Apr 08, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission

[00:00:02]

GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AND WELCOME TO THE CITY OF ROWLETT PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR APRIL 8TH,

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

AND IF YOU CAN'T HEAR ME, PLEASE MOVE FORWARD.

YEAH. THE CITY OF ROWLETT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO RECONVENE, RECESS, REALIGN THE REGULAR SESSION OR CALLED EXECUTIVE SESSION OR ORDER OF BUSINESS AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO ADJOURNMENT PROCESS FOR PUBLIC INPUT.

IF YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND IN PERSON, YOU MAY COMPLETE THE CITIZENS INPUT FORM ON THE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE BY 3:30 P.M..

THE DAY OF THE MEETING, ALL FORMS WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PRIOR TO THE START OF THE MEETING FOR IN-PERSON COMMENTS.

REGISTRATION FORMS INSTRUCTIONS ARE AVAILABLE INSIDE THE DOORS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS.

WE HAVE A QUORUM, SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. AT THIS TIME WE'LL GO AHEAD AND HAVE CITIZENS INPUT.

THIS IS A THREE MINUTE COMMENT. WE'LL BE TAKEN FROM ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE ON ANY TOPIC.

NO ACTION CAN BE TAKEN BY THE COMMISSION DURING CITIZENS INPUT.

DO WE HAVE ANY. ANYBODY WANT TO SAY ANYTHING TO US? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE CITIZENS INPUT. NEXT ITEM IS CONSENT AGENDA.

[3. CONSENT AGENDA]

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OR A CITIZEN MAY REQUEST ITEMS TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

THE ONLY ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THIS NIGHT, THIS EVENING IS CONSIDERED THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF MARCH 25TH, 2025 REGULAR MEETING. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO PULL THAT? YES. THAT WILL FLOW FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.

FIRST ITEM AND I KNOW THIS WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE MINUTES FOR MARCH 25TH 2025 REGULAR MEETING.

MR. POLLARD. MR. JONES. YOU'VE CORRECTED THE VOTE ON AGENDA ITEM FIVE. BE. YES. OKAY. OKAY. SO IF YOU DIDN'T CATCH IT, THE MOTION WAS PASSED ON THE SIX ZERO VOTE AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN DENIED ON THE 16 YEAR OLD.

ALRIGHT. OKAY. YEAH. I COULDN'T PASS IT. SO YOU ALREADY HAVE THE MINUTE.

SO IF WE JUST SAY A MOTION TO TO ACCEPT THE AMENDED VERSION YOU GOT.

YEAH, WE GOT IT. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? AND I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS AMENDED.

I SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES, AS AMENDED.

ALL WHAT'S CALLED A VOTE. AND THAT'S APPROVED SIX ZERO WITH ONE ABSTENTION.

[4A. Consider and make a recommendation to the City Council on a request by Kimley-Horn, Tyler Scott, P.E, on behalf of property owner Texas Enterprise Rowlett LP, for approval of a Tree Removal Permit on a property zoned Planned Development Ordinance No. 004-24. The property is located northwest of the cul-de-sac of Enterprise Drive, consisting of Lot 6, Block 1, Rowlett Business Park, a portion of Lot 3, Block 1, Boyd & Kneggs Business Park Replat, and Tract 6 of the U Matthusen Abstract 1017 also described as all of Tract 1 to the Doreen Sue LiuzzI & Doreen Sue Luizze Family Trust Inst. No. 201700024931, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

SORRY. OH. I'M SORRY. I'M LIKE, THIS SOUNDS FAMILIAR.

MR. CALLER I'VE ANSWER YOUR CALL. OKAY. HERE WE GO.

THAT'S THE RIGHT PAGE. AND THERE WAS A CONSIDERATION.

PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMENTS MAY BE MADE IN PERSON AND WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.

REGISTRATION FORMS ARE ENTITLED TO CONSIDER AND MAKE, CONSIDER AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON A REQUEST BY KIMBERLY HORN TYLER SCOTT P ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER TEXAS ENTERPRISE ROWLETT, LP, FOR APPROVAL OF A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ON A PROPERTY ZONED PLAN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE NUMBER 004 DASH 20 FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED NORTHWEST OF THE CUL DE SAC OF ENTERPRISE DRIVE, CONSISTING OF BLOCKS. LOT SIX, BLOCK ONE ROWLETT BUSINESS PARK, A PORTION OF LOT THREE, BLOCK ONE, BOYD AND KEGS BUSINESS PARK REPLAT AND TRACT SIX OF THE YOU MATHESON ABSTRACT 1017, ALSO DESCRIBED AS ALL OF TRACT ONE TO THE DOREEN SUE, LUCY AND DOREEN.

SUE LUCY FAMILY TRUST INSTRUMENT NUMBER 201700024931 IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, DALLAS

[00:05:06]

MY NAME IS LIANE MOREJON, AND I'M HERE TO PRESENT THIS ITEM TONIGHT.

THE REQUEST IS FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 70,000 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING WITH THE NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.

YOUR CHAIRMAN HAS JUST DESCRIBED THE LOCATION TO YOU, SO I DON'T THINK I NEED TO GO OVER IT AGAIN.

IT IS ZONED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH THE BASE ZONING OF C-2.

THIS WILL PERMIT CAME TO US BACK IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, BUT IT CAME TO OUR ATTENTION THAT THE TREES HAD BEEN REMOVED WITHOUT YOUR PERMIT APPROVAL.

THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION AND THE. AND THE APPROVAL FROM COUNCIL.

SO STOP. WENT AHEAD AND ASK THE APPLICANT TO UPDATE THE SURVEY TO VERIFY THAT WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED WAS, IN FACT THE TREES THAT WERE CUT DOWN. THE TREE MITIGATION TABLE IN FRONT OF YOU SHOWS WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY ON THE SITE, WHICH WERE 48 TREES. OUT OF THOSE 48 TREES, 30 OF THEM WERE PROTECTED UNDER OUR DEVELOPMENT CODE.

OUT OF THOSE 30, 24 WERE PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED.

SIX OF THEM WERE LEFT ON SITE, WHICH IS CREDIT TO THE APPLICANT WHEN IT COMES TO THE MITIGATION, WHICH MEANS THAT THE APPLICANT IS LEFT WITH 247 CALIPER INCHES OF TREES TO BE OFF OF CALIBRATIONS TO BE MITIGATED, WHICH EQUATES TO ABOUT $30,000 THAT THEY NEED TO PAY TO OUR TREE DEVIATION FUND.

THANK YOU. AS A RECOMMENDING, BODY MAY APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THIS REQUEST.

AT THE END OF MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. JUST A QUICK QUESTION, THOUGH.

THIS IS AT LEAST THE SECOND TIME, IF NOT MORE, THAN A CONTRACTOR HAS TORE OUT TREES WITHOUT A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.

IS THERE SOME REASON WHY THAT WOULD OCCUR? I MEAN, IS IT NOT PART OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE? IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN. NO. THE REASON WHY IT'S IT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

BECAUSE IT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN. TREES SHOULDN'T BE CUT DOWN BEFORE APPROVAL.

YEAH, BUT MY QUESTION WOULD BE FOR THE FOR THE STAFF.

WHAT? WHAT IS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE CONTRACTOR TO INFORM THEM OF THAT? WE DO INFORM THEM THAT THEY CANNOT CUT DOWN THE TREES BEFORE THE APPROVAL.

BUT THEN AGAIN, THE REASON WHY IT'S JUST CHECKING.

THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE? I. THINK.

SO. GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. I THINK WE DID A GOOD JOB WITH THE PRESENTATION.

SO IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY.

I DID HAVE ONE REQUEST REGARDING SOME OF THE TREES THAT WERE LISTED TO BE MITIGATED.

THAT I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT. SO THERE WAS THERE'S TWO COTTONWOODS THAT WERE REMOVED ALREADY ON SITE THAT, BASED ON OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE CODE WE FELT WERE FELL UNDER THE LIST THAT WOULD EXEMPT THEM FROM NEEDING MITIGATION.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT AS A CONDITION OR IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION.

ULTIMATELY LET COUNCIL DECIDE. BUT THAT'S THAT'S MY PROBLEM.

AND I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

YES, MISS WILSON. YEAH. I WANTED TO ASK WHAT CREATE THIS SITUATION.

WAS IT BECAUSE YOU MISINTERPRETED WHAT NEEDED TO BE CUT DOWN ON OR AS FAR AS THE TREES BEING REMOVED PRIOR TO THE PERMIT? YEAH. I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT WAS JUST OVERSIGHT WE HAD DURING OUR PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING.

WE WERE INFORMED WE NEEDED THIS TREE REMOVAL PERMIT THAT SAME DAY WE APPLIED.

OKAY. HOW MAYBE WE WEREN'T AS CLEAR TO THE CONTRACTOR.

THE CONTRACTOR HAD REPRESENTATION AT THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING.

OKAY. I CAN'T SAY WHAT ULTIMATELY LED TO THE REMOVAL, BUT WE WERE MADE AWARE WHEN WE APPLIED THAT DAY.

WE WOULD HAVE BEEN HERE EARLIER THIS MONTH OR IN FEBRUARY DID NOT HAPPEN.

SO IT'S UNFORTUNATE. SO YEAH, THAT'S MY QUESTION.

OKAY. MR. POLLACK. SO AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FOLLOW UP FROM WHAT HE SAID AND WHAT

[00:10:09]

IT'S ALMOST AS IF IT'S. IMPLIED TAKING DOWN THE LAST FORGIVENESS LANE.

AND I MAY NOT BE THE CASE, BUT IT'S ALMOST AS IF.

BECAUSE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS YOU WANT TO TURN AROUND AND SAY, UNDERSTAND AND PAY.

PLAY JUST LESS THAN $37,000 IN THE REFORESTATION FUND, SO IT'S CHEAPER TO DO THAT.

AND ON THE PROJECT THAN IT DOES WORK AROUND THE TREES.

AND I, YOU KNOW, ANY REASON WHY YOU CAN'T REPLACE THE NUMBER OF CALIPER INCHES THAT YOU TOOK DOWN? THERE IS TREES BEING PLANTED AS PART OF OUR LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENT.

THERE'S A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF TREES I WOULD SAY ARE BEING PLANTED.

I, I HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CALCULATIONS TO SEE HOW MUCH IS BEING REPLANTED VERSUS WHAT WE REMOVED.

BUT, I MEAN, WE'RE WE'RE MEETING EARLY SCREENING REQUIREMENTS.

SO THERE'S ADDITIONAL TREES THAT ARE PLANTED ASIDE FROM JUST A REGULAR INTERIOR LANDSCAPE.

BUT I DON'T HAVE. OKAY, SO YOU HAVE LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT WAS ACCEPTED.

CORRECT. AND THEN YOU PLACE TREES AROUND THE GROUNDS, AROUND THE BUILDING.

BUT THEN WE HAVE THIS OTHER PROBLEM, WHICH YOU TOOK DOWN MORE TREES THAN WHAT YOU WITHOUT A PERMIT, BUT YOU WERE ALLOWED TO DO. SO NOW YOU JUST WANT TO PAY BUCKS INTO THE FUND INSTEAD OF PUTTING MORE TREES THAN THE LANDSCAPING PLAN WAS ACCEPTED.

AND WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN PUT MORE TREES THAN WHAT, YOUR LANDSCAPING PLAN? YEAH. AND I DON'T THINK THEY TOOK DOWN ANY MORE THAN WHAT THEY NEEDED IN ORDER TO DO THE CONSTRUCTION.

THE POINT IS THAT THEY DID SUBMIT THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT BEFORE THEY TOOK THOSE TREES DOWN.

AND THE STAFF. IS THAT THE CASE? YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT, I'M MISINTERPRETING.

YEAH. COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? FOR ME WHERE I NEED CLARITY. SO ALL THE TREATS THAT YOU TOOK DOWN WERE ON YOUR LANDSCAPE PLAN TO BE REMOVED? CORRECT. DURING OUR SITE PLAN. SHALL WE BE AT TONIGHT? BECAUSE YOU DID NOT GET THE PROPER PERMIT TO REMOVE THE TREES.

CORRECT. THANK YOU. AND WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD UNDERSTAND YOUR DESIRE TO BE CREDITED MORE THAN WHAT THE CITY IS DOING.

HOW DO YOU HAVE A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT AND WENT THROUGH THAT PROCESS? YOU'D HAVE TO TALK TO THE CITY ABOUT STAFF, ABOUT WHICH ONES YOU THINK SHOULD BE CREDITED OR SHOULD BE CREDITED.

BUT I THINK YOU PAST THAT POINT WHEN THE TREES CAME DOWN.

SO IT'S A FAIR POINT. YEAH, I HAD TO TRY IT. YOU HAD TO TRY.

OKAY. ANYWAY. NOTED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

MR. CHAIR. YES, I HAVE A QUESTION. I UNDERSTAND.

YES, SIR. ON THIS ISSUE BRITTANY, OF THIS VENTURE THAT I UNDERSTAND.

SO HE'S ASKING TO PUT JUST LESS THAN 30, $37,000 FOR THE REFORESTATION.

BUT IF HE TOOK DOWN ONLY THE THE TREES AND THE NUMBER OF COVERED BRIDGES THAT HE WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE BEEN ALLOWED TO DO. AND HE'S REPLACING THAT IN HIS LANDSCAPING PLAN.

WHY ISN'T IT A WASH? AND WHY IS THERE BASICALLY 37,000? SO THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. SO WHAT IS REQUIRED PER THE LANDSCAPING PLAN DOES HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TREE MITIGATION SURVEY AND THE TREES THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE CUT DOWN. SO THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT. WE VIEW THOSE SEPARATE.

SO THE CODE REQUIRES THEM TO PLANT A CERTAIN NUMBER OF TREES IF THEY CHOOSE TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT WITH REPLANTING, REPLACING TREES FROM FROM WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING ON REMOVING, THEN WE THEY GET CREDIT FOR THAT.

BUT THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. OKAY, SO I'M STILL UNCLEAR BECAUSE THE QUESTION THAT I WAS ASKING IS WHY IS THERE A THIRD.

[00:15:08]

THEY CAN IF THEY CHOOSE TO IF THEY IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO THAT, THEY DON'T GET CREDIT FOR THOSE TREES, WHICH MEANS THEY'LL BE PAYING LESS ONTO THE TREE REPRESENTATION FUND.

THAT WAS MY THOUGHT. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT? AND I'M READY TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

MR. CHAIRMAN. MOTION. MR. HERNANDEZ. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT AS LISTED WITH THE MITIGATION CHARGES.

WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND.

Y'ALL CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT. YEAH, JUST NOT MICHAEL.

MISS WILLIAMS SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.

PERMIT? ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? THANK YOU, MR. POLLARD. OKAY, SO LAST TIME WE HAD AN APPLICANT IN HERE ABOUT A MONTH AND A HALF AGO, AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE REFORESTATION FUND, AND IT HAD SOMEWHERE 2400 AND $500,000 IN IT, I BELIEVE. IS THAT ABOUT RIGHT? I WOULD HAVE TO CONFIRM THAT NUMBER. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S I THINK THAT'S ABOUT RIGHT.

SO WE HAVE SO MUCH MONEY IN THE DOGGONE FUND THAT'S ACCUMULATED OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS.

LITERALLY YEARS. NOTHING'S BEEN DONE WITH THAT.

I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF OF THE REFORESTATION FUND.

I'M GOING TO PLANT MORE TREES OUT THERE TO ADD UP TO THAT CALIPER INCHES, WHICH WAS 303 CALIPER INCHES.

AND HOW THEY GET THERE WITH THAT IS THAT EIGHT INCH TREES OR THEY PUT IN 12 INCH TREES.

I DON'T KNOW. AND THAT'S THAT'LL BE UP TO THEM.

BUT I AM I'M NOT FOR THROWING MORE MONEY AT THE REFORESTATION FUND, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T DO WHAT THE WHOLE POINT OF THE, THE THE TREE ORDINANCE WAS FOR THE WHOLE POINT OF THE TREE ORDINANCE WAS TO PRESERVE THE TREE.

THE TREES THAT THIS WAS A COTTON FIELDS DIDN'T HAVE THAT MANY OF OF OF OF MATURE, NICE TREES. SHADE TREES BECAUSE IT WAS LIKE THEY WAS ALL TAKEN DOWN BECAUSE OF THE COTTON FIELDS.

AND I'M JUST I'M NOT FOR THAT. I'M FOR FOR THEM REPLACING THE TREES.

YOU KNOW, IF IT COMES TO A POINT WHEN YOU GOT TO DRIVE THE POINT HOME TO WHOEVER DOES EARTHWORK AND SO FORTH, THAT YOU JUST DON'T GO TAKE THE TREES DOWN IN THIS TOWN AND THEN TURN AROUND AND SAY, OH, ASK FORGIVENESS. I CAN THROW A FEW BUCKS IN IT.

THAT'S IT. THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN OVER THAT.

AND I CAN ALSO SAY THAT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE CURRENTLY ATTEMPTING TO WORK WITH PARKS AND RECREATION TO FIND AREAS TO PLANT TREES AND GET THAT MOVING. AND THAT'S BEEN OVER A YEAR. ACTUALLY, I THINK IT WAS JUST REVITALIZED THE EFFORT ABOUT THREE MONTHS AGO, TWO MONTHS AGO. WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT. IT'S JUST IT'S TAKING A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.

SO AND I CAN I MEAN, I CAN APPRECIATE THAT. BUT FOR THE DEVELOPER, YOU KNOW, HE'S GOT A DEVELOPMENT WITH CONCRETE AND ASPHALT AND ONLY SO MANY PLACES YOU CAN PUT TREES.

AND HE ACTUALLY HAS A PRETTY NICE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

SO YOU KNOW SOMETIMES WHEN YOU JUST GO AHEAD AND BITE THE COST.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT AS PRESENTED. IT'S CALLED VOTE. YES.

AND THAT PASSES 5 TO 1. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS.

[00:20:06]

[4B. Consider and make a recommendation to the City Council on a request by Frederick Gatela, JR Eisenhour Consulting LLC, on behalf of property owner Global Investment Group INC, for the approval of a Development Plan with Warrants for the development of two (2) Commercial Retail buildings on a property zoned Form-Based Urban Village (FB-UV) District. The property is located at the corner of Main Street and President George Bush HWY, addressed as 4800 Main Street, consisting of 3.576 acres, Block A, Lot 1, Downtown East Rowlett, in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

LOT A LOT ONE DOWNTOWN EAST ROWLETT IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. OUR NEXT ITEM IS FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH MULTIPLE WARRANTS.

AGAIN, THE SITE LOCATION. LOCATION IS AT THE CORNER OF CORNER OF MAIN STREET AND PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH.

IT IS ZONED FOR URBAN VILLAGE AND IS ABOUT 3.5 ACRES.

THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN CALLS THIS AREA FOR MIXED USE.

ON TOP OF THAT, YOU ALSO HAVE US. THE SITE ALSO HAS A DOWNTOWN FRAMEWORK PLAN.

IT'S GOVERNED BY A DOWNTOWN. THE DOWNTOWN FRAMEWORK PLAN, WHICH CALLS FOR HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ACCOMPANIED BY RETAIL SHOPS AND RESTAURANTS.

ON TOP OF THAT, THERE'S ANOTHER LAYER WHERE THEY HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE STANDARDS, WHICH IS AN AREA BASED MASTER PLAN.

AGAIN, THE THE SITE IS PROPOSED IS PROPOSED FOR TWO COMMERCIAL RETAIL BUILDINGS, ONE OF 1400 SQUARE FEET.

THE SECOND BUILDING IS AT AROUND 90,000FT². THEY'RE PROPOSING 157 TOTAL PARKING SPACES.

THE SITE HAS TWO ACCESS POINTS, ONE FROM CASPIAN STREET AND ONE FROM OSHAWA STREET, AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO OFFERING ABOUT 17,000 TO 17,000FT² OF OPEN SPACE. THE REQUEST TONIGHT IS FOR FOUR MINOR ONES.

I'LL GO INTO DETAIL INTO MORE DETAIL AS FAR AS THE PRESENTATION GOES, BUT ESSENTIALLY IT'S FOR ACCESS DRIVE.

THE MINIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT, BLOCK SIZE AND CONFIGURATION AND OPEN SPACE.

SO THE FIRST ONE YOU'LL SEE TONIGHT IS FOR ACCESS DRIVE.

AS YOU ARE ALL AWARE, THE FORM BASED CODE REQUIRES SEVERAL ACCESS DRIVE TO BE APPROVED THROUGH A VENDOR WARRANT.

WHICH IS WHY THIS THIS IS IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT.

AGAIN, THERE'S TWO ACCESS POINTS FROM SHIRAZ AND CASPIAN STREET.

THE SECOND WARRANT IS FOR BUILDING HEIGHT. THE FORM BASED URBAN VILLAGE DISTRICT AND THE DOWNTOWN FRAMEWORK PLAN CALLS FOR A MAXIMUM OF TWO STORY BUILDINGS WITHIN THIS AREA. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A ONE STORY BUILDING AT 29FT IN HEIGHT.

THE TWO STORY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION IS JUST NOT FEASIBLE FOR THE APPLICANT ECONOMICALLY, AND IT POSES LEASING CHALLENGES FOR HIM.

SO ALTHOUGH THE DESIGN MEETS THE ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT A TWO STORY BUILDING, THE DESIGN STILL MEETS THAT TWO STORY STRUCTURE BY ACHIEVING THAT REQUIRED FLOOR STANDARD WITHIN THE SINGLE STORY BUILDING.

THE THIRD REQUEST IS FOR BLOCK SIZE AND CONFIGURATION.

THE FORM BASED CODE, URBAN VILLAGE DISTRICT, ASKS FOR 250 TO 300 LINEAR FEET OF BLOCK LENGTH, MAXIMUM FOR 400. THE EXISTING BLOCKS IN SHIRAZ AND PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH ARE ABOUT 500FT.

THIS IS A MINOR ONE REQUEST CAUSED BY THIS PREEXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH INCLUDES THE BLOCK LENGTH.

THE LAST WARRANT IT WAS MISTAKENLY NOT ADDED TO THE STAFF REPORT, BUT ONE THAT'S IMPORTANT IS FACING OPEN SPACE.

THIS IS ANOTHER SITE CONSTRAINTS THAT LIMITS THIS COMPLIANCE, WHICH THE APPLICANT THE APPLICANT DID TRY TO MEET.

BUT AGAIN JUST, YOU KNOW, ME TRYING TO MEET THE BUILD TO ZONE, TRYING TO MEET THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, IT'S JUST NOT FEASIBLE FOR OPEN SPACE TO BE IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING.

HE IS FULLY COMPLIANT WITH ALL THE THEY ARE. HE'S FULLY COMPLYING WITH ALL THE OTHER STANDARDS WHEN IT COMES TO PRIVATELY MAINTAINED, OPEN SPACE, PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE HAVING IT BEING IRRIGATED AND UNFENCED, BORDERING THE STREET,

[00:25:03]

AND ADDITIONAL ITEM THAT I BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION DURING THE STAFF REPORT, AND AGAIN TONIGHT IN THIS PRESENTATION, IS THE FACT THAT THERE'S THERE WERE COMMENTS STILL OUTSTANDING FROM THE LANDSCAPING PLAN.

I'VE BEEN WORKING. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT, AND IT'S BEEN SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCED TO ONE COMMENT THAT WE'RE STILL WORKING WITH, WHICH IS REVISING THE TREE AND SHRUB CAPS, BUT EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN ADDRESSED.

NOW YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDING BODY, MAY APPROVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS OR DENY THIS REQUEST.

AND THAT IS THE END OF MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONERS. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF IS CLOSED.

BRITTANY. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE FORM BASED URBAN VILLAGE ARE MOST OF THE FORM BASED CODE. BUT SPECIFICALLY THE URBAN VILLAGE THAT BUILDINGS WHEN THEY CAME IN WE HAVE OTHER USES, LIKE MULTI-FAMILY.

YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE, LIKE, FIRST FLOOR WOULD BE WOULD BE COMMERCIAL OPTION ON THE SECOND FLOOR IS COMMERCIAL OR WOULD BE MULTI-FAMILY.

AND WHAT HAPPENED ON THIS ONE, OR WAS THERE A CHANCE THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF IN THE IN THE CODE THAT ALLOWS THIS ONE TO BE SEPARATED FROM THE, THE ONE MAIN PROJECT, BECAUSE THIS ORIGINALLY WAS APPROVED IN 2016 AS PART OF THE SAME COMPLEX THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF A DIFFERENT THE A DIFFERENT ARGUMENT, THE ONE COMING AFTER.

SO IT'S IT'S WITHIN THE SAME AREA. YEAH. BUT IT WAS ALL PART OF WHAT WAS APPROVED IN 2016 IS IT NOT.

SO THE THE USE ITSELF HASN'T BEEN APPROVED YET FOR THIS COMMERCIAL BUILDING.

SO IT'S ALLOWED BY WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT AREA, THIS COMMERCIAL BUILDING TYPE USE IS ALLOWED.

IT HAS. IT HAS NO MULTIFAMILY. THIS IS JUST TWO STORY BUILDINGS.

I MEAN, IN 2016, THE COUNCIL PASSED THE CHANGE.

I ASSUME WHAT YOU'RE HINTING TO IS THAT THEY TOOK THIS AND MADE IT STRICTLY COMMERCIAL, AND TOOK IT OUT FROM THE REST OF THE PROPERTY.

WOULD THAT BE CORRECT? BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL ZONING, WHEN IT CAME IN IN 2016 COVERED THE WHOLE FROM THE FROM THE SERVICE ROOM BACK TO THE PARK.

ALL OF IT. SO CAN I CLARIFY? SURE. SO MIXED USE IS ALLOWED IN URBAN VILLAGE, BUT IT IS NOT REQUIRED TO MIXED USES THAT RETAIL ON THE BOTTOM AND THE FAMILY ON TOP.

SO IT IS ALLOWED. IT IS NOT REQUIRED. THERE'S A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT BUILDING TYPES THAT ARE ALLOWED AND PROTECTED USES THAT ARE ALLOWED.

THAT'S JUST ONE. OKAY. SO I'M STILL TAKING IT THAT THERE'S SOME SEPARATED OUT FROM UNDER WHAT WE KNOW AS THE ONE MAIN PROJECT OR ONE.

YES, THIS IS A SEPARATE PHASE OF THAT. IT'S ALL WITHIN THAT SAME REGULATING PLAN.

THIS IS A SEPARATE PHASE, BUT I THINK THE VISION FOR THAT AREA WAS ALWAYS SOME COMMERCIAL NEAR GEORGE BUSH AND SOME MULTIFAMILY BEHIND.

SO. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MR.. WELL, MY ONLY QUESTION HERE IS, IS I SAW IN THE PRESENTATION THAT THERE WAS A MENTION TO HIGH DENSITY.

IS THIS CONSIDERED HIGH DENSITY, A TWO STORY BUILDING? YEAH. THAT AREA DOES CONSIDER THAT HIGH DENSITY.

OKAY. ANOTHER QUESTION. QUESTION. YOU SAY SOMETHING ABOUT.

THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT, THE TWO STORY BUILDING.

LET'S SAY THE BUILDER IS GOING TO GET AROUND IT BY ADJUSTING THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. HOW IS THAT? HE SAID IT'S A TWO SURGERY. THEY SAID THE AREA HAD A TWO STORY APARTMENT MAXIMUM.

BUT THEN YOU SAID THE BUILDERS CAN GET AROUND IT BY INCREASING THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, OR IT'S NOT THAT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO GET AROUND IT.

IT'S THEY'RE STILL MEETING THE INTENT BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS ABOUT 20, 29FT IN HEIGHT.

SO THAT STILL MEANS THAT THAT THE TWO STORY. THE INTENT OF A TWO STORY BUILDING WITHIN A ONE STORY.

BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM THE OUTSIDE, IT STILL LOOKS LIKE A TWO STORY BUILDING IN HEIGHT.

SO SO THE INTENT IS THERE? NOT NECESSARILY NOT IN TERMS OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN.

BUT THE INTENT OF THE TWO STORY BUILDING IS MET WITHIN THAT ONE STORY.

BECAUSE OF THE HEIGHT OF THE OF THE BUILDING, THE FRONT FACING PART OF THE ENTIRE BUILDING.

[00:30:04]

WANTING TO GO TO 500FT. IS THAT NOT A PREREQUISITE FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO BE ABLE TO GET ACCESS? IS THAT IS THAT RIGHT AT 400FT LIMIT OR FOR THEM, I BELIEVE IT'S LESS THAN 600.

SO THAT'S JUST A RALLY AT ABOUT 1200. SO THIS IS UNIQUE TO THE FORM BASED CODE.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT.

DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE A PRESENTATION. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTION I'M HERE TO ANSWER.

OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

YES. STATE YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. MY NAME IS SHAWN CHAN. I'M A RESIDENT OF GARLAND, TEXAS.

SIX, SIX, ONE THREE LAKESHORE DRIVE, GARLAND.

WE OWNED THIS PROPERTY SINCE 25 YEARS AGO. AND I WOULD LIKE TO PUT IT INTO THE BACKGROUND. WE TRIED TO BUILD ON THAT PROPERTY BECAUSE THE CITY DID NOT HAVE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE, SO WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GET ANYTHING. SO WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN 2014, WE HIRED A CONSULTANT, WHICH WORKED WITH THE CITY AT THAT TIME FOR THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS, WHICH ARE LOCATED IN THE CENTER OF THE CITY. AND THEN WE HIRED ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS, AND WE CAME UP WITH THE PLAN, WHICH YOU JUST SAW.

ACTUALLY, THE BASE COAT WAS CREATED BY US, THE CITY AND THE COOPERATION OF THE CITY.

SO THE NORTH, THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY RIGHT NOW IS BUILT IS APARTMENT BUILDING.

AND THE SOUTH PORTION, THE EAST PORTION, WHICH IS A SHOPPING CENTER, IS GOING TO BE LOCATED.

NOW, THE ONLY FACTORS WHICH WE ARE CONSIDERING IS THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.

IF YOU GO TO A TWO STORY LOOK LIKE A TWO STORY BUILDING, BUT THE WINDOWS AND ALL THAT, IT WOULD NOT BE ECONOMICAL TO RENT.

ACTUALLY, I HAVE DONE SOME WORK ON THE AMOUNT OF THE CONSTRUCTION COST INTEND TO DESTROY HIS WISH. I COULD SHARE IT WITH YOU.

RIGHT. AND THAT WOULD PUT US IN A POSITION THAT IF WE INTEND TO LEASE THAT PROPERTY, WE HAVE TO DO IT AT A SCORE OF $41.8 PER SQUARE FOOT. IF 100% FULL, AND IF YOU GO ON A 75% OCCUPANCY THROUGHOUT WITH A 50 SOMETHING ON THAT RATE, IT WOULD NOT IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE A TENANT.

SO THAT'S THE MAIN FACTOR. OTHER THAN THAT, I, I THANK MR. MARTIN FOR THE TIMELESS TIME THAT SHE HAS DEVOTED TO THIS PROJECT AND ALSO THE DEPARTMENT.

WE HAVE WORKED ALMOST A YEAR AND A HALF WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.

THANK YOU SIR. MR. UNQUESTIONABLY. YES, SIR. WHAT DO YOU FEATURE GOING INTO THESE TWO BUILDINGS? IT WOULD BE A NEIGHBORHOOD A SHOPPING CENTER IN NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO IT MEANS THAT THE SERVICES PROVIDED WOULD BE THE RESTAURANTS AND ANYTHING.

WHICH NEIGHBORHOOD REQUIRES. YOU DO NOT HAVE THIS TAKEN INTO THE CONSULTATION? WE DO NOT HAVE THAT TRAFFIC. NUMBER, YOU KNOW, WOULD WOULD ALLOW US TO DO ANYTHING IN THE BLOCK IN THAT SHOPPING CENTER. THERE IS NO FOOT TRAFFIC AS WELL EITHER.

SO IT'S REALLY HARD TO GO AFTER CERTAIN TENANTS.

IT HAS TO BE ALL OF THE TENANTS WHICH WOULD GIVE THE SERVICE TO ALL THE AREA WITHIN THIS AREA OF THE DOWNTOWN.

[00:35:08]

IT WOULD BE A BEAUTY SALON. IT WOULD BE ANYTHING THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT WOULD ALLOW US, BECAUSE YOU HAVE A ZONING REQUIREMENT FOR THAT.

SO BASICALLY WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE LARGEST THING THAT MAY PERHAPS GO IN HERE IS SIT DOWN RESTAURANT.

YES. THE OTHER OTHERWISE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SMALLER SPACES FOR A SMALL SHOP OF SOME TYPE.

THE SMALLEST SPACES IS DESIGNED SOMEHOW. IS IT THE WEIGHT OF THE.

EACH UNIT IS 20 BY 65. SO IT WOULD BE 1300 TO 1400FT².

BUT LESS THAN THAT WOULD BE A COFFEE SHOP. SO DO YOU HAVE ANY.

TENANTS THAT THAT YOU'VE KIND OF LINED UP? POSSIBLY LINED UP FOR, FOR THIS SHOPPING CENTER.

WE HAVE OTHER SHOPPING CENTERS AS WELL. WHICH WE WORK WITH OUR TENANTS OVER THERE.

WE HAVE ALREADY INFORMED THEM THAT THIS PROJECT IS COMING UP, AND THEY ARE INTERESTED TO SEE WHEN THE BUILDING IS GOING UP.

THEY WILL COME AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT FOR THEIR FOR THEIR OWN PURPOSES.

AND ONE LAST QUESTION FOR YOU. WOULD YOU CONSIDER ADDING AN ADDITIONAL LANE ON MAIN STREET AND ALSO ALONG PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH SERVICE ROAD ALONG YOUR PROPERTY LINE? IT IS IT IS IT IS IT IS ALREADY EXISTS THIS. COMES TO THE AM I RIGHT? IF THERE'S ONE INTEREST IN THIS COMING TO THE SHOWS.

ONE LANE ACTUALLY. OKAY, SO LET ME LET ME ASK IT AGAIN.

WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL TO WHAT'S ALREADY THERE IF YOU IF YOU PUT ADDITIONAL LANE IN THERE.

SO THEN WE CUT ALL OTHER PARKING LOTS. THERE WOULD BE NOT ENOUGH PARKING LOTS IN THERE.

OKAY. SO I TAKE IT THAT YOU'RE NOT WILLING. IS THAT CORRECT? I LIKE TO DO IT, BUT IF THE CITY WOULD ALLOW US THE NUMBER OF THE PARKING SO THAT.

SO THAT IT ALSO APPLIES TO ON THE GEORGE BUSH TURNPIKE SIDE.

ON THE GEORGE BUSH, YOU CANNOT SEE ANYTHING BECAUSE IT'S A HYBRID POLICY.

ANYTHING WE DO, WE COULD DO WITHIN THE CITY OF RALEIGH.

AND IF WE CUT ANYTHING FROM THIS PORTION AND THAT PORTION.

SO GET RID OF ALL OTHER PARTIES. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO.

YEAH, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.

SO YOU'RE WANTING TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL TRAVEL LANE.

IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL LANE ON MAIN STREET.

THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLY A RIGHT TURN, ONLY TO GO SOUTH ON THE SERVICE ROAD AND THEN HAVE AN ADDITIONAL LANE. IT LAYS DOWN AS FAR AS HIS PROPERTY IS CONCERNED FOR A THIRD LANE ON THE SERVICE ROAD VERSUS THE TWO THAT'S THERE.

SO WE WOULD HAVE TO DO FURTHER REVIEW BECAUSE MAIN STREET, ACCORDING TO OUR MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN ALREADY, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALREADY PLANNED FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT, CERTAIN AMOUNT OF LANES.

AND SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE APPLICANT, OUR CITY ENGINEER.

I MEAN, IT WOULD IT WOULD TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO, TO SEE WHAT WHAT COULD HAPPEN WITH WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR.

BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THIS IS ALL PREEXISTING. SO ALL OF THE BLOCKS, BLOCK LANES, THE STREETS ARE ALL ARE ALREADY EXISTING.

SO THIS SITE IS READY FOR DEVELOPMENT. SO WHAT I'M ASKING THE APPLICANT IS SIMPLY AND I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER FROM THE APPLICANT, BUT SIMPLY IS IS HE WILLING TO PUT IN AN ADDITIONAL LANE OF TRAFFIC? ALL THE CITY HAS TO DO IS SAY YAY OR NAY.

THAT'S IT. IT'S THAT SIMPLE. IF HE PUTS IT IN, AS LONG AS IT'S PUT IN ITS STANDARDS TO TO MAIN STREET IS BUILT.

AND THE SAME THING WITH TEX DOT AND JUST GETS A TEX DOT APPROVAL.

BUT BUT WHAT HE'S SAYING IS IT MESSES UP HIS IS PARKING AND THAT THROWS IT OFF.

[00:40:01]

THAT'S WHAT THE LOOK OF IT. SO WE HAD A DEFAULT BUFFER BETWEEN THIS BUILDING AND THE MINISTRY.

BUT THEY TOLD US PUSH THE BUILDING ALL THE WAY TO THE MINISTRY TO LINE UP WITH OTHER APARTMENTS, BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALREADY BUILT UP THE SIDEWALK AND ALREADY WITH ALL THE TREES IN THERE.

AND I DO HAVE ONE. ONE LAST QUESTION. SINCE YOU MENTIONED PUSHING THE BUILDING DOWN, IT CAN CAUSE THAT.

DO YOU HAVE ANY INTEREST LEFT IN THE REST OF THE PROPERTY TO YOURSELF? WELL, WE STILL OWN THE REST OF THE PROPERTY. THIS WEEK WE INTEND TO PUT THE HOTEL AND ALSO ARE A SITTING RESTAURANT IN THE SOUTH. IF YOU HAVE THE METHOD, IF YOU HAVE A MASTER PLAN.

SO YOU STILL WANT THE PROPERTY OR AT LEAST FACING GEORGE BUSH OR YES, WE ARE ON SOUTH.

YEAH THAT'S RIGHT. TAKE A LOOK AT THAT ONE. THE WHOLE THING ON THE FRONT OF THE 190.

THE WHOLE THING. WE ALSO PROVIDED THAT, THAT THAT THE THE FACE ON ON THE STAFF REPORT ON THE ATTACHMENTS. YOU'RE WELCOME TO LOOK AT IT.

THAT'S ALL WE HAVE. THANK YOU, MR. HERNANDEZ.

OH, MY QUESTION. YOU MENTIONED ABOUT A STUDY THAT SAID THAT YOU WOULD NOT HAVE ENOUGH TRAFFIC FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SOMETHING ELSE.

YES. WHERE DID THAT COME FROM? WELL, THE NUMBER OF THE CARS WHICH WOULD GO FROM ON THE SERVICE ROAD INTO THE HIGHWAY, ACTUALLY, AND ALSO THE FOOT. THERE WILL BE NO FOOT TRAFFIC ON THE HIGHWAY, ON THE SERVICE ROAD THAT LAND ON THE ON THE NORTH SIDE. THE ONLY, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, THE ONLY TRAFFIC TRAFFIC WE HAVE WHEN THE SCHOOL IS FINISHED, YOU KNOW, HIGH SCHOOL, THE KIDS ARE WALKING AND COMING TO THE APARTMENTS.

SO IT DOESN'T GIVE US IT'S NOT THAT ATTRACTIVE TO GO TO VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE BUILDING.

YOU KNOW THAT IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO LEASE IT.

I GUESS THE REASON I'M ASKING THE QUESTION IS BECAUSE HIGHWAY 66 IS NOT MORE THAN A FEW BLOCKS UP.

YES, THE DOWNTOWN AREA IN ROWLETT HAS SEEN, YOU KNOW, AN INCREASING AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC.

I MEAN, I'VE SEEN WHERE THERE'S QUITE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THAT AREA WALKING, DRIVING THROUGH.

YEAH. I GUESS JUST WHAT I VISUALLY SEE, I SEE MORE TRAFFIC GOING THROUGH THIS AREA NOW, NOT TO MENTION, NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT THE APARTMENTS THAT YOU'RE BUILDING NEXT TO IS GOING TO PROVIDE FOOT TRAFFIC.

I BELIEVE THERE'S ANOTHER ITEM ON THE AGENDA TODAY THAT'S GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT ADDITIONAL APARTMENTS. SO I GUESS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT HERE IS, IS THIS THE DEVELOPMENT TO ME SEEMS LIMITED IN THE SENSE OF I BELIEVE THAT THERE WILL BE THE TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY AS THIS AREA CONTINUES TO GET BIGGER.

WE WOULD LIKE WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE TRAFFIC.

IT'S IT'S GOOD FOR US ANYWAY. WE ARE BUILDING 38,000FT² MAXIMUM.

NOT MORE THAN THAT AMOUNT IS ALLOWED TO US, SO WE ARE USING THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF THE FOOTAGE YOU COULD GO ON THAT GROUND IS NOT A PHONEME 39 OUT OF 30,000, SO WE'RE GOING 100%. AND THIS MAY BE A THIS MAY BE MORE OF A QUESTION TO CITY COUNCIL, PERHAPS OF OF THE AREA TO ME SEEMS LIKE IT NEEDS, IT NEEDS TO BE ALLOWED TO ALLOW FOR SOMETHING EVEN MORE THAN JUST THIS, ESPECIALLY IF WE WANT DOWNTOWN TO BE A DESTINATION.

THAT IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THAT, THAT WE COULD ASK FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THIS.

BUT I ALSO JUST WANNA CLARIFY THIS USE IS ALLOWED BY.

RIGHT. SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING I KIND OF WANT TO MAKE EVERYONE AWARE OF, IS THAT YOU'RE HERE TODAY TO LOOK AT THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TO LOOK AT THE WARRANTS, AND WHETHER YOU THINK THE WARRANTS ARE FROM IF THEY'RE APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

BUT THE USE ITSELF IS NOT UP FOR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT.

SO I JUST WANT TO KIND OF PUT THAT OUT. THAT. OKAY.

[00:45:04]

THIS OFFERS OPPORTUNITY FOR ISLAND TO DOWNTOWN BY HAVING THIS.

BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, THERE'S POTENTIAL FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TYPE BUSINESSES AND THINGS.

SO TURNING AWAY FROM AN OPPORTUNITY THAT'S ON THE TABLE AND SAYING IT COULD COME AS TWO SEPARATE ISSUES.

THAT'S JUST RIGHT. SO IT'S LIKE SOMETHING IS ACTUALLY PROVIDING THE OPPORTUNITY.

SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU SIR.

AND I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND APPLICANT.

WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION. OKAY.

I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. MR. HERNANDEZ. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH WARRANTS AS ITEMIZED IN THE AGENDA ITEM.

WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE THE ITEM, MR. TUCKER. SECONDED BY MR. TUCKER. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? MR.. PAUL? OKAY. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MODERN WARRANT OR NUMBER TWO OF BUILDING HEIGHT.

DOESN'T BOTHER ME AT ALL. BUT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE BLOCK SIZE CONFIGURATION AND THE ACCESS GRANTED. BUT I'M NOT SURE. HOW OR IF UNDER THE THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST THAT WE CAN, WE CAN FIX A PROBLEM. AS I SEE IT, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FIXED BEFORE THIS.

BUT IF HE OWNS THE PROPERTY ADJACENT AND JUST TO THE SOUTH, AND I THINK HE COULD PUSH HIS BUILDINGS DOWN AND AND IT STILL HELPED WITH THE RIGHT TURN ONLY ON TO FROM MAIN STREET ONTO THE SOUTHBOUND SERVICE ROAD. I JUST. WE HAVE A 14 AND A 19,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDINGS. I THINK IT'S PROBABLY 2008 99 AND ¥14.899998. SO BASICALLY AT 15 AND A 20,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDINGS.

AND I JUST BELIEVE THAT THERE'S THERE'S A WAY TO FIX SOME STUFF THAT, THAT WE'RE NOT ASKING OR BEING ASKED TO DO. SO I JUST CAN'T SUPPORT THIS. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? JUST A QUESTION. JUST AS A COMMENT, I DO AGREE WITH MR. POLLARD IN THE SENSE THAT THE TRAFFIC HERE IS ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE.

WITHOUT ESPECIALLY WITHOUT A DEDICATED TURN LANES INTO THE PROPERTY OR INTO AT LEAST TO TO WHAT IS IT, CASPIAN STREET. THERE IS A DEDICATED TURN LANE ONTO CASPIAN STREET.

OKAY. BECAUSE IT'S NOT A WELL, MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE IT'S NOT ON THE SITE PLAN.

I GUESS BECAUSE WE CAN CONFIRM. BUT THERE IS.

BUT WE CAN CONFIRM. OKAY. OKAY. BUT JUST TO KIND OF FINISH MY POINT, I DO AGREE WITH MR. POLLARD THAT THAT SERVICE ROAD IS IN DIRE NEED OF A THIRD.

PROBABLY FOR SURE. WELL, THE SERVICE ROAD AS WELL ACTUALLY IS TWO, TWO TWO LANES PLUS A TERMINAL.

THERE IS A THIRD LANE THERE ONLY BECAUSE THE EXIT OFF THE BUSH CREATES THE.

NO, NO IT DOES. AND THEN IT GOES RIGHT BACK OFF INTO AN ENTRANCE ACCORDING TO THIS PLAN.

RIGHT HERE. STAY HERE. FOR TWO MINUTES. COMING IN HERE.

RIGHT. AFTER AN ENTRANCE. THANK YOU. YOU KNOW.

ONE, TWO, THREE THINGS THAT START TO THIS GOES AWAY RIGHT HERE AND IT GOES BACK HOME.

SURE. I HAVE A QUESTION. YES. MR.. I DON'T KNOW.

ASK THE QUESTION IN THE MIDDLE OF MOTION. YEAH.

[00:50:02]

BECAUSE THERE'S THIS PART OF THESE AREAS HAVE COME THROUGH BEFORE. SO I BELIEVE THEY HAVE LOOKED AT TRAFFIC. I'M NOT SURE IF TIA HAS DONE SO, BUT THIS IS REVIEWED BY OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THAT DOES LOOK AT TRAFFIC.

AND SO THIS DID GO THROUGH STAFF REVIEW THAT INCLUDED TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ALL OF THOSE STADIUMS. ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER DIDN'T THINK THAT IT REQUIRED ADDITIONAL ACCESS OR THE ADDITIONAL TITLE FOR THIS SITE.

SO. WE GOT HERE AND. YOU CAN SEE THAT RIGHT NOW.

BUT I'M NOT SURE IF. AND HERE'S WHAT I'M NOT SURE YOU CAN BECAUSE THIS THING WAS ALL OTHER DEVELOPERS AND IT WAS ACCEPTED BY COUNCIL SINCE APRIL. BUT THEY MAY HAVE I DON'T KNOW.

THAT IT IS 37 DAYS, BUT. I JUST I DID TAKE A LOOK REAL QUICK AT THE SATELLITE IMAGES ON GOOGLE MAPS. THERE IS A DEDICATED RIGHT TURN LANE TO CASPER.

SO YEAH, YOU WERE CORRECT. BUT THAT DOESN'T HELP THE PROBLEM ON MAIN STREET COMING AROUND.

YOU ONLY HAVE TWO. WHEN THE CITY REDID MAIN STREET.

THEY, THEY THEY SCREWED UP BY PUTTING ALL THE PARKING SPACES THERE.

AND WE TOOK OUT A LANE, AND IT'S STILL TWO LANES WITH PARKING ON EITHER SIDE.

SO WHEN YOU GET UP TO THE INTERSECTION AT TRAFFIC LIGHT, YOU HAVE TWO LANES.

THE RIGHT IS A COMBO RIGHT TURN AND STRAIGHT ACROSS THE BRIDGE.

THE OTHER ONE IS STRAIGHT ACROSS THE BRIDGE UNTIL YOU CAN TURN LEFT ON THE NORTH ON THE OTHER SIDE.

AND WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU IS, IF HE WOULD PUT IN A DEDICATED RIGHT TURN LANE STUDENT OVER, THAT, HE CAN PUT HIS BUILDING BACK SINCE HE OWNS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND HE CAN SIT DOWN AND STILL PUT IN THAT WAY.

SO CAN I TURN IT OVER? I'M SORRY. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.

SO THE REGULATING PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, DOES THAT KIND OF SHOW THESE BLOCKS ALREADY AS THEY ARE, INCLUDING THAT THERE'S A ROAD THAT BIFURCATES KIND OF THESE FOUR PHASES DOWN THE MIDDLE.

SO IT WOULD REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL TO GO BACK AND AMEND THE REGULATION.

WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE THE APPLICANT BACK THROUGH AND SEE IF CITY COUNCIL WAS OPEN TO AMENDING THE REGULATING PLAN THEY APPROVED.

SO THAT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO TO APPROVE. THE THE REQUEST FOR MINOR WARRANTS.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON IT? SEEING NO MORE DISCUSSION, WE'LL CALL THE VOTE.

GUYS. AND THAT PASSES 4 TO 2.

[4C. Consider and make a recommendation to the City Council on a request by David Bond, Spiars Engineering and Surveying, on behalf of property owner OHT Rowlett I, LP for approval of a Development Plan with Warrants for the development of a 300-unit multifamily development on a property zoned Form-Based Urban Village (FB-UV) District. The property is generally located west of the President George Bush Highway and north of Miller Road, addressed as 2 President George Bush Highway, consisting of 9.076 acres of the H. Van Tassell Survey, Abstract No. 1499 and a portion of Lot 2, Block A of the Kirby Elevated Tank Addition in the City of Rowlett, Dallas County, Texas.]

MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON A REQUEST BY DAVID BOND SPIRES ENGINEERING AND SURVEY ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER O ONE LP FOR APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH WARRANTS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 300 UNIT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT ON THE PROPERTY.

ZONED FORM BASED URBAN VILLAGE DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF THE PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH HIGHWAY AND NORTH OF MILLER ROAD, ADDRESSED US TO PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH HIGHWAY, CONSISTING OF 9.076 ACRES OF THE H.

VAN TASSEL SURVEY, ABSTRACT NUMBER FOUR. EXCUSE ME.

ABSTRACT NUMBER 1499 AND A PORTION OF LOT TWO, BLOCK A OF THE KIRBY ELEVATED TANK ADDITION IN THE CITY OF ROWLETT, DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.

[00:55:05]

SO THIS IS GOING TO SOUND VERY SIMILAR TO GIULIANI'S PRESENTATION BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL PART OF THAT SAME REGULATING PLAN.

SO THIS IS A COMMISSION, AS THE CHAIR HAS ALREADY MENTIONED.

IT'S WEST OF GEORGE BUSH. IT'S NORTH OF MILLER.

IT IS ZONED FOR BASE URBAN VILLAGE. IT'S A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH WARRANTS BEFORE YOU.

YOU'LL NOTICE THE WARRANTS ARE GOING TO BE EXACTLY THE SAME AS GIULIANI'S. SO I MIGHT MOVE KIND OF QUICKLY.

THE SITE ITSELF IS 9.709.706 ACRES. IT'S A 300 UNIT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

SO A BIT OF BACKGROUND. AS I SAID, THIS IS PART OF THAT DOWNTOWN FRAMEWORK PLAN, AND IT IS PART OF THAT SAME REGULATING PLAN YOU CAN SEE THERE ON THE SIDE.

SO THIS IS THE PLAN NORTHWEST. IT'S THOSE TOP TWO PARCELS THAT ARE COMING BEFORE YOU FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.

AND JUST SO YOU'RE KIND OF AWARE, SO 199 IS THE TOP TWO NORTHEAST ON IT.

AND THEN LILIANA'S CASE WAS THE PLAN SOUTHEAST JUST KIND OF TO ORIENT YOU FOR THAT REGULATING PLAN.

SO THE REGULATING PLAN WAS APPROVED ON MARCH 13TH, 2018 FOR THIS SITE.

JUST FOR SOME CLARIFICATION, THE ORDINANCE WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER OF 2020.

THAT DID REQUIRE SPECIAL USE PERMITS FOR MULTIFAMILY WITHIN THE FORM BASED ZONING DISTRICTS.

HOWEVER, BECAUSE THIS REGULATING PLAN WAS APPROVED BEFORE THEN AND THEY DID CONTINUE TO MAKE PROGRESS, THIS SITE IS ACTUALLY EXEMPTED. THIS USE IS ACTUALLY VESTED AT THIS SITE.

SO THE SITE DID PREVIOUSLY COME THROUGH FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BACK IN 22.

IT HAS SINCE EXPIRED. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE WAS SOME CONSTRUCTION COST ISSUES THAT KIND OF HELD THEM UP A LITTLE BIT.

YES. SO IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S A CONFLICT OF OR TWO DIFFERENT COMMENTS THERE.

WE WERE MAKING PROGRESS OR WERE EXEMPT FROM THE SVP, BUT WELL GUESS WHAT? EXPIRED BECAUSE WE WEREN'T MAKING PROGRESS. SO WE GOT VERIFICATION FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY. BECAUSE SO THEY WERE MAKING PROGRESS OR THEY GOT THAT SITE DEVELOPMENT 22, THEY GOT A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT THAT'S ACTUALLY STILL VALID IN 23.

AND THEN THINGS KIND OF CEASED. SO SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS EXPIRE AFTER TWO YEARS.

SO THAT'S WHY THAT KIND OF EXPIRED. BUT WE DID GO TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND WE ASKED, HEY, HERE'S THAT SITE HISTORY. HERE'S WHAT THEY'VE DONE DEVELOPMENT WISE.

AND SHE SAID THAT VESTED STATUS FOR THE USE ITSELF IS A LITTLE AMBIGUOUS IN TEXAS, BUT THAT SHE DID THINK THIS MET THAT STANDARD OF KEEPING THE USE ITSELF VESTED, EVEN IF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN HAS EXPIRED.

DOES THAT SOUND AMBIGUOUS TO ANYBODY? SHE THINKS SHE THAT WAS HER.

THAT WAS HER. THAT WAS HER HERE A PROFESSIONAL OPINION TEST. SO THE USE IS VESTED.

BUT THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHICH USE VESTING ACTUALLY IS MORE PROTECTED THAN THE SITE PLAN.

IN GENERAL, WHEN WE LOOK AT USES, WE GENERALLY LOOK AT ABANDONMENT AND TEND TO ABANDON THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO GENERALLY YOU JUST HAVE MORE PROTECTION FOR VESTED USES THAN YOU WOULD FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

AND THAT'S KIND OF TRUE ACROSS THE BOARD OKAY.

THANK YOU. OKAY. SO HERE'S THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR YOU TODAY.

SO THERE'S 300 UNITS. 210 OF THEM ARE ONE BEDROOM UNITS.

90 OF THEM ARE TWO BEDROOM UNITS. SO 473 VEHICLE PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED.

THEY'RE PROVIDING 397 ON SITE AND 121 ON STREET.

SO THEY ARE EXCEEDING WHAT THAT BARE MINIMUM IS.

24 BICYCLE PARKING WAS PROVIDED, WHICH IS WHAT'S REQUIRED.

SO TWO PER BUILDING ON SITE. AS FAR AS ACCESS GOES, THIS IS EXACTLY MATCHING WHAT WE SAW IN THE REGULATING PLAN.

SO THEY HAVE ACCESS FROM SHIRAZ. ONE IS ALREADY BUILT PORTION OF THAT.

THIS WILL GET BUILT OUT WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.

AND THEN THERE IS GOING TO BE TWO ADDITIONAL ROADWAY ACCESS TO GEORGE BUSH.

SO ONE THE PLAN WEST, WHICH IS THE SOUTHERN BORDER OF BORDER OF THIS PROPERTY, AND THAT ONE DOWN THE MIDDLE, THAT'S GOING TO BIFURCATE DOWN THE MIDDLE OF ALL OF THIS.

SO THIS IS A LANDSCAPE PLAN. SO THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE US 143 TREES.

THAT'S WHAT IS BEING PROVIDED. THE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 79 PARKING LOT TREES.

THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE PROVIDING. OPEN SPACE. THEY ARE MEETING ALMOST ALL THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS SIMILAR TO LILIANA'S.

EXCEPT FOR ONE, WHICH I'LL GO OVER IN JUST A BIT, BUT THEY ARE EXCEEDING THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF OPEN SPACE ON SITE, AND THEY ARE EXCEEDING THE MINIMUM USABLE SHADE WITHIN THAT OPEN SPACE THAT'S REQUIRED ON SITE.

SO THESE ARE THE THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS. THEY'RE MEETING ALL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR FORM BASED CODE AS WELL. SO AGAIN THE WARRANT REQUEST I'M GOING TO MOVE THROUGH THESE KIND OF QUICK BECAUSE THEY'RE THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU HEARD. BUT THEY ARE DOING THE SAME FOR WARRANTS AT THIS SITE AS WELL. SO THE FIRST AGAIN IS THAT BLOCK SIZE AND CONFIGURATION. SO IT IS MATCHING LARGELY CONFORMING TO WHAT THE REGULATING PLAN WAS APPROVED WITH.

UNFORTUNATELY, THIS ONE JUST WASN'T PROCESSED WITH THAT REGULATING PLAN.

SO WE HAVE TO PROCESS IT NOW WITH THESE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS. AND SO THAT'S WHY IT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY. SO THEY ARE EXCEEDING THAT AVERAGE BLOCK LENGTH.

SO THEIR AVERAGE BLOCK LENGTH IS 509. AND THEY ARE EXCEEDING THAT MAX TO 803.

BUT THAT MAX BLOCK PORTION IS THE PART THAT'S GOT TO GO UP BY THE PARK UP THERE.

SO THE REST OF THE BLOCK LENGTHS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS.

THE OTHER THING I WANT TO POINT OUT ABOUT BLOCK LINKS IS THE FORM BASED CODE SPECIFICALLY CALLS THEM OUT AS IT'S DEMARCATED BY RIGHT OF WAY.

[01:00:01]

THEY'RE PROPOSING FOUR DIFFERENT ACCESS POINTS.

SO CIRCULATION IS NOT A CONCERN. PD OR FIRE LOOKS AT THIS.

YOU KNOW LIFE SAFETY IS NOT A CONCERN. THERE'S A LOT OF CIRCULATION HAPPENING ON SITE.

IT'S JUST BECAUSE THE FORM BASED CODE SPECIFICALLY CALLS OUT FROM RIGHT OF WAY TO RIGHT OF WAY.

SO THAT'S WHY THESE BLOCKS ARE SO LONG. SO AGAIN THEY'RE DOING THAT MINIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT.

SO THEY HAVE 12 BUILDINGS ON SITE, TEN OF WHICH ARE APARTMENT BUILDINGS, ARE ALL THREE STOREYS.

THEY HAVE A CLUBHOUSE AND A FITNESS HOUSE OR FITNESS CENTER.

BOTH ARE ONE STORY, AND THEY'RE PRETTY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU WOULD SEE IN ANY MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

SO FACING OPEN SPACE, AGAIN, THEY'RE MEETING ALL OF THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS.

SO IT HAS TO BE IRRIGATED AND FENCED. IT HAS TO HAVE A PERIMETER STREET.

IT CAN'T BE IN THE PARKING LOT. ALL OF THE BUILDINGS NEED TO BE WITHIN THAT BUILDING ZONE.

AND SO THEY'VE HIT KIND OF ALL THESE OTHER REQUIREMENTS EXCEPT FOR THIS ONE, THAT OPEN SPACE HAS TO BE FRONTED BY BUILDINGS TO COUNT.

STAFF DOES FEEL THAT BASED OFF, YOU KNOW, THE SITE CONSTRAINTS HERE AND THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE THEY'RE HAVING TO WORK WITH.

BUT WE DID FEEL THAT THIS WAS A GOOD PLACE FOR THE OPEN SPACE.

SO BUT THEY DO REQUIRE THAT WARRANT BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT BEING FULLY FRONTED BY BUILDINGS.

SO IN GREEN ON THIS ONE, YOU CAN SEE THOSE ARE THEIR ACCESS DRIVES.

SO THEY'RE PROPOSING ONE ON THAT SOUTHERN ROAD THAT'S GOING TO BE AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

THEY'RE GOING CLOSING TWO OFFSHORE STORES AND ONE OFF OF THAT ROAD THAT'S GOING TO BE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

AND AGAIN, THE ACCESS DRIVES, THEY'RE NOT DEVIATING FROM OUR STANDARDS.

IT'S JUST WRITTEN THE FORM BASED CODE THAT WE HAVE TO ASK FOR THAT WARRANT.

JUST SO STAFF AND PNC AND CITY COUNCIL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE A LOOK AT THEIR ACCESS AND THEIR CIRCULATION AND MAKE SURE IT MAKES SENSE.

SO AGAIN, THOSE ARE THE FOUR WARRANTS THAT ARE BEING REQUESTED TONIGHT. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF PRESENTATION.

AS A GOVERNING BODY, YOU MAY APPROVE APPROVAL CONDITIONS OR DENY. COULD YOU GO BACK IN YOUR PRESENTATION TO THE PARKING? 121 ON STREET PARKING. SO THAT'S LIKE IF YOU CAN SEE AND IT'S KIND OF HARD, BUT OFFSHORE LAWS ARE PROVIDING SOME OR PROVIDING SOME OFF OF THE OTHER ROAD UP TOP. SO THEY'RE PROVIDING ON OFF ON STREET PARKING, WHICH IS TECHNICALLY OFF SITE, BUT IN THE FORM BASED CODE. YOU CAN INCLUDE THAT AND REDUCE YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENT SO YOU CAN COUNT THAT TOWARDS YOUR PARKING MINIMUMS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MR. PAUL, GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. ALRIGHT. SO TORRES, IS THAT HOW YOU PRONOUNCE THAT, I THINK, OR IS IT CONNECT FROM GEORGE BUSH TO CENTENNIAL? SO A NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. ACTUALLY, NO, IT DOES NOT.

IT CONNECTS TO MAIN STREET. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO IS THERE A INTERNAL ACCESS AND EGRESS THAT CONNECTS TO CENTENNIAL? SO CENTENNIAL THERE IS STILL SOME CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING AT THE STAFF LEVEL OF WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH CENTENNIAL.

BECAUSE THAT MUNICIPAL COMPLEX THAT THE CITY MUNICIPAL COMPLEX IS, IS STILL BEING DESIGNED RIGHT NOW.

AND SO THAT WILL KIND OF DETERMINE WHAT HAPPENS WITH CENTENNIAL IF THAT ROAD GETS CONTINUED.

OKAY. SO THE THE ROAD, WHATEVER THE NAME OF THE ROAD IS THAT THAT GOES OUT THE EXCESS, THE INGRESS AND EGRESS OUT TO GEORGE BUSH. AND ONE OF THE ACCESS POINTS.

SO AS I READ THE PLANS ONE OF THEM WINDS AROUND AND COMES OUT AND CONNECTS WITH CENTENNIAL.

SO AGAIN THAT MIGHT CHANGE A LITTLE WHENEVER THE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX, WHENEVER WE FINALIZE THAT DESIGN IT MAY CHANGE.

BUT RIGHT NOW THE PLAN SHOWS THAT. IS THAT RIGHT? THE PLAN SHOWS. YEAH, IT WOULD CONNECT IF THAT. IF THAT'S CONTINUED THERE, IF NOT THEN IT WILL BE POTENTIALLY BE GATED AND DONE VIA TURNAROUND THERE.

OKAY. SO THE 121 PARKING SPACES. IS ANY OF THAT ON THAT PARTICULAR.

YES. YEAH. AND SO WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AGAIN WHENEVER THAT.

IT DOES HAVE TO CHANGE. THEN IT'S TOO LATE. SO THEY'RE STILL EXCEEDING THEIR PARKING COUNTS RIGHT NOW.

WELL BUT THE POINT IS THAT ONE 21ST MAY OR MAY NOT OCCUR, DEPENDING ON WHAT THE CITY COUNCIL SAYS ABOUT THE NEW MUNICIPAL COMPLEX. SO IF THIS MOVES FORWARD, THEN THIS HAS APPROVAL FROM CITY COUNCIL.

[01:05:03]

I DON'T THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE PUBLIC, IS MY UNDERSTANDING, BUT WE CAN CLARIFY THAT.

COULD YOU REPEAT WHAT YOU JUST SAID? SO THAT CONNECTION THERE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS I DON'T THINK THAT NECESSARILY WILL BE PUBLIC.

I THINK THAT MIGHT ENTER AN EXIT INTO A MUNICIPAL COMPLEX.

BUT DE FACTO, BECAUSE OF THE REPEAL. YES. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE MIDDLE.

THE MIDDLE ONE. THE VERY MIDDLE ONE. YEAH. THE MIDDLE ONE ACTUALLY WOULD GO INTO THE BACK OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY, WHICH WOULD BE GAINED. SO THAT ONE WOULD NOT BE A PUBLIC ACCESS POINT.

THE ONE THAT'S ON THE FAR RIGHT WOULD BE A CONNECTION TO THE PARK, WHICH WOULD.

IT'S CURRENTLY PLANNED TO BE A PUBLIC ACCESS INTO THE PARK.

THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE WINDOW. OKAY, SO THE ONE THAT YOU SAY POTENTIALLY COULD BE A CONNECTION TO THE ONE, THE ONE ALL THE WAY TO THE FORUM. CORRECT. IS THERE ANY PARKING THAT'S PART OF THAT ONE? 21. SORRY. NO, I DON'T THINK PART OF THAT ONE.

LIKE THE VERY FAR ONE. YES. NO. OKAY. BECAUSE THAT'S RIGHT OFF THE OPEN SPACE AT THAT POINT.

THIS IS NOT. IT WOULD BE A FAIRLY NARROW STREET.

IT'S NOT A MAJOR ARTERIAL. IT'S GOING INTO A PARK. IT'S NOT GOING TO DRIVE INTO THE PARK AS WELL.

BUT OTHER THAN MAJOR ARTERIALS. SO THERE IS ON STREET PARKING.

IT LOOKS LIKE THEY ACTUALLY HAVE SOME ON STREET PARKING. THAT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH OUR PLAN. OKAY. OKAY.

SO ANOTHER QUESTION BECAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN THE PLANS OF POTENTIAL BUILDING LOCATIONS IN THE COMPLEX MUNICIPAL COMPLEX. AM I TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE BUILDINGS WILL BACK UP TO.

THIS PROJECT. NOW WE WALK BACK UP TO IT. NO. NO.

AGAIN? CAN I USE YOUR POINTER, SIR? GOOD WORK.

SO COME A LITTLE CLOSER, PLEASE. SO, RIGHT ABOUT HERE, WHERE YOU SEE THE WATER TOWER.

THAT'S THE VERY BACK OF THE CITY PROPERTY, RIGHT? SO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING WOULD BE THIS AREA BACK.

THERE IS ACTUALLY A PARTY TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY PARTY.

ABOUT HALFWAY THROUGH HERE IS THE CURRENT PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING.

THAT SAFETY BUILDING GOES BACK THIS WAY. OKAY.

SO ONE SIDE OF IT WILL LOOK THIS WAY. SO WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING AS WE DESIGN THAT THAT PROJECT, WE'VE BEEN AWARE OF THIS PROJECT AND WORKING ON MAKING SURE WE ARE WE'RE SENSITIVE TO THE RESIDENTS, BUT ALSO SENSITIVE TO THE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX WITH PUTTING THINGS IN PLACE WHERE? IF WE NEED TO PICK SOMETHING FROM SITE OR ACCESS, WE'RE DOING THAT AS PART OF THAT DESIGN PROCESS.

YEAH. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I'M ASKING ALL THESE QUESTIONS IS CENTENNIAL COME OFF, MAIN STREET WAS RELOCATED.

AND ALL THIS MESS AND FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES.

IT BECOMES CENTENNIAL STREET OF THE CITY OF RALEIGH.

BUT PART OF THE PARKING LOT FOR WHAT, 90 MILLION? BECAUSE YOU EVEN HAVE ALL THE PARKING SPACES THERE, RIGHT UP TO THE DOORS AND THE APARTMENTS.

SO WHAT I'M WONDERING IS WHAT I'M ASKING THIS COMPLEX BACKS UP TO THIS AREA TOO, AND IT CUTS THROUGH TO CENTENNIAL. CENTENNIAL BECOME A STREET IN THERE THAT ONCE AGAIN WE HAVE A WIDTH.

POTENTIAL WIDTH PROBLEM FOR THE TRAFFIC. I THINK TWO THINGS.

ONE IS THE PARTICIPATION THROUGH CIVIL. AND THESE PLANS HAVE BEEN APPROVED.

SO OUR ENGINEERS HAVE LOOKED AT IT AND APPROVED IT.

AND WE'RE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE DESIGN OF THE ADJACENT PROJECT.

SO I WANT TO GIVE YOU SOME COMFORT THERE THAT WE ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO THOSE ISSUES AS WE DESIGN THIS PROJECT.

THE IDEA RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, IS THAT THAT STREET COMES AROUND THE EDGE, WOULD COME IN AND ACTUALLY BE PROVIDE THE ANIMAL SHELTER BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT THE WETLANDS

[01:10:04]

AND I BELIEVE THAT IS A CUL DE SAC. SO IT REALLY BECOMES A VERY IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A HEAVILY DRUGGED PATH AND EVERYTHING GOING ON.

PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING IS GOING TO RUN INTO SECURITY BARRIERS.

THAT'S WHY THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING AT THE BACK END OF THAT FACILITY, SO THAT IT'S NOT REALLY IT'S NOT ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC FROM THE I WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET A LOT OF THROUGH TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH HERE. SO I DO WANT TO TRY AND GIVE YOU SOME COMFORT THAT WE'RE PAYING SOME ENGINEERS, SOME PRETTY SIGNIFICANT FUNDS TO LOOK AT BOTH DESIGNS OF PREFERRED PARK AND THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK THROUGH HERE TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS.

OKAY. SO WHILE YOU'RE STANDING THERE ANSWERING PEOPLE THAT SAY THESE APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN THE COMPLEX, IF I DON'T WANT IF I HAVE KIDS IN SCHOOL.

IF IT'S IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, THEY CAN EITHER PIN IT ON THE FENCES, WALK POTENTIALLY TO STEVENS, OR THEY GET OUT OF THEIR VEHICLE. THEY PULLED OUT ON THE SERVICE ROAD. THEY GO DOWN TO MILLER AND COME BACK INTO STEVENS MIDDLE SCHOOL AND EITHER WALK AROUND OR IF IT'S BY VEHICLE, THEY CAN COME OUT ON THE SERVICE ROAD BECAUSE THAT TAKES YOU SOUTH AWAY FROM COYLE TO COME THROUGH CENTENNIAL AND TO MAIN STREET AND BACK DOWN TO COURT.

I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT DRIVING PATTERNS IS WE ALL TRY TO PARK AS CLOSE TO A DEFINITION THING.

WE ALL TRY TO DRIVE THE SHORTEST ROUTE THAT WE CAN.

AND SO I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO GET MORE TRAFFIC THAN WHAT THE ENGINEERS THOUGHT THAT COME OUT TO GO EITHER TO THE HIGH SCHOOL OR GOING UP TO MAINE, OR MAYBE CROSSING THE BRIDGE VERSUS GOING ALL THE WAY TO MILLER.

DO YOU MEAN COMING BACK OR TO COURT? OR IF YOU NEED TO GO TO POINTS NORTH OR WORK OR WHATEVER YOU CUT THROUGH THE PARK INSTEAD OF GOING OUT ON THE SERVICE ROAD, WHICH IS ONE WAY TO TAKE A HIKE ALL THE WAY UP AND THEN COME BACK TO THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING AT AT POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS HERE.

I THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE PACKAGE.

I NEED TO HEAR A QUESTION. YES, SIR. WELL, THAT'S MY COMMENT.

AND I GUESS THE QUESTION FOR ME IS, DID YOU THAT THE THE THE ENGINEERS LOOKED AT ALL OF THAT FOR SOME OF THE SCHOOLS. OKAY. I'M SORRY. WHAT WAS THAT? SO WE'RE CERTAINLY PAYING ATTENTION TO THE SCHOOLS.

THANK YOU. QUESTION FOR YOU. THE STATE LOOKED AT SUCH A HIGH DENSITY HOUSING.

SO CLOSE. I THINK RIGHT ACROSS CROSS STREET IS THE BUILDERS.

I THINK IT'S A SOME BUILDING. OR THEN THERE'S A GATED COMMUNITY RIGHT THERE, SOME HOUSING BEHIND IT.

THE THE CITY. THE CITY HAVING CONTROL OVER PUTTING SO MUCH LARGE, HIGH DENSITY HOUSING IN THAT AREA.

OR IS IT JUST ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT HERE OR WHAT OTHER AREA? OH, THIS AREA, BECAUSE I KNOW FURTHER UP IS THE OTHER APARTMENTS, LIKE I SAY 90.

I THINK THAT YOU'VE ALREADY RECEIVED A PRESENTATION THAT THIS WAS ZONED APPROPRIATE FOR THIS AT THE TIME THAT TONY WAS PUT IN PLACE.

SO CERTAINLY THERE WAS A DECISION BY THE POLICY BODY AT THAT TIME THAT THIS DENSITY WAS AN APPROPRIATE USE FOR THIS LOCATION BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO COMMERCIAL AND ADJACENT TO ALL THIS. NOW, THAT'S MY ASSUMPTION.

I WASN'T HERE WHEN THAT DECISION WAS MADE, BUT CERTAINLY SORRY, THIS ISN'T A INCONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING.

IT'S ACTUALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING. AND THAT WAS THE PREVIOUS ZONE.

THAT IS THE CURRENT THE CURRENT OKAY. CURRENTLY.

OKAY. AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, YOU DID SAY SINCE IT IS IN CONVERSATION IN THOSE PARAMETERS.

SO YES, AFTER FOLLOWING THOSE PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, I MEAN BASICALLY COMPLYING WITH ALL THE REGULATIONS EXCEPT FOR THE THREE ONES OF THEIR ASSETS. AND AS FAR AS TIMING, AND I WOULD SAY THAT THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE CONGESTIONS OF THE WORLD, WE WOULD EXPLAIN ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY, CERTAIN THINGS YOU GUYS WOULD PROBABLY DISCUSS AND PUT IN PLACE TO TRACK.

THAT'S CORRECT THEMSELVES. THAT'S PROBABLY. ANY

[01:15:10]

ANY QUESTIONS? TRAFFIC STUDY. SO I BELIEVE THAT WHEN ALL THIS WAS FIRST COMING THROUGH, AND I'LL HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT THIS TRAFFIC WAS LOOKED AT AS THE SITE OVERALL AS A REGULATED PLAN, AS YOU MIGHT BELIEVE. I HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK THOUGH.

BUT WE DID HAVE OUR ENGINEERING TEAM LOOK AT THIS.

AND AND THEY DIDN'T SAY THAT IT WAS REQUIRED FOR THIS SPECIFIC SITE.

MAYBE IT'S A TRICK QUESTION. HAVE YOU LOOKED AT TOTALITY OF STUDY? UNDERSTAND? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW EACH OF THEM, YOU KNOW, I CAN BUILD A SMALL BOX HERE, TWO PLUS TWO, BUT MAYBE TWO TIMES TWO NECESSARILY TWO AND TWO IS FOUR, BUT THREE TIMES BETWEEN THREE THREE PLUS THREE IS SIX.

THREE TIMES THREE IS NINE. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE UNDERSTANDING THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CLARIFY.

SO THIS ON THE SCREEN HERE IS IS WHAT WE CALL REGULATING PLAN.

SO IT'S A PHASED AREA MASTER PLAN. SO IT LOOKS AT MULTIPLE DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE COMING IN AND LOOK AT AS A WHOLE AT THE TIME.

SO AT THIS STAGE, ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT PARCELS WERE LOOKED AT TOGETHER.

SO THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS ONLY A PORTION OF THIS BASE AREA MR. DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO AT THIS STAGE IS WHEN I BELIEVE STAFF LOOKED AT JUST BEFORE MY TIME AT THE CITY, BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS AT THIS STAGE THAT STAFF LOOKED AT TRAFFIC FOR THAT OVERALL SITE, FOR ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS COMING IN AS PART OF THIS REGULATING PLAN.

AND THAT WAS DONE, I BELIEVE. SO I NEED TO DOUBLE CHECK, BUT I BELIEVE SO.

SO. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE.

ENTERTAIN A MOTION. OKAY. THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND THEY HAVE A PRESENTATION.

I'M SORRY. OH. NO. DID YOU.

DID YOU. SOMEBODY OPEN THE BACK DOOR, PLEASE.

WE NEED TO LEAVE IT OPEN. OF COURSE, THAT DOESN'T GET YOU ANY POINTS.

GOOD EVENING. HOWELL BEAVER. I LIVE IN DALLAS.

4232 SAN CARLOS. SO MY NAME IS HOWELL BEAVER.

I'M WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY. WE ARE OAK PARTNERS, HEADQUARTERED IN AUSTIN.

OUR OFFICE HERE IN DALLAS. WE BUILD APARTMENTS ACROSS THE STATE.

WE'VE DONE SINCE 2010, WHEN THE COMPANY WAS FOUNDED, SOME 55 DEALS.

PROJECTS VERY SIMILAR TO THIS, SOME MORE INFILL, SOME IN SUBURBS.

I DON'T SAY THAT TO BRAG, BUT I SAY THAT TO I THINK IT'S RELEVANT TO SOME OF THE DISCUSSION WE MIGHT HAVE ABOUT, WELL, WE OUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT KIND OF WORKS AND DOESN'T WORK FOR OUR PARTNER COMMUNITY IS KIND OF WHAT'S BEST PRACTICES AND WHATNOT.

SO I HAVE MORE TO SAY, BUT A SAY, BUT A LOT OF IT IS GOING TO BE REALLY REPETITIVE.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LOT SO FAR TONIGHT, SO I'LL JUST FLIP THROUGH A COUPLE OF THESE.

THESE ARE JUST DIFFERENT PROJECTS WE'VE DONE ACROSS THE STATE IN DIFFERENT MARKETS.

THIS IS A PROJECT WE DID IN DOWNTOWN DALLAS. WE'RE NOT DOWNTOWN, BUT MORE IN TOWN IN THE LEFT FIELD, SHOWING THIS TO TO IMPRESS UPON YOU GUYS THE TYPE OF QUALITY STUFF THAT WE DO.

WE ARE OUR GOAL EVERY TIME IS TO BE THE BEST IN CLASS.

AND WE WANT TO BE REALLY GOOD NEIGHBOR TO ALL THAT AND AND CERTAINLY EMBRACE YOU GUYS AND HOPEFULLY BE EMBRACED AS WELL.

THIS IS A PROJECT WE DID IN ARLINGTON RECENTLY.

YOU GUYS KNOW THE SITE BY NOW? ROUGHLY NINE ACRES WRAPPING AROUND THE WATER TOWER ADJACENT TO HERBERT PARK.

THIS IS OUR SITE PLAN WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A LITTLE BETTER VISUAL IN COLOR THAN WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY SEEN.

WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS, I BELIEVE, BEFORE. MY WARRANTS ARE FOR BLOCK LENGTH BUILDING HEIGHT, SPECIFICALLY AT THE CLUB. THE CLUB BUILDING AND ALL THE AMENITIES ARE OUR OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT.

AND THEN THE ACCESS DRIVES. I'LL SPEAK QUICKLY TO BLOCK LENGTH.

FIRST AND FOREMOST YOU KNOW, IT WAS OUR IMPRESSION ALL ALONG THAT WE WERE TO MATCH THE BLOCKS SHOWN ON ON THE REGULATING PLAN.

WE DO MATCH THAT. PRECISELY. WE BUT OF COURSE, THE WAY AS DESCRIBED PREVIOUSLY.

FOR MY WAY RIGHT AWAY, WE WE EXCEED THE MINIMUM AVERAGE, AND I'M SORRY, THE MAXIMUM.

THE MAXIMUM. I WILL SAY, AS MENTIONED BY BRITTANY AS WELL, THAT I THINK WE DID A REALLY GOOD JOB AT GETTING GETTING TO WHAT THE FORM BASED CODE, IN A PRACTICAL SENSE, ONCE WE GET THERE, IN A PRACTICAL WAY, BY WAY OF THE PRIVATE FIRE ACCESS AND JUST ACCESS DRIVES, THE FIRE ACCESS ROUTES THAT CIRCULATE THROUGHOUT DO EFFECTIVELY CREATE A MUCH SMALLER BLOCK THAT WOULD CERTAINLY BE WITHIN THE INTENDED MAXIMS IN THE FORM BASED CODE. SO? SO I DO THINK WE MEET THE INTENTION OF THE CODE WHILE MATCHING WHAT THE REGULATORY PLAN SHOWS US.

[01:20:08]

SO THIS IS A RENDERING SHOWING YOU THE CLUBHOUSE, WHICH IF YOU RECALL IS THAT YOU CAN SEE ON THE TOP RIGHT THERE'S THE SITE PLAN WITH A WITH A CIRCLE SHOWING YOU WHERE THAT BUILDING IS. THAT IS FORMALLY, I GUESS TECHNICALLY ONE STOREY, BUT IT IS A TWO STOREY CONDITION, TWO STOREY HEIGHT.

SO IT CERTAINLY GIVES THE ESTHETIC, IF THAT'S IMPORTANT AS WELL IT ALLOWS FOR SOMEONE DOWN THE ROAD IF THEY WANT TO, TO COME IN AND PUT A, A FLOOR BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, AT TEN FEET OR WHATEVER TO HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND FLOOR.

WE DON'T HAVE A USE FOR IT. IT'S NOT IT'S NOT USEFUL.

IT'S NOT A BEST PRACTICE TO HAVE A TWO STOREY CLUB AND A PROJECT LIKE THIS.

WE ARE FULLY MONETIZED AND HAVE ALL SORTS OF BELLS AND WHISTLES, AND IT ALL DOES REALLY WELL WITH THIS FLOOR PLAN AND THIS SPACING.

AND WE REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE A CLUBHOUSE THAT HAS A HIGH CEILING VOLUME.

SO WE HAVE WE HAVE THESE 20 FOOT CEILINGS. IT'S REALLY REALLY NICE.

IT'S A GREAT FIRST IMPRESSION FOR THE RESIDENTS.

SO WE REALLY LIKE THAT. AND WE DO IT ALL THE TIME AND IT'S A PROVEN SUCCESS.

ALSO, IT'S JUST GOT A REALLY GOOD SCALE FOR WHAT WE A REALLY GOOD PEDESTRIAN SCALE FOR THIS RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY THAT WE'RE GOING TO DEVELOP.

HERE'S ANOTHER PICTURE FROM THE OTHER SIDE. THIS IS FROM THE INTERIOR, FROM THE PARKING LOT LOOKING AT THE CLUBHOUSE.

SAME BUILDING, JUST DIFFERENT SIDE. HERE'S A FLOOR PLAN SHOWING THE FLOOR PLAN THAT WE GOT.

IT'S NOT PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT TO THE DISCUSSION AT HAND.

WHAT? WE'LL HAVE A LEASING TEAM. WE'LL HAVE AMENITY AREAS.

WE HAVE A WORKSPACE, A WORK STUDIO, WHICH IS KIND OF INSPIRED BY WEWORK A PLACE FOR OUR RESIDENTS TO GO WHO WORK FROM HOME OR OR STUDENTS TO STUDY OR WHATEVER.

A PLACE FOR THEM TO GET OUT OF THEIR APARTMENT AND GO WORK IN THE SPACE THAT WE PROVIDE FOR THEM.

YOU KNOW, THE USE THE PURPOSE OF THE SPACE IS THIS IS THEN, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS TO IF YOU DON'T USE IT FOR A COMMERCIAL TODAY, IT CAN BE USED FOR COMMERCIAL OR IT CAN BE RETROFITTED FOR COMMERCIAL SOMETIME DOWN THE ROAD.

BUT THIS USE I MEAN, IT'S FOR AN APARTMENT COMPLEX, BUT IT'S REALLY A COMMERCIAL USE MUCH MORE.

IT'S NOT A RESIDENTIAL USE, THAT'S FOR SURE. YOU KNOW, THERE'S AN OPERATION HAPPENING ON THE LEASING SIDE AND THEN THE AMENITIES, YOU KNOW, IT'S A FITNESS CENTER. IT'S A WORK STUDIO. IT FEELS LIKE WE WORK OR A FITNESS CENTER.

MOVING ON TO THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT, WE HAVE TWO OPEN SPACE AREAS DESIGNED AS MENTIONED EARLIER.

WE DO EXCEED THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT. WE EXCEED THE SHADE REQUIREMENT.

THESE ARE VERY, VERY SENSIBLE TO US IN TERMS OF WHERE WE'VE LOCATED THE OPEN SPACE.

BOTH OF THEM ARE AT REALLY BOTH OF THEM REALLY MAXIMIZE THE KIND OF PUBLIC USE ONES THAT OF COURSE, THE, THE, THE THE ROUNDABOUT AND THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE.

AND THEN THE OTHER THAT'S, THAT'S SPECIFICALLY THE ONE THAT'S SLIGHTLY OUT OF COMPLIANCE IS AT THE TOP RIGHT OF THE PAGE THAT'S ADJACENT TO HEREFORD PARK.

WE THINK THAT IS A REALLY GREAT OPEN SPACE LOCATION BECAUSE IT PROVIDES CIRCULATION TO THE PARK.

NOT ONLY FOR US, BUT FOR THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY THAT IS PAGE SOUTH OF US, DUE EAST OF US, AGAINST THE HIGHWAY. THIS I THINK THE THE THE.

I THINK WE NEED THE INTENT HERE. IT'S A REALLY FOCAL POINT OF THE PROPERTY.

SO. SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE TOP RIGHT OF THE PAGE OR THE OPEN SPACES, IT DOES NOT HAVE A STAFF.

STAFF SAYS THAT IT NEEDS A LOT OF WORK BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE A BUILDING FRONTING IT.

THE IT DOES HAVE THE FOCAL POINT OF THE PROJECT FRONTING, WHICH IS THE CLUBHOUSE, THE FITNESS CENTER AND THE POOL.

SO IT REALLY IS THE MOST ACTIVE PLACE ON THE ENTIRE PROJECT.

AND, AND THAT REALLY BRINGS REALLY ALL THE ATTENTION IN MY MIND TO THAT OPEN SPACE.

AND I THINK IT'S A REALLY APPROPRIATE USE FOR IT.

AND I THINK THE BACKDROP OF THE CLUBHOUSE AND THE POOL AND THE FITNESS CENTER, WHICH HAVE UNIQUE ARCHITECTURE TO THE REST OF THE PROJECT, REALLY MAKE FOR A NICE ESTHETIC AND A GOOD VIBE. AND THEN LASTLY, THE THE APARTMENT BUILDING, WHICH I COULD POINT TO IT, THE TOP RIGHT APARTMENT BUILDING HAS A DRIVE AISLE BETWEEN IT AND THE OPEN SPACE.

AND SO I THINK THAT'S THE MOMENT WHERE WE TECHNICALLY ARE NOT DON'T QUALIFY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE BUILDING FRONTING THE OPEN SPACE.

THAT PART, THAT JIVE AISLE RIGHT THERE REALLY HELPS THE FIRE ACCESS.

MY GUESS IS IF WE, YOU KNOW, WE COULD MOVE THE BUILDING TO THE RIGHT IN THEORY AND GET IT TO, TO TO TO FRONT THE OPEN SPACE. I DON'T THINK YOUR FIRE DEPARTMENT'S GOING TO LIKE THAT AS MUCH.

SO THAT THAT'S ALL WE CAN. WE CAN DISCUSS ALL THAT, BUT THOSE ARE KIND OF THE MAIN POINTS I WANTED TO HIT ON THAT.

HERE'S A HERE'S A RENDERING OF THE OPEN SPACE AT THE ROUNDABOUT.

[01:25:03]

YOU KNOW, IT'S GOT THE FITNESS CENTER, IT'S GOT THE FITNESS CENTER AND THE AMENITY AREA AND THE CLUBHOUSE ON THE PAGE LEFT.

AND THEN THE APARTMENT BUILDING WITH THE FIRE LANE IS KIND OF IN THE CENTER OF THE PAGE IN THE BACKGROUND.

AND OF COURSE, THE PARK ON THE RIGHT ACCESS DRIVES.

I THINK WE'RE PRETTY MUCH IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL BEST PRACTICE.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING THAT THAT STAFF ACTUALLY HAS A CONCERN HERE.

OTHER THAN THAT ALL ACCESS COMES TO THE EVENTS.

SO I WON'T I WON'T BORE ANYBODY WITH WHY THESE MID-BLOCK ACCESS POINTS MAKE SENSE? AND THAT'S ALL I GOT. SO OPEN FOR ANY AND ALL QUESTIONS AND APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER. MR. HERNANDEZ CANDIDATES.

ONE QUESTION I DID HAVE ON THE AS FAR AS THE PARKING SPACES WITHIN THE WITHIN THE COMPLEX ITSELF, THE THE STREET PARKING. WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION GIVEN AS FAR AS COVERINGS FOR THE VEHICLES? WELL, YOU MEAN LIKE CARPORTS AND OR GARAGES AND WHATNOT? YEAH. AND I'M TRYING TO THINK AT ONE POINT WE DID HAVE SOME BECAUSE IT GETS HOT IN TEXAS, I AGREE.

NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT WE'RE IN THIS SEASON HAIL AND SEVERE WEATHER IS A VERY, YOU KNOW, REAL THREAT. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. THAT'S SOMETHING WE WILL CONSIDER THAT.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU GUYS FOR THAT, BUT WE WE CERTAINLY WOULD CONSIDER THAT.

MR. COHEN SO JUST LIKE I ASKED THE GENTLEMAN BEFORE YOU. YES, SIR. ARE YOU GUYS WILLING TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL LANE ON GEORGE BUSH SERVICE ROAD? WE ARE PROVIDING TWO TURNOUTS OFF THE BUSH, BUT WE ARE NOT.

AND WE DON'T OWN THAT PROPERTY, SO WE CAN'T. WE'RE REQUIRED TO ADD THE TURN LANES TO BOTH OF THE ACCESS POINTS THAT COME OFF THE BUSH FRONTAGE ROAD.

THEREAFTER, WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY CONTROL OF THAT PROPERTY THAT FRONTS THE BUSH.

WE DON'T OWN THAT. OKAY. AND ALSO WOULD YOU BE AND CONSIDER WIDENING CENTENNIAL TO THE REAR? WE LOOK AT THAT. I'M NOT SURE I FOLLOW, NOR I'M NOT SURE I HAVE CONTROL OF THAT, BUT LET'S LOOK AT THAT. LET'S GO TO THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER.

WANT TO KNOW IF ON YOUR FAR ALRIGHT. END UP THERE.

THAT WHERE YOU HAVE YOUR OPEN SPACE. YOU GOT YOURSELF THAT I BELIEVE CONNECTS TO CENTENNIAL.

YES, SIR. I THINK IT WILL. DOES IT? YES. OR WILL IT? YES. I GUESS THE ANSWER ULTIMATELY YOUR QUESTION IS WE WOULD CERTAINLY CONSIDER WHATEVER MAKES SENSE TO BE TO WORK WITH THE CITY.

I THINK THERE'S MORE THAN PROBABLY THE ENGINEER'S CONSIDERED THE THE CITY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE TRAFFIC QUITE A BIT OF TRAFFIC COMING OUT OF YOUR APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT'S WILLING TO GO INTO THE PARK AND OVER TO MAIN STREET TO CIRCUMVENT GOING OUT ON THE SERVICE ROAD, WHICH IS ONE LANE, GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO MILLER BEFORE THEY CAN TURN AROUND AND COME BACK NORTH, EITHER TO GET ON TO BUSCH OR TO GO UP TO 66 OR TO THE HIGH SCHOOL.

OR IS THIS AN OPTION TO ACCESS THE WARRANT FOR THE ACCESS? YEAH. WHAT WOULD PEOPLE THAT THAT WON'T GO TO THE HIGH SCHOOL OR TO CALL OR UP TO 66 WANT TO GO OUT ON TO GEORGE BUSH ON ACCESS POINTS AND YOUR EGRESS POINTS.

YEAH. AND THEN GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO MILLER BEFORE THE TURN AROUND AND COME BACK NORTH.

SO THE EASY WAY OUT IS TO GO OUT OF MY COMPLEX AND GO INTO CENTENNIAL AND GO OUT TO MAIN STREET.

UNDERSTOOD. SO I GUESS I WOULD RESPOND BY SAYING, YES, WE'LL CONSIDER ANYTHING THAT THE CITY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT.

I CERTAINLY COULDN'T MAKE A CALL RIGHT NOW. DO I CONTROL THIS? I WAS LOOKING FOR THE REGULATING PLAN, BUT I THINK WHAT WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY IS WE ARE WE ARE MATCHING PRECISELY THE STREET PLAN, THE CIRCULATION PER THE REGULATING PLAN. MY GUESS IS PEOPLE, IF THEY'RE TRYING TO GET TO MAIN STREET, THEY'LL EITHER CUT THROUGH SHIRAZ. THAT NEW, THAT NEW BRIDGE CONNECTING THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH.

NO, NO. CUT THROUGH THAT PROPERTY UP TO MAIN STREET OR ONE CENTENNIAL.

I GUESS THEY COULD GO UP CENTENNIAL AND DO THE SAME.

AND YES, WE'RE OPEN TO DISCUSS ANYTHING IF IF IT'S SENSIBLE, BUT I JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO SPEAK BEYOND THAT.

OKAY. AND DO YOU HAVE ANY OF YOUR APARTMENT BUILDINGS ON THOSE?

[01:30:07]

THREE STORY PARK APARTMENTS DO NOT HAVE ELEVATORS.

DOES YOUR BUILDINGS IN ARLINGTON. AND WHATEVER YOU SHOWED.

ARLINGTON. I HAVE A THREE STORY BUILDING AND A FOUR STORY BUILDING.

THE FOUR STORY BUILDING DOES. THE THREE STORY BUILDING DOES NOT.

THAT'S ALL. IN ONE PROJECT WE HAVE DIFFERENT PRODUCTS, BUT I BELIEVE THE CITY STANDARDS HERE IS PROBABLY IN LINE WITH ARLINGTON.

YOU GO TO A FOURTH STORY, YOU GOT TO HAVE AN ELEVATOR.

THAT'S RIGHT. AND WE OBVIOUSLY AGREE WITH THAT AND DO THAT FROM A MARKETING STANDPOINT.

OTHERWISE THREE STORIES OR LESS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE IT.

THAT'S RIGHT. AND THE MARKET EMBRACES THAT. THE MARKET WOULD OBVIOUSLY NOT LIVE IN UNFORTUNATELY. AND THE REASON WHY I ASKED THAT QUESTION, YOU MENTIONED ABOUT HOW NICE THE PROJECT THIS IS GOING TO BE.

AND YET WHAT I'M SEEING IS BASICALLY THIS IS JUST A THREE STORY APARTMENT BUILDING.

I DON'T SEE ANY FEATURES THAT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T PUT ANY ELEVATORS IN, YOU DON'T PUT ANY OF THE OTHER AMENITIES IN THOSE BUILDINGS OTHER THAN JUST STANDARD. WELL, I, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO TOUR YOU AND SHOW YOU THE COMPETITION THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE. WELL, THE PROJECTS WILL BE COMPETING WITH.

AND I'LL SHOW YOU IN THE PLAN THE STUFF WE'RE DOING, LIKE AT THE POOL RELATIVE TO SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORS.

WE'RE JUST GOING TO BE SEVERE. I JUST KNOW IT.

AND AND THAT'S WHAT I'M COUNTING ON. OUR UNIT FINISHES ARE VERY NICE.

I MEAN, I COULD DRIVE YOU AROUND TOWN AND AND SHOW YOU KIND OF HOW WE OPERATE AND WHAT WE DO AND WHAT OUR STANDARD IS.

AT SOME POINT, THREE STORY APARTMENTS, AT LEAST IN THE RENDERING, IS HARD TO.

IT'S HARD TO TELL THAT STORY. THE EXTERIOR LOOKS LIKE IT'S PARTY BOARD.

WE'VE GOT A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MASONRY AND SOME VERTICAL BOARDING BACK FIBER SIDING.

AND I'M SORRY, STAINED GLASS IS NOT ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT MATERIALS.

SO WE CAN'T TELL THEM WHAT TO DO. TALK ABOUT THAT.

JUST LET ME SEE WHAT WE'RE PUTTING ON THE RECORD.

WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. RIGHT. IF THEY GET THE DECISION, THEY FEEL LIKE WE'RE MAKING A DECISION BASED ON MATERIAL.

THAT MAY BE SUITABLE. WE'RE NOT. SO WE'RE NOT.

IT'S JUST THAT YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A PRESENTATION THAT THIS IS ABOVE, YOU KNOW, THE NORMAL.

I WANT TO SEE ABOVE. NORMAL. I WILL NOT SEE ABOVE.

BUT THAT'S THAT'S A I'LL BE HAPPY TO DRIVE YOU AROUND.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I HAVE A QUESTION.

YES, SIR. IN COMPARISON TO THE COMPANY BUILDING HERE, TO OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, ARE WE EQUIVALENT OR IS IT DIFFERENT, OR IS IT. ARE YOU SEEING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE UNITS YOU'RE BUILDING HERE VERSUS ONE YOU HAVE IN ARLINGTON OR IN THE AIRPORT? YOU KNOW, ARLINGTON. WE'RE THREE MILES SOUTH OF UT ARLINGTON.

WE KIND OF GEARED A LITTLE BIT TOWARDS THE GRADUATE STUDENT TYPE OF PROFILE.

HERE'S WHERE HERE WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING TO TO HOUSE ANYBODY THAT WORKS WORKS ON ON OR OFF THE BUSH.

YOU KNOW YOU'RE BETWEEN GARLAND AND DOWN ON. BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A MUCH MORE DIFFERENT THAN ARLINGTON IN THAT REGARD.

IT'S LIKE BIGGER UNITS, 850 FOOT AVERAGES HERE.

AND ARLINGTON IS ABOUT 800. BUT AGAIN, I GUESS, AGAIN, BACK TO THE DISCUSSION OF QUALITY.

MY PURPOSE OUT OF THE GATE WAS WE ARE ALWAYS COMMITTED TO BEING A BEST IN CLASS, CLASS A DEVELOPMENT.

AND AND THAT'S THE GOAL EVERY TIME. AND INSIDE THE UNITS TO, YOU KNOW, CONSTRUCTION DETAILS ALSO.

OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, MR. HERNANDEZ? COULD YOU GIVE AN ESTIMATE ABOUT WHAT THE THE MONTHLY RENT WOULD BE FOR THESE UNITS? YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW, REVEAL ON THE LAKE IS JUST THE CLOSEST DEAL TO US, JUST SOUTH OF US.

AND THEY'RE GETTING ROUGHLY 1850 A MONTH FOR BIGGER UNITS JUST BECAUSE ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE.

SO THAT'S THE BEST I CAN TELL YOU. SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I'VE ALWAYS HAD ABOUT THE CITY IS, IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING? YES, SIR. AND I'M JUST KIND OF WONDERING, IS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION TO HOUSING ASSISTANCE? ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT RENT CONTROLS OR ANYTHING? NO.

NOT RENT CONTROL. MORE LIKE IF SOMEBODY I GUESS BASICALLY WHAT I'M ASKING HERE IS, IS IF IF THERE'S ANY PROGRAM THAT YOU GUYS WOULD BE

[01:35:01]

THIS IS A PURELY MARKET RATE DEAL. 100% OF THE INVENTORY IS GOING TO BE LEASED OR WHATEVER THE MARKET WILL BEAR.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU GUYS.

YES, SIR. YES, SIR. I HAVE A COMMENT. NOPE. NO QUESTION.

I CONSERVATIVES ANOTHER 450 CARS ON THE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET.

GEORGE. YEAH, LET'S LET'S WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE A MOTION.

SO I'M OPEN FOR A MOTION. IS THERE A.

DIFFERENCE? NO. NO PROBLEM. IT'S NOT A PROBLEM THERE.

OH IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT. THESE ARE JUST MINOR WARMS FOR.

ANYBODY TO MAKE A MOTION. I DON'T THINK, MR. HERNANDEZ.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH WARREN SCOTT'S ITEMIZED ON THE AGENDA ITEM.

WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND.

MR. WILSON SECONDS. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? MR. TUCKER? WELL, MY DISCUSSION. I'M SAYING 473 PARKING SPACES.

TRAFFIC IS ALREADY HEADED FOR THAT INTERSECTION NOW WITH THE SCHOOL.

I JUST SEE THIS MANY MORE CARS ADDED, I THINK.

COMBINATION, OR IS THAT GOOD? SO THAT'S MY JOB.

CAN I CAN I COMMENT ON THAT? MILLER ROAD AND GEORGE AND GEORGE BUSH? I'VE BEEN ON THAT INTERSECTION BEFORE AT BETWEEN 3 AND 6.

AND THAT IS A NIGHTMARE. IT'S A 20 MINUTE EXISTING DELAY RIGHT THERE.

LIKE SO. IF YOU ADD ANOTHER 400 CARS TO THAT SAME COMPLEX AND THE SCHOOL THAT GETTING EXACT SAME TIME, THAT'S GOING TO CLOG UP THAT WHOLE DEPARTMENT ALL THE TIME AND GET TO THE OTHER SIDE OF GEORGE BUSH.

I WANTED TO ADD AND THAT, WELL, WE SEE THE TRAFFIC.

IT HAPPENS. I MEAN, YOU'RE RIGHT. IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE TIME OF DAY.

BUT LIKE WE'VE HEARD FROM STAFF THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, AND TRAFFIC IS GONNAHAPPEN BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH.

BUT WHEN AN APPLICANT COMES AND WE'VE ALREADY DEFINED A PARTICULAR ZONE TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.

UNFORTUNATELY THE TRAFFIC IS BAD. I MEAN, YOU'RE RIGHT.

TIME OF DAY STILL. MR. PARKER? ANYWAY SO I BEEN AROUND THIS CITY WORKS FOR A LONG TIME.

30 YEARS, AND I HAVE YET TO SEE. BUT MAYBE 1 OR 2 TIMES WHEREVER.

WHENEVER WE HAVE REQUIRE A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT CAME BACK AND SAID, I THINK I HAVE LANES TO A ROAD OR WHATEVER.

I THINK YOU'VE GOT YOUR ACCESS POINTS DOWN ON GEORGE BUSH.

THAT BOTHERS ME. AND I THINK I THINK IN REALITY, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE EXIT THIS. LIKE THE APPLICANT SAID, IT WOULD GO DOWN TO THE ADJACENT APARTMENT COMPLEX TO THE NORTH AND GO OUT THAT WAY TO TO MAIN STREET, OR THEY'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE PARK DISTRICT ANYWAY TO CIRCUMVENT GOING DOWN AND COMING BACK NORTH. SO THAT BOTHERS ME.

SO I HAVE REAL PROBLEM WITH THE BORDER ON ACCESS RAMPS.

I ALSO HAVE A PROBLEM. I THINK THAT ONE OF THEM IS GOING TO BE THEIR ACCESS DRIVES ARE UNEVEN.

THAT'S TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN HITTING THE STREETS, APPARENTLY.

YEAH, OKAY, I UNDERSTAND. I MEAN, YOU WANT TO ADD MORE ACCESS DRIVES TO THE CURRENT STREETS IN YOUR PLAN, BUT YOU KNOW, WELL, THAT WON'T CHANGE ANYBODY'S CIRCULATION OR ANYTHING.

CREATE EVEN MORE TRAFFIC. BUT I THINK THAT WITH THE THREE GOING OUT THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO THOSE OUT TO THE ONE IN THE MIDDLE AND THE TWO ON EACH END, THE CONTEXT GOES OUT TO GEORGE BUSH.

[01:40:05]

THEY WANT THE ACCESS POINTS. NO, NO, THE ACCESS IN FACT.

SO THE CAN WE GET THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE WHAT OUR ACCESS POINTS.

YES. SO IN THE GREEN THOSE ARE THE ACCESS POINTS YOU'RE LOOKING AT.

IT IS ACCESS TO AND FROM THIS SITE ONTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

RIGHT. BUT NO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE FOUR ACCESS DRIVES.

CORRECT. I APOLOGIZE. YEAH. HOWEVER, THE REGULATORY PLAN AND NOT JUST THOSE 3 OR 2 FOR THAT WHOLE RUN.

YEAH. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, TEXDOT IS PRETTY PARTICULAR ABOUT SPACING FOR DRIVEWAYS. SO THEY HAVE VERY STRICT RULES ABOUT SPACING FOR DRIVEWAYS.

SO THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THEY CAN EVEN GO AND GET THAT APPROVAL. SO ONE OF THE WORD I'M LOOKING AT THIS IT SHOWS THE POINTS.

THIS IS THE PROPERTY AND POINTS COMING DOWN. SO THIS IS THIS PROPERTY HASN'T BEEN PLATTED YET.

AND SO WHEN IT COMES THROUGH THOSE AREAS WILL BE DEDICATED AS PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. AND THE PARCEL LINES WILL KIND OF SEE ON THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

BUT THE DRIVES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE OVERALL MASTER OR THE OVERALL REGULATING PLAN, THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY DRIVES, THOSE WERE DECIDED AS PART OF THE REGULATING PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2020 OR 2018.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THE FOUR ACTS OF STRIKES INTO AND OUT OF THE SITE. RIGHT? I REALLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING HEIGHT FOR THE CLUBHOUSE.

THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM THERE. BUT THAT'S MY COMMENT.

OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? THIS IS A COMMENT. ONE THING I REALLY DO, AND THIS MAY PROBABLY BE I'M PROBABLY GOING TO BE IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF THIS MINORITY ON THIS, BUT ONE THING I DO WISH IS WHEN WE SEE APARTMENTS LIKE THIS, ESPECIALLY ON HIGHWAYS, I WOULD LIKE THERE TO BE ACTUALLY DENSER SIMPLY BECAUSE NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC ISSUE, BUT BECAUSE OF A LIVING SPACE ISSUE.

YOU KNOW, WE HEAR ALL THE TIME ABOUT COMPLAINTS ABOUT TOO MANY APARTMENTS OR TOO MANY THIS OR TOO MANY OF THAT, BUT YET WE'RE CONTINUALLY ALLOWING OR ENCOURAGING THREE AND FOUR STORY BUILDING APARTMENT COMPLEXES INSTEAD OF 6 OR 7 STORIES TO ACTUALLY GET MORE DENSE HOUSING INSTEAD OF JUST MORE SPREAD OUT HOUSING.

BUT THAT'S IT. SECOND HALF OF THOSE SPACES IS COMMERCIAL BUILDING.

OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON MOTION? SEEING NONE. THEN WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.

ON THE FLOOR. AND SECONDED TO APPROVE THE THREE WARRANT FOR BOARDS.

RIGHT. FOR MINOR WARRANTS AS PRESENTED. CALL THE SHERIFF. MISS WILSON.

PUSH A BUTTON. THAT'S WHY I'M WONDERING WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT PERSON.

NOTHING. JUST WAITING FOR IT TO TAKE A SECOND.

IT'S GOSH, I THREE. THREE. SO I GUESS FAILS TO APPROVE.

BUT IF THEY MOVE TO COUNCIL, THEN THEY STILL JUST NEED A SIMPLE MAJORITY.

IS THAT HOW THAT SHAKES OUT? OKAY. AND WITH THAT, WE'RE ADJOURNED.

NO.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.