT COMES CONSEQUENCES.

CONSEQUENCES IS, WHAT THEY LEFT WAS A PIECE OF PROPERTY BACK THERE THAT WAS NOT DESIRABLE FOR OFFICES.

THE NOW THEY WANT THE CITY TO BAIL THEM OUT.

THEY NEED THE MONEY TO PUT IN THEIR BUILDING, AND IT'S NOT THE JOB OF GOVERNMENT TO TAKE SOMEBODY'S DECISIONS AND BAIL THEM OUT. THAT'S NUMBER ONE.

NUMBER TWO, IT HAS BEEN MEN MENTIONED ABOUT THE APARTMENTS, 700 PLUS OVER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY.

IT'S NOT CONDUCIVE FOR WALKING TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, AND CHEYENNE OR MIDDLE SCHOOL FROM THAT LOCATION.

MAYBE THE HIGH SCHOOL, BUT LET'S FACE THE FACTS, HOW MANY PEOPLE REALLY ARE GOING TO HAVE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS THAT THE PRODUCT LIKE THIS. IT'S EITHER OLDER PEOPLE THAT WANT TO DOWNSIZE, NO YARD, OR MAYBE YOUNG PEOPLE WITH A BRAND-NEW FAMILY IF THAT. THE BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANY YARD FOR ANYTHING. I MENTIONED 61 UNITS, TWO-CAR GARAGES, 122 VEHICLES, AND THEY'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING TO ADD OR FIX ANY CONGESTION. GREED.

THAT RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEIR PROPERTY, IT'S TWO LANES, ONE IN EACH DIRECTION, AND THERE'S NOBODY ELSE IN ACTIVITY.

BUT HOWEVER, TO GET OUT OF THERE, TO GO ANYWHERE, THEN YOU DO RUN INTO THE TRAFFIC COMING TO AND FROM THE RCC, AND FROM THE SCHOOL. THAT DOES ADD UP TO NINE MONTHS OF THE YEAR, AND IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN DOWN THERE, YOU SEE THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION AT THE SCHOOL, WHICH IS UNDERPARKED IN THE FIRST PLACE. THE KIDS PARK ALL THE WAY DOWN WHERE THE CHURCH ORIGINALLY WAS. SO I'M AGAINST THE DENSITY DOWN THERE, IT WAS NEVER INTENDED. IT'S NOT CONDUCIVE, AND THERE'S ONE OTHER THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE.

THAT'S A FREIGHT RAIL THROUGH THERE.

HE KEEPS TALKING ABOUT IT BEING DART.

IT'S NOT DART. THEY MAY HAVE A LEASE ON IT, BUT DART AS YOU KNOW ENDS AT THE STATION.

>> THANK YOU. MR. GORY.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. >> MY NAME IS RUSS GORY.

AND I LIVE AT 4888 EDGEWATER DRIVE.

DRIVE HERE IN ROWLETT ON THE CUL DE SAC COMING OFF OF 66 AND DOWN BETWEEN THE LAKE AND THE RAILROAD TRACKS.

AND I USUALLY DON'T TALK VERY MUCH AT ALL.

I TRY NOT TO. I'M A RETIRED PHARMACIST.

I JUST MADE UP NOTES SINCE I GOT HERE.

I'VE BEEN IN ROWLETT SINCE 1983 WHEN THE POPULATION WAS ABOUT 14,000. AND WHAT'S BAD IS THERE'S HARDLY ANY WAY TO GET ANYWHERE GOING EAST AND WEST.

THE TRAFFIC IS JUST TERRIBLE. ESPECIALLY I MEAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW, THE 5:00 TRAFFIC STARTS AT 3 P.M..

AND SO IT'S LIKE WHAT DALLAS USED TO BE.

CATO BE EVERYONE IN WHEN ITGETST OUT ONTO HIGHWAY 66.

AT LEAST NOT TO MAKE A LEFT-HAND TURN AND GO WEST.

AND THEN I CAN'T GET IN THE RIGHT HAND LANE TO MAKE A U-TURN. SO I'VE BEEN TELLING MY WIFE I'M READY TO DON'T OUT OF HERE BECAUSE OF THAT.

AND THERE OF ABOUT SEVERAL TIMES TRYING TO GET OUT THERE, AT LEAST ONCE, TWICE, FOR A T-BONE. MY MOTHER-IN-LAW, WHO WAS

[01:05:06]

THERE'S NO WAY TO GET IN AND OUT.

KIDS WALKING ACROSS THE GEORGE BUSH OR ANYWHERE AROUND THE AREA KIND OF GETTING DANGEROUS. ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION, THEY SAYS DOES IT DOESN'T GET HIT BY LIGHTNING.

I'VE BEEN HERE AND SEEN FOUR TORNADOES COMING THROUGH ROWLETT. AND I'VE SEEN AT LEAST TWO SUBSTATIONS HIT FROM WHERE I LIVE.

AS FOR I HOPE THEY HAVE A BETTER QUALITY THAN WHAT THEY'RE THINKING OF BUILDING SIMILAR TO THE COIL HISTORIC HOUSE, BECAUSE HOPEFULLY IT'S AT LEAST BRICK VENEER, AND AS FOR THE ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION, THERE IS EVIDENCE OF IT CAUSING HEALTH HAZARDS LIKE CANCER AND OBVIOUSLY HE'S NO AUTHORITY.

>> SIR, YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. THE THANK YOU.

I'M GOING TO BUTCHER THIS ONE I BELIEVE.

MR. UZAKI. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, MY NAME IS JOHN MUZIKA. CARROLLTON, AND I'M HERE TODAY REPRESENTING THE CHURCH. I'M THE BROKER FOR THE CHURCH AND I WORK WITH PASTOR COAL. FOR MANY YEARS, WHETHER THEY'RE SELLING THEIR BUILDING AND HELPING THEM WITH MULTIPLE ZONING AND OPTIONS AND CAN WE APPRECIATE WORKING CLOSELY WITH TTHE CITY FOR PROBABLY FOUR OR FIVE YEARS NOW.

PASTOR COAL COULDN'T BE HERE BECAUSE HE'S ON A MISSION TRIP WITH 11 MEMBERS OF HIS CHURCH AND I'M HERE TO REPRESENT THEM.

AND EXPRESS HOW EXCITED THEY ARE FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.

THE LAST ONE THAT WE WERE HERE FOR HAD OVER 200 PLUS MULTIFAMILY UNITS AND WE UNDERSTOOD THAT THAT DID HAVE A LOT OF DENSITY THAT WAS NOT EMBRACED.

WE LOOKED AT EVERY OPTION. IF WE COULD PUT A 6-STORY OFFICE BUILDING THERE TODAY, WE WOULD HAVE CARS SITE.

BUT THERE'S NO DEMAND FOR AN OFFICE THERE.

IT WAS NOT IN THE LAND USE PLAN THAT THE CITY HAD ONCE THEY CHANGED THE URBAN VILLAGE DESIRE.

SO THE MIXED USE WITH RESIDENTIAL THERE THAT WE LOOKED AT PREVIOUSLY, THAT DIDN'T WORK. WE HAVE LOOKED AT THINGS LIKE WAREHOUSE USERS, SOMEBODY WHO MIGHT HAVE DISTRIBUTION FROM THERE BEING CLOSE TO THE HIGHWAY WITH I-30 NOT BEING FAR AWAY, BUT THAT WOULD BRING LOTS OF TRUCKS AND THAT COULD BE AN ISSUE, AND HERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 61 GREAT UNITS, TOWNHOMES, THAT TODAY ARE IN NAND. DEMAND.THEY ARE NOT BUYING TOWNT HOUSES, THEY'RE BUYING TOWNHOMES AND A LOT OF THEM ARE RENTING MULTIFAMILY APARTMENTS BUT WHEN THEY DO GET A CHANCE, THIS IS A HIGH QUALITY TOWNHOME THAT PROVIDES A GREAT COMMUNITY ATMOSPHERE. THE CHURCH IS VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS BEING THEIR NEIGHBOR. YOU SEE THE BUILDING GOING UP OVER THERE, AND THEY'RE EXCITED AND CAN'T WAIT TO MOVE IN THERE.

BUT THIS IS A GOOD NEIGHBOR. THE CHURCH, THEIR HIGH TIMES OF USE ARE SUNDAYS AND SOMETIMES ON WEEKNIGHTS FOR STUFF SO WE BELIEVE THAT THIS WILL BE A GREAT COMPATIBLE USE FOR US.

THE QUESTION OF WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE SOLD OFF AND MOVED TO THE FRONT, THE CHURCH IS HERE TO BE A LIGHT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IT YES, THEY WA WANTED VISIBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY AND THEY WANT TO SERVE THE PEOPLE OF ROWLETT AND THE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ACROSS THE STREET, AND THEY'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT. AND THIS 28-ACRE CAMPUS WHICH IS NOW A 17-ACRE CHURCH CAMPUS AND WILL BE AN 11-ACRE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THEY'RE EXCITED ABOUT IT.

SO WE APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CHURCH, KNOW THE CHURCH IS NOT GOING TO BE A PARTNER IN THIS OR GET ANY PROCEEDS OR SELL IT.

WE'RE PASSING THAT ON. AND WE HAVE MET AND ARE HAPPY WITH NICK AND HIS PARTNER, JOHN AND WE WERE LOOKING FORWARD TO IT, SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? MR. VICE CHAIRMAN FRISBEE.

[01:10:01]

>> I HAVE A FOLLOWUP QUESTION FOR STAFF CONCERNING THE CONDITION OF THE FRONTAGE THERE ON MAIN STREET. AND IN THE PACKAGE, THERE WAS SOME REFERENCE TO SOME IMPROVEMENTS.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT KIND OF IMPROVEMENTS ARE PROPOSED IN TERMS OF EITHER REPAIR OR CONSTRUCTION AND WHAT THE EXTENT

OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS MIGHT BE. >> BEFORE WE ANSWER THAT QUESTION, LET ME GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> GOOD IDEA. >> SO I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY

ON STAFF HAS THAT INFORMATION. >> MR. COHEN.

>> GOOD EVENING. CHAIRMAN.

THE COLD DOES REQUIRE PROPERTY DEVELOPERS THAT ARE ADJACENT TO STREETS THAT IF THOSE STREETS ARE SUBSTANDARD, THEY HAVE TO BE UPGRADED TO STANDARD. THAT DOES NOT MEAN REPAIR OF A -- FALLEN INTO A DISREPAIR STREET.

IF THE STREET IS CONCRETE AND CURB AND GUTTER, THAT'S OUR STANDARD, IT IS A STANDARD STREET AND IT'S THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN THAT. THERE'S A PORTION OF MAIN STREET THAT THE CRETE TERMINATES A ANDNATES AND IT BECOMES AN ASPHALT STREET AND THAT WOULD BE THE PORTION THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE UPGRADED. THEY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HALF OF THAT STREET. THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THE OTHER SIDE WOULD BE UPON FOR UPGRADING THE OTHER HALF AND THAT WOULD BE THE CITY, AND WE WOULD PARTNER WITH THEM TO UPGRADE IT, OR THEY

COULD PUT IT INTO ESCROW. >> WOULD THAT ALSO INCLUDE NEW SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT PRONT FRONTAGE?

>> THEY WOULDN'T BE REQUIRED TO PUT THE SIDEWALKS IN ON THE OTHER SIDE. BUT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PUT SIDEWALKS IN ON THE FRONTAGE, PERIOD.

WHETHER IT'S A SUBSTANDARD STREET OR NOT.

IF THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS, THEY WOULD HAVE TO PUT SIDEWALKS IN,

YEAH. >> AND THOSE SIDEWALKS ARE IN THE CHURCH'S PLANS, RIGHT? TO GO DOWN THE NORTH SIDE OF THE

STREET? >> THE CHURCH IS PUTTING IN ITS SIDEWALKS. THEY WOULD CONNECT.

EXCEPT IN FRONT OF THE SUBSTATION, I'M NOT REALLY SURE HOW THAT WOULD WORK. WE HAVEN'T LOOKED INTO THAT.

BUT -- >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. YES, SIR, MR. RYAN.

>> THAT'S PERFECT TO ASK THIS QUESTION.

SO SOMETHING IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED THERE AT SOME POINT.

AND COMMERCIAL OBVIOUSLY HAS ISSUES WITH IT TOO.

SO I CAN SEE THE OBJECTIONS, THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE OBJECTIONS TO GROWTH. BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE BEST OPTION FOR THIS -- WELL, ACTUALLY IF WE KEEP THE OFFICE, I DON'T THINK THAT IT WILL EVER BE DEVELOPED BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN YET. BUT YOU'RE RIGHT.

YES. SO DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION WITH

THAT? >> YES, MAYBE I SHOULD WAIT FOR DISCUSSION TIME. BUT THE QUESTION IS, IF THERE'S A BETTER OPTION, THEN I GUESS I COULD ASK THE STAFF, WHAT WOULD THAT BE? IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE COULD SUGGEST TO THE CHURCH IF IT'S NOT THIS? I WOULD ASSUME THAT IN YOUR DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CHURCH, YOU ALREADY MADE THOSE SORTS OF RECOMMENDATIONS.

>> YES, BUT AS MR.MUSKA SAID WE HAVE HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, AND SOMETIMES WE HAVE SUGGESTED THAT WE WOULD NOT FEEL THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IF I WANT THERE, AND OTHER TIMES, I THINK THEY HAVE ALSO MOVED IT FORWARD WITH THEM NOT MOVING FORWARD WITH THEM AND ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL

UNTIL THIS TIME. >> THEN I GUESS TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY A VERY GOOD PLAN FOR THAT PIECE OF LAND THE WAY IT'S SITUATED.

AS FAR AS DENSITY,ER I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY LOW BASED ON OTHER OPTIONS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE OR WOULD BE ON THE TABLE OR COULD BE ON THE TABLE. I DEFINITELY LIKE THIS A WHOLE LOT BETTER THAN ANYTHING ELSE WE HAVE EVER SEEN, AND I'M GOING TO BE SUPPORTING IT. WE'LL SEE HOW FAR THAT GOES.

[01:15:03]

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. SO IF WE WERE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, THERE ARE SEVERAL CONDITIONS, COULD SAY STAFF PLEASE BULLET THOSE OUT FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KNOW?

>> I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAD ANY CONDITIONS ON IT, DID WE?

WE JUST APPROVED -- >> THE STAFF DID NOT PLACE ANY CONDITIONS BUT HOWEVER, BASED UPON WHAT I HAVE HEARD THIS EVENING, I COULD ANTICIPATE THAT THE COMMISSION MAY WISH TO PLACE SOME CONDITIONS ON THERE, AND YOU MAY DO SO AS PART OF YOUR

MOTION. >> WELL, WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THAT, THERE WERE SOME -- THE DEVELOPER IS ASKING FOR FL FLEXIBILITY WITH REGARDS TO REMOVING THE ALLEYS FROM THE BACK ACCESS, AND SOME TREE CREDIT SO THAT WE'RE NOT REQUIRING A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TREES ON THE FRONTAGE AS WELL AS THE ENTRANCES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

>> THAT ALL WRAPS UP IN ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS APPROVE THE

PLAN TO CONSTRUCT. >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IF THERE WAS A MOTION MADE AND WE HAD TO GO THROUGH AND BULLET EACH ONE, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

>> SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT D OF YOUR PACKET, THOSE WOULD BE THE SPECIFIC MODIFICATIONS THAT THEY WOULD BE MAKING.

SO THEY WOULD BE COVERED UNDER A MOTION IF YOU WERE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEM AS PRESENTED, IF THERE WERE SOME ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO IMPOSE, THAT WOULD BE WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IN YOUR MOTION, AND YOU WOULD NEED TO

ADD A CONDITION TO DO SOMETHING. >> MR. SWIFT.

>> AT THE VERY BEGINNING, SOMEBODY BROUGHT UP I BELIEVE THE TERM IS DEED RESTRICTION RENTAL.

BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE DONE IT BEFORE.

BUT IF WE DID, WE DO NOT DO IT TONIGHT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE OPINION OF THE CITY'S ATTORNEY.

>> WE COULD ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY PROVIDE INPUT ON THAT.

AND -- IT'S A FEAR THAT I DIDN'T HAVE, AND I JUST GLANCED AT THE TAX RECORDS AND THAT COMPLEX IS RIDDLED WITH LLCS, THE PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTION OUT THERE, SO IT'S A LOT OF RENTAL RIGHT NOW. SO A FEAR THAT I DIDN'T HAVE WHEN I WALKED IN, A FEAR THAT I HAVE RIGHT NOW, AND IT'S GOING TO BE RENTAL. I WOULD HAVE TOLD YOU AN HOUR AGO, NO, IT'S NOT, BUT MAYBE IT WILL, BUT IF WE CAN DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WHICH WOULD TABLE TO THE VOTE IF

WE WENT THERE. >> I DON'T THINK WE TABLED THE VOTE. BUT WE COULD MAKE A MOTION AND HAVE THAT AS A CONDITION. CONDITION OF OUR

MOTION. >> IS THAT SOMETHING THAT -- I MEAN FROM HERE IT GOES TO COUNCIL, SO THE REQUEST COULD BE THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE CONSULTED BETWEEN NOW AND THE TIME COUNCIL IS -- BEFORE THIS ITEM IS BROUGHT TO COUNCIL. I'LL ADD THIS, MY 2 CENTS WORTH.

BEFORE I MOVED TO ROWLETT I L LIVED IN DALLAS AT THE PHOENIX TOWNHOMES, AND THEY WERE VERY SIMILAR TO THESE.

AND TO THE POINT OF THE RENTALS, THOSE ARE 25 UNITS IN THE HEART OF DOWNTOWN, AND IN THE PAST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, AND WE HAD LESS THAN 25% OF THOSE UNITS WERE RENTALS, AND IT WAS A REALLY GREAT COMMUNITY BECAUSE THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENTS WERE OWNERS. MOSTLY YOUNG PROFESSIONALS, EITHER SINGLES OR YOUNG MARRIED COUPLES.

AND IT REALLY WORKED OUT WELL AS A COMMUNITY, BECAUSE IT WAS A VERY CLOSE-KNIT -- VERY SIMILAR TO BEING IN A TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I KNOW THAT ROWLETT DOESN'T HAVE VERY MANY TOWNHOMES, AND IT'S KIND OF HARD TO GAGE WHAT QUALITY OF LIVING YOU'RE GOING TO TO GET THERE, BUT I JUST OFFER THAT AS A KIND OF INSIGHT FROM BEING BEEN IN A COMMUNITY LIKE THAT. SO I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A GOOD PRODUCT. I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT LEVEL OF QUALITY. I AGREE THAT -- I CAN'T THINK OF

[01:20:03]

AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE WOULD WANT TO HAVE THAT KIND OF TRAFFIC BACK THERE ANYWAY. SO I THINK THIS IS A PRETTY GOOD

FIT. >> I ALSO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT SECURITY AND PEOPLE DOING WHATEVER IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, ET CETERA IN THAT AREA, AND PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

AND I THINK THE MAJORITY OF THAT IS BECAUSE IT IS AN OPEN, FREE AREA RIGHT NOW, AND NOBODY IS LOOKING AT YOU, EXCEPT FOR THE PEOPLE THAT HAPPEN TO BE OF COURSAD -- USUALLY THE FOLKS RIGHT ALONG THE LAKE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TRACKS.

AND BY DEVELOPING THIS, IT WILL ACTUALLY STAVE OFF SOME OF THE HEY, LET'S RUN DOWN THERE WHERE NOBODY IS AT AND PLAY AND WHAT NOT, BECAUSE WE HAVE PEOPLE THERE.

I AM, WITH NO FURTHER COMMENTS -- ONE MORE.

>> IF THIS DOES GET APPROVED, I TOO WOULD SUPPORT THE IDEA, IF THE ATTORNEY CAN WEIGH IN ON THE RENTAL ISSUE.

ALSO, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO -- IF THIS DOES GET APPROVED, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SIDEWALKS THROUGHOUT, NOT JUST IN FRONT OF WHERE IT OPENS AND THEN NOTHING IN FRONT OF THAT ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION AND KEEP ON GOING. THAT SEEMS SILLY IF THEY'RE

GOING TO DO THAT. >> I'M NOT SURE WE CAN MAKE TXU OR ENCORE, WHOEVER OWNS THAT, UPGRADE THAT AREA.

HOWEVER, I THINK WE COULD PROBABLY CONVINCE THE CITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S A CROSSWALK ON THE EAST SIDE THAT WILL CROSSOVER TO THE COMMUNITY CENTER SIDE AND WALK DOWN THE SIDEWALK THAT WAY, WHICH COULD BE DONE WHEN WE UPGRADE OUR

PORTION OF THAT STREET. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS?

>> I'M READY FOR A MOTION. MR. PRESIDENT.

>> WELL, SINCE NOBODY ELSE IS WILLING TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE YET, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO IMPROVE.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE A LITTLE BIT CAREFUL HERE.

THE WORDING, SO HELP ME OUT HERE.

I'LL MAE A MOTION TO APPROVE TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM GENERAL OFFICE OF TO DISTRICT TO PLANNED PD DISTRICT FOR MULTIFAMILY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE MF-TH, AND IMPROVE CONCEPT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 61 TOWNHOMES.

ITEM 3, AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND 4, AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY AT THIS PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST INTERSECTION OF THE GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE AND MAIN

STREET. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION? DO I HAVE A SECOND? WHAT A CROWD.

MR. TUCKER SECONDS. THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE REZONING IN THE 61-TOWNHOUSE CONCEPT.

CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON THE ZONING MAP.

LET'S CALL THE VOTE. AND THAT PASSES 4-2.

AND WE'RE ARE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.