[Board of Adjustment -- Regular Meeting]
[00:00:10]
WILL GO AHEAD AND BEGIN THE SESSION. AS AUTHORIZED BY SECTION 551.071 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, THIS MEETING MAY BE CONVENED THE -- THE REGULAR SESSION ARE CALLED EXECUTIVE SESSION OR ANY BUSINESS PRIOR TO ADJOURNMENT. A PROCESS FOR PUBLIC INPUT, IF YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND IN PERSON, YOU MAY COMPLETE THE CITIZENS INPUT WARM -- FORM -- SORRY ABOUT THAT. COMPLETE THE FORM ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. ON THE DAY OF THE MEETING. ALL FORMS WILL BE PORTED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS PRIOR TO THE START OF THE MEETING. FOR IN PERSON,, REGISTRATION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS ARE AVAILABLE INSIDE THE DOOR OF THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. WILL BEGIN OUR CALL TO ORDER. AT THIS TIME WE WILL ALSO PUT FORWARD TO CITIZENS INPUT. THREE-MINUTE COMMENTS WILL BE TAKEN BY THE AUDIENCE ON ANY TOPIC BUT NO ACTION CAN BE TAKEN BY THE BOARD DURING CITIZENS INPUT. ARE THERE ANY CITIZENS INPUT TO COME FORWARD, PLEASE FEEL FREE. THERE IS NONE? WE WILL MOVE ON TO TONIGHT'S CONSENT AGENDA. ITEM 3A, CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MEETING ON JANUARY 22ND, 2025. DO I HAVE A MOTION ? A MOTION WAS MADE BY KEN. SECOND BY DOHERTY. AT THIS TIME WE WILL APPROVE THE MINUTES.
ADAM, DID YOU VOTE? VOTE PASSES APPROVING THE MINUTES OF THAT JANUARY 22ND, 2025 MEETING. ONTO ITEM FOUR, INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATIONS. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON A REQUEST FOR VARIANCES, INCLUDING MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH , ALLEYS, PRIMARY ENTRYWAY DIMENSIONS, RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH REDUCTION, GARAGE ORIENTATION, AND AMENITIES IN PRIVATE, AND OPEN SPACE SUBMITTED BY TY YOUNG OF SKORBURG COMPANY PRESENTING JUDY MCCALLUM RITA ALFORD, SARA ACRI AND DAVID ALLEN . THE PROPERTY IS OWNED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND ENCOMPASSES APPROXIMATELY 16.607 ACRES LOCATED ABOUT 300 FEET NORTH OF FLAMINGO DRIVE ABUTTING THE PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE .
>> MY NAME IS MARTIN MORRIS AND I WILL BE PRESENTING THIS ITEM TONIGHT. A QUICK BACKGROUND, THIS LOT IS OWNED SF-9 DISTRICT . THIS SIZE IS APPROXIMATELY 16.607 ACRES . IT IS APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET FROM FLAMINGO AND ADJACENT TO THE PG BT. IT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN RED. THERE IS A PROPOSAL ON THIS LOT AND THERE ARE SOME VARIANCES THAT I WILL DISCUSS FURTHER ALONG BUT ESSENTIALLY WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING WOULD BE 56 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES . IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 3.4 DWELLING PER ACRE AND THEY WOULD HAVE TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS . I WILL GO INTO SOME OF THE VARIANCES THEY ARE REQUESTING. THE FIRST BEING THE MAXIMUM LOT LENGTH . TYPICALLY YOU WOULD HAVE A 1200 A LOT LENGTH AND THEY ARE ASKING A VARIANCE INCREASE TO 1900 SQUARE FEET . THE SECOND IS, THEY WOULD NOT BE PROVIDING ALLEYS.
TYPICALLY, RESIDENTIAL DO REQUIRE ALLEYS. THE THIRD WOULD BE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE REDUCTION OF RIGHT AWAY WITH IN THAT AREA WE SEE THAT CURB . THEY ARE REDUCING IT TO 50 FEET SO THAT REDUCTION WOULD BE FROM 60 TO 50 FEET. ANOTHER VARIANCE THEY ARE ASKING ON THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE THE GARAGE ORIENTATION.
[00:05:01]
TYPICALLY WE DON'T ALLOW FOR GARAGE SPACE AND GARAGES AND THEY ARE PROPOSING FRONT FACES GARAGES INSTEAD OF --. ANOTHER ONE WOULD BE THE PRIVATE OPEN-SPACE AMENITIES . THEY ARE ASKING TO EXCLUDE THE REQUIREMENT FOR THESE AMENITIES ON THESE LOTS. THE LAST ONE IS THE PRIMARY ENTRYWAY DIMENSIONS.TYPICALLY YOU WOULD HAVE AT THE ENTRYWAY THERE WOULD BE 9600 SQUARE FEET OF OPEN SPACE . IT WOULD BE DIVIDED IN TWO AREAS , THE NORTH AREA DOESN'T MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS AND THEY ARE ASKING FOR A REDUCTION INSTEAD OF 4800 SQUARE FEET ON THAT PORTION TO BE 4180 SQUARE FEET . WE DID PROVIDE NOTIFICATION TO THE NEIGHBORING SITE. WE DO PROVIDE 200 TO 500 SPEC WE PROVIDED 71 NOTICES IN THE 200 NOTICE AND WE DID RECEIVE 14 IN OPPOSITION AND THE PROPERTY OWNER AT THAT SITE DID PROVIDE ONE IN FAVOR AS WELL AS WITHIN THE 500 WE DID PROVIDE 152 NOTICES. THERE WAS NINE IN OPPOSITION AND ZERO IN FAVOR.
ADDITIONALLY WE DID HAVE NEIGHBORS THAT DID NOT HAVE ADDRESSES BUT THERE WAS ADDITIONAL EIGHT IN OPPOSITION AS WELL AND I DID PROVIDE THAT IN YOUR PACKET. SOME THINGS TO CONSIDER WITHIN THIS VARIANCE , PER SECTION 77 812 OF THE RDC SHOULD HAVE VARIANCES ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE LIMITED --.
PHYSICAL CONDITIONS CREATE UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP AND RELIEF IS NOT TYPICALLY GRANTED FOR FINANCIAL OR MARKET-BASED CONSIDERATIONS. AS THE BOARD YOU MAY APPROVE OF CONDITIONS OR DENY THIS REQUEST. I AM OPEN TO QUESTIONS BUT THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION FOR YOU TONIGHT.
>> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME IF THERE IS ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO ASK, IS FEEL FREE.
>> THERE IS NO -- THE DRAWING ONLY SHOWS THE TOP DOWN VIEW .
SOME OF THE INPUT FROM PUBLIC INDICATED THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE
>> IN TERMS OF THAT, WE ARE REVIEWING THE VARIANCES FOR THIS SITE . IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED WE WOULD STILL TAKE IT THROUGH OUR PROCESS, WHICH THE FIRST PROCESS WOULD BE A FULL SITE DEVELOPMENT AND PER THE SF-9, IT WOULD BE DEVIATIONS FROM SF-9 BUT EVERY OTHER STANDARD SHOULD BE MET IF IT
WERE TO BE APPROVED. >> THANK YOU. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I BELIEVE WE ARE GOOD AND CAN MOVE ONTO THE
NEXT PART. >> GOOD EVENING, BOARD , CHAIRMAN , MY NAME IS JOHN ARNOLD. I'M WITH THE SKORBURG COMPANY DALLAS, TEXAS. 75225. YOU WOULD THINK I COULD GET THAT BY NOW. I'M GOING TO TAKE YOU THROUGH A PRESENTATION , GIVE A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON SOME OF THE VARIANCES, WHERE WE HAVE BEEN IN THE PROJECT, OUR BUILDING PARTNER , WE ARE . I HAVE BEEN TO PNC BUT I WILL GIVE YOU BACKGROUND ON WHO WE ARE.
BEFORE WE STARTED, ONE THING I WANTED TO CLEAR UP WAS ABOUT THIS IS A VARIANCE REQUEST ZONING WISE . WE ARE COMING IN TO MEET SF-9 . WE ARE MEETING ALL OF THE UNDERLYING ZONING .
THERE IS CONFUSION FOR US COMING IN ON A HIGHER DENSITY , ZONING, SMALLER LOT SIZES. WE HAVE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS. THAT WAS DENIED. I'M TRYING TO GET SOME 5000 6000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. WE ARE GOING IN UNDER THE UNDERLYING ZONING.
WE ARE GOING TO SHOW YOU SOME OF THE PROJECTS WE HAVE DONE IN ROW LET AND WE ARE TRYING TO DO A LOT OF THE SAME THINGS WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN DOING. AGAIN, LOT SIZE , IT EXCEEDS THE MINIMUM OF 9000 SQUARE-FOOT. WERE UNDER THE MAXIMUM DENSITY FOR SF-9 SO JUST TO THAT UP BECAUSE I THINK THERE WAS CONFUSION ON THAT TO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED. WE
[00:10:01]
ARE SKORBURG COMPANY . IS THERE A SPECIAL BUTTON? THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH MY CONTROLLER AT HOME, TOO. THERE IT GOES. OKAY.WHAT I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH TONIGHT, A LITTLE BACKGROUND ABOUT SKORBURG COMPANY AND OUR HISTORY IN ROWLETT. WE WERE BEST OF ROWLETT IN 2023 BUILDER AND DEVELOPER. WE BUILD HOMES THROUGHOUT ROWLETT FOR THE LAST 10 OR 15 YEARS. I HAVE DEVELOPED MYSELF SIX PROJECTS IN ROWLETT SINCE 2013 . I HAVE BEEN WITH THE COMPANY FOR ABOUT 12 OR ÷13 AND I HAVE DONE SIX PROJECTS PER I WILL TELL YOU ABOUT OUR BUILDING PARTNER . I'M SURE A LOT OF YOU HAVE SEEN THEIR ADS AND AROUND TOWN. THEY ARE OUR BUILDING PARTNER. I WILL GO THROUGH SOME REPRESENTATIVE PRODUCT THAT WILL EXPLAIN WHAT PRODUCT WE ARE BRINGING. YOU CAN SEE THAT IN OUR WINDSOR HOMES, OUR OTHER PROJECTS, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT AS FAR AS GARAGE ORIENTATION SETBACK. WE WILL GO TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CONCEPT PLAN AND THEN I WILL TAKE YOU THROUGH THE VARIANCES. WE ARE SKORBURG COMPANY, LOCALLY OWNED , FAMILY OWNED , LOCAL DEVELOPER. WE ONLY DEVELOP IN VFW. WE HAVE BEEN HERE FOR ABOUT FOUR YEARS. WE HAVE BEEN OVER 140 PROJECTS . WE STARTED LUCAS FAIRVIEW AND HAVE BEEN IN ROWLETT ROCKWELL, NOT AS MUCH ON THE WEST SIDE OF TOWN BUT A LOT OF PROJECTS ON THE EASTSIDE. WE DO ANYTHING FROM SMALL INFILL PIECES, 16 ACRE TOWNHOMES UP TO 400+ ACRE MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITIES. I HAVE OVER 25 CURRENT PROJECTS IN ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT. TWO AND ACTIVE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW AND I WILL TAKE YOU THROUGH THOSE IN ROWLETT. WE HAVE A REPUTATION FOR BUILDING HIGH-QUALITY, LONG-LASTING COMMUNITIES. OUR PROJECTS IN ROWLETT , WE CAN STOP FROM THE TOP-DOWN. MERRITT VILLAGE , WOODSIDE ESTATES, LAKESHORE VILLAGE VILLAS AT LONGBRANCH AND MANNERS ON MILLER. MANNERS ON MILLER WAS ONE OF THE FIRST PROJECTS I DIDN'T ROWLETT . IT WAS ABOUT 8 1/2 ACRES. ABOUT HALF THE SIZE OF THIS WITH 39 LOTS ON THAT.
THOSE WERE 50 BY 115 AND IT'S OVER ON MILLER ROAD. WINDSOR HOME ACTUALLY BUILT ALL THOSE HOMES BUT THESE ARE EXAMPLES OF SOME OF THE HOMES WE BUILT THERE. MOST OF THE VARIANCES WE ARE ASKING FOR WERE GRANTED THROUGH OUR DEVELOPMENT. WILL WOULD, VERY SIMILAR IN SIZE TO THIS 15.5 ACRES 59 LOTS . IS OVER ON SHE'S A, THOSE WERE 50 FOOT WIDE LOTS. WOODSIDE ESTATES , ABOUT SIX ACRES, 27 FOOT LOT ACROSS FROM THE SCHOOL. WINDSOR HOME IS THE BUILDER ON THAT ONE AS WELL. VILLAS AT LONGBRANCH IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. THAT WAS ABOUT 7 1/2 ACRES AND 32 MONTHS. THESE WERE OUR SMALLER LOTS, 40 FOOT WIDE BY 115 . MERRITT VILLAGE , THE LARGEST PROJECT WE HAVE DONE IN ROWLETT, 131 LOTS, 33 ACRES OVER ON CASON AND MERRITT. WINDSOR HOME WAS OUR BUILDER . WE HAD 40 FOOT LOTS AND 60 FOOT LOTS.
LAKESHORE VILLAGE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW . WINDSOR AND GRANT ARE BUILDING THAT. THERE IS ABOUT 99 LOTS, 21 ACRES, 4.5 UNITS PER ACRE, HIGHER THAN THIS ONE. THIS WAS OUR MOST RECENT ZONING CASE IN ROWLETT AND IT IS IN BELL&. WE HAVE 70 FOOT LOTS IN THAT DEVELOPMENT. REPRESENTATIVE PRODUCT --. THE PRICE RANGE ON THESE HOMES AND TO BE STARTING JUST UNDER 600 UP INTO THE 800S. THERE'S GOING TO BE VERY HIGH QUALITY HOMES. THEY HAVE A VERY GOOD REPUTATION IN THE AREA AND VFW. I'LL GIVE EVERYBODY A COUPLE OF SECONDS TO LOOK THROUGH THESE. IT IS A WIDE RANGE OF PRODUCT FROM THEIR SMALLER PRODUCT UP TO THE LARGER PRODUCTS. IF YOU NOTICE , THESE ARE ALL FRONT ENTRY HOMES . ALL THE HOMES I HAVE SHOWN YOU IN EACH OF THE SIX PROJECTS HAVE
[00:15:02]
ALL BEEN FRONT ENTRY HOMES WITH AN ALLEY.SUBJECT PRETTY -- PROPERTY. EVERYBODY ALREADY KNOWS WHAT THE PROJECT IS, RIGHT OFF OF GEORGE BUSH. 16.5 ACRES . OUR DENSITY , WE ARE LOOKING TO DO 56 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS . ALL OF THESE ARE 9000 SQUARE FOOT ABOUT 3.48 , DEPENDING ON WHICH ACREAGE YOU PULL FROM THE PLOT. IT'S ON 3.5. A LITTLE BIT MORE IN DEPTH ON OUR PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY . AGAIN, 56 TOTAL LOTS.
OUR AVERAGE LOT SIZE WILL BE 10,000 SQUARE FOOT . IT IS LARGER THAN OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH. LOT SIZE WILL BE 9000 SQUARE FOOT, WHICH IS ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR SF-9. 40 OF THE 56 LOTS WILL HAVE DEPTH BETWEEN 150 FOOT AND 200 FOOT BACKYARDS , SO VERY LARGE PREMIUM LOTS IN THIS 45 FOOT BACKYARD TO BE ABLE TO FIT A POOL AND A LOT OF ENTERTAINMENT IN THE BACKYARD.
WE WILL HAVE ENTRY MONUMENT TATIAN. WE WILL HAVE ORNAMENTAL FENCING AND COLUMNS. WE PLAN TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH. WE PLAN ON KEEPING BUFFERS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH BECAUSE THESE WILL BE VERY DEEP YARDS. 205 FOOT LOT DEEP AND WE WILL KEEP SOME BUFFERS ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH. WE ARE STILL COMMITTED TO THAT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE TABLE TO THE RIGHT , WE ARE MEETING ALL OF THE DENSITY LOT AREA , MINIMUM LOT WITH , MINIMUM LOT DEPTH, FRONT SETBACKS , SIDE SETBACKS, REAR SETBACKS, MINIMUM FLOOR AREA AND THE MAX HEIGHT ALL OF THOSE WE ARE MEETING. ONTO THE VARIANCES , THE FIRST THAT MARTIN WENT OVER WAS THE BLOCK LENGTH. THIS IS ONE LONG PIECE OF PROPERTY. WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A STREET TO THE NORTH, SOUTH TO CONNECT INTO. THERE IS NOT REALLY A PLACE TO BREAK THIS BLOCK. ONE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS WERE ACTUALLY -- HER BACKYARD AND SHE IS WILLING TO GIVE US THE RIGHT OF WAY TO CONNECT FOR THE REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY TO CONNECT AND MAKE THOSE TWO POINTS OF ACCESS. NEW SUBDIVISIONS ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A 1200 LENGTH MINIMUM BUT IN CASES WHERE PHYSICAL BARRIERS OR PROPERTY OWNERSHIP CREATES CONDITIONS WHERE IT IS APPROPRIATE THESE STANDARDS BE BURIED , LENGTH MAY BE INCREASD OR DECREASED TO MEET THE EXISTING CONDITIONS HAVING REGARD FOR CONNECTING STREETS, CIRCULATION AND PUBLIC SAFETY.
WE HAVE THE TWO POINTS OF ACCESS, WE MEET PUBLIC SAFETY.
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, THERE IS NOT ANOTHER ENTRY OR EXIT TO ENTER INTO THE SUBDIVISION AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY CONNECTING STREETS. WE MEET ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS FOR VARIANCE.
ALLEYS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN ALL NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.
UNLESS OTHERWISE ACCEPTED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
THE SITE DIMENSIONS ON THIS ARE NARROW , MAKING ALLEYS VERY HARD . ONE OF THE THINGS WE WANT TO DO IS KEEP THESE BACKYARDS, KEEP THE TREES ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH. PUTTING ALLEYS BACK IN THE BACK OF THESE LOTS WILL SHORTEN THE LOTS AND ALSO REQUIRE US TO TAKE OUT TREES. ALSO THERE IS TOPOGRAPHY ON THE SITE AND WE WANT TO KEEP AS MUCH OF THAT TOPOGRAPHY IN PLACE.
THOSE DEEP BACKYARDS WILL ALLOW US TO KEEP LEAVE FALL. THERE IS 20+ FOOT ELEVATION CHANGE FROM THE NORTH TO THE SOUTH. BY KEEPING THOSE 200 FOOT, UNDER 50 FOOT WE WILL BE ABLE TO GRADUALLY BRING THAT FROM NORTH TO SOUTH AND NOT HAVE TO LOSE A LOT OF THAT ELEVATION. THIS VARIANCE HAS BEEN GRANTED AND ALL SIX OF OUR PREVIOUS SUBDIVISIONS, WE ONLY HAD ONE SUBDIVISION WITH ALLEYS IN IT AND THAT WAS MERRITT VILLAGE AND THOSE WERE THE 40 FOOT LOTS BECAUSE WE HAD A CONCEPT WHERE EVERYTHING WAS FACING INTO OPEN SPACES. WE HAD ALLEYS ON MERRITT VILLAGE BUT ALL SIX OF OUR PREVIOUS OF ELEMENTS IN ROWLETT HAD BEEN GRANTED THIS VARIANCE. ENTRYWAYS, WE ARE ACTUALLY , IF
[00:20:07]
YOU TAKE THE AREA WE HAVE A LONG GEORGE BUSH, WE ARE ACTUALLY EXCEEDING THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOT. WE ARE NOT MEETING THE DIMENSIONS. OF 96 100 SQUARE FOOT REQUIRED, WE HAVE ABOUT 1400 PROPOSED , 14,000 SQUARE FOOT PROPOSED FOR OPEN SPACE UP FRONT. WE ARE NOT MEETING THE DIMENSIONS BECAUSE THEY STARTS WHIZZING BACK INTO OUR LOT WIDTH'S . IT WILL ALLOW FOR MORE APPEALING LANDSCAPE UP FRONT. WILL HAVE ENTRY FEATURE .IT WILL BE VERY SIMILAR TO MOST OF OUR SUBDIVISIONS HAVE DONE IN ROWLETT. RIGHT AWAY WITH, AGAIN THIS IS MORE TO THE PROPERTY CONSTRAINTS . WE ARE MEETING THE 60 FOOT RIGHT AWAY. AS YOU GO FROM GEORGE BUSH INTO THE PROPERTY BUT AS WE GET TO MISS JUDY'S HOUSE, THE PROPERTY STARTS TO NARROW. IN ORDER TO KEEP THE DEPTH OF THOSE LOTS , WE HAVE ASKED THE CITY TO 250 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE OPERATIVE WHERE IT CONDENSES, WHERE THE NORTH-SOUTH CONDENSES. MOST OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE A 60 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY BUT WE HAVE TRANSITIONED INTO A 50 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH EASEMENTS WITHIN THE LOT FOR MAINTENANCE FOR THE CITY BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN THE BIGGEST CONCERN, MAINTENANCE. THE BUILDERS WILL BE ABLE TO USE DEEPER FLOORPLANS ON THOSE LOTS THAT ARE LACKING UP TO THE PROPERTY AND THAT MORE NARROW AREA. IT WILL BE ABLE TO KEEP THE LOT DEPTH DEEPER ON THOSE LOTS IF WE HAVE THE 50 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY THROUGH THERE.
AGAIN, MANORS ON MILLER, LAKE SHORE, MERRITT VILLAGE, THEY WERE ALL CONSTRUCTED WITH THE 50 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY , ALL OF OUR PREVIOUS PROJECTS. WE ARE LOOKING TO MEET THE ORDINANCE WHERE WE CAN AND THEN ASKING FOR VARIANCE ABOUT HALFWAY THROUGH.
FRONT ENTRY AT THE -- . WE ARE LOOKING TO VARY FROM THE JURY HOOK -- J HOOK DRIVEWAYS IN THE RECESS. IT'S MAINLY A RODDICK THING. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT FOR TWO AND HALF YEARS, LOST EVERY BUILDER THAT WAS LOOKINGAT IT WITH US AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO THEIR RODDICK HERE. I THINK THEY HAVE A GREAT PRODUCT AND AS YOU SAW FROM THE SIDES WE DID BEFORE AND ALL OF THE SITES FROM OUR PREVIOUS PROJECTS, AGAIN THIS VARIANCE WAS THROUGH RPD , ALL SIX OF OUR PRODUCTS HAD FRONT ENTRY GARAGES. PRIVATE OPEN-SPACE , WE ARE MEETING THE ACTUAL SIZE OF THE PRIVATE OPEN-SPACE WITH OUR FRONT ENTRY AREA BUT ON THIS ONE, WE FELT THAT WE HAVE MARINER PARK -- SORRY, COLUMBIA PARK DIRECTLY DOWN THE STREET FROM US WHICH PROVIDES PLENTY OF OPEN SPACE IF YOU SEE TO THE RIGHT OUR PROJECT WILL ACTUALLY BUT INTO MARINER PARK AND THE LAKE WITH THAT LIKE BEING THERE , WE BELIEVE MARINER PARK IS ADEQUATE OPEN-SPACE FOR THIS PROJECT. THERE IS NOT REALLY A PLACE TO PUT A POCKET PARK THAT IS RIGHT BY SOMEBODY'S HOUSE AND WINDOW.
EVERYBODY WILL BE ABLE TO WALK DOWN TO THE PARK AND INTO THE LAKE. AGAIN, THIS SIDE WAS -- TO CLEAR UP SOME CONFUSION, ALL OF THE LETTERS WAS SO WERE TALKING ABOUT US TRYING TO COME IN AND PUT IN A HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT OR INCREASE THE DENSITY. TONIGHT IS NOT ABOUT THAT. IT IS NOT ABOUT ZONING. WE ARE GOING TO MEET THE SF-9. WE WILL EXCEED THE MINIMUM -- AVERAGE LOT SIZE. BY ALMOST 2000 SQUARE FEET, 1500 TO 2000 SQUARE FEET. OUR MINIMUM LOT SIZE IS HIGHER. WE ARE NOT TRYING TO COME IN WITH A HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENT THAN OUR NEIGHBORS.
I THINK THAT IS IT. I'M HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU. BEFORE WE PROCEED FORWARD, I WOULD LIKE TO IDENTIFY THAT OUR CHAIR SHOWED UP AND I WILL BE STEPPING DOWN TO ALLOW HIM TO TAKE THE CHAIR POSITION. TONY, IF YOU DON'T MIND SWITCHING.
[00:25:11]
>> OPEN UP FOR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD.
>> I HAVE A PROCEDURAL QUESTION. IS HE NO LONGER ACTIVE? WHAT
HAPPENS NOW? >> HE IS ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSION BUT NO LONGER VOTING MEMBER.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
>> HOW FAR AWAY IS YOUR WALL FROM THE BEND TO THE PARK? WHAT
>> OKAY. YOU FELT THAT IT WAS NOT FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE TO PUT EVEN A SMALL GREEN SPACE SOMEWHERE IN THERE? THAT'S NOT A GREEN SPACE WHERE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO CONGREGATE.
OKAY. YOUR MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENT FROM YOUR PRESENTATION , IT APPEARED THAT AT LEAST THE HOMES YOU SHOWED WERE ALL FRONT FACING ENTRYWAYS . WHAT IS THE MOST RECENT PROJECT ? I'M TRYING TO GET SQUARED AWAY . WE HAVE SF-9 REQUIREMENT BUT ALL YOUR DEVELOPMENT DON'T MEET THAT OR HAVE THAT FEATURE. THEY ARE ALL FRONT END.
>> WE HAVE ACRE LOTS , 100 FOOT LOTS .
>> IN ROWLETT. I'M JUST SAYING ALL THE PRESENTATION -- DEVELOPMENT YOU HAVE DONE HERE IN ROWLETT , YOU PRESENTED HOMES
THAT WERE ALL FRONT FACING. >> THERE MIGHT BE A J SWING OR TWO ON THIS. PRODUCT WISE, IT PUSHES THE LOT BACK INTO THE BACKYARD . IT IS HARDER TO DO ON A 65 FOOT LOT , 60 FOOT LOTS ARE FINE. 65 FOOT LOTS ARE FINE. THERE WILL BE SOME J SWINGS . WE DON'T WANT THEM ALL TO BE REQUIRED TO BE J SWING. OUR BUILDER IS MOSTLY ALL FRONT ENTRY. WINDSOR'S HOMES, WE HAD 60 FOOT LOTS , THEY HAD AN OPTION TO DO J SWING. THEY STILL WENT WITH THE RENT ENTRY PRODUCT. SOME OF OUR PROJECTS DID -- . LAKE SHORE DID HAVE SOME 9000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS WE DID HAVE SOME 9000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS.
>> THE MAJORITY OF YOUR DEVELOPMENTS ALMOST NONE OF THEM
HAD ALLEYS EITHER. >> NOT NONE OF THEM HAD ALLEYS FOR VERY FEW 60 FOOT LOT PROJECTS THAT HAVE HAD ALLEYS.
IT COMES WHEN YOU DO A 40 FOOT PRODUCT OR SMALLER COTTAGES.
[00:30:08]
THEY ARE BECOMING RARE. ROCKWALL DOESN'T REQUIRE THEM ANYMORE. I WAS INTO OTHER CITIES WHERE THEY ASKED ME NOT TO DO THEM. AND THEY HAVE IT ON THEIR ORDINANCE THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO. WILEY, THAT'S WHERE I WAS PICKED WHILE HE HAS THE SAME ORDINANCE.ROCKWALL HAS THE SAME ORDINANCE THAT YOU ALL DO THAT IT IS REQUIRED AND I HAVE BEEN IN BOTH OF THOSE CITIES AS LONG AS I HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR 15 YEARS , AND THEY HAVE SHIED AWAY FROM ALLEYS IN BOTH OF THOSE CITIES. ROCKWALL ACTUALLY TELLS YOU NOT TO DO ALLEYS. IF YOU GO SMALL, THEN, YES.
>> I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. YOU ARE SAYING THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF GARAGES BUT YOU'RE NOT INCLUDING IT HERE AND ASKING FOR A VARIANCE BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE THOSE BE THE ONLY OPTIONS AVAILABLE?
>> WE WON'T HAVE A BUILDING PARTNER IF THEY WERE ALL J SWING. IT'S NOT A POPULAR ENOUGH PRODUCT FOR THE MARKET.
>> OKAY. IF THAT'S THE ISSUE, YOU HAVE ALREADY REQUESTED A REDUCTION IN THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM 60 TO 50. WHY WOULD YOU NOT CONTINUE THAT THROUGH THE WHOLE AREA AND SHORTEN UP SOME OF THE PROPERTIES BY ABOUT 5 TO 10 FEET TO ALLOW FOR ALLEYWAY EASEMENT SO YOU WOULDN'T NEED THE
FORWARD FACING GARAGES AT ALL? >> ALLEYS WOULD ONLY GIVE US 10 FOOT. PLUS THERE WOULD BE ON THE TWO PROPERTY LINES TO THE SOUTH AND THERE IS NICE TREELINE BUFFERS THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP IF WE SHOVE THOSE AND THEN TRY TO KEEP THE BUFFER, YOU WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT 40 FOOT ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH AND YOU DO START HAVING PROPERTY ELEVATION CONCERNS WITH THE PROPERTY. IT DROPS 20 FEET NORTH TO SOUTH. ALLEYS IN THE BACK , YOU STILL TRY TO KEEP THE TREES IN THE BACK, YOU ARE TAKING ABOUT 80 FOOT , FIVE FOOT DOESN'T REALLY GET US ANYTHING AND THE CITY WOULD LIKE US WHERE WE CAN TO DO 60 FOOT
RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> YOUR PLAN IS TO YOU THE ADJACENT OPEN GREEN SPACE PARK FOR THIS AREA AS A CONSIDERATION AND YOU DON'T INCLUDE ANYTHING TO UPDATE OR ADD TO THAT
EXISTING PARK? >> WE WENT THROUGH THAT PROCESS BUT IT IS NOT A TONIGHT DISCUSSION. WE HAVE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS WITH ANOTHER BOARD. WE HAD A VERY
NICE OFFER ON THE TABLE. >> I HAVE NO MORE QUESTIONS.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AT THIS TIME WE WILL MOVE TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING. WE WILL TAKE PUBLIC INPUT . WE HAVE A FULL HOUSE SO WE WILL BE STRICT WITH THE THREE MINUTE RULE. WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC
COMMENTS? >> FIRST UP IS PATRICK WOTTON AND SHERRY HARMON WILL BE ON DECK .
>> WHEN YOU APPROACH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR
THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> PATRICK LAWTON . YEAH, YOU WILL COME TO THE FRONT AND STATE YOUR NAME AND -- FOR THE RECORD.
>> MY NAME IS PATRICK LAWTON AND I LIVE ON ROYAL BAY. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THE TRAFFIC OF THE ROAD . WHEN WE EXIT ROYAL BAY, THERE IS A DIP JUST BEFORE OUR EXIT AND WE CAN'T SEE THE CARS.
THEY ARE TRAVELING AT 50 MILES AN HOUR. IF WE HAVE ALL OF THIS ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT THAT MUCH HARDER AND RISKIER TO GET OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEN THE ONE THING I DID REALIZE, WHICH I SAW IN THE FILM , WE LIVE ON ROYAL BAY ON THE SOUTH SIDE . IF THEY DON'T HAVE ANY ALLEYS BEHIND, THEN THESE OTHER PROPERTIES WILL COME RIGHT UP TO OUR BACKYARD.
THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATION AS FAR AS I CAN TELL BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES, SO I THINK THERE SHOULD BE ALLEYS. THE OTHER THING I WAS THINKING , AT ANY TIME, HAS ANYBODY CONSIDERED PUTTING ANOTHER EXIT TO THIS NEW NEIGHBORHOOD GOING DIRECTLY TO 66 , IN ORDER TO ALLEVIATE THE TRAFFIC GOING UP THE FEEDER ROAD? AND THE REDUCED SIZE OF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE HOUSES,
[00:35:07]
I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE RISKIER FOR FIRES OR TO GET AMBULANCES AND FIRE TRUCKS IN THEIR OR THINGS OF THAT KIND.THAT'S ALL, UNLESS SOMEBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE SHERRY HARMON AND THE BROTHERS ON DECK. STATE
YOUR BROTHERS ON DECK. >> RESPECTED MEMBERS OF THE
PLANNING ZONING MISSION. >> STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PICS FROM SHERRY HARMON ROYAL BAY DRIVE.
>> I AM HERE TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO THE REQUESTED VARIANCES OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OFFERED TO STATES .
MY CONCERNS STEM FROM THE LACK OF ALIGNMENT WITH ROWLETT'S COVER HAS A PLAN AND THE MISSED OPPORTUNITY TO ASSUME MORE RESPONSIBLE DEVELOP SOLUTIONS. DENYING THESE VARIANCES WOULD ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPER TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES THAT RESPECTED THE CURRENT LAND USE DESIGNATION AND THE CITY'S LONG-TERM VISION. ROWLETT'S COVER HAS A PLAN IS DESIGNED TO PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH WHILE PRESERVING THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF ITS NEIGHBORHOODS AND NATURAL LANDSCAPES. GRANTING VARIANCE THAT ENABLE HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT CONTRADICTS THESE PRINCIPLES AND OVERLOOKS THE POTENTIAL FOR A BETTER, MORE COMPATIBLE APPROACH. I HAVE BEEN A FIREFIGHTER PARAMEDIC FOR 25 YEARS. YOU PUT REGULATIONS , ZONING THINGS IN PLACE FOR A REASON. 50 FOOT , LET'S GET A FIRE ENGINE DOWN THERE , NOT GOING TO WORK. LET'S GET AN MICU DOWN THERE, NOT GOING TO WORK. YOU CANNOT TURN A FIRE ENGINE ON A DIME. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THESE THINGS IN PLACE, WHAT YOU HAVE DONE . YOU HAVE A DELL OF UPPER THAT IS MONEY TO COME IN AND CHANGE THE RULES. PUBLIC SAFETY IS FIRST AND FOREMOST . HE WANTS TO TOUT 9000 SQUARE FEET LOTS BECAUSE THEY ARE THIN. THEY GO BACK DEEP , WHICH MEANS THE HOUSES ARE SIDE-BY-SIDE. ONE CATCHES FIRE, THE NEXT ONE CATCHES FIRE , BECAUSE THERE IS NO SPACE IN BETWEEN THEM. WITH THE THOUGHTFUL AND COMMITMENT TO THE RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT, THIS PROPERTY COULD STILL BE DEVELOPED IN A WAY THAT COMPLEMENTS THE SURROUNDING AREA AND RESERVES THE NATURAL FEATURES. INCORPORATING THE UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY, VEGETATION AND ADJACENCY TO THE LAKE GOOD GREAT A DEVELOPMENT THAT ALIGNS WITH THE CITY'S GOALS WHILE MAINTAINING THE AREAS APPEAL.
THIS APPROACH WOULD ENHANCE COMMUNITY CONNECTIVITY , PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES AND CREATE LASTING VALUE FOR CURRENT AND FUTURE RESIDENTS. THE VARIANCES REQUESTED BY THE DEVELOPER ARE NOT NECESSARY TO MAKE THIS PROPERTY VIABLE. INSTEAD, THEY PRIORITIZE CONVENIENCE AND DENSITY OVER QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY. DENYING THESE VARIANCES SENDS A MESSAGE THAT ROWLETT VALUES LONG-TERM PLANNING AND RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES THAT BENEFIT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. I RESPECTFULLY URGE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO REJECT THESE VARIANCES AND REQUIRE A PLAN THAT REFLECTS THE CITY'S VISION FOR BALANCE, THOUGHTFUL GROWTH. WE HAVE BEEN IN MARINER PARK AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS DEVELOPED. IT IS A QUIET NEIGHBORHOOD . THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT COMING IN WITH THAT VARIANCE ON THE END OF THAT TO COME INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITH
THEIR 56 HOMES -- . >> THANK YOU.
>> STACIA BROTHERS AND THEN ON DECK IS BOB R THERE.
>> MY NAME IS STACIA BROTHERS AND I LIVE AT 5514 AND OSS BAIT DRIVE IN MARINER PARK FOR WANT TO SPEAK TODAY BECAUSE I KNOW YOU ALL ARE HERE BECAUSE YOU HAVE A PASSION FOR THE CITY AND HAVE A DIRECT VOICE AND DECISIONS BEING MADE THAT AFFECT US ALL. THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN IN THOSE WHO THROUGHOUT 2024 MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH THE PRIOR REQUEST OMITTED REGARDING THIS BEAUTIFUL GREEN PIECE OF LAND AND TO YOU I KNOW I WILL SOUND REDUNDANT. IS IS IMPORTANT NOT ONLY FOR HOW IT AFFECTS US IN FLAMINGO BAY BUT FOR EVERYONE IN ROWLETT NOW AND THOSE AFFECTED BY THE PRECEDENTS SET FOR THE FUTURE. FOR THOSE WHO ARE NEW, THIS IS AN ONGOING SAGA THAT YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO END. THE EXCEPTIONS BEING ASKED FOR OPEN THE DOOR FOR PROPOSED EVOLVEMENT OF THE ACREAGE ADJACENT TO FLAMINGO BAY WHICH IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AS PRESENTED. THE CURRENT ZONING AND PLANNING RESTRICTIONS IN PLACE ALLOW FOR RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT , WHICH WOULD MAINTAIN THE CURRENT AESTHETICS OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY. APPROVING THESE VARIANCES PAVES THE WAY FOR
[00:40:02]
POSSIBLE REZONING , WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED BY THE REQUESTER AND IT ALSO PRESENTS SAFETY CONCERNS . ADDITIONALLY, THE TRAFFIC THAT WOULD RESULT FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD EXACERBATE TRAFFIC ISSUES FOR ALL OF ROWLETT. LAST MONDAY AT 6 P.M., THE LINE FOR THE LIGHT STARTED ON THE HIGHWAY . WE WERE SITTING IN THE FAR RIGHT-HAND LANE BRING THE CARS DARLING BEHIND US REALIZED THAT WAS THE LINE AND IN PLOW INTO EYES. MANY OF YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS AND THE ALREADY APPROVED DEPARTMENTS BEING ADDED IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA ARE ONLY GOING TO MAKE THIS TRAFFIC ISSUE WORSE. THE DEVELOPER IS ASKING FOR EXCEPTIONS TO ALLOW FOR ADDING OVER 50 HOMES, WHICH MEANS HUNDRED PLUS MORE VEHICLES WAITING AT THE DOOR -- GEORGIA VERSE TURNAROUND. AS A RESIDENT WHO MOVED TO THIS AREA TO ESCAPE THE CONCRETE AND COMPACT LIVING CONDITIONS IN SOME OTHER METRO AREAS, I CAN SAY THE NATURAL GREEN SPACES IN THE CITY'S CONFERENCE OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO PROTECT THE VISION OF WHAT ROWLETT WILL LOOK LIKE IN THE FUTURE IS WHY WE CHOSE TO MOVE HERE. OUR THOUGHTFUL CITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS MEANT TO PREVENT CIRCUMSTANCES JUST LIKE THIS AND TO GIVE YOU A BASIS TO VOTE FROM. DO NOT ALLOW THIS LAND TO BECOME A PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE EXCEPTIONS. VOTE AGAINST THIS REQUEST AND VOWED TO KEEP IN PLACE OUR CURRENT DEPARTMENT CODE RESTRICTIONS. SHOW THESE DEVELOPERS WHO ARE JUST TRYING TO GET AS MUCH PROFIT AS THEY CAN , WE HAVE A VISION FOR ROWLETT AND IF THEY WANT TO DEVELOP HERE THAN A TO DO IT IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY THAT VALUES OUR NATURAL RESOURCES AND OUR PLAN THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE.THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT IS BOB ARTHUR AND THEN
ON DECK IS ELIZABETH COALFIELD . >>
>> THANK YOU, THERE. THAT IS ELIZABETH . THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO STAND IN FRONT OF
YOU TODAY. >> STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
FOR THE RECORD. >> ELIZABETH COALFIELD, 3305 SEA BREEZE LANE. WE RECEIVED A LETTER STATING THAT OUR PROPERTY , THE VARIANCES THAT WERE PROPOSED WOULD REDUCE OUR PROPERTY BY QUITE A LOT . MY MOM HAS LIVED IN HER PROPERTY FOR 25 YEARS AND THE PROPERTY DEVELOPER COMING IN AND COMPLETELY CHANGING THE STRUCTURE OF WHAT WE CONSIDER OUR LOT SIZE. I WENT AHEAD AND BROUGHT THE LAND SURVEY FOR OUR LOT . IT WILL COMPLETELY DEVIATE FROM WHAT WE PURCHASED 25 YEARS AGO . WE ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF ANY OF THE PROPOSITIONS THAT WERE PLACED TODAY BY THE LAND DEVELOPER AND WE ALSO AGREE WITH EVERYONE WHO HAS STATED SOME FORM OF CONCERN IN REGARDS TO THEIR PLANNING. IT DOESN'T SEEM FAIR TO A LOT OF US WHO HAVE BEEN HERE FOR 30 YEARS, 25 TO 30 YEARS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT WE HAVE GIULIANA AND THEN ON DECK JUSTIN MARSTON. YOU DON'T WISH TO SPEAK? OKAY, THANK YOU. JUSTIN MARSTON AND THEN ON DECK, JAMES.
>> JUSTIN MARSTON AT 540 FLAMINGO DRIVE . I'M HERE TO STRONGLY OPPOSE THE REQUESTED VARIANCES FOR ALBERTA STATES.
WHILE THE DEVELOPER IS NOT SEEKING A ZONING CHANGE AT THIS TIME, THE EXISTING ZONING CONTRADICTS THE CITIES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND FUTURE LAND-USE MAP. THEY WERE ESTABLISHED THROUGH EXTENSIVE PLANNING EFFORTS IN COMMUNITY INPUT. THEY WERE FUNDED BY TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO ENSURE RELEVANT -- 13 GROWS IN A RESPONSIBLE MANNER. IT BALANCES DEVELOP AND WITH LONG-TERM INFRASTRUCTURE, CAPACITY, ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION, AND COMMUNITY NEEDS. APPROVING THESE VARIANCES UNDERMINES THE INVESTMENT AND CONFERRAL OF HIS CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF ROWLETT'S FUTURE. THE LAND-USE MAP ACTUALLY DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY AS ESTATE RESIDENTIAL WHICH IS INTENDED FOR HALF-ACRE LOTS OR LARGER. A CLASSIFICATION BASED ON SURROUNDING AND EXISTING LAND-USE SIDE CONDITIONS AND ACCESSIBILITY. THESE DECISIONS WERE NOT MADE ARBITRARILY. THEY TOOK INTO ACCOUNT THE SITES NATURAL CONSTRAINTS INCLUDING SIGNIFICANT TOPOGRAPHY CHANGES, DENSE VEGETATION, DRAINAGE CHALLENGES AND LIMITED ACCESS TO MAJOR THOROUGHFARES. THE DEVELOPER'S REQUEST FOR
[00:45:02]
MULTIPLE VARIANCES IS AN INDICATION THAT PROPOSED DENSITY DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE CITIES -- WITH THE SITES NATURAL LIMITATIONS OR THE CITY'S LONG-TERM GROWTH STRATEGY. THE CITIES DEVELOP MEANT STANDARDS EXIST TO PROTECT BOTH OF THE PROPERTY INTEGRITY AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE ROWLETT RESIDENCE AND GRANTING THESE VARIANCES WITH IT DANGEROUS PRECEDENT FOR THE DISREGARD OF THOSE STANDARDS. WHILE I RESPECT THE LANDOWNERS RIGHT TO SELL THE PROPERTY, I SYMPATHIZE WITH THE LANDOWNERS AND UNDERSTAND THE FINANCIAL BURDEN OF PROPERTY TAXES. I REALLY DO. I JUST WANT TO ARBITRATION WITH THAT. I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND. THE DEVELOPMENT MUST BE PURSUED IN A WAY THAT ALIGNS WITH ROWLETT'S LONG-TERM VISION. THERE IS EVEN A GOAL IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT THAT STATES ONE OF THE STRATEGIES TO IMPROVE ROWLETT IS TO REFERENCE THAT FUTURE LAND-USE MAP IN EVERYDAY DECISIONS WHEN IT COMES TO NEW PROPOSALS AND NEW DEVELOPMENTS. I WOULD RATHER --. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE ARE NOT PRIORITIZING THE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT INTEREST AT THE EXPENSE OF THE COMUNITY.ROWLETT HAS AN ABUNDANCE OF HOUSING CHOICES AND A HEALTHY SURPLUS OF RESIDENTIAL HOMES , ACCORDING TO THE MOST RECENT NUMBERS. MY NEIGHBORS SUPPORT RESPONSIBLE INFILL DEVELOPMENT BUT THIS PROPOSAL IS WHOLLY INCONSISTENT WITH THE PLANNING FRAMEWORK THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE BY OUR CITY. IT WOULD NOT ONLY INCREASE THE DENSITY WELL BEYOND WHAT IT'S INTENDED USE FOR THE SITE BUT SET A PRECEDENCE FOR THE WEEK AND INTEGRITY OF RELATIVE ZONING AND LAND-USE POLICIES. I URGE YOU --.
>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT IS JAMES AND ON DECK IS DARYL HALL.
>> RATHER THAN OTHER LOCATIONS THAT I HAVE LIVED IN AT THE TIME. BECAUSE OF ROWLETT'S PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. AS ESTATE ON THE WALL, WE HAVE A PLAN. THIS IS RIGHT HERE ON THE WALL IN OUR CHAMBER HERE. WE HAVE A PLAN OF THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF ROWLETT. THIS PROPERTY CAN FALL WITHIN THOSE GUIDELINES. IT WILL NOT MAKE AS MUCH PROFIT FOR THE DEVELOPERS. I UNDERSTAND PROFIT IS NOT A DIRTY WORD BUT SEEKING VARIANCES BECAUSE WE GOT THEM BEFORE, BECAUSE OTHER CITIES GAVE US THOSE IN THESE TYPES OF THINGS DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A GOOD REASON TO PILOT THE PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN IN EFFECT FOR QUITE SOME TIME . RIGHT NOW WE ARE LOOKING AT A SITUATION WHERE MANY OBJECTIONS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORTH AND EVERYBODY HAS SPOKEN ABOUT THE TRAFFIC, THE SAFETY, ACCESS , AND WE ALL KNOW THIS LAND IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED . I'M ASKING YOU TO DENY THESE VARIANCES SO THAT THIS LAND CAN BE DEVELOPED RESPONSIBLY AND IN A WAY THAT IT DOESN'T DAMAGE OR HARM THE FUTURE AND OVERALL GOOD OF ROWLETT AND THE CITIZENS IN THE AREA. NOT JUST IN THE SUBDIVISION. WILL HAVE TO LIVE TOGETHER. THE TRAFFIC WILL BE FLOWING AND THAT WILL CAUSE A LOT OF STRESS FOR THE DRIVERS EVERYWHERE. WE DON'T NEED TO HAVE A DEVELOPER COME IN AND SAY, HOW MANY PROPERTIES CAN WE SQUEEZE INTO THIS PLACE, THIS MUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE SO THAT WE CAN MAKE MORE OFF OF THIS LAND? THAT'S NOT A GOOD AND RESPONSIBLE WAY TO DEVELOP THIS LAND. I URGE THE COUNCIL TO DENY SO THE DEVELOPER CAN GO BACK , LOOK AT THE PLANS AND WORK WITH THE CITY TO CONFORM WITHOUT VARIANCES ON ALMOST EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO DO. THANK YOU FOR
>> NEXT WE HAVE DARYL HALL AND ON DECK IS DIANE ARTHUR .
>> HELLO, THANK YOU. MY NAME IS DARYL HALL, 5418 OSS THEY IN MARINER PARK. MY HOME BUT RIGHT UP AGAINST THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. FOR ME THE CONFUSION IS WHY A DEVELOPER WOULD NEED TO COME TO YOU FOR SO MANY VARIANCES FOR A PROPERTY THAT'S NOT EVEN DEVELOPED AND I THINK SOME OF YOU GUYS HIT ON IT EARLIER BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THEY KNOW THE CITY PLAN, THEY KNOW THE REQUIREMENTS WHEN THEY COME IN AND THEY DO THEIR SITE SURVEYS AND EVERYTHING. IT SEEMS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING THEY
[00:50:01]
SHOULD BE COMING TO YOU WITH SO MANY VARIANCES. IT SHOULD BE MINIMAL, A 1200 FOOT STREET, MAYBE THEY NEED 1250, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES BUT TO COME IN AND ASK FOR SO MANY DIFFERENT VARIANCES WHEN THERE IS NOTHING THERE, SO THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE THESE PLANS PRIOR TO COMING TO ANY KIND OF COUNSEL OR ANY BOARD MEMBER. FOR ME IT IS ALMOST ARROGANT THAT THEY COME TO YOU SAID, WE HAVE DONE IT SIX TIMES BEFORE AND PREVIOUS BOARDS HAVE ALL GIVEN THE OKAY FOR THIS. WE EXPECT YOU TO DO THE SAME THING. FOR ME, I'M ASKING YOU TO COME BACK AND SAY, NO, MAYBE COME BACK WITH A BETTER PLAN. THE VARIANCES AREN'T REQUIRED. REDO YOUR DEVELOPMENT BASED ON WHAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY LAID OUT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT WE HAVE DIANE ARTHUR AND
ON DECK, ARTHUR PHILLIPS. >> HELLO I AM DIANE ARTHUR AND I LIVE AT MARINER PARK AT THE CORNER OF OASIS BAY AND WORLD BAY. WE HAVE BEEN THERE SINCE DECEMBER OF 99 . ALL THE POINTS THAT EVERYBODY HAS MADE IS SO TRUE. IT IS REALLY A NEAT NEIGHBORHOOD. ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT ARE THE TREES. ARE THERE ANY CONSIDERATIONS FOR SOME OF THE SIZES OF THOSE TREES? THEY ARE HUGE. RIGHT NOW I KNOW THAT THERE IS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT BEHIND OUR FENCE . WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THAT? THOSE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT I REALLY HAVE ALONG WITH THE CONCERNS THAT EVERYBODY ELSE HAS
MENTIONED. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT WE HAVE ARTHUR PHILLIPS AND ON DECK, GREG BELLAMY.
>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ARTHUR PHILLIPS I'M AT 53 -- I'M SORRY I DON'T HAVE A PREPARED STATEMENT. THIS IS MY FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. I ECHOED THE CONCERNS OF MY NEIGHBORS AND I AM OPPOSED TO THE CHANGES VARIANCES AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND. AS MY NEIGHBOR SAID , THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE TREES AND PRESERVING THE NATURAL FEATURES OF THE LAND. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE BELLAMY FOLLOWED BY
TOM JOHNSON. >> GOOD EVENING , MY NAME IS GREG BELLAMY I LIVE AT 5500 FLAMINGO DRIVE. I WAS A LITTLE BIT LATE GETTING MY FORM AND BECAUSE I WAS AT PARENT-TEACHER NIGHT, SOUTH CAROLINA HIGH SCHOOL. THIS TOUCH IS A LITTLE BIT ON I THINK THAT I MADE. THERE ARE VARIOUS TIMES SPEAKING HERE IN THE PAST, WE HAVE TO STICK TO THE PLAN. BEING AN ADULT, BEING A TEACHER , MODELING ADULT BEHAVIOR IS TO TELL PEOPLE WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO AND THEN YOU FOLLOW THROUGH ON THAT . WITH REGARDS TO THE CITY PLAN AND THAT PLAN USAGE OF LAND, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO THIS AND MODEL THIS BEHAVIOR FOR OUR CHILDREN AND YOUNG ADULTS HERE IN ROWLETT. JUST YESTERDAY I WAS DRIVING HOME FROM SCHOOL , LEFT A LITTLE BIT LATE, STOPPED BY SPROUTS TO PICK UP SOME MILK AND OTHER ESSENTIALS FOR THE HOUSE AND IT TOOK ME 30 MINUTES TO GET HOME. I'M SURE SOME OF YOU REMEMBER THAT STUFF. I KNOW THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T EXACTLY HAVE TO DO WITH THAT BUT I'M STILL WONDERING , WHAT IS THE LIMIT FOR HOW MANY PEOPLE WE ARE GOING TO TRY TO STUFF INTO THIS PLACE? AS A HOMEOWNER, THE HOME THAT I BOUGHT THREE YEARS AGO WAS BUILT IN 1979. I WONDER AM I SERIOUSLY WONDER IF I WILL BE ABLE TO SELL IT WITH HOW MANY NEW INVENTORY IS GOING TO BE THERE WHEN WE GET FINISHED WITH DEVELOPING ROWLETT. I TELL ALL OF MY FRIENDS WHO ARE THINKING ABOUT COMING TO ROWLETT, I AM 44 NOW SO WE ARE GETTING TO THE AGE WHERE WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THINGS AND THEY SAY, IT'S A PRETTY NEAT PLACE IF YOU CAN GET CLOSE TO SOME GREEN SPACE . THE TRAFFIC IS WEIRD. THERE IS ONLY A THREE EAST-WEST THEIR AFFAIR AND NO PLAN OR EVEN ANY SPACE TO ADD ANYMORE. WITH THAT IN MIND, IF YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A MEDICAL EMERGENCY, DO NOT HAVE A BETWEEN THE HOURS OF WORK LOOK AT 6:00 P.M.. THAT'S MUCH ALL I HAVE. I HOPE WE CAN CONTINUE TO DEVELOP THE LAND RESPONSIBLY . I
[00:55:05]
DEFINITELY FEEL FOR MY NEIGHBORS WHO WANT TO SELL THE LAND. I WOULD SUPPORT A BOND OR SOMETHING TO COMPENSATE AND MAKE THAT SOME GREEN SPACE , WHICH WOULD NOT ADD TO THE MAINTENANCE OF THE CITY AND KEEP THE BIODIVERSITY OF THE AREA , SINCE WE DO HAVE ALL SORTS OF GOOD WILDLIFE INCLUDING HERONS, I THOUGHT A SIX POINT DEAR THIS LUSTFUL IN MY BACKYARD. IT IS A REALLY NEAT LITTLE SPOT PICK LET'S TRY TO KEEP IT NEAT.LET'S TRY TO KEEP THE CHARM IN ROWLETT.
>> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE TOM JOHNSON.
>> TOM JOHNSON, I LIVE AT 63 10 OASIS BAY DRIVE . I HAVE LIVED IN THE PARK FOR 26 YEARS . I DON'T REALLY HAVE MUCH MORE TO ADD TO THE CONVERSATION. I BELIEVE THERE IS POWER IN NUMBERS SO I THOUGHT I WOULD COME DOWN AND SUPPORT MY NEIGHBORS. I DO ECHO SOME OF THE CONCERNS WITH REGARD TO AESTHETICS AS WELL AS TRAFFIC CONCERNS. WHEN I LEFT TO COME HERE THIS EVENING, I HAD TO WAIT 50 OR 60 CARS TO PASS BY ON THE SERVICE ROAD FOR ME TO GET OUT OF THE COMMUNITY JUST TO COME HERE TO PARTICIPATE. THERE IS EVIDENTLY TRAFFIC ISSUES AND THAT IS GOING TO EXACERBATE THE PROBLEM. THE OTHER THING I THINK IS WORTH NOTING, WITH ALL THE TREE REMOVAL, ONE OF THE CONCERNS WE HAVE IN OUR COMMUNITY NOW IS THE ROAD NOISE , SO WE GET IT FROM 66 AND WE GET IT FROM BUSH . IF YOU TAKE OUT ALL OF THAT , I SUSPECT THAT WOULD EVEN INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF NOISE WE WOULD HAVE IN OUR COMMUNITIES, PARTICULARLY DURING TRAFFIC HOURS. I ECHO THE SAME CONCERNS THAT MY NEIGHBORS HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT. MOSTLY ABOUT THE AESTHETICS AND THE DENSITY AND THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS THAT HAVE COME ALONG WITH IT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. >> NO FURTHER CARDS.
>> CAN I SPEAK? IT'S STILL A PUBLIC HEARING. I CAN'T REBUTTAL OR SPEAK? I CAN'T SPEAK TO ANYTHING SAID?
>> WAS SAID TONIGHT. ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THERE IS HEALTH AND SAFETY WELFARE ITEMS SET. THE PAVEMENT IS NOT CHANGING.
THE PAVEMENT IS THE SAME AS A NEIGHBOR ABOVE. THE LOT HAS BEEN SET --. THIS IS ZONED SF-9 . IT IS ALLOWED TO HAVE 9000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. WE ARE NOT TRYING TO CRAM DENSITY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS NOT SAID, TWO LADIES , JUDY AND RITA LIVE ON THIS PROPERTY. THEY ARE THE NEIGHBORS AND HAVE BEEN THERE BEFORE MARINER PARK. THEY HAVE BEEN THERE BEFORE GEORGE BUSH AND FLAMINGO. THEY DID NOT SELL AT THAT TIME. THEY WOULD BE ADDED IN AND PART OF MARINER PARK PROPERTY RIGHT NOW AND THEY WOULD HAVE 8000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS ON THE PROPERTY. MARINER PARK TO THE NORTH OF US, SOMEHOW THERE IS NO ALLEY TO THE NORTH OF US.
A VARIANCE WAS REQUESTED. THE VARIANCE WAS GRANTED. THEY HAVE NO FRONT ENTRY GARAGES. THEY HAVE ALL FRONT ENTRY GARAGES, ALL ALONG OUR BOUNDARY. WE HAVE LARGER LOTS. WE ARE ASKING FOR VARIANCES BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY NARROW PIECE THAT SOMEBODY HELD ONTO 60 YEARS AGO. THEY ARE GETTING PUNISHED FOR THAT. WE ALREADY WENT FOR THE 75 LOTS. WE HAVE ALREADY GONE FOR WHAT WE DID IN ROWLETT BEFORE PICK WE CAME IN WITH THAT, HEY WE DID THIS IN ROWLETT AND WE WANT TO DO IT AGAIN. WE WERE TOLD NO. WE ARE BACK HERE TO DO 9000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS. TO BE FAIR TO THE LANDOWNERS WE NEED SOME VARIANCES AND SOME HEALTH. THEY NEED SOME HELP. TREES , THERE IS NOT A CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON THE FRONT. WE ARE STILL PLANNING AND WE WERE GOING TO KEEP THE TREES ON THE NORTH AND TRY TO KEEP AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE PICK IF THIS WAS DEVELOPED 50 YEARS AGO, THERE WOULD NOT BE A TREE ON IT AND THERE WOULD BE SMALLER LOTS AND MORE OF THEM. I DON'T KNOW IF I HAD MUCH MORE. AGAIN, THE LAND-USE IS LAND-USE AND IS FOLLOWING THE PLAN. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
[01:00:03]
MOTION TO OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ALL RIGHT, LET'S OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION. GO AHEAD.>> I FEEL FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE. IT WAS MOVED INTO ABOUT FIVE HOMES TO THE ACRE AND THERE WAS A LOT OF NEGOTIATION AND WENT BACK AND FORTH FOR MANY YEARS BEFORE IT WAS DONE. THINK ABOUT TRAFFIC , WE ALL HAVE TRAFFIC ISSUES IN ROWLETT. THAT LAND IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED . THE OWNER HAS A RIGHT TO SELL IT. THE 50 FOOT ROAD WITH THAT OF PEERS -- IT'S TO THE NORTH OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED. PART OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT HAS A 60 FOOT TOLERANCE ON THE ROADWAY. IT WOULD BE NICE IF SOMEBODY IN MARINER WANTED TO SELL THEIR LOT TO LET A ROW TO COME OUT TO SPLIT THE 1900 FOOT BUT I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WANTS TO VOLUNTEER TO SELL THEIR LOT TO LET THAT HAPPEN. THE PROPERTY DICTATES THAT A STREET HAS TO BE THAT LONG, UNFORTUNATELY. IS PROBABLY NOT VERY POPULAR BUT I THINK THE PROPOSAL IS REASONABLE FOR THE CITIZENS AROUND THERE. I THINK IT IS REASONABLE FOR THE CURRENT LANDOWNER WHO HAD A CHANCE TO SELL THAT LAND 50 YEARS AGO. I HAVE BEEN HERE FOR ALMOST 40 YEARS MYSELF NOW AND CHANGE HURTS. CHANGE SUCKS SOMETIMES BUT I PERSONALLY THINK I AM GOING TO BE FOR THE VARIANCES, PERSONALLY. THANK YOU
FOR THE TIME. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?
>> UNFORTUNATELY, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS CAN'T ADDRESS TRAFFIC . IT'S NOT A QUESTION HERE. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA. AS MY COLLEAGUE SAID, THE 50 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY IS THE SAME AS THE OTHER IN OASIS BAY AND THE OTHER STREET. AS WELL AS THEY ARE ALL FRONT FACING ENTRANCES . I'M NOT A FAN OF THE LACK OF GREEN SPACE BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT WOULD BE ACCOMPLISHED . YOU HAVE A LOT OF TREES . JUST TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE TREES, WHICH WILL HELP YOUR STORMWATER, BUT THE QUESTIONS WE FACE , WE CAN'T ADDRESS TRAFFIC.
>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I WOULD LIKE TO SAY MYSELF THAT ALTHOUGH I THINK WE WOULD ALL LIKE TO ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC, WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO. I THINK THE DECISION HERE IS ABOUT WHETHER WHAT IS BEING ASKED IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE CITY IS DOING , IS A DEVELOPMENT REQUEST IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN? I THINK WE KNOW THAT IS THE CASE AND I THINK FOR US , WE RECOGNIZE THERE ARE TWO OTHER STEPS AND IF THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT OR TRAFFIC OR DENSITY ISSUE , THAT IS REALLY ONE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MIGHT BE ABLE TO TAKE UP AT THAT TIME BUT I DON'T BELIEVE OUR BOARD IS CHARGED WITH ANSWERING THAT QUESTION TONIGHT. DO WE HAVE A
MOTION TO ACT ON THIS REQUEST? >>
>> DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SECOND.
>> ALL RIGHT, LET'S VOTE. WITH THIS, THE MOTION DOES NOT PASS.
HAVE TO HAVE FOUR. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM 4B . CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON A VARIANCE REQUEST BY PROPERTY OWNER DAVID ALLEN TO REDUCE SIDE
[01:05:01]
SETBACKS FROM FIVE FEET TO LESS THAN ONE FOOT AND DO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE FROM 45% TO APPROXIMATELY 50.4 TO PRESENT ON A PROPERTY ZONED PLAN TO DEVELOP SF-V2 . THE THREE ACRE LOT IS LOCATED AT 3309 SEA BREEZE LANE IDENTIFIED AS LOT 20 BLOCK C OF PENINSULA 7 IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT , DALLAS COUNTY,TEXAS. >> I'M HERE TO PRESENT THIS ITEM TONIGHT. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN QUESTION TONIGHT IS ZONED PLAN DEVELOPMENT. THE LOT IS .3 ACRES AND IT IS PLATTED.
IT'S CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY YOU HAVE A TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING WHICH IS 3900 SQUARE FEET. THE GROUND COVERAGE IS 2500 SQUARE FEET. WE HAVE RECOGNIZED THERE IS PERMANENT STRUCTURES AND A CARPORT AND DRIVEWAY EXTENSION ON SITE AND THESE ARE ALSO IN QUESTION , NOT IN QUESTION TONIGHT BUT WE WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION. GOING BACK IN THE TIMELINE, DECEMBER 12, 2023, THE APPLICANT -- CODE ENFORCEMENT REFERRED THE APPLICANT TO US IN PLANNING BECAUSE THERE WERE NOT PERMITTED STRUCTURES ON SITE. THE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL WENT THROUGH US FOR THE NONCOMPLIANT EXISTING CONCRETE AND STRUCTURES ON SITE. WE DID REVIEW THIS ITEM PER THE REGULATIONS OF THE 1997 DEVELOPED CODE , SPEAKING ABOUT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. FOR THE FRONT YARD WE LOOK AT 25 FEET -- . SIDE YARD MINIMUM IS ABOUT FIVE FEET. WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT A STRUCTURE THAT IS SET BACK ABOUT 90 FEET , WE ALLOW THREE FEET OF SETBACK . IN TERMS OF THE REAR YARD, WE LOOK AT THREE FEET. THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE IS ABOUT 45% . IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOR A REDUCTION OF THE EAST AND WEST SIDE SETBACK FROM FIVE FEET TO ONE FOOT AND HE IS ALSO ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION OF THAT MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE FROM 45%, WHICH IS ABOUT THOUSAND 800 SQUARE FEET TO 50% ABOUT 65 -- 100 SQUARE FEET. ALSO , ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT A PART OF SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN APPROVE OR DENY TONIGHT WE DO RECOGNIZE THERE IS A 10 FOOT EASEMENT ON THE REAR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY PER THE PLAT APPROVED AT THE TIME . THE APPLICANT DID BUILD THESE IN PERMANENT STRUCTURES WITHIN THAT UTILITY EASEMENT AND HE IS REQUESTING TONIGHT TO MAINTAIN THE STRUCTURES AS IS, WHICH IS ENCROACHING ON THAT EASEMENT.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE HERE TONIGHT, WHAT HE IS PROPOSING TO DO TO MITIGATE THIS ACTION IS TO INSTALL RIVER ROCKS TO ALLOW FOR WATER FLOW AND PAVERS. AGAIN, THE DEVELOPMENT GO CHAPTER 54 189 PROHIBITS ANY STRUCTURES WITHIN THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT OR DRAINAGE EASEMENTS EXCEPT FOR UTILITIES OR DRAINAGE FACILITIES . AGAIN, EASEMENTS WERE ESTABLISHED THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WHICH IS OUTSIDE YOUR JURISDICTION BUT WE STILL WANTED TO BRING IT UP TO YOUR ATTENTION TONIGHT. AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE ARE PHOTOS SO YOU CAN HAVE A FEEL ON WHAT THE SITE LOOKS LIKE TODAY. AGAIN, THE VARIANCE PROCESS IS GOVERNED BY SECTION 77 12 OF THE CODE AND WE ALSO LOOK AT SECTION 212 009 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE AND THEN AS YOU HAVE ALL READ ON YOUR STAFF REPORT, THERE IS A DEFINITION FOR WHAT A VARIANCE IS AND IS INTENDED TO PROHIBIT -- PROVIDE LIMITED RELIEF FOR THE DEVELOPED CODE . ONE APPLICATION OF THE CODE WOULD CREATE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP. YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GRANT VARIANCES TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE BUT NOT TO BUILDING OR FIRE CODES. IN THIS CASE, WHEN SPEAKING WITH OUR BUILDING TEAM, THERE IS A LOT --. THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO -- GIVEN THAT THE STRUCTURES ARE NOT PERMITTED, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO REVIEW THIS COMPLETELY, SO AT THIS TIME, ALTHOUGH THE VARIANCES WERE TO BE APPROVED, THERE STILL HAS TO BE AN
[01:10:06]
APPROVAL PROCESS FOR ANYTHING PERTAINING TO BUILDING OR FIRE SAFETY. WE DID SEND OUT NOTICES SEVERAL TIMES AS THIS ITEM HAD BEEN POSTPONED FOR SEVERAL REASONS. IN THIS CASE, WE RECEIVED ONE LETTER IN OPPOSITION WITHIN OUR 200 FOOT NOTICES AND THREE LETTERS IN OPPOSITION WITHIN OUR 500 FOOT NOTICES. AGAIN, THE GOVERNING BODY MAY APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THIS REQUEST. THAT IS THE END OF MY PRESENTATION. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I AM HERE TO ANSWER THEM.>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD?
>> IF WE WOULD CHOOSE NOT TO APPROVE, THEN THE OWNER HAS TO BRING THE BUILDING TO COMPLIANCE, WHICH MEANS PROPER SIZING AND PROPER PERMITTING, CORRECT?
>> AS FAR AS EASEMENTS AND LOT COVERAGE, CORRECT. ANYTHING PERTAINING TO THE STRUCTURE, THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED
BY A DIFFERENT BODY. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. ARE WE ABLE TO APPROVE ANYTHING WITHIN THE UTILITY EASEMENT? I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION IT THEY WERE CONTROLLED BY UTILITY AND REGULATED BY THE CITY. THE UTILITY , AND WE EVEN VOTE TO APPROVE ANYTHING WITHIN THE UTILITY EASEMENT?
>> NO. THAT WOULD BE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION GIVEN THEY WERE THE ONES THAT APPROVED THOSE EASEMENTS PER
PLAT . >> TO CLARIFY, IS IT UP TO THE CITY TO ENFORCE THE EASEMENTS THAT WERE AGREED TO ON BEHALF OF
THE UTILITIES? >> OUR CODE SAYS THERE CANNOT BE ANY STRUCTURES PLACED WITHIN THE EASEMENT. THAT IS OUR ENFORCEMENT , ASIDE FROM THAT THERE IS OTHER VIOLATIONS --. AS FAR AS ENFORCEMENT , WITHIN THAT EASEMENT, WE DON'T ALLOW THAT.
>> IF YOU WILL LET ME CHIME IN, OUR ORDINANCE REALLY IS JUST IN AID OF THE UTILITY EASEMENT , ENCORE OR WHOEVER WANTS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT. THE ORDINANCES , REALLY TO PREVENT EXACTLY THE SITUATION TO PREVENT ENCORE COME IN AND SAY, YOU HAVE TO DEMOLISH THIS. IN OTHER WORDS, THE ORDINANCE PREVENTS IT FROM EVER BEING CONSTRUCTED. BUT IF YOU WAIVE THAT HERE, IT DOESN'T PREVENT ENCORE FROM ENFORCING ITS RIGHTS OR WHOEVER THE
>> THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF YOU WISH TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS OF
HIM. >> DO WE KNOW HOW THIS GOT PUT UP WITHOUT PERMITTING? THERE IS A LOT OF STRUCTURES WITH NO
PERMIT. >> YES. OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT TEAM WAS THE ONE WHO BROUGHT THIS TO OUR ATTENTION AND THAT'S WHEN WE STARTED THE PROCESS WITH THE APPLICANT ON FIGURING OUT WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO NEXT TO BE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REGULATIONS THAT HE IS VIOLATING.
>> IS THERE ANY COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES TAKING PLACE THERE?
>> WE ARE NOT SURE. THERE HAS BEEN COMPLAINTS FROM RESIDENTS THAT THERE IS A LOT OF THOUGHT ABOUT HIM USING IT AS A WAREHOUSE OR SOME TYPE OF IS THIS BUT IT'S NOTHING THAT HAS
BEEN CONFIRMED. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? WAS THERE GOING TO BE A PRESENTATION OR DISCUSSION FROM THE APPLICANT?
>> HELLO, I'M DAVID ALLEN . IF I DON'T LIVE IN ROWLETT I STILL NEED TO GIVE YOU MY ADDRESS? I LIVE AT 6125 HIDDEN OAKS IN QUINLAN . THIS IS MY BROTHER DANIEL ALLEN. HE IS HEARING IMPAIRED . I DID WANT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER HE IS RUNNING A BUSINESS OUT OF HIS CURRENT ADDRESS AT 3309 SEA BREEZE LANE. HE IS NOT RUNNING A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS . HE DOES HAVE HIS OWN BUSINESS BUT HE DOES DO A LOT OF COPYING OUT OF
[01:15:03]
HIS CURRENT ADDRESS . HE DOES STEREO COMPETITION . I CAN SEE WHERE THE CONFUSION WOULD COME THAT PEOPLE MIGHT THINK HE IS RUNNING SOME SORT OF AUTO SHOP. THAT IS NOT THE CASE. TO DRESS THE PERMITTING ASPECTS , ALL I CAN SAY IS HE IS MAYBE A LITTLE NAÏVE DUE TO HIS HEARING IMPAIRMENT. MAY BE TRUSTED THE PEOPLE BUILDING THOSE THINGS WERE DOING THINGS PROPERLY WITH THE PERMIT OF THOSE THINGS. BUT DIDN'T REALIZE UNTIL IT WAS BROUGHT UP FROM THE CODE ENFORCEMENT. DO YOU HAVE ANYQUESTIONS FOR DANNY? >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD?
>> BASICALLY , YOU ARE SAYING THAT THIS WAS ALL AN INNOCENT
MISTAKE ? >> WRITE. HE DIDN'T INTEND TO BREAK ANY REGULATIONS OR RULES. HE DIDN'T REALIZE.
>> DID YOU INQUIRE ABOUT THE RULES? THESE ARE RATHER SIGNIFICANT EVENTS -- INVESTMENTS.
>> SUPPOSED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO BUILD A BUILDING. I PAID THE CONTRACTOR TO DO WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DONE.
THAT'S WE ARE AT RIGHT NOW. >> WITH IT IN YOUR CONTRACT FOR
HIM TO PROVIDE THE PERMIT? >> I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT BACK THEN. IT STARTED BACK IN 2005 . I HAVE HAD IT SINCE THEN. AND THEY STARTED CONSTRUCTION , THEY STARTED TO
NOTICE SOMETHING WASN'T RIGHT. >> IS THERE ANYTHING IN ANY OF THE CORRESPONDENCE AND/OR PAPERWORK WITH THAT CONTRACTOR THAT INDICATED THAT THERE WAS A PERMIT FOOLED? -- PULLED ?
>> I HAVE PAPERWORK . I THOUGHT HE HAD ALL THE PERMIT TAKEN CARE OF. I WISH I DID. I DIDN'T KNOW BACK THEN.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> JUST FOR PEOPLE IN GENERAL LISTENING TO THIS, WHEN I HAD MY BUILDING DONE, THE CONTRACTOR WHO WAS ADDING ONTO MY EXISTING BUILDING WOULD EVEN START UNTIL THE PERMIT WAS IN MY POSSESSION BECAUSE HE SAID ROWLETT WOULD NOT EVEN PERMIT THAT BUILDING , TOOK SOME PICTURES, WENT ACROSS TO THE PERMIT DEPARTMENT -- THIS IS 20 YEARS AGO. THAT SAME DAY I HAD MY $45 PERMIT . IT WASN'T A HARD THING TO GET. MY CONTRACTOR SAID, DON'T EVEN START UNTIL WE HAVE THE PERMIT IN HAND. MOST REPEATABLE CONTRACTORS WON'T PUT A CUSTOMER IN THAT POSITION , SO THAT'S JUST FOR THE GENERAL AUDIENCE
>> I UNDERSTAND THAT NOW. WHEN I LOOK AT -- I FOUND THE PERSON WHO BUILT THE BUILDING , I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED. WE STARTED WORKING ON IT AND HE SAID HE GOT EVERYTHING COVERED. HE SAID HE HAD A PERMIT AND THEN LATER IT DIDN'T LOOK RIGHT IN THE DRIVEWAY AND MOVED IT SO NOBODY COULD SEE THROUGH THE DRIVEWAY. WE GOT THE PERMIT TO MOVE IT OVER AND I DON'T KNOW
WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THAT POINT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME WE WOULD LIKE TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING . DO WE HAVE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK?
>> YES WE DO, BRAXTON MILLER. >> COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND
[01:20:12]
ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AS WELL, PLEASE?>> GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TONIGHT. MY NAME IS RUXTON MILLER AND I LIVE AT 7510 LEEWARD WAY RELATIVE. BEFORE I BEGIN I WANT TO EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE TO EACH OF YOU FOR VOLUNTEERING YOUR TIME TO SERVE ON THE BOARD . HAVING ALSO SERVED ON BOARDS IN THE PAST, I KNOW THE DECISIONS YOU FACE ARE NOT ALWAYS EASY. YOUR DEDICATION TO OUR COMMUNITY IS APPRECIATED.
I HAVE COME HERE AS A CONCERNED CITIZEN WHO WANTS TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY, SAFETY AND HARMONY OF OUR COMMUNITY.
TONIGHT I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WHAT I BELIEVE THE SETBACK VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR 3309 SEA BREEZE LANE SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED. FIRST AND FOREMOST MY CONCERN IS WITH THE STRUCTURES IN QUESTION BEING BUILT WITHOUT PROPER PERMITS OR INSPECTIONS.
THIS IS NOTED IN CODE ENFORCEMENT OPEN CASE NUMBER 29 000032 , WHEN PERMITTING IT RAISES IMPORTANT QUESTION ABOUT COMPLIANCE WITH BUILDING CODES WHICH ARE THERE FOR A REASON , TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC SAFETY. ADDITIONALLY, SOME OF THESE STRUCTURES HAVE METAL ROOFS OR -- THEY CAN POSE A SERIOUS RISK AND SEVERE WEATHER. WITHOUT PROPER INSPECTIONS TO ENSURE THEY ARE SECURE TO, THESE ROOFS COULD EASILY BECOME DEBRIS IN HIGH WINDS , POTENTIALLY THREATENING NEARBY HOMES AND FAMILIES. SOME OF THESE STRUCTURES ARE ALSO BEING USED FOR A CAR STEREO BUSINESS. THE DOCUMENT FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE LISTS THE PRICE OF BUSINESS FOR PUSH START PLATE AS 3309 SEA BREEZE LANE. WITHOUT THE PROPER PERMITS AND OVERSIGHT, HOW CAN WE BE SURE THESE INSTALLATIONS ARE SAFE, SECOND THE COMMERCIAL USE OF THIS PROPERTY SEEMS TO CONFLICT WITH ZONING REGULATIONS. SINCE JANUARY, 2022, THERE HAVE BEEN MORE THAN 80 NOISE DISTURBANCE INCIDENTS TIED TO THIS ADDRESS REQUIRING POLICE TO INTERVENE. ONE OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS STATED THAT THE FATHER LIKES TO FEEL THE VIBRATIONS. AS ONE OF HIS NEIGHBORS, WHY WIFE AND I DO NOT WANT TO FEEL THOSE VIBRATIONS THOUGH WE HAVE REPEATEDLY. IT'S AN ONGOING DISTURBANCE THAT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTS THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THOSE WHO LIVE NEARBY. I MAY RUN OVER A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I PASSED OUT THE PAPERWORK. MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THE PRECEDENT THAT GRANTING THIS VARIANCE WOULD SET -- . GRANT VARIANCES FOR STRUCTURES BUILT WITH PERMITS TO BYPASS THE USUAL PROCESSES WHICH SEND A MESSAGE THAT THESE SAFEGUARDS ARE OPTIONAL, WON'T STOP OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITY FROM DOING THE SAME. AND IS IT FAIR TO OTHERS SUCH AS MR. TAYLOR FROM THE LAST MEETING FOLLOW THE PROPER PROCEDURES MAINTAINING CONSISTENT ENFORCEMENT OF OUR REGULATIONS AS VITAL TO KEEPING IT , OUR NEIGHBORHOODS SAFE FAIR AND DESIRABLE. LET ME END BY SAYING MY OPPOSITION TO THIS VARIANCE IS NOT PERSONAL. I RESPECT MY NEIGHBORS RIGHT TO ENJOY THE PROPERTY BUT I ALSO BELIEVE WE ALL SHARE RESPONSIBILITY TO FOLLOW THE RULES , PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY BUT UPHOLDING THESE STANDARDS TO ENSURE A SAFE HARMONIOUS NEIGHBORHOOD FOR EVERYONE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND LISTENING TO MY CONCERNS.
>> THANK YOU. >> IF I CAN HAVE A FEW MORE SECONDS ON A PERSONAL NOTE. I'VE INTERACTED WITH MR. ALLEN ON THREE OCCASIONS, PERSON-TO-PERSON . AFTER SEVERAL WEEKS I WAS ABLE TO TRACK DOWN THE SOURCE OF THE NOISE , WHICH HAD HARASSED US FOR YEARS AND THE CONVERSATION WENT LIKE THIS.
MR. ALLEN WAS PARKED AT THE SCHOOL IN AN SUV , LOAD BASE
[01:25:03]
MUSIC, SCHOOL LETTING OUT . I APPROACHED THE VEHICLE AND SAID, I LIVE RIGHT AWAY THERE. MR. ALLEN SAID, GET AWAY FROM MY TRUCK. THERE WAS NO INTERPRETER REQUIRED AND I SAID, OR WHAT? AND HE SAID I WILL RUN YOU OVER. AND THEN HE TRIED TO HIT ME WITH HIS VEHICLE. SO THAT IS HOW NAÏVE MR. ALLEN IS.>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS? WE'VE GOT MORE PEOPLE WANTING TO SPEAK. PLEASE APPROACH, GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.
>> GOOD EVENING, AGAIN ELIZABETH , 3305 SEA BREEZE LANE. THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO MY MOM'S HOME PURCHASED OVER 25 YEARS AGO. WE RECEIVED A LETTER IN REGARDS TO REDUCING THE SIDE SETBACKS FROM FIVE FEET TO LESS THAN ONE FOOT AND INCREASING LOT SIZE FROM 45% TO APPROXIMATELY 50%. WE JUST HAD A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THAT GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE HAVE HAD THIS PROPERTY FOR MANY YEARS. I DID GO AHEAD AND BRING OUR LAND SURVEY WHICH BASICALLY INDICATES THAT THE LAND THEY ARE PROPOSING TO ENCROACH UPON , WE PURCHASED THE LAND. I HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING HOW IT IS OKAY FOR THEM TO NOW COME SEVERAL YEARS LATER AND NOW REQUEST TO PUSH BACK THEIR PROPERTY LINE ON TWO HOURS. I URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST ANY SORT OF PROPOSITION OF VARIANCE IN THIS CASE. THANK
YOU. >> THANK YOU. OKAY. AT THIS TIME WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANYTHING FOR DISCUSSION? OKAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACT ON THIS REQUEST? OKAY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT? I THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY IT IS A
MOTION TO REJECT THE REQUEST. >>
>> IF YOU VOTE YES YOU ARE AGREEING TO REJECT THE MOTION.
>> MODIFY TO VOTE TO APPROVE? OKAY. AT THIS TIME WE WILL VOTE, THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE --. SECOND? TO APPROVE? DEVOTE TO APPROVE? YOU ARE STICKING WITH YOUR SECOND? HE IS MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE , IF SOMEONE SECONDS WE CAN VOTE TO APPROVE . IT DOESN'T MEAN WE ARE GOING TO VOTE TO APPROVE. NO SECOND?
>> I WILL SECOND. >> WE ARE VOTING TO APPROVE THE MOTION, THE REQUEST.
ALL RIGHT AT THIS TIME THE MOTION FAILS. AND AT THAT TIME WE WILL MOVE ONTO THE NEXT ITEM WHICH IS ITEM FIVE AND THAT HIS ADJOURNMENT . AT THIS TIME THE MEETIN
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.