[ Board of Adjustment -- Regular Meeting] [00:00:10] >> GOOD EVENING, WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. AT THIS TIME, WE WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE CITY OF ROWLETT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING TO ORDER, THE TIME IS NOW 6:30 P.M. AS AUTHORIZED BY SECTION OF 551.071 OF THE TEXAS CODE. THIS MEETING MAY BE CONVENIENT TO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEEKING CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL ADVICE FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ON ANY AGENDA ITEM HEREIN. THE CITY OF ROWLETT'S BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO RECONVENE, RECESS OR REALIGN THE REGULAR SESSION OR CALL THE EXECUTIVE SESSION OR ORDER OF BUSINESS AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO ADJOURNMENT. WE HAVE A PROCESS FOR PUBLIC INPUT. IF YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND IN PERSON, YOU MAY COMPLETE THE CITIZEN INPUT FORM ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE BY 3:30 P.M. THE DAY OF THE MEETING. ALL FORMS WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PRIOR TO THE START OF THE MEETING. FOR IN PERSON COMMENTS, RESTRICTION FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS ARE AVAILABLE INSIDE THE DOOR OF THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS. AT THIS TIME, WE WILL JUMP TO CITIZENS' INPUT. AT THIS TIME, THREE-MINUTE COMMENTS WILL BE TAKEN FROM THE AUDIENCE ON ANY TOPIC. NO ACTION CAN BE TAKEN BY THE BOARD DURING CITIZENS' INPUT. DO WE HAVE ANYONE? ALL RIGHT, WE WILL MOVE TO ITEM THREE, THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOVING ON TO ITEM 3A, CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING ON FEBRUARY 12, 2025. WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? AT THIS TIME, IT IS MOVED. ALL RIGHT, THE MINUTES PASS. ALL RIGHT, AT THIS TIME WE WILL MOVE ON TO SECTION 4, ITEM 4A, CONDUCTED PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON REQUEST FOR MULTIPLE VARIANCES COMMITTED BY VANCE LILES OF NTG ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS, THE PROPERTY IS OWNED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SF-8. THE APPROXIMATELY 2.67 LOT IS LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF QUAIL RIDGE DR. AND QUAIL CREEK DR. AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS BLOCK A LOT 1 OF LEAL ADDITION OF ROWLETT, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. >> IT IS SURROUNDED BY AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD. I JUST PROVIDED THE PLAN FOR REFERENCE, THE ONE SPECIFIC TO THIS ONE YOU WILL SEE, 8101 , EVERYTHING AROUND IT IS PLOTTED , IT WAS WHEN THE SUBDIVISION WAS NOT BUILT BUT GOT BUILT OUT. IN TERMS OF THE SITE, WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING TO DO ESSENTIALLY IS YOU WOULD HAVE 10 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS , ONE OPEN SPACE LOT , THEY ARE ASKING FOR A 50 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH THE CUL-DE-SAC AT THE END THAT WOULD BE GOING INTO THEIR NEIGHBOR'S LOT AS WELL TO PROVIDE THE TURNAROUND , AND ESSENTIALLY WITH THE REQUEST IS MULTIPLE VARIANCES TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INFILL PROJECT. THEY ARE NOT LOOKING TO REASONABLENESS. JUST A FEW DEVIATIONS THEY ARE LOOKING TO DO TO ESSENTIALLY BE ABLE TO BUILD WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING. I'M KIND OF GOING INTO THE VARIANCE REQUEST, WHAT THEY ARE SEEKING TO GET TONIGHT, SO THE FIRST ONE IS THE MAXIMUM CUL-DE-SAC LENGTH. TYPICALLY IN OUR CODE, WHAT WE ALLOW THE MAXIMUM LENGTH TO BE AT 600 FEET. WHEN YOU MEASURE WHERE THEY HAVE THE CUL-DE-SAC LENGTH THERE, IT WOULD BE AT 872 FEET, SO THAT IS THE FIRST REQUEST. ANOTHER REQUEST THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR IS RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH REDUCTION, ESSENTIALLY WHAT OUR CODE REQUIRES IS A 60 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY , FOR A 50 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY SIMILAR TO ALL THE STREETS AROUND THEM. THE OTHER THREE VARIANCES ARE ALSO ASKING FOR ALLEYS. ESSENTIALLY, THE RDC DOES REQUIRE ALLEYS AND THEY ARE PROPOSING NO ALLEYS IN THIS SUBDIVISION. THEY ARE ALSO PROPOSING FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS [00:05:03] . THE RDC TYPICALLY REQUIRES OUR JAYHAWK DRIVEWAYS , SO THE APPLICANT PROCESS TO THE FRONT ENTRY INSTEAD , AND THE LAST ONE WOULD BE THE ENTRYWAY REQUIREMENTS, TYPICALLY YOU WOULD HAVE AN ENTRY DESIGN REQUIRED AT THE FRONT. THE WAY THIS IS SET UP, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES NO ENTRY FEATURES DUE TO THE ENVIRONMENT AROUND THERE. WE DID PROVIDE NOTIFICATION TO THE NEIGHBORS WITHIN 200 AND 500. WITHIN 200, WE DID SEND OUT 35 NOTICES, WE DID RECEIVE ONE IN FAVOR WHICH IS THEIR ADJOINING NEIGHBOR, AND WITHIN THE 500 WE DID RECEIVE TWO IN OPPOSITION, AND WE DID HAVE THREE MORE LETTERS OUTSIDE OF THAT RADIUS SEND COMMENTS AS WELL. JUST A REMINDER THAT VARIANCES SHOULD BE MORE FOR HARDSHIPS . I GAVE YOU SOME INFORMATION IN THE LAST MEETING YOUR ESSENTIALLY, YOU MAY APPROVE OF CONDITIONS OR DENY THIS REQUEST. I AM OPEN TO QUESTIONS AND AM HAPPY TO ANSWER APPLICANT QUESTIONS TONIGHT AS WELL. >> DOES ANYONE ON THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY? OKAY, THANK YOU. WE HAVE AN APPLICANT PRESENTATION? >> WE DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION, BUT THEY ARE HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> WITH THE BOARD LIKE TO DISCUSS OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. >> DO WE NEED TO CLOSE THIS PART OF THE HEARING AND TURN IT INTO PUBLIC INPUT? OKAY. WE ARE GOOD. THANK YOU BOARD AND CHAIR FOR HEARING -- >> PLEASE DATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. THE MAC WHERE THE ONES THAT SUBMITTED THE REQUEST. AGAIN, THANK YOU ALL FOR HEARING OUR VARIANCE REQUEST. THE OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY ARE DOING THE BEST THEY CAN TO COMPLETE AN INFILL PROJECT. THIS PROPERTY IS COMPLETELY DEVELOPED AROUND ON ALL SIDES AND THE VARIANCES WE ARE REQUESTING ARE ENABLING US TO ACTUALLY MAINTAIN THAT SFA ZONING AND COMPLET THIS PROJECT. SO, OUR FIRST REQUEST WAS AN EXTENSION OF THE 600 FOOT MAX LENGTH OF THE CUL-DE-SAC. THAT IS ACTUALLY TO GET THE CUL-DE-SAC TO TOUCH THE ADJOINING PROPERTY TO THE NORTH , THERE IS AN EXISTING HOME ON. SHE HAS ACCESS, HER AND HER HUSBAND FROM AN ALLEY, SO THEY DON'T HAVE DIRECT STREET FRONTAGE. SO, BY US PUSHING THAT CUL-DE-SAC TO THEIR POVERTY, IT'LL ACTUALLY SOLVE THAT ISSUE FOR THEM. THE NOTE ENTRYWAY REQUEST IS BECAUSE THIS IS KIND OF AN EXTENSION OF AN EXISTING DEAD END STREET. WE FEEL IT IS MORE SUITED TO JUST FIT INTO THE EXISTING SUBDIVISION, THE HOMES THEY ARE PLANNING TO BUILD HERE, THEY WANT TO MATCH THE SAME AESTHETIC, HAVE IT BLEND IN WITH THE COMMITTEE RATHER THAN HAVING IT STICK OUT WITH A NEW ENTRYWAY AND SEEMING TO BE SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. LET'S SEE. AND THEN THE REQUEST FOR NO ALLEYS, JUST BASED ON THE CONFIGURATION AND THE SIZE OF THIS PROPERTY, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO FIT ALLEYWAYS IN, FOR ONE, AND TWO FIGURE OUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE ON HOW THOSE CONNECT, AND THIS PROPERTY IS NOT A GOOD FIT TO FIT ALLEYS AND HAVE THEM COMING IN AT WEIRD INTERSECTIONS WITH EXISTING STREETS WITH EXISTING ALLEYWAYS. THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH REDUCTION IS TO GO FROM 60 FOOT DOWN TO 55. THAT ALLOWS US TO GET THE MINIMUM DEPTH REQUIREMENTS FOR SFA LOTS. THIS PROPERTY IS 10 FEET SHORT OF BEING ABLE TO FIT SFA LOTS OFF BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET, SO BRINGING IN THE RIGHT OF WAY WITH WILL STILL PROVIDE ALL THE EXACT SAME IN STRESS FRACTURE, WILL BE 10 FEET LESS OF RIGHT-OF-WAY AND WE WILL BE ABLE TO STAY WITHIN THE SFA ZONING. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. >> QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? GO AHEAD. >> YES. YOU ARE ASKING FOR VARIANCES AS OPPOSED TO GOING IN FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT? >> YES, SIR. BASED ON OUR PREDEVELOPMENT MEETINGS, EVERYBODY SEEMED TO BE ON BOARD AT THE CITY WITH KEEPING IT AS SFA , SO STICKING WITH THE CURRENT ZONING. THESE FEW ISSUES CAME UP ONCE WE GOT TO A PLAN THEY WERE HAPPY WITH. WE JUST NEEDED THESE IF YOU VARIANCES TO BE ABLE TO STICK WITH THE SFA ZONING. >> IT WAS LESS DESIRABLE BECAUSE IT IS EASIER? >> NO, SIR, BASED ON OUR PRELIMINARY CONVERSATIONS, EVERYBODY WAS OKAY WITH THE SFA ZONING SO WE DID NOT CONSIDER A [00:10:02] PD. THESE ISSUES CAME UP AS WE PROGRESSED THROUGH THE PLAN. WE WERE INSTRUCTED THAT THE EASIEST COURSE OF ACTION IS TO GO THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS. OUR COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE CITY. >> REGARDING THE DESIGNS OF THE HOUSES AND LOCATIONS OF THE LOTS THEMSELVES, YOU SAID THERE IS NO REALLY GOOD ACCESS POINTS FOR THE ALLEYWAY OR LOCATION OF THEM. THERE IS AN EXISTING ALLEYWAY THAT FRONTS THESE PROPERTY LINES. IS THERE NO CONSIDERATION OF USING THAT PART OF ACCESS OR USING ALLEY ACCESS FOR AT LEAST THREE CURRENT HOUSES THAT COULD PROBABLY BE WORKED WITH MINIMAL CHANGE TO THE LAYOUT OF THE PLANT PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT, EASILY FOUR HOUSE IS CONNECTED TO THE ALLEYWAY. >> YES, SIR. THERE ARE TWO OR THREE LOTS THAT HAVE FULL, DIRECT ACCESS TO THE EXISTING ALLEY. THERE IS NOTHING THAT PREVENTS THOSE LOTS TO HAVING REAR ENTRY GARAGE IS AND CONNECTING FROM THERE. WE DIDN'T WANT TO EXTEND THE ALLEY TO THE NEW STREET INTERSECTION STRICTLY BECAUSE THAT WILL THEN PUT AN ALLEY IN SOMEONE'S EXISTING SIDE YARD THAT THEY HAVEN'T EVER HAD THE ALLEY THERE. SO, WE ARE TRYING TO BE CONSIDERATE OF OUR NEIGHBORS. OF COURSE, THE SOUTHERN BORDER THAT BORDERS THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TO US, IF WE WERE TO PUT AN ALLEYWAY THERE FOR THOSE OTHER LOTS, WE WOULD NOT BE SFA ZONING ANYMORE BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE ALLEYWAY FOR THAT. >> IS THERE ANY REASON WHY THE L OR J THAT HOUSING LAYOUTS WOULD NOT BE AN OPTION HERE? >> THEY ARE AN OPTION, IT WAS A REQUEST JUST TO MAKE THE HOUSES MORE COMPLIANT WITH THE SURROUNDING HOMES. ALL THE SURROUNDING HOMES ARE EITHER REAR OR FRONT ENTRY HOUSES. THAT IS A VARIANCE THAT IF THAT IS AN ISSUE, WE ARE WILLING TO PULL THAT OFF IF YOU ARE WILLING TO EXCEPT WITH THAT CONDITION. >> THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAD. >> I ACTUALLY HAVE ONE QUESTION. THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE BY ONE OF THE CITIZENS ABOUT A CITY PARK IN THAT AREA. ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT LAND OVER THERE FOR A PARK? I THOUGHT IT WAS IN A TOTALLY DIFFERENT LOCATION THAN WHERE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. >> I HAVEN'T SEEN A COMMENT REGARDING A PARK. CAN YOU ELABORATE? >> IT JUST CAME IN THE LAST HOUR OR SO. >> WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? >> THE PARK WAS ON THE INSIDE CORNER OF THE CURVE. >> I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING REGARDING THIS PROPERTY BEING A PROPOSED PARK, NO SIR. >> I UNDERSTAND, I DO AGREE. >> I HAVE A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION FOR THE CITY. BASED ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY REDUCTION IN THE CUL-DE-SAC, WE ARE STILL IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE NEEDS OF TRASH COLLECTION AS FAR AS THEY NEED TO OPERATE IF THERE WILL BE NO ALLEYWAYS? >> THAT SOMETHING I WOULD HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU ON, NOT SOMETHING THAT CAME UP DURING OUR CONVERSATIONS, BUT IN TERMS OF FIRE -- IF IT WERE TO BE APPROVED, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE REVIEWED STILL THROUGH CIVIL AS WELL AS THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> AT THIS TIME, WE WILL CLOSE THE HEARING AND OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC INPUT. >> DAN. ON DECK, CATHERINE. >> WHEN YOU COME TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> DANNY, 8206 QUAIL HOLLOW COURT, WE ARE WITHIN THE 500 FOOT RADIUS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. WE HAVE LIVED IN OUR HOUSE FOR 35 YEARS AND DURING THAT TIME WE HAVE LIVED UNDER CITY CODES. MOST RECENT CARPORT COVER , I WANTED A 20 X 20 BECAUSE OF THE CODE , AND MY DRIVEWAY IS SLANTED, I CAN ONLY GET A 20 X 18. VERY INCONVENIENT TO MY FAMILY, BUT WE ARE LIVING UNDER THOSE CODES. IF YOU ARE GOING TO APPROVE THIS VARIANCE TO THE CODES, I JUST ASK THAT YOU MAKE SURE IT DOES NOT REDUCE THE VALUE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD , THE HOUSES' BRICK VENEER, CERTAIN SQUARE FOOTAGE IS, ET CETERA TO OUR CURRENT NEIGHBORHOOD . IF WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE THE CODES, IT DOES NOT NEED TO HARM THE VALUE OF OUR LITTLE COMMUNITY THERE. IF YOU CAN GUARANTEE THAT , AND I KNOW [00:15:05] THINGS CHANGE, BUT IF YOU CAN GUARANTEE THAT THE BUILDER IS GOING TO COME IN AND BUILD SOME NICE HOMES , NOT VINYL SIDING HOMES, BUT THE BRICK VENEER HOMES AND THEY ARE SUBJECT TO AT LEAST THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IN OUR EXISTING AREA, THEN I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> CATHERINE AND DEBRA GOSS. >> DO WE HAVE THE THREE MINUTE TIMER? GO AHEAD. >> HI. I'LL -- PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> I'M SORRY. CATHERINE, 8206 QUAIL HOLLOW CT. I WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE OF THE LAST TIME THE CITY HAD THE PROPOSALS FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD , AND WHEN I WALKED IN, I WAS LOOKING AT THE SIGNS BACK THERE. THE CITY'S VISION OF QUALITY NEIGHBORHOODS, CULTURAL CHARM , CITIZEN CENTERED SERVICES EXCEEDING EXPECTATIONS OF RESIDENCE, MY EXPECTATIONS AS A RESIDENT , ACTUALLY WOULD BE 36 YEARS IN MAY. WE LOVE ROWLETT. WE RAISED OUR CHILDREN HERE. LIKE MY HUSBAND SAID, WE WANT THIS TO BE -- WE WANT THIS TO LOOK NICE. I WOULD LIKE THE GENTLEMAN WHO ARE PROPOSING THIS , THEY ARE SAYING THAT THE STREET THAT HAS THE CUL-DE-SAC AT THE END OF IT, THAT ENCROACHES ON THE BOSS' LAND, AND I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THEM GOING TO PAY THEM FOR THAT LAND, AND I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. AND I ALSO AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRASH COLLECTIONS. WE ARE NOT REALLY THAT THRILLED WITH THE WAY THE TRASH COLLECTION SERVICE HAS CHANGED, AND I DON'T LIKE THAT THEY GO UP AND DOWN OUR ALLEY TWICE. ONCE TO COLLECT TRASH, ONCE TO COLLECT RECYCLABLES. ANYWAYS. SO, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INTEGRITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS GOING TO REMAIN. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE VERBAL ASSURANCES. I DON'T HOLD ANY WEIGHT WITH THE VERBAL ASSURANCES HAVING WORKED FOR ATTORNEYS WHEN I WAS WORKING . IT WAS NOT IN WRITING, VERBAL ASSURANCES ARE WORTHLESS. BUT, I WOULD LIKE THE CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE INTO EFFECT, OR TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION TO DO RIGHT BY YOUR VERY SMALL LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CLOSE KNIT. TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD NICE . AND I THINK THAT'S IT. TAKE YOU FOR YOUR TIME, I APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU. >> DEBRA GOSS FOLLOWED BY JOHN GOSS. >> HI, THE EXTENSION OF THE -- >> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD PLEASE. >> DEBRA GOSS, ADJACENT TO 8101 QUAIL RIDGE. THE EXTENSION OF THE CULTURE STACK LEAVES AT A MINIMUM OF 870 FEET IS CRUCIAL TO THE SAFETY OF OUR HOME. THE LIMIT OF 600 FOOT FOR QUAIL RIDGE PUTS OUR HOME IN DANGER OF EMERGENCY ACCESS. THE FIRE MARSHAL SAID IT WOULD TAKE AT LEAST THREE FIRE TRUCKS TO BRING IN AND OPPOSES FROM A 600 FOOT CUL-DE-SAC, AND HE WILL NOT LET ANY OF HIS EMPLOYEES EVEN HELP ANYTHING WITH THE FIRE UNTIL HE GETS ALL THESE HOSES HOOKED UP. BASICALLY IT SOUNDED LIKE WE ARE GOING TO DIE IN A FIRE IF WE CANNOT RESCUE OURSELVES. WE NEED ROAD ACCESS TO A PROPERTY. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A 24 FOOT FIRE LANE ACCESS, WHICH IS NOT TO CODE. THE CITY HAS NOT MAINTAINED IT AND THEY SAID IT WAS A PUBLIC EASEMENT FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY. SO, THE CITY HAS NOT MAINTAIND FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS, AND THE ROCK ROAD WAS TAKEN AWAY WHEN THEY BUILT THE DRAINAGE ON THE ALLEYWAY. THE ENGINEER AND OWNER HAVE DISCUSSED WITH ME THEY WILL [00:20:01] EXTEND THE ROAD TO OUR PROPERTY SO WE WILL HAVE SEVERAL EMERGENCY EXITS WERE HOME. THEY HAVE VERBALLY ASSURED US THAT HOMES WILL HAVE AESTHETICS TO THE HOMES. THEY HAVE AGREED TO WORK WITH US ON THE DRIVEWAY, ATTACHED THE LOCATION OF OUR WATER METER AND OTHER THINGS TO HAVE SAFE EMERGENCY ACCESS. THEREFORE I AM IN FAVOR BECAUSE THIS IS THE BEST SOLUTION WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN. I DO HAVE AN ATTORNEY. THE ATTORNEY TRIED TO TALK TO THE CITY AND THE CITY REFUSED TO TALK TO HIM SAYING NOBODY WANTS TO BUILD ON THAT LAND UNTIL SOMEONE HAS BUILT. I WILL BE GIVING HIM THE INFORMATION THAT COMES FROM THIS MEETING. MAYBE I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE 60 FOOT WIDE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD MEAN THE LOTS HAD TO BE WIDER. I DO WANT TO HAVE IT SAFE. I DO WANT THE NEIGHBORS TO NOT BE UPSET WITH US , AND BE HAPPY WITH THE HOMES THAT ARE BUILT. IF THEY ARE BUILT WITH THE SAME AESTHETIC AND SAME DENSITY OF THE HOMES ON QUAIL RIDGE, THEY ARE OKAY. THERE IS A PROBLEM IF THEY DO HAVE ALLEYWAYS AND CONNECT BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO INCREASE THE TRAFFIC IN THE ALLEYWAYS WHICH ALREADY WE HAVE TO BACKUP IF ANOTHER PERSON IS COMING, OR A TRUCK IS COMING. THE ALLEYWAYS HAVE ALREADY BEEN BUILT TO WHERE THEY ARE TOO SMALL FOR THE TRASH TRUCKS. THEY DRIVE AND PUT RUTS IN NEIGHBORS' PROPERTIES, SOMETIMES HIT A LOT OF THE GREEN INTERNET THINGS, SO ALREADY THE ALLEYWAYS ARE NARROW. WE WOULD NOT WANT TO INCREASE THE TRAFFIC ON THERE, SO I CAN SEE HOW THAT IS A POSITIVE BY NOT ADDING THE ALLEYWAYS. THAT IS ALL THE INFORMATION I HAVE, BUT I NEED ROAD ACCESS TO IT I WAS PROMISED I WOULD HAVE ROAD ACCESS BY THE CITY BEFORE I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> JON DOSS FOLLOWED BY RANDY PATRICK. >> GOOD EVENING. I AM JOHN GOSS, THIS WAS MY WIFE, WE RESIDE AT 87 $23 ROCK, AND THAT SHE HAS NOTED, OUR PROPERTY IS JUST ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY THAT IS IN QUESTION FOR DEVELOPMENT. AS SHE INDICATED, OUR HOUSE DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO A ROAD CITY STREET. IT SOUNDS VERY ODD. ANYONE THAT WE HAVE TALKED TO AT THE CITY OVER THE YEARS, THEY CAN'T EXPLAIN WHY WE DON'T HAVE A STREET , BUT THE ONLY WAY TO GET TO OUR HOUSE IS WE HAVE TO DRIVE DOWN AN ALLEY , AND THEN OUR DRIVEWAY TO THE FRONT OF OUR HOUSE CONNECTS TO THE ALLEY. SO, IF YOU WANT TO REVIEW, YOU CAN LOOK AT GOOGLE MAPS AND ZOOM IN AND YOU WILL BE LIKE OH, OKAY I SEE WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. WE HAVE MULTIPLE PROBLEMS WITH DELIVERIES BECAUSE YOU CAN USE GOOGLE MAPS, IT'LL TELL YOU HOW TO GET TO OUR HOUSE BUT AS SOON AS IT TELLS PEOPLE TO TURN DOWN AN ALLEY, THEY GET CONFUSED, SO WE GENERALLY HAVE TO HAVE THEM CALL US AND WE HAVE TO COME OUT THERE AND TELL THEM THIS IS WHERE OUR HOUSES. IT IS A VERY UNIQUE PROPERTY. BUT THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY, OR YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO CORRECT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST THAT NO ONE CAN REALLY EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT HAPPENED. MY ASSUMPTION IS THIS WAS ONE PROPERTY , LIKE 10 ACRES, AND THESE PEOPLE BUILT THE HOUSE WE ARE LIVING IN RIGHT IN THE CENTER. OVER TIME, I THINK SOMETHING HAPPENED WHERE THEY ENDED UP SUBDIVIDING, AND MAYBE THEY FIGURED OUT A WAY OF NOT GOING DIRECTLY THROUGH THE CITY PLANNING, AND ENDED UP GETTING DIVIDED UP , SO NOW THAT WE ARE KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE AND IN THIS SITUATION, BUT ANYWAY, I'M HOPING THAT YOU GUYS CAN REVIEW THIS AND HOPEFULLY RIGHT A WRONG THAT HAPPENEDIN THE PAST AND PROVIDE US WITH ROAD ACCESS. LIKE I SAID, IF I WANTED -- I HAVE 2.7 ACRES. IF I WANTED TO BUILD A SHOP IN THE BACKYARD OR A GARAGE OR SOMETHING, I'M NOT IN COMPLIANCE. BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE A STREET FIRE HYDRANT AND ALL THOSE SORTS OF THINGS, THEN I'M IN A REALLY STRANGE PREDICAMENT , SO BY DOING THIS , AND LIKE I SAID I AGREE WITH ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE AS WELL, THE HOUSE IS BEING THE SAME AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SAME SIZE, SAME BRICK, SO THAT WE ARE NOT REDUCING SOMETHING TO A SMALLER VALUE, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO RIGHT A WRONG ESPECIALLY FOR US , THAT SOMEHOW ENDED UP THIS WAY. SO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> RANDY PATRICK'S. >> I AM RANDY PATRICK, 8205 8205 [00:25:05] QUAIL LANE COURT. DAN AND KATHY HAVE BEEN MY NEIGHBORS S, AND T TALKING ABOUT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I MOVED OVER THERE BECAUSE IT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN BUILT 30 YEARS AGO, AND IT HAS NOT BEEN. BUT THIS PROPERTY YOU GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT, I WANT TO SEE SOME FINAL DRAWINGS BECAUSE EVERYTHING THAT GOES ON SEEMS TO BE THE LAST MINUTE CHANGED. AND WE DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE GOING TO GO IN BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING, AND WHAT SCARES ME IS THEY ARE ASKING TO CHANGE THE CODES TO GET THE STUFF IN THERE. ONCE THE CODES ARE CHANGED, THEN THEY CAN CHANGE OTHER STUFF. I'M NOT AGREEING WITH THAT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW YOU GUYS KNOW IN YOUR OWN NEIGHBORHOODS, EVERYBODY PARKS ON THE STREETS. AND WHEN YOU PUT A 90 DEGREE ON THAT AND YOU ARE PUTTING THESE PEOPLE ON THE STREETS ON A 50 WIDE, FIRETRUCKS ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET IN THERE. THERE AIN'T NO WAY. TRASH TRUCKS MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO GET IN THERE BECAUSE WHERE ARE THESE PEOPLE GOING TO PARK? I SEE IT ON MY STREET. OUR STREETS ARE COMING RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE TRASH TRUCKS, OR THE 18 WHEELER IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT SHOULD BE THERE. WE ARE HANDLING THAT RIGHT NOW AS WE SPEAK WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE CITY ABOUT WHAT THE CODES OF 18 WHEELERS ARE, BUT OUR STREETS ARE CRUMBLING RIGHT NOW. I'M CONCERNED. I WAS AGAINST IT. I'M ONE OF THE ONES THAT WAS AGAINST IT. I WILL CHANGE IT TO AGREEING WITH IT IF JOHN AND DEBBIE CAN GET THAT ACCESS ROAD TO THEIR PROPERTY, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY ARE A DOW ROCK ADDRESS AND THEY HAVE BECOME DOWN OUR ALLEYWAY TO GET TO THEIR OWN. IT'S JUST GETTING BAD. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO GO ON THE PROPERTY TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. I HAVE SEEN THE PLOTS, WAS GOING ON THERE, BUT ONCE THE CODES GET CHANGED, THERE IS NO REASON WHY A J OR L HOME CAN'T GO IN THERE FOR THE FRONT ENTRY. BECAUSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS, YOU VERY SELDOM USE THEM. THEY USE THE STREETS, AND THEY USE THOSE FOR STORAGE. WHY ARE YOU CHANGING THE CODES TO PUT THIS MANY HOUSES IN THERE , DROP TWO HOUSES OFF OF IT, AND MAKE THEM COMPLIANT? THAT'S WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHERE THEY CHANGE AT THE END. SO, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. IS THAT IT? ALL RIGHT, AT THIS TIME WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THIS TIME, I WANT TO OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD. I DID WANT TO OPEN UP DISCUSSION WITH A FEW CLARIFICATIONS. ONE, THE CITY CAN NO LONGER REQUIRE MASONRY. IT IS AGAINST STATE LAW UNLESS IT IS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. ALSO, WE ARE NARROWING THE RIGHT OF WAY, IT IS NOT NARROW THE ROADWAY. THE ROADWAYS ARE COMPLIANT, SO THOSE ARE SOME COMMENTS I DID WANT TO CLARIFY BEFORE WE GET STARTED. ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS? >> ACTUALLY DID HAVE ONE QUESTION . I WAS TRY TO LOOK ON HERE AND IT WAS NOT CLEAR. TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE ACTUAL PROPERTY HOW SIZING IS THAT IS GOING IN ON THESE LOCATIONS. IT JUST LOOKS LIKE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE ACTUAL LOT , BUT NOT THE PROPERTY. WITH A BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR US REAL QUICK? WHAT IS THE AVERAGE HOUSE SIZE? >> BASICALLY IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE SFA ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY. WE WOULD STILL GO THROUGH SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS, SERVING US WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH SFA REGULATIONS THROUGH OUR USE, BASICALLY. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS EDUARDO RODRIGUEZ, ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THAT I'M A CITIZEN OF ROWLETT. I LIVE IN THE HARBOR COMMUNITY. SO, THE HOUSES WILL BE 2000 FT.รท PLUS OR MINUS NO LESS THAN 1800 FEET . FOUR BEDROOMS. >> APPRECIATE IT, THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ANY OTHER COMMENTS? GO AHEAD, JOHN. >> NOT -- THEY WOULD HAVE BECOME BACK TO THE BOARD OTHERWISE THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A MEETING OVER ALL OF OUR COATS. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME WE WILL ASK IF ANYONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS AGENDA ITEM. [00:30:07] >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, BUT IT WOULD BE A NOTION OF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. BASED ON THE RESPONSES AND EVERYTHING OF LOOKING AT IT. I WOULD LIKE TO VOTE ON THE APPROVAL OF VARIANCES ONE, TWO, FOUR, AND FIVE AND NOT INCLUDING PERIODS REQUEST NUMBER THREE FOR THE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS. >> OKAY, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> I THINK YOU SAID THREE WAS THE JAYHAWK GARAGE IS. SORRY, SO YEAH -- TO CLARIFY, IT WOULD BE VARIANCE ONE WHICH IS THE MAXIMUM CUL-DE-SAC LENGTH, THERE'S TWO FOR NO ALLEYS, OR ITS FOUR FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH REDUCTIONS, AND VARIANCE FIVE FOR REMOVAL OF ENTRY CLIMATES. WE ARE VOTING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THOSE FOUR PRINCES AND NOT INCLUDING PERIODS REQUEST NUMBER THREE IN DISAPPROVAL. THERE IS NUMBER THREE IS THE FRONT ENTRY GARAGE IS. >> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. AT THIS TIME WE WILL VOTE. >> I TRIED, WE ARE NOT ABLE TO MAKE THE MOTION. IT'S NOT RECOGNIZING ME MAKING THE INITIAL MOTION. >> OKAY. SO, AT THIS TIME WE WILL VOTE ON THE MOTION. >> NOT LETTING US VOTE EITHER. IT IS LOCKED OUT STILL. >> IT SHOULD ALLOW YOU IN JUST A SECOND. >> THERE WE GO, NOW WE CAN GO. LET'S VOTE. ALL RIGHT, THE MOTION PASSES. OKEY-DOKE YOU. SORRY, I LOST MY DOCUMENT HERE. THERE WE GO. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT, AT THIS TIME WE WILL MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE, WE WILL ADJOURN THE MEETING * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.